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

Friday Feature: Solstice Hybrid Academy

May 30, 2025

David Boaz, RIP: Reflections on a Great Libertarian,...

June 7, 2024

David Boaz, Son of Liberty

June 7, 2024

Should Governments Encourage Population Growth?

August 19, 2024

SCOTUS Stumbles: EPA’s Power Plant Rule Is Inflicting...

October 24, 2024

Federal Rail Administration’s New Two-Person Train Crew Rule...

April 5, 2024

An Encouraging Report on Overdose Deaths

September 18, 2024

Illegal Immigrants Have a Low Homicide Conviction Rate:...

February 28, 2024

Friday Feature: Bright Minds STEAM Studio

February 28, 2025

Claude AI Thinks Marco Rubio Is Apparently Breaking...

March 14, 2025

    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

    • Harmony Squad: Supreme Court Issues Six Unanimous Decisions

      June 5, 2025
    • Quick Login to AmourFactory: A Beginner’s Guide

      June 5, 2025
    • Disabling Trump’s “Tariff Button”

      June 5, 2025
    • ‘Sick puppy’ Tim Walz should never have been on Dems’ 2024 ticket, Trump says

      June 5, 2025
    • Federal judge orders Trump to restore funding to Clinton-era agency gutted by DOGE

      June 5, 2025
    • Musk says Trump would have lost 2024 election without him as ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ feud continues

      June 5, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,149)
    • Investing (2,011)
    • Politics (15,535)
    • Stocks (3,128)
    • 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