Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Map of misery

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Economy Donate to DU
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-09-08 03:53 PM
Original message
Map of misery
The house-price bust has a long way to go

SOUNDING more like a cartographer than a central banker, Ben Bernanke this week showed off the Federal Reserve’s latest gizmo for tracking America’s property bust: maps that colour-code price declines, foreclosures and other gauges of housing distress for every county. His goal was to show that falling prices meant more foreclosures, and to urge lenders to write down the principal on troubled loans where the house is worth less than the value of the mortgage. His maps—where hotter colours imply more trouble—also make a starker point. The pain of America’s housing bust varies enormously by region. Hardest hit have been the “bubble states”—California, Nevada and Florida, and parts of the industrial Midwest. The biggest uncertainty hanging over the economy is how red will things get.

The answer is not simple. It is hard to be sure how much house prices have fallen. America has several house-price indices and they tell different stories. Widely cited, but least useful, are monthly figures showing median home prices produced by the National Association of Realtors (NAR). These indicate that median prices are down some 13% from their peak, but since these averages do not adjust for the mix of homes changing hands, which fluctuates from month to month, they are inevitably distorted.

Mr Bernanke’s maps use figures from the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO). Its statistics have broad geographic reach and track repeat sales of the same house. The monthly national index suggests average prices have fallen only 3% from a peak in April 2007, and the quarterly figures are still positive. But OFHEO’s figures include only houses financed by mortgages backed by the government-sponsored giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They leave out the top and bottom of the market—where prices rose fastest during the bubble and where the mortgage mess was most severe. Thus OFHEO’s figures probably understate the scale of the housing mess. Another set of indices, developed by Robert Shiller and Karl Case and produced by Standard & Poor’s (S&P), a rating agency, includes all types of houses and show house prices rising faster during the boom and falling faster now. Although the Case-Shiller figures are not perfect—they miss many rural areas—they are a better gauge of price declines in big cities.



Economist
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-09-08 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. The map is a little deceptive
Around here, there is a huge oversupply of the wrong kind of housing, McMansions that were built for speculators, mostly from out of state. Often these places have never been lived in and some are currently uninhabitable due to the fact that absentee owners didn't realize it gets down to the teens here in the winter, didn't turn on the heat, and pipes have burst.

The glut in the McMansion market has caused those prices to drop, while a dearth of realistic housing is causing those prices to edge upwards, causing an overall modest price increase. People who think this is a rosy market need to investigate much more closely.

Also at the site in the OP is a chart showing what rents are doing. After bottoming out relative to the price of the average house in late 2005 when real estate prices spiked, they're now starting to spike upwards, themselves, slightly exceeding the ratio of 1994, before the housing bubble occurred, and out of proportion to the fall in the median house price.

Moderately priced housing as a hedge against rising rents is still a good idea in a lot of markets, in other words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 06:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Regarding rentals ...
At the moment, I am without specific data to address this but from observation here goes ...

In discussions about housing, home ownership in particular, there was little attention given to the other segment of the real estate market, rising rental costs. In some areas, high rental costs and low wages required individuals to exceed occupancy of a unit to pay the rent.

Rising rental costs also displaced large segments of the population and force them to live greater distances from their workplace in search of reasonable housing costs. Now, transportation (gasoline) costs offset any savings after making that decision.

Today, using 40-40 hindsight, it is easy to claim Americans made bad decisions when they realized their housing expense, rentals, matched and sometimes exceed the teaser mortgage payment and took the bait.

All discussions and plans regarding housing and relief is directed towards homeowners. There are no discussions or rescue plans, to my knowledge, about renters who are being priced out of the market.

Now, using some bizarre "supply and demand" paradigm, rental costs are suppose to increase because foreclosures are increasing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-10-08 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Certain homes around here are seeing an increase in price but
others are seeing a decline. In this very rural area of East TN, homes over $150,000 are dropping in value, while homes in $100,000 or less range are increasing in value. My home is valued at above $150,000.

I have replacement value home insurance. That is if my house were to burn down, the insurance would pay to build me a house equal to what I currently have. As prices and costs go up, my insurance goes up. It went down last year by about 10%. It is the first time since 2001 that the insurance costs declined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Economy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC