OT---Dean, did you see Feldstein's op-ed in the Post? ("I believe the federal government should create a firewall to prevent too great a fall in housing prices.")

I almost get the feeling that the JC is trying to convince tenants that we should buy now or face rent increases. In many bubble areas investors are now buying housing (why I don't know) and renting them out. This is putting pressure on apartment complexes--some of which are offering a free month's rent etc.

Of course, people in bubble areas need to check out the landlord--a lot of owners are renting out their soon-to-be- foreclosed homes to unsuspecting tenants.

More contributions from the Joint Center:

"It's not going to be a big dramatic event [when the housing boom ends]" says William Apgar, senior scholar at Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies.
-- WSJ, August 17, 2005,
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB112423869908615091.html

"But comparing the [sudden price declines in the] stock market and the housing market is misleading at best. Because people live as well as invest in their homes, many owners stay put when prices first show signs of softening. This reduces the number of houses on the market and helps bring supply and demand back into balance, forestalling faster and sharper price declines."
-- from a 2005 Joint Center report,
http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/remodeling/remodeling2005.html

"With the slowdown in the entire residential construction sector, the home improvement market has downshifted to a more sustainable rate of growth... The dip in spending should, however, be both mild and short-lived. The fundamentals of remodeling demand remain positive, and the backlog of under-improved homes ensures a ready market for upgrades in the near term. And with home equity still at record levels, owners have the means as well as the motivation to continue to invest in their properties over the coming years."
-- from a 2007 Joint Center report,
http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/remodeling/remodeling2007/index.html

You always like to pound on the press for only talking to industry shills. How about some names of folks to whom they SHOULD be talking? I always wonder why no press report on homeownership ever mentions Caroline Katz Reid? Her 2004 dissertation showed that most low income homebuyers become renters again within 5 years - low income borrowers may be helped into homeownership, but there's not much to keep them there. You'd think she'd be viewed as an expert for an article like this one, but as they say on Calculated Risk, hoocoodanode????

See

http://www.nonprofithousing.org/2005conference/Reid_Paper.pdf

The Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard is bankrolled by homebuilders and others in the real estate business: Centex, Beazer, Fannie, Freddie, Georgia-Pacific, Home Depot and on and on Quoting this outfit is no different than quoting NAR economists on the impending housing rebound.
I'm surprised Harvard sells out its name and reputation.
Here is a link to the list:
http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/people/pab_member_companies.html

There's an interesting lead article about the possible role of multiculturalism in the housing bubble at:

http://www.takimag.com/

It details how government policy led to throwing money at underqualified borrowers.

Wouldn't it be plausible that rentals would remain plentiful? Would not much of the foreclosed housing stock be converted to rentals? And hence that rents would not rise much? Or perhaps even decline if more people rented in a house than would be there if occupied by the owner.

It is my understanding that the sweet spot is when monthly rent equals 1% of the housing value. This "golden rule" has been quoted throughout the bubble and if true, we have a ways to go in some markets.