Maybe some people need a car to get to work, plus maybe they also want good optics with it, not wanting to be perceived as "broke" by the rest, so they splurge on a new car without any thoughts on financial responsibility just to keep up appearances.
It’s the optics part that breaks the camel’s back. Any decent car goes from A to B. Only expensive cars have the “optics”. The car is a status symbol that carries you around, and the poorest are the most “vulnerable” to need such a status symbol to compensate.
It mirrors perfectly the luxury fashion industry where more branded merchandise is bought by broke people than by rich ones (unbranded luxury goods are a different beast).
It's not just optics. For consumers who care about safety, newer and more expensive cars generally have significantly higher ratings for both passive crash safety and active collision avoidance. You might not care about such things but there is a real and measurable difference.
I would disagree for a different definition of optics. As someone else who replied to me mentioned, the top selling vehicle in the US is the Toyota RAV4. Based on the many people I personally know who own them, this is a vehicle that says "I'm doing just fine thanks" even when that is very much not the case.
It doesn't even matter if someone is actually looking or not, what matters is that owner has the perception that others are looking, so will act on that.
You don't think many people are judgmental on appearances or at least think they are being judged?
That's the main reason why people get a better paying job, buy a fancier car, fancier clothes, nicer haircut, go to the gym, take Ozempic, etc so they can influence how they are perceived.
Maybe some people need a car to get to work, plus maybe they also want good optics with it, not wanting to be perceived as "broke" by the rest, so they splurge on a new car without any thoughts on financial responsibility just to keep up appearances.