Real US home prices have increased by about 90 percent since 1997.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
What would count as true or false
Judge as of Sep 2006, comparing inflation-adjusted US home prices in 1997 with the 2006 peak or the latest level (Case-Shiller real index as in Shiller's data, or OFHEO deflated by CPI). True: the real increase is about 80–100%. Mostly true: about 70–80% or 100–110%. Mixed: about 55–70% or 110–125%. Mostly false: about 40–55% or above 125%. False: under about 40%.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (4)
-
E1 The Housing Boom Is Already Gigantic. How Long Can It Last? Yale School of Management (Insights), republishing a New York Times piece by Robert Shiller · 10 December 2018
“The No. 1 boom occurred from February 1997 to October 2006, when real prices of existing United States homes rose 74%.”
-
E2 Case Shiller Home Price Index by Year multpl.com (compiles Robert Shiller data)
“| Dec 1, 1997 | 181.48 |”
-
E3 Case Shiller Home Price Index by Year multpl.com (compiles Robert Shiller data)
“| Dec 1, 2006 | 305.95 |”
-
E4 Case Shiller Home Price Index by Month multpl.com (compiles Robert Shiller data)
“| Sep 1, 1997 | 180.47 |”
Reasoning
Robert Shiller, whose real home price index the criteria name, wrote that real prices of existing US homes rose 74% from February 1997 to the October 2006 peak (E1). The multpl.com real Case-Shiller series compiled from Shiller's data points the same way: from about 180–181 in late 1997 to about 306 in December 2006, a rise of roughly 69% (E2–E4). Shiller puts the real rise from February 1997 to the October 2006 peak at 74% [E1], which falls in the criteria's "mostly true" band (70–80%). The year-end 1997 and 2006 index values [E2, E3] imply about 69%, at the edge of the "mixed" band (55–70%). It is below the claimed 90%, which would have needed about 80–100% to count as true.
Cite this claim
Nouriel Roubini, “Real US home prices have increased by about 90 percent since 1997.” (said 25 September 2006). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_db66a192dfed, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_db66a192dfed
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Nouriel Roubini
-
Mostly true
“this year’s Iran War, which caused the largest energy shock since the oil crises of the 1970s.”
The 2026 Iran War caused the largest energy shock since the oil crises of the 1970s.
-
Mixed
“Although there was a massive boom in AI-related investments, uncertainties caused by President Donald Trump’s tariffs and other polices curtailed growth in the second half of the year”
-
Mixed
“Stuff that is tech-related is hit by rising interest rates because they are long-duration assets, [which] are more sensitive to interest rates than shorter-duration assets.”
-
Mostly false
“Food prices were already spiking before the invasion because you have desertification of lots of parts of the world, and therefore the food supply is limited.”
-
Mostly true
“All the zombie institutions that survived before because we had negative [interest] rates, quantitative easing [and] credit easing, now face rising debt servicing ratios.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.