pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Storyteller 31 Aug 2023 \ on: People in the US are getting poorer since 1963 (housing data shows). bitcoin
That is a great first indication. However the average gdp per capita and the average house price don’t say a lot.
You are dividing two averages on each other. How many real people actually earn the average GDP per capita? And how many houses actually cost the average price?
There is probably a huge income equality in USA. There are a lot people earning below that average gdp per capita. And a lot of millionairs and billionaires.
Check the website wtfhappened in 1971. You see that from the moment Nixxon defaulted all the graphs went up.
Probably the reason is that the prices of houses grew faster than the average income/economy.
The wealthy people invested in scarce assets (houses) and that caused the houses to increase in price faster than the incomes.
If you watch all other precious assets like Mona Lisa, gold, value stocks probably you will see the same. You can buy less of them.
The CPI is a basket of goods that smart people don’t want to buy, your personal CPI includes holidays, steak, lobster, twice a month dining out in a restaurant, every 3 years a new macbook. That is not the regular CPI.
So they are fooling us. Telling is what to buy.
If you measure the gdp per capita in terms of the bitcoin, how much bitcoin can you buy in 2023 compared to 2009 you will also see you can buy much less bitcoin.
It means all precious assets go up.
But yeah it is a pitty that young USA people will not be able to own a house.
I use averages precisely because of all the debatable nuances there are in the income distribution.
I have no doubt the wealthiest 10%-20% of the people have increased their purchasing power to buy property.
For the poorer 80% of the people, this decline is even worse.
Because of the income inequality distribution, I could have used the median values instead of the averages, and that would have shown even a grimmer picture than the numbers I showed. But that would be something an economist can debate saying that the total share of wealth is the important element, thus the average numbers are the important.
Also I did not find in my sources any data other than averages.
reply