Home > The Economy > What Spring?

What Spring?

from Peter Radford

It’s a couple of years since Ben Bernanke used the springtime “green shoots” description of the economy. Since then we have had a few good quarters of warming weather, but we never arrived at a fully fledged summer. We seem, to extend the saying, stuck in perpetual springtime.

The reason, I think, is clear. Average folks are not seeing much to cheer about. And since they form the bulk of the consuming population they are not providing the power to generate that burst sufficient to allow us to break out.

A couple of recent statistics get at the heart of the problem. 

House prices continue to drop. It is astonishing how long this decline has been going on. Yes, there have been a few false dawns along the way, but the trend remains resolutely downwards. Today’s Case-Shiller index merely confirms the gloomy news. Our housing malaise is a long way from being settled. Eighteen of the twenty cities in the index have seen declines in the last twelve months. The worst affected was Phoenix where the drop was 9.1%, whereas Boston saw the least decline at 0.6%. Only San Diego and Washington DC saw increases. Even then San Diego’s growth was minimal at 0.1%. The 3.1% drop in the overall index in January was worse than the 2.4% drop recorded in last December, and the outlook remains bleak

It is glaringly obvious that our housing problems are here for a while longer, and while they linger the shadow they cast is very long indeed. The real estate market has yet to end its adjustment back to a sustainable price level. The inventory of unsold homes is an illusion since it fails to account for a very large number of homes people would like to sell, but are unwilling to do so at what they consider to be  temporarily reduced prices. I am surprised that it is taking so long for sellers to realize that their homes are simply not worth what they would like to receive for them. This imbalance, this inability or unwillingness to grasp reality, is creating a burden in the market that is depressing activity and making matters worse. By elongating the period of adjustment we have allowed the adverse psychology to build to a point where the market clearing price is probably lower than it might have been had sellers been willing, or able, to withstand the earlier price declines. In other words had the original decline been sharp enough, and had people acted to dump homes in order to avoid further losses, we might well have arrived at a position from which the market could recover. Instead we are stuck in a long winded meandering decline that casts a pall over whatever recovery may be going on elsewhere.

This story has become so prolonged that there is no real news in it anymore. Yet is is still important to reflect on. As long as the housing market fades the way it is, households will remain reluctant to spend, and will be forced to save to offset the steady erosion of wealth caused by lost home values. The support of the vaunted wealth effect has become the erosion of an insidious poverty effect. Such is the inevitable way with real estate, an asset we should all view with as much skepticism as any other.

As if to support this thesis immediately, consumer confidence has taken a decided turn for the worse.

The Conference Board reports that its measure of consumer confidence dropped sharply in March, down to 63.4 from February’s 72.0. Prior to this decline the index had shown five months of steady increase, so March’s drop stands out as being a sudden reversal of trend. There is no real surprise in the factors driving the decline: food and gasoline prices have spiked up sharply lately; and wages are not keeping up. Add in the rotten employment market and people are realizing that the economy is just not as healthy as it ought to be. Yes, it has risen from the depths of the crisis, but, no, most of the benefit of that recovery has not flowed into average households. Indeed with disposable incomes under pressure from the spike in prices and with profits rather than wages scarfing up the gains from the recovery we are building a platform for possible decline in growth from its current rather poor level. Big businesses seem intent on shooting themselves in the foot by hoarding cash and not investing. And our government seems intent on aiding and abetting the decline by cutting government expenditure – which means jobs – before we have accelerated enough to withstand the blow. So our economy is not just leaderless, it is being badly led. The direction is the wrong one, and households are reacting by being more circumspect and pessimistic about their prospects.

In essence our leadership, business, political, and professional, has abandoned the task of encouraging economic growth and has entered a phase of self-destructive policy and strategy decision making. Presumably this is the course of least resistance.  For business it is always easier to cut costs that to generate new streams of revenues. It is always simpler to offshore activities to low cost production facilities than it is to innovate domestically. And it is more straightforward  to deploy attorneys and accountants to reduce tax burdens than it is to boost gross revenues.

As for the politicians. It is a much easier task to sell austerity and reduction, than it is to explain why we need to run larger deficits. After all voters understand the rhetoric of cutbacks more than the more convoluted argument in favor of spending.

