Recs

120

Bet on a 2009 Housing Recovery

The housing bubble was caused by poor lending standards, lax regulation, and low interest rates. Poor lending standards have met a natural death, lax regulation is irrelevant now -- it turns out banks do self-regulate when lower executive bonuses are suddenly on the table -- but today's low interest rates should surely impact housing prices.

But is it enough to save the housing market? And what does it mean to your stock portfolio?

Avoiding foreclosures
Almost half of home sales these days are distressed sales, so reducing foreclosures is the first step to stabilizing the housing market. Low interest rates can help achieve this goal. Homeowners with adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) will build more equity, since more of their mortgage payment will go toward paying back the principal. Plus, lower rates allow monthly payments to be reduced if necessary, keeping people in their homes.

Unfortunately, "option ARMs" -- loans where the homeowner had the option of interest-only or even less-than-interest payments for a period of time -- are still a problem. Though these mortgages often had low teaser rates, about 70% of option ARM holders made the minimum payments. So, even with the low interest rates, the combination of the teaser rates expiring and normal amortizations starting could cause payments to jump close to 100% in some cases.

About $500 to $600 billion in option ARMs will reset over the next few years. With that payment shock many -- maybe over half -- will default, hurting the market.

Of course, supply is only half the equation. Low interest rates and lower housing prices should increase demand by improving housing affordability. Despite the option ARM issue, improved affordability will likely cause housing prices to begin to stabilize some time in 2009.

Necessary or not?  
Regardless, is a housing recovery necessary before the economy can recover?

Certainly it would help. About seven million people are directly employed in construction. A recovery would boost homebuilders like Pulte (NYSE: PHM  ) , and materials providers like Cemex (NYSE: CX  ) and Weyerhaeuser (NYSE: WY  ) . Not to mention the banking industry.

What's more, this decade, consumer spending has been driven by homeowners withdrawing equity from their homes. In 2005 and 2006, mortgage equity withdrawals were $150-$200 billion each quarter, or about 5% of GDP in total. These days, people are paying off their mortgages.

These equity withdrawals historically stimulated the economy. But, they were already absent through most of 2008, so consumer spending and the stock market should already reflect these conditions.

A penny saved
Besides, low interest rates provide their own stimulus. Consider how much money consumers are saving because of the declining interest rates. In the second quarter, there were about $2.35 trillion ARMs and $11.3 trillion of fixed-rate mortgages outstanding. Since 2006, the benchmark interest rate to which many ARMs are pegged has fallen about four percentage points, leading to a savings of $94 billion annually on ARMs alone.

But, mortgages applications recently hit five-year highs due to a huge surge in refinancings. If only 20% of the fixed rate mortgages refinance, it would save another $90 billion. Combined, the total annual savings would be $184 billion.

To put that number in perspective, the U.S. GDP is about $14.4 trillion. So, consumers have an amount equivalent to 1.2% of GDP to spend. That's more than the $152 billion stimulus package of the second quarter, which helped boost GDP by a surprising 2.8% annualized rate in that quarter.

Admittedly, it is much less than the $700 billion TARP bailout or the House's proposed $825 billion stimulus package. But, that's because those plans are huge. Combined, they're equivalent to every worker in America donating the results of their labor in January and part of February toward bailing out the country.

Portfolio resuscitation
Overall, many of the direct effects of the weak housing market have been felt throughout 2008. Much of the stimulus, however, is still to come. So, though a housing recovery would help the economy recover, it might not even be necessary.

What's more, stocks have dropped significantly since their 2007 highs, and they were not particularly expensive even then. Even with earnings estimates reflecting the terrible economy, many companies seem cheap.

For instance, Adobe (Nasdaq: ADBE  ) owns Flash and Acrobat, software that's on almost every computer, as well as Photoshop and Dreamweaver. Despite its best efforts, Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT  ) hasn't really been able to make any inroads against the company, which shows just how entrenched Adobe is. The company looks cheap with a couple billion dollars of cash and an earnings multiple below 14.

Or consider FedEx (NYSE: FDX  ) and UPS (NYSE: UPS  ) . They're both down as shipping volume falters in the slowing economy. Yet over the long term, these companies are likely to gain as weaker competitors fail. They too look cheap at mid-teens earnings multiples.

The Foolish bottom line
If stocks are priced attractively when their earnings are near cyclical lows, what will happen when the economy recovers? A potent combination of escalating earnings and low valuations could result in excellent returns for investors over a number of years.

