The Norris Group Blog

California Real Estate Headline Roundup

Posts Tagged ‘demand’

By Bruce Norris .

California Forecast 2013: More of the same save the black swan by Sean O’Toole

Wednesday, December 12th, 2012

Bruce Norris, The Norris GroupIn 2012, we saw the continuation of a housing recovery in California, with solid sales volumes and price increases throughout much of the state.  More importantly, short sales, loan modifications, price increases and even foreclosures helped many get our of being underwater on their homes.  Many would say this recovery is artificial.  And, while there is no question government intervention played a major role, it appears unlikely that intervention will end anytime soon; so the recovery is likely to persist-save the possibility of a black swan.

The biggest change in 2012 was the dramatic decline in foreclosure sales, and as a result, bank owned properties (REOs).  The “foreclosure wave” that many others predicted has yet to materialize in California.  Instead, over the past 12 months, notices of default plunged by 48.9 percent year-over-year, foreclosure sales fell 27.7 percent y-o-y and REO inventories declined 34.9 percent y-o-y.  While we correctly predicted that there would be no foreclosure wave, this decline was steeper and sooner than we expected.

For 2013, we largely expect more of the same.  Demand will remain strong thanks to low interest rates and affordability.  Housing supply will remain constrained, largely due to foreclosure intervention.  Prices will rise, though likely at a slower pace.  But unlike 2012, we expect sales volume will decline due to further decreases in supply.

Demand will remain relatively strong, despite structural issues

  • The Federal Reserve is clearly committed to monetary-stimulus programs that will keep mortgage interest rates at or near record lows.  Low interest rates have and will continue to positively impact demand.
  • In many parts of California, rents remain higher than payments, despite recent price increases, making housing attractive both to buyers and investors. This positive impact on demand may be offset by further price increases.
  • Early foreclosure “victims” may now qualify again for a mortgage, and choose to return to homeownership.  This new set of buyers will increase demand for scarce inventory.
  • Negatively impacting demand is the reality that homeowners with equity are not moving up at the rate they did during and before the credit bubble, and instead are hunkering down.
  • Nearly a quarter of all homeowners are underwater, owing more than their homes are worth.  While these homeowners may be able to short sell, they are typically unable to repurchase, and are forced instead to rent negatively impacting demand.
  • Demand also continues to be constrained by tighter mortgage lending standards.  Given that most mortgages are still government backed, and that the government backed entities are still struggling with losses that are blamed on loose lending standards, we don’t expect mortgage lending standards to ease anytime soon.

Supply will remain tight, with the inventory of homes for sale at record lows

  • Government intervention will continue to play a huge role in the foreclosure market.  The National Mortgage Settlement Program, the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), and the California Homeowner Bill of Rights legislation that goes into effect on January 1, 2013, will all continue to put downward pressure on foreclosures and foreclosure inventory.  Foreclosures have been a significant source of supply since 2008, and these continued declines will hurt sales volume in 2013, likely dropping foreclosure supply to half the level seen in 2012.
  • Similar to the impact on demand, the hunkering down of homeowners with equity, and the inability of underwater homeowners to sell, except through short sale, will negatively impact supply.
  • Short sales will likely increase in 2013.  We believe this is the sole bright spot for housing supply.  Banks ultimately want to clean up non-performing assets, and short sales provide clear benefits to banks over foreclosing including: faster disposition, better recovery of value, less political opposition, and reduced risk of homeowner lawsuits.  That said, short sales are at risk, as the tax exemption established under the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 is set to expire at the end of this year.  This tax exemption allows mortgage debt forgiven by a lender in a short sale, loan modification or foreclosure to be exempt from federal taxation.  we see the risk of this occurring as low, and believe Congress will choose to extend the Act for another year.  Still short sellers and their Realtors should push to close currently pending deals before year-end, just to be safe.

Housing prices will rise, but increases will be constrained

  • Continued demand, combined with the continued constraint of supply, should result in prices continuing to rise throughout 2013, though likely more moderately than in 2012.
  • The increase in home prices will continue to be constrained by appraisals.  As bidding wars push prices beyond those supported by recent sales, getting purchase prices to appraise will continue to be a challenge.  2012 saw a willingness of buyers to bring cash to the table to overcome this issue.  Not all buyers have ability, which will make this market especially difficult for first-time buyers.
  • The increase in home prices will also be constrained by affordability and return on investment (ROI).  The key ingredient to fast rising prices in 2012, was the fact that house payments , even after taxes and insurance, were lower than rent in many areas.  This also led to very strong demand for rentals by investors seeking, and finding, high returns on their investment.  Demand from these buyers has been the critical driver behind price increases to date, but as prices rise affordability and returns drop.

