Great set of charts from Visualizing Economics, showing the 2000-06 period, the 2007-11 collapse, and the c0ombination of the two.

My one beef is with the phrase Housing Bubble. As the charts show, the bubble was very specifically limited to a handful of regions. Nationally, we had a Housing boom & bust — but the “bubble” was in Credit. This was thanks to Greenspan’s ultra-low rates, the abdication of lending standards, that  were driven by the demand to feed the Wall Street securitization machine.

Anyhow, here is what the price changes look like mapped out:

click for larger map

Category: Credit, Real Estate

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

8 Responses to “Mapping the US Credit/Housing Bubble”

  1. Petey Wheatstraw says:

    Michigan seems to:

    a) be getting its ass kicked, and;

    b) leading the nation in adjusting prices to the new reality.

    Keeping in mind that wages for the vast majority of the working class (the bottom 98% to 99%) have been flat to declining, I expect more purple states should the map be redrawn in a year, or so.

    I also don’t think we’re after the crash, yet. It’s in process (if it wasn’t, we’d be seeing a much faster sell-off of the housing inventory).

    That said, a credit economy requires future income gains for economic growth, generally. That won’t happen, organically.

  2. [...] Posted on April 27, 2011 by HOMEva Most policy makers think this is true unfortunately. Today’s best visual comes from Barry Ritholz’s post on mapping the US Credit/Housing bubble. If you look at [...]

  3. BennyProfane says:

    Good evidence against the “jobs will bring back housing” argument. Job growth has been flat to slightly negative during the same period. It was all about easy money, even if the borrower didn’t have a job – or lied about it.

  4. BusSchDean says:

    Spoke with someone in Michigan just the past weekend. They were going to show a house to a potential buyer – modest, but livable. The price? $10K!

  5. cognos says:

    The 10-yr price colors would be more interesting if -20% to +20% was 1 color.

    A 0 to +40% price move in 10-yrs spans the long-term natural rate (+4%) and v v low rate of 0%.

    IF housing is flat on 10-yrs… then inflation is v v low.

  6. [...] Barry Ritholtz’s economics blog, there’s a very illustrative set of charts (courtesy of Visualizing Economics) that shows [...]

  7. willid3 says:

    appears that the entire housing ‘boom’ was driven by easy credit. cause if you look at jobs and incomes for that same time period, you will see that they were either barely growing (jobs) at best, and incomes were in reverse, which tends to make one think that jobs weren’t really growing. and that easy credit was a creation of the banks and wall street who desperately needed it, or there would have been barely any income for them to ….

  8. DMR says:

    Interestingly: The 4 “bubble” states were also the ones that gave us the hanging chad (FL), tax referendums (CA), birthers (AZ), and legalized prostitution (NV).

    Maybe the credit bubble just happened to be the thing that came along. These folks had plenty of crazy-tinder to light even without it.