A Solution to the Housing Crisis

by Surya on August 31, 2010

Sadly, each passing day brings with it more depressing economic news. Today’s latest is that housing sales dropped 27% in July, the weakest showing in 15 years. That the housing market remains a complete disaster, common knowledge to most of us, appears to still be a secret to those in Washington. This latest news reinforces that it is time to put aside the Washington “PR fixes” and get down to real solutions that address what is both a devastating crisis for many American families and a major barrier to any economic recovery.

To properly address the housing crisis we have to first stabilize the market. We can only stabilize the housing market by first stopping the downward spiral that it is currently caught in. What downward spiral? Today, each foreclosure, auction, and new house for sale puts increasing downward pressure on prices. As home prices drop, more mortgages become “underwater”, which leads to increasing cases of homeowners walking away and more bank foreclosures. This in-turn drives home prices down even further, and the cycle continues and continues.

To date none of the DC solutions have had a prayer of addressing this core problem; they were just band-aids. Not surprisingly, these DC solutions have only succeeded in allowing our politicians to say that they’ve tried to address our housing crisis versus actually doing so.

* The first attempt at a federally run loan-modification program appears to have failed: 50% of participants have dropped out since the program started.
* The recent homebuyer tax credit only succeeded in making folks who were going to buy a home anyway buy it earlier, so they could get $7,500 from Uncle Sam. Immediately after the credit expired, a huge decrease in home sales resulted.
* Ironically, the brutal economic climate, which has allowed interest rates to stay at historic lows, is the only federal intervention that has worked in the housing market’s favor.

We must go beyond these superficial gestures to fix a problem of this size. How about some fresh thinking on the subject? That’s why I’m proposing:

Banks becoming equity partners with homeowners. Let’s explain that with an example:

Jim has a $100K mortgage from the bank for his $120K house. If the house is currently appraising for $75K, the bank would readjust Jim’s mortgage to $75K and take, say, a 20% ownership stake in the house. The result would be that Jim’s monthly payment would be substantially reduced and he becomes much less likely to “walk away” from his house. The bank has a loan which has immediately become more solid and, say, in 10 years when Jim sells his house, the bank, as a 20% equity partner, can share in the upside.
While the fine print still need to be worked out, this type of private-sector administered program actually cuts to the core of the issue and establishes the foundation for a sustainable housing market. There are other measures as well — going to a 50 year mortgage (Japan and other nations already offer them), etc., that also warrant discussion and would also help.

Washington’s failure to deal with the housing crisis represents a truism in politics and life: there are no short-term solutions to long-term problems. Sadly, short-term thinking and fixes are all Washington appears to be capable of. Housing, jobs, our national debt – these are not intractable problems, just difficult ones. Yet until we elect officials who demonstrate the capability for fresh thinking and are focused on solutions not ideology, we’ll keep getting more of the same: band-aids.

This is the first in the series “A Business Plan for America” that will outline critical public policy proposals that are free of partisan politics, ideology, and dead ideas.

  • Harshal Patel

    I think there is an important point missing:
    It doesn’t matter how low your home value is if you are unemployed.If yo do’t have a paychech you won’t be able to pay your mortgage which lead to foreclosure which will then lead to a lower in value of the overall market.

    Fixing housing won’t fix employment (no matter what home builders say)
    But fixing employement will help fix housing (less foreclosures, more people buying)

    Nothing can replace steady employment.

  • http://www.votechili.com/ Surya Yalamanchili

    Agreed. There are a number of variables here affecting housing prices, and
    like you say, I don’t think we can address all of them with a housing bill.
    There is also an oversupply of property (condos in key markets) that will be
    a drag on prices, in addition to unemployment. Walk-aways are a key issue
    that (I believe) can be addressed and so that’s why I put this forward.
    agreed that steady employment is crucial.

  • George Barnard

    I agree with many of your stated positions on economic issues, but Congress also deals with foreign policy. What are your positions regarding the war in Afghanistan, the Middle East, Iran. etc.?

  • http://www.votechili.com/ Surya Yalamanchili

    Hi George – I’m supportive of the General’s plan for a phased
    withdrawal from Afghanistan. Regarding Iran, I believe that it is
    important that we work with the EU and other nations in that region
    that stop Iran from acquiring nuclear capability. Does that help?
    Also, my general philosophy towards foreign policy is here:
    http://votechili.com/issues-security/#physical-security

  • keith coscia

    Harshal-
    I don’t think you can separate the housing crisis from unemployment so easily. When a worker loses his job in this economy, but can’t sell his home because he is (suddenly) mortgaged for more than it is worth, and he cannot relocate to a sector that better matches jobs with his skills. The housing market involuntarily polarizes people (by preventing stratification) and thus puts further strain on unemployment. It is a symbiotic relationship, to a degree.

  • Sean O

    I am a conservative long-term Republican but I really do not like Schmidt. I have decided to learn more about your philosophies to see if I should vote for you on Nov. 2.

