Why Land and Homes Actually Tend to Be Disappointing Investments
Land and Homes should not suck useful capital out of our economies.  Where could you spend more money and benefit less people per dollar?  Our capital is better deployed in businesses where many more people benefit from many less dollar input.<p>This is why the SP500 craps on real estate.  Because it should.  Hell, the only reason real estate has had the peaks it has, is because it was subsidized by the financial sector.  And as you can see, that blip of misvaluation did much more harm than good.<p>Business make the world better than houses do.  Businesses are where you get people the best benefits.  More expensive houses, to the point of unaffordable are the enemy.  If you have allocated a huge portion of your assets into a non productive asset (a house), then you are part of what is wrong with the world.  Stop expecting your &quot;only benefits you house&quot; to pay the same as &quot;benefits 10x + more people&quot; businesses.<p>P.S.  liquidity, capital surplus recycling, less bid&#x2F;ask spread, less fees, less counterparty risk (eviction, destruction).  The capital markets pretty much crap on the real estate markets.  And they should.