Next bubble
2009 December 7
Some of you may know that Dean Baker likes to remind his readers that he saw the housing bubble as early as 2002. He brings it up no matter the topic.
Anyway, my childhood friend Jason – who, mind you, has a degree in economics – has spotted the next bubble. Read about it here.
I do however have one question for Jason. An important piece of evidence for the housing bubble was that housing outpaced renting prices, a normally correlative relationship that Wikipedia so aptly calls the ownership ratio. I wonder, is there any comparable analysis for the current bubble? Is this too much to ask without the help of a think tank?
4 Responses
leave one →
Baker wrote:
“The second reason why this task force is strange is that Social Security doesn’t need reforming. According to the Congressional Budget Office, it can pay all scheduled benefits for the next 40 years with no changes whatsoever.”
Have I missed something? I thought Social Security was doomed.
Ben,
I am neither able nor willing to make hyperlinks, but here are some other posts of Baker’s on Social Security. He’s definitely in what you might call the non-alarmist camp:
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=07&year=2009&base_name=the_washington_post_aka_fox_on
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=11&year=2009&base_name=parade_magazines_propaganda_pa&18
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=09&year=2009&base_name=cbs_moneywatch_says_its_time_t&69
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=09&year=2009&base_name=social_securitys_finances_are&7
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=08&year=2009&base_name=post_continues_attack_on_socia&33
I like Dean Baker because he exudes confidence and snarkiness, but also erudition. And in spite of this, he talks to me at about a high school level, which is what I need in this area.
Thanks for the links. I think I may have been swayed to his point of view. It appears the only reason I was alarmed myself was because of the seeming consensus of alarmism in Washington. I’ll have to read more about this.
Isn’t there a more immediate problem with Social Security, because we have been spending the “surplus” fund that was supposed to accumulate to pay the baby-boomers (of which I am one, and you are not) once they retired, beginning around 2011?