« POPE 5 Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Ben Jones: The Housing Bubble Is Popping Right Now (Part 3 of 6)

By: Decomposed in POPE 5 | Recommend this post (0)
Wed, 28 Nov 18 6:39 PM | 61 view(s)
Boardmark this board | Pope 5
Msg. 14867 of 62138
(This msg. is a reply to 14866 by Decomposed)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Chris’ interview with Ben Jones (continued):

Uploaded Image


Chris Martenson: You know Ben, a really important point that I don’t know why it had to be drilled into me this way. Because if you just live out here in the world of receiving your news from the newspapers, you will that message which is, oh, look these people are wealthier because their houses are going up in price. So that whole thing is just marketed constantly. It says your house is an asset. Your house is an asset.

Well, I’ve been hanging out with Robert Kiyosaki and I think it was probably the third time I heard him say the same story, but he drilled into me finally that your house is not an asset. An asset puts cash in your pocket. If you really examine what a house is, it’s a major cost center for everybody if you’re living it. You’ve got taxes, which are going through the roof in a lot of locations. You’ve got of course, all the maintenance. You’ve got insurance. You’ve got whatever interest payments you’ve got going on. This thing is a major cash sucking machine. A money pit. Therefore, it’s not an asset and somehow that all got reversed into this idea that your house is an asset. But I think we can expose this.

Let’s imagine some on Mercer Island. They decide to sell their house. So now they’re rich. But what would they do with that? Well, now they have to…the only way you can tap that equity is to move to a place with lower cost housing and buy another money pit and hopefully capture some gains difference. But otherwise, it’s not possible, by definition for everybody to get wealthy because their houses go up in price because everybody's got to live somewhere. The whole thing just falls apart as soon as you look at it even slightly rigorously, I think

Ben Jones: Well, right and all you have to do is listen. I don’t know about your radio, but when I listen to the radio all I hear is cash out refinance commercials, Rocket Mortgage. That’s how it works is the musical chairs. That’s why you read so often about people in California. Well, we’re moving to Arizona, or we’re moving to Nevada, or we’re moving to Oregon. Yeah, that works for a while, but it’s not sustainable.

Chris Martenson: Right. Well, absolutely not. So let’s talk about these bubbles then. So as far as I’m concerned, a bubble always needs two things. You need the story. There’s some story. It’s eyeballs. Elon Musk is going not create electric cars for everybody in the world. There’s a story and its usually got a good nugget of truth buried in it somewhere and you need credit. This is the thing. Like the tulip bulb crisis mania back in the 1600s in Holland. That couldn’t have happened without letters of credit being issued. So you need credit, because again, back to the definition of bubble. Occurs when asset prices rise beyond what incomes can sustain.

So we can all chortle and laugh about tulip bulbs, because obviously there was no income or cash flow associated with those things. But the same thing is true today in housing and just slightly more complicated. So you need the story, you need the credit. What kind of stories need to be told in order for…let’s pick on an area. I don’ know, let’s pick San Francisco Bay Area where I understand a local governance board has decided to…if I have the numbers right in my head. This is off top my head. But they’ve said well, to be qualified as a poor family now, to qualify for housing assistance, a family if they have an income up to 108,000, they’re poor.

So here we have an example of a place where it’s literally impossible for an average family to own an average house. Yep, there’s a story that has to go along with that which says, well, this is reasonable. Rational. It’s not that the house prices are wrong, there must be something else wrong with the story so that you have local governance saying, you know what we’re going to do? We’re going to help people afford the houses. Because there’s nothing wrong with house prices. We we’ll help them get into affordable housing with air quotes around that word affordable. Talk to us about this idea of what the story needs to be and the role of credit in creating these things.

Ben Jones: Well, the story is in the Bay Area well, we’ve got all these tech jobs. Which in my opinion the tech jobs are part of the bubble as well. You got all of these companies out there that don’t make money. But somehow are worth billions of dollars. Basically, like bed-and-breakfast, air B&B kind of things. But yeah, I mean if you look at the credit, the first thing that happened when the housing bubbled popped was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac increased the loan caps for California. Now that happens whenever the jumbo loans went way.