You still need to be cautious -- the economy hasn't turned around yet, and more companies could fail. But now is the time to look for bargains. Our Inside Value team is doing just that and we've found the stocks that we believe will both survive this rough patch, and outperform during the recovery. You can read all about them with a 30-day free trial.

Fool contributor Richard Gibbons doesn't find his arms as optional as other folks seem to. He owns shares of Microsoft, which is a Motley Fool Inside Value pick. FedEx and Cemex are Stock Advisor recommendations. Cemex is also a Global Gains selection and Fool holding. UPS is an Income Investor selection. The Fool's disclosure policy just refinanced the server it lives in.


Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 5:16 PM, pmorrisonfl wrote:

    This article is a little disappointing in that it does not consider price/income or price/rent ratios, which remain higher than historical norms. In my area (a bubble one, South Florida) houses have declined greatly in price since 2005... and yet are still anywhere from 25-75% overpriced compared to incomes here. Interest rates can mitigate this somewhat, but not by much. I would argue that there will be no recovery in home prices until people can afford to buy them on the premise that they are for livig in rather than investing in.

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 5:37 PM, jdyee wrote:

    The thing this article doesn't address is the massive job losses this country is experiencing. While lower interest rates and lower home prices will help turn the housing market around, it doesn't matter how low the rates are or how cheap the homes are, you can't buy a home without a job. Not only can you NOT buy a home w/o a job, but if you do have a home, you will likely lose it if you don't have an emergency fund which you can make your mortgage payment from if you don't have a job.

    I think this is a HUGE issue which has a direct impact on this article. I disagree that the housing market will turn around in 2009.

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 6:38 PM, Shar54 wrote:

    We had better all pray that it does. I don't believe there will be any economic recovery until it does. People can't refinance even if they have excellent credit if the equity isn't there and unfortunately most of us lost equity like crazy. We bought a house on a lake for 325,000 in Sept 07, used all of our 401K to remodel and it's still worth 20% less than it was when we bought it and our remodel included adding a bathroom, master bath and second full bath remodel, complete kitchen remodel with new cabinets, floors and granite, adding, a 2.5 detached garage and installing all new floors throughout the house. Imagine our surprise when we couldnt' refinance for a lower interest rate without PMI. If we can't do it, almost no-one can. I wouldn't be investing in any building companies for quite a while!

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 7:00 PM, pianofritz50 wrote:

    I'll bet on NO housing recovery in 2009... maybe mid 2010.

    But certainly between now & then is the time to buy & mortgate (fixed 30 yr) at these low prices & rates.

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 7:19 PM, dyadco wrote:

    The scenario MAY be that there isn't an up-turn in the value of housing, but rather a re-aligning to the long term average value of housing.

    This may sound a depressing prospect, however, it may be that this price consolidation is what is needed to put a secure floor under house prices without the likelihood of another valuation bubble built on speculation.

    Lets face it, a house is a place where we live. Thats it. It is nothing other than that. Sadly, many people in the past have viewed it as something other than that.

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 7:41 PM, loucanoe wrote:

    At my first job in the brokerage business one of the traders had a tie bar that read "TANSTAAFL". I later learned that this stood for "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch". Yes, dropping interest rates will save some homeowners money--but there is an offset. Dropping interest rates will mean lower incomes for many conservative investors--holders of savings accounts, CD's, short term bonds, etc. Somehow,writers about the benefits of lower interest rates never mention how they can hurt savers. Are they net pluses or minuses--I really don't know.

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 8:20 PM, megustodinero wrote:

    No housing recovery in 2009 nation wide, but certainly some steady activity in select areas and

    price ranges.

    I live in a tent. No PMI recquired when I bought tent at

    REI.

    Interest rates maybe lower, but I believe the banks and mortgage companies are still up to thier same old

    tricks. ie smoke and mirrors mortgages to put people in homes they really cannot afford.

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 8:42 PM, HSHEnterprises wrote:

    The recession is now driving the housing market, not the interest rates. Job loss will keep the buyer numbers lower and will also depress all spending which will intensify the recession. Rebound in housing in 2009. Fools can keep hoping I suppose. Ain't going to happen.

