6
Looking back at 2008's housing crisis
A row of for-sale signs near a subdivision in Chino Hills, Calif.
To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.
TEXT OF INTERVIEW
TESS VIGELAND: Just when you thought it was safe to put '08 behind you, a reminder of months past: Today Bank of America finalized its purchase of Merrill Lynch. That makes it the largest U.S. bank with some $2.7 trillion worth of assets.
You may remember the merger was announced a scant hour before Lehman Brothers collapsed on September 15th, adding to the list of awfulness that already included Bear Stearns, Fannie, Freddie, IndyMac, and eventually engulfed WaMu, Detroit, and the bailout.
But here's the remarkable thing: All of it -- everything -- began with the collapse of the housing bubble.
Nic Retsinas is the director for Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies.
Hi, Nic, and welcome back.
NIC RETSINAS: Nice to be with you.
VIGELAND: So the subprime mortgage story really started at the beginning of the year last year and rolled into this one. But what was the housing story this year, do you think?
RETSINAS: Not a very pretty picture. It was a very, very difficult year for housing. We did start to set lots of records, but all the records were negative records. Housing starts fell to a 50-year low. Housing sales dropped precipitously. And housing prices declined. So it was a very, very difficult year for housing in 2008.
VIGELAND: Let's talk about what the government tried to do to help homeowners this past year. We had programs called Hope Now, Project Lifeline. . . . But, you know, if memory serves, the government itself even said, "Yeah, those didn't work."
RETSINAS: Good intentions. But if one looks back with all the, I might add, clarity of hindsight . . . you know, back a year from now in November 2007 the initial government response was voluntary modification -- modifications of loans by the banks where investors and borrowers would come together and agree on a way out. That didn't gain much traction. Indeed, the problem got worse and worse. And now we're well beyond the phase where voluntary modifications is going to get us out of this.
VIGELAND: Even the modifications that were done, a lot of those people ended up in foreclosure, anyway.
RETSINAS: According to a recent study by the Comptroller of the Currency, over half of the loans that were modified at the beginning of the year have re-defaulted. Calling into question whether the loan modifications, in fact, were truly modifications or they were just very temporary stopgap measures.
VIGELAND: So, Nic, what should have been done? And what might still be possible to save us from this ongoing foreclosure problem?
RETSINAS: Let me start at the end. At this point I don't know whether it's possible to be saved. Matter of fact, I think we're really at the end of the beginning of the problem. Because, with people losing their jobs, that puts a limit on any kind of modification. Because even if you reduce an interest rate or extend a term, if you're not working, you can't pay it back. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't still attack this problem. I do think we need to have a much more activist government. I think we should revisit bankruptcy reform as a way to encourage investors and servicers and lenders to be more aggressive in trying to stem the tide of foreclosures.
Because, Tess, everything is related to everything. The foreclosures is one of the reasons we have widespread price declines. And if prices continue to decline, buyers will continue to stand on the sidelines.
VIGELAND: But you still hear this argument from folks who say, "You know what, I pay my mortgage. Why should I be responsible for helping the people who made such big mistakes?"
RETSINAS: And that is a very, very legitimate question. Part of the answer to that is the externalities. By that I mean, if your neighbor loses their home and their home is foreclosed upon, just that mere reality, that mere fact, lowers your home. American households have lost over $3 trillion in wealth because of the declining housing market. I would submit that would argue for some kind of intervention -- understanding that, in the end, we may end up helping some people who don't deserve to be helped. But by standing on the sidelines, matters can only get worse.
VIGELAND: Nic Retsinas heads up Harvard's Joint Center for Housing Studies. Thanks so much, as always.
RETSINAS: Always a pleasure.
About the author
Tess Vigeland is the host of Marketplace Money, where she takes a deep dive into why we do what we do with our money. Follow Tess on Twitter @radiotess
I remember this. My family and I tried everything, home staging, lowering the price, even a short sale and our house just, would not sell! It was a very hard time. http://www.myenglishtouch.com
DAVID BREINDEL LOAN LENDING/INVESTMENT COMPANY. We are investors/loan lending company located internationally in different countries.We invest with other companies and also offer loans to interested persons who are interested in it.We offer Educational loans,Agricultural loans,Start-up Funds,Investment Loans,Construction loans,Personal Loans,Purchase funds, e.t.c to any interested persons with affordable interest rate.If you are interested in obtaining funds from my firm,contact us through the below email address for your loan request. davidbreindel@yahoo.com
Housing Crisis - Partial Solution to Stimulating the Economy There are numerous consumers who have good jobs; good credit and need to buy a home (have outgrown their existing housing). Unfortunately, many are not aware of the current FHA programs which offer the potential home buyer a fixed rate mortgage (currently 5%), down payment of 3.5% (which can be gifted and paid back through the $7500 tax credit), credit scores of 580>. The media and so called "industry experts" continually state that "mortgage funds are difficult to obtain; you need a 10-20% down payment and 700+ credit scores." If the correct message (not spin) was heard by the consumer and educated as to the opportunity to solve their housing need, we could jump start the market through first home purchases. This would filter up through the real estate economy and "move-up" buyers could buy/sell, builders could build, loan officers, lenders, Realtors, movers, etc. would all earn a paycheck. The �talking point� for those in our industry and related should be � A buyer can purchase a home with 3.5% down, a credit score of >580 and obtain a fixed rate mortgage at 4 7/8%. No bailout, no additional tax payer money, no smoke and mirrors. Blog http://fdoleac.activerain.com/post/876568/call-to-action-we-can-change-t...
What many economists like Mr. Retsinas seem not to realize is that NOT intervening may actually be the most beneficial course of action, especially for those that were most fiscally prudent.
"But by standing on the sidelines, matters can only get worse." NOT SO. Depending on your perspective, one could say that things are getting better with the housing market. Many people, myself included, took a hard look at housing prices during the boom years and realized that they were artificially and unsustainably high when compared to rent and income in many markets, such as California. Those of us who decided not to buy have no interest in an intervention that props up home prices and prevents a natural settling back down to historic ratios with income. Also, those who intend to live in their homes long-term should appreciate the fact that lower home values mean lower property taxes, insurance, etc. Certainly not an unmitigated disaster.
There will be many winners and losers whether intervention is taken or not, so why not do the simple thing and let the market return to normal on its own? That way, the biggest losers are generally the ones who made the biggest mistakes and the biggest winners are the ones who were prudent. Not perfect, but it seems that any other option would encourage more risky behavior in the future.
This country is placing an inordinate amount of hope and trust in the incoming administration. But in my opinion, it’s going to take a team of super heroes to come up with a workable plan to get the housing market stabilized and back on track. And until we get our house in order here at home, the economies around the globe could continue to suffer and slide further into the abyss.
This comment was posted by Jose Roncal, co-author of "The Big Gamble: Are you investing or speculating?" - For more information, visit www.financialspeculation.com
"All of it-everything-began with the collapse of the housing bubble."
Well, not really. The housing collapse is really the first symptom, not the cause of the problem. The central cause has two characteristics: deficit spending by the government, and deficit trade spending. The former desensitizes us to proper budgeting, and the latter send jobs overseas and lowers our standard of living.
