"The norm" in this case is what has happened to real estate prices in the last 100 years!? Rubbish. There's _nothing_ "norm" about what has happened to real estate in the US in 100 years. You might get more traction with "post WWII" but you'll catch my attention the most with, say, post 1968. Ah, here's one:
http://www.realestateabc.com/graphs/natlmedian.htm
> You're forgetting mortgage interest in this calculation.
I think I showed my work earlier in this thread ... and even earlier in the year:
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20070319/005617.html
> I'm just saying that buying a house isn't going to make you rich
I don't think that was the original supposition, and it's far from the point. The feeling I got from the article you posted about in the NY Times was that the financial value of home ownership is over-rated: why look, it'll take you 21 years to "break even" ...! That plus Joanna's "renting is 1/3 to 1/4 the cost of buying in the Bay Area" ...
I'm just giving the other side of the coin.
/jordan