So I take it your arguement is that family disposable income is higher than household disposable income
BUT
the factors that would cause a variance in these two figures in 2006 are the same factors that existed in 1996 and 1986
So in 1986 when the average home was 2.5 times the average household disposable income the ratio would have been even less if the price was compared to average family income
As in 1996 when prices where 3 times the average household disposbale income
As again in 2006 whne prices where 5.4 time the average household income.
seeing as you are attempting to distort the ABS figures by introduce a different set of figures, how about producing some sort of facts or charts to show that disposable family income since 1986 has increased at a great growth rate than household disposable income.
or how about the growth rate of disposable household income over the last 25 years compared to the CPI adjust growth rate of property
As benjamin Franklin said "there are three types of lies, lies damn lies and statistics.
BUT the figures I supplied have compared rleated like for like figures from 1986 to 2006 that show conclusively that property prices have grown fatser than the CPI, Wage Growth and Growth in disposable houshold income while at he same time construction costs compared to the CPI have fallen.
Which proves realestate HAS been a good investment but it can not continue as some one needs to be able to afford to pay for it.
