LETTER TO THE EDITOR: More thoughts on the impending housing crash

In formerly remarking on the forthcoming debacle of the housing market predicted by Allen Greenspan, which I posted to the Delaware State News in a letter dated 9 June [“Population issues account for housing troubles”], I wrote that the impending deaths of Baby Boomers are going to be the foremost contributing factor to a protracted calamity. I also alluded to there being a solution to it. I hinted at that solution when I wrote that the government was going to make it very attractive for people to abandon property. Government at every level is going to make up all sorts of excuses as to why a house should be condemned, thereby keeping some builders in business while keeping housing available at a supportable level in regards to the population. It doesn’t matter if the materials used in the construction of an existing house were not considered harmful at the time the structure was built; some will say it is now understood how hazardous they are. There are many reasons they can call upon or invent to prompt people to purchase a more recently built structure, thereby keeping the housing industry active — reasons such as eminent domain. Some entities will express concern for those living in houses deemed unfit, but I suspect they will do so because those living there are vulnerable to being exploited, and often, the land the house is situated on is more valuable than the dwelling. Do not refer to a deed in order to determine a property’s real value; instead, look at it as would an aggressive investor or some level of governmental agency. Might the properties involved make a dandy campus of some variety once the dated houses are removed? Truly, in many areas near good-paying jobs where public transit is available, the revenue base could be doubled or even quadrupled by putting condominiums where once a single-family dwelling stood. Consider, if you will, how terrifically expensive it is to maintain overhead power lines. Then, think about the way in which we power our homes and how that is likely going to evolve over the next 20 to 40 years. Ask yourself who is going to pay for the conversion of older homes to newer technologies once providers abandon obsolete systems. As importantly, who is going to pay for the disposal of the previous infrastructure? I’ve been listening to the talking heads ever since Mr. Greenspan announced what they are mistakenly referring to as The Housing Bubble 2.0. What is coming is not the same sort of bubble that occurred in the first decade of this century. It’s wholly different, and it will be worse because it doesn’t have much to do with what you can get for selling your home. The Population Bubble is going to burst! When it does, the ramifications are going to go way beyond whether or not you’ll even be able to sell your home. In making decisions regarding home ownership, do your research, and that includes investigating emerging technologies that may not be compatible with older structures. Those with a vested interest in the building industry are quick to point out anachronistic notions that millennials may have difficulty embracing. Inasmuch as it is a proven fact that home ownership promotes healthy families, the drag on finances causes a lot of divorces, too. Furthermore, Congress has been batting around the idea of doing away with the interest deduction, and that will probably happen. People are not going to be able to buy and sell homes as easily as they did formerly. Millennials who must remain footloose to insure career progression cannot afford to be trapped in a mortgage. Remember that a lot of people used to believe that real estate never goes down. Whereas, by region, some may suggest that ownership is at an all-time high, statistics show that overall ownership has dropped 5 percent since 2000, and the downward trend is most likely to continue. Additionally, the statistics for minorities are wholly less enchanting than for whites by upwards of 20 percent. In futurism, one of the main tools employed by its proponents is analysis of probabilities. How probable does what I’ have presented sound?

Carol Hotte Felton