4 ms·

"Would 50% of avocados be unaffordable to the median buyer?" Avocados are homogenous. One is generally as good as another. It's hard to convince someone to pay

"Would 50% of avocados be unaffordable to the median buyer?" Avocados are homogenous. One is generally as good as another. It's hard to convince someone to pay significantly more for an identical product (although- it's possible through marketing and there are boutique produce suppliers with wildly unaffordable prices. Specially imported/handled fruits and the like which aren't found in grocery stores) Homes are not homogenous. Real estate values vary wildly in value based on location, size, and other characteristics. This will always be true because real estate is inherently a zero-sum system. A skyscraper will have drastically different prices for units along the side of the building with the best view - or near the top, etc. The product is inherently unequal with large differences in demand between each type of unit, so prices will always be unequal as a result. People with more money will always be able to bid higher than people without. This dynamic exists no matter how many homes are built.

mrkeen 4y ago
Every response seems to say that avocados aren't houses. No-one wants to touch the private jets question. Where did you get the %50 figure from?
- throwaway09223 4y ago
  It's because the private jets question is stupid. Jets aren't affordable to a median wage earner. "Where did you get the %50 figure from?" It's literally the definition of a median.
  - mrkeen 4y ago
    Yes, you can use the median wage earner to make statements about the 50th percentile wage earner. What does that have to do with homes? You have not explained how you've connected the 50th percentile wage earner to "50% of homes". Bringing up other unrelated items which obviously don't have a %50 <-> %50 mapping should have made that clear.
    - throwaway09223 4y ago
      'You have not explained how you've connected the 50th percentile wage earner to "50% of homes".' Yes I did. It's the second paragraph of this post. You may want to read it again keeping in mind your question has already been answered: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35041925 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35041925 "Bringing up other unrelated items which obviously don't have a %50 <-> %50 mapping should have made that clear. " Incorrect, as I've already explained in the above post. Eggs are a fungible commodity, homes aren't.
      - mrkeen 4y ago
        There's plenty of facts I'm willing to take axiomatically at face value: * Avocados aren't houses * Eggs are fungible * Homes are not homogenous * Half of all earners earn above the median * Half of all earners earn below the median > as I've already explained in the above post. Eggs are a fungible commodity, homes aren't. So all I have to do is find a non-fungible commodity X (which is not as "silly" as private jet), and it will follow that 50% of X will be unaffordable to the median buyer?
        throwaway09223 4y ago
        "So all I have to do is find a non-fungible commodity X" No, that's a contradiction in terms. Homes are non-fungible, non-commodities. You'll also need something in broad demand with a fixed supply.

mrkeen 4y ago

Every response seems to say that avocados aren't houses. No-one wants to touch the private jets question. Where did you get the %50 figure from?

throwaway09223 4y ago
It's because the private jets question is stupid. Jets aren't affordable to a median wage earner. "Where did you get the %50 figure from?" It's literally the definition of a median.
- mrkeen 4y ago
  Yes, you can use the median wage earner to make statements about the 50th percentile wage earner. What does that have to do with homes? You have not explained how you've connected the 50th percentile wage earner to "50% of homes". Bringing up other unrelated items which obviously don't have a %50 <-> %50 mapping should have made that clear.
  - throwaway09223 4y ago
    'You have not explained how you've connected the 50th percentile wage earner to "50% of homes".' Yes I did. It's the second paragraph of this post. You may want to read it again keeping in mind your question has already been answered: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35041925 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35041925 "Bringing up other unrelated items which obviously don't have a %50 <-> %50 mapping should have made that clear. " Incorrect, as I've already explained in the above post. Eggs are a fungible commodity, homes aren't.
    - mrkeen 4y ago
      There's plenty of facts I'm willing to take axiomatically at face value: * Avocados aren't houses * Eggs are fungible * Homes are not homogenous * Half of all earners earn above the median * Half of all earners earn below the median > as I've already explained in the above post. Eggs are a fungible commodity, homes aren't. So all I have to do is find a non-fungible commodity X (which is not as "silly" as private jet), and it will follow that 50% of X will be unaffordable to the median buyer?
      - throwaway09223 4y ago
        "So all I have to do is find a non-fungible commodity X" No, that's a contradiction in terms. Homes are non-fungible, non-commodities. You'll also need something in broad demand with a fixed supply.