Negative "Positive Feedback Loop" of Employment and Housing
Quick Comment - August 10, 2006
by Eric Janszen
I start my comment today with the following story:
Housing-related employment accounted for about 23 percent of the 4.9 million jobs created since the nation's job market began to grow in late 2003, according to Moody's, fueled by Fed policies designed to blunt the impact of the collapsing stock market bubble. A year earlier, in January 2004, I hypothesized that the housing market, when it starts its descent, will first "sieze up," for a period followed by falling prices and declining housing related employment -- in everything from mortgage lending, to construction, to agency services -- and that this decline in housing related employment will feed back into the real estate market as falling real estate prices. In electronics, this is called a "positive feedback loop," although there's nothing "positive" about it in an economic sense. I was certain of the process, the only questions were when would it begin and how rapid the decline might be.
The housing bubble peaked in mid 2005, about six months after my Housing Bubble Correction piece appeared on AlwaysOn-Network. The seven step model predicted that housing prices were not due to get hit by housing related unemployment until five years after the correction began. That means 2010. In retrospect, that prediction now looks very optimistic. Here we are one year into the decline and incomes and employment are falling fast in some areas. It's hard to imagine how even with a year or two of lag time, housing related unemployment will not begin to hit housing prices by, say, mid 2007 at the latest. That's three years ahead of schedule, per my original model.
iTulip.com has a rep as bearish but has been consistently optimistic in its predictions. In 1998, the site predicted an 87% decline in a basket of popular dot com stocks. If we remove the survivor bias -- leave in the companies that went out of business and therefor were deleted from the index but instead leave them in and account for them as zero value -- the decline was well over 90%. Also predicted in 1999, the NASDAQ was due to decline from 5000 to around 1500 and then rebound to 2500 and stay there for a decade. This, too, appears optimistic. It's traded sideways around 2000 for the past six years.
What does this mean for my housing correction prediction and the US economy?
Less than 25% of US households held a significant portion of their assets in stocks in 1999, so managing a crashing stock market bubble was relatively speaking a piece of cake for the Fed. But a housing bubble collapse can wreck an economy where 70% of household wealth is tied up in homes. I'm still wondering what the Fed has in its anti-deflation monetary repair plan to rescue us from the collapse of this latest asset bubble. It'd better be better than what Bernanke's hinted at so far.
Bernanke, in remarks before the New York Chapter of the National Association for Business Economics, New York, New York October 15, 2002, stated:
We had a housing bubble from 2002 until mid 2005. Whether by intent or not, Fed rate hikes since 2004 collapsed it. As What (Really) Happened in 1995 points out, capital adequacy in the banking system is doubtful, although the Fed can likely fix that by throwing the discount window wide open, assuming the exposure that the banks have to hedge funds don't hit them at the same time. While the banks may have effectively stress-tested their portfolios and have adequate transparency in accounting and disclosure practices, many of the hedge funds that have borrowed hundreds of billions of dollars from them have not. Financial literacy in the US is poor, and anyway during the get-rich-quick frenzy of an asset bubble, common sense about finance goes out the window, even among experts, never mind Joe and Jane Sixpack. All that leaves us with from Ben's prescription kit is, "a willingness to play the role of lender of last resort when needed."
"We will not have a deflationary depression, dammit!" is the message from Bernanke in another speech in 2002.
New guy, but the same old "we can't do nutthin' about no asset bubbles" Fed. The Fed sees its role as that of a clean-up crew standing by to watch a train take the curve at 100MPH that was designed to be taken at 30MPH. They wait with fire hoses, the jaws of life, food, bottled water and body bags.
How will the Fed counter the massive deflationary impulse that the collapsing real estate bubble will unleash on the economy? Everything and anything to prevent the onset of a deflationary spiral. As Ben happily notes in the remarks quoted, unconstrained by the gold standard, the Fed can clearly re-liquify the system now in a way it could not in the 1930s. The Fed can print money and buy real estate directly. Maybe this period is what Bill Gross is referring to in his The End of History and the Last Bond Bull Market. Perhaps this is why Greenspan mysteriously recommended ARMs on February 23, 2004, when he spoke to the Credit Union National Association 2004 Governmental Affairs Conference, even though a 30 year fixed rate mortgage was then available at 5.5 percent with no points, at 40 year lows.
The "Ka" in Ka-Poom is coming. Gross believes it. Greenspan implied it. How do we play it? We know what's going to happen to real estate. What will happen to stocks, bonds, commodities and the dollar?