    I find your bank example to be simplistic. I really don’t think it is worthy of a Congressman to write such ideas.

    There is nothing in today’s regulations to disallow what you are proposing in this column. Having a shared ownership with a bank would do nothing to solve the problem of houses that are underwater. It would only transfer that risk to a larger institution instead of the homeowner that may have purchased too much home to begin with. Also, if this was a commercially viable option than companies would be springing up everywhere to independently offer this service to homeowners – “We will take a partial ownership of your home and pay for part of your mortgage”.

    You seem to think that home ownership is an investment, it isn’t. It is a way to have a lower cost of living in a property than renting it. It is still ultimately a cost and not an investment that yields a return.

    50 year mortgages aren’t the answer either. Americans rarely live in the same home for 30 years let alone 50. We want the ability to buy small as a young couple, upsize when the family is growing and then downsize when we are empty nesters. Also with a divorce rate that is approximately 50 percent, we need the flexibility to downsize or rearrange after about 10 years. None of these issues are as prevalent in the Japanese society. Also, just like when car loans were extended from 4 years when I was a young man to now 6-7 years, the reality is that you remain underwater much longer. With a 50 year mortgage, you would be much more likely to be underwater on the value of your home for the first 10-20 years.

    I look forward to your response as it will be a major factor in me deciding if I vote for Schmidt, you or Johnston.

  • Bob Lewis

    I have a fear that because you are running as a Democrat you will eventually “go along to get along” with party leadership. I do like some of what you are saying, but will you stay true to your word? I don’t trust anyone any longer. The first time I voted was Kennedy/Nixon and have been dissapointed by nearly every politician since with the exception of Reagan ever since. What can you say to allay my fears.

  • Viveleroi

    Sean,
    I too am not interested in voting for Schmidt because even though several years ago I worked on her campaign, I am disgusted by the way she switched her vote for TARP after assuring us that she would vote “No”. I agree with many of your criticisms of the positions of “Chili”. While I respect his work ethic, I can’t vote for him because of his lack of experience compounded with his simplistic and unrealistic “plans” which further rely on government intrusion into markets which I am against. I also find it rather amusing that Mr. “Chili”, some 20 years my junior, remembers when things were made here in America because by the time he was in middle school, the vast majority of our manufacturing had already moved overseas.

    I took a look at his debate with rep. Schmidt and while “mean Jean” wasn’t inspiring “Chili” was big on bluster and snide attacks and short on real solutions to problems that didn’t involve more government. He spent the majority of his time pointing fingers and doing exactly what he claimed Schmidt was doing!

    Finally, Mr. “Chili”, how do you, a single solitary representative plan to change Washington all by yourself?? Visions of sending a lamb to the slaughter come to mind…

  • David

    The goverment is starting to heal the mortgage market. I think it finally will spur on the private mortgage market to come on in and stop waiting on the sidelines. I believe its doing that now by becoming tigher in its underwriting standards with Freddie, Fannie, & FHA. The credit standards are getting too tight, but that creates opporunities for private money to come in. Great example of this with the self employed borrower most of the gov’t mortgage insurers require 2 yrs tax returns inorder to qualify and as we all know 2008 was not kind to the S/E’d.(2009 a little better) A huge number of them are able qualify for a refi even if they may have a ton of equity and a large amount of liquid assets. With QE2 in place to lower fixed income rates even more it should create the perfect opporunity for those who know the mortgage market best to come on in and the scared 2.5% treasury bond holder to seek real value. The FED has pumped up all other assets to the point where they look risky why not take a chance on a SE borrower with 20% equity in this depressed housing market. And by the way they will pay you well for it.

  • David

    We won’t have steady employment til the housing sector comes back. Fix the housing mess you fix employment. Housing was & is a big part of gdp so a healthly housing market will in itself. But what it was to the new home owner back in 2000 to 2006 was piece of mind he had equity (liquid) most of them never really had ever.@ least not in 10K,20K,50K, 100K,etc. type of cash. If he got in financial trouble no problem cash out refi and if he wasn’t in trouble he had 100K in the house bank so I can feel free to live life in a more pronouced way. Well that now reversed he not rich and if your in trouble you can’t do a cash out refi and BK is the not much of an option either anymore. That truly is the damage the wealth effect and without it no
    real improvement in employment. (I apoligize for my writing only have one contact in.)

  • Whburns

    this is an insult. this is no solution . first of all the banks and wall street have proven that they are not responsible lenders or servicers and the notion that you can securitize mortgages as they have is not a good idea. we need to take the mortgage business out of the hands of these irresponsible idiots ( crooks is a more accurate characterization ] . consumers need to take control of the most important investment that the vast vast majority of them will ever make. we will perish before nightfall if we continue to let crooks and idiots in control of this market. i am a scotch presbyterian economist who is fed up. i have a much saner and a more secure solution

blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: