I’d need to see numbers to back that up. I don’t think your logic flies. Labor costs for low wage paying companies usually hover around 25% of total costs. 1 dollar wage increase doesn’t even come close to 1 dollar wage inflation. It’s a dumb argument.

Labor costs on the lower end of wages are usually around 25% of total cost, this isn’t that big a deal. Raising wages won’t kill anyone, nor meaningfully erode GDP.

Increased labor costs don’t translate to same/same cost increases as it goes through the organization. So a 3% increase in purchasing power would see a significantly lower rise in cost.

Doesn’t work that way. First of all, you got a 41% increase in wages. That’s pretty awesome, and something that doesn’t happen often nowadays. no matter how hard you work.

The common trope is that wage increases will increase costs a corresponding amount and lead to increased prices. It doesn’t work like that. The company will make up the cost in a multitude of ways, but what you’ll get is a compaction where at the upper tiers people get smaller raises and at the lower tiers people make…

I don’t really get the $15/hr counter arguments, how is it better to have a minimum wage that allows huge corporations to effectively subsidize their bottom line with tax dollars?

Also, just because someone is rich, doesn’t mean they don’t believe in a more just society.

Except everyone has a third person anecdotal story about how this immigrant was a real freeloader so it must be true. 

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/bmw/bmw-3-series-4-series/
Granted, it’s at the end of its cycle so we should see sales rise after the new model comes out, nevertheless, I am not seeing robust growth here in the segment.

It’s like every single R scare trope is the opposite of true in reality. If only facts mattered.

Yeah, I mean, fair enough. But let’s put it another way. The 1998 Toyota 4Runner, a body on frame SUV, started at 3400 lbs.

DIY vanos doesn’t look that bad actually. Subframe seems like a pretty decent chunk of change.

That seems to be the case with most cars, and no doubt that’s the case. Still, I have an aircooled 911 and I see plenty of those with 200k + miles, granted, with at least one rebuild in most cases, but the cost for that is cheaper than a rebuild for the E46. I don’t see many E46s in top top shape pushing that kind of…

I’d have to go find statistics, but I don’t really think their market share has been growing as a result of these changes. So while I can sympathize with the idea that the status quo is a pretty good place to be, either they are really moving forward, or they are eventually going to start losing share.

I know a guy that owns an E46 M3 - the thing that scared me away aside from the prices these things are climbing to, is that he was ENDLESSLY bitching about the constant repair bills. 

It probably didn’t help that at one point they had a 15k mile oil change interval which they’ve since reduced.

Which 911? The C4 911 was probably heavier, but not the C2. 993 was right around 3000 lbs. The 964 was also around the same.

You keep talking about the E90 as though everyone wasn’t bitching about how heavy it was back then. Everyone knew it was heavy. The M2 does feel better than an E90, and I’ve driven both.

Did you even read the article? The chassis is lighter, but the curb weight actually ends up being heavier.

Heavier cars feel heavier, even if they have more horsepower. They can out-handle, and out-accelerate old stuff all day, but you still feel the weight in the corners. The E36 is objectively more fun to drive than a modern 3 series, despite being slower. I went from a car with over 450 HP and a tuned suspension to a 35…