※ 발췌 (excerpt):
출처 1: Why the house price bubble still hasn’t burst (Steve Keen, Mar 2016)
( ... ) Fundamentally, the demand for housing comes from the flow of new mortgages. Only the super-rich or the well-heeled offshore buyer can afford to buy property without a mortgage, and the importance of mortgage debt has increased dramatically over time. In the 1970s, you couldn't get a mortgage without a 30% deposit, so cash made up 30% of the purchase price; now it's closer to 10%.
So, on the demand side of the supply and demand equation, we have the flow of new mortgage debt.
On the supply side, we have two factors: the number of properties for sale and their prices.
There is, therefore, a "dynamic tension" (to quote Rocky Horror) between the rate of change of mortgage debt, and the level of house prices: if monetary value of the flow of new mortgage debt equals the monetary value of the flow of supply, then there is no pressure forcing prices to change.
It follows that there is a relationship between the acceleration of mortgage debt and the rage of change of house prices. So for house prices to rise, the flow of new mortgage debt needs to be not merely positive, but acceleratingㅡgrowing faster over time.
Lest that sound like standard economic mumbo-jumboㅡas Ross Gittins pointed out very well recently, most so-called economic modelling is no more than fantasy(“Tax modelling falls down at the household level”)ㅡFigure 1 shows the empirical evidence for America, where not even Alan Greenspan disputes that there was a bubble. Similar relationships apply for all countriesㅡand for the econometrically minded, the causal relation (as tested on US data) is from accelerating mortage debt to house prices, not vice-versa.
Is Australia different ? ( ... ... )
Figure 1: Australia isn’t different — it’s the same story in the rest of the world
Figure 2: Accelerating mortgage debt causes rising house prices
출처 2: The Australian Property Bubble Explained with Steve Keen ( ? 2016)
출처 3:
글
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기