If previous episodes are any value as a guide, bond yields will fall and prices will rise and stocks will decline. The wild card is commodities and the dollar. They may decline as well, at least initially, but if dollar depreciation is used early and strongly enough as a measure to limit deflation, the downside on commodity prices, at least priced in dollars, may be limited and short lived.
Join our FREE Email Mailing List
Copyright © iTulip, Inc. 1998 - 2006 All Rights Reserved
All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Nothing appearing on this website should be considered a recommendation to buy or to sell any security or related financial instrument. iTulip, Inc. is not liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. Full Disclaimer
Quick Comment - August 10, 2006
by Eric Janszen
I start my comment today with the following story:
Region feels ripples from home building slowdown
August 10, 2006 (Miami Herald Tribune)
August 10, 2006 (Miami Herald Tribune)
Slowdown in building is rocking small contractors as they scramble for jobs
Southwest Florida's cooling housing market is starting to pinch people whose livelihoods are tied to housing.
Many workers like cabinet-maker Jorge Ayo face the difficult choice of leaving the region for greener pastures, doubling up on contracts or moving to other job sectors to find stable work.
Three months ago, Ayo says he earned $2,000 a week with one customer, Timberlake Cabinets. Now, even with two more accounts, he makes only half his previous income.
"Three months ago, I worked every day. Now the big houses are gone," he said. "I have a condo here and a town home there, and I get a few remodels here and there. And sometimes, I have no work."
Going back to January 2005, my piece on the seven step Housing Bubble Correction noted the high correlation of employment to housing prices.Southwest Florida's cooling housing market is starting to pinch people whose livelihoods are tied to housing.
Many workers like cabinet-maker Jorge Ayo face the difficult choice of leaving the region for greener pastures, doubling up on contracts or moving to other job sectors to find stable work.
Three months ago, Ayo says he earned $2,000 a week with one customer, Timberlake Cabinets. Now, even with two more accounts, he makes only half his previous income.
"Three months ago, I worked every day. Now the big houses are gone," he said. "I have a condo here and a town home there, and I get a few remodels here and there. And sometimes, I have no work."
Housing-related employment accounted for about 23 percent of the 4.9 million jobs created since the nation's job market began to grow in late 2003, according to Moody's, fueled by Fed policies designed to blunt the impact of the collapsing stock market bubble. A year earlier, in January 2004, I hypothesized that the housing market, when it starts its descent, will first "sieze up," for a period followed by falling prices and declining housing related employment -- in everything from mortgage lending, to construction, to agency services -- and that this decline in housing related employment will feed back into the real estate market as falling real estate prices. In electronics, this is called a "positive feedback loop," although there's nothing "positive" about it in an economic sense. I was certain of the process, the only questions were when would it begin and how rapid the decline might be.
The housing bubble peaked in mid 2005, about six months after my Housing Bubble Correction piece appeared on AlwaysOn-Network. The seven step model predicted that housing prices were not due to get hit by housing related unemployment until five years after the correction began. That means 2010. In retrospect, that prediction now looks very optimistic. Here we are one year into the decline and incomes and employment are falling fast in some areas. It's hard to imagine how even with a year or two of lag time, housing related unemployment will not begin to hit housing prices by, say, mid 2007 at the latest. That's three years ahead of schedule, per my original model.
iTulip.com has a rep as bearish but has been consistently optimistic in its predictions. In 1998, the site predicted an 87% decline in a basket of popular dot com stocks. If we remove the survivor bias -- leave in the companies that went out of business and therefor were deleted from the index but instead leave them in and account for them as zero value -- the decline was well over 90%. Also predicted in 1999, the NASDAQ was due to decline from 5000 to around 1500 and then rebound to 2500 and stay there for a decade. This, too, appears optimistic. It's traded sideways around 2000 for the past six years.
What does this mean for my housing correction prediction and the US economy?
Less than 25% of US households held a significant portion of their assets in stocks in 1999, so managing a crashing stock market bubble was relatively speaking a piece of cake for the Fed. But a housing bubble collapse can wreck an economy where 70% of household wealth is tied up in homes. I'm still wondering what the Fed has in its anti-deflation monetary repair plan to rescue us from the collapse of this latest asset bubble. It'd better be better than what Bernanke's hinted at so far.
Bernanke, in remarks before the New York Chapter of the National Association for Business Economics, New York, New York October 15, 2002, stated:
"My talk today will address a contentious issue, summarized by the following pair of questions: Can the Federal Reserve (or any central bank) reliably identify "bubbles" in the prices of some classes of assets, such as equities and real estate? And, if it can, what if anything should it do about them?"
He concludes:"Understandably, as a society, we would like to find ways to mitigate the potential instabilities associated with asset-price booms and busts. Monetary policy is not a useful tool for achieving this objective, however. Even putting aside the great difficulty of identifying bubbles in asset prices, monetary policy cannot be directed finely enough to guide asset prices without risking severe collateral damage to the economy.
"A far better approach, I believe, is to use micro-level policies to reduce the incidence of bubbles and to protect the financial system against their effects. I have already mentioned a variety of possible measures, including supervisory action to ensure capital adequacy in the banking system, stress-testing of portfolios, increased transparency in accounting and disclosure practices, improved financial literacy, greater care in the process of financial liberalization, and a willingness to play the role of lender of last resort when needed. Although eliminating volatility from the economy and the financial markets will never be possible, we should be able to moderate it without sacrificing the enormous strengths of our free-market system."
Nice speech, but it's too late to use any of these prescriptions for the housing bubble, except for one. "A far better approach, I believe, is to use micro-level policies to reduce the incidence of bubbles and to protect the financial system against their effects. I have already mentioned a variety of possible measures, including supervisory action to ensure capital adequacy in the banking system, stress-testing of portfolios, increased transparency in accounting and disclosure practices, improved financial literacy, greater care in the process of financial liberalization, and a willingness to play the role of lender of last resort when needed. Although eliminating volatility from the economy and the financial markets will never be possible, we should be able to moderate it without sacrificing the enormous strengths of our free-market system."
We had a housing bubble from 2002 until mid 2005. Whether by intent or not, Fed rate hikes since 2004 collapsed it. As What (Really) Happened in 1995 points out, capital adequacy in the banking system is doubtful, although the Fed can likely fix that by throwing the discount window wide open, assuming the exposure that the banks have to hedge funds don't hit them at the same time. While the banks may have effectively stress-tested their portfolios and have adequate transparency in accounting and disclosure practices, many of the hedge funds that have borrowed hundreds of billions of dollars from them have not. Financial literacy in the US is poor, and anyway during the get-rich-quick frenzy of an asset bubble, common sense about finance goes out the window, even among experts, never mind Joe and Jane Sixpack. All that leaves us with from Ben's prescription kit is, "a willingness to play the role of lender of last resort when needed."
"We will not have a deflationary depression, dammit!" is the message from Bernanke in another speech in 2002.
New guy, but the same old "we can't do nutthin' about no asset bubbles" Fed. The Fed sees its role as that of a clean-up crew standing by to watch a train take the curve at 100MPH that was designed to be taken at 30MPH. They wait with fire hoses, the jaws of life, food, bottled water and body bags.
How will the Fed counter the massive deflationary impulse that the collapsing real estate bubble will unleash on the economy? Everything and anything to prevent the onset of a deflationary spiral. As Ben happily notes in the remarks quoted, unconstrained by the gold standard, the Fed can clearly re-liquify the system now in a way it could not in the 1930s. The Fed can print money and buy real estate directly. Maybe this period is what Bill Gross is referring to in his The End of History and the Last Bond Bull Market. Perhaps this is why Greenspan mysteriously recommended ARMs on February 23, 2004, when he spoke to the Credit Union National Association 2004 Governmental Affairs Conference, even though a 30 year fixed rate mortgage was then available at 5.5 percent with no points, at 40 year lows.
The "Ka" in Ka-Poom is coming. Gross believes it. Greenspan implied it. How do we play it? We know what's going to happen to real estate. What will happen to stocks, bonds, commodities and the dollar?
If previous episodes are any value as a guide, bond yields will fall and prices will rise and stocks will decline. The wild card is commodities and the dollar. They may decline as well, at least initially, but if dollar depreciation is used early and strongly enough as a measure to limit deflation, the downside on commodity prices, at least priced in dollars, may be limited and short lived.
Join our FREE Email Mailing List
Copyright © iTulip, Inc. 1998 - 2006 All Rights Reserved
All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Nothing appearing on this website should be considered a recommendation to buy or to sell any security or related financial instrument. iTulip, Inc. is not liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. Full Disclaimer
Comment