Other factors in 2013

  • We believe more households will become renters in 2013, through short sales and foreclosures, than will become homeowners.  This will continue the strong demand for rentals, and continue to put upward pressure on rents throughout much of California.
  • Trustee sale investors will continue to see strong competition at the steps.  However, as prices continue to rise, they may see the large rental buyers move away from the auctions, and perhaps even California, as they seek better returns elsewhere.  This lessening of competition may help offset declines in foreclosure volume for the traditional trustee sale investor, who focuses on restoring foreclosures for homebuyers.
  • Trustee sale investors also need to be aware the FHA’s anti-flipping waiver expires on December 31, 2012, and to date there has been no announcement to extend the waiver.  In 2011, however, the announcement to extend the waiver was made on December 28, so we remain hopeful they will again extend it.  We actually believe it would be better to let the waiver expire to discourage flipping, and instead exempt trustee sale and sheriff sale purchases, which are non-market transactions and require a professional purchaser to flip the property in order to make it available to most homebuyers.
  • As the end of 2012 approaches, debate over the mortgage interest deduction is intensifying.  We believe the debate is mainly political posturing.  Many Congress members have second homes in Washington and benefit more than most from the mortgage interest deduction.  We highly doubt our elected leaders will vote against their self-interest, and when the push comes to shove, they will vote to keep the deduction.  We also think it would not be smart to do it now.  That said, we do think the mortgage interest deduction benefits banks, at the expense of homeowners by encouraging debt rather than real ownership.
  • We expect taxes to rise in 2013, more for some than others.  In addition to the unknown tax increases associated with the expiring Bush tax cuts, the Affordable Care Act will impose an estimated $260 billion in new taxes in 2013, and the passing of Proposition 30 will significantly increase taxes for higher income earners in California.  Higher taxes take money away from consumers, constraining job growth and possibly keeping a lid on demand for housing.  With higher income earners clearly being targeted, the most affluent neighborhoods are likely to be the hardest hit.

The risk of a black swan should not be overlooked

The term “black swan” comes from Fooled by Randomness by Nassim Taleb.  The idea is that rare, unexpected, events are actually the norm, and should be expected.  Today we face a number of risks that no one, including us, expects will happen.  We summarize some of these are here because we believe Mr. Taleb is right, and we should always prepare for the unexpected.

  • While hopefully resolved before the start of 2013, the so-called “Fiscal Cliff” creates real uncertainty for next year.  If Congress fails to act within the next couple of weeks, taxes will increase by an estimated $500 to $700 billion, almost certainly sending the U.S. economy into recession.  Most expect some sort of compromise, even if just pushing the issue into the future.  We are concerned the economy will tough, regardless of the outcome; and that much of the current political posturing is less about any real attempt to resolve the issue, and more about making sure the other party takes blame for what’s ahead.
  • The Middle East continues to be highly volatile.  A crisis there could send fuel prices skyrocketing; and any US involvement would also result in new spending and debt that the country can little afford.  Resulting impacts to the economy, and possibly interest rates, would not be favorable to housing.
  • The Eurozone debt crisis continues to make headlines.  In this interconnected world, it would be unwise to think that further problems there could not impact us here.
  • Something else, even more unexpected than those we’ve outlined above.

Despite the risks, government intervention, higher taxes, and the other issues that keep up at night, we remain relatively bullish on the housing market for 2013.  We have little doubt that fewer people will be underwater by the end of the year, and that housing will have proven a relatively safer investment than entrusting your money elsewhere.

And no, there will still not be a wave of foreclosures.

Connect with Sean O’Toole

www.ForeclosureRadar.com or

FaceBook_24x24.jpg Twitter Feed Blogger Google Plus

See also Sean’s TNG profile page with links to all the radio shows including those for I Survived Real Estate.

