According to Slate's Green Lantern,
the Toyota Prius wins. His estimates do not take into account disposal costs -- which according to some, risks eliminating the supposedly-dreaded nickel battery disposal problem...an issue which the column
debunks pretty convincingly in a previous edition.
There's another question, of course: will a Prius cost less out of your pocket in the long run? The immediate answer is no...but the long-haul answer seems to depend entirely on the cost of gasoline. When gas was just over $2 a gallon, it would have been cheaper over the long haul to buy the Toyota Corolla. But given today's gas prices, the Prius makes up its $5000 average higher sticker price in gas savings over the assumed 11.5-year period of ownership.
So as long as you do what you should do and drive your car into the ground, you'd probably be better off buying the Prius -- as long as you could afford the immediate out-of pocket price difference (and assuming you believe the government fuel economy estimates of a Prius vs. their estimates for any comparable car). The Prius also gives off virtually no emissions, so that's another win for the earth-conscious set.
The only other argument I can think of is that repair costs would mount more steadily with the hybrid, because Toyota's Synergy Drive system is incredibly complicated. They have a point: it's probably going to be cheaper to take the Corolla into the shop when it starts to break down. Thing is, the vast majority of car buyers aren't doing their own repairs due to the increasing complexity of all cars. And assuming Toyota's standard 150,000-mile powertrain warranty on the Prius means anything, you probably won't be paying to fix the worst problems anyway.
links: digg this del.icio.us technorati reddit