Live data from Hacker News

Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

fullstackeconomics.com

171–180 of 344 posts

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#171
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd change the perspective. Both you and the GP are right, but all these benefits are used against the consumer, to distract them from other things that are happening. It's a subtle race to the bottom which, when looking at younger generations / lower classes and their incapability to buy, suddenly isn't so subtle anymore. The entire thing also creates a cycle of "house prices must go up!" which further exacerbates t…

Now that people have less children, or no children, and the population tends to age-out and shrink in many countries, I wonder if we'll reach a point where real state prices start to consistently fall every year, reversing the current trend, as people die of old age in large numbers leaving lots of empty properties behind.

I hope so, but I also heard enough reasons to not expect this. Many countries are still projecting population increases well until 2030 (sometimes even 2050?). The Netherlands predicts population will continue to rise well until 2070, despite fertility rate fluctuating between 1.5 and 1.7 for five decades now. It's pretty similar to Japan, and Japan has only just started decreasing in population.

There's also the cautionary tale of "there is enough housing, just not enough affordable housing", as well as VCs convincing governments to tear down homes in favor of other things, further reducing the number of homes.

Then again, there's the darker perspective that lack of medical staff / medicine will significantly lower the lifespan of several generations.

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My monthly mortgage payment on a nearly 4,000 sq foot home on nearly an acre is about the same as local monthly rental of a 2 bedroom apartment. I can't decide if I got a deal or if local rental prices are crazy high.

The house across the street from me rents for 2x my mortgage.

A lot of people can't afford the down payment to reduce the monthly payments. Plus the endless rumors of hedge funds buying up all the houses w cash to force renting, reduce supply.

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the really psychotic aspect of this all is that in the long run it will destroy the economy as family formation craters Starting a family doesn't require owning a home. Vast numbers of people start families without ever owning a home.

Source? The VAST majority of non-single parent families in the US still alive today owned a home. Maybe current trends are different since home ownership rates are low in young people. But family formation rates are also lower than normal.

Majority homeownership is a post-1950s thing in the US, corresponding with the beginning of the big drop in the fertility rate; the (temporary) late 1980s surge in homeownership corresponded to the start of the big drop in family formation; the recent drop is from an extremely short term spike and is still above where the late-1980s surge started.

While at any given time homeowners may be more likely than their age-peer contemporaries to start families, aggregate homeownership rates don't show any sign of being a positive contributor to family formation.

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> home prices have been absolutely bonkers, with two massive bubbles (we are in one right now) Isn't the definition of a bubble that it has the capability to pop and then eventually pops? At least for urban housing, I see no way of that even being remotely possible, neither for the US nor here in Europe. Rural areas simply are too far left behind to support decent human life - no high speed Internet, no public transp…

Housing prices are affected by monetary and psychological aspects just like the stock market and inflation are. If people stop believing housing is a good investment then prices will fall.

> If people stop believing housing is a good investment then prices will fall.

People need something to live in though, and as long as the demand for places to live is higher than the supply, rents and purchase prices will keep going up.

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the really psychotic aspect of this all is that in the long run it will destroy the economy as family formation craters Starting a family doesn't require owning a home. Vast numbers of people start families without ever owning a home.

Anecdotal: my wife and I are waiting for a home to start a family. We're not even going to stop contraception until we move in. The second we do, we'll start trying. Fortunately it looks like a 10% correction is all we need, and, fingers crossed, it looks to be coming.

> Anecdotal: my wife and I are waiting for a home to start a family

Sure, some people do that, but there are race and economic class biases to it, and both the races and economic classes biased to it are shrinking as a share of the population.

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#176
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you benefit from inflation if your income or other investments don’t go up in value? Someone owning a house and making $300k/year loses purchasing power at the same rate as their mortgage “value” drops due to inflation.

You'd have to be in a pretty crappy situation to not have your income go up over a 25-year mortgage.

Same goes somewhat for home prices going up, but if you don't live in a booming tech city it might not hold true. I'm in one, my house is 4x in under 20 years. My payment was so huge when I got it, now it isn't so crazy.

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#177

Mortgage loan officers (and also car salesmen) do all in their power to redirect people away from the fact that they're going to fork over e.g. $600k in total interest and principle for a $300k sticker-price house over 30 years. They do this by focusing on the monthly payment rather than the actual total spend. Convincing buyers that monthly out-of-pocket spend is somehow a proxy for the actual purchase price is a po…

Inflation is a monthly/annual measure (at least insofar as most economists are interested in it). Looking at monthly spend is the fair comparison.

You're bringing up an important point about buyers often left unaware of their total outlay, but on the flip side, their home is usually an appreciable asset, they are free to re-fi, and they also get to deduct mortgage interest.

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#178

Mortgage loan officers (and also car salesmen) do all in their power to redirect people away from the fact that they're going to fork over e.g. $600k in total interest and principle for a $300k sticker-price house over 30 years. They do this by focusing on the monthly payment rather than the actual total spend. Convincing buyers that monthly out-of-pocket spend is somehow a proxy for the actual purchase price is a po…

Interest rate below inflation? I don’t care about that 300k, I would have lost it to inflation anyways. Mortgages let you pay 2052 dollars against 2022 prices and that’s under appreciated by the financially illiterate.

The greatest vehicle ever for the common man to leverage debt to his advantage.

Re: Why the government took home prices out of its main inflation index

#179
post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The government lets you deduct your mortgage interest from taxes This is effectively not true anymore. > Also, what am I going to do instead, rent? My rent can go up $50 bucks a year where my mortgage payment is locked in. For most people, home ownership is the safest and best way to build a retirement nest egg and a tangible asset to borrow against in times of trouble. I'm going to push back a touch on this, it's…

>> The government lets you deduct your mortgage interest from taxes > > This is effectively not true anymore. Care to explain? Is this because the standard deduction is so high, it's generally not worth itemizing for most people since the Trump tax system adjustment? Genuinely curious; I'm a current renter, hopefully purchasing in the next couple of years. But this is an important part of the buying calculus.

I assume that's the point they're making. With relatively recent tax law changes, it no longer makes sense for a lot of people to itemize--and if you don't itemize, you don't get a break on your mortgage.
Post reply on HN