From: kludge@panix.com   
      
   Keith F. Lynch  wrote:   
   >eleeper@optonline.net  wrote:   
   >> My parents' house, built in the 1950s, had a three-quarter bath off   
   >> the master bedroom, and it was by no means an upscale house.  (They   
   >> paid $17,500 in 1964; adjusted for inflation that would be $168,089   
   >> in 2023.)   
   >   
   >Presumably it's actually worth far more than $168,089 today, meaning   
   >that the official inflation rate is an enormous underestimate.   
      
   This may be true, although the price for a small three-bedroom house   
   in this town isn't much more than that these days.   
      
   However, although the price for housing has increased far faster than   
   inflation, the price for food has not increased anywhere near as much   
   as inflation.  In the fifties, food was often the largest expense in   
   a family budget, whereas today it is usually housing (or medical expenses).   
      
   >There was an article in today's Washington Post pointing out that   
   >rates of homelessness are way up, and that homeless people are no   
   >longer majority mentally ill or addicted.  Most of them were just   
   >squeezed out by rents increasing much faster than wages.   
      
   A lot of this is because rental houses that used to be owned by independent   
   landlords are now being bought up by real estate investment trusts which   
   basically optimize everything for maximum return.  There are many apartment   
   buildings in NYC which are completely empty because the reit that runs them   
   can't rent them out at market rate, and if they rented them below market it   
   would reduce the value of their other properties.   
      
   The rental problem is less the consequence of the housing shortage as a   
   consequence of direct market manipulation.   
   --scott   
   --   
   "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)