agree that we should not buy cars for status symbol, but disagree on the experience part.
We should not go for the bare min for the sake of replacing the legs, but can be a balance of many factors that the driver deems as important which different for everyone (apart from brands of cause because that is pure stupity). Some value driving comfort because he spends 3 hours on the road every day. Some value conveniences like ADAS or AA/ACP. Some value safety. Some value reliability. Checklist is different for everyone. For some people, having a better car is "more beneficial for own living conditions".

40 years of protectionism still not long term enough ka?

protectionism. So that those car supplier company owner can buy a 30 million house.

https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/5560369/+0&#entry112859547

Bare minimum for what someone needed. Some functions although can improve the driving experience but might means have to pay high price for it, if the amount too big it's just make more sense to not get it and spend the money elsewhere.

Bruh, Zus's peer is Luckin / Baskin etc so its stated there

Again, kopitiam as a reference, says alot

You are not comparing apples to apples

And a quick google tells you how Tuhu is disruptive towards local market. Undeniably, good for consumers, but for local businesses?

And not forgetting that the point of argument is MITI's favoritism to "protect" only a specific industry

Rather than be consistent throughout the country and all industries - Which includes but not limited to: Seeds (again, google); F&B; Services; Electrical Appliances etc

p1 and p2 enjoice lor.