Business Week and the New York Times each have very bullish articles on both housing and the economy.
From Business Week:
The author tries to make the case that interest rate is more important than purchase price - that each 1/4 point is worth roughly $12,000 so if rates go from today's 5% to, lets say 8% in a year or two, he claims that's worth nearly $144,000 in value. In other words, if prices decline due to interest rates going up, you've got that built in.
Meanwhile, from the NYT article:
They keep referring to the stock market rally from March lows as a "bull market" and how the "second phase" of the bull market might look.
Ahh, but the counter arguments are pretty obvious - no? And barely mentioned. Purchase price is paramount if you need to sell within 5 years. If you can hold for 30, then yes, lock in what will likely end up being the last time we ever see 5% interest rates. But the shorter your time line, the more advantageous it is to wait for even lower prices if you expect that to happen.
As for the NYT's "bull market". There are many economists who think the market must test the March lows before it can really become a bull market. And that could play out over the next 2 to 4 years, not the next 2 to 4 months. I'd be cautious messing around in the stock market since it's up so much higher than it's lows. Where can it really go now without earnings? And right now companies are not earning.