    Bigger Gardens

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 9:08 PM, Factrender wrote:

    Your assessment of the housing market is dangerously short of factual data. I am a Counselor or Real Estate, retired member of the Appraisal Institute and Certified Mortgage Banker. I've taught appraisal and mortgage banking courses with both the Institute and the Mortgage Bankers Association School of Mortgage Banking. You have ignored several important facts. The first is "Maturity Risk". Refer to J. P. Morgan's release yesterday of the volume of loans maturing in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012. More loans must be restructured or refinanced in EACH of those years than in 2007 or 2008. If interest rates rise (and they well may have to to continue attracting foreign investors into U.S. Treasury bonds), qualifying for a new higher rate loan with declining property values will become even more difficult. Are you aware that 58% of 2007 restructured home loans are back in default and 38% of those restructured in 2008 are also back in default? Declines in property values have many unqualified borrowers just choosing to walk away.

    The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, later beefed up by President Clinton and Congress in the 90's, required banks make Alt A and Sub Par loans to unqualified buyers. The loans were sold by the banks to investment bankers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac then were securitized and sold to investors all over the world. The traunches that didn't sell were securitized again into CDOs and resold using guarantee insurance provided by A.I.G. and others. The Banking Oversight Committee of the Senate enforced this unsound practice through bank regulation (NOT deregulation as you state). All this was done to permit low income families to own their own home and supposedly enjoy the wealth building opportunity of rising home prices. Loan underwriting was deliberately abandon by permitting "stated income" rather than "verified" income underwriting. Fraud has occurred on a massive scale.

    In my opinion, the only solution is for property values to decline to the proper ratio of household income to sales price before a market recovery can occur.

    Bail Outs may help banks get rid of bad loans but the housing industry is oversupplied and will languish for years in many regions of the country.

    I saw it coming and wrote many letters to trade associations, members of Congress, President Bush, etc. No one appeared concerned because they were making so much money and politicians gloated that U.S. home ownership had risen from 66% to almost 70%. Unraveling this mess will take years, not months.

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 10:39 PM, ReillyDiefenbach wrote:

    More happy talk from Motley Fool. How did your portfolio do over the last year, Fools? Did they pick up on the subprime debacle in time? Did they advise you to sell in November of 2007 to preserve your capital? Oh, they never advised you to sell anything, ever? Too bad!

  • Report this Comment On January 16, 2009, at 11:59 PM, TrailerParkJawa wrote:

    Given that the the layoffs are just starting and they are across the board in terms of sectors I'd really doubt any sort of recovery. As already mentioned we need to work our way through all the loans being restructured or resetting before any hope of a floor can be reached.

    I wish I understood this 8 months ago. I'm sure I'm not alone.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 12:52 AM, devine1s wrote:

    This housing disaster was instigated from not just desperate (yes ignorant) Americans who wanted a slice of the great American pie, but also Bankers with bad lending practices, short term investors flipping houses, and brilliant key government officials including President elect Barack Obama who wrote a letter to Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac encouraging them to make it easier for high risk individuals to purchase homes. During the peak of the housing boom everyone rich, poor, working or not, with a down payment and without a down payment. Some had income to debt ratio, some did not, it just did not matter, if you had a heart beat and could sign papers chances are you qualified for a home. Now we’re here in 2009 and this nations Real Estate has gone south, the sub-prime / Alt A loans have literally terrorized homeowners and our nation. The fall out could be compared to a nuclear bomb if you want to look at this with a pessimistic view.

    The percentage of foreclosures in this country represents a small number of homes relative to the number of sound mortgages not affected by this problem. Behind the scenes we have this quite little story not sensational enough for the media; this is the best time to purchase primary and or secondary vacation/retirement homes. Interest rates are historically at their lowest ever, according to Bloomberg.com lumber prices fell to an 18-year low making the costs of building cheaper, and the cost of homes have dropped almost half of what they were a few years ago. If you’re playing the waiting game for the lowest price possible, it just may pass you by when you look in the rear view mirror and realize there is only a no U-turn sign ahead of you.

    If you are one of these individuals who plan to start building or remodeling your home, I shamelessly ask you to think in terms of the trickle down effect and hire people now rathan latter.

    Just think you can help turn this country around, one person at a time. Hire an Architect/Designers to design you a new home or re-design your existing home will generates a job for an Engineer. Your job will generate jobs within our states and counties which in turn creates revenues for local counties/cities to keep those offices running. Your job will generate a job for contractors and sub-contractors they need supplies to build, and companies that make those supplies to build or remodel homes. Your job will create state tax dollars from selling supplies to build your home, and let’s not forget about you the homeowner who will spend more money to accessorize your home.

    I guess I need to believe the glass is half full and our economy will turn around soon.

    Gail

    Mddesignhomes.com

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 1:34 AM, G880nions wrote:

    I have a hard time believing anything will turn around the way we are printing $$....bail outs? What is a bail out...oh...just another way to rob more from the American Taxpayer.....By the way....I made 2 tenths of a % on my 401k in 2008....No bull..Our economy is in deep s----.

