patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,364,663 comments by 15,735 users - FortWayneHatesRealtors, GreaterNYCDude, stereotomy online now
Comments 1 - 18 of 164 Next » Last » Search these comments
First: Bull$hitter, you rule.
Second: My opinion is that the very low interest rates of the past years had more to do with inflating the housing bubble than the tax incentives for investing in RE. And I tend to doubt that the FED was TRYING to create an asset bubble, they were mainly trying to stave off a recession. That being said, it seems the Government likely has a vested interest in incenting the masses to take on a large mortgage debt burden. Kind of ties them to the land in a modern form of serfdom and ensures they work hard each day to pay off that debt and do their part for the economy. And the whole time they're slaving to pay off that debt they get to pay interest to the banks as a form of wealth transfer from the lower classes to the upper classes. But it sure as Hell beats living in Somalia or Iraq now don't it!!
@San Francisco RENTER,
My opinion is that the very low interest rates of the past years had more to do with inflating the housing bubble than the tax incentives for investing in RE.
Though it's had to isolate/quantify how much of an impact any one policy decision has on a system as complex as the RE market, I agree the ultra-low interest rates were probably a bigger factor. I do think the 1997 tax changes took time to work into the buyer's psyche (and were pretty much ignored especially during the Dot.com era) and were a contributing factor, though.
The main point I'm trying to get across here is you have these RE insiders who have steadfastly maintained that there was no bubble, prices are supported by fundamentals, blah-blah, and now terrified that the government might remove their tax security blanket. These are the same types pretending to be in favor of "free enterprise" and "deregulation", as long as that doesn't mean taking away THEIR taxpayer-subsidized goodies.
And I tend to doubt that the FED was TRYING to create an asset bubble, they were mainly trying to stave off a recession.
I agree with this as well, but create one they did. ;-)
If I had to break it down by percentages, I'd guess the 'Top Bubble Causes' table would look something like this:
40% ultra-low interest rates/massive M3 Fed money creation
30% GSEs/MBS risk underwriting
20% RE-targeted tax incentives
10% herd mentality/greed factor (once the ball got rolling)
At the rate we're going here, Patrick may have to close this blog down for the holidays.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ....
Peter P
@
2005 Dec 5, 11:34am
At the rate we’re going here, Patrick may have to close this blog down for the holidays.
Do not worry. I am back. Let's blow some thread bubbles!
Hey, Peter P --welcome back!
Now all we need is for Jack & Surfer-X to return and we're off the the races. :-)
Peter P
@
2005 Dec 5, 11:41am
40% ultra-low interest rates/massive M3 Fed money creation
30% GSEs/MBS risk underwriting
20% RE-targeted tax incentives
10% herd mentality/greed factor (once the ball got rolling)
That 10% herd mentality creates a feedback loop though... In the end, psychology is 95% responsible.
The “free market†is lovely when the Government subsidizes you. But when market forces bite you in the ass you come begging at the Government’s door for bailouts.
Bingo! this is what I see as the ultimate hypocrisy in the 'pro-business/anti-regulation' camp.
Hey, anyone else having trouble getting to Ben Jone's site tonight?: http://thehousingbubble2.blogspot.com/
Google blog site (blogspot.com) is down. I was trying to read that mini-msft blog, but couldn't for the whole day. Only the front page of blogspot.com is up.
Is having the government pick winners & losers really a “free market†or “pro-business†philosophy?
No.
Are you a “Big Government Libertarian�
Yes. If only to contain the talking nazi monkey menace.
Cheers,
prat
Looks like Bens blog was deleted. I get a blogger page with "not found" attached.
oops, my mistake.... I forgot to put "the" in front of housingbubble2.
San Francisco Renter says:
That being said, it seems the Government likely has a vested interest in incenting the masses to take on a large mortgage debt burden. Kind of ties them to the land in a modern form of serfdom and ensures they work hard each day to pay off that debt and do their part for the economy. And the whole time they’re slaving to pay off that debt they get to pay interest to the banks as a form of wealth transfer from the lower classes to the upper classes.
*Excellent* conspiracy theory! I love it.
I'd like to add that the only thing that's missing to complete the screwage of the middle class is making the bubble burst.
Who's going to buy foreclosure properties on the cheap? It's going to be the "smart money" guys who've been collecting vulture capital for a while now.
@joey,
I love how the first guy they quote is from Freddie Mac, who tries to spin it as a temporary Hurricane Katrina/Wilma thing.
Who posted this longest thread topic in the history of thread topics? The disembodied head?
Peter P, welcome back! We missed you. The blog was fading fast.
Comments 1 - 18 of 164 Next » Last » Search these comments
I've noticed that lately there have been a lot of big industry players raising Cain over proposals to limit or even eliminate the mortgage interest deduction (http://tinyurl.com/bht2q). These are the same “pro-business” industry blowhards who typically lobby with all their might against the evils of government “regulation” (which usually translates as “consumer protections” or “eliminating my favorite sacred-cow tax subsidy”).
I have a few questions for these people:
Consider the incentives government currently provides for individual homeowners: the 1997 tax law greatly increased the RE capital gains exemption ($250K single/$500K married: http://tinyurl.com/bsfzd). This exemption was even extended to second (investment) properties, for reasons we can only “speculate” about (*smile*). Add to this the already existing generous mortgage interest tax deduction and the popular “1031” tax shelter. Result? A tax incentives system rigged heavily in favor of RE “investing” over saving or investing in any other asset class –stocks, bonds, commodities, etc.
If this weren't lopsided enough, taxpayers are also partly subsidizing risk for banks and mortgage companies. By selling their conforming loans to the GSEs and selling non-conforming (sub-prime) loans to private MBS issuers & REITS, the lender can simply walk away from default risk with profits in hand and go make more bad loans. (Btw, the GSE conforming loan cap was just raised another 16%: http://tinyurl.com/azd48.) Chickens will no doubt come home to roost for investors in private MBS paper at some point, but GSE-issued MBS paper has the implied full faith and backing of the U.S. taxpayer. This (assumed) low risk has translated into extremely low risk premiums by investors, and incredibly loose-to-nonexistent lending standards. To this day, the GSEs, which still purchase some 50% of the nation's residential mortgages for MBS resale, remain privately owned for-profit companies with exclusive government monopoly charters, along with implied taxpayer guarantees and access to unlimited Treasury capital. And let's not forget that the Fed kept their funds rate negative in real (inflation-adjusted) terms for two years, which no doubt “helped” many home values go parabolic over the past few years.
Whatever you subsidize, you get more of –right? Now the taxpayer is heavily subsidizing both sides of the RE market: supply and demand. Predictable end result: historically low risk premiums (low rates on mortgages & MBSs) in a time of historically high default risk, sky-high prices and overextended borrowers. See PMI Group's breakdown of default risk by city at WSJ.com: http://tinyurl.com/dd6ps.
Is having the government pick winners & losers really a “free market” or “pro-business” philosophy? Are you a “Big Government Libertarian”?
Discuss, enjoy...
HARM
#housing