I think one aspect is that financial assets are merely stores of wealth with potential for growth/returns as well as risks. The house has both of those as well as a direct use value in consuming the housing services. Additionally it offers something of a risk/uncertainty mitigating role. Once paid for the cost of consuming that housing services is pretty low so even if you see a bit hit to your income you still have a stable place to build from.
I think it’s really all the non-pecuniary aspects that get missed when analysis starts relying too strongly on the monetary equivalence point of view; by which I mean we start filtering those aspects out and just don’t see them.
I think one aspect is that financial assets are merely stores of wealth with potential for growth/returns as well as risks. The house has both of those as well as a direct use value in consuming the housing services. Additionally it offers something of a risk/uncertainty mitigating role. Once paid for the cost of consuming that housing services is pretty low so even if you see a bit hit to your income you still have a stable place to build from.
I think it’s really all the non-pecuniary aspects that get missed when analysis starts relying too strongly on the monetary equivalence point of view; by which I mean we start filtering those aspects out and just don’t see them.