    Jack

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 1:48 AM, TrailerParkJawa wrote:

    Gail,

    I'd like to spend $5000 on my home but things are so bad its not wise the spend money for wants. Its a self sustaining spiral. People wont spend till they feel safe and we cant feel safe till people spend.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 7:31 AM, BigB2000 wrote:

    The government cannot save many of the people who brought into ARM's or IO's. That is because the only people who are and able to get one of these new lower interest rate loans are the people with good credit ratings who did not buy into ARM's and IO's. From my own actions, they are refinancing to reduce their rates. That means a lot of people holding the ARM's and IO's will still go under despite government interference; let them. What the banks need to do is to get people with the money and good credit ratings to spend. They need to adjust their terms with the people who could afford them under favorable terms. They need to write off the people who cannot afford them under any terms.

    Howard B

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 9:29 AM, jwe3 wrote:

    The author got this wrong in the very first sentence. Dude, *lax* regulation is not what happened. It was a case of runaway regulation by a bunch of socialist idiots who decided if only they believed, then things would work out. Faith-based stupidity. Faith in socialism is what it was, and that has always been a idea with poor results. Lenders weren't just "free" to make inappropriate loans; they were required to do so and were penalized if they did not participate and hey, the government said so and was backing them, so join the party. Oooops sorry, they did not use a fire ring for their party fire, it got away from them and has turned into a conflagration burning many many other trees in the financial forest.

    Now we have a fool (not Fool) spouting, "economic justice," appointing clowns and tax cheaters to his cabinet. Anyone see any likelihood of accountability in that crowd???

    Aren't the markets having a confidence problem?

    No Accountability, No Confidence.

    Know Accountability, Know Confidence.

    The disaster will continue until there is accountability.

    Period.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 10:12 AM, BlueLakeVentures wrote:

    In this blog 2 years ago, I predicted a housing bottom at the end of 2009 and a full recovery by 2013. The prediction still holds.

    http://bluelakeventures.blogspot.com/2007_10_01_archive.html

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 10:15 AM, skully201 wrote:

    My pie is not in the sky; it looks just right when it is on a plate in front of me. There is so much that has to be worked through in the econ. before housing begins the long period of improvement which will take years. We cannot accept this article as of any use because it is connected to a solicitation for another paid subscription. This type of advertising diminishes TMF's reputation.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 10:50 AM, Dannysea wrote:

    Greetings!

    A lot of limited conjecture in this article. Sure, we all desire life to be wonderful, but here is a different set of conjectures. I work in the foreclosure field for the past 15 years, and have been a second generation contractor for about 30 years in Florida.

    The unloading of the bank foreclosure properties is a bank-created market place; remember, the bank are being demanded not to be in the real estate business and must unload these properties at all cost. Therefor to create an avenue of sales, the prices for these same properties that are now being listed, must be so low and continueing to fall, that a new type buyer can be found;: the first time buyer. Yes, this is a great opportunity, but reality bites! We are having to fix these properties for the banks to minimum FHA standards. These first time buyers are scraping through the door with the same kind of minimum down payments. They have no reserve, the amounts of their mortgages are reduced from buyers several years ago, but so is their income. As an overall group they have been renters, and make such a little bit of money that rent payments are a struggle. Now introduce home ownership with Air Conditioners and Well water equipment that has a 12-15 year life cycle if you are fortunate. Add in for ever-increasing land taxes and home owner insurance. What about that roof that has a 3-year life expectancy left? And if in Florida or one of the other controlling states, how about that barn, porch or garage that was built with out a permit and the municipality is now, 5 years later, dictating those items need to be removed or a fine of $150 per day? And now, this new home owner has to pay for all their own utilities. Remember, these buyers have no reserve and are getting in with the same deals the previous owners lost their homes over.

    Now add this in the housing economy, and one more thing. The investors of five years ago are mostly upside down and out of business.

    Recovery in 2009? What a joke! Our perspective is at least 18 months away from the bottom; then, how long will we scrape that? And the first upturn, is that recovery? This writer is obviously not visiting the workplace except their own.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 12:56 PM, theodored47 wrote:

    Have we seen the bottom yet? I have been in the home building industry for 33 years and I can tell you the worst I have seen was from 81 to 84. That time the reason was high interest rates. Now there seems to be so many factors playing into this slow down that I would say we are looking for at least 4 to 5 years of bottom before we see an uphill climb of any substance. I believe the economy will have to turn around before the housing market will start it's climb out of this. Living in an area where industry is the base economy. People here have to know that their jobs are secure to really want to extend themselves. The mortgage payments have to be affordable then I think we will see a turn around in the housing market.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 1:04 PM, battlecat wrote:

    Surprising bad article, or maybe not.

