While in the same time frame, gold has tripled in value.

The de-valueing of the dollar plays a part, but so does the large number of baby boomers retiring.

And the NYTimes' "solution" is to give more power to the elite, enslaving the former sovereign people.
We need a fly-over revolution.

The middle-class is being crushed. The average middle-class family is paycheck-to-paycheck.

Trust the New York Times not to mention a massive expansion of government debt, thus increasing the debt service burden on the economy; the refusal to allow inefficient firms to go bankrupt, consequently not moving resources to more efficient firms; huge increases in government spending and regulation, and crony capitalism. Somebody ends up paying for all this government for which they have been one of the main cheerleaders. They are in the same intellectual tradition that can't figure out why the New Deal didn't solve the Great Depression--because the cure is the disease! "Which way did he go, George, which way did he go?"

I agree on the loss range.

The foreclosures are still happening all around at a brisk pace.

inflation + debt (+ some bad decisions)

* Their "inflation adjusted" numbers are certainly wrong if they're using the government's version of that statistic and I suspect they are. Thus, they have not truly factored inflation out of this.

* What's happened to everyone else since 2001 besides the housing devaluations the article mentions?

A) The dot-com bubble burst, causing many people to "make up the loss" with additional contributions, reducing their take-home pay. Now let's see how they spent that smaller paycheck...
B) A recession brought on high unemployment which sent less revenue to the state governments, which then cut contributions to their counties to balance their budgets. In return, many counties hiked property taxes. Mine are up over 50% since 2001.
C) Gasoline prices TRIPLED. Electric rates went up 50%.
D) College tuition is up 300%
E) I just paid $10 for two pounds of ground beef today. That's about 100% up since 2001, I think.
F) Everyone "needs" a cell phone now. Families with 3, 4, 5, or more cell phones turning what used to be a $20/month land line expense into a $200+ cell phone contract expense. Those cell phones have built-in interfaces to app stores that make it very easy for the kids to rack up additional spending with a simple tap on the screen.
G) Youtube / Skype / Streaming TV services meant that people had to ditch their dial-up or DSL service ($10-$20/month) for broadband ($50+) to keep the internet connection useful.
H) Cable/Sat company "bundling" of TV+PHONE+INTERNET services became popular. I am amazed at how many "poor" people have these bundles. In the old days, you'd have free over the air TV, a phone without a long distance plan, and dialup internet if you were on a budget. Now you might be into it for $150/month on one of these bundles. "What a savings!"
I) Now your car from 2001 is unreliable - time for a new one, but with all the other financial obligations and the cost of the new car, you either take out a six or a seven year loan, or you take a withdrawal from your 401K. Oh, but the car comes with Satellite Radio and they already signed me up for a year - how convenient! Let's keep THAT subscription going.
J) Then the housing bubble bursts takes out the stock market AGAIN and you've got to decide if you're going to kick in even more of your pre-tax paycheck to make up the loss, AGAIN.
K) Obamacare introduces yet another hefty monthly cost for many.

* The rich don't have any debt (unless it's a mortgage on their house, and broadly speaking the rich are currently the only property owners with houses that are appreciating in value). When you have no debt, absorbing extra costs brought out by inflation is no big deal. It just means you're saving less, but when your current stock holdings are getting juiced by QE to infinity you actually come out ahead anyway and everything looks fine.