Maybe they went to zero during the crisis and then went up? If they went down, perfectly valid to ignore them, no? I think we should exclude extreme examples in these debates. The data backing the arguments up are random at best
They did not go to zero. They did not even go as low as 2009. The water crises started in Apr 2014 resulting in a brief drop of typical sized followed immediately next quarter by a record breaking rise to record high prices even though sales were low before it.
Comments
Flint Michigan is emerging from one of the greatest catastrophes in modern times - their entire water supply poisoned by lead.
This is not the city to use in any argument, unless it involves EPA super sites.
I think that's his point. If the city is a disaster, with a shrinking population, and lax zoning laws -- why are prices continuing to rise?
My point is that this is not a city to use in any argument. Their situation is so unique as to be irrelevant to any aggregate statistic.
It’s a worst case scenario for property values and they’re still going up. That’s a perfectly valid example.
Maybe they went to zero during the crisis and then went up? If they went down, perfectly valid to ignore them, no? I think we should exclude extreme examples in these debates. The data backing the arguments up are random at best
They did not go to zero. They did not even go as low as 2009. The water crises started in Apr 2014 resulting in a brief drop of typical sized followed immediately next quarter by a record breaking rise to record high prices even though sales were low before it.
http://www.city-data.com/housing/houses-Flint-Michigan.html
Well sure, it makes it easier to ignore depending on the point you are trying to make.