My argument is that the CPI is an inappropriate index to use, it hasn't done a good job of measuring general inflation. My interpretation is that the price of the house is staying about the same (probably slightly down) and real incomes are dropping a bit faster than that (which'd be consistent with real incomes tracking metrics like energy availability per capita & the relative lack of capital investment in the US compared to Asia).
There isn't a particular reason why the real price of houses would go up. A house today is more or less the same good as in 1950, and technology improvements suggest that if anything it is probably easier to build cheap houses today than back then. And on the other hand, the money printing being done is entering into the economy through loans so it probably turns up first in things like house prices. I can imagine scenarios where the real price rose, but the more likely explanation for affordability issues is that real incomes dropped.
There isn't a particular reason why the real price of houses would go up. A house today is more or less the same good as in 1950, and technology improvements suggest that if anything it is probably easier to build cheap houses today than back then. And on the other hand, the money printing being done is entering into the economy through loans so it probably turns up first in things like house prices. I can imagine scenarios where the real price rose, but the more likely explanation for affordability issues is that real incomes dropped.