| ▲ | lotsofpulp 4 days ago |
| Some land does. A lot of land does not. |
|
| ▲ | quickthrowman 4 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Agricultural land you can cultivate certainly does, particularly irrigated land. Land in the desert with zero economic value (think Slab City) probably does not keep up with inflation. |
|
| ▲ | pfannkuchen 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I think this is strictly not a true statement? Land value can decrease in real terms at the same time inflation is happening, sure. But it isn’t revalued by inflation in the way that a contract denominated in the inflationary currency is. Can you explain more about what you mean? |
| |
| ▲ | lotsofpulp 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I don’t understand what your comment could mean. You buy land at time t for price x. You sell land at time t+1 for price y. If (y-x)/x is is less than the same calculation for whatever other asset you would have bought (I would use sp500), then you lost money. | | |
| ▲ | pfannkuchen a day ago | parent [-] | | I didn’t say that land was as good as the s&p at appreciating in value. That is a completely different claim which I wouldn’t assert. S&P has appreciated considerably more than inflation, right? So saying that something does or doesn’t track inflation is completely different from whether you lost money compared to if you’d instead gone with the s&p. |
|
|
