quote:
Ownership implies capability to actually buy a home, which then implies that their is enough economic opportunity to buy such said home. Do you not agree with that? The price per sqft in said 1970 home is drastically lower than a 2017 sqft price.

So, you are attempting to assert that in 1970, people were more capable of buying a home, but just didn't?

quote:
Just looked it up: The median cost of a home in Nov 1970 was $23,500. As of Feb 2016, the median cost to own a home in the US is 349,400

So, in other words, the median of a 1970 home was $150,495 in today's dollars.

quote:
Now, I wouldn't claim to be a master of economic projection, but I am an Engineer and I can clearly see that $349,400 is CLEARLY larger than $23,500. So since you know everything apparently, explain that gap.

Well, as above points out, you left out a key metric. I would think an engineer would be aware of that needed metric.

We also know that 1970 home for $150K in TODAY's dollars had a LOT fewer features than the median home has today. BUT, you can absolutely STILL buy a home today with the same level of features. Do I have to explain the implications of that to you?

quote:
Yes they have greater value, but that cost is passed onto the consumer and therefore driving up the cost of said vehicle. Wages haven't climbed at all at the same rate of CoL and inflation so what is Joe the Plumber supposed to do when a Camry now costs 30K or more?

Again, you really gotta work on that time value of money thing. Just sayin.

quote:
Hint. Your household income comparison is wrong. You have a clear case of tunnel vision

Do you even know why the household income measure is wrong? Are you even going to maybe ask?

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by 50_Tiger

Dallas TX

Member since Jan 2016

40326 posts

Posted on 3/14/17 at 9:42 am to ShortyRob

quote:
So, you are attempting to assert that in 1970, people were more capable of buying a home, but just didn't?

Nope, all im saying is that there are less people capable in 2017 of buying a home period. Not comparing time scales there.

quote:
So, in other words, the median of a 1970 home was $150,495 in today's dollars.

150k < 350k

I know a lot of folks who could swing 150k right now.

quote:
Well, as above points out, you left out a key metric. I would think an engineer would be aware of that needed metric.

We also know that 1970 home for $150K in TODAY's dollars had a LOT fewer features than the median home has today. BUT, you can absolutely STILL buy a home today with the same level of features. Do I have to explain the implications of that to you?

I'll ignore the personal attack.

Where can you buy an 150k home thats not in the hood or "warzone." I mean we can deep dive into the social economical things if you want. People genuinely don't want to live in the ghetto and well prices in City centers are higher than 150k easily as well as suburbs. It's easy to argue absolutes, but this is a factor into people's buying decisions.

quote:
Again, you really gotta work on that time value of money thing. Just sayin.

Changing prices into Today's dollars just proves my point....it costs less than the MSRP of a vehicle today period. People have finite resource (money). You can only buy so many things. When those things become exuberant in cost. You can't have said things. When those things are required in most cases to have a job, aka a car/phone/net. This becomes a problem.