The original poster seemed to have complained about government involvement distorting the market. I’m not sure that’s quite the same thing.

Perhaps I didn't understand their sarcasm. The government didn't distort the market so that people can make money from the sale of their home and property. Unless they are going back to a time before governments, when people were trading animals for land and so on... the owner would get as much value as the person buying it had in the acquisition. This almost always turned a profit for the seller, unless they were completely desperate.

Every car I’ve ever owned returned all the money back that I invested and then some.

As in, you've profited from the sale of every car you've owned? Or that owning a vehicle, allowed to you not spend as much as you would have without one?

If it's the former, then it would be unheard of, unless you're omitting some critical detail.

Why the hell would you buy one otherwise?

I can't speak for other people, but I'm sure convenience and "my job" are at the top of the pile. If given a choice, I don't think most people would want to own a car, especially if affordable housing is on their mind.

I also don't think many regular consumers are buying cars for some chance to profit from the sale of them afterwards. I think the majority of car owners have resigned to the fact that they will never recover the costs of owning a car.