Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 1, 2010 at 5:30 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534948April 1, 2010 at 5:30 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #535212
(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participant[quote=pemeliza]
Also, At 3% inflation it takes about 23.5 years for a price to double. Prices in 1996 were an overshoot to the downside. Given the scope of this bubble I would not be surprised to prices overshoot to the downside at about 2001 nominal pricing for the best areas. I’m already seeing this type of pricing in good areas.[/quote]
What areas are you seeing 2001 prices ?
April 1, 2010 at 2:37 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534196Participant[quote=AN]I like charts Rich posted in his Bubble Primer: http://piggington.com/shambing_away_from_cheapness_but_still_milling_about_in_the_gene much better. I think interest plays a huge role.[/quote]
I don;t know why we are debating what incomes have done since 1996.
The analysis by Rich indicates that in terms of home price to income ratio, we are about 20% higher than in 1996, BUT interest rates are such that monthly costs for owning have recently been lower than they have been in at least 30 Years in San Diego.
The author in the original link should have published his work in crayon.
April 1, 2010 at 2:37 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534327Participant[quote=AN]I like charts Rich posted in his Bubble Primer: http://piggington.com/shambing_away_from_cheapness_but_still_milling_about_in_the_gene much better. I think interest plays a huge role.[/quote]
I don;t know why we are debating what incomes have done since 1996.
The analysis by Rich indicates that in terms of home price to income ratio, we are about 20% higher than in 1996, BUT interest rates are such that monthly costs for owning have recently been lower than they have been in at least 30 Years in San Diego.
The author in the original link should have published his work in crayon.
April 1, 2010 at 2:37 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534784Participant[quote=AN]I like charts Rich posted in his Bubble Primer: http://piggington.com/shambing_away_from_cheapness_but_still_milling_about_in_the_gene much better. I think interest plays a huge role.[/quote]
I don;t know why we are debating what incomes have done since 1996.
The analysis by Rich indicates that in terms of home price to income ratio, we are about 20% higher than in 1996, BUT interest rates are such that monthly costs for owning have recently been lower than they have been in at least 30 Years in San Diego.
The author in the original link should have published his work in crayon.
April 1, 2010 at 2:37 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534882Participant[quote=AN]I like charts Rich posted in his Bubble Primer: http://piggington.com/shambing_away_from_cheapness_but_still_milling_about_in_the_gene much better. I think interest plays a huge role.[/quote]
I don;t know why we are debating what incomes have done since 1996.
The analysis by Rich indicates that in terms of home price to income ratio, we are about 20% higher than in 1996, BUT interest rates are such that monthly costs for owning have recently been lower than they have been in at least 30 Years in San Diego.
The author in the original link should have published his work in crayon.
April 1, 2010 at 2:37 PM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #535147Participant[quote=AN]I like charts Rich posted in his Bubble Primer: http://piggington.com/shambing_away_from_cheapness_but_still_milling_about_in_the_gene much better. I think interest plays a huge role.[/quote]
I don;t know why we are debating what incomes have done since 1996.
The analysis by Rich indicates that in terms of home price to income ratio, we are about 20% higher than in 1996, BUT interest rates are such that monthly costs for owning have recently been lower than they have been in at least 30 Years in San Diego.
The author in the original link should have published his work in crayon.
ParticipantI give my housekeeper half of everything.
ParticipantI give my housekeeper half of everything.
ParticipantI give my housekeeper half of everything.
ParticipantI give my housekeeper half of everything.
ParticipantI give my housekeeper half of everything.
April 1, 2010 at 9:54 AM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #533985ParticipantThis guy is mixing inflaiton adjusted curves and non-inflation adjusted curves.
I completely disagree with the chart where he has a big yellow bar that indicates the remaining bubble to deflate to get us back to 1996 (or 1994 or 1989) prices.
He’s completely ignored inflation in that chart.
Consider that due to inflation it requires about $140 today to equate to $100 in 1994.
If he did this analysis on a High School Economics project he would receive an F.
April 1, 2010 at 9:54 AM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534570ParticipantThis guy is mixing inflaiton adjusted curves and non-inflation adjusted curves.
I completely disagree with the chart where he has a big yellow bar that indicates the remaining bubble to deflate to get us back to 1996 (or 1994 or 1989) prices.
He’s completely ignored inflation in that chart.
Consider that due to inflation it requires about $140 today to equate to $100 in 1994.
If he did this analysis on a High School Economics project he would receive an F.
April 1, 2010 at 9:54 AM in reply to: Should the houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? #534667ParticipantThis guy is mixing inflaiton adjusted curves and non-inflation adjusted curves.
I completely disagree with the chart where he has a big yellow bar that indicates the remaining bubble to deflate to get us back to 1996 (or 1994 or 1989) prices.
He’s completely ignored inflation in that chart.
Consider that due to inflation it requires about $140 today to equate to $100 in 1994.
If he did this analysis on a High School Economics project he would receive an F.
-
AuthorPosts
