You have to take that 'short cold-engine journeys' issue in perspective though. Engines don't just blow-up as result....
An engine that is used mostly for motorway cruising will be good for say 150,000 or 200,000 miles.
An engine used only for short journeys will reach the same amount of terminal wear in say just 50,000 or 75,000 miles, which would constitute very short service life for a modern engine by any measure.
But with 2 miles commune per day... say two ways.... 260 days a year... we are talking about around a 1,000 miles per year.
So the owner runs the car for 3 or 5 years, racks up some 3,000 or 5,000 wear-inducing miles, but the car still feels right.
And this is not a theoretical scenario.
My wife's car does mostly the school run, and apart from one trip to Paris last year, it rarely sees a motorway. And it covers around 1,000 miles per year (not withstanding the one-off trip to France).
Her previous car was 2005 Renault Scenic II which we sold on in 2013, aged 8 years, with 14,000 miles on the clock. I doubt it is still on the road, the value would be next to nothing at 13 years old.
Her current car is a 2010 Kia Soul with 24,000 miles on the clock. We will probably replace it next year, at which point it will have covered around 25,000 miles. It's value is already very very low.
My point is that these cars will be taken off the road long before the short-journeys engine wear will catch-up with them.
In short, I don't disagree that short journeys significantly increase engine wear, this is obvious, but in practical terms it is inconsequential and shouldn't be a cause for concern for the would-be owner.
So you can safely buy a car and use it for a number of years for short journeys, servicing it regularly, and it will serve you just fine.