Anonymous #1 10w

Damn I was right rightoids really would try and defend this 😔

23

Anonymous #1 10w

Yeah bro houses HAVE to infinitely accrue value with no cap faster than everything else and become inaccessible because... Yeah!

6

Rage bait get better

15

Anonymous #1 10w

Would you see anything wrong with a megacorp purchasing the majority of homes and only renting them out? Let’s say they end up immediately purchasing any home for sale, and now your only option is to rent or move to a different country

10

Anonymous #1 10w

This is economically wrong. An investment doesn’t “necessarily” outpace inflation. That’s not what investment means. The graph is already inflation-adjusted, so you’re using inflation to explain a 96% increase after inflation was removed.

12

It takes a two-second google search to learn that even though Singapore’s GDP per capita is growing greatly, it has a very high cost of living and a large margin of wealth inequality

11

Comment Deleted

0

#6 isn’t very smart

10

YES.

8

IS THIS RAGE BAIT?

11

Oh nvm didn’t realize you were trolling

7

Anonymous #3 10w

Yes you’re responding to a comment made by Elon spammer

6

>he’s comparing East Asian microstates to the U.S. This is a more apt comparison to the U.S., and what we should do.

4

Anonymous OP 10w

Based Xi strikes again 🙏

2

Anonymous ___joker__ 10w

An investment is an asset you expect to increase in value (aka outpace inflation) or to generate income. However, housing doesn’t necessarily have to be an investment. American politicians have just traditionally treated it that way.

-2

He verbatim told all of you to inject yourselves with bleach LMAO also “untested experimental,” you’re so fucking stupid to not know how clinical drug trials work

10

Anonymous #1 10w

Homes are for living. Hope this helps :)

6

Anonymous #8 10w

Those are completely different claims than what was originally made. An asset can appreciate nominally while losing value after inflation, and an income-producing asset can decline in price and still generate a positive return. There is nothing in the term “investment” that requires price to continuously appreciate in real terms.

5

Anonymous #3 10w

That’s basically how the stock market and inflation work yes The minimum wage will always go up. Inflation will always go up. The stock market will always go up.

-1

Anonymous #8 10w

It is what we call an investment It doesn’t have to be, but it is Quite a lot of older people’s net worth is mostly tied up in their real estate

-1

Anonymous #1 10w

Sorry to boomers but we can’t have infinitely growing house values unless we want everybody to rent their entire lives

1

Anonymous #4 10w

We build new houses And also your salary keeps going up But yeah that’s the way stuff is going, house ownership is going way down and you have to be way older to buy a house on average

1

Anonymous #1 10w

“Back in my day I bought this house for $2000 and a firm handshake” That’s just not how the world works anymore

-1

Anonymous #1 10w

We should criminalize single-family home zoning. Takes up so much space and creates car-dependency, plus it’s a money-sink for towns since they need a shit ton of road maintenance and their own driveways, super inefficient use of space. Maybe not criminalize completely, but dense residential housing should be the norm

1

Anonymous #8 10w

Lots of downvotes, no rebuttals

-1

Anonymous #8 10w

No need to provide a rebuttal for something that’s clearly false 🤭

5

Anonymous #8 10w

Can’t speak to OP’s data, but people’s spending power is absolutely not increasing on average…

2

Anonymous #8 10w

You want a rebuttal on something that you’ve wildly misread?

2

Anonymous #8 10w

I’ll give you a hint, you’ve confused the cost of housing services in CPI with the asset price of purchasing a home.

5

Anonymous ___joker__ 10w

I didn’t confuse anything. I’m talking about overall purchasing power, not how easy it is to buy a home.

-1

Anonymous #9 10w

Citation needed, because average incomes have outpaced inflation.

-1

Anonymous #8 10w

You specifically said that meant people had more spending power after paying for pricier housing. Overall CPI-adjusted purchasing power and the affordability of purchasing a home are two different questions. You’ve shifted your argument.

7

Anonymous ___joker__ 10w

Paying for pricier housing as in OER/rent. You’re trying to pin me down to an argument I never made.

-1

Anonymous #8 10w

Okay? Your point still doesn’t rebut the chart. The chart is specifically showing that the asset price of purchasing a home rose 96% in real terms while real median household income rose 30%. Rising CPI-adjusted purchasing power can coexist with deteriorating home-purchase affordability. You are trying to answer a different question…for what?

8