3 ms·
Well, only if you ignore how we got there. Housing output took far too long to recover after 2008, and on top of that, many homeowners felt entitled to the gain
by DragonStrength 4y ago
Well, only if you ignore how we got there. Housing output took far too long to recover after 2008, and on top of that, many homeowners felt entitled to the gains they lost during the recession because that is what the American Dream promised.
We could also pull on the demographic weirdness of the moment as Baby Boomers only finally cede political power, skipping a generation. What have all are priorities concerned since they came of voting age? Should we be surprised our recent policies continued to favor older people who owned homes over young people deciding the shape of our next generation? And to be clear, I'm not blaming any motives. I'm saying much of this can be explained by an "accident" (or maybe "conclusion") of demographics.
The worst is if our incentives are for lazy capital returns (like rapidly rising residential real estate) for retirees the people who benefit in the younger generations are not going to be the people taking risks like starting businesses.
- throw8383833jj 4y agoIn the long term, housing should always return to the cost of building it plus the cost of land, that's the long term trend line. Now, why this trend line is increasing so fast is the real reason why housing is so expensive (something no one ever talks about), everything else is just incidental and or temporary effects.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]