To buy out, yes, but not to sell it to somebody else. The lessee (who is not the owner) has a right to buy the car and become an owner. Until the lessee becomes an owner, he/she can not sell the vehicle. There are sales tax implications here at the very least.

The owner (manufacturer? ) should be able to change rules at any time unless expressly forbidden in the contract.

This is a legal issue, but it seems like the owner should have more default freedoms than the driver.

I wonder if the lessor is also the owner. If this is the case, then the owner (manufacturer?) can so anything that is not expressly forbidden in the contract. Anything that a lessee (Joe Driver) can do should be limited to what is expressly permitted in the contract.  

Lease consumers do not have equity in their cars because the cars are not theirs. The manufacturers simply are closing the loophole that allowed the customer to sell not their car to a third party. I am surprised that loophole even existed in the first place. 

And these people have a right to vote...

People are very rich and they can do whatever they want with their big piles of cash. LOL. 

He said luxury

Yes, but you have not been putting 200 miles a day on it, have you. This is 100K miles assuming 5 days a week commute. No matter the market, any car will be worthless after 2 years and almost there after 1.

Has to be brown and under $15K new. Lol.

Lol

You are, sadly, correct. 

Interested in this, Veloster N, or Golf R, all in manuals.

The Soviet Union/ Russia did pay the US back. Took a while, but they did. 

Prices rise because people are willing to pay. People who pay more money for the same car are either sufficiently wealthy, too dumb to do math, or it still makes sense for their business.

BUT do you pay your income taxes?

On what planet are you living where a pile of cash would impress anyone? If you offer that much before MSRP, you will be at best politely (as I said, at best) shown the door.

This lady got the smarts. 

It is govt business because people declare bankruptcy buying stuff they could not afford. I am all for abolishing bankruptcy protection and instituting debt prisons. This way, dumb financial decisions would be on the buyer alone.

This is also dependent on how one to define “can not afford”. Can a DINK family with $250k income afford a $50K car? Technically almost always yes, but it still seems like a lot of money to spend.