Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Vosilla who wrote (34563)	6/28/2005 11:54:04 AM
From: KyrosL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

>>times percentage of homeownership Why? Those that are already homeowners are not affected if their home value increases. Wouldn't percentage of first time home buyers be more apt? Shelter inflation is much different depending on whether you are a home owner, a renter, or a first time home buyer.

To: John Vosilla who wrote (34563)	6/28/2005 2:34:48 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Respond to of 306849

Way too simple, straight forward and sensible....it doesn't stand a chance!<G>

To: John Vosilla who wrote (34563)	6/28/2005 8:53:22 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

A simple and fair formula for the housing component of CPI would be: 1)percentage increase in median home prices (adjusted for change in size and amenities) times the percentage of homeownership 2)plus percentage increase in median rents adjusted for change in size and amenities times percentage of renters. That indeed would be closer to the truth than what Darffot has suggested but it would also not be accurate. Consider the simple case where a person buys a home, lives in it for 30 years and dies. Over that 30 years that person's housing expenses only went up by the factor of property taxes (and other such items like insurance). Perhaps those property taxes were offset by interest expense declines by refinancing at opportune moments. Thus, you model while simple, is way too simple. It needs to incorporate turnover, property taxes and other expenses, and perhaps interest rates as well. If one does all that, one should clearly be able to see just how WRONG looking at price appreciation alone would be. That is the basis of my disagrement with Darffot. Mish