RSS

It's time to take back The American Dream

March 8, 2010

Social Mood Swings

Economically-speaking, inexpensive housing is a wonderful thing.

Economically-speaking, a large percentage of our population would be much better off renting.

Government programs like FHA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, HAMP, Tax-Credits, etc, were all designed with the goal of making homeownership more attainable…meaning that more people can now attain a limited supply of homes.  Increased demand leads to higher prices…meaning these programs just made housing less attainable. Economically-speaking, we’d be better off if they never existed in the first place.

It sounds almost un-American to say such things…and that’s a big part of the problem.

Even while acknowledging that high home prices actually harm the economy, Yale economics professor Robert Shiller wrote a piece in The New York Times, making a case that the Government should continue supporting the programs that cause them.  He specifically mentions the F.H.A., Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac, but all supporting programs were implied.

His reasons for supporting Government actions were basically:

  1. Home prices would fall more if the programs ended
  2. “The American Dream” is essential to our “sense of national identity”

From the article:

…But what is the long-term justification for putting taxpayers on the line to subsidize homeownership? Is this nothing more than a sacred cow in American society — a political necessity because so many voters own homes and are mindful of their resale value?

In fact, there is much more to the history of subsidizing housing. While the crisis in the housing market shows that our current approach is far from perfect, there is a certain wisdom behind it, related not only to economic stimulus but also to the preservation of a sense of national identity. It’s important to remember this as we consider re-engineering our institutions as the crisis ebbs.

This time, the best answer isn’t found in traditional economics but rather in American culture: a long-standing feeling that owning homes in healthy communities is connected to individual liberties that embody our national identity. Historically, homeownership has been associated with freedom, while renting — often in tenements or mill villages — has been linked to the oppression of a landlord.

In his classic 1985 book, “Crabgrass Frontier,” Kenneth T. Jackson of Columbia University delineated the complex train of thought that over the last two centuries has produced the American belief that homeownership encourages pride and good citizenship and, ultimately, preservation of liberty. These attitudes are enduring.

Back in 1899, in “The Theory of the Leisure Class,” Thorstein Veblen described homeownership, particularly of large and expensive dwellings, as “conspicuous consumption.” By that, he meant that it was undertaken substantially for the purpose of impressing others by showing the amount of money one can afford to waste on space one doesn’t need.

What is specifically American here — though it’s increasingly seen in other countries, too — may be the modern sense of equal citizenship, engendered by the illusion that we can sustain conspicuous housing consumption even among a majority of the people.

In short, this all has a great deal to do with culture, and little to do with financial wisdom.

On home prices, Shiller writes:

If many of these homes needed to be converted to rental units, home prices might well drop.

The Emperor’s clothes are beautiful indeed.

Though the policies are economically insane, they are worth the cost in order to perpetuate “a long-standing feeling that owning homes in healthy communities is connected to individual liberties that embody our national identity.”

In other words, the concept of “The American Dream of Homeownership” is worth spending trillions to uphold because it is a central to our culture.

Really?

Is our National Identity really defined by lust for a material good?

Consider the alternatives…

Americans: Smart and Hard-Working

Americans: Gracious and Strong

Americans: Helping Each Other

Americans: Character and Perserverance

No, we’re Americans: People who want to Buy Houses

How twisted and materialistic have we become as a culture to openly define ourselves by something we own?

As a renter, I am offended.  As a citizen and a taxpayer, I am outraged.

Shiller suggests that The American Dream is too sacred…that our fragile national ego would collapse if its credibility were threatened.  But, he’s wrong.  The jig is up and the public knows it.  In fact, they are asking for it, desperately wanting to find some financial purity after a decade of decadence. Social mood is shifting.

Shiller mistakenly suggests that home prices are worth propping up.  But the problem isn’t that home prices are falling, it’s that home prices are still too high. Falling prices and foreclosures aren’t the problems, but the solutions, not the illness, but the cure.

The time has come to shout out that the Emperor has no clothes: The American Dream is simply a marketing campaign, a gimmick, perpetuated by industry groups and their lobbyists.  That a home can define one’s success or national identity is simply a symbollic, mutually-shared illusion.

Consider the actual, original American Dream by James Truslow Adams:

“that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.”

Somewhere along the line, corporate marketing departments changed The American Dream to exactly “high wages and motor cars (houses)”.

Somewhere, our heros changed from men-of-character to men-with-credit-cards.

Now, the false American Dream is becoming an American Nightmare.  Many of our friends, neighbors, and family members are in their darkest hours and being forced to re-examine their paths and priorities.  One-by-one, they are emerging from the darkness and rebuilding lives to be recognized by what they are, not what they have.  Their stories are spreading, giving hope and courage to others who are struggling financially.

