On 16/01/2012 17:26, The Weasel wrote:

On 16/01/2012 17:12, JNugent wrote:
On 16/01/2012 13:04, The Weasel wrote:
On 16/01/2012 01:21, JNugent wrote:
On 15/01/2012 20:47, dr6092 wrote:
wrote:
spoke mon wrote:

But i'm pleased I got the bike now, it will save me quite a lot of
money and the exercise will be good for me. Also means the wife can
use the car during the week if she wants to.

Most cyclists are apparently rather rich. If you can't at least
afford two cars, are you sure you're ready for membership of the
cycling fraternity?

Not needing to have two is why they're rich.

You've missed the point by a fair margin there.

Ability to afford is highly aligned to desire.

Is it?
I could afford a £5,000 bicycle. Several of them, in fact.
But do I desire one?

What I can afford and the next
man can afford will differ considerably. Most people cannot afford a new
£1000 bike every year.

You are surely wrong. "Most people" see more than that depreciate off
the value of their car every year. Flat screen TVs must be depreciating
fast as well (though not by £1,000 pa). They can afford it. If they
couldn't, they er... wouldn't. The reason they don't buy a £1,000 bike
annually is that [delete as appropriate] (a) they don't want a bike at
all (just throwing that out there for discussion), (b) don't want one
that badly or are prepared to (c) buy one which is cheaper.

I can, but I can’t really afford a second car.

No shame in that. The cost of running a car is more than £1,000 a year.
Whether you can afford a second car is a completely separate issue from
whether you would like one.

Disagree, I could actually afford a second car if I wanted one. But the fact
of the matter is that I don’t want one. I do not want the car, and I do not
want the costs that would go with it.

Actually, you've just agreed with me.