https://www.bls.gov/cpi/factsheets/owners-equivalent-rent-an...

“Why doesn’t the CPI include the cost of buying and financing houses as well as property taxes and home maintenance and improvement?

Houses and other residential structures are not consumption items and, therefore, should not be CPI items. All buildings and structures are capital goods, which are items that provide a service. In the case of houses and other residential structures, that service is shelter.

Buildings and structures are also investment items, things that are bought and resold in organized markets with a potential for gain. House prices frequently appreciate; in this respect they differ from consumer durables such as vehicles.”

Edit:

Downvoted for stating facts. From above:

https://www.bls.gov/cpi/factsheets/owners-equivalent-rent-an...

“Why doesn’t the CPI include the cost of buying and financing houses as well as property taxes and home maintenance and improvement?

Houses and other residential structures are not consumption items and, therefore, should not be CPI items. All buildings and structures are capital goods, which are items that provide a service. In the case of houses and other residential structures, that service is shelter.

Buildings and structures are also investment items, things that are bought and resold in organized markets with a potential for gain. House prices frequently appreciate; in this respect they differ from consumer durables such as vehicles.”

This isn't so much a "fact" as it is a "position." In other words, the fact that the BLS uses this position in its definition does not make that definition the best possible definition, nor does it mean people have to accept that definition when they use the word "inflation" in a conversation.

There are loads of reasons why one might argue that house prices should be considered necessary expenses rather than investments. A particular area may have only houses for sale and very few rentals. Ownership provides things that cannot be achieved by renting. The appreciated value of a house is largely meaningless or even detrimental for people who just want to keep living where they live when their wages are not increasing. Etc.

Also, generally, quoting definitions unprompted isn't well received in most conversations :).

I believe we should focus on relieving the burden of the massive regulatory state on the poor. I.e. relax zoning and lower regressive taxes.

Signed, child and grandchild of union workers from Michigan

But they can't dig ditches in Korea and export them to the U.S.

The idea that employees are paid according to their value is entirely wrong. Employees are paid according to the labor market. The price of labor on the market is significantly controlled by supply, not the value to the employer of employing someone. Besides that, employers have much more power in the employment relationship. This is true even in tech. For example, the FAANGs got caught colluding with one another to suppress salaries via secret anti-poaching agreements a few years back.