I said "I would not necessarily hate on them for it".
If they show reasons for hating on them for it, then I will.
Merely owning the car is not enough to properly determine that.
I already mentioned this earlier in the thread.
If it fits into my personal utility equation, then it is extremely relevant.
You don't seem to understand that different human beings have different utility equations.
You are making the mistake of believing that other peoples' utility equations must be like yours.
Therefore, the only requirement for one's car choice to be rational is that it fits into one's greater goals.
Therefore, in order for your conclusion to be correct, it would have to be impossible for buying a "nice car" to fit into one's greater goals.
But different human beings have different goals (and utility equations, and circumstances), and, as such, it is possible for buying a "nice car" to fit into the greater goals of some human beings.
For you to assume that it would be impossible for such compatible goals, utility equations, and/or circumstances to exist, is, simply put, wrong.
There are indeed human beings who possess such compatible goals, utility equations, and/or circumstances.
The mistake you are making is very evident: You are making the mistake of assuming that your own personal, subjective goals, utility equation, and/or circumstances, which, apparently, do not include and/or are not compatible with owning a nice car, must apply to all other human beings.
And then, when this is not the case for other people, you call these people "irrational".
It is a very common form of argumentation.
You see it all the time.
It is, at its essence, a form of bigotry.
It's also why your argument is a complete logical failure.
All you're really doing is attempting to force your own personal, subjective value judgments (about fucking cars, for fuck's sake) on others.