Search Smart Spending:

Is home equity falling? 'Maybe, maybe not'

Posted Mar 06 2008, 11:32 AM by Karen Datko
Rating:

Here are some stunning facts: The total value of homes owned in the U.S. has increased from $834 billion to $5.1 trillion, in inflation-adjusted dollars, since 1952. In the same time, home equity -- the portion people have paid off -- has increased from $672 billion to more than $2.5 trillion.

That sounds like great news. But it also means the average equity people have in their homes dropped from 80% of the home's value in those Howdy Doody days to a record low of 50.4%.

This information comes from Michael Rizzo, senior economist at the American Institute for Economic Research. "In short, the value of homes has increased greatly since 1952, but mortgage debt has increased even more," Rizzo writes at the institute's Web site.

So is this good news or bad news? Well, it all depends. In a post at his personal blog, The Unbroken Window, Rizzo asks, "Is home equity falling?" and answers, "Maybe, maybe not."

We contacted Rizzo with a couple of questions, and here's what he had to say: "I just wanted to point out that 60 years ago, homeowners (in aggregate) owned a large percentage of a small pie and while homeowners' share of the pie today is much smaller (leverage making up nearly half of housing values), the pie is substantially larger. Would you rather own 80% of $800 or so billion or 50% of $5 trillion? The point is to get people thinking."

Why the big dollar increases since 1952? The value of housing has gone up, the population is growing, and more of those people own houses, Rizzo writes in the AIER post.

Why is the equity percentage at a record low? "This largely reflects increased mortgage borrowing by homeowners, who have taken on larger debt to buy their homes and increasingly spent down their equity via home-equity loans," Rizzo writes.

Not everyone has mortgage debt. In fact, a third of homeowners own their homes free and clear. However, one in 10 owe more on their homes than the houses are worth, Rizzo says. 

Comments

 

So what does this prove? That we have access to more money through credit but not more access to sense? Debt is not wealth. Savings is wealth. Financial security and independence does not come without wealth. Period.

We are definitely worse off.

I believe the 50% current equity would be lower if this was truely a free market society. The Fed Chairman rate reductions and current Administration and Congress loan limit guarantee increases and coercing of lenders to use creative accounting will cause high inflation and artificially high home prices in markets where prices are unrealistic (specifically CA, NY, FL..). With home prices in these areas high, I would suspect this causes a greater inflation in other areas of the country. Few states are big winners - inflated home prices, higher (non/skilled) wages, subsidized farming, natural disaster funds...Personally, I would prefer the choice to buy my products at a truely competitive price. Opaque global government fiscal, monetary and business policies don't allow most people to get a factual picture of any/all countries financial policies; however, I think if they were as transparent as most corporate reports, I still wouldn't get a clear picture.      

Greed is evil.

The currency in this country as well as around the world is based on fiat curency, meaning it is not backed by anything but paper and worthless promises. We are looking at a peroid of a over 50 years, do we have any idea what currency is actually now worth. How can you make such as careless comparison of housing values from that time to now. I believe people hear things like this and actually don't understand how all this debt , actually effects them on a long term basis.

In reality, none of this is that surprising. The changes since 1952 have been huge. We have encouraged the growth of suburbia (own) vs cities (some rent). Folks moved a lot, and with the 30 year mortgage they would buy a new house and start a new mortgage with each move, etc. I think that comparisons to 1952 have some anecdotal value but are not very useful. A comparison to the 90s would be more interesting, because society has not changed that much since. What has changed is the financial industry, which as of late offered almost free money and pushed the use of home equity as a means of paying off other debt and buying goodies.

Geesh, if 1/3rd of the population has no mortgage, that likely leaves another 1/3rd of the population with a mortgage with a healthy debt/equity ration and another 1/3rd  that will likely have to struggle and are vulnerable to walking away from the home they owe more than it is worth. Attorneys, realtors, taxes and other closing costs will easily place many folks bringing money to the closing in order to sell their home. I think home values could be 30-40% lower than the 2005/2006 peak by 2010/2011, and in some distress sales 75% lower. This should take 4-5 years to work through as long as the politicos stay out of the way, if the politicos interfere it may be more than a decade before housing recovers. I think we are closer to the beginning of the housing mess than the middle of it for most of the US. Time for belt tightening for our government, the politicos need to compete on whom can spend less than see whom gets to spend more of our tax dollars and future. Enjoy the ride down. jim in vermont

Why?  Its obvious.

We tax savings both with the taxes that you see, inflation-the hidden tax, and then social benefit tax.  Social benifit tax is probably not a correct term but, if you have savings, you are not eligable for student aid, health care, long term care and if you have savings you have to have insurance-no one sues a debter.

AND WE WONDER WHY THERE IS SOOO MUCH DEBT AND SO LITTLE SAVINGS-EQUITY.

Never underestimate the power of other people's money. Thirteen years ago I bought my first condo, and by now I could have paid it off and had 100%  equity in it. But I have traded up twice since then, and only have a little less than 50% equity in  my new house ( thanks to the drop in recent prices).  I still have more than doubled the dollar amount of equity in my home, which I could have never saved over the same thirteen years! While being debt free and financially independent would be spectacular, I think things have turned out o.k. for some of us who don't share that same view.

Is there any correlation between the increased value in homes and lack of equity? Taking a simple approach, the housing boom is the reason why people are paying ridiculous prices for houses and undertaking large debts. Perhaps if everything was increased as a ratio our paycheques would be taking care of this problem. There is no stability because of this whole inbalance.

This number is old, Q4 of last year equity dropped to 47%

Send a Comment

Comments must be directly related to the blog entry. Comments with offensive language will be deleted. Your e-mail address won't be displayed.

(please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):