That Is Not Rain (Peter Orszag)
The Market Ticker ® - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Posted 2012-05-02 08:21
by Karl Denninger
in Housing
Ignore this thread
That Is Not Rain (Peter Orszag)
 

There's an old saying that goes something like this:

Will you stop*****ing on me and calling it rain?

Peter Orszag makes the following observation in a "View" column today on Bloomberg:

Bernanke said in his speech on April 13, at a conference sponsored by the Russell Sage Foundation and the Century Foundation, that “any theory of the crisis that ties its magnitude to the size of the housing bust must also explain why the fall of dot-com stock prices just a few years earlier, which destroyed as much or more paper wealth -- more than $8 trillion -- resulted in a relatively short and mild recession and no major financial instability.”

...

The Fed chairman is right: The housing crisis was much more damaging because the initial impact was concentrated in a highly leveraged financial sector and then substantially amplified as those losses cascaded.

The rest of the column is basically a scolding on the "miss", ignoring the real policy question that should be debated and answered:

How did it come to be that one of the key items for every person's personal comfort and indeed their life -- housing -- came to be a "highly-leveraged financial sector", what intentional government distortions made this possible, and how do we withdraw those distortions so that (1) it doesn't happen again and (2) necessary components of everyday life -- such as housing -- are not subject to the rank manipulations of this sort in the future?

But this debate is not being held -- on purpose -- because to do so exposes the soft underbelly of far too much for comfort among the so-called "financial elites."

Housing should not be a materially-levered part of the economy.  Unlike commercial real estate which can bend and flow with demand -- when the local bar goes out of business if there are no others in town someone will soon decide that opening a watering hole makes sense -- housing displaces people on a permanent basis and does critical and personal damage to the nation's population when leverage is abused in this area of the economy.

It was, to a large degree, this same sort of leverage abuse in the 1920s with balloon mortgages (that had to be rolled every five years or so) that led to the Depression being as nasty as it was.  The "Hooverville" shanties popped up due to people being displaced -- and they were displaced because the nation's housing stock became financialized and levered from the consumer on up.

The Government of course tried to "fix" the problem with FNMA, now known as "Fannie Mae", which was originally created to try to bail out banks during The Depression.  This eventually led Fannie to be levered 80:1 by the time 2007 rolled around and, ultimately, was responsible for its collapse.

So what's next?

Good question.  This much I can tell you with certainty -- there has been no recognition among the policy wonks, nor any attempt to correct the problem with leverage in the housing sector.  In fact the exact opposite has happened -- the government has, to the maximum possible extent, done everything in its power to prevent that leverage from coming back out!

It's not working because it can't work. 

And this morning's ADP number simply underlines the point -- until we stop screwing around with trying to protect financial "bigwigs" from the consequences of their own acts and this leverage comes out of the system there will be no economic recovery -- because there can't be.

Discussion below (registration required to post)
 

Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
Get Adobe Flash player





Blogtalk 3:30 CT Mondays
Items To Look At


Discuss The Capital Markets along with daily technical analysis with our Gold Donor program.

Where We Are, Where We're Heading (2013) - The annual 2013 Ticker

Links and Blogroll
Our policy on reciprocal links: Send us an email with your information and why you think your blog or news site would make a good addition - in most cases reciprocal link requests will be granted.
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Looking for "The Best of Market Ticker"? Check out
Ticker Classics.

Visit the forum to discuss this and other investing-related topics; see the FAQ on the forum for information about Gold Donor status including access to our technical analysis video server.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media or for commercial use.

Submissions may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Leads on stories of current economic and political interest are always welcome. Our fax tip line is 850-897-9364; please include contact information with your transmission.

 
Comments.......
User: Not logged on
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
User Info That Is Not Rain (Peter Orszag) in forum [Market-Ticker]
Flappingeagle
Posts: 1249
Incept: 2011-04-14

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Quote:
Bernanke said in his speech on April 13, at a conference sponsored by the Russell Sage Foundation and the Century Foundation, that “any theory of the crisis that ties its magnitude to the size of the housing bust must also explain why the fall of dot-com stock prices just a few years earlier, which destroyed as much or more paper wealth -- more than $8 trillion -- resulted in a relatively short and mild recession and no major financial instability.”


Couldn't you make the claim that the dot-com bust that "destroyed as much or more paper wealth" was really the destruction of unrealized gains? If you bought Cisco at 20, rode it up to 80, then rode it down to 20, you didn't lose $60 a share. Also, the dot-com money was a stockmarket phenomena which cleared itself as people either rode thier losing stocks down, or got margin called down to zero.

It was not like the housing market, as Karl points out, because the houses are/were not as easily liquidatable on the way down as we all saw. In fact, the government has largely prevented "the way down" so the market has not really cleared.

The "magnitude" that the quote mentions when speaking of the crisis needs to be parsed into depth and duration. So far, we've gone down a lot, then put in place policies that make the duration infinite.

Flap

----------
Here are my predictions for everyone to see:
S&P 500 at 320, DOW at 2200, Gold $300/oz, and Corn $2/bu.
"You can't build a house of cards on a shaking table." - Tony Johns
The January 2015 AMZN put at $130 (cost $4.25) will be a winner.
Dburn
Posts: 165
Incept: 2009-09-10
Green
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The main difference between the two is that the housing bust did a few things that the dot.com bust didn't. It removed the only component of the wealth effect that people could monetize as in getting HELOCS. The effect of a housing market that made people feel rich was removing the caution light on the road to heavier debt loads. One of the results: many people used HELOCS to pay down credit card debt only to run the credit debt right back up. That introduced two additional components of leverage to a home , the HELOC and even more credit card debt as credit lines were raised out of earth's orbit. When housing prices collapsed there was no more fuel for a debt stimulated consumer economy.

Stocks could only be monetized if they were sold or borrowed against if one had a big enough portfolio. If they were a component of a 401K or an IRA, most people were unwilling to take the money out and pay penalties and taxes, until now. So the disappearing 401K occurred as a result of the housing market collapse as people were now forced ( in their minds) to take loans out to deficit finance their lifestyle especially as pay drifted lower and fear of another crash.

The Dot.com crash hurt people, but it more or less hurt their future plans, not their immediate life styles ( with a few notable exceptions) . The FED drove the interest rates down after the crash to start a new bubble which ultimately led to a massive level of refinancing before the banks started going to rate insensitive people in 2004. The recession was short yet job recovery was slow and didn't rise to the 2000 level until 2007, just in time for the next crash.

Yet people felt they had wealth and options (the real wave of outsourcing was covered by the real-estate bubble) in terms of careers etc . People were also more mobile as putting a house on the market wasn't an exercise in futility. They were usually snapped up pretty quick which allowed people to move families to different locales to get jobs.

Anecdotal; I do remember a freind who took a 700K inheritance and placed it with mutual funds in the late 90s which converted 100s of thousands into 10s of thousands. Two years later she lost her dream job as publisher of Guitar Player Magazine.

She was 44 at the time. I don't think she ever recovered. Her savings was the inheritance.

----------
"Bring out your dead"-a new alternative to Health care reform
Flappingeagle
Posts: 1249
Incept: 2011-04-14

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
From Dburn
Quote:
The FED drove the interest rates down after the crash to start a new bubble which ultimately led to a massive level of refinancing before the banks started going to rate insensitive people in 2004.

I agree 100%. The same trick did not work so well for the Fed this time around did it.

----------
Here are my predictions for everyone to see:
S&P 500 at 320, DOW at 2200, Gold $300/oz, and Corn $2/bu.
"You can't build a house of cards on a shaking table." - Tony Johns
The January 2015 AMZN put at $130 (cost $4.25) will be a winner.
Azzi
Posts: 144
Incept: 2009-10-08
Green
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The cries like this are hollow as they fall on deaf ears. There must be blood spilled to turn things around.

----------
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. - Thomas Jefferson
Sushihorn
Posts: 7802
Incept: 2007-10-22
A True American Patriot!
Arlington, TX
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Back in 2000 stocks could only be leveraged 100%. But even at that time, you could easily leverage housing 400% or more. By 2007 2,000% leverage was common on new loans and zero down effectively applied INFINITE leverage. Just with those numbers, the difference should be obvious.

Then there is the broadness of participation. The percentage of people who had significant stock portfolios is 2000 was much smaller than those whose houses represented a significant part of their GROSS portfolio in 2007. The degree of participation on the lender side was much broader with housing also. Most banks didn't have any material lending against stock portfolios but nearly all of them did in either residential or commercial RE or often both.

----------
http://jengafinance.blogspot.com/

Build a banker a fire and keep him warm for a night.
Set a banker on fire and keep him warm for the rest of his life.
Lowbeyond
Posts: 17126
Incept: 2008-02-11
Green A True American Patriot!
CO aka West NJ/East CA
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
someone should come up with a way to short your own house.

----------
Maybe it was a birdy bread-bomber from the future?!
Mannfm11
Posts: 3617
Incept: 2009-02-28
Gold
DFW, Tx
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Bernanke must be stupid. The dotcom bubble was air. One group won, those that sold the stock and one group lost, those that bought the stock. And, not all of them lost. There was no link from the stock to a bank account. This was different than the 29 bust, which was levered 9 to 1, wiped out trade accounts and immediately took money out of circulation. People could sit on their stock and they didn't have to make payments. If they had a margin call, they were sold out. They just lost their money. It was money another person had. I think margin debt in the entire market was something arouond $200 billion, from what I recall. It was a 1 year trip up the shoot and I doubt many people actually went out and spent the money.

The housing bust was entirely different. The entire game was financed. There were payments to be made. The appreciation was borrowed out by the hundreds of billions every year. Equity flowed as spendable cash into the economy. When it went bust, bad debt inundated the economy. Unlike the stock market, people were living in their wealth effect and I doubt many go out and spend money because their house was worth more, save for those that were borrowing their equity. One was a mania, the other just a long, drawn out bubble. Bernanke is confusing wealth with money and credit. He asked a question that even a deaf dog could answer.

----------
The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable.---John Kenneth Galbraith
Dburn
Posts: 165
Incept: 2009-09-10
Green
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
"someone should come up with a way to short your own house."

I asked a few people when my Condo was up 50% from purchase price. Condos don't do that in Indiana.

----------
"Bring out your dead"-a new alternative to Health care reform
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