Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The panic of 2008: a letter from America

By Wendell Cox - posted Monday, 16 March 2009


It is common knowledge that the world financial crisis began in the United States. In short, the crisis would not have occurred if the US had not been “asleep at the switch” as bankers gave money to any with a pulse and if it had not allowed major markets to regulate their house prices to unheard of heights through overly strict land use regulations (called urban consolidation in Australia and smart growth in America).

Just as the US started it all, its recovery will also be important to the world economy. In that light, it is useful to review the present economic downturn in comparison with others in recent decades.

It is frequently claimed that the crash of 2008 is the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. There is plenty of reason to accept this characterisation, though we clearly are not suffering the widespread hardship of the Depression era. Looking principally at historical household wealth data from the Federal Reserve Board’s Flow of Funds Accounts of the United States, summarised in our Value of Household Residences, Stocks & Mutual Funds: 1952-2008, we can conclude it’s pretty bad, but nothing yet like the early 1930s.

Advertisement

But this Panic of 2008 is no picnic. And in some key areas, notably housing, it could become even worse than what was experienced in the Great Depression.

Housing

It all started with the housing bubble that saw prices in some markets rise to unheard of levels, principally in California, Florida, Phoenix, Las Vegas and the Washington, DC area. Mortgage lenders were unable to withstand the intensity of losses that resulted from interest rate resets and declining prices. This precipitated the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy on Meltdown Monday (September 15, 2008) and a far broader economic crisis since that time.

Before the housing bubble, housing had been a stable store of wealth (equity or savings) for Americans, just as it has been in Australia. According to government data, the value of the US owned housing stock increased in every year since 1935. The bursting of the housing bubble, however, brought declines in both 2007 and 2008, the longest period of housing value decline since between 1929 and 1933. The value of the housing stock was down 20 per cent from its peak at the end of 2008. In some markets the losses amounted to more than double this amount. By comparison, the 1929 to 1933 house value decline was 27 per cent. However, only one Great Depression year (1932) had a larger single-year decrease than 2008.

Indeed, between 1952 and 2006, the value of the housing stock never declined for more than a three month period. The bubble changed all that. The value of the housing stock has now fallen eight straight quarters. An investment that has been safe for most middle class Americans - the house in the suburbs - suddenly experienced the price volatility usually associated with the stock market, as is indicated in the chart below.

House Asset Values

The resulting losses have been substantial. By the end of 2008, the value of the housing stock had fallen $4.5 trillion. In Phase I of the housing downturn, before Meltdown Monday, the largest losses were concentrated in the markets with the biggest “bubbles”, (PDF 21KB). But since that time the market has entered a Phase II decline, while a more general decline has characterised housing markets around the country in the fourth quarter of 2008. The decline continues.

Advertisement

California, the largest of all the states, has been particularly hard hit. New data for both the San Francisco and Los Angeles areas show price drops of about 10 per cent in January, 2009 alone, as prices fall like the value of a tin-pot dictatorship’s currency. This decline, it should be noted, has spread from the outer ring of these areas - places like the much maligned inland California markets - into the formerly more stable, and established, areas closer to the larger urban cores, which some naively imagined would be safe from such declines.

Sadly, there may well be some time before house price stability can be achieved. To restore the historic relationship between house prices and household incomes to a Median Multiple (median house price divided by median household income) of 3.0 would require another $3 trillion in losses, equating to a more than 15 per cent additional loss. Losses are likely to be greater, however, not only in the “ground zero” markets of California and Florida but also other hugely over-valued markets, such as Portland, Seattle, New York and Boston. Of course, these are not normal times, and an intransigent economic downturn could lead to even lower house values than the historical norm would suggest.

Stocks and mutual funds

As noted above, stocks and mutual funds have been inherently more volatile than housing values. According to Federal Reserve data, the value of these holdings fell 24 per cent during the year ended September 30. During the intervening “panic” months, declines have accelerated. Based upon later data from the World Federation of Exchanges, we estimate that the value declined sharply after September 15 (PDF 96KB), and at December 31 stood at 45 per cent below the peak.

