Here’s where things stood as of last night as Greek officials deliberated:

Understandably, Reuters appears to be confused by what’s going on in this very fluid situation. Between the time that this URL was copied for the links post a few minutes ago until the time it was posted, the title changed from “Greece heads to Brussels empty-handed” to “Greek political leaders agree on bailout reforms: sources”, however, they were careful not to use the word “imminent” in the updated story.

At issue is the Fed’s continuing policy of bond-buying. While the central bank has stopped expanding its balance sheet with new asset purchases, it is engaged in a plan to sell short-dated Treasury bonds and replace them with a like amount of long-dated government debt. The result? Ten-year Treasury borrowing rates are around historic lows, and with them, mortgage rates.

For Bernanke, this is by design, not accident. He told Toomey a significant aim of the Fed is to gobble up enough risk-free Treasury debt so that investors are forced into riskier investments that will in principle generate better levels of growth.

“We don’t want to go too far,” Bernanke told the committee. He said the Fed was “very attentive” to signs that its stimulus was in the process of generating imbalances, and added the central bank had “greatly expanded” its surveillance of financial markets, in a bid not too be caught off guard.
…
“The effects of Fed policy, independent of all the other factors, on Treasury rates [are] modest,” Bernanke said. The bigger problem is investor confidence in future government borrowing. “Rates will rise eventually, and if investors were to lose confidence in U.S. federal fiscal policy, there is nothing the Fed can do to stop those rates from rising”.

If memory serves, it was Ken Rogoff (of This Time is Different fame) who observed that, throughout history, there is virtually no warning for when the bond market turns on a nation’s sovereign debt (so much for the Fed’s “attentiveness”) and, when combined with Bernanke’s warning above that there’s little they’ll be able to do under those circumstances, this sets the stage for one monster U.S. sovereign credit crisis somewhere down the road.

Says Stockman:

This is ultimately, at the end of the day, a bailout for JP Morgan and Wells Fargo. They’re the big writers of second mortgages and home equity lines. Those – and there’s two or three or four hundred billion dollars in the top three or four banks – are in great jeopardy in the case of of homeowners who have mortgages, that are primary mortgages, that are way under water on primary mortgages and are likely to default or throw in the keys at some point down the road.

Good point…

I don’t know about you, but I can’t tell the politics from the statistics when trying to make sense of  last Friday’s monthly jobs report and, at this point, I don’t care anymore.

As for the housing market, none other than Bill McBride at the wildly popular Calculated Risk blog weighed in on the subject yesterday declaring The Housing Bottom Is Here, a view that you find out at the end of the article isn’t quite as strongly held as you might think from just reading the title.

Bill notes there are two housing markets – new home construction and existing home sales – and, while the former has clearly made a bottom, the latter is likely to do so next month, though he qualifies that prediction with words like “I think that house prices are close to a bottom” and there being “a reasonable chance that the bottom is here”.

Now, caveats notwithstanding, this is still a big deal since Calculated Risk isn’t just an ordinary offering out there in the blogosphere. This particular blog happened to be calling the US housing market a bubble back when few had an inkling of the trouble to come and, for that reason alone, his is an opinion worth listening to.

It was back in late-2004 and early-2005 that a few people in Southern California – one of the many “ground zeros” for the late, great housing bubble – started writing about the remarkable rise in home prices and how it could not be sustained.

Yours truly was one of them and I’ve learned much from Bill over the years.

I recall reading commentary by Bill and Mish over at Silicon Valley insider as they set about creating what are two of the most influential financial blogs in the country today, so, it’s not as if any of us are “Johnny-come-latelies”.

Another of the original housing bubble bloggers was Rich Toscano at Piggington.com and, as long as we’ve begun to gather data points, it’s worth noting that Rich is in the process of buying a home in the San Diego area, something he characterized as Jumping the Shark.

Recall that San Diego was ahead of the crowd, housing-bubble-wise, over last decade and, today, it’s certainly no Las Vegas, where home prices just keep falling month after month, year after year.

According to the latest data from Case-Shiller, San Diego home prices are four or five percent above their recession lows in early 2009, and, when factoring in the Federal Reserve’s freakishly low interest rates and the reality that, to most people, it’s not the house price, but the monthly payment that is most important, a home purchased there at this time would seem to make good sense.

Of course, my wife and I purchased a home here in Montana just over a year ago, so, actions normally speaking louder than words, you have a pretty good idea about how we feel about property prices in this part of the country.

And if you go a few hundred miles or so east of here to where the shale energy boom is underway in North Dakota, you’d think it’s 2005 again.

