Thomas Sowell - The Housing Boom and Bus t [unabridged] 
fsdsob 
Audio Books : Misc. Educational :: English 
This is from Amazon.com: 


American Spectator 
"An economic primer on the housing bubble, but more importantly, it is an 
examination of the ruling class's inability to leave well enough alone." 
Review: 

Newsweek.com 

"Sowell's account qualifies the standard story that greedy investment 
bankers and mortgage brokers caused the whole crisis." 
Review: 

The Washington Times 

"For anyone looking for a straightforward and honest discussion of the 
origins of our current crisis, informed by a deep understanding of both 
economics and politics, The Housing Boom and Bust is required reading." 
Product Description 
This is a plain-English explanation of how we got into the current economic 
disaster that developed out of the economics and politics of the housing 
boom and bust. The "creative" financing of home mortgages and the even more 
"creative" marketing of financial securities based on American mortgages to 
countries around the world, are part of the story of how a financial house 
of cards was built up-and then suddenly collapsed. 

The politics behind all this is another story full of strange twists. No 
punches are pulled when discussing politicians of either party, the 
financial dangers they created, or the distractions they created later to 
escape their own responsibility for what happened when the financial house 
of cards in the financial markets collapsed. 

What to do, now that we are in the midst of an economic disaster, is yet 
another story-one whose ending we do not yet know, but one whose outlines 
and implications are explored to reveal some surprising and sobering 
lessons. 



5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent, Excellent, Excellent, Excellent -, May 18, 
2009 
By Loyd E. Eskildson "Pragmatist" (Phoenix, AZ.) 



The current housing and economic crises are fertile grounds for slanted and 
one-sided accounts. Sowell's "The Housing Boom and Bust" has none of that - 
it's an honest accounting of how we all participated. Lenders, government 
entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, builders, local government regulations, 
local homeowners, government regulators (HUD and bank authorities), the 
Congress, and presidents each played a part. Both parties were involved, 
though the Democrats involved outnumber the Republicans. 

Sowell begins with an accounting of how housing prices across the U.S. 
diverged from their relatively low prices of the early 1970s, especially 
along the California coast. The "standard" for housing expenditures used to 
be about 25% of gross income - this recently grew to as high as 60% in some 
areas (eg. Salinas, California). 

Sowell contends that a major cause for California's rapid rise, beginning in 
the 1970s, was land restrictions that set aside areas for "open space," 
"protecting the environment," "historical preservation," etc. (The 
population increase during that period was almost equal to the national 
increase rate.) He cites an international study of urban areas around the 
world that found 23 of 26 areas with the highest land-price increases had 
strong "smart-growth" policies. Minimum lot-size laws also raise land costs 
of building a house - here, he points to Houston (incomes rose faster there 
than in the nation overall, but also lacks zoning laws) and a Coldwell 
Banker estimate that homes there costing $155,000 would cost over $1 million 
in San Jose. 

Sowell goes on to point out that first-time buyers are limited in their 
ability to provide a large down-payment - averaging less than $30,000, vs. 
over $100,000 for repeat buyers. Meanwhile, housing prices began to escalate 
(the extreme was probably March, 2005 in San Mateo County where they rose 
$2,000/day), and houses moved rapidly (median time a home was on the MLS in 
California was less than 2 weeks in 2004, and just over that in 2005). 

But, I'm getting ahead of things. Prior to the rapid escalation of home 
prices, federal bank regulators began using the 1977 Community Reinvestment 
Act (CRA) to press for racial equality. The issue was the statistical 
difference in approval rates, not a claim that most blacks could not get 
mortgage loans. New regulations required that the banks not just look for 
qualified buyers, but make a requisite number of loans to low and moderate 
income buyers (quotas). Then, when legislation was proposed in 1999 to 
permit banks to diversify into selling investment securities, the Clinton 
White House urged "banks given unsatisfactory ratings under the CRA be 
prohibited from enjoying the new diversification privileges." The Congress 
happily obliged. Another factor was HUD's beginning legal action in 1993 
against mortgage bankers that declined a higher percentage of minority 
applicants. HUD also set a 42% target for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae (FM & 
FM) to buy mortgages for people whose income were less than an area's 
median. Banks, sensing that FM & FM were implicitly guaranteed, where only 
too happy to not only issue these mortgages, but to buy FM & FM debt as 
well. (In 2003, about 3,000 banks held FM & FM debt for 100% of their 
capital requirements.) The "icing" was FM & FM's creative accounting that 
misclassified $11 trillion of sub-prime assets. Then in 2002, Bush II urged 
Congress to pass the American Dream Down Payment Act, subsidizing down 
payments of prospective buyers with incomes below a certain level. 

Sowell has now set the stage, and readers have no problem understanding what 
happened. Interest-only teaser rate ARMs rose to counter rising prices and 
down-payments. By 2005, interest-only mortgages had risen to 31% of all new 
mortgages, up from less than 10% in 2002. In Denver, Seattle, and Phoenix it 
was 40%, and 66% in the S.F. Bay area. Speculators jumped into the fray (28% 
in 2005, 22% in 2006) adding further fuel to the fire, and happy homeowners 
took out $1.13 trillion in home equity loans in 2007. However, the storm on 
the horizon was the rise of interest rates to avoid inflation (1% in 2004, 
to 5.25% in 2006), making monthly payments more expensive and reducing the 
demand and prices for housing, and everyone takes a loss - including the 
banks (about $40,000 per foreclosed house), and especially speculators, 
minorities, and those with ARMs and interest-only loans. (Interesting Note: 
As of October, 2008, 7% of Bank of America's mortgages were CRA lendings, 
and 24% of its defaults.) Bailing out FM & FM, with their sub-prime laden 
inventories, cost the government more than that for all the private banks 
put together. 

Sowell also has no problems believing that many sub-prime loans were foisted 
upon unaware and uninformed buyers by predatory lenders - especially 
involving contracts for repairs or remodeling on credit. 

Bottom Line: The law of unintended consequences strikes again - helping 
minorities was a good intention, but backfired. We're all to blame, though 
admittedly some more than others. Deregulation was not the problem, rather 
misguided regulation. Further, the economy is not likely to reach former 
levels for a LONG time, lacking the frenzy the rapidly rising home prices 
brought to consumer buying. 


Size: 327.29 MB 
http://www.demonoid.com/files/details/2154220/3099042/ 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ShadowGovernment" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/shadowgovernment?hl=en.

Attachment: ((Demonoid.com))-Thomas_Sowell_The_Housing_Boom_and_Bust_[unabridged]_4413655.6164.torrent
Description: application/bittorrent

Reply via email to