ok, i punched in 300k from 2003 to 2007, and the value comes out at $334k, which is 11.3% (over four years).
i can find many suburbs where median has gone way beyond that over the same period almost to the point where 11.3% inflation adjustment is negligable compared to the overall gain.
But you have to apply the same logic to a $300k stock investment over the same period, when sold, the gains if adjusted for inlfation are reduced by the same 11.3%.
So i cant see why this only applies to property when the money you're holding in your hand at the end of the investment period, whatever the asset class, is compared to the principle investment's inflated cash value.
