What's an affordable sports car?

Jake B

I'm not looking for a brand new sports car, but i would like to get something on the side, like a 3000GT or something similar just for fun. What would be a reliable, fast, and good looking sports car at an affordable price?

Answer
The absolute hands down best deal is the Chevrolet Corvette..... Maybe you havent looked at one in a while..... Look one over closely and you will realize your getting a lot of car for very little money.... Those 1990 to 1995 vettes are down right cheap and look great..... Check ebay....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvette

Looking for $15,000 used sports car, Any Suggestions?

Jay

Answer
Honda S2000

Probably the best car EVER.

Absolutely no problems even after 147k on my 2001. Not one thing broke, i mean the clutch was replaced once, and oil change every 5k and tires also which were replaced every 25k but that's with my driving.

I have another 2001 with 42k on it and I wouldn't trade it for any car except a ferrari or a new BMW m5. Search on Autotrader.com they have very good prices and also ebay. By the way the 2001-2002 year is the best year for the car because its perfect!

Look at these for sale!

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=222057520

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=221391200

Good luck!

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

How did it work out when George HW decided to target the rich with luxury taxes?

Q. How many boat builders and luxury car making laborers lost their jobs?
Did it take to long to see the trickle down effect of economic jealousy?
All knowing one - They repealed it quickly as it destroyed parts of the economy. No thanks for your false facts.

Answer
Twelve days ago, the luxury tax on expensive cars expired. It was the last of the luxury taxes that the first President Bush signed in 1990 as part of the budget agreement in which he broke his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge.

The agreement was brokered Sen. George Mitchell , D-Maine , then majority leader. And the luxury tax was supported by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass.

The luxury tax applied not just to cars, but to jewelry, furs and private planes, and to expensive boats â yachts.

Not So Lucrative

Congress estimated that in 1991 these luxury taxes would rake in $31 million. But the actual sum was just $16.6 million.

Why? Because, to the surprise of no one except tax-raising politicians the luxury taxes caused people to buy less jewelry and fewer expensive cars, planes, and, especially, yachts.

The tax destroyed jobs â an estimated 25,000 of them in the boat-building industry, much of which is in New England â in Sen. Mitchell's Maine and Sen. Kennedy's Massachusetts.

Job losses cost the government more than $24 million in unemployment benefits and lost income tax revenue. So the luxury tax actually cost the government money.

New England's boat-building industry was still so devastated by 1999 that another Kennedy â Ted's son Patrick, a Rhode island congressman â actually proposed a federal subsidy to help rich people buy yachts. He called it, "exactly the opposite of a luxury tax."

Remember this costly farce when you hear talk about helping the common folks by taxing the rich.

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=132568&page=1

Why did we have all these technological advances during a recession?

Iliketomak

Smartphones, tablets, better gas mileage on cars. I understand that technology advances quickly, but why did all these advances have to happen during and after the economic downturn of '07?

Answer
Not everybody suffered. Many basic manufacturing businesses never felt anything except maybe fewer sales, because of less of a demand. Luxury items suffered, however. Yachts and private planes dropped a lot, for example. So, time marches on and they (basic manufacturers) continued research and development of their products. It was the banks and insurance companies and real estate that suffered the most. Little people like me, part time inventors, who were involved with securities sold by the banks, lost money on the investments, but that did not bankrupt me, since I was diversified. I only lost 40% of what I had invested. Investment is like gambling, but what you are betting on is different. You can bet on the toss of a coin or bet on the skills and products of a company. Either way, over time, you win or you lose.

Powered by Yahoo! Answers