Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Don't Blame Subprimes

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 Mon Feb-11-08 05:20 AM
Original message
Don't Blame Subprimes
Those Bad Loans Were Just a Response to Our Real Problem

...

The truth is that subprime lenders, by responding to demand, were the finger in the dike for the whole housing market. The real problem is affordability and the incongruity between incomes and home pricing.

Forty years ago, the median national price of a house was about twice the median household income. In some parts of the country, this ratio was closer to 1 to 1. Twenty years ago, the median home price was about three times income. In the past 10 years, it jumped to four times income.

But in most major economic centers, typical families haven't been able to buy a home for anything near the national median price for decades. Try to find a single-family home in the D.C. area for the national median of $221,900. In the major markets, there is tremendous dependency on alternatives to the standard 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, which in turn has created a dependency on the least scrupulous mortgage companies and lenders.

...

Without mortgage options that provide lower monthly payments than traditional 30-year mortgages, a majority of families cannot afford homes in our nation's major population centers.

Today's crisis differs greatly from previous housing downturns. In past downturns, the housing market was influenced by and was an indicator of other economic issues. This time, millions of homes have been built around the country during the past few years using a financing option that no longer exists. There may never be enough capacity to absorb all of these homes and other existing homes using 30-year mortgages, because there simply aren't enough people with the incomes to meet the requirements. Prices could not roll back far enough without damaging the economy irreparably.

The solution is not to be found in a short-term stimulus nor in waiting things out. What is needed is a new standard mortgage product, something as revolutionary today as the 30-year fixed-rate loan was when it was introduced.

So many people bought into subprime loans because that was all they could afford. Subprime and Alt-A lenders exposed the market demand. Now it is time for more trustworthy capitalists, more focused on long-range outcomes, to meet this demand and reopen the door to homeownership to millions of Americans.

Washington Post


Driving down wages while increasing costs is not working.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 05:29 AM
Response to Original message
1. But the crazy loans were what was driving prices up.
30 people bid on one house -- 4 have a 50K for a downpayment and make 130K a year as a couple -- enough to swing an OK mortgage. The other 26 are getting 110% financing and make 75K together. The prices shoot up. Is that "satisfying demand"?

House prices DO need to roll back. The solution isn't to find innovative new mortgage products that guarantee that most americans are renting their homes from banks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 05:42 AM
Response to Original message
2. "Prices could not roll back far enough without damaging the economy irreparably. "
That line is such nonsense.

A significant drop would hurt many homeowners in the short term, but over the long term our economy would be much better off if housing accounted for a lower percentage of our monthly expenses.

Oh, and there already is a revolutionary mortgage product helping people afford housing. It's called rent. Rents stayed affordable and have even dropped in many of the boom markets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 06:02 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. No offense but how is lowering the value houses not going to hurt them
for a long term.
Say for example I invest $200,000 in a house. If the value of that house drops below the equity I have in that house, I am screwed. No two ways about it.

Granted houses in many locations are inflated but lowering values isn't the answer at this point. Too many people would take to large of a hit and that too would be a drag on the economy.

Developing less expensive yet quality construction methods is the answer. Of course paying people a living wage wouldn't hurt either.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Yes, people who paid too much for housing will be hurt.
Just like people who bought Internet stocks in 1999 were hurt. Banks will lose the most since many people were given 100% loans and others took all of the equity out of their homes and spent it. A lot of these people will choose to walk away and take the hit to their credit rating.

We can't inflate our way out of this situation because we have to compete globally now. A young American worker paying back tens of thousands in college loans and then having to spend thousands a month for housing cannot compete with a young worker in India who got subsidized college and cheap housing. In the long term, lower housing costs will benefit our economy. In the short term people will get hurt, but these people took risks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. More like devastated
Losing an $100 thousand isn't really an option for me. If I want to ever retire anyway.

I guess I can just go be a door greeter at Wal-Mart.

How about we work to raise the standard of living for the rest of the world, eliminate the third world would be a good start. The people we compete with in India live in homes with dirt floors and ride bicycles if they can afford that. Same with China. Is that what you expect Americans to do?


I hope not, because I am not willing to accept that fate. Besides, it is much too cold to ride a bicycle here 4 degrees here today Wind Chill -15
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. Unless a gas works opens up on one side of your property
an auto junkyard in across the street, and a commercial pig farm on the other side, chances are the property value will never drop to zero.

