Not only that, but doesn't spending $60,000 on a Volvo C70 entitle you to expect more reliability (or anything for that matter) than spending, say, $18,000 on a Nissan Versa? I dunno, I just thought I'd ask.... 
No. Reliability never increases as prices do. A four-banger Accord is more reliable than an Acura RL, if I recall correctly. Greater prices mean more mechanical complexity and greater drivetrain stresses, which in turn mean less reliability. The really reliable cars out there are very often econoboxes. Corollas, Yarises, those sorts of things. Your example of the Versais a great example. Does a Versa have a folding hardtop that could break? Is it turbocharged? Does it have heated power seats? All of these extras that make the C70 a nicer driving experience than a Versa are also potential reliability trouble spots.
Well said. Often times, you see the expensive cars on the bleeding edge of technological advancements. It's the early adapters who put the latest and greatest into their cars for those who have money to enjoy and be the first to have.
"Don't buy a car loaded up with fancy gadgets. They're only something more to break".
I've heard that a lot over the years and in some ways it's true. The amount and complexity of equipment on a car often influences the number of repairs and sometimes results in a lower reliability score from someone like J D Powers or CR.
Of course if we all followed that advice we'd all be driving 3 speeds with rollup windows and AM radio