So why did the federal government feel a need to increase loan caps for California at a time when prices were collapsing. That made no sense at all. Now we find that the federal government is basically guaranteeing not…close to 90 percent of the home loans in the United States. Before the housing bubbled popped, I think it was in the 70s, 70 percent. So that’s the credit. The credit is endless. It’s an endless well that’s coming from just the government. The federal government.

Chris Martenson: Yeah. Well, the headwaters of that particular river the central banks, but you’re right. Having Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and also I believe FHA loans; I was surprised how quickly they walk those all the way back to needing a three percent down payment. Which is just an insanely low thing. Of course, house prices…if people don’t…people don’t’ buy the house anymore. They buy the monthly payment. So as long as interest rates were falling and they were extremely low. Generationally low.

My first mortgage was at 12 and a half percent in 1988. So as long as mortgage rates were down there in the three and a half, four percent range, you could afford a lot more house in terms of price. Now that interest rates are rising, we’re obviously seeing some stress and strain. So let’s talk about that now Ben. In your view A, where do you see bubbles? What you would call housing bubbles. B, would you agree that many of those are arguably quantitatively passed peak and starting to fall?

Ben Jones: It’s hard to say. It’s a much short list to say where’s not bubbles.

Chris Martenson: Well, pick some of the worst ones.

Ben Jones: The worst in the world or in the United States?

Chris Martenson: Let’s take a world tour and then we’ll come to the US.

Ben Jones: Well, Hong Kong, China, Sydney, Australia, Auckland, New Zealand, Dubai, London, France. The United States I would say Seattle, the Bay Area, almost all of Florida, New York, Massachusetts. I’m here in Texas right now and it used to be the…these houses were 30, 40,000 dollar and now they’re 250, 350,000 dollars. In Dallas, which is falling right now, people don’t really blink buying a 250,000 dollar house; spending 10,000 dollars on it and then putting it back on the market for 350. I got to tell you, the people in Dallas don’t make enough money to afford that. It just got out of control. For whatever reason, these central bankers and the governments did this. I cannot speak for them. I don’t know what their motivation…well, I have my suspicions. But they just let it get out of control and it’s really unfortunate, but there is going be a price to pay I can tell you that.

 
Uploaded Image

- continued -




Avatar

Gold is $1,581/oz today. When it hits $2,000, it will be up 26.5%. Let's see how long that takes. - De 3/11/2013 - ANSWER: 7 Years, 5 Months


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Ben Jones: The Housing Bubble Is Popping Right Now (Part 2 of 6)
By: Decomposed
in POPE 5
Wed, 28 Nov 18 6:37 PM
Msg. 14866 of 62138

Chris’ interview with Ben Jones:

Uploaded Image

Transcript

Chris Martenson: I am your host Chris Martenson and today, we’re going to be talking about housing and the many and various housing bubbles that exist across the globe. Housing bubble you say? Yup. Remember, a bubble exists when asset prices rise beyond what incomes can sustain. That’s my definition. I think it’s a good workable one. In housing, my rules of thumb are these. A ratio of median income to median house prices is healthy when it’s in the range of two and a half to three and a half. In other words, if the median household income was $50,000 dollars, then we’d expect immediate house prices ought to be in the range of $125,000 to $175,000.

By the time that ratio stretches to around five, I consider that to be the beginnings of certified bubble territory. By the time that ratio climbs to eight or more, you have a silly bubble on your hands. One that will end in tears for a lot of people, especially those who took out home equity lines of credit or otherwise fell for the stupid banker blather about tapping your equity or taking advantage of the wealth effect. So let‘s give one example. In Toronto, Canada today, the median income for the Metro region is $78,373 dollars. So we’ll call that $78,000. That means a healthy housing market would be priced for the median house somewhere between $195,000 and $275,000 dollars. That makes sense.

Well, let’s turn now to look at the average home selling price in Toronto. What would that be? It’s $825,000, giving us ridiculous ratio of 10.6. However, if you actually wanted a detached home in Toronto, then the selling price for those vaults to $1.35 million dollars yielding a ratio of 17.3. Bubble territory? You decide. Here today to discuss all things housing bubble related is Ben Jones, proprietor of thehousingbubbleblog.com. Ben’s been tracking housing markets and bubbles for a long time in his excellent blog. Great way to track the ups and the downs of housing. Welcome to the program Ben.