The Norris Group Real Estate News Roundup 1/3/11

Monday, January 3rd, 2011

Today’s News Synopsis:

Tom Wind of J.I. Kislak Mortgage expects refinancing activity to drop by nearly 66% in 2011. Moody’s Investor Service forecasts lower supply and higher demand for rental apartments in 2011. The 50 state attorneys general probing U.S. foreclosure practices will first settle with Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial. Rick Sharga believes foreclosure activity will improve in Orange County during 2011.

In The News:

Bankrate.com“Zero-down mortgages endure in rural areas” (1-3-11)

“borrowers must demonstrate they can afford the mortgage payments by meeting the USDA debt-to-income ratios of 29 percent for the housing payment and 41 percent for the overall debt to gross monthly income.”

Housing Wire“J.I. Kislak expects higher purchase loan activity in 2011″ (1-3-11)

“Tom Wind, managing director of J.I. Kislak Mortgage, expects the refinancing activity to fall to $350 billion in 2011 from $1 trillion last year.”

Housing Wire“Moody’s sees multifamily REIT credit strengthening in 2011″ (1-3-11)

“Moody’s Investors Service expects lower supply and higher demand to stoke growth in rental apartments and subsequently help the credit of multifamily real estate investment trusts.”

Housing Wire“Ginnie Mae moves up multiple issuer deadline” (1-3-11)

“The cut-off time for issuers submitting multiple loan packages into real estate mortgage investment conduits (REMICs) was three days before the end of the month. Ginnie is now moving that up to six days before the end of the month.”

Bloomberg - “BofA Resolves Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Loan Dispute” (1-3-11)

“Bank of America Corp., the biggest U.S. lender by assets, paid $2.8 billion to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae after the U.S.-owned firms demanded the company buy back mortgages they said were based on faulty data.”

Bloomberg - “Foreclosure Deals to Start With Big Lenders, Iowa Says” (1-3-11)

“The 50 state attorneys general probing U.S. foreclosure practices will first settle with the five largest loan servicers, including Bank of America Corp. and JPMorgan Chase & Co., Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller said. No settlements have been reached yet, Miller said in a telephone interview today. The other three are Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. and Ally Financial Inc., said Miller, the leader of the 50-state investigation. The five have 59 percent of the market, Miller said.”

Orange County Register“Dip in O.C. foreclosures for 2011?” (1-3-11)

“Orange County foreclosure activity has been trending downward over the course of 2010, and may continue to improve marginally over the course of 2011. There are a number of reasons for this, including an unemployment rate that is better than elsewhere in the state, and the fact that Orange County doesn’t have as much excess housing inventory as other areas in California.”

Orange County Register“No end to high-end foreclosures eyed for ’11″ (1-3-11)

“A recent study by the State Foreclosure Prevention Working Group found that nearly 3 years into the mortgage crisis, more than 60% of homeowners with seriously delinquent loans are still not involved in any loss mitigation/loan modification activity.”

For m ore information about The Norris Group’s California hard money loans or our California Trust Deed investments, visit the website or call our office at 951-780-5856 for more information. For upcoming California real estate investor training and events, visit The Norris Group website and our California investor calendar. You’ll also find our award-winning real estate radio show on KTIE 590am at 6pm on Saturdays or you can listen to over 170 podcasts in our free investor radio archive.

The Norris Group Real Estate News Roundup 11/9/10

Tuesday, November 9th, 2010

Today’s News Synopsis:

An opinion survey from the Federal Reserve shows demand for commercial and industrial loans decreased in the third quarter. Budd Bugatch claims housing fell to 2.22% of nominal GDP in the 3rd quarter. Foreclosure inventory increased 1.1% in September, according to LPS.

In The News:

Housing Wire“Federal Reserve Bank finds lenders slightly easing credit standards” (11-9-10)

“Banking institutions large and small are gradually easing their lending standards due to decreased demand for loans. The Federal Reserve Bank Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey reported that demand for commercial and industrial loans decreased across the board in the fourth quarter after regaining ground the first half of 2010.”

Housing Wire“IAS360 house price index fell 0.2% for 3Q” (11-9-10)

“home prices in the Midwest fell 1.4% for the third quarter, declined 0.5% in the West and slid 0.4% in the South. The HPI for the western region, which includes California and Nevada, is down 26.7% from its peak, according to the IAS360.”

Housing Wire“Panel: Consumer protection bureau may eventually regulate mortgage banking” (11-9-10)

“The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau could be responsible for the regulation of 85% of the mortgage banking industry when supervision responsibilities shift in July 2011.”

