4 ms·
They're not at odds. It is possible for the people at the bottom to have better housing, better food, better education, and better health, while the people at
by slumdev 6y ago
They're not at odds.
It is possible for the people at the bottom to have better housing, better food, better education, and better health, while the people at the top still enjoy a vastly disproportionately greater increase in income and wealth.
With disproportionate gains and different spending priorities, you won't see consistent inflation across all kinds of goods. Because the inflation is concentrated at the top, the people at the bottom won't get priced out of the things they need. They're not getting priced out of anything they couldn't have afforded 20 years ago.
A nice house that cost $100k in 1999 costs $200k today.
A fabulous house that cost $500k in 1999 costs $5,000k today.
- cammikebrown 6y agoI think it depends where you live. My parents bought a home in 1988 for $100k and sold it six years later for $120k. Zillow says it’s worth $590k now. They bought their next home in 1994 for $180k, and it’s now appraised at $650k. This is Sacramento, CA. By the way, they pay about $3k/year in property taxes, while a new homeowner pays about triple that. If property taxes weren’t kept so artificially low for long time homeowners, I don’t think property prices would have gone up so much.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]