oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments


Well, I'm glad you've come around to my argument that both parties were to blame. As for Bush, I said the WH wanted to take the foot off the gas. And it's true as far back as April 2005:

" “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05).

Now, note that the WH still wants to expand ownership. That's bad. But they clearly see things are heading for trouble.

fixie guy

32 chip Says: "Fixie, some errors in that piece of yours but to focus on one: your claim that successive presidents adhered to a ‘markets fix all’ approach." Your post was actually two different topics. On the one above, Google "Brooksley Born". Clinton killed any hope of regulating over the counter derivatives, without which this bubble couldn't have happened (or at least not in the form it took.) He may have been a social liberal but he was a market conservative. The politics south are so polarized many ignore Willie had his own bubble; Dotcom. Instead he's credited with governing a period of prosperity. Re: the WSJ bit, they're hardly the most objective source when it comes to fiscal regulatory topics and that mess is a perfect example, starting the sentences with 'subprime' and then tacking on a slew of… Read more »


"Word straight from God, folks, get in the market NOW."

Right, well, if the imaginary spaceman god-on-a-stick says so, I'll get right on that, shall I?


Not so good sales outside of metro Vancouver. http://fishyre.blogspot.com


A friend of mine had come to Vancouver from my old country to buy a condo. I explained him the situation and he asked me to talk to his realtor who was pushing them to buy. During our arguments he tried to play the Chinese card; what a blunder; he said 300,000,000 chinese want to invest in vancouver. beleive me, I am not joking. he also mentiond the line up in pre-sale in Burnaby.

Any way, my friend decided to put off his purchase for a while.


Numbers to warm a bear's heart


Maybe we should all leave Vancouver and look outside, better wait for the final radioactive numbers before we look on the coast though!

CRASH JPMorgan-Chase

@arbit: Typical BS Canadian comment. Let someone else do it you are saying. You lazy bugger 😉


@patriotz: "The theory that Krugman “promoted” the bubble was invented after the bust."

That is obviously not true, since you can see Krugman's words in Internet archives yourself. (I actually remember various articles from 2002-2003 promoting the theory about the "need" to create a housing bubble to fix the economy).

But yes, Krugman eventually changed his mind and criticized the bubble. Krugman's opinions, however, were not the main point of my post. All I am saying is that it was the mainstream "wisdom" that the nasdaq bubble (and post 9/11 crisis) must be cleaned up by low interest rates and loose lending.


East Van Realtor … band handle! Do you advertise your small penis too!

Sucks to be you

Patiently Waiting

I was talking to the Rev at the Church my relatives go to (I'm not religious myself) at a social function.

Anyhow, conversation turned to the rectory, which is quite a nice house. The church rents it out on the market these days instead of housing the Rev's family there. This is not unusual at all, but I asked whether it was because of privacy and being to get away from work (would be understandable).

That wasn't it. The reason is the Church prefers its Ministers to buy their own home so they will have equity when they retire. Word straight from God, folks, get in the market NOW.

lol cats

@East Van Realtor:

without your bitterness winning would not be as sweet


@bubbly: Actually, the housing bubble was not an accident. The Housing bubble was created intentionally. Krugmam said this in 2002 for NYT: Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble. That of course was not "promoting" the bubble, any more than saying "Harper needs to be re-elected" is promoting Harper's re-election. The fact is that Krugman was one of the earliest public figures to call the US housing bubble and the fact is also that Krugman was attacked for it by the bubble deniers at that time. The theory that Krugman "promoted" the bubble was invented after the bust. You will see no mention of this theory during the bubble itself, not even from Krugman detractors like Mish. Go ahead and look. Interestingly, Mish mentioned Krugman only once in 2005, supporting the latter's contention that… Read more »


On boy, looking forward to tonight's numbers! I have a feeling that they are going to be great! May the RE party continue!

Patiently Waiting

@Emigrant: Does the big increase in the category "net non-permanent residents" mean more people are overseas? If so, I suggest its more to find work than long-term retirement vacations.

