LyrArc Article Gist
Price declines in housing markets just after the mortgage crisis hit in August. Detroit and San Diego hardest hit.Also Phoenix, Las Vegas. Portland due to population shifts in western states and Seattle because of boom in industries there bucked the trend. Worst still to come as credit tightens.

LyrArc Article Gist
Faces of the U.S. unemployment, foreclosure and housing crisis in Hagerstown, Maryland, in 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
The revised AIG rescue plan helps banks recover some of their losses on collateralized debt obligations and helps AIG by cancelling the credit default swaps it wrote on these CDO's, and thus helps shore up the financial system. This is what happened. During the boom period banks bought protection from the insurer AIG on securities backed by now-troubled mortgage assets. These securities are called CDO's or collateralized debt obligations backed by subprime mortgage bonds, commercial mortgage loans and other assets. Banks in the US, and Europe bought credit default swaps on these securities from AIG, and AIG promises to compensate them if the securites default. Now with the housing and the credit crisis the values of these CDO's plummet, banks go to AIG and AIG has to provide them collateral to help cover these losses of the banks. AIG ends up giving $35 billion in collateral to the banks including Goldman, Merrill, UBS, Deutsche Bank and others. The continuing fall in value of the CDO's meant AIG had to give more and more collateral to the banks leaving AIG severly exposed, which is along with other problems on its accounting books when the government stepped in in early October to bailout AIG with loans, with interest rates that became punitive for AIG leaving it in a struggling condition. What does the new revised plan do. It eases conditions on the interest rates and the New York Fed puts $30 billion of its money to buy the multisector CDO's at market prices averaging 50 cents to the dollar and AIG provides an additional $5 billion. With than one action banks get to recover their $35 billion and AIG gets to cancell its credit default swaps on these CDO's, in effect freeing AIG from thses swaps that were creating a hemorrhaging effect as it had to keep posting more and more collateral to banks, and banks got to recover the money on CDO's. In effect helping shore up the financial system. There are other problems at AIG but this was the biggest and most draining, and it helps AIG protect its other businesses, and banks get to put this dismal chapter behind them. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The figures are startling, alarming dangerous whatever you call it. How many homeowners are under water or owe more on their mortgage than their house is worth today in today's depressed market? And how many more will be under water in tomorrow's even more depressed market as unemployment gets worse in 2009, and much worse after that in 2010. Moody's Economy.com's chief econmist mark Zandl has worked out some figures. And he says one in 6 mortgages in America today are under water, that is 16% of 7.5 million households that own homes they live in, or roughly 12 million households. To give some idea of how quickly this is deteriorating while Congress, the Administration and the general public could not reach any agreement or consensus about assisting homeowners avoid foreclosure in steps that cover all homeowners across the USA. The comparable figures were roughly 4% under water in 2006 and 6% in 2007. Thats a huge jump from 6% to 16% and was not expected to be such a steep jump in 2008. And it may be accelerating for 2009. And of the homeowners who took on a mortgage in the last 5 years the figures are startling, 29% are under water according to estimate by real estate Web site Zillow.com, that is one in 3 almost. Which is why absence of government help on a comprehensive scale covering the whole country and all homeowners facing foreclosure remains the one huge gap in the rescue package passed by Congress for $700 billion at Sept end 2008. Why is it dangerous? Because it accelerates the downturn in the economy and exacerbates the problem of toxic mortgage assets on the books of overleveraged banks, as dropping housing prices from higher foreclosures depresses the value of those assets even further. And this creates a vicious circle of lower consumption spending followed by lower production, higher unemployment and leading to lower consumption spending in a repeat cycle leading to higher foreclosures as a consequence of higher unemployment....

LyrArc Article Gist
Difficulties facing China from an overheating economy, a property bubble in many cities,, and a 22.5% jump in March in the broadest measure of money supply being the latest signs of trouble. The government announcement will show the economy growth at 12% rate in the 1st quarter of 2010 vs. 8.7% in 2009. The problem is that China may have acted too aggressively when the central bank increased money supply and state-owned banks in China's centralized banking system were ordered to jack up the lending. The $586 billion stimulus sent even more money to construction and energy companies. Without effective steps and fast the Chinese economy could run into serious problems.

