Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Senator Warren Is Way Off on Raspberries—and Americans’ Living Standards

by August 16, 2024
August 16, 2024
Senator Warren Is Way Off on Raspberries—and Americans’ Living Standards

Norbert Michel and Jerome Famularo

Last week, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D‑MA) went on X to promote her latest housing reform plan. She claimed the United States has a shortage of seven million homes and then discussed ways to subsidize demand, a surefire way to make shortages worse.

That’s bad enough, but then she asked her X followers, “You ever wonder how your grandparents bought a home for 7 raspberries, but you can’t afford a one bedroom apartment?”

We know that politicians exaggerate. It’s just what they do. And this claim that everything is so unaffordable compared with when your grandparents were your age has been a favorite populist talking point for decades. Still, though Warren may have been joking about the raspberries, her example shows how far off these kinds of claims really are—she’s off by almost a factor of one million, depending on exactly whose grandparents we’re talking about.

As the chart in this post shows, between 1963 and 2023 the average house in the United States never cost less than three million raspberries. So a bit more than seven. (We dug up some old raspberry data from the state of Washington, made a few assumptions, including one about the weight of the typical raspberry, and then compared the average raspberry price with the annual median US house price.)

Yes, the typical American house now costs almost six million raspberries, whereas it cost only about four million in the early 1960s. But the data do not display a steadily increasing trend, and those older houses were only about 300 square feet per person, three times less than today’s 924 square feet. And those houses were likely to have asbestos roofs, lead pipes, and no Wi-Fi.

Americans are generally not buying the same houses that they were in the 1960s. And that’s partly because income growth for the typical American has been strong. Regardless, the homeownership rate—though it increased (because of awful federal policies) in the run-up to the 2008 financial crisis—has hovered around 65 percent for decades, even as the population grew by more than 150 million people.

No matter which fruit politicians want to price homes in, it’s simply not the case that everyone is worse off now than their grandparents. And if Congress really wants to do something about housing affordability, they’ll get rid of all the federal policies that subsidize demand. Sooner rather than later would be great.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Expert dismisses Russian commander’s ‘highly unlikely’ claim about crucial military advantage over US
next post
Jane Fonda says Harris-Walz ticket is ‘only hope’ to beat ‘orange man’ in campaign call with climate activists

You may also like

Krugman’s Cold Comfort on the Federal Debt

June 13, 2024

VP Picks for Kamala Harris

July 24, 2024

The State of Student Loan Forgiveness: September 2024

September 3, 2024

Lawmakers Navigate Licensing Law Hurdles So Patients Can...

February 20, 2024

A New Podcast with Peter Van Doren

May 3, 2023

Getting the Word Out On Podcasts

October 24, 2023

The State of Student Loan Forgiveness: May 2024

May 1, 2024

It’s Not Just Republicans, Democrats Want Trillion-Dollar Tax...

December 5, 2023

Are Police-Worn Body Cameras Useful?

August 25, 2023

Will Brazil’s Government Shut Down X for 20...

August 29, 2024

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Call with China’s Xi, and Trump-Musk exchange fueled barbs during 20th week in office

      June 7, 2025
    • Trump’s conservative allies warn Congress faces critical ‘test’ with $9.4B spending cut proposal

      June 7, 2025
    • Tech ETFs are Leading Since April, but Another Group is Leading YTD

      June 7, 2025
    • TIMELINE: Inside the evolving relationship between Trump and Musk from first term to this week’s fallout

      June 7, 2025
    • Deadly drone wars are already here and the US is horribly unprepared

      June 7, 2025
    • Week Ahead: NIFTY’s Behavior Against This Level Crucial As The Index Looks At Potential Resumption Of An Upmove

      June 7, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,152)
    • Investing (2,019)
    • Politics (15,564)
    • Stocks (3,136)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved