Blast from the Past

by Russ Roberts on March 6, 2009

in Housing

Some excerpts from a Bloomberg news story, June of 2003:

Fannie Mae Chief Executive Franklin
Raines, who runs the biggest mortgage portfolio in the world, said
the continuing rise in housing prices won't end in a bust like the
stock market of three years ago.

“We do not see any sign of housing price decline nationwide,
let alone the bursting of a bubble,'' Raines said in an interview
with Bloomberg News in New York.

And:

Housing has been one of the few bright spots in the U.S.
economy as unemployment rose to the highest level in almost nine
years and the country struggled to recover from recession. The
lowest interest rates in more than four decades boosted home sales
and mortgage-loan refinancing to record levels, putting cash in
consumers' pockets. Fannie Mae benefited as debt backed by home
loans surged and home prices rose.

And:

There hasn't been a nationwide decline in home prices since
the Great Depression, though there are signs that job losses and
slow economic growth are taking a toll, Raines said. Prices are
falling in “a lot of the old Internet cities'' such as San Jose,
California, and Seattle, he said.

Dean Baker and the Economist look a little smarter:

Mortgage rates at their lowest levels since the Kennedy
administration have exacerbated the “fat'' in housing, Baker
said. An increase in the cost of 30-year fixed rate mortgages to
near 7 percent from 5.26 percent today would burst bubbles where
they exist, he said.

“Housing has helped sustain the economy so far as we've had
growth, and when it does burst that could have a big effect'' on
prospects for growth in future quarters, he said.

A study by The Economist predicted a “property price
bubble'' in the U.S. and the U.K. would burst in the next few
years, leading to consequences “far nastier'' than seen from the
plummeting stock market of 2000 and 2001.

“Some people say, well, they had a housing bubble in
Ireland, why can't we have one in the United States?,'' Raines
said. “That's like saying we had a housing bubble in
Massachusetts. You can, but you can't work up one in the whole
United States just like you probably can't in the whole of
Europe.''

Here are Greenspan and Shiller:

Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan in February called a nationwide
housing bubble “quite unlikely,'' in part because there isn't a
national housing market. Comparisons to the stock market aren't
justified since most people must live in their homes and house
transaction costs inhibit speculation, he said.

Robert Shiller, who predicted the 2000 stock market bubble
with his book “Irrational Exuberance,'' said he'd only predict a
nationwide housing slump if a worldwide economic slump “kills''
consumer confidence. Only some “high-flying'' cities like San
Francisco, Denver and Boston are at risk of price depreciations,
and the chances of declines in those regions are less than a
third, he said from his office at Yale University in New Haven,
Connecticut.

“In the last bubble in 1990 the declines were preceded by a
slowdown and accelerated by a slowing economy, and the slowdown
might be a harbinger of a drop in some places,'' Shiller said.
“Even so we predict increases everywhere. It would be quite
daring to predict'' a nationwide housing bubble, he said.

Comments    Share Share    Print Print    Email Email

  • Martin Brock

    And here's, errr, Russ Roberts in this forum on May 17, 2007.


    "So yes, indebtedness is up in America. Most of that debt is housing. So people have more debt but they also have more assets—median net worth over that time period has gone up for every group except the second lowest quintile. So people are borrowing more but their assets are generally worth more."


    We saw quite a few posts along these lines in '07 and had some long discussions with lots of statistics on net worth. I know I can find at least half a dozen more in the archives in a few minutes.


    I suggested an update on these statistics several months ago. So far, I've seen nothing.

  • vidyohs

    To paraphrase myself on another thread: If the economy had a twist-off cap on it and/or could be viewed through a small LED screen, then America would know all about it.


    Unfortunately Americans in general are ignorant so deep, so wide, and in such volume it mimics stupidity.

  • Mesa Econoguy

    Yeah, you kinda all make me sick…

  • vikingvista

    Greenspan, Raines, Baker, & Shiller should've just asked one of those Wall Street CEOs who we all now seem to agree were with full knowledge willfully and recklessly riding the risky housing bubble (in complete defiance of their conservative and prudent pasts).


    Or maybe messing with the signals necessarily makes ignoramouses of us all.

  • John Templeton, July 2003:


    http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/p52744.asp


    Moving on to housing prices, Sir John comments: "Every previous major bear market has been accompanied by a bear market in home prices. . . . This time, home prices have gone up 20%, and this represents a very dangerous situation. When home prices do start down, they will fall remarkably far. In Japan, home prices are down to less than half what they were at the stock market peak." Sir John adds, "A home price decline of as little as 20% would put a lot of people in bankruptcy."


    Sir John also had a few words about debt -- a four-letter word that folks seem not to care about: "Emphasize in your magazine how big the debt is. . . . The total debt of America is now $31 trillion. That is three times the GNP of the U.S. That is unprecedented in a major nation. No nation has ever had such a big debt as America has, and it's bigger than it was at the peak of the stock market boom. Think of the dangers involved. Almost everyone has a home mortgage, and some are 89% of the value of the home (and yes, some are more). If home prices start down, there will be bankruptcies, and in bankruptcy, houses are sold at lower prices, pushing home prices down further." On that note, he has a word of advice: "After home prices go down to one-tenth of the highest price homeowners paid, then buy."

  • In June of 2003, Justin Lahart at CNN saw something different happening:


    "Think stocks have gone too far, too fast? Think the rally has got out of hand, and the market is way too expensive?


    You may be right, but with all the country's cash spigots cranked open, things could get a lot nuttier..


    There's plenty of dough hitting the economy now, and it looks like there will be plenty more on the way. The Fed has put its overnight target rate at a 40-year low of 1.25 percent and looks set to lower it to 1 percent when it next meets in three weeks.


    More important, the Fed has engineered a sharp move lower in long-term rates by signaling that it does not plan to raise rates until well after the economy starts growing strongly. Already, the effects of this have started to show. Mortgage and refinancing activity have both hit all-time highs ..


    "The idea is to get top-line growth going again," said Aeltus Investment Management strategist Jim Griffin. "But if you do that as an intermediate step, or side effect you're going to pump a lot of money into financial assets."


    There are, after all, only a few things you can really do with money. You can stuff it into the mattress, you can spend it, or you can buy an asset. The low funds rate makes the mattress option less appealing -- money markets and savings accounts don't throw off much of a return these days. Spending takes time to rev up. So the money gets parked in some sort of asset -- gold (which is going up), bonds (which are going up), houses (which are going up) or stocks (which are going up).


    "When you print money, it's going to inflate some asset price," said Northern Trust chief U.S. economist Paul Kasriel. "Maybe we'll revert to the late 1990s and buy stocks with it." "

  • Mesa Econoguy

    6 of 120

  • Mesa Econoguy

    42

  • Mesa Econoguy

    Greenspan didn’t create loose lending standards, Ray.


    Dick Syron did that (Boston Fed, later head of Freddie Mac).


    Surprise.


  • Ray G

    Greenspan mentioned prohibitive costs to getting into housing. He would have been correct if it were not for the no-money down, sub-prime sector of the market jumping up to something like 20% of the mortgage market.

  • Mesa Econoguy

    Here’s another blast from the past:


    ''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''


    Yeah, nothing to see here. They're fine.


    This is the same piece of crap who now wants to prosecute "financial wrongdoing," and as the WSJ observed, he should probably start with himself.


    Insider trading rules state that it is illegal to benefit monetarily from any material nonpublic information. The rules also say that reputational gain as a result of this information is also prosecutable.


    Mr Frank clearly 1) was in a control/insider position with FRE/FNM, and 2) has benefited greatly (both monetarily and reputationally)from his lengthy involvement with these 2 entities, and their interaction with HUD.


  • abhtiw

    is there some place where we have a pompous prognosticators list for the present period (till date) , like the one here http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/2008/06/p... .


    also shiller's view, worldwide slump and housing bubble are related, but cause effect is a dilemma here. sudden inflation in 1st half 2008 exposing the debt/credit economy spiralling into housing and back.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: