[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

OK kewp you are right. Let’s use oil as the fundamental metric to assess price and returns.

Q: Was there a bubble in housing in San Diego from 1998 to 2005?

Prices in 1998 …
Median-priced house: 195 K
Barrel of oil: $11.91
That’s 16,373 Barrels per house.

Prices in 2005
Median-priced house: 540 K
Barrel of oil: $50.04
That’s 10,800 Barrels per house.

A: Nope. There was no housing bubble. As measured by barrels of oil, housing prices actually declined by 34% in San Diego from 1998 to 2005.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

OK kewp you are right. Let’s use oil as the fundamental metric to assess price and returns.

Q: Was there a bubble in housing in San Diego from 1998 to 2005?

Prices in 1998 …
Median-priced house: 195 K
Barrel of oil: $11.91
That’s 16,373 Barrels per house.

Prices in 2005
Median-priced house: 540 K
Barrel of oil: $50.04
That’s 10,800 Barrels per house.

A: Nope. There was no housing bubble. As measured by barrels of oil, housing prices actually declined by 34% in San Diego from 1998 to 2005.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Yes, I am completely serious.

Oil was grossly underpriced in the late 1990’s and 2000. In fact the all-time low in inflation adjusted oil prices was 1998. Stocks were grossly overpriced in 1999-2000.

Measuring the relative value of two things from a point in time where one is near a generational low in value and the other is at a decadal peak in valuation creates a distorted view.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Yes, I am completely serious.

Oil was grossly underpriced in the late 1990’s and 2000. In fact the all-time low in inflation adjusted oil prices was 1998. Stocks were grossly overpriced in 1999-2000.

Measuring the relative value of two things from a point in time where one is near a generational low in value and the other is at a decadal peak in valuation creates a distorted view.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Yes, I am completely serious.

Oil was grossly underpriced in the late 1990’s and 2000. In fact the all-time low in inflation adjusted oil prices was 1998. Stocks were grossly overpriced in 1999-2000.

Measuring the relative value of two things from a point in time where one is near a generational low in value and the other is at a decadal peak in valuation creates a distorted view.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Yes, I am completely serious.

Oil was grossly underpriced in the late 1990’s and 2000. In fact the all-time low in inflation adjusted oil prices was 1998. Stocks were grossly overpriced in 1999-2000.

Measuring the relative value of two things from a point in time where one is near a generational low in value and the other is at a decadal peak in valuation creates a distorted view.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Yes, I am completely serious.

Oil was grossly underpriced in the late 1990’s and 2000. In fact the all-time low in inflation adjusted oil prices was 1998. Stocks were grossly overpriced in 1999-2000.

Measuring the relative value of two things from a point in time where one is near a generational low in value and the other is at a decadal peak in valuation creates a distorted view.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

In your example I would say they were wrong, as your supposed rally in 2003 was more an artifact of inflation than anything.

So, you are saying that an 87% increase in the S&P 500 over a 4-year period is a “supposed rally”.

Priced in gold or oil equities have been in a bear market since at least 2000.

This is an artifact of your arbitrary (or deliberately deceptive) selection of 2000, which is the peak of a stock market cycle and a near-bottom of the gold price cycle.

If you look at stocks measured versus gold from 1980 to today, you would observe that the DJIA has risen by 8-fold as measured in gold. What’s that ? A 900% increase in stocks ?

1980 was the last peak in gold prices. 2008 is the current peak (for now). Looking over partial cycles results in distortions due to the phasing of those cycles and is driven almost entirely by gold speculation.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

In your example I would say they were wrong, as your supposed rally in 2003 was more an artifact of inflation than anything.

So, you are saying that an 87% increase in the S&P 500 over a 4-year period is a “supposed rally”.

Priced in gold or oil equities have been in a bear market since at least 2000.

This is an artifact of your arbitrary (or deliberately deceptive) selection of 2000, which is the peak of a stock market cycle and a near-bottom of the gold price cycle.