I wonder how recent Stats Can figures are for international migration in Canada. Would it show we're losing a lot of working age people to other countries and other provinces? Anecdotally, I've seen a lot of that in the last couple years.


The sudden increase in civil unrest around the world makes me wonder if Goldman Sachs has figured out how to securitize it.


Here's for anyone who thinks immigration will save us…
That's a whopping 57% drop in international migrants from last year!

Another 0.0% growth for BC's population, soon to be negative as our 8.8% unemployment rate keeps a climbing…

East Van Realtor

@4444 4444 4444 4444:

Yes ,even the idiots from Dunbar have stopped buying here in Vancouver east.

On my street ( grandview area) there are 3 heritage large homes that would have been snapped up buy rich kids (with mom and dad's help)in days, are now getting stale.

The easy / stupid money is drying up.



The FACT is that the Republicans controlled the House, Senate and White House from January 2003 to January 2007. Now that doesn't excuse Dodd or any other Democrat for cheerleading RE, but the Republicans had full control over the USG over that period and they must be held fully responsible for everything the USG had jurisdiction over during that period.

As for Bush supposedly wanting to reign in F/F, I suggest you watch this video. Pay particular attention around 4:15



@Best place on meth:

You're right, Bush et al weren't applying the brakes, though they did want to take the foot off the gas with regards to Fannie and Freddie. I'm just saying if you're going to blame the politicos, you have to look at the guys who thought it was a swell idea to throw away risk controls so people with no or little income could own a home. And you just have to listen to Frank and Dodd as they presided over House and Senate sessions on housing to see how much they enjoyed "rolling the dice," as Frank famously said.


@fixie guy: Fixie, some errors in that piece of yours but to focus on one: your claim that successive presidents adhered to a 'markets fix all' approach. "When Fannie and Freddie were finally taken over by the government in 2008, more than 10 million subprime and other weak loans were either on their books or were in mortgage-backed securities they had guaranteed. An additional 4.5 million were guaranteed by the FHA and sold through Ginnie Mae before 2008, and a further 2.5 million loans were made under the rubric of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), which required insured banks to provide mortgage credit to home buyers who were at or below 80% of median income." What this means is: "Thus, almost two-thirds of all the bad mortgages in our financial system, many of which are now defaulting at unprecedented rates,… Read more »


@Oh danny boy, irish eyes are:

Wow, that's grim. To think that once upon a time they were the jewel of Europe attracting every tech company around. The only thing saving Canada's bacon are natural resources, without them we would be right screwed.


This buyers strike has struck a nerve in Australia although this guy is claiming responsibility for the property slump we've been experiencing since May 2010. 🙂


The idea of a buyers strike is pretty irrelevant except for the publicity it brings to the bubble. We rent for the simple fact that when you run the numbers it's way cheaper to rent.

We're going to be moving in the next month or so and based on the properties we're looking at we'll end up renting something worth $800,000+ for $450/week. Converted into a price/monthly rent ratio that's 410 and I haven't even added the stamp duty and legal fees into the purchase price.

4444 4444 4444 4444

Higher/Lower interests rates not important, crash can ,and, will occur regardless.

Higher rates would speed trip to the bottom.
Lower rates will just prolong correction time.

April 4 soon, listings even in choice Chinese locations are starting to pile up pretty good.

Tic toc tic toc,

Free ride is over


@GR Guy: Actually, the housing bubble was not an accident. The Housing bubble was created intentionally.

Krugmam said this in 2002 for NYT:

Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble.

and this:

During phases of weak growth there are always those who say that lower interest rates will not help. They overlook the fact that low interest rates act through several channels. For instance, more housing is built, which expands the building sector. You must ask the opposite question: why in the world shouldn’t you lower interest rates?

The (central) banksters knew very well what they were doing. For them, there really was no downside. They made money on the way up and forced the taxpayer to foot the bill on the way down.

Read more about Krugman promoting the housing bubble here:

Patiently Waiting