And if you're getting started today in investing -- it's always a good time to invest. If you think that 10 years ago you should have invested in X, then in 10 years from now you'll be thinking you should have invested in Y.
For example -- buying BTC is a bit expensive today and will likely be more expensive in the future. You could buy 1 BTC today and hope that it goes up significantly in the future. OR you could look at Ethereum and realize that it's in a similar place to BTC and that in 7 years from now you may be wishing you had purchased it today.
The primary factor being proximity to other people in the same industry is dramatically higher, and jobs within the computer industry in Silicon Valley are so much more dense than any other place on the planet. The joke in SF is that you can't walk 5 feet without running into a programmer or a startup founder. Go to anywhere else in the world and there are comparatively a very small number of programmers/startup founders.
In LA you have something similar with movies -- most people are aspiring actors and there are many people in filming and sets. However, working as a programmer in LA versus SF is very different -- there are a lot fewer engineers and entrepreneurs here per mile than the Bay Area.
It comes down to proximity to people of the same talent set. Where are the people who are good at X living? That's where X is thriving. If suddenly all the engineers left Silicon Valley, it would no longer be a tech hub.
There's a lot of cities trying to figure out how to handle Airbnb -- Barcelona for example is cracking down on unlicensed AirBNB's -- and the reason is the resulting rent increases.
Like taxis and taxi cab companies taking their hatred out on Lyft or Uber, I do believe that technology changes economies and that this will be another example of a misled attempt to prevent a technology from changing a city's economy. I also believe that many times these preventative measures are led by lobbyists by the very industry that is being hurt by the technology, and in this case it's likely hotels -- but then blaming it on rent prices.
It'll be great to see where all this leads, but making it illegal and taking it out on owners or drivers is going the wrong direction.
For now. In 5-10 years the debate will be "why do we have gas cars at all now that electric cars are all faster, drive farther, don't pollute, and are solar powered."
In my opinion, not having to deal with oil spills and carbon emissions will certainly win out in the long run.
It sounds like you bought it used? While I'm unsure of a Tesla's longevity, it looks like you could buy a used Tesla for $35k these days. Which is cheaper than your $15k + $42k. No gas -- but I'm not sure how much it would cost per kilowatt hour. Now if you were to get a Tesla $35k and install a solar roof for $10k then you're looking at $45k and a renewable energy system, taking power out of the oil companies' hands and actually cheaper than the $57k... and that would be "free" power indefinitely -- way cheaper than the fact that you will have to continue to put oil and gas in your car.
Speaking of which, did you factor in the oil change costs? Assuming $30 an oil change, you're looking at $12k in oil changes. That's now $69k for your Camry.
Plus, the Tesla looks cooler and has faster acceleration than your Camry.
You can also fly. Skies are more 3D than digging and easier to access -- the problem with digging is that many people live and work and drive right above where you dig. At some point the holes could cause collapses. There's also water mains and other hazards and obstacles. Sounds dangerous.