Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participant$15-17 per hour.
Participant$15-17 per hour.
Participant$15-17 per hour.
Participant$15-17 per hour.
ParticipantI wonder how good the data is from 100+ years ago. Where the heck could they even find it? If it is good data, I’m impressed they could go that far back.
This chart has been around for a long time. My main issue with it is that it is inflation adjusted based on official government figures. Inflation calculations have changed a lot since 1900. For example, in the early 1990’s the US changed the way inflation was calculated. I believe that the result is that inflation as currently measured is more than 1% less than the pre-Clinton method. I wonder how much of the recent spike is due to mis-measurement of inflation. It could easily be distorted by 15-20% if we under-report inflation by 1% per year since the early 1990’s.
I think the best measure of prices is to look at carrying costs of owning relative to rent. At some point, it will make financial sense as a business to buy and rent out property for profit. That’s what I would look at, not this inflation-adjusted graphic. This chart is good at demonstrating the excessive prices, but there are too many issues to use it quantitatively and apply it practically.
ParticipantI wonder how good the data is from 100+ years ago. Where the heck could they even find it? If it is good data, I’m impressed they could go that far back.
This chart has been around for a long time. My main issue with it is that it is inflation adjusted based on official government figures. Inflation calculations have changed a lot since 1900. For example, in the early 1990’s the US changed the way inflation was calculated. I believe that the result is that inflation as currently measured is more than 1% less than the pre-Clinton method. I wonder how much of the recent spike is due to mis-measurement of inflation. It could easily be distorted by 15-20% if we under-report inflation by 1% per year since the early 1990’s.
I think the best measure of prices is to look at carrying costs of owning relative to rent. At some point, it will make financial sense as a business to buy and rent out property for profit. That’s what I would look at, not this inflation-adjusted graphic. This chart is good at demonstrating the excessive prices, but there are too many issues to use it quantitatively and apply it practically.
ParticipantI wonder how good the data is from 100+ years ago. Where the heck could they even find it? If it is good data, I’m impressed they could go that far back.
This chart has been around for a long time. My main issue with it is that it is inflation adjusted based on official government figures. Inflation calculations have changed a lot since 1900. For example, in the early 1990’s the US changed the way inflation was calculated. I believe that the result is that inflation as currently measured is more than 1% less than the pre-Clinton method. I wonder how much of the recent spike is due to mis-measurement of inflation. It could easily be distorted by 15-20% if we under-report inflation by 1% per year since the early 1990’s.
I think the best measure of prices is to look at carrying costs of owning relative to rent. At some point, it will make financial sense as a business to buy and rent out property for profit. That’s what I would look at, not this inflation-adjusted graphic. This chart is good at demonstrating the excessive prices, but there are too many issues to use it quantitatively and apply it practically.
ParticipantI wonder how good the data is from 100+ years ago. Where the heck could they even find it? If it is good data, I’m impressed they could go that far back.
This chart has been around for a long time. My main issue with it is that it is inflation adjusted based on official government figures. Inflation calculations have changed a lot since 1900. For example, in the early 1990’s the US changed the way inflation was calculated. I believe that the result is that inflation as currently measured is more than 1% less than the pre-Clinton method. I wonder how much of the recent spike is due to mis-measurement of inflation. It could easily be distorted by 15-20% if we under-report inflation by 1% per year since the early 1990’s.
I think the best measure of prices is to look at carrying costs of owning relative to rent. At some point, it will make financial sense as a business to buy and rent out property for profit. That’s what I would look at, not this inflation-adjusted graphic. This chart is good at demonstrating the excessive prices, but there are too many issues to use it quantitatively and apply it practically.
ParticipantI wonder how good the data is from 100+ years ago. Where the heck could they even find it? If it is good data, I’m impressed they could go that far back.
This chart has been around for a long time. My main issue with it is that it is inflation adjusted based on official government figures. Inflation calculations have changed a lot since 1900. For example, in the early 1990’s the US changed the way inflation was calculated. I believe that the result is that inflation as currently measured is more than 1% less than the pre-Clinton method. I wonder how much of the recent spike is due to mis-measurement of inflation. It could easily be distorted by 15-20% if we under-report inflation by 1% per year since the early 1990’s.
I think the best measure of prices is to look at carrying costs of owning relative to rent. At some point, it will make financial sense as a business to buy and rent out property for profit. That’s what I would look at, not this inflation-adjusted graphic. This chart is good at demonstrating the excessive prices, but there are too many issues to use it quantitatively and apply it practically.
ParticipantI bought here in November ’06 in an odd deal, the details of which I won’t bore you with, that protects me from a peak-to-trough decline of 40%.
I, for one would be very interested in the boring details of an odd deal that would protect one from a 40% decline in prices. Do tell.
ParticipantI bought here in November ’06 in an odd deal, the details of which I won’t bore you with, that protects me from a peak-to-trough decline of 40%.
I, for one would be very interested in the boring details of an odd deal that would protect one from a 40% decline in prices. Do tell.
ParticipantI bought here in November ’06 in an odd deal, the details of which I won’t bore you with, that protects me from a peak-to-trough decline of 40%.
I, for one would be very interested in the boring details of an odd deal that would protect one from a 40% decline in prices. Do tell.
ParticipantI bought here in November ’06 in an odd deal, the details of which I won’t bore you with, that protects me from a peak-to-trough decline of 40%.
I, for one would be very interested in the boring details of an odd deal that would protect one from a 40% decline in prices. Do tell.
ParticipantI bought here in November ’06 in an odd deal, the details of which I won’t bore you with, that protects me from a peak-to-trough decline of 40%.
I, for one would be very interested in the boring details of an odd deal that would protect one from a 40% decline in prices. Do tell.
-
AuthorPosts
