Tweet
Sorry, I was wrong about the people per household.
That means there are 167 million people who live in houses where they have a mortgage (which includes condos!), which means there are 133 million people who do not, of whom over 100 million are adults.
That's a huge chunk of the US population, and they will have a significant effect on consumer spending.
No, you don't seem to understand what I've said at all.
Demand fluctuates, and supply follows demand. Demand increases, supply increases to match demand and overshoots. Demand falls, supply falls.
Gosh.
So if there were no speculation, then supply wouldn't come into the equation?
That's one reason to buy a house, but that's not the only reason. People buy houses because they need them. This intrinsic demand will be decreasing in the US.
That is the demand which reflects the true value rather then the speculation. Speculation raises demand, so that the housing supply increases to match the demand. Then when the speculation ends, you have too many houses to match the intrinsic demand.
That means there are 167 million people who live in houses where they have a mortgage (which includes condos!), which means there are 133 million people who do not, of whom over 100 million are adults.
That's a huge chunk of the US population, and they will have a significant effect on consumer spending.
You just continually state that supply matches demand.
If that were so prices wouldn't fluctuate like they do.
There's always a shortage or a surplus, and the reason for that is speculation.
So if there were no speculation, then supply wouldn't come into the equation?
That is people buy and sell houses under the expectations of future prices.
That is the demand which reflects the true value rather then the speculation. Speculation raises demand, so that the housing supply increases to match the demand. Then when the speculation ends, you have too many houses to match the intrinsic demand.
Comment