Will so many ARMs make it more difficult for homeowners to hold on or interest only owners to jump ship?

Arguably, for FBs upside down on their houses, nominal rather than real declines are more important. At least that's true if they don't have an ARM. To see how screwed ARM home buyers are we should compare wage-indexed equivalent rent with the current cost financing remaining principal.

This boom (bubble) is bigger then the previous one in LA. Real Dollar declines will be more the 30% let's try 40- 50%.

Earlier Thronberg said something like "this landing is very, very hard and very, very fast... not like other downturns" (anybody have the exact quote?). Sounds like he's now contradicting himself.

I think a lot of economists are afraid of saying too much and being blamed for starting (exacerbating) a selling panic.

If you recall, the housing bust in SCal in the early 90s was a highly local affair, exaggerated by the massive shut down of aerospace in the region. Not to say that there is not a housing bubble or that prices will not decline, but the periods are not really comparable - for LA or the country as a whole - in my view.

Martin, Yes, the '90s bust was exacerbated by the slowdown in defense spending, but there was a clear housing bubble in the late '80s in California and elsewhere.

I thought looking back might give us a clue as to what to expect for this housing cycle.

I don't know exactly how this bust will play out - maybe Thornberg is correct and prices will just stay flat for years until wages catch up. From PE.com: 'Thornberg said Southern California home prices are easily 40 percent overvalued and it will take about six years for incomes and other economic factors to catch up.'

I suspect there will be a both nominal price declines and inflation over several years (real price declines) to bring the values of housing more in-line with incomes.

Best Wishes.

A big difference with the early 1990s housing bust is that mortgage rates were falling during that time helping to cushion the fall in house prices.

This time mortgage rates are rising which should worsen house price declines.

I'm not ready to call for 10 percent declines per year yet, but I think you could be underestimating nominal declines.

I think the changes in the way the CPI is calculated have artificially lowered the reported inflation that has already occurred, and I don't see anything that is going to kickstart wages.

Even with the skewed CPI, real wages have declined. While inflation could and should eat away at the currently bubble inflated prices, I think the lack of wage growth is a limiting factor to future inflation and nominal price declines will have to be larger to help bring prices into line.

Has there ever been a housing runup in history that has peaked and then stayed flat for years and years?

Let alone one preceded by the abysmal lending standards of the past few years...

I think Thornberg has some serious 'splainin to do regarding his flat-price predictions.

You won't see declines of 10 percent or 15 percent per year.

The real question for me is how much housing prices need to correct to meet economic support? Noteworthy to this present cycle is how many didn't actually buy affordable homes; they bought into the promise of appreciation (and security). If those promises fade away, a flattening isn't likely to motivate buyers. This might explain why I'm seeing 10% reductions from last Fall, without any effect.

Around 1981 we saw a drop of almost fifty percent in one year here in vancouver. That was of course a time of extremely high interest rates.

If real wages and sometimes nominal wages are falling, then when will the leveling of home prices be met by falling wages?

I still think there needs to be a catalyst to get most folks to sell their homes. Specifically, job losses. Right now, the nation is at full employment with unemployment at 4.6%. The economy is moderating, but GDP is still supposed to be around 3%. Wages are picking up a little, too.

In the 1990's there were lots of military base closures that contributed to the housing decline in some areas. Esp in CA.

Given that up to 50% of jobs created in the past 5 years are directly or indirectly related to the housing bubble (mortgages, refis/HELOCs, construction, home improvement, major appliances, electronics, etc.), AND that many people are spending their home equity "gains" on consumption (MEW-negative savings rate), we will not have to wait very long for that "catalyst".

If you look at the numbers, real prices have already fallen 8%-10% since November.
Houses are unaffordable at current prices. Without the promise that they will increase in value, most people cannot pay 50% or more of there income on a home.
High inventory, no buyers. How do prices not plummet.
I see a correction of 50% to 70%.

Some desperate realtors in California are lowering themselves down to sexual favors to sell a house, that shows how tough it has gotten. Something happened in the fall of 05 that changed everything.

If they are doing sexual favors now I cant imagine what they will be doing next year. Looking for jobs in other sectors of the economy (perhaps in Asia). Sales volumes still have a way to fall. However, watching prices fall is unlikely to be a spectators sport.

In a study of bubbles, not one was found to be "different this time". Each one reverted to its pre-bubble nominal value.

Grantham invited his audience of 2400 investors to find even one exception, and now I invite you to do the same. I invite Thornberg to answer why it's different this time, why this time the fundamentals will catch up. Isnt't that what they said about the stock market in 2000 - that earnings will catch up?

I e-mailed Thornberg twice with my own analyis, after I attended his May 2006 conference in San Diego. He did not reply. His main weakness is ignoring exotic loans; he does not mention ARMs even ONCE!

His other problem is thinking we need a recession to reverse housing prices, because widespread ARM resets will result in the same effect as a recession, which is large numbers of homeowners unable to make their mortgage payment and forced into foreclosure. His 5/06 forecast depended on $50/barrel oil. Other than that, he is very accurate on the poor state of the economy.

Re Harms point about 50% of the jobs created in the past 5 years, I think this is one of the scarier aspects of the bubble.

The economy has become too heavily dependant on housing. Remove this support and it will get a whole lot uglier as the whole thing unravels.

Just as the Zaibatsu exacerbated the burst of the Japanese bubble economy, the housing bubble will cause untold pain.

Just imagine what things would be like if we took away the easy money for a little while...

On the subject of higher oil, we just received our electric bill for the month. $455.00! Ouch! We are in Riverside, CA and it's been hot lately. I am afraid for those overstreached here. Luckily we live within our means and can afford it.

Angela

Have we ever had an economic contraction during a war?

Is this war like other wars?

I don't know ... I think we have at least another year to go before a recession. And I think the Fed has a ways to go, too, to finally complete it's mercy killing.

While I'm making predictions ... I think this recession will be at least as deep as the early nineties.

In the housing bubble pop of 1990s Los Angeles, you also have to figure in the effect of the L.A. Riots.

One would think, unless there is another riot, that things will play out differently this time around. Not that there won't be a slowdown -- but it might not be as bad as the last.

Just a thought.

The 'riot' you see this time will not be based in south central- but those trying to sell their vastly overpriced homes, and banks running for cover- worse then the riots of 1992.

Johnson, which realtors are offering those favors? (just so I know who to avoid......)

Let's forget about what asset class we are talking about for a minute. If you were looking at a chart of an asset class that's returns have shot through the roof in the last few years with no supporting fundamentals (this case housing returns), wouldn't it be obvious that this trend is due for a serious correction? To make matters worse, housing is far more illiquid than stocks which could potentially create a worse correction than anticipated. People will do anything they can to unload a property if they are in a panic, even if the sales price is 50% less than the purchase price.

I really think Thornburg has it wrong here.

" Have we ever had an economic contraction during a war?

Is this war like other wars?"

Yes this is the first war in World History were a nation has cut taxes.

Didn't the economy contract during the Gulf War? The latter half of Vietnam?

The 'favors' were supposedly going with some realtors in Coachella,California while they waited for the sale as part of the transaction. Don't know the names.

I don't know if it is true, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Your right, that was a pretty bad recession during Vietnam ... probably the worst next to the Depression.

Let me try again: a protracted guns-and-butter conflict is troublesome.

I still think we have a while to go. Liquidity is still excessive.

Login or register to post comments
Syndicate content