The big short, the housing bubble and the financial crisis(cepr.net)
cepr.net
The big short, the housing bubble and the financial crisis
http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/the-big-short-the-housing-bubble-and-the-financial-crisis
6 comments
Working cached link: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?sourceid=chrome...
On this topic, I always like to point to this illustration from The New York Times:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2005/06/15/business/arm3...
Notice the date: 2005. That was around the time I started asking around, "How can I short the housing market?"
I felt relieved reading The Big Short because it revealed that there wasn't any way to do so at the time, especially for a little schmuck like me. And even the guy who eventually figured out how to do it, Michael Burry, ended up fantastically wealthy and, according to Michael Lewis, deeply embittered.
On this article, I agree that trying to treat the Housing Bubble and Financial Crisis as independent events seems disingenuous. (Are there really serious people trying to do this?)
Nevertheless, I question this claim:
We are supposed to feel good about this because it saved us from a Second Great Depression. But there was nothing about the collapse of these banks which would have condemned us to a decade of double-digit unemployment.
I abhor Wall St. and the industrial-finance complex it has created almost as much as any Teapartier or Wall-Street-Occupier. But I don't understand the scenario where those firms collapse and civilization as I know isn't put in, if not serious peril, then unnecessary peril.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2005/06/15/business/arm3...
Notice the date: 2005. That was around the time I started asking around, "How can I short the housing market?"
I felt relieved reading The Big Short because it revealed that there wasn't any way to do so at the time, especially for a little schmuck like me. And even the guy who eventually figured out how to do it, Michael Burry, ended up fantastically wealthy and, according to Michael Lewis, deeply embittered.
On this article, I agree that trying to treat the Housing Bubble and Financial Crisis as independent events seems disingenuous. (Are there really serious people trying to do this?)
Nevertheless, I question this claim:
We are supposed to feel good about this because it saved us from a Second Great Depression. But there was nothing about the collapse of these banks which would have condemned us to a decade of double-digit unemployment.
I abhor Wall St. and the industrial-finance complex it has created almost as much as any Teapartier or Wall-Street-Occupier. But I don't understand the scenario where those firms collapse and civilization as I know isn't put in, if not serious peril, then unnecessary peril.
If those giants were allowed to fall, there would be a vacuum that will be filled faster than we would even notice. The only real problem is if the collapse causes enough uncertainty that people stop spending money, but really, are you more confident now that the giants are being propped up than you would be if they were replaced?
"8 trillion (@ 60 percent of GDP) in ephemeral housing equity"
"loss of 8 trillion in housing wealth"
Is this true?
How do you create 8 trillion in wealth?
If it was "lost" then who has the 8 trillion now?
"loss of 8 trillion in housing wealth"
Is this true?
How do you create 8 trillion in wealth?
If it was "lost" then who has the 8 trillion now?