Housing Wire“FDIC proposes changes to assessments for fees to assets from deposits” (11-9-10)

“The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation approved a regulatory change for basing its fees on assets minus average tangible equity rather than a fee system based on domestic deposits.”

Bloomberg - “U.S. Housing’s Postwar Low Threatens Home Depot: Chart of the Day” (11-9-10)

“U.S. home-improvement retailers face ‘rising headwinds’ as housing investment’s share of the economy falls to a post-World War II low, according to Budd Bugatch, an analyst at Raymond James & Associates Inc. Housing fell to 2.22 percent of nominal GDP in the third quarter from 2.45 percent in the second. The previous low was 2.35 percent, set in the first three months of this year.”

Inman - “Foreclosure inventory rises in September” (11-9-10)

“Foreclosure inventory stood at 3.84 percent of all loans in September, up 3.6 percent from September 2009 and 1.1 percent from August, according to LPS’ monthly Mortgage Monitor report. Nearly 275,500 homes that hadn’t been in the foreclosure process in August started foreclosure in September, down 0.6 percent year-over-year and 2.5 percent month-to-month.”

Orange County Register“O.C. property index’s 1st gain in 4 years” (11-9-10)

“The Big O Property Index, up for three consecutive quarters, rose 0.02% this summer vs. a year ago. Last gain? A rise at an 1.4% annual rate in summer 2006.”

Looking Back:

One year ago, a survey of 1,500 registered voters showed that most citizens were still pessimistic towards California’s financial future. Default notices doubled in Los Altos, Greenbrae and Alamo from 2008 to 2009. Zillow reported that the number of under water mortgages decreased in the U.S. decreased by 2 percent in the third quarter.

For more information about The Norris Group’s California hard money loans or our California Trust Deed investments, visit the website or call our office at 951-780-5856 for more information. For upcoming California real estate investor training and events, visit The Norris Group website and our California investor event calendar. You’ll also find our award-winning real estate radio show on KTIE 590am at 6pm on Saturdays or you can listen to over 170 podcasts in our free investor radio archive.

189-TNG Radio – Christopher Thornberg 8-28-10

Friday, August 27th, 2010

christopher-thornberg

Christopher Thornberg

Founder and Principle of Beacon Economics


streamitunesdownload

rss

September 17th, 2010, The Norris Group returns with its award winning event I Survived Real Estate 2010. The Norris Group has assembled an incredible line up of industry experts to discuss the state of REO from the inside. Topics will include regulatory intervention and aftermath, bulk buying, myths and facts, and opportunities emerging for real estate professionals. 100 percent of the proceeds support the Orange County affiliate of Susan G. Komen for the Cure. This event would not be possible without generous help from the following platinum partners: Foreclosure Radar and Sean O’Toole, the San Diego Creative Real Estate Investors Association and Bill Tan, Investors Workshops and Shawn Watkins and Angel Bronsgeest, Invest Club for Women and Iris Veneracion and Bobby Alexander, Claudia Buys Houses, The Business Press, Frye Wiles, MVT Productions, and White House Catering.

This week Bruce is joined by Christopher Thornberg. Christopher is the founding principle of Beacon Economics, and is widely considered to be one of California’s leading economic forecasters. He is an expert in economic forecasting, regional development, real estate dynamics and labor markets. He was one of the earliest and most adamant predictors of the housing crash and the recession that followed. In 2008, he was appointed chief economist for the California State Controller as well as the Controller’s Council of Economic Advisors. He serves on the advisor board of Paulson & Company Inc., one of Wall Street’s most successful hedge funds. Dr. Thornberg holds a PhD in business economics from the Anderson school of UCLA, and a BS in business administration from the state university of New York at Buffalo.

Public sentiment tends to wander between optimistic and pessimistic. No one wants to believe that this recovery might be too slow. Instead, people either hope for a rapid recovery, or they panic over a double dip. Earlier in the year, people were far too optimistic about a rapid recovery, and now they are in a state of unwarranted pessimism. Thornberg does not believe that either of those beliefs are true. He believes that slow growth is most likely going to occur.

Expectations can have an economic impact. Forecasters tend to think that the stock market is a leading indicator of the economy. Paul Samuelson once said “The stock market has predicted 9 out of the last 5 recessions.” We must remember that when we see market swings, it has a material impact on the economy. When the market dumps 15 percent, you are literally talking about a couple trillion dollars in wealth disappearing from the U.S. economy. That does have an influence on spending, particularly at the top end of the income scale. From that perspective, unwarranted worries can create a self fulfilling prophecy and slow the economy.

Over the last 20 years, we have seen unprecedented volatility in the equity markets. We would help ourselves by putting in some rules to dampen that volatility. Thornberg describes the problem as “the tail controlling the economic dog”.

GDP growth in the 90s was caused by stocks. In 2000, it was from real estate equity withdrawal and profits. Currently, our limited growth seems to come from stimulus money. Thornberg does not believe there will be any sort of big driver, and that is part of the reason we will have a slow recovery.

In the mid 70s, there was a consumer let down with the oil shock. Consumers responded to the loss of jobs, high energy prices, and the overall pessimism by cutting back on spending, and that caused a down turn. At the back end of that down turn, consumers who were under-spending started to ramp up their income. They then bought the car they would have bought during the down turn plus another one. That caused a huge surge in consumer spending growth.

Similarly, in the 2001 down turn, we saw a cycle in business spending. Business spending was very high, and then it collapsed. When business spending came back in 2002, we pulled out of the down turn and we got back to normal growth in 2003.

This time, there is no single great source that will cause us to bounce back. The economy was vastly overheated in 2008, and the pain of the down turn was severe, because the pull back occurred in multiple markets at one time. The government got massively involved in both monetary and fiscal policy. In their attempt to stabilize things, they prevented our imbalances from returning to a steady state.

Consumer spending should represent about 80 percent of income, and the other 20 percent should go to savings, taxes and a couple other things. In the midst of the asset bubble, we went from 80 to 84 percent. That extra 4 percent represents approximately half a trillion dollars in excess spending. Savings rates have popped back up in the midst of the crisis, which is good, but the pain of that decline in consumer spending was profound on the economy. As a result, part of the stimulus package was a huge cut in taxes. Right now, Americans are the lowest tax rate in 65 years. This has steadied consumer spending at 82 percent of income. The government is running a deficit of $1.4 trillion per year. At some point, the government will have to raise taxes. When they raise taxes, consumers are going to have to cut back on spending, and that will slow the economy.

We have a lot of deleveraging going on. 23 percent of Riverside is not making a house payment. Because so many people aren’t making their house payments, Bruce believes that people will have plenty of money to spend. Thornberg disagrees, because he does not feel that the money saved from not paying mortgages will amount to that much. Mortgage payments in the U.S. amount to 15 percent of income. Thornberg believes the non-payment of mortgages only adds up to .5 percent of personal income. That is a much smaller number than what happens to personal income as a result of the rise and fall of the unemployment rate.

Bruce explains that in California, a house payment typically represents 40% of someone’s gross. When they don’t make mortgage payments, that saves money, and that fuels GDP. Thornberg understands this, but 1/3 of homeowners in California homeowners own their house free and clear. Of the 2/3rds that are left, the majority are still making their payments. You only have 10 percent of the people in the state that aren’t making their payments. Thornberg does believe that this will make a small difference in the economy, but it is not as significant as people make it out to be.

Bruce asks, “What does seeing a 2.6 10-year T-build tell you?” Thornberg laughs and exclaims that the t-builds are in a bubble. You got to call it as you see it. Sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn’t. A few years ago, Thornberg claimed the housing market was going to crash, and he was right. One of the worst forecasts Thornberg ever made happened 3 months ago when he claimed that interest rates would never go lower. Thornberg has seen some crazy things happen lately. He never could have forecasted this. He believes these things have been driven by worries about sovereign debt in Europe, and a potential for a double dip. This is why Bruce asked his question about Thornberg’s expectations for the t-build, because people’s fears have skewed a lot of categories.

The raw ratio of prices to income will show you that we have not seen a level of retraction that brings us back to the levels we were at in 2000. Prices are still high in comparison to income, but once you adjust for interest rates, affordability levels have never been this great. We have never seen such an affordable housing market when considering current interest rates. Thornberg does not believe that the current interest rates will be maintained. They are going to rise, but he wonders when they will rise and how fast they will rise. If we are on the path to recovery, we could have problems if the credit bubble pops rapidly. If interest rates increase 4.5% to 6.5% in 6 months, then it will severely damage the housing market.