So we are locked into decline. Or rather mediocrity. Voters accept that the economy is not going to provide for them. This acceptance is borne out of thirty years of experience with the stagnation associated with the relaxation of regulation and the massive growth in power of business. We have produced an economy that protects profit well. The cost has been the loss of opportunity and relative wealth of the very households who we now need to carry us along. That their confidence is dented or skittish, and that their belief in our leadership is skeptical to say the least, should come as no surprise. The combination of cynicism, anger, and abandonment embodied in our political discourse is dangerous. These are unhealthy times for democracy. But for capitalists the boom continues.

Good for them.

  1. Pandora
    March 29, 2011 at 8:44 pm

    To continue the “green shoots” analogy from the natural world, we “average folks” are like grass trying to grow beneath a large and greedy maple tree (“too big to fail” banks, corporations?) The maple tree roots suck up all the vital moisture and nourishment before the grass has a chance to access it. The large tree canopy shades out the sun which further stresses the grass and finally, the grass becomes straggly and sparse. The tree canopy can be cut back to allow more light to reach the grass, but if the grass is to truly thrive and grow thick and lush, the tree must be cut down and replaced with something more compatible with the other flora on the lot.

  2. Podargus
    March 29, 2011 at 8:49 pm

    “Good for them” ?? I hope you are being ironic.

    Maybe a guest post by Herman Daly is in order.Maybe Bill Mitchell could help as well.

  3. Lucy Honeychurch
    March 29, 2011 at 9:43 pm

    We became doomed to a perpetual ‘early Spring’ when taxpayer ‘stimulus’ money was given to the Banks instead of the people.

  4. March 29, 2011 at 10:26 pm

    Please tell me why falling house prices are a bad thing – except for the banks, that is.

    • Peter Radford
      March 29, 2011 at 10:58 pm

      My quick response. Falling home prices are a problem because:

      1 – People who own homes lose wealth if the price of their home drops and they, for some reason, sell below cost. This is a real loss of cash and thus spending power.

      2 – The inverse of the notorious psychological artifact known as the “wealth effect”. This is the “feeling” of relative loss people feel when home prices fall, even if they retain positive equity in the home. They feel constrained or otherwise less able to spend because they have less wealth to rely on. In other words people who have relied on rising home prices as a form of savings reduce consumption from current income in order to replace their perceived loss of wealth/savings.

      3 – Declining prices prevent some people from being able to sell their home because they would realize a loss on sale. This stops them from moving to a new location and finding a new and/or better job. It thus introduces a level of friction in the labor market that was not there hitherto. It may contribute to prolonged unemployment.

      4 – Modern western economies have high rates of private home ownership. So falling home prices affects a lot of households. This magnifies the above issues to a large scale with noticeable system wide impact.

      Thus the problems of falling home prices becomes a general economic issue beyond the individual. Aggregate demand is [potentially] reduced as a derivative of the decline in home prices.

      As for the banks: they only lose if home prices drop and homeowners fail to pay off their debts. Else the banks are immune [i.e. they are indifferent, since they rely on the cash flow from debt repayment and not the value of the asset underlying the mortgage]. Declining home prices by themselves are not a problem for the banks. It is the failure of repayment that threatens them.

      ~ Peter

    • March 30, 2011 at 3:44 am

      Falling house prices are only bad for the banks if they have to foreclose.
      As long as people are making payments on their highly inflated loans, the banks are laughing because their milking machine is performing very well.

  5. March 30, 2011 at 12:08 pm

    A depressing post. This needs to be balanced by some good news: Sales of million-dollar homes and condos rose 2010 in all 20 major metro areas, according to DataQuick Information Systems. On average, these cities saw an 18.6% jump in high-end home sales. The nation’s wealthiest 5% of households account for about 37% of consumer spending, according to Moody’s Analytics. Sales of private jumbo jets are so strong that Airbus and Boeing now have special sales forces devoted to potentates and the hyper-rich,… Porsche’s U.S. sales in 2010 were up 29% over 2009; Cadillac’s climbed 36%. Rolls-Royce sales rocketed 171%.

    A tiny part of the US population seems to be in upgrade mood regarding their transportation infrastructure? Do you need more good news?

  6. March 30, 2011 at 4:24 pm

    @Helge
    Falling house prices are bad for banks’ new lending. Banks are now the main rent collectors.

  7. March 31, 2011 at 11:47 am

    How long will you moderate my post #7 ??? Anything wrong with it ???

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.