Ben Jones: Thank you.

Chris Martenson: It’s good to have you. So Ben before we really dive in the housing, could you please tell people about your background and how you got interested in tracking housing bubbles?

Ben Jones: In the 1980s in Texas, I was studying real estate and we had a big real estate bubble that popped, and it was devastating. All the banks failed, the S&Ls. Then 1998 I moved to Austin, Texas and became aware of a housing bubble there. At that time, it was kind of a dot com thing related. Then that popped, and I moved to Arizona in 2003. Sedona, Arizona and I just kind of parachute in and everybody was just gaga about housing. I had a guy saddle up to me one day and to me his house was going up 10,000 dollars a month. We’re not talking about fancy houses. So became concerned. In 2004 I started of The Housing Bubble Blog and went from there. Of course, within two or three years in Sedona it was a disaster. Tell you the truth, it’s really disappointing that we’re back here in this situation that we’re in.

Chris Martenson: Well, I would certainly agree with that, because if we look at the history of bubbles whether they were tulip bulbs, swampland, railroads, it usually took a little over a generation to forget the painful lessons. I’m astonished Ben that we had an internet stock bubble in 2000, a housing bubble in 2007 and we’re here again. I think this shows that whatever people are up to today, maintaining a sense of perspective history and memory is just not part of it. I did not expect us to get back here again so soon.

Ben Jones: Well, that brings up an important point. We talked about it a few times on my blog that, I think this is the same bubble. For instance, in Texas when everything got wiped out in the 80s, the term speculative building was a dirty word for decades. For decades. The fact that we jumped right back into these TV reality shows about flipping houses and stuff like that. I think that shows that this was…that the speculative frenzy wasn’t extinguished by the collapse last decade. So I think it’s the same bubble.

Chris Martenson: Well, now I would agree with that and I think that’s really when we talk about what the central banks were up to, we could constrain it to the Federal Reserve if you want, but I prefer to look at all the world's central banks because this is a global liquidity phenomenon now. But one of the things they clearly had to do was, they had to maintain that bubble fervor. Because I actually traced this…when people say oh, there was this major housing bubble that burst. That was the pain. I said, no, no. That was a site bubble. The main bubble is this one that’s been blown since the mid-1980s and it’s centered on this ridiculous idea that you can constantly expand debts faster than incomes.

Taken nationally or globally, that would be the global amount of debt to global GDP. Nationally it would be national debt to national GDP. At the household level it's your household income to your own debt levels. Whatever it is. But as a household Ben we know that’s a dumb idea. I can’t expand my debts faster than my income forever. I have a math problem pretty soon. Somehow, we fell for the story in the central banks. The Federal Reserve is the main defender of this idea that what we need to do as a nation is continually perpetually forever have our debts grow faster than our income. Where do you fall on that particular story? I’m sure you’re tracking the central bank's shenanigans, too right?

Ben Jones: Right. I think if you chase it down to where it really started, it probably was in the 80s. For instance, from ‘86 to ’89, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac doubled their mortgage portfolios. So that’s probably where the genesis of the whole thing is and this whole idea that houses or…well, in other words, why housing? Well, because everybody’s got to live somewhere and it’s a way to create this idea, this wealth effect and in as many households as possible. Yeah, now you’ve got houses that were bought for 25…or built rather, for 25, $40,000 dollars now trading for a million or a million whatever. Sure, people feel really wealthy and the dollar has kind of become meaningless and like you said debt becomes meaningless.

When you are talking about incomes to housing prices, there was a report that came out I don’t know, a couple of years ago that the most expensive neighborhoods in the country actually had the lowest incomes to house prices. I think that the high…yeah. That to me was like really telling. I mean, like the one that I remember the most was Mercer Island in Washington was the highest. It has 11…the house prices were 11 to 1 to the incomes. Every single…it wasn’t Detroit. It wasn’t the slums of this area or Ohio. It was the most expensive neighborhoods had the lowest incomes to housing ratios. The report was without any irony. Wow. These people are really wealthy. It’s like, no they’re not. Their houses are just way higher than their incomes.

 
Uploaded Image

- continued -


« POPE 5 Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next