    I subscribed to MF over ten years ago and have received MF emails daily that I have marked as spam because I've come to conclusion that they were not were the time to read. However I read this article since it was topical. My take away is that I was right to conclude that MF articles are in fact not worth the time to read. My opinion is that it's much better to become informed in the economics around you from reading and listening to pod cast such as NPR Planet Money, Econ talk or blogged by knowledgeable and informed individuals than reading vague and poorly written MF articles.

    The other thing I find of interest in that in this environment of increasing unemployment is the value of hard skills over soft skills. It's become clear to me that anyone can be a journalist and write articles an any topic under the sun but that doesn't mean that they are any good at it or that they will not soon be replaced or eliminated.

    The best thing about MF is that often the authors that contribute in the comments section have a more informed and valuable perspective.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 1:43 PM, trenton1ryan wrote:

    <The best thing about MF is that often the authors that contribute in the comments section have a more informed and valuable perspective.>

    Agreed. I've learned more from reading the comments than I have with any of the MF articles. Sitting in an office all day, reading stuff on the internet can't take the place of being in the field and witnessing things first hand.

    I think the best we can hope for is to not get too much worse this year. The mention of resetting of option ARMs bears repeating. It's just one example why this will take years to sort through.

    All these articles about valuations being so low, etc. It doesn't ever seem to occur to any of these authors that were in a whole new ballgame here, that the 'great' economy and stock/housing run-up we had was based on lies, inflated figures, and most of all-leverage. To me, that means that things weren't really that great when we thought they were, and to figure out what real demand and spending will be, we have to move through the rubble of these multiple messes and see what lies on the other side. I don't see us doing that for 3-10 years. And a lot of companies will go under and/or be bought out in that time.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 3:19 PM, kamuirei wrote:

    "The best thing about MF is that often the authors that contribute in the comments section have a more informed and valuable perspective."

    Agreed. Most of the time I read the comments first before even looking at the article.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 3:44 PM, wuff3t wrote:

    "Dude, *lax* regulation is not what happened. It was a case of runaway regulation by a bunch of socialist idiots who decided if only they believed, then things would work out..."

    I find it hard to accept that the current economic crisis was caused by socialism! The mess we are all in is entirely due to the greed of bankers who were never as clever as they thought they were. That's capitalism, not socialism, at fault. You might not like socialism - that's your choice - but projecting capitalism's faults onto socialism is not going to get us out of this mess.

  • Report this Comment On January 17, 2009, at 4:13 PM, Italyssun wrote:

    Who will the housing market turn around for in 09? Millions out of work, the stimulus with taxpayer and printed up dollars will only provide medium incomes at the most if it works for even a short while, easy lending money is gone, people are refinancing at the most and not buying brand new homes and also I was at auction the other day and a very nice 100,000.00 home in 2006 sold for 39,200.00.

    James Bond: "But who would want to kill me, Sir?"

    M: "Jealous husbands, outraged chefs, humiliated column writers ... the list is endless."

  • Report this Comment On January 18, 2009, at 7:47 AM, WhidbeyIsland wrote:

    My wife, a very sensible woman, loves cheesy 1950s science fiction movies. One of her favorite movies (I forget the title, but I think it involved giant octopuses under the sea) starts with an announcer intoning something along the lines of "They [scientists] understood everything there was to understand but that which they did not comprehend."

    My parents and their siblings grew up in the 1930s. They were deeply scarred by the Great Depression. I grew up hearing many stories about this calamity and with a vague foreboding that it would happen again.

    Today, I am in my 60s, and I read and hear many stories about how we are in a "deep recession." Are we afraid to say the "d" word?

  • Report this Comment On January 18, 2009, at 8:23 AM, wuff3t wrote:

    Hi WhidbeyIsland,

    "Are we afraid to say the "d" word?"

    Sadly, no! The reverse seems to be true - people are throwing the word around as though we are already there. The most commonly used definition I've seen for a depression is a fall of 10% or greater in GDP - that's a massive fall and we are nowehere near that sort of collapse yet.

    When FDR spoke about "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself" he wasn't quite right, but we shouldn't panic ourselves into creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  • Report this Comment On January 18, 2009, at 3:57 PM, sa7nt wrote:

    The housing market has to bottom out before it will turn around. Housing prices still are not inline with incomes and purchasing power. I am betting on a bottoming out of the housing market closer to 2011 than 2009.

  • Report this Comment On January 18, 2009, at 5:46 PM, steveherb wrote:

    Desert Storm, 92 Recession, Dot. Com Era, nine eleven, food prices, gas prices, wall street scammers, real estate bubble... Are you trying to say my life will be any different if we fall into depression?

  • Report this Comment On January 18, 2009, at 11:06 PM, devine1s wrote:

    That is one of the issues I have with our governments bailout programs. All the bailout money (we will pay for) is going to the banks with no accountability and the banks are not loaning the money to the people, there buying other banks that are failing and than asking the Government for more money because they can’t handle the weight of the failing financial institutions they purchased.

    If they invested into the fabric of our nation, small business and banks loaned the money out individual people who will reinvest back into the fabric of our country. The Government needs to look closely at how they allocate the money, if they keep making the same moves demonstrated from the past we can not move forward. Let the banks who screwed up fail, help the people who keep us solvent.

    Gail

    mddesignhomes.com

  • Report this Comment On January 19, 2009, at 10:01 AM, silvermetalman wrote:

    I am a little baffled as to why financial institutions are either reluctant to or precluded from bargaining with people facing foreclosure. There have got to be ways to avoid the "death penalty" of foreclosure.

  • Report this Comment On January 19, 2009, at 4:34 PM, Big50Shooter wrote:

    WoW!

    You ARE writing about economic life on the planet Earth right?!?

    So Richard, we'll all just borrow ourselves right back into financial health, real quick like huh? Sure seemed to work good the first time around (NOT!)....

    Respectfully Richard... There are so many holes in this analysis that I don't think you do The Fool any favors in helping them sell their services...

  • Report this Comment On January 19, 2009, at 9:27 PM, macker007 wrote:

    Some "interesting" perspective on the national debt. A little bit disconcerting to say the least......

    http://www.iousathemovie.com/

  • Report this Comment On January 20, 2009, at 8:59 AM, Tony4044 wrote:

    I subscribed to the Fool yesterday. So far, it appears that it's just more VAGUE opinions that are no better than CNBC, which stinks. There are always substantial caveats with each recommendation. I'm not expecting a sure thing but I was hoping for better than the norm. I guess a subscription service targets the lowest common denominator in order to generate maximum income. MF's pitch was all business, straight-to-the-point and it specifically emphasized that they are into substance, not sexy. Holy crap, what a sexy website. Entirely too much information (all vague and/or empty). The worst part- all of the advertisement for more MF products! The basic subscription service is just like cable TV- I'm paying them money to advertise to me! Sickening. These guys actually came across as genuine guys, too. So genuine, I actually had to fight to suppress the recurring thought "if they were that good at picking stocks, why would they bother wasting their time running this business?" While they might have picked some good stocks, a cursory review of their historical recommendations shows they picked quite a few duds, too. If you don't buy equal parts of all of their suggestions, you could severly screw yourself. MF offers nothing unique. Perhaps they started the company, just like CNBC seems to have done, to steer lazy people into buying stocks that the publishers have investments in...

    Am I wrong?

  • Report this Comment On January 20, 2009, at 12:38 PM, pncampbell wrote:

    I think its pretty obvious that the era of free money is over, and its not coming back any time soon.

    Any "recovery" is going to have to be based on real wealth generating activities rather than borrowing money against assets that magically only ever appreciate ad infinitum.

  • Report this Comment On January 20, 2009, at 4:30 PM, misterrock wrote:

    Don't live in your investment!! You will drive yourself crazy. My house is my home and my investments are completely separate; that is how I view it. Don't buy over-priced property as a home, hoping it will continue to appreciate. As many people found out, that WILL come back to bite you in the end. Live in your affordable home and enjoy it, then invest in other property that won't leave you homeless if you lose it. If your investments give good returns, then upgrade your home but don't turn it into an investment.

  • Report this Comment On January 21, 2009, at 10:52 PM, Nzinga888 wrote:

    Historically, bubbles have taken as long to deflate as they do to inflate. This is true, going back as far as the Dutch Tulip bubble in the 1600s and to the South

    Sea bubble of the 1720s. Also, past bubbles have been spread much further apart, while we've had, for the first time in recorded economic history, I believe, two overlapping bubbles: Ttech and then housing. In fact, Greenspan et.al. helped to exacerbate the housing bubble in his reaction to the unwinding of the tech bubble, with his 1% interest rate free money regime.