LyrArc Article Gist
Will the housing slowdown impact the rest of the economy, industries like auto, airlines, oil. How much slowdown in growth is to be expected? Both sides of the picture. Oil price declines and the fact that consumers are spending less out of cash from home equity may mitigate the slump.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Case-Shiller Index shows a decline in housing prices of 4.2% in the first quarter of 2011. This follows a drop of 3.6% in the fourth quarter of 2010. Of the 20 cities in the index, 12 were at a post-bubble low in March 2011. The yearly drop for Minneapolis was 10%. Only Washington D.C. showed a rise in March and over the year. Housing prices are at 2002 levels. The Center for Economic and Policy Research estimates a decline of 6-8% for the rest of 2011. The excess supply of housing was estimated at 1.8 million units in April 2010 by the financial Blog Calculated Risk, which used 2010 census data for the estimate calculations. The Conference Board consumer confidence index fell to 60.8 from a revised 66 in April 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points to some striking facts about China in 2011. Consumer spending in China is only 35% of GDP and has declined over the years. There are no signs of rebalancing the economy away from exports by increasing consumer spending. China's dependence on exports for trade surpluses is greater than ever. Beyond this there is another disturbing fact. With weak consumer spending and heavy investment spending at about half of GDP, Kugman raises the question where is all that increase in spending going? Real estate investment takes up about half of the increase in investment spending, as the share of GDP of real estate investment almost doubles compared to figures for 2000. Much of the rest of the increase Krugman attributes to firms selling to the construction industry. The speculative fever, the corruption at the local level, the shadow banking system which is not protected and unsupervised, the poor quality of statistics, suggest a bubble phenomena that may not be under control of policy makers, and risks damaging China economy and the world economy in 2012-2013. After all China's economic and financial planners and banks are no better than America's or Japan's, where asset bubbles burst causing serious damage....

LyrArc Article Gist
Bernanke's plan to address the deep downturn is very aggressive and he is pulling out all the stops. This includes the purchase of mortgage backed securities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac corporate debt and other assets, Since it stated its intention in late November to buy such securities, the 30 year mortgage rates have fallen to 5.2% from 6%, and refinance applications have tripled. Now the purchases will be greatly expanded. See the related link to this in Hubbard and Mayer article based on their research paper, in the WSJ, that shows that at a mortgage rate of 4.5% the housing market prices could stabilize. Next step the Fed will, starting early 2009, pump money into markets for student, auto, credit card ansd small business loans in hoping to bring life to those markets. How much money is involved? Quite a bit. All told the Fed's assets could add up to $5 trillion says Ed Yardeni of Yardeni Research, up from $2.2 trillion now. Its these sweeping moves and decisions that have overshadowed the December 16 announcement cutting the target federal funds rate to a range from zero to 0.25%, the lowest in its history. Whats the thinking behind this? Coy of BW points to Bernanke's research on the depression years and the lost decade years in Japan. In 1999, in a book he contributed to, Bernanke referred to Japan's monetary policy and passive approach as a self induced paralysis, including all the zombie loans that were allowed to continue on company books and no effort to clear up the bad assets quickly. He always thought highly of the aggressive approach taken by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and felt that more tools available and a better understanding of the market system since FDR's day enabled a lot more actions to be taken to reverse the kind of steep global downturn that might occur. Yardeni's view is that even though this huge asset buildup could lead to inflation down the road, the economy in the medium term faces a deflationary environment, and the only way to cope with this series of bubbles bursting is to create another bubble, rather than risk anything going seriously wrong. Basically Bernanke is making an assessment of the current situation, and he sees bad credit situation getting worse, bad unemployment situation getting worse, consumer spending falling off and getting worse, continued home foreclosures and falling prices, the transition between administrations and lack of policy direction for a few critical months complicating things, and he sees the economies of all trading partners in Asia and Europe weakening in great speed, and sees very tough years for 2009 and 2010 no matter what the administration and the Fed do. Not enough aggressive actions to forestall the worst is as bad as inaction in Bernanke's view. And with all the aggressive moves, including the $1 trillion stimulus and infrastructure spending to create 2.5 million jobs that Obama administration plans, the US and global picture for the next 24 months will still be a long uphill climb. So the risks for Bernanke are all in the region of not doing enough and not doing it vigorously and speedily to get the best results. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Binyamin Applebaum cites different experts on how U.S. Fed policy could play out in 2017-2019. He cites Fed governor Dudley that there is increased uncertainty under the Trump administration, and other economists who say that aging population, lack of innovation, and steady growth under the Obama administration with falling unemployment, make it unlikely that growth will jump well above 2%. The Fed's own forecasts are for for under 2% growth in 2017 and 2018, and Applebaum says this is not expected to change by much. Janet Yellen does not see a huge stimulus as a positive, says Applebaum, because it would increase the deficit at the wrong time. He cites Yellen who prefers to see more fiscal space now that unemployment is down to 4.6%. Steady growth in the view of Fed officials has taken up much of the backlog of people looking for work since the 2008 crisis. Yellen sees some fiscal space as desirable with high debt to GDP ratio at 77 percent, so that the government could respond to some adverse event in the future. A Republican Congress is also averse to sudden increases in the deficit. See the link to views about the uncertainty of how things can play out in a separate article by Neil Irwin of NYT. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Karl Case, co-author with Shiller, of the Case-Shiller housing index, describes what the American dream of owning a house was always all about- having a safe long-term investment with the happiness gained from ownership of one's own home. It was never really meant to become a way to pay bills, and enjoy an artificially high standard of living based on artificially high speculative returns of 30% a year. Based on the authentic verson of this dream, it is still alive, says Case. Buying a house today costs less because of lower interest rates, the costs of a house are lower, and it provides a return in the form of rent that the owner doesn't have to pay for the home. Case has not factored in unemployment and job uncertainty, especially with the worsening economic outlook in 2011. This may still depress housing markets.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. market looks like it is becoming the kind of maturing market that Japan and Germany have become for automobiles. Germany and Japan saw sales peak at high levels and then decline. And they have been declining steadily for several years. The US has a growing population and demographics because of immigration compared to Japan so there wil be continued demand for new cars. However since 2000 carmakers have introduced so many price incentives, interest free loans, and other ways of pushing sales that sales have continued to climb to unsustainable levels. All through the 1990's sales were in the 15 million range, then after 2000 sales climbed, except for the short period of uncertainty after 9/11/2001 Trade Center bombings. Sales climbed up to 17 million and stayed at these higher levels till the recent crises in 2007 saw a drop in sales and a shift to smaller fuel efficient cars. GM was offering 0% financing for 5 years through its Keep America Rolling campaign in the aftermath of 9/11. By 2005 automakers were offering as much as $8000 in discounts on pickup trucks. Employee pricing enabled regular customers to buy at employee prices. The Big Three sold to rental fleets unsold cars, so much so that by 2005 25% of all vehicles made by GM and Ford went to rental fleets, to rental companies in which these companies had large ownership stakes. For GM this became part of strategy. Fixed costs were high and the UAW contracts made it difficult to layoff workers, a jobs bank in which layed off workers could remain till rehired was itself quite costly as money had to be paid to the workers in the job bank. With this kind of inflexibility in the labor market GM could only spread all the fixed costs for its aging workforce which required pension payouts to retirees and health payments to retirees, by selling more automobiles. During this period of inflexibility in labor, and the legacy costs of previous boom years since the 1950's with generous UAW contracts, GM and Ford pushed sales to unsustainable levels; without considering the furture implications of this short term strategy. Another way this could hurt is by pulling sales in future years into current years because of interest free financing or huge discounting which probably happened in 2004-2005 and is seeing a payback today in 2008. At the peak in 2005 carmakers were planning further expansion of SUV capacity or expansion of other carmaking facilities. Gas was still not at the high levels of today. In 1999 gas cost $1.15 cents a gallon, and it was a little higher than that, but nowhere near what we are seeeing today. These new plants are coming up just as the sales are dropping