So what did you want the government to do, nothing? Yes, as a matter of fact, that would have been the best course of action for it to take. If we really believe in free markets (a freedom principle) and the economics of supply and demand, then the role of government is too help protect consumers from fraud (a criminal act with criminal intent) and monopolies (manipulation of markets to gain control and prevent freedom within the market), and such acts for fairness sake, but not to dictate which businesses we can have and how we should run them or who we can and can’t deal with. It is when governments try to intervene on the belief that they can best determine how to ‘create’ fairness that we all lose.
This is called social engineering and it has never worked well if it has ever worked at all. In any instance I can think of, it comes down to taking away from one to give to another. It is providing subsidies for a favored group at the expense of a less favored group, and it is always the party in power that is making the decision of which group to favor. This is not equality this is theft, and it is the worst injustice of all. Two wrongs do not make a right. Just because your group or cause may be winning the ‘equality equation’ one minute is no guarantee that it will the next. Welcome to the roots of Socialism and Communism. Ayn Rand, F.A. Hayek, George Orwell, and many others have tried to warn and persuade against these evils.
So if the government would have done nothing, the market would have worked itself out and life would have gotten back to normal a lot sooner than it did. Remember the words about supply and demand. Basic economics says that when a seller and a buyer have the same price in mind, a transaction takes place. If there is a difference in the desired price each is willing to accept then no transaction takes place…that is until they come to an agreed price. Of course, if a seller’s price is less than what a buyer is willing to pay or if a buyer’s price is higher than the seller is expecting a transaction will also occur with a happier than expected outcome for one of the participants.
If prices rise too far, buyers quit buying or buy less than they normally would until either their situation changes or prices fall back to a level they are willing to accept. This is where the true power of the market and more importantly the people’s power lie…as consumers. If a consumer decides that the price is too high she can just turn away, and with the markets that America has developed, they can look elsewhere. We as consumers have the power of alternatives and options, another great benefit from having free markets…choice.
So what happens in a bankruptcy? The prices fall to clear inventory. How far the prices fall is determined by the market and the need to move that inventory to meet the demands of the defunct business. Again the market place determines a fair price by matching the seller with the buyer at a price both can live with. In the case of stocks, the price will fall to some level where a buyer will believe that he can find value in the purchase. Look at the recent Circuit City bankruptcy as an example. They have invited in the liquidators who will sale all remaining inventory (and then some) at liquidation prices. First they will move all prices back up to full retail and then start marking off a certain percentage to make the sale. A few weeks pass and they will raise the percentage off to sell a little more. A few more weeks and a few more percentages, until most all the inventory has been sold off by having a willing buyer and a willing seller at an agreed upon price. The good stuff will go first at the highest prices and the lesser stuff will go as their fair price is eventually reached. It is natural, and it is how real markets work.
So what can we compare this to today? There are two common elements that exist today that were common back then. First is an overinflated market full of speculators and hype that has easy access to excessive credit for an overleveraged play. If anybody could not see the comparison to Real Estate investing then you shouldn’t be allowed to vote because you just aren’t paying enough attention to the world around you.
Real estate has been a huge hit sense someone went to the trouble of trying to convince everyone that they should have some. A chicken in every pot, a car in every garage, and home ownership, the American dream, who could ask for anything more?
Real estate promised equity and wealth, and a place of status. It was incentivized and subsidized by tax breaks and government programs. Best of all you could finance 80%, then 90%, then 100% with no money down. They even had loans that would give you 120% of the homes “value”. At the pinnacle of it all you could even find loans where you never had to pay back the principle, just pay the interest and everything would be fine. After all the prices were going up and up and up and they aren’t building any more land you know.
Everywhere you turned there was a class or a course on how to buy real estate with no money down, or how to flip a home, or buy a foreclosure, or become a landlord. Real estate gurus came and went as fast as you could change the channel on the late night infomercials. All you had to do was take a look around and you could see someone that had made a mint in real estate, why even the Governor of California made his millions in real estate so why shouldn’t we.
And even if it wasn’t to make us rich by becoming the next Donald Trump we could at least be better off. We have always been told that owning your own home was a good and smart investment. Look at the equity your building. You have ownership of something and they can’t take that away from you. Why pay someone else when you can be paying yourself? (That is good advice when applied in a practical matter).
So the equity you built is caused by inflation and not by an increase in value, and owning your own home allows you to put holes in the walls where you want to and repaint any color you so choose without checking with a landlord first, and owning your own home means you can do with it whatever you want to as long as what you want to do is consistent with existing zoning laws and property covenants and building permits, and owning your home means no one can take that away from you unless you have a mortgage and miss a payment or run up against hard times and can’t pay your property taxes, but hey it is your home.
In the past, you could only borrow an amount that would have your monthly payment no greater than 25% of one wage earners income and that was probably take home pay at that. Recently it seems that you could qualify to finance an amount that would take 80% of your take home pay. (The remaining amount could pay for cable and you could feed yourself with food stamps).
Click here to see the new Great Depression Part 3 or here to go to Part 1.
This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.
No comments:
Post a Comment