If you find yourself in an upside down mortgage with your cash equity gone, take a good look at what local rents are doing before you risk foreclosure.

Chances are that if you haven't gotten yourself into some McMansion, that fixed mortgage will still act as a great hedge against rising rents, even if you are in a negative equity situation on the house for a period of time.

Remember, that situation is not going to last forever. At some point in the life of the mortgage, you will be in positive territory again. By that time, the mortgage might be a fraction of what rents are.

This doesn't apply to California, where the PITI on a house might be three to four times what the rent on an equivalent property is. California prices need to drop and they need to drop NOW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. The McMansions are what drove up the value of my home
I purchased quite an existing home reasonably. Yet I couldn't stand to lose $100 thousand in equity. If the values drop that far, they will not rise again before the house is paid off.
Then there is the factor that I could be transferred again at some point and if you are upside down, it is a lose - lose situation.
If you can't get the existing home sold, you can't take advantage of the lower cost elsewhere. The home was an investment in the first place.

California is a different animal and I must agree those homes were way over inflated. Maybe the attitude should be that if they paid those inflated prices, then it is their tough luck. I just don't completely subscribe to that thought.

What happens to the investment people have put into those homes, they will have to severely tighten their belts depending on how close they are to retirement just to eat if like many people, the home they live in was to be part of their retirement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 06:20 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Rent on decent housing is still out of reach for a lot of people, at least where
we live.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 07:07 AM
Response to Original message
5. This article is a load of bull....
.... that is essentially saying "people couldn't afford houses before there were subprime loans, and they cannot afford them, ruinously, after".

I love a fresh angle on an issue but this is stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. LOL the answer is here
"The writer is president and chief executive of Emerge Homes Inc., a luxury home builder."

I kept thinking, uh, maybe the homes being built were TOO BIG, uh, with maybe a few too many granite countertops and jet tubs. Scaling back might help affordability (??) What a concept!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Is this incorrect?
"Forty years ago, the median national price of a house was about twice the median household income. In some parts of the country, this ratio was closer to 1 to 1. Twenty years ago, the median home price was about three times income. In the past 10 years, it jumped to four times income."

Median Salary by Job - All People in All Surveys (United States)

Updated: 2/11/2008 | Individuals reporting: 529,618

Median Housing Costs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. It probaby is correct....
.. but that doesn't mean what the writer wants to make it mean.

The answer to not being able to afford something is to not buy it, not to buy it anyway and lose it anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. How about a sub sub prime!!
That fits the bill for all those expensive homes that nobody can afford. Sheesh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. The price of homes...
... is set by supply and demand just like everything else.

That's why homes are about to get a lot cheaper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flashl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Agreed, it may not be the intent of the writer. There is however some truth about affordability
GSEs were formed to address the issue of affordability.

The government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) are a group of financial services corporations created by the United States Congress. Their function is to enhance the flow of credit to targeted sectors of the economy and to make those segments of the capital market more efficient and transparent. The desired effect of the GSEs is to enhance the availability and reduce the cost of credit to the targeted borrowing sectors: agriculture; home finance; and education.

The residential mortgage borrowing segment is by far the largest of the borrowing segments in which the GSEs operate. Together, the three mortgage finance GSEs (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the 12 Federal Home Loan Banks) have several trillion dollars of on-balance sheet assets.

The GSEs have created a secondary market in these loans through securitization so that the primary market debt issues can be bought and—most importantly—traded by investors. Demand for debt securities drives up their trading price, which lowers their interest rates. Proponents say that this secondary market in consumer loans gives household borrowers cheap fixed rate loans (low fixed rates on long term loans), removes credit risk from banks' balance sheets and provides standardized instruments (securitized securities) for investors.

Wikipedia


It seems the three GSEs have the means -- several trillion dollars worth -- but not the will to ensure that the secondary market exist for those interested in owning a home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
15. The cost of housing in America..
... has risen for various reasons, some of course the "bubble".

At the same time, Americans' income has dropped steadily in buying power terms for 3 decades. Much of this drop has been encouraged or plain engineered by the "free market" Republicans.

Americans keep voting for these asshats, and now they are shocked, shocked I tell you at their malfeasance in running the economy.

Americans get the economy and the government they deserve. Maybe the upcoming "recession" will wake them up, I sure hope so.
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 Tue Apr 30th 2024, 09:35 AM
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