The either/or of housing

[Recursion]

This is one of those either/or choices that there's not really a way around. Either housing can rise in price faster than inflation, or not.

If it does, young people can't afford to buy houses (or rent; the two are inextricably linked). If it doesn't, homeowners can't expect their houses to go up in value over time; it stops being an investment.

There's not really a way for housing to be both a place to save money into and affordable. You can't thread that needle and have both of those happen at once.

[gredinger]

1. An outside perspective.

Look at the Japanese housing market. Their houses are nearly worthless after 30 years. Real estate as a long term investment should be hedged against catastrophe bonds at this point.

Making affordable real estate would be just ensuring there's more supply than demand. By creating an over-saturation of supply, houses will sit empty, but people will have the ability to afford these houses.

[NutmegYankee]

2. I'll be honest - I bought a house as a nice place to live.

I really don't care as much about the investment part. I just wanted my own free standing structure where I didn't have to fight for parking and listen to neighbors walk around or make noise at odd times. That and space to build a massive garden, which is a hobby I love.

Math wise, my mortgage payment has increased $77 over the last decade, about 6% overall driven mostly by taxes. The official inflation rate over the last decade was 18%. Rent was very likely to increase at a much faster rate

[Hoyt]

3. Housing is going to have to get smaller like just about every other developed country.