Should I Invest in Housing for the Long Term?

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.

Should I Invest in Housing for the Long Term?

Postby Teetlebaum » Thu May 09, 2013 5:29 pm

Should You Invest in Stocks or Housing for the Long Term? It Depends.
eight out of 10 people surveyed for a Pew Research report agreed that buying a home was the best long-term investment a person can make.
User avatar
Teetlebaum
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:27 pm

Re: Should I Invest in Housing for the Long Term?

Postby RadAudit » Thu May 09, 2013 5:32 pm

You don't have to paint your stocks.
"Everything will be all right in the end. If everything is not all right, then it is not the end." - The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel
RadAudit
 
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 10:20 am
Location: Second star on the right and straight on 'til morning

Re: Should I Invest in Housing for the Long Term?

Postby WolfpackFan » Thu May 09, 2013 5:43 pm

well i'd say it beats investing in housing for the short term
User avatar
WolfpackFan
 
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 2:18 pm

Re: Should I Invest in Housing for the Long Term?

Postby otbricki » Thu May 09, 2013 5:49 pm

Ed Tufte would get a kick out of this graph.
otbricki
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:28 pm

Re: Should I Invest in Housing for the Long Term?

Postby swaption » Fri May 10, 2013 8:42 am

A few thoughts:

1. Long term is going back to 2000. Really? Hard to take anything seriously after you see this.

2. Comparing returns on an unlevered home to stocks is sort of like comparing returns on bonds to stocks. This comparison is made all the time, but it makes absolutely no sense as it is far from apples to apples in terms of risk/volatility.

3. The last point is actually the most amusing since he actually came oh so close to getting this right with the following:

But unlike houses, many stocks pay dividends (especially in the large-capitalization S&P 500), which changes the return calculus yet again.

But of course, this too was a complete whiff as the writer completely missed the "dividend" that houses pay in terms of imputed rent.

So aside from the above, the grammar seemed sound and the graphics were nice. That's about it for the positives. Really makes you wonder about the qualifications of those that become a senior writer at "think" tanks like Pew. How did this article come to exist? Did he suddenly feel that he had some great insight into housing? But insight would imply that that it was preceded by some amount of genuine thought. Unfortunately, there is no evidence of that.
swaption
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:48 am


Return to Investing - Theory, News & General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], cromwell, DaftInvestor, Dale_G, fposte, jlawrence01, Peterjens and 65 guests