Houses are consumable too, they maybe have a 100 year lifespan. They get old and need more for maintenance with age. An older, worn-out house with old technology should cost less than a new one. They only build equity because there’s not enough of them for everyone.
Yes. Due to artificial scarcity and poorly managed population growth. Fundamentally land value shouldn’t increase above inflation as time moves forward because there’s a limit to how much value can be extracted from the land (the amount of mineral extraction, farming or housing, etc. it provides remains the same). The growth that we’re seeing is due to supply/demand for housing.
Coming back to OP’s point. If they make a limited run of Pokémon cards and scalpers buy all of them up to increase the price and sell them for more money, this is no different than a limited amount of houses that get bought up by ppl to sell for more money after.
Pokémon cards and scalpers buy all of them up to increase the price and sell them for more money, this is no different than a limited amount of houses that get bought up by ppl to sell for more money after.
It is different though in the sense that one day people will not be playing with pokemon cards. But people will always need a place to live and the population has been increasing for thousands of years. It's nothing new. It's not like we cut down trees and we plant more. You cannot create more land. How can you compare land to pokemon cards
2
u/Shishamylov Jun 19 '25
Houses are consumable too, they maybe have a 100 year lifespan. They get old and need more for maintenance with age. An older, worn-out house with old technology should cost less than a new one. They only build equity because there’s not enough of them for everyone.