Fannie Mae is planning to hire 1,000 REO agents in Southern California. This tells Bruce that Fannie intends to release inventory; perhaps as soon as the 4th quarter. FHA has 73,000 REOs and 555,000 people that are 90 days late. There are a lot of properties that the bank has not released, but we also have to be concerned about the properties that the banks are not foreclosing on yet. There are probably 4 to 5 million homeowners that are behind on their payments.

Because affordability is so good right now, there will probably be some demand for the shadow inventory. One thing that distinguishes California from states live Nevada, Florida and Arizona is the fact that we did not over build. Nevada and Florida have years of home supply.

Rental vacancies typically stay high after a recession, but vacancies are actually starting to drop quite quickly, especially in California. Thornberg does not believe there will be enough inventory in California, so when the shadow inventory gets released, it will probably be easily picked up. Thornberg believes we will have a stronger housing market over the next couple years because of the inventory levels in relation to the population. It surprised Bruce to hear Thornberg speak so positively about the housing market.

Bruce and Thornberg do not believe we have pent-up demand, but Thornberg does believe that we have a lack of overall supply. When you look at permits over the past 20 years, the numbers show that we have not built enough housing relative to the population growth since 1995. Even in the midst of the bubble, Thornberg believes we were only building an amount that was appropriate for our population growth.

The builders do not have many vacant unsold homes right now, but their competition, which is an REO, is going to be much to competitive. This competition will force them to build smaller houses. Going forward, Bruce believes that vacant homes are going to increase a tremendous amount. Thornberg does not believe prices will come back a lot.

The kind of building going on right now is on the basis of already finished lots. The inventory of finished but unused lots is disappearing rapidly. In the peak of the housing bubble, local economies ramped up fees. Given what people were willing to pay, there were enormous profits to be made in the sale of a new home. Now that the bubble is gone, cities need to reduce their fees, but they probably won’t. Right now, local governments have a lot of pressure placed on them because of the down turn in revenues. Thornberg believes we will have crowded housing, because many people will not be able to purchase new property due to the excessive fees.

In a down turn, people tend to start living together rather than moving out. This is actually starting to change, which is part of the reason why apartment vacancies are going down. We are not in a strong recovery, but it has been a year since the recession ended. Things have stabilized, and fears are beginning to lift.

Overall, jobs are down right now, but that is mainly due to losses in the public sector. Construction jobs actually bounced a decent amount from June to July. Thornberg does not believe the construction industry will come roaring back to what is was like 5 or 6 years ago, but we are seeing more stability in that sector.

Here are the pros and cons of our current situation: On the con side, we still have problems in the housing market. Many people are not making payments and many are underwater. California has some of the worst unemployment rates, which means we have more to recover from. On the pro side, prior to this down turn, this state was driven by internal demand. This means that our demand was coming from consumers with excessive amounts of false housing equity. At the same time, our external sources of growth were getting hammered. The dollar was over-valued and housing was too expensive, which made it hard to run a business here. Those internal sources of demand will not come back. On the other hand, with a weaker U.S. dollar and cheaper housing, other things will begin to improve. Despite our high unemployment rate, people are beginning to migrate back to California.

The percentage of homeownership is probably headed down. Thornberg does not believe that this is a real concern. He does not believe there are any particular benefits for owning vs renting.

For more information about The Norris Group’s California hard money loans or our California Trust Deed investments, visit the website or call our office at 951-780-5856 for more information. For upcoming California real estate investor training and events, visit The Norris Group website and our California investor calendar. You’ll also find our award-winning real estate radio show on KTIE 590am at 6pm on Saturdays or you can listen to over 170 podcasts in our free investor radio archive.

Thank you for being a Gold Sponsor for I Survived Real Estate 2010: Adrenaline Athletics, Benton Investment Group, Community RE-Invest Group, Delmae Properties, Elite Auctions, Entrust California, Everlast Photography, Inland Empire Investors Forum, Keystone CPA, Landwood Title, Las Brisas Escrow, Leivas Financial Services, Mike Cantu, North San Diego Real Estate Investors Association, Northern California Real Estate Investors Association, Personal Real Estate Investor Magazine, Realty 411 Magazine, San Jose Real Estate Investor Association, Rick and LeeAnne Rossiter, San Jose Real Estate Investor Association, Starz Photography, Summit Solutions, Tony Alvarez, Wealth Point, and Westin South Coast Plaza.