The household value of stocks and mutual funds has declined for five consecutive quarters, as of December 2008. There was a more sustained drop over six quarters in 1969-1970, although the decline in value was less than the present loss, at 37 per cent. A larger decline (47 per cent) was associated with the four quarter decline of 1973-1974. Comparable data is not available for household stocks and mutual fund holdings before 1952. The less complete data available indicates that the gross value of common and preferred stocks fell 45 per cent from 1929 to 1933. As late as 1939, a decade after the crash, the loss had risen to 46 per cent, indicating both the depth and length of the Great Depression.

The present downturn seems on course at a minimum to break the post-depression loss record with an overall decline at 58 per cent as of March 2 (this assumes the change in the value of the market is proportional to the change in the Dow). This would correspond to a household loss of $8.5 trillion from the peak.

Consumer confidence

The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index reached an all time low of 25.0 in February, down a full one-third in a month. Even with its petrol rationing, the mid-1970s downturn saw a minimum Consumer Confidence Index of 43.2. Normal would be 100; as late as August of 2007, consumer confidence was above 100. Consumer confidence is important. Where it is low, as it is today, there is fear and even people with financial resources are disinclined to spend. Confidence is a major contributor to economic downturns, which is why they used to be called “panics”. Restoring confidence is a requirement for recovery.

Government confidence

If there were a US government index of confidence, it would probably be near zero. This is demonstrated by the trillions that both political parties in Washington have or intend to throw at banks, private companies and distressed home owners to stop the downturn. Never since the Great Depression have things become so bad that Washington has opened taxpayer’s checkbooks for massive financial bailouts.

How much wealth has been lost?

The net worth of all US households peaked at $64.6 trillion in the third quarter of 2007, according to the Federal Reserve Board. Since that time, it seems likely that the housing, stock and mutual fund losses by the nation’s households could be $13 trillion - $4.5 trillion in housing and $8.5 trillion in stocks and mutual funds. This is a major loss and is unlikely to be recovered soon. Yet it makes sense to consider these losses in context. Unemployment is far lower than in the 1930s, when it reached 25 per cent, and the Dust Bowl is not driving people from the Great Plains to California (indeed, more than 1,000,000 people have migrated from California to other states this decade).

Born yesterday Jeremiahs

It is fashionable to suggest that the current economic crisis is the result of over-consumption and an unsustainable lifestyle. The narrative goes that the supposed excesses of the 1980s and 1990s have finally caught up with us. In fact, however, even with the huge losses, the net worth of the average household is no lower than in 2003 and stands at 70 per cent above the 1980 figure (inflation adjusted). This may be a surprise to “born yesterday” economic analysts.

The reality is that the United States (and Australia and the rest of the first world) achieved astounding economic and social progress since World War II. The reality remains that even after the losses we are not, objectively speaking, experiencing Depression-like conditions. Critically, the answer to the question, "Are you better off today?" (PDF 60KB) in 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990 and even 2000 is “yes”. This is a critical difference with the situation in the 1930s when we were much poorer, and far less able to withstand such punishing losses.

Beware the Panglossians

Even so, it seems premature to predict that the economy will turn around soon. Some Panglossian analysts who predict recovery later in the year or in 2010 seem likely to miss the mark by years. Remember, analysts - particularly those tied to both the real estate and stock sectors - have discredited themselves with their past cheerleading. In addition, the international breadth and depth of this crisis cannot possibly be fully comprehended at this time.

And even when the recovery starts, it is likely to be slow because of the public debt run up to stop the bleeding. When the recovery begins, the nation and the world will have to repay the many trillions in bailouts one way or the other. This can take the form of higher taxes, inflation, rising real interest rates or, perhaps all three.

How bad is it? Bad enough

The present downturn is not as serious as the Great Depression. Nonetheless, the Panic of 2008 is without question, the most serious economic downturn since the Great Depression. The real question is whether the US government will react as ineffectively as it did back then, and prolong the downturn well into the next decade. Wise policy out of Washington, so often in short supply, is required not only for the United States but also for the rest of the world, which remains so tied to the American economy.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

This article is adapted from one previously published in newgeography.com.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

2 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Wendell Cox is a Visiting Professor, Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers, Paris and the author of War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Wendell Cox

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 2 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy