|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
In the greater Chicago area .... not the city itself .... prices are
relatively unchanged for the last decade. The city itself has gone nuts
with the bull market, but you can't give a house away in many of the
burbs.
Gary Fritz wrote:
> > Huh ? Yes, check the dismal scientist site, prices did rise over
> > 15% in California last year. Over 40% in the San Jose area. If
> > that aint RAMPANT asset price inflation, I sure don't know what is.
>
> James. Did you READ what Dennis wrote? Yes, housing inflation in
> the Bay area is insane. But the Bay area is an ANOMALY. Look at the
> Dismal Scientist site again and you'll see San Jose has the HIGHEST
> rate of housing inflation in the country. (If I remember right,
> anyway. The site seems to be down now.)
>
> As Dennis pointed out, the AVERAGE housing inflation rate, across the
> country, is closer to 3-5%. Which is NOT "RAMPANT asset price
> inflation" by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> If you have 100 people and ONE of them has a temperature of 106 degF,
> do you slap all 100 of 'em into the hospital? Of course not. And if
> ONE small area of the country has housing hyperinflation, should you
> expect it to appear across the entire country? Of course not. Sure,
> it's possible the Bay area's "fever" could spread, but that would
> require fundamental changes in the economy around the country, and
> even then it's hardly likely to spread in the same degree as found in
> California.
>
> If the entire country was in the 15-40% range, that would indeed be a
> major problem. If isolated pockets are in the 15-40% range, that is
> a problem ONLY for the people who **CHOOSE** to live there, and it
> should not be a driver for national economic policy.
>
> If you don't like the housing inflation in the Bay area, go live
> somewhere else. But quit calling people stupid because they don't
> think the Bay area is the only thing in the whole freakin' country.
>
> Gary
|