Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Question for Economic Experts: Can You Say "Housing Bubble"?

By Dean Baker, TruthOut.org. Posted December 12, 2008.


Millions of people may lose their homes and life's savings, all because the economists who are supposed to know better didn't.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Atheism and Diversity: Is It Wrong For Atheists To Convert Believers?
Greta Christina

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Are You Brave Enough to Say No to a High-Stress Holiday?
Bill McKibben

DrugReporter:
The Feds Are Addicted to Pot -- Even If You Aren't
Paul Armentano

Environment:
Our Lives Are Filled With Worthless Crap That's Destroying the Earth: Here's What You Can Do
Sharon Bloyd-Peshkin

Food:
Don't Be Scared of Food: Are We Being Needlessly Hysterical About Food Safety?
David E. Gumpert

Health and Wellness:
10 Signs Vegetarianism Is Catching On
Kathy Freston

Immigration:
Republican Playbook on Immigration Debate Long on Emotions, Short on Facts
Mary Giovagnoli

Media and Technology:
What Do Levi Johnston, Evangelicals and Oprah Have in Common? They All Blind Us to Our Catastrophic Reality
Chris Hedges

Movie Mix:
Disney Apocalypse: Why 2012 Sucks
Alexander Zaitchik

Politics:
Shocking: High School Grads Twice As Likely To Be Jobless Than College Grads – and Right-Wingers are Profiting From Their Pain
Adele M. Stan

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Have Women's Lives Improved Globally?
Laura Liswood

Rights and Liberties:
Amy Goodman Detained at Canadian Border; Guards Demand Notes For Speaking Event
Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez

Sex and Relationships:
"You Like That Baby, You Like That?": Has Porn Made Men Bad at Sex?
Cord Jefferson

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Revealed: Astroturf Groups Planning Massive California Water Grab to Benefit Big Ag and SoCal
Dan Bacher

World:
Politicians' Symbolic Opposition to Afghan Escalation is Pointless As Long As Congress Keeps Writing Checks
Norman Solomon

More stories by Dean Baker

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The answer for many economists is apparently "no." Many of the most important figures in economic policy over the last decade, including luminaries like Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, Robert Rubin and Henry Paulson, could not see the $8 trillion housing bubble growing right in front of their eyes. As the bubble grew larger, and the financial system became ever more highly leveraged, these folks saw nothing but blue skies ahead.

Not only did these folks miss the bubble, even now, they still can't seem to understand the housing bubble as its collapse throws the economy into the worst downturn since the Great Depression. That is the only possible explanation for Henry Paulson's 4.5 percent mortgage rate policy.

The bubble has largely deflated in many parts of the country, however, prices in many of the former bubble markets still must decline another 20 percent to 30 percent to return to trend levels. It does not make sense to apply the same policy to both bubble and non-bubble markets.

In non-bubble markets, it might be appropriate to use aggressive measures, like extraordinarily low mortgage rates, as a tool to stabilize house prices. We want to avoid the scenario in which falling house prices create an expectation of further declines in house prices. This expectation can become self-fulfilling, as potential buyers defer purchases, causing house prices to fall further.

By contrast, in the bubble markets, supply hugely exceeds demand at current prices. The only way to restore stability to these markets is to have prices return to levels that are consistent with the underlying supply and demand conditions. The effort to sustain prices at their current bubble-inflated level will be no more successful than an effort in 2000 to keep the NASDAQ at its 5,000 peak.

Even worse, to the extent that we can artificially prop up house prices in these bubble markets, we would just be passing along the pain to a new contingent of homebuyers. We are not going to have 4.5 percent mortgage interest rates forever. Suppose the economy recovers in a few years and mortgage rates rise back to a more normal 6.5 percent to 7.5 percent level.

Whatever effect low mortgage rates had in sustaining house prices will be reversed. House prices will complete their correction and today's homebuyers may well be seeing losses of 15 percent to 20 percent when they sell their homes in five years. For a house selling at $250,000, this price decline translates into a loss of $38,000 to $50,000.

Losing $38,000 to $50,000 would destroy the bulk of most homeowners' wealth. That does not seem like very good policy.

Unfortunately, most of the promoters of the housing bubble still have not owned up to the harm caused by their policy. Millions of people are facing the prospect of losing their home, and tens of millions of people are losing their life's savings, because the people who are supposed to know better didn't. They encouraged people to buy homes and/or borrow against them in what was quite obviously a bubble-inflated market.

Before Paulson is allowed to carry through with his scheme to use public money in an attempt to reinflate the housing bubble, he should be forced to publicly explain how he thinks this policy will work. There are clearly people who will be badly harmed by temporarily reinflating the bubble. Unless Paulson can explain how the benefits will outweigh this harm, he should not be allowed to pursue his blanket policy of providing 4.5 percent mortgages everywhere.

As it is, Paulson and other people in policy positions have not even acknowledged that we have a housing bubble that is in the process of deflating. Paulson could not possibly be so incompetent that he still doesn't see the housing bubble, but for some reason he can't bring himself to talk about it.

If Paulson cannot bring himself to talk about the housing bubble in a serious way, then he does not deserve to be taken seriously in discussions of economic policy. The same is true of any other person in either the Bush or Obama administration. In this period of crisis, we can't afford to waste any more time with policymakers so clueless that they can't see an $8 trillion housing bubble.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: economy, housing bubble, foreclosure, economic experts

Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement