Data to Information Critique

The author has however stated that the policies were meant to promote homeownership but failed to benefit the majority medium and low income earners. Finally, the article has stated factors the author has addressed in the entire article.
In Davis (2012, p.2), the author has stated the price index of houses since 1975 through the year 2011. However, values indicate that since the year 2000 to 2008, the prices of the house have been escalating tremendously. This contradicts the data in page on homeownership rate. This date indicates that between the year 2000 and the 2010, the rate of homeownership remained higher than the previous years in which the price indices were a bit lower.
One of the policies introduced was deductibility of mortgage interest from income for tax purposes. The author has argued that this policy did not benefit the low income earners but instead it benefited the higher income earners (Davis, 2012). This could be the reason why the homeownership has remained still remained high even when the price indices of houses were still high. This is in line with the author’s view that the policies did not favor the low income earners.
The author has also elaborated the other policy as that which aimed at reducing the cost of mortgages agencies. The author has stated that the policies on homeownership have resulted to a high cost on the US economy to the tune of $2.5 trillion net present value (Davis, 2012). This figure has not been supported by the author working ad there is information about the discounting factor or any other method the author used to arrive at such a figure. Going by t he authors view about the extra burden caused by the policies, then it is crystal clear that the policies introduced by the federal government were more of a burden to the citizens that a relief.
The author has argued that the rate of homeownership has remained unchanged for the last forty years despite the