dramatically, the half million SUV's sold in 2008 is about half the sales in 2003, enough to fill 2 plants when many more plants are being built or opening. The new capacity of 4 plants capable of producing 1 million vehicles is looking like a big mistake, like the new Toyota Tundra plant in Texas. Some of the new carmaking capacity is a Toyota plant in Tupelo, Mississippi, a Honda plant in Indiana, and a Kia Motors plant in Georgia. All this means a big drop in factory utilization rates. GM has 2 plants making full size SUV's. Later this year GM will cut production at these plants and at 2 plants making pickup trucks to utilize them only for 1 eight hour shift a day. Toyota has 1 full plant of excess capacity, not including the plant opening in Tupelo, Missisippi, making it likely to be down in utilization very significantly as well. Nissan is only using 65% of capacity at plants in Canton, Mississippi and Smyrna , Tennessee. And these utilization rates reflect the impact at the early stage of the housing crisis, consumption spending is only now beginning to bite, and unemployment is still to take a hit, so th economic recession immpact is still not reflected in auto sales. Even now GM and Chrysler cling to the hope of a sales pickup in late 2008 and in 2009, which is looking less likely by the day. J.D. Powers survey show the North American auto making capacity at 18.7 million cars and production this year at 14.1 million. This means the automakers have disastrously misjudged the auto market, and the role their own actions in pushing sales have affected the market in inflating the sales numbers beyond what is a sustainable sale increase. When credit tightening and lower consumption spending, housing crisis, and higher unemployment all hit the US in full impact by 2009 the situation is likely to worsen significantly and could become a disaster. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The contrarians not just then, but still today, as many economists shrug off facts about the new savings rate and predict a bounce back in 2009. Jeremy Grantham, co-founder of Boston money mangement shop GMO LLC, got the date right, predicting real risk to the financial system in October 2008. He pointed out for years since 2000 that the Fed's moves and the government's fiscal actions (including 2 costly wars) after the 2001 terrorist attacks, had simply postponed "a sensational bust". Its useful to see how these three, Peter Schiff, President of EuroPacific Capital, Bob Rodriguez of the FPA New Income Fund, and Jeremy Grantham agree and where even they disagree, and where the common thread of logic runs. Currency valuations including the US dollar, are the hardest to predict, and the predictions in this regard are also hardest to state for their timing. When separated from the rest of the picture, they give a better sense of what this common thread of logic in most of the crisis picture is. Grantham saw this crisis coming, but its not clear that he sees this running for a long period of a decade. He agrees with Rodriguez and Schiff about another 30% fall in the S&P 500 stock index, but at the same time he predicts over the next 7 years returns in the US stock markets will be 7.5% annually. Rodriguez sees this going on far beyond periods 1 and 2 to periods 3 to 10. And he sees government efforts to jump start the economy leading to some progress and then sputtering out because consumers are turning frugal. The savings rate will grow eventually going up to 10% by 2010. What this means is that as 70% of the US economy depends on consumption spending, and consumption spending has been too deeply damaged to recover in a few years, the downturn will only deepen in 2009 and 2010. This is his central point, and the analysis free of clutter and controversy. Basically he says the policy makers do not fully grasp that the US consumer has turned into a saver, and while the Obama administration puts one foot on the accelerator to stimulate spending, consumers will be pushing on the brakes. Schiff sees difficulties in financing the debt leading to higher interest rates and a serious drop in the value of the dollar. The views on the dollar face a lot of uncertainty as to timing, the relative strength of currencies in countries in Europe which have weak economies (UK, Ireland and Spain), and the rapidly weakening Chinese economy. But the common thread of logic runs through Rodriguez's argument about the savings rate and consumption spending, with debt and the overstretched consumer in the US running through every discussion about a weakening economy. Something much like what is happening to the auto industry because of its extraordinary degree of oversupply (with capacity reaching 94 million vehicles worldwide and demand inflated by the boom years and easy money now deflating) playing out in a few quarters, is likely to happen across the whole economy. In a gradual pattern playing out over a few years, as consumers postpone purchases of retail goods. Already this is showing up in the inventories of electronic goods that is building up. See links. Kelly Evans in the WSJ front page on January 6, 2009, confirms the signs of a seriously frugal American consumer....

