4 ms·
Was it? I thought the original argument was mostly about how interest rates affect housing prices. The particular bit you quoted -- > If they fall to 5%, the v
by gjm11 7y ago
Was it? I thought the original argument was mostly about how interest rates affect housing prices. The particular bit you quoted --
> If they fall to 5%, the value of that same stream of flowers doubles to £2,000
-- and asked "how would that work?" about, wasn't about how buying and selling houses affects the prices or rates-of-return of other assets, it was about how prevailing interest rates affect the prices of houses. Which is what my comment addressed.
Incidentally, it's very rare to "trade a house for another house". You buy houses for money, and sell houses for money. (You often do those two things together, but often the house you buy is quite different in price from the house you sell, and in any case the buyer and the seller are different people, so this still isn't equivalent to trading one house for another.) This isn't just nitpickery; it's because houses are bought and sold for money that could be used for other things that their prices can interact with the prices of other things.
- lottin 7y agoHe says "interest rates on other assets", which I take to mean "rate of return of other assets" since the phrase "interest rates on other assets" doesn't make sense. Interest rate is a particular rate of return, that of money.
- gjm11 7y agoHe does indeed say those words. And what he means by them is that house prices change if interest rates change, not the other way around. (Whether he means interest rates specifically, or rates of return on other assets like equities, I'm not certain, but those things have some tendency to vary together and I would expect all of them to influence house prices in a similar way.)