It may be the case that nominal house prices have rarely if ever fallen since WW II, but I would doubt their annual average percentage increase over this period exceeds the capital gain on stocks and certain classes of bonds, particularly when the carrying cost of this type of investment is factored in. We bought our house in Ottawa 20 years ago, and its value has risen steadily in tandem with the city's growth as a high-tech centre, but I still calculate the average annual price increase in our home at about 5-6% over that period, excluding maintenance, taxes, and interest charges. This includes the sharp increase in house values over the past few years when the stock market turned down from its peak in 2000.
Marv Gandall ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Davies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 6:47 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Housing prices > it's only happened once in the UK since the war. > > dd > > -----Original Message----- > From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael > Pollak > Sent: 23 July 2004 03:12 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Housing prices > > > I recently read that nominal housing prices have never declined in the US > since WWII. Real prices have declined three times, durind the mid and > late seventies and the early 90s, but nominal prices never. Is that > really true? It makes it look as if people who think they're ever-rising, > rather than being delusive, have quite a track record -- you have to be a > wonk to have noticed any falls ever, and even those have been short and > fleeting. > > If it is true, is there any non-bubble-headed explanation for it? > > And how come it's true here but not in the UK? > > Michael >