LyrArc Article Gist
The House of Representatives just passed a bill to stem foreclosures and stabilize house prices by having the government through the Federal Housing Administration reinsure upto $300 billion of problem loans. The bills backers estimate 1.5 million foreclosures could be prevented by this bill but the Congressional Budget Office estimates only about 500,000 foreclosures can be averted this way. Under this bill lenders would have to writedown their loans to 85% of current value of the house. Borrowers pay a fee for the insurance and give up any share in future price appreciation to the government. According to the Congressional Budget Office the cost to the government is modest about $1.7 billion over years. The reason for the limited effectiveness of this bill is that it is voluntary, not much government money is extended. Many of the comments in the blog on this article as is the case with other articles on help to homeowners facing foreclosure show the widespread idea that its a bailout of irresponsible decisions by homeowners and mortgage companies who made the loans. This may be the reason why so little has been done in this regard and the limited government money extended even in plans put forth by Congressional Democrats like Barney Frank. Feldstein who is a former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under Reagan has taken a different approach focussing on homeowners who may see the rational decision is to walk away from homes where they have no equity in their homes as prices drop by 20% and for government to prevent a wave of foreclosures in this manner. The danger is if not much is done there could be a downward spiral in home prices as foreclosure reach a new high in 2009. Last year according to Economist's charts foreclosures were averaging more than 100,000 a month now they are averaging more than 200,000 a month, this would take it from 1.5 million foreclosures in 2007 to 2.5 million in 2008. According to the Economist 9 million people owe more than their house is worth, the homeowners who have negative equity, and if they were to foreclose at the rate of 2-3 million a year and accelerating as the economy deteriorates, this could be enough to start a downward spiral. At that point a new President and Congress would have to take drastic action with a substantial amount of the government's money. In that kind of crisis not much thought would be given to the cost because like the financial meltdown that was feared during the Bear Stearns crisis the fears of a global severe economic crisis would make action necessary on many fronts of which housing would be one....

LyrArc Article Gist
The cost of fixing the nation's financial system could be around $2.5 trillion with an additional $350 of the second TARP funding and the rest of the money coming from the Federal Reserve through the Fed's ability to print money and from private investors. About $1 trillion of this is to compensate for the lack of issuance of securities backed by consumer loans of $1.2 trillion between 2006 and 2008, so that credit markets can function again like they used to. Another component of the plan is to give banks more government money which they will now be expected to lend to consumers and businesses. But a key feature of the plan much awaited by markets was the bad bank or aggregator bank solution which would enable banks to transfer bad assets to this bank. And on this one Geithner said very little so it was adisappointment for financial markets. Also the plan lacked details and was more broad brush and small on specifics. Another area on which Geithner said little is how the government will tackle rising forecolosures and keep people in their homes, which in turn would help stabilize housing prices. But by building up expectations and offering little of specifics on the bad bank solution Geithner earned withering criticism from Senators Kerry, Shelby, Frank, and others. A former managing director at Morgan Stanley Frank Pallotta, now aconsultant to buyers and sellers of distressed mortgages, says the fundamental problem still is the pricing and the gap between what abank like Chase thinks its mortgage is worth of 75 cents to the dollar and aprospective buyer who thinks its worth 45 cents or 25 cents. This is a huge gap and would be expensive to fill in. A bad bank one analyst says could be very expensive and this is why Geithner acknowledges the goal of setting up a fund of some $1 trillion. ...