Maybe how much housing is being used or actually exists, compared to how much money is being spent on it? The problem with looking at what’s on the market regardless of price is that if there is plenty of housing currently on the market at a very high price, that could be because there are many dollars chasing not much housing, and it’s already priced in enough that all available units aren’t getting immediately bought.
I looked through the context of this comment thread and see no quotes. To clarify, my claim is that you can’t measure housing supply like you say you can, and I’m making a logical argument for this, not presenting evidence. Still don’t understand what if any criticisms you have against that argument.
Well, considering there are lots and lots of houses here that have been on the market for a long time, yes. There’s not a supply issue, at least where I am.
Yes, no one said houses weren’t expensive, so I’m not sure what either of those things prove.
Also, from the very end of your first link:
But it’s not all bad news. Daryl Fairweather, chief economist at Redfin, has seen a recent uptick in sellers marking down prices, and competition for each home is not nearly as heated as it was two years ago. Low demand from buyers and low inventory from sellers has led to somewhat of a balance in the market.
“We’re no longer in this environment where there’s so much demand and sellers are flooded with offers,” she said.
Plenty of houses around here are for sale. Doesn’t seem like a supply issue.
You can’t measure housing supply relative to demand by the presence of houses currently on the market
How else would you measure it?
Maybe how much housing is being used or actually exists, compared to how much money is being spent on it? The problem with looking at what’s on the market regardless of price is that if there is plenty of housing currently on the market at a very high price, that could be because there are many dollars chasing not much housing, and it’s already priced in enough that all available units aren’t getting immediately bought.
You’re ignoring the fact that your supposed evidence contradicted your claim.
No idea what you mean, elaborate?
Your “evidence,” which I quoted, said that demand is no longer outpacing supply.
I looked through the context of this comment thread and see no quotes. To clarify, my claim is that you can’t measure housing supply like you say you can, and I’m making a logical argument for this, not presenting evidence. Still don’t understand what if any criticisms you have against that argument.
As long as overpriced houses find buyers, it’s a supply issue.
There’s always about 100 house available for sale but they’re sold in a few days and there’s about 1000 families looking for a house at all times
Your analysis: ThErE’s No SuPpLy IsSuE
Well, considering there are lots and lots of houses here that have been on the market for a long time, yes. There’s not a supply issue, at least where I am.
“here”
Yeah so using just your local community to evaluate the market as a whole should make you question your methodology.
“There’s plenty of cheap housing available for everyone!” says the guy looking at the Detroit market.
It’s not like I live everywhere… and it’s not like you’ve presented any evidence.
…
Evidence of a crisis that has been extensively covered for years at this point?
“It’s not like I live everywhere”
Yeah so I don’t need to live in Gaza to know that people are getting killed over there. Get out of your bubble a bit.
I know people are getting killed in Gaza because people have shown me evidence of it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2024/housing-market-price-trends-zip-code-map/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/604228/median-house-prices-canada/
Yes, no one said houses weren’t expensive, so I’m not sure what either of those things prove.
Also, from the very end of your first link:
Did you even read it?