Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ilaine who wrote (96577)	4/19/2001 7:55:50 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) of 436258

cobalt, i'm thinking in terms of a single income. "family" doesn't designate how many incomes contribute. example (assume no inflation). 1. in 1973 a single family home costs $1000 and the avg wage is $500. 2. that same house sold for $1900 in 2001 but now the husband and wife work (avg wage remained flat at $500). family income calculations would say yes - even though the home rose 90% and individual wages remained flat. i'd argue that homes rose 90% relative to an apples to apples comparison of the average single person's wage. forcing one's significant other to work is a real cost. i am a little bit perplexed how many different ways the "pros" calculate "affordibility." it does get confusing. one can not look at the headline and resolve this issue (either way). the mechanics are key, and it appears there are a lot of different mechanics depending on the agenda - the real estate web site that wants to market "rosy scenario" and grandfather doomsday quotes the home buyer's association and they get a pretty dismal result for the same time period.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next