In the Bay area, there’s Patrick Killelea of Patrick.net fame who has yet to fall in line with some of the other capitulating 2005-era housing bubble bloggers and, given his proximity to what appears to be another inflating Silicon Valley tech bubble, I wouldn’t expect him to do so anytime soon.

It’s funny to think back to about 12 years ago when I was working in Southern California and was visited by co-workers from Northern California who told tall tales of run-of-the-mill 1,000 square foot homes selling for a half million dollars.

Little did we know that large portions of the rest of the country would experience that same phenomenon just a few years later. As it turns out, Northern California seems to get a new bubble every five years or so, something that makes it particularly hard to call a housing market bottom there due to the spill-over effect of these non-housing bubble bubbles.

I don’t know – conditions are different depending on where you are and, in most cases, national home price trends have little meaning for an individual contemplating a home purchase.

Surely, with a couple years of home price history now in the books, housing bubble spotter Dean Baker was right to buy a house near Washington D.C. a few years back since the market there seemed to make a bottom just as the freshly printed and borrowed money started gushing from the nation’s capital.

One thing is certain, I’d much rather be writing about whether the housing market has hit bottom than whether the labor market has turned a corner as the November elections draw nearer because that discussion has become way too toxic for my tastes.

If you were to extend the chart to the left, you’d see that bank assets rose modestly for decades while the many economic/financial imbalances were being built up as the end of “The Great Moderation” signaled the beginning of “The Great Central Bank Intervention”.

In all, there are a dozen or so more images in this depressingly good collection of charts(.pdf) at Cumberland that will make you wonder anew where this is all headed.

New boss, same as the old boss … and the ones before that.

Maybe we’ll get a good third party candidate this year…

It’s kind of amazing that, nearly four years after the financial crisis, Fed economists still think that interest rate policy during the housing bubble mania had little or nothing to do with its formation or subsequent bust.

“Unfortunately, I haven’t heard from Mr. Romney yet,” joked Grant when I called on him in his offices down on Wall Street. “I’m sitting by the phone, I’m ready.”

He may have to wait some time. Romney, a conventional Wall Street figure, is unlikely to tap him anytime soon.
…
He is best known these days — to Gingrich and Paul, among others — for his long-standing support for the gold standard. The world has moved in his direction. In 12 years, gold has risen from a derided relic trading at $250 an ounce to a hot investment at $1,750. Everywhere paper currency systems are under challenge. In 2008, the world discovered that you can’t just manufacture endless wealth out of thin air, as the gold bugs had long argued, and it is still struggling with the realization.

Many people will think of the gold standard as a relic of a bygone era, something as old-fashioned as bow-ties and stuffed animals. (My caveat: To me, that’s not an insult.) Grant, when we met, argued the reverse. He says paper currencies and our current monetary system are the ones that are out of date.

“The anachronism is today’s system,” he says. We have a “command and control, top down” system where the Fed imposes an interest rate on society. The Fed, in other words, tells us what the price of money should be. It is, Grant says, at odds with the modern age. “We live in a world of collaborative social networks” of the Internet and Facebook, of Wikipedia instead of the old World Book, and so on. And yet when it comes to the price of money, we wait for a committee that sits in private to tell us what it should be”.

There’s lots more in this story on Grant’s views of the financial system as currently constructed and what he would do if he were to sit in Ben Bernanke’s chair at the Fed. If you ask me, his gold standard price of $2,500 an ounce for the metal seems a bit low.

On the one hand, you have to feel for homeowners who have continued to make their mortgage payments despite the declining value of their home, but can’t refinance at today’s freakishly low rates. But, on the other hand, you have to scratch your head about the government intervening to create new loans for more than theses homes are worth.

Those worrying about the latter shouldn’t be too concerned, however, as not much is likely to happen in Congress during this increasingly heated election year.

As shown to the right using the mid-1990s Los Angeles housing market as an example of what might happen to national home prices in the years ahead, housing market bottoms are long drawn out affairs.

We happened to be living in Southern California at the time and had the good fortune to buy a house there in 1995, though, we were just looking for a place to live, not thinking of it as an investment.

I remember the price actually declined by another five percent or so in the year after we bought it and it wasn’t until five or six years later that we began to hear about rising home prices, a bit surprised to learn that the value of our place had increased by  $100,000 or more.

But, for the first few years, you were better off not even thinking about home values.

Using the broad Los Angeles price index as an example, even if you had bought at the absolute bottom in February 1996, you’d have had less than a one percent gain a year later.

The index spent a full four years within five percent of the February 1996 low!

Anyone thinking that a housing market bottom in 2012 means that home prices will be higher next year or the year after that will probably be disappointed.

Moreover, given the size of the recent boom and the likelihood of the bust being of similar magnitude, I wouldn’t be surprised if home prices don’t post a substantive advance for the rest of the decade.