    So, when did the housing bubble start? 1998? and when did it begin to deflate- 2007? Then expect the first possibility of a recovery in 2016.

  • Report this Comment On January 22, 2009, at 9:31 PM, trenton1ryan wrote:

    Gail, please stop plugging your website here.

    Thank you.

  • Report this Comment On January 22, 2009, at 9:32 PM, trenton1ryan wrote:

    <So, when did the housing bubble start? 1998? and when did it begin to deflate- 2007? Then expect the first possibility of a recovery in 2016.>

    That about the middle of the range I'm predicting.

  • Report this Comment On January 23, 2009, at 3:12 PM, mikeb36511 wrote:

    All articles like this are nothing but a pathetic joke designed to give fools hope . Just like CNBC had jerks on all day long to tell you to hold your tech stocks and buy more in 2000 . This will be over when they stop reporting on it night and day ,when its in no ones interst to artificially hold up the price of houses.

    Not hundreds of billions but trillions of dollars in sub prime and alt -A mortgages will reset and default in the next 4 years.. Lets keep it real and not be dreamers

  • Report this Comment On January 23, 2009, at 3:53 PM, mikeb36511 wrote:

    since we're writing articles like this, where can I find one that explains how Madoff is not really guilty

  • Report this Comment On January 23, 2009, at 4:37 PM, pbealtx wrote:

    the issues that mitigated the housing disaster may have abated, but now the housing situation is being impacted by the very recession it effected.

    no, my vote is for housing to move lock-step with the general economy, TARP or no TARP "help", and not show improvement until third quarter of 2010.

  • Report this Comment On January 23, 2009, at 5:31 PM, realEconomy wrote:

    "The housing bubble was caused by poor lending standards, lax regulation, and low interest rates. "

    This is just part of the underlying problem.

    The deeper cause is the wage-to-salary imbalance that has been carefully orchestrated by the Federal Reserve Banking Corp since the 1973 recession.

    The minimum wage was $5,000./year, and the highest single salary was $300,000./year in 1973, in the USA.

    During these 35 years, the top earners have added 4 zeros to their salaries, while the minimum wage workers have not received even a single additional zero.

    This was due to Volker and Greenspan threatening US employers, every few months, that if they increased wages, the 'fed' would increase interest rates.

    Wages were called 'inflation', the excesses at the top were ignored.

    This created the inbalance.

    It's no wonder that the banksters are being refered to, coast to coast, as a gang of highly trained idiots, controlled by dangerous psychopaths at the top.

    If the congress really wanted to restore balance and viability to the economy, they would increase the minimum wage to $45/hour (or more) and cap the top appropriately, where a 99.9% tax would kick in...with thoughtful adjustment and scrutiny of the plan, until balance is restored.

    What could have been a friendly and mutually prosperous system of international trade has deteriorated into an ugly ideology of 'globalism' that embraces slavery, and persues a vicious twisting of logic.

    Stay happy, fellow fools

  • Report this Comment On January 23, 2009, at 9:10 PM, RORZALLI wrote:

    I was told that fannie and freddie are going to start charging an extra 100-200 basis pts. if you refi with cash out. So even though rates are low it isn't going to matter if you want to take some cash out with your refi. Anybody know anything about this?

  • Report this Comment On January 23, 2009, at 10:03 PM, needsadime wrote:

    <i>the issues that mitigated the housing disaster may have abated</i>

    If you mean "created" and not "mitigated", then they have not. we're only about half way through the housing defaults. See http://www.newyorkfed.org/regional/subprime.html

    This is one of the most irresponsible articles I've seen from the Fool yet.

  • Report this Comment On January 23, 2009, at 11:04 PM, trenton1ryan wrote:

    <I'm not plugging anything, my signature is what it is...>

    Your signature-as you call it-includes (and therefore plugs) a website.

    Enough said.

  • Report this Comment On January 24, 2009, at 5:26 AM, venkytalks wrote:

    I disagree with many commentators here. It is a good time to take a loan and buy a house - WHICH YOU NEED - and is within your means.

    Interest rates are low and likely to remain so for quite a while.

    One does not buy a house for its investment value. How much it appreciates or depreciates is irrelevant when one is living in it and cant sell it.

    Investors in real estate will probably enter in the market 10 years from now.

