Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RE: Recovery Kool-Aid

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • RE: Recovery Kool-Aid

    from ZeroHedge

    One day, we hope, the broader public will realize that just as the Libor scandal was largely precipitated by the fact that it was a self-reported number and thus open to collusion and manipulation by the same people who set it, so any data coming out of the National Association of Realtors - an organization that by definition benefits from high prices and frenzied real estate activity - is total manipulated garbage (in fact courtesy of the massive 2011 restatement from the NAR several months ago we know just that).

    . . . the latest forced delusion being that US real estate has bottomed and is rising even as the global economy is decelerating at the fastest pace in the past 3 years, the NAR serves a handy purpose: it provides a reflexive way of misrepresenting the underlying trends in real estate, suckering the marginal fool in once again, as it did throughout the period between 2000 and 2007. The question then is what does objective, unmanipulated data say. As the following three charts from Bloomberg confirm the last word one should use when discussing the US housing market, where as we already pointed out shadow inventory is once again building up while construction jobs have tumbled to decade lows, is "bottomed."

    From Bloomberg Brief:


    Key housing barometers are all moving in a sideways direction, implying neither definitive improvement nor continued deceleration.

    The most leading of the housing/construction indicators is the American Institute of Architect’s Work-on-the-Boards survey. During June the headline Architecture Billing Index (ABI) was mired in contractionary territory with a reading of 45.9. This was the third consecutive sub-50 posting. This isn’t very surprising since executives have been quite vocal with respect to concerns in Europe, China and the increased potential contagion in the U.S. The CEO Roundtable sent a letter to Congress citing these three issues. In addition, a sizeable number of complaints were found in the Bloomberg Orange Book.


    Lumber giant Universal Forest Products’ CEO Matt Missad said in the company’s latest earnings conference call, “We are watching our inventories closely and trying not to get too far ahead because we are concerned about disappointing employment figures and lack of construction growth in the U.S.”

    Rather than observe the trends in the Mortgage Bankers Association’s headline Mortgage Applications Index, which includes refinancing, a far better gauge of economic conditions is the Mortgage Purchases Index trends. This weekly representation of demand for mortgages related to home buying is little changed from levels registered at the bottom of the housing market collapse.
    The level of residential housing construction is an important indicator, and has made little improvement since the apparent market bottom in 2009.


    The sunken pace of residential construction spending in May was $268 billion – essentially the same levels seen in 1997. This profoundly low level of activity is not limited to the residential sector; spending on commercial structures is currently the same as in 1996.

    Since there is diminished activity, the need for workers in the construction industry has also stagnated. During June construction employment totaled 5.5 million workers – a near 30 percent decline from the peak in April 2006 and the same number as in mid 1996.


    The Federal Reserve has kept its overnight borrowing target at near zero for more than three-and-a-half years. As a result, mortgage rates are at all-time lows with the average 30-year fixed rate lingering around 3.53 percent. Since adopting this accommodative policy there has been essentially no improvement in the level of new home sales.
    And finally, here is the NAR's reflexive feedback: existing home sales:


    Existing home sales have improved somewhat, but remain a far cry from pre-recession and pre-bubble levels. The gain is likely a function of the “haves” grabbing the foreclosed properties of the “have-nots.” This is proof that the Fed may be able to lead the horse to (lower rate kool-aid), but scant few are drinking up.

    In other words, instead of "housing recovery" a much better phrase would be "the rich are getting richer", and everyone else can go suck a lollipop and watch their wealth evaporate courtesy of Z/NIRP.

  • #2
    Re: Recovery Kool-Aid

    I know that home values will fall, but what about the value of land itself? I hope to acquire land eventually, so this is an issue I am keen on.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Recovery Kool-Aid

      now here's an idea the NAR would like - like a vampire digs garlic - based on an old Jeffersonian 'principal' . . . .

      Shortly before died, Thomas Jefferson tried to pay debts that amounted to $80,000 by disposing of land he owned through the use of a lottery, a well-established method at the time.

      He explained the rationale for such financing: "An article of property, insusceptible of division at all, or not without great diminution of its worth, is sometimes of so large value that no purchaser can be found ... The lottery is here a salutary instrument for disposing of it, where men run small risks for a chance of obtaining a high prize."


      Presenting the Jingle-Mail Lottery!


      The proposal would work as follows. First, establish a National Lottery for foreclosed properties. The financial institutions would put all foreclosed properties into a pool and the government would supervise the lottery. Next, tickets would be sold at $100 or so. The proper price of the tickets should be high enough to be serious so as not to be treated as a game, but low enough so that almost any family could spare the money, including foreigners.

      The National Lottery would indeed induce people to seek "risky assets" in exchange for uncommitted cash and savings - the not fully thought through stated policy objective of the Fed - but without the present wrongheaded pursuit of severely punishing savers, in pension funds in particular.

      Homeowners risking foreclosure and financial institutions owning foreclosed property could each participate. The homeowners would obtain both lender permission and a reserve price set at or above the outstanding mortgage debt. Homeowners would not have to sell below that price. Owners could get more, but would never end up below the reservation price. Banks, however, could set the reservation price at less than the mortgage, since they have been forfeiting mortgage payments anyway, and owners risking foreclosure could negotiate with their banks, allowing for lowering the reservation price.

      All houses would be listed online, with the reservation price and an initial probability of winning equal to 100 divided by the reservation price. If the proposal made clear that this would be a one-time lottery, then it would be highly likely that the homeowners and financial institutions would establish reasonable reserve prices.

      Only properties that met the reserve price would be sold. The bidders for such unsold property would forfeit the $100 lottery price, but they would be able to deduct it from their taxes.

      The lottery ticket buyers would choose which house they wanted. Houses that got bids with aggregate values greater than the reservation price would have their probabilities decreased by dividing 100 by the aggregated sum of the bets on this particular property. Houses whose aggregate bids do not meet the reservation price would not be sold and would revert to the present owners.

      People could change their choices based on the fluctuating probabilities. This process would go on for a stated period of time, say two weeks or a month, and then ticket holders would be committed to whatever house they last selected. Any winner could either keep the house or obviously dispose of it as they wish.

      A winner of the lottery drawing would then receive title and ownership of the property from the owner. The latter would get a net price equal to $100 multiplied by the number of bidders on this property, after deducting an established percentage to the government for administration fees. The newly won house would be tax free.

      Participants could own a house for $100, foregoing the monthly beer, lottery and McDonald and Coke budget of many citizens (sorry Mr Buffet). If unable to maintain the prize, they could re-sell promptly and pocket the winnings obtained for the $100.

      Or they could choose to wait, as property taxes would be their only annual obligation.

      One million families would become homeowners, free of mortgage debt. Details about participation, including the possibility of restrictions on foreigners, need further discussion, though foreign participation should be welcomed. After all, such participation would signal that foreigners are betting on the future of the US. Property is "immobile" capital within the US, and an investment in such an asset signals belief in the country's prosperity: it can't be taken away from the US, right?

      the benefits would snowball . . .

      • Financial institutions would benefit because millions of mortgages would be paid off and removed from their balance sheets. These payoffs would cascade through hundreds of thousands of CDOs, CLOs, SIVs and other types of derivatives, which would serve to clarify value and help to further unfreeze credit markets.
      • the 65+ group could spare a few bucks, giving up some bottle of beers and buying lottery tickets instead. After all, this is their sole chance of recouping some wealth at this age.
      • There are many who think the US needs some "big, uplifting" national project. Building bridges and roads? Why? Shouldn't the Internet be used to allow more people to work from homes and bring less congestion? (Though this requires drastic simplification of the tax code)
      • And where should they be built? And if they are not used by people whose income would be generated by more businesses such infrastructure would all turn out to be empty monuments.


      Restoring the housing market to health using a National Lottery might just be the ticket. And if the US will then be labelled the "betting nation" - so be it.

      Reuven Brenner holds the Repap Chair at McGill University's Desautels Faculty of Management, and serves on the Board and Investment Committee of its Pension Fund. The article draws on his World of Chance (Cambridge, 2008, co-authored by Gabrielle Brenner and Aaron Brown) and History - the Human Gamble (Chicago, 1983).

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Recovery Kool-Aid

        And how many "winners" would promptly mortgage their prize so they could increase their "monthly beer, lottery and McDonald and Coke budget." For many, poverty exists in their soul, not their bank accounts.
        "I love a dog, he does nothing for political reasons." --Will Rogers

        Comment

        Working...
        X