OTTAWA房价走势-50年一观

[Pontiac1998]

To CCC:

I did a little search, they are prime rates. Since 1980, they are higher than 20% twice.

PN

 

[ccc]

To CCC:

I did a little search, they are prime rates. Since 1980, they are higher than 20% twice.

PN

They could be, as the mortgage rates were above that a few times too.

 

[寺言]

That's great.

up

 

[Tony138]

Dow Jones Industrial Average

The question is : If you don't buy a house, what should you invest on?

Dow Jones Indul Avestriarage :blowzy:

 

[zhzh]

1956 " $ 13,351 " 0.2
...
1999 "$149,650" 4
2000 "$159,511" 6.6
2001 "$175,971" 10.3
2002 "$200,711" 14.1
2003 "$218,692" 9 (18 years)
2004 "$235,678" 7.8
2005 "$244,531" 3.8
2006 "$255,889" 4.7
2007 "$272,618" 6.4
2008 "$290,366" 6.6

1956 "$ 13,351 " -> 2008 "$290,366" (vs $674,291 as calculated above)

Make sense about this "$290,366" vs "$674,291", but the price increase rate is much higher than the inflation rate 4% since 1999

 

[Pino colada]

Assume:
inflation rate: 4%/year
investment required return rate: 4%/year
Combination rate: 8.16%
That means, the purchasing power of $50.50 today = $1's in 1956.
If you want your property, $13,351 in 1956, to remain the same value, the property should be sold at $674,291 today.

Now, you may figured out if investment in houses is a good option. Don't be misled.

(1.0816^50 = 50.50)

1956 "$ 13,351 " -> 2008 "$290,366" (vs $674,291 as calculated above)

When a property investment is compared with a non-property investment, the conclusion is pointless because it fails to take into consideration of the following:

1) the rental cost the owner saved over 50 years if he stayed in the house, or

2) the rental income collected by the owner over 50 years if it was used for producing rental income.

 

[挺傻]

Assume:
If you want your property, $13,351 in 1956, to remain the same value, the property should be sold at $674,291 today.

不明白你这个结论是否有普遍说服性。如果你觉得房产投资不是好的投资方式，那么请问哪种方式可以BEAT INFLATION，而且可以长期稳定持有，并且具有较好的易操作性和变现比较快呢？谢谢分享。

 

[挺傻]

When a property investment is compared with a non-property investment, the conclusion is pointless because it fails to take into consideration of the following:

1) the rental cost the owner saved over 50 years if he stayed in the house, or

2) the rental income collected by the owner over 50 years if it was used for producing rental income.

I agree. We try to make calculation simple, some key factors have to be considered in though.

你的网名挺好玩，是不是刚从南边回来。

 

[shanghaigirl]

put this way, from 1956 through 2006, during the past 50 years, the house price increased roughly by 20 times. That translates to 6% (20^(1/50)-1)of annual growth rate.

However, suppose you put only 20% down payment and make it break even between rent income and mortgage payment, then your investment return will be 9% ( (20/0.2)^(1/50)-1), which is not too bad.

Correct me if I am wrong

 

[Kanata Laker]

嘿，看着吧，等这次走出衰退后，可能会是有记载历史上最高的通胀：你没看见各国救世的唯一办法就是印钱。钱刚开始印的时候，还没有进入大规模流通，这段时间通常的表现是通缩，就像现在；等到进入大规模流通阶段，就变成了通胀，通胀多高会导致政局动荡，甚至战争！但愿，现在的政府能有更好的办法解决未来的通胀。但有一条很明确，就是发达国家一定会向外转移通胀，而发展中国家将首先出现高通胀和高动荡。

 

[土火]

十二年过去了，总结一下吧？

 

[Littlecesar]

十二年过去了，总结一下吧？

你这坟挖的有水平。

 

[Littlecesar]

这帖里怎么没有看到鸭兄发言呢？

 

[Anakin]

这帖里怎么没有看到鸭兄发言呢？

鸭鸭忙着数钱呢
@uglyducking

 

[Anakin]

put this way, from 1956 through 2006, during the past 50 years, the house price increased roughly by 20 times. That translates to 6% (20^(1/50)-1)of annual growth rate.

However, suppose you put only 20% down payment and make it break even between rent income and mortgage payment, then your investment return will be 9% ( (20/0.2)^(1/50)-1), which is not too bad.

Correct me if I am wrong

10年房价又涨了一倍