[pwinnski]

That there is a scenario that, effected perfectly if you stand on one leg and squint and get super-favorable rates at just the right times, makes an 84-month loan not the worst economic choice possible does not mean that it's not the worst economic choice possible. Because it is the worst economic choice possible.

[SilasX]

This. Plus, the typical 7-year loans we're seeing are not the 1.9% loans but subprime rates.

[hurricanetc]

The people who understand money and finance will end up ahead of those who don’t.

Denying this reality will lower your risk profile but also lower your potential rewards. If you can’t control your spending and investing then don’t finance a car for 7 years.

But don’t pretend that economics and math are wrong.

[SilasX]

But also don't pretend that your prime rate example is the typical case for the 7-year loans, which are mostly subprime borrowers who don't plan on perfectly maintaining and keeping the car forever.

[hurricanetc]

I’m not. The premise here is that financing a car for 7 years makes you an idiot. That’s only true if you are already bad at personal finance.

[SilasX]

Assume some charity here. Everyone was speaking in generalities about the trend. You can always find non-central, imperspicuous examples, but that's not really responsive. (Scott Adams has made the acronym BOCTAOE, but of course there are obvious exceptions, to head off such replies.)

The recognition that something -- like your case -- is an extreme exception proves the general validity of the rule. (Yes, I know there's a frequently misused version of the quote, but I use this modified, correct version.)

>That’s only true if you are already bad at personal finance.

That's kind of the point: you can't just assume away the case of "people making bad financial decisions", and that might be -- and probably is here -- the reason for the trend.