Morgan Housel

And so I think if you tie that all together, we are inflating the values of homes almost intentionally to keep current homeowners happy in a way that gives them the impression of getting wealthier even if they're not.

And we're doing that at the cost of younger generations who, because home prices have risen, can't afford to take their first step into it.

It makes sense to them.

It's not this nebulous stock market thing.

It's the thing you can wrap your head around.

Another element to this.

Didn't mean to cut you off in your great story you're telling.

But

All wealth comes from compounding and compounding takes time.

Time is the magic sauce of compound interest.

And for a lot of people, a house is the only asset.

I'm not going to say investment.

It's the only asset that they are willing to own for 10 or 20 or 30 years and actually give compounding a chance to work.

Whereas most people, if they buy the stock, if they invest in the stock market, they're going to check it 90 days later and say, didn't do anything.

It's a scam, but they're gonna live in their house for 30 years.

And if you live in it for 30 years, even if the value only goes up by 3% per year, over 30 years, that's a lot.

And this is why you hear stories about people who bought a house in the 1970s for 70 grand and now it's worth 4 million or whatever it might be.

Just because like the average annual return on that might not be that much, but if you compound it for 50 years, it's a lot.

No, I think it's entirely symbolic.

And from a politician's point of view, I would not discount symbolism.