House prices in gold (updated, longer series)

[grapejelly]

Re: House prices in gold (updated, longer series)

That's why I just told my mom to get out of her rental and buy a house NOW!! She's a fixed income retiree. (Don't worry, her bullion investment will carry her through if I'm wrong.

except that extremes over-correct the other way...and we can expect this one to over-correct, which it hasn't yet, and bigtime too. Because of the difficulties financing, which has removed many buyers from the market.

[jimmygu3]

Re: House prices in gold (updated, longer series)

except that extremes over-correct the other way...and we can expect this one to over-correct, which it hasn't yet, and bigtime too. Because of the difficulties financing, which has removed many buyers from the market.

Yeah, if she's able to pay cash, the deals will get better.

[jayers4647]

Re: House prices in gold (updated, longer series)

I saved MacKay's chart as a .pdf. It is attached to this post.

If he wants me to remove this post, I will.

If you review the chart 260 ounces at $1000/oz = $260,000 median house in 2009.

In 2012, if the price of gold is $2500 ounce and the ratio from the chart is 100 ounces, that leaves a nominal house value of $250,000. That could be strangely an accurate prediction in that chart !

[Slimprofits]

Re: House prices in gold (updated, longer series)

copy of Mackay's chart from way back when:

[Jay]

Re: House prices in gold (updated, longer series)

Hey, somehow he even got the reflation bubble almost right too! Check out the blip.

[sn1p3r]

Re: House prices in gold (updated, longer series)

Hoping to revive this thread, so here goes. How would you think we could account for acreage? What if acreage stays the same? What is the projected low and on what timeframe? Back to @75 oz? That seems high...

[lektrode]

Re: House prices in gold (updated, longer series)

wrote on 2dec09: Hoping to revive this thread, so here goes. How would you think we could account for acreage? What if acreage stays the same? What is the projected low and on what timeframe? Back to @75 oz? That seems high...

yes, please LETS DO REVIVE THIS THREAD, seeing as 26months have passed beneath the bridge?

where are we now, with RE, vs the above metrics - in particular the ratio of au-gram/re-sqft?

while my sense (from absorbing as much of you guys + dr housing bubble (is that our Don?) + patrick.net + what eye see in SLC (where i'm intending on buying a fixerupper, as i'm worried the bernank is intending on pushing the price of lift tickets and hotel rooms out of my tax bracket) is that RE still has a way to go (down) yet and given EJ's outlook is a 10-15year correction tween 2006 and 2016-? - what happens if we get into a burst of high/hyper inflation sooner than expected?

at some point rents will have to climb inversely-proportional to value of $US and/so the question becomes: will house prices continue to decline vs gold?

and wont a change in inflationary expectations drive housing prices higher (if only in nominal $'s), in a shorter time frame than the iTulip thesis suggests?

[zoog]

Re: House prices in gold (updated, longer series)



As someone always points out in discussions like these, houses today are larger than they were in the past (although there was a small decline in 2009, the latest data available). So the following chart shows ounces of gold to buy one square foot of the median home.



Although this gold ratio concept is a neat idea, and both charts suggest we are at or near historic low points, I believe there are other factors to consider. If you are at least relatively well-off, have every reason to believe you will continue to be, and intend to by a home to live in "forever", then using the gold ratio to determine timing is probably a reasonable approach.

For the rest of us, I think that house prices relative to incomes are more important. The following chart shows the ratio of median new home prices to median annual household income. Prior to 1944 I had to use average income data. One might think then that the ratio is too high in the early part of the 20th century, but as averages tend to be higher than medians, it may actually be understated.

At any rate, using this metric, homes have been getting progressively more expensive relative to incomes since the end of WW II. Despite a significant decline in nominal prices over the past few years, this ratio has hardly slowed down.

As a bonus of sorts, this chart also shows income expressed in ounces of gold. It is important to understand the dynamics of the dramatic increase and peak around 1970. After the war, the United States was the only major country left untouched. The industrial base built up for the war effort turned to consumer goods, and the nation prospered. Meanwhile, however, the US dollar gold price was still fixed at $35 until it was allowed to float in 1968. Incomes were rising during those years, roughly three times in nominal terms, but the gold price was flat. This over-exaggerates the increase. After gold was allowed to float, the price quickly climbed, and therefore the income ratio dropped.



Incomes measured in gold are near historic lows. Will they soon reverse? What if they don't, and what if you have to sell sooner than expected... who can afford to buy your house? 1945 was the most affordable time to buy a home in living memory. IMO, either home prices need to continue to drop significantly, or median incomes need to rise significantly (or some combination of the two) to make buying a home affordable.