If you look at stocks measured versus gold from 1980 to today, you would observe that the DJIA has risen by 8-fold as measured in gold. What’s that ? A 900% increase in stocks ?

1980 was the last peak in gold prices. 2008 is the current peak (for now). Looking over partial cycles results in distortions due to the phasing of those cycles and is driven almost entirely by gold speculation.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

In your example I would say they were wrong, as your supposed rally in 2003 was more an artifact of inflation than anything.

So, you are saying that an 87% increase in the S&P 500 over a 4-year period is a “supposed rally”.

Priced in gold or oil equities have been in a bear market since at least 2000.

This is an artifact of your arbitrary (or deliberately deceptive) selection of 2000, which is the peak of a stock market cycle and a near-bottom of the gold price cycle.

If you look at stocks measured versus gold from 1980 to today, you would observe that the DJIA has risen by 8-fold as measured in gold. What’s that ? A 900% increase in stocks ?

1980 was the last peak in gold prices. 2008 is the current peak (for now). Looking over partial cycles results in distortions due to the phasing of those cycles and is driven almost entirely by gold speculation.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

In your example I would say they were wrong, as your supposed rally in 2003 was more an artifact of inflation than anything.

So, you are saying that an 87% increase in the S&P 500 over a 4-year period is a “supposed rally”.

Priced in gold or oil equities have been in a bear market since at least 2000.

This is an artifact of your arbitrary (or deliberately deceptive) selection of 2000, which is the peak of a stock market cycle and a near-bottom of the gold price cycle.

If you look at stocks measured versus gold from 1980 to today, you would observe that the DJIA has risen by 8-fold as measured in gold. What’s that ? A 900% increase in stocks ?

1980 was the last peak in gold prices. 2008 is the current peak (for now). Looking over partial cycles results in distortions due to the phasing of those cycles and is driven almost entirely by gold speculation.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

In your example I would say they were wrong, as your supposed rally in 2003 was more an artifact of inflation than anything.

So, you are saying that an 87% increase in the S&P 500 over a 4-year period is a “supposed rally”.

Priced in gold or oil equities have been in a bear market since at least 2000.

This is an artifact of your arbitrary (or deliberately deceptive) selection of 2000, which is the peak of a stock market cycle and a near-bottom of the gold price cycle.

If you look at stocks measured versus gold from 1980 to today, you would observe that the DJIA has risen by 8-fold as measured in gold. What’s that ? A 900% increase in stocks ?

1980 was the last peak in gold prices. 2008 is the current peak (for now). Looking over partial cycles results in distortions due to the phasing of those cycles and is driven almost entirely by gold speculation.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

And unless you sold in SD at the top and are renting or moved to a cheaper part of the country, your “timing” was no better.

Well, we got it half right. We happened sold our primary residence in San Diego in June 2005. But we moved to a more expensive city.

But, again, I’m not a financial expert/economist pimping my services to consumers. I’m simply a lay person trying to make educated decisions, mitigate risk and hedge my bets in turbulent times for the good of my family.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

And unless you sold in SD at the top and are renting or moved to a cheaper part of the country, your “timing” was no better.

Well, we got it half right. We happened sold our primary residence in San Diego in June 2005. But we moved to a more expensive city.

But, again, I’m not a financial expert/economist pimping my services to consumers. I’m simply a lay person trying to make educated decisions, mitigate risk and hedge my bets in turbulent times for the good of my family.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

And unless you sold in SD at the top and are renting or moved to a cheaper part of the country, your “timing” was no better.

Well, we got it half right. We happened sold our primary residence in San Diego in June 2005. But we moved to a more expensive city.

But, again, I’m not a financial expert/economist pimping my services to consumers. I’m simply a lay person trying to make educated decisions, mitigate risk and hedge my bets in turbulent times for the good of my family.

[Author]

Posts