164-TNG Radio – Robert J. Samuelson 3-6-10

Friday, March 5th, 2010

Robert J Samuelson

Robert J. Samuelson

Author and Columnist

(Full Bio)


streamitunesdownload

rss

This week Bruce is joined again this week by Robert J. Samuelson. Robert is an award winning columnist and author. He has been writing a column for The Washington Post since 1977, and for Newsweek since 1984. He has recently published a book named The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath: The Past and Future of American Influence.

One of the main claims in Samuelson’s recent book is that the rise and fall of inflation was the most significant event in the past 50 years. When most people think of the fall of inflation, they think of a very short time. One of Samuelson’s key points is that there was nothing usual about the last 25 years. Samuelson thinks the fall of inflation was even more important than the rise of inflation.

In the early 80s, inflation was reaching 15 percent, mortgage rates were around 15 percent, and the prime rate for good bank customers was over 20 percent. When inflation came down, interest rates came down slowly, because no one believed that inflation would come down. Asset prices, beginning with the stock market, began to increase during this time. The Dow Jones industrial average was between 800 and 900. There was an explosion in the stock market over the next 20 years. By 2000, the Dow was over 10,000. Stock market wealth within households went from about $1 trillion in the 80s to over $11 trillion at the end of the 90s.

Later, this increase in stock values lead to an increase in real estate values. For many years, consumers spent more of their income and borrowed more. There were only 2 modest recessions during this time in 1991 and 2001. This increase in wealth made people very careless. It conditioned them to take risks which they should not have taken, because they believed the economy had entered into a state of prolonged prosperity.

If you have a feeling of preordained success about an investment, you are probably ignoring a lot of the risk factors you would normally pay attention too. People thought that risk had gone down because of lower inflation. They also felt that they understood risk better. People then began to take more risks because of these two false assumptions. Lenders began to lend money to people with high levels of debt, and they did it with silly and destructive interest rates. People assumed that stock prices would increase forever. For many years, Samuelson warned people that things would not continue to increase forever. Some of those people looked at Samuelson with pity, because he wasn’t taking part in the stock market increase.

Great gains inspire perverse behavior. There were people who owned 50 and 60 homes, who did not have a normal job, with a $30,000 negative cash flow per month. They would show you their list of properties with pride, because they were worth $4 million. They assumed they would be able to sell all their properties to people who were even dumber than they were. These kinds of people were sure that their investments couldn’t go wrong.

Before the bubble burst, people had high expectations for success, which allowed them to grumble about things not being good enough. The paradox at that time was that they could only have grumbled if they expected themselves to be heading towards paradise. The fact that things had been so good for them allowed them to criticize the actual conditions. When historians look back at this time, they will likely conclude that the times were not that good, even thought they really were; the times just weren’t as good as people thought they should be.

Roughly 2/3 of today’s population are too young in 1980. They were either not alive, or they were in their pre-adult years. They were not aware of the 70s and the high inflation, but even the people who lived during that time forgot about it.

Samuelson knows a columnist who wrote about Reagan’s leadership qualities. Samuelson does think that Reagan was a good leader, but the columnist did not address inflation at all. This history is the lost history. Professional historians and economists have engaged in an act of amnesia. This is scary because people will be more likely to make the same mistakes in the future. Samuelson thinks it is good to have the truth for the sake of truth, but also because if we don’t know the truth we will likely repeat our mistakes. There are prominent economists who are claiming that a little more inflation would be okay. Samuelson believes that if we encourage a little inflation, we will end up with a lot of it.

When society is used to good times, it can be difficult to ask for sacrifices, depending on what sacrifice you are asking for and why. Today, we have made more promises to people than we can afford to keep. Most of these promises are to retirees through social security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The cost of paying for those programs, when the baby boomers retire, will be staggering. Our children will be saddled with very high taxes, high budget deficits, or great cuts in other services. If we explain this to people, perhaps they would be willing to make some sacrifices. They may have to cut back on benefits for retirees, and raise the eligibility age for those programs. There may also be some sort of tax increase. None of our political leaders have made the case for sacrificing for our own interest. They seem to be waiting for a crisis to happen, which will force them to do things they should have done on their own.

