you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

No, this is revisionist history. The 90s were part of a nearly 15 year period when house prices were flat in Canada. For quite a few years your return would have been negative. People in the 90s were not thinking of their house as their retirement account.

We did stop making enough housing, but it’s precisely that artificial scarcity that is making people treat it as an “investment”. If we make enough, it will not be treated primarily as an investment anymore, which is how it should be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    The 90s followed the extremely high interest rates, which were why housing was flat. People couldn't easily buy in, so demand was reduced.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    But that just further corroborates the point: when housing was at its most affordable it was not considered a good investment.

    It’s also important to note that housing remained flat even when interest rates went down, partially because of a healthy stock of non-market and market housing.

  • source
  • parent