The new house in Shanghai rose by 0.2 per cent and Beijing fell by 0.2 per cent: two types of household risk in the same housing price table

The data on the prices of 70 urban houses published by the National Statistics Office on 19 October show two different urban images of households that have also saved money for housing: the price of new commercial housing in Shanghai rose by 0.2 per cent and in Beijing by 0.2 per cent; Guangzhou and Shenzhen, respectively, increased by 0.2 per cent and 0.3 per cent, while the three-line cities as a whole continued to decline by 0.2 per cent. Reuters calculated that the average price of new houses in 70 cities fell by 0.1 per cent and 2.8 per cent in comparison with the same year, which was another month after the price of new houses had been depressed for more than three years.

For families that have paid down payments and have been mortgaged for decades, figures are hardly seen as market fluctuations alone. A flat may be the main vehicle for total savings and the principal amount of the loan will not decrease with the house ' s valuation when the price falls. Young people who are considering buying a house are also caught in the middle: renting a house requires a stable income, while buying a house requires trust in the future of urban employment, public services and housing. The more volatile the house price, the more rational the decision to postpone.

The weak warming in front of the city is not a national relief

Shanghai eased its purchase restrictions this year, and some of the purchase requirements were re-marketed when conditions permitted. Beijing is the same line, but the same increase was not recorded in the September New House Ring Index; In smaller cities, the problems of emigration, inadequate industrial jobs and stock of established housing are still continuing. The official use of 70 city statistics does not allow for the presumption of gains or losses for a particular community, building block or family to be based solely on average urban prices, but the city ' s fragmentation is already sufficient to explain why a single national home purchase stimulus is difficult to reach directly to every market.

The People ' s Bank and the Financial Regulatory Authority have previously announced the introduction of a mortgage interest subsidy in eligible low-line cities, with a ceiling of $1.5 million on the applicable gross housing price. For some buyers, this may reduce actual repayment expenditure; It remains unable to replace stable wages, ready-to-do housing and public services that can be provided by local finance. The home purchaser is required to calculate the household asset liability for the next 20 or 30 years, instead of the interest rate discounts for the current week at the place of sale.

Local governments have relied on land for income-transfer support projects and public services in the past, and the more difficult real estate is to sell, the more tight local finances are; The tighter the local financial situation, the more vulnerable the population's expectations of urban jobs, education and health resources. The reform of the housing market promoted by Xi Jinping ' s Government includes tightening the risk of pre-sale and encouraging the delivery of live housing, and the clear relevance of the plight of paying for houses that were not received by former buyers. But reforms have made markets more prudent and may make it more difficult for small and medium-sized developers who lack liquidity to sustain construction.

The market figure for the building eventually falls between the key to the door and the monthly supply. The 0.2 per cent increase in Shanghai is not sufficient to prove that the national building market is warming, nor is the fall in Beijing and the third-line cities to show that all houses are worthless. The real social cost is that ordinary families cannot determine macro-financial rules and land policies, but often bear the risk of market-related misinvestment with years of wages.