There seems to be a popular conception that hyperinflation will likely occur in the next 20 years. However, based on our current scenario, Bruce does not see this occurring any time soon. Bruce and Samuelson are more considered with short term deflation. Samuelson doesn’t understand how you get higher inflation when you have empty shopping malls, 10 percent unemployment, and surplus factory capacity. As long as the people running economic policy in this country don’t come to the conclusion that higher inflation is better, we shouldn’t have it in the near future. When Samuelson says near future, he means 3 to 5 years.

In the long term, some people say that we will have to inflate because we have so much debt. The problem is that it is not easy to inflate your way out of debt. Forty percent of inflation turns over in a year or two. If you raise the inflation rate, you don’t really erode the debt, because you just have to refinance it at higher interest rates. In theory it seems like a practical choice, but in reality, it is not realistic.

Economists make the mistake of assuming that the economy responds in a mechanical way to credit, interest rates, government spending, and taxes. These things are significant, but Samuelson doesn’t think they are everything.

What happened in Japan was that they had an economic model, from the 50s to the middle 80s, which worked well for them. They had an export led economy, and they had an undervalued exchange rate. Their domestic economy was not very dynamic, but their exports kept growth and investment high. That model didn’t work in 80s because the exchange rate appreciated dramatically, and their exports became less competitive. This caused the Japanese to settle into a low growth mode, and they haven’t found a different economic model that works better. Contrary to what people learn in college economics, monetary and fiscal policy cannot change that kind of problem. The Japanese efforts to expand their economy through large budget deficits and loose monetary policy didn’t work. Their policy was dynamic internationally, but not domestically, and Samuelson thinks that is the problem in Japan.

If deflation became anticipated, it would be very destructive. Samuelson doesn’t think that modest price decreases would be that bad for a little while. However, if people think that prices will decrease forever, then they won’t borrow money, because their debt burdens will rise. They will postpone buying because the car they could buy today will be expected to fall even more in the future. This mentality will reduce demand, and then unemployment will increase.

Bruce asks Samuelson about what has changed in the baby boom generation’s expectation for retirement. Samuelson claims that this question is a little above his competence, because he is at the very edge of the baby boom generation. Samuelson feels that his retirement has become much less certain. He has saved a fair amount of money, but one thing he has learned is that markets don’t always increase. For example, if you have $100,000 on Thursday, six months from Thursday you may only have $100,000 minus 30 percent of its value. If you thought that money amount would be adequate to supply you through retirement, you may discover later on that it isn’t. That whole generation is probably feeling that same way about their retirement savings. Bruce thinks this mentality will cause a scenario that will not be inflationary. The economists that Samuelson talks to claim that people have short memories, so if we get into a fast growing economy for a few years, then their mentality of fear will disappear. However, Samuelson tends to agree with Bruce in his belief that these setbacks will leave people with a scarred mentality.

Samuelson wrote that the baby boom generation was the benefactor of large chunks of profit. They had the stock market increase, and then they had the real estate increase. This caused the baby boom generation to accumulate a lot of equity. Most of the GDP growth after 2002 came from equity growth and the extraction of it. Bruce wonders what is going to fuel the GDP growth going forward. This makes Bruce think, “How will we get inflation if we will have difficulty obtaining a moderate GDP growth?” Samuelson says that in an ideal world, the source of growth for the next 10 years would come from higher exports, fewer imports, and investment related to those thins. Also, more investment into our energy infrastructure might help as well. Specifically, natural gas could help us a lot now that we know we have more than we previously thought. Also, oil production can make a big difference for our potential economic growth.

After the Great Depression, a pact was made between the government and big business. Bruce asks if Samuelson sees another pact being made today. Samuelson does not see another pact being made today. The pact that occurred in the past was informal and unstable. After World War II, businesses did not want to be reviled in the same way they had been during the Great Depression. Because of this, businesses submitted to social and economic regulation in return for continued market freedom. What we should have today is a generational pact in which the baby boomers agree to reduce their benefits, so that we can take those burdens off of the young. This will allow them to start businesses, have children, and live in such a way so that a significant chunk of their income isn’t being drained to support their grandparents. Bruce completely agrees with this. There are plenty of people who can afford to pay for their own retirement, instead of having their grandchildren be taxed for it.

Robert Samuelson has created one heck of a book: The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath: The Past and Future of American Influence.