Quote from sle:
Well, realistically, the house used to cost a 100k, but NYC was,erm, not as desirable at the time. I know someone who bought a nice Bleeker street loft for something like 25k, but she had to live there for 30 years to actually see the neighborhood improve. Guess what - you can buy a brownstone in the Bronx these days for a few hundred thousand, but would you want to live there?
Personally, I think its about 1:5 ratio of what a million dollars was then to now.
That is a good point that has some merit, yet I am referring to relative prices in a specific neighborhood. Beacon Hill has been where the Boston elite have lived for hundreds of years.
Perhaps in NYC is would be "what did a nice home cost in a nice part of the upper east side 35-40 years ago relative to today". Rather than what did home cost in a now gentrified former ghetto area.
EDIT: I just realized I got jumbled up in both this reply and in the post sle is responding too. In that first post I said back bay, in the second I said beacon hill. Beacon hill is what I meant to say in both posts.
And by the way, and this has huge irony relative to this topic... The guy who told me about his beacon hill purchase in the 70's was a PLUMBER!