Social movements are born from crisis such as this. The opportunity is here to redefine American Culture.

It’s time to take back The American Dream.

, , , , , ,

About Greg Fielding

I am a longtime real estate agent who has pretty much seen it all during the housing boom as bust. With experience in selling high-end property and low-end foreclosures, raw land, short sales, development work, apartment buildings, and working with investors, I bring a well-rounded perspective to my work. I cover most of Northern Alameda County and Western Contra Costa county and I live in Danville with my three kids. You can reach me at gregpfielding@gmail.com or call me at 925-212-2908

View all posts by Greg Fielding

6 Comments on “It's time to take back The American Dream”

  1. Keith Says:

    This article is right on!

  2. ryan Says:

    Greg, as a taxpayer, I share your outrage. I think that government programs like FHA can serve a useful purpose if used appropriately. The reason is that government makes a good backstop for minimum standards. The problem is allowing them to get out of hand. For example, having FHA backed loans tends to create a bottom, which the market will tend not to fall too far below when FHA loans don’t create the market. By setting amonetary limit on FHA loans that accurately reflects the population we are trying to serve, presumably moderate incomes (those that are within 10% of median income in a given area), the government effectively creates the bottom of the barrel. The problem arises when we raise the FHA loan amount to effectively give loans to the bulk of those beyond the median income of a given area because then the government is pushing prices higher. Here in the Bay Area, you can get an FHA backed loan of over $729K. That is what is propping the market up. Lower the FHA amount to $250K (slightly lower than the median income in Santa Clara County), we will see housing prices fall to the appropriate level that would be more in line with income, but would still have an FHA bottom.

  3. Patrick Butterfield Says:

    Ryan,

    You are right about the FHA floor and the fact that the program has been completely bastardized. But, I’m not sure that a “backstop” is needed…especially when that backstop serves to make homes more expensive for the people it’s trying to help.

    If FHA turns an $80,000 entry-level home into a $150,000 home, who dose that help?

  4. Sacramento Joe Says:

    Hey Greg,

    I am also a renter and have been for the last 11 years for the simple fact that I never believed the “appreciation” was real. I have been pretty angry about the way renters are treated in this country and the illusion of home ownership. It should be treated as a shelter and special place for a family to flourish………not as a cold calculated commodity. I remember sitting in a marketing meeting back in 1995 and an article being read about how Fannie and Freddie were going to be expanded to provide liquidity to the masses. It sounded wrong headed and dangerous as I listened to it that very day and look how badly it has ended.

    Thanks for your insight and repositioning of an important ideology to its rightful meaning.

    And another thing….Robert Shiller has turned into a complete government shill…..how disappointing.

    Good work!

    Joe

  5. ryan Says:

    Patrick,

    I’m sure you would agree “boom and bust ” markets are not really very healthy for the economy. What is best is steady growth over time with little volitility. Both mania and panic should be regulated to prevent bubble/burst disasters. FHA backed loans create an effective short term floor. By short term, I mean 3-5 years. We can see that even now. FHA loans have been essentially propping up the market for the past 2 years.

    My problem with the floor created by the FHA is that it is not in line with moderate incomes. No family should be able to get a $750K FHA backed loan in the Bay Area. If a family makes $200K a year, then they are not moderate income and should not be able to get FHA loans. If that family make $81,000 (roughly 10% below median in Santa Clara County), the government is creating a debt slave allowing such a high limit.

    The proper use of FHA is give loans to moderate income families. Take our family making $81,000 in the Bay Area. They would qualify for a home that costs about $250,000. Of course, government loans are not the only game in town (though it may seem that way now). Private loans must be regulated to end the practices of no doc loans, Option ARMs, etc. These debt bombs create the bubble aspect of a boom and bust market, but we are taking about the value of a floor.

    The question you ask is a rather loaded question. If you are not seeking an answer that is built into the question, you are asking:
    Who would benefit from FHA loans being used in the manner I describe?
    1) Short term, buyers benefit from falling prices.
    2) Long term, the market benefits from having minimum standard that will be insured by the government creating less volitility on the bust end of the market cycle. State governments benefit from having a baseline of property taxes that can be counted on (not CA because of Prop 13, but that’s another story). Taxpayers benefit because we are not on the hook for financing $750K homes in the Bay Area.

  6. Alan Barker Says:

    The thinking of what the “American Dream” is, really is messed up. The problem is that so many people, including Government wanted people to have the American Dream without really earning it.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s