I assure you that if I wanted to, I would have been able to find a 10 year period that worked out to inflation +1% precisely. I'm too lazy. The bottom line is that no matter what I say, and no matter how much I source it, you'll deny it because reasons. Ever notice that I'm the one always sourcing things, and you and your coven are throwing out anecdote after anecdote?Mike15 wrote: ↑ That chart is real (normalized to 2016) dollars, btw so you can visualize it excluding inflation. Using your numbers above, 1985 trough - 1996 trough was inflation + 2.27%. That's a big difference compared to "inflation + 1%." If you really think "it's not precisely 1%, but close enough" plug inflation + 2.27% in your rent vs. buy calculator and report back.
So your inflation+1 is a US ~20th century historical average from a 2000/2005 book. Would GTA-info, more current, not be more useful than a US nationwide figure?
As far as I'm concerned, you are more than welcome to buy 200 properties at today's prices and subsidize your tenants. It always makes me smile when I see a landlord not know what they're actually doing. What I don't like is when you guys say painfully ignorant things like "equity is part of my ROI" or "it's not negative cashflow because equity" or "the house is paid for so it's free chortlechortlechortle". It confuses impressionable people.
If you guys want to think that you are geniuses for buying houses, be my guest. But try not to spread misinformation, if you don't mind. It's not good for anyone.
Oh, and inflation +1% applies to Canada as well.
_____
Housing bear who won't be a bear forever.
Follow my journey through the Toronto housing bubble on Twitter: @SoSudsy
Housing bear who won't be a bear forever.
Follow my journey through the Toronto housing bubble on Twitter: @SoSudsy