  • Report this Comment On January 24, 2009, at 11:31 AM, brightiside wrote:

    There is no doubt our economy is in trouble, but if no one ever starts to think positively, nothing posistive will ever come of it. Do we really believe that housing prices will never stabilize and start to turn up? Do we really believe that our economy will forever stay in a down turn and never recover? Don't we still want to keep moving forward in our lives and striving for a better and more comfortable life style? Of course, that's what we all want, at least I do. There is no better investment that buying a home. Now is the perfect time to do just that - low prices, low interest rates and a ton of supply to pick from Those who wait are surely going to miss an opportunity of a lifetime, when the market turns it is going to be massive and quick. There is a lot of pent up demand out there and home prices will begin to tick up quite rapidly. If you want and need a home, now is the time to buy. Home prices will stabilize sooner rather than later and then begin to increase in value. We've had to learn the hard way never to let this happen again, so don't bet that home prices once they start to increase in value will ever come down again - at least not in our lifetime. Housing is crucial to a strong and thriving economy and will continue to be a top priority in our government's mind and policies to be sure.

    This forecosure mess is going to be solved, it has to - there is no choice, and then house prices will start going up. Home ownership is a good thing, and the equity that the homeowner has built into their home is really nice security in a normal stable economy, which is coming - maybe not today or tomorrow, but it is coming.

  • Report this Comment On January 24, 2009, at 12:07 PM, weownthenight wrote:

    Several things:

    (1) Housing cycles according to Jake Bernstein are 10-12 yeaer events. This last cycle exceeded the maximum by 2 years

    (2) We are in a 70-80 year super cycle which, if it approximates the end of the last super cycle, we could be looking at 2012-15 before the end of this downturn comes to pass. Given the willingness of this moron president to repeat the mistakes of Roosevelt, we could exceed the length and depth of 70+ years ago

    (3) The same idiots that said there wasn't any problem with FNM & FRE have vowed to continue down the same road that brought us here. Which of you are willing to buy loans packaged by these two corrupt democrat controlled companies. No investors, no money, no money no home loans - except for the most qualified. And this of course means home starts will be predicated on pre-sales which naturally will mean lower sales. And don't forget there will be a whole slew of baby boomers retiring and downsizing.

    Economies turn around the fastest as is their wont when idiot elitists who have never worked a day in the real world stay out of the picture. FDR and his socialist policies did not turn around the economy, a cataclysmic event did - WW11.

    The time to buy is when the housing sector posts a double bottom.

  • Report this Comment On January 25, 2009, at 7:27 AM, FRINEDOFFOXY wrote:

    The housing market will recover, be it 2009 (unlikely)or 2012 (likely earlier than). There are tons of theories backed by statistics to support arguments for recovery. Some argue that the housing industry is already recovering. I have a practical method of discovering when the houing industry is truly on the way back. That is watch Toll Brothers. When they start to move, the worm has turned. Toll Brothers concentrates on the high end of the housing market. That is where buyers either have the money or can get it. When Toll Brothers starts to recover other builders won't be too far behind. Keep your eye on that ticker and it will tell you when the housing market is on the way back.

  • Report this Comment On January 26, 2009, at 5:57 PM, twspt wrote:

    Interesting article, but a little off on some of the facts. For instance, I'm curious as to how ARMs will pay down more principle than, say, a 30 year fix rate loan. ARMs come with adjustable rate caps, and, on the low side, most are set to correspond with the initial (non-teaser)rate. In other words, they are already as low as it is going to get. Further, all the interest rate does is set the monthly payment. It does not affect the rate at which princple is paid down.

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 812236, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 5/27/2012 5:04:37 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Today's Market

updated 1 day ago Sponsored by:
DOW 12,454.83 -74.92 -0.60%
S&P 500 1,317.82 -2.86 -0.22%
NASD 2,837.53 -1.85 -0.07%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

5/25/2012 4:00 PM
PHM $9.33 Down -0.07 -0.74%
PulteGroup, Inc. CAPS Rating: **
UPS $74.94 Down -0.24 -0.32%
United Parcel Serv… CAPS Rating: ****
WY $19.77 Down -0.14 -0.70%
Weyerhaeuser Compa… CAPS Rating: ****
MSFT $29.06 Down -0.01 -0.03%
Microsoft Corp CAPS Rating: ****
ADBE $31.60 Up +0.06 +0.19%
Adobe Systems CAPS Rating: ***
CX $5.47 Down +0.00 +0.00%
Cemex CAPS Rating: ***
FDX $89.28 Down -0.74 -0.82%
FedEx CAPS Rating: ****

Advertisement