The Mystery Of The "Missing Inflation" Solved, And Why The US Housing Crisis Is About To Get Much Worse

Tyler Durden's picture

Over the past few months (not to mention last 7 years), the topic of America's "missing inflation" has gained major prominence, because while supposedly every other aspect of the economy is humming along (which really just means that record numbers of waiters, bartenders and temp workers are hired and collect minimum wage salaries), CPI remains so low it (together with China to a lesser extent) was used as justification by the Fed to not hike rates for 55th consecutive FOMC meeting, even though 75% of polled economists said, after 9 years of ZIRP, Fed lift off would take place last week.

One problem with the Fed's measures of inflation, as we have documented in the past, is that they are wrong, if not with malicious intent, then purely due to definitional purposes. Recall our July comparison between CPI and PCE and our warning that "With The Spread Between CPI And PCE Blowing Out The Most Since 2009, Is The Fed Making A Big Mistake" in which we warned that "with a rate hike, as small as [25 bps] the Fed can and will almost certainly start a chain of events that results in the "ghost of 1937" waking up. We don't know if, like during the first Great Depression, it leads to a 50% plunge in stocks, but for those long risk here, it hardly makes sense to stick around and find out."

The Fed did not hike.

But a bigger problem for the the Fed's measures of how the overall economy is doing (and/or overheating) is that the Fed telling the vast majority of Americans that inflation is negligible, leads to riotous laughter.

The reason for this is a simple, if dramatic, one: the U.S. transformation from a homeownership society, to one of renters.

We hinted at the key features of this unprecedented conversion in June, when we wrote the following:

... by now everyone knows that the artificially suppressed, "hedonically-modified" and seasonally-adjusted inflationary readings is what has permitted the Fed to not only grow its balance sheet to $4.5 trillion but to keep rates at 0% for 8 years. Because "how will the economy recover if there is no broad inflation", the Keynesian brains in the ivory tower scream, demanding more, more, more easing just to push inflation higher.


There is only one problem with this: it is all a lie - just ask any average American whose cost of living has soared in the past decade.


Still, with reality diverging so massively from the government's official data, reality just had to be wrong somehow.


Turns out reality was right all along, as revealed by the latest "State of the Nation's Housing" report released by the Center for Housing Studies at Harvard, which showed that while inflation among most products and services may indeed be roughly as the Fed and BLS represent it, when it comes to rent - that most fundamental of staple costs - things have never been worse.


According to the report, for American renters 2013 marked another year with a record-high number of cost burdened households - those paying more than 30 percent of income for housing. In the United States, 20.7 million renter households (49.0 percent) were cost burdened in 2013.


It gets worse: a whopping 11.2 million, or more than a quarter of all renter households, had "severe cost burdens, paying more than half of income for housing." The median US renter household earned $32,700 in 2013 and spent $900 per month on housing costs. Renter housing costs are gross rents, which include contract rents and utilities.

At this point we should perhaps remind readers that according to the latest census data, the US homeownership rate tumbled to 63.4%, the lowest reading since the first quarter of 1967: the lowest in 48 years!


Peeking behind the headline number, an even uglier truth is revealed: the only reason the homeownership rate is as "high" as it is, is due to homeowners in the 65 and over age group. For everyone else, homewonership rates are now the lowest in history!

And with housing increasingly unaffordable for most, or mortgage lending standards so stringer the vast majority simply do no qualify, it means that record number of households are forced to chose less capital-burdensome rent as a form of shelter.

And since there is an unprecedented demand for rental units across the US (as the "owning" alternative has become inaccessible), the median asking rent not only soared at an annual rate of over 6%, it has never been higher, with the Census Department recently reporting that the Median US asking just hit an all time high $803.


What is odd is that according to the BLS, rent inflation is far less: at just 3% in the most recent print. One wonders what seasonal adjustments American renters should use to make their monthly paycheck smaller, the way the BLS perceives it.  Still, at 3.6% this is the highest annual rent inflation since 2008.


And herein lies the rub: because it is not so much what the real, honest inflation growth rate of rent is, it is what the offsetting income growth. Unfortunately, while the BLS can seasonally adjust rent payments to make them as low as a bunch of bureaucrats want, the bigger problem is that US household income is not only not keeping up with rent inflation, it is far below it. In fact, as reported last week, real income is now back at 1989 levels!


Which brings us to the latest, just released joint white paper by Harvard's Center for Housing Studies in conjunction with the Enterprise Resource Center, in which we read that the US rental crisis is about to get far worse. In fact, in an optimistic scenario in which rental inflation rises by 3% annually (it is currently far higher at 3.6%), while annual income growth is rising at a speed 2.0% (it is currently far lower in real terms) the number of severely cost burdened households - those who spend over half of their income on rent - will rise by over 25% over the next decade, from 11.8 million to a record 14.8 million households!

Which means that is using at least somewhat realistic assumptions, the real number of households who spend more than half of their income on rent will likely be in the upper teens if not 20s of millions by 2025.

From the report:

if current trends where rent gains outpace incomes continue, we find that for each 0.25 percentage point gain in rents relative to incomes, the number of severely cost-burdened renters will increase by about 400,000. Under the worst-case scenario of real rent gains of 1 percentage point higher than real income gains per year over the decade, the number of severely cost-burdened renters would reach 14.8 million by 2025, an increase of 25 percent above today’s levels.

More depressing details about the state of the US housing rental market:

At the time of the decennial census in 2000, one in five renters were severely cost burdened, paying more than half of their gross income for rent and utilities (Figure 2). Meanwhile, another 18 percent faced moderate cost burdens, spending between 30 and 50 percent of their income on housing costs, exceeding the widely accepted standard that housing should not command more than 30 percent of a household budget.3 This represented a slight improvement over the shares burdened in 1990 as income gains outpaced growth in rents.

And here is the punchline: "in the years following 2000, gains in typical monthly rental costs exceeded the overall inflation rate, while median income among renters fell further and further behind (Figure 3). As a result, the share of renter households facing severe cost burdens grew dramatically, reaching a new record high of 28 percent in 2011 before edging down to 26.5 percent in 2013. Adding in those with moderate burdens, just under half of all renters were cost burdened in 2013. These rates are substantially higher than a decade ago and roughly twice what they were in 1960."

Here the white paper confirms what, as a result of the above dynamics clear to everyone but the Fed, we already know.

At the same time that the share of renters facing cost burdens was rising, so too was the share of households opting to rent. Over the last decade, the share of renter households in the United States has increased significantly as homeownership rates have fallen from a high of 69.2 percent in the second quarter of 2004 to 63.4 percent in the second quarter of 2015, the lowest level since 1967. We are now seeing more renters than at any other time in U.S. history.

Furthermore, rent inflation isn't going anywhere - in fact, it will only get worse: "as of 2013, the median rent of a newly constructed unit of $1,290 was equal to about half the median renter’s monthly household income, underscoring the urgent need for policy makers to consider enhanced levels of support for rental housing particularly for lowest income households but across a range of income levels."

Even the pinnacle of status quo thought, Harvard itself, is now mocking the 'recovery' propaganda:

While reports on the state of the economy have become more optimistic in recent years, the number of renters with severe cost burdens is not expected to slow. Even if trends in incomes and rents turn more favorable, a variety of demographic forces will exert continued upward pressure on the number of rent-burdened households. Rapid growth of the minority population is one key factor, driven by past and predicted high levels of immigration. By 2050, the U.S. is expected to have a majority-minority population, meaning a greater share of the population will be non-white racial and ethnic minorities. The Hispanic population in particular is projected to continue its fast growth, reaching 106 million (or doubling) by 2050.


With that said, racial and ethnic minority households are disproportionately burdened by housing costs, regardless of tenure. According to the Center for Housing Policy’s Housing Landscape 2015, working households that are headed by non-white individuals have a significantly higher rate of severe housing cost burden than white-headed households. According to this analysis, one-quarter of both African-American and Hispanic households were severely housing-cost burdened in 2013, compared to less than 20 percent of white households.

Sorry Europe, the US has its own refugee, pardon immigrant, crisis and it is getting worse by the day.

Finally, tying it all together, here is the reason why the biggest US generation by number of participants - the Millennials, at 82 million strong - and the one generation that was supposed to be the dynamo that pushes the US out of its post-crisis funk is, simply said, crushed.

Millennials are also expected to continue experiencing rent burdens as they age. Having entered the labor market during and following the Great Recession, those in the millennial generation have received lower wages and experienced higher rates of unemployment and underemployment than their older counterparts at this point in their lives. As a result, millennials have less wealth accumulated, have delayed forming new households, and are less likely to become owners at the age that older generations had previously. In combination, we are likely to see additional household formation by millennials over the next decade and expect a relatively higher share to remain renters during that period.

Bottom line: far from confirming the "bullish thesis" that Millennials will eventually move out of their parents basement and buy (or rent) their own housing while starting new households, just the opposite is taking place:

In 2015, 15.1 percent of  25 to 34 year olds were living with their parents, a fourth straight annual increase, according to an analysis of new Census Bureau data by the Population Reference Bureau in Washington. The proportion is the highest since at least 1960, according to demographer Mark Mather, associate vice president with PRB. "The phenomenon of young adults, facing their own financial challenges, forced to squeeze in the homes of their parents. And new data show the trend is getting worse, not better."

As Bloomberg redundantly adds, "It takes young people longer these days to find jobs with decent wages," Mather said. "Young adults need to spend more time getting the necessary education and skills before they can become self-sufficient. The recession likely exacerbated this trend."

The latest Census data show just 3.1 percent of Americans from 25 to 29 relocated in the last year between states, just half the share of 2002. While moves between counties in the same state — less likely to be for jobs — have increased some, they too remain below pre-recession levels, according to PRB's analysis.

For some like Goldman, there is hope: "There is a silver lining to the trend. Presumably, all the adult children will one day leave their parents' basements, and that household formation will prove to be a huge boost to a subpar housing recovery. There is already evidence this is occurring to some degree."

Actually, no. And as the Harvard report suggests, Millennials are not only not leaving their "parents basements", but even if they were, their financial situation would be even worse! At least for the time being, their parents cover the rental costs. Should tens of millions of millennials suddenly see their "disposable" income be crushed once the real world presents itself, that will be the end of the upswing in US consumer spending.

In conclusion, nowhere is the mystery of the "missing" inflation more obvious than in the following interactive map showing that in virtually all major seaboard metro areas, including the major cities in California, New York, and Florida, the number of households with a cost burden is 50% or higher.



All of this could have been avoided if only the Fed has observed the "missing" and soaring rental inflation that was right in front of its nose all the time, and which it did everything in its power to ignore just so the 1% can keep their ZIRP (and soon NIRP)and QE, and become even wealthier on the back of the middle class and the 80 million of 25-34 year old Americans who have found out the hard way that not only is the American Dream of owning a home officially dead, it has been replaced with the American nightmare of completely unffordable renting.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
VonSalza's picture

You see, the owners of this country know the truth. It's called the American dream. Cause ya have to be asleep to believe it.

XAU XAG's picture

Welcome to RENT A you cannot afford a REAL LIFE

Divine Wind's picture




Long tent manufacturers.

Hype Alert's picture

Housing and healthcare are severely under reported on inflation.  How healthcare can triple and not set off flashing red lights on inflation is unreal.

Never One Roach's picture

I don't know how seniors who relied on SS benefits to survive are living when their COLA has been 0.01% the past several years despite soaring food, health costs, utinilites, etc.

Four chan's picture

obama shipping in 100000 new low iq migrants will fix things.

Never One Roach's picture

"Change you can believe in" is right!

kaiserhoff's picture

Still yet another reason,

  to flush the illegals.

Stuck on Zero's picture

The map of affordability looks to me like a map of the solidly Democratic areas.

Occident Mortal's picture

What's up with young adults today?


1 in 5 men under 35 are living in their moms basement? FFS, talk about missing the best years of your life.


Not for all the tea in China would I have spent my 20's living with my folks. That's the kind of regret that really burns you when you hit 70.

Kprime's picture

I'm not yet 60 and I can barely remember my 20s, let alone regret them.

dojufitz's picture

I'm in my late 40's and can barley remember my 30's let alone what I did when I was in my 20's.

old naughty's picture

into the night- of third world riots and conflicts...

such is the -mares reality they have agendized for us sheeples everywhere,

complete with boots and camps.

ZD1's picture

Many of us feel like foreigners in the countries where we were born with the massive influx of people from third world countries who don't assimilate.

gimme soma dat's picture

Ugh.  All she did was make excuses for people to discriminate against her in that article. 

Id fight Gandhi's picture

There's living and there's surviving.


Most young adults are in survival mode.

j0nx's picture

F them. They voted for hopey changey now they get to live with it. Zero empathy here. Enjoy your new third world hipsters.

Took Red Pill's picture

Do you really think things would be any different if Romney was president?

bigkansas's picture

Romney slams quantitative easing policy: “biggest contributor” to income inequality

gimme soma dat's picture

It's so cute when people still believe elections are legitimate and bring about change. 

cornflakesdisease's picture

We all can't live a life of immorality and std's like you.

nuubee's picture


Try being a young person today, just try it.
1) No path to a career without going to college.
2) No college without crippling debt in most cases.
3) No home ownership, and likely no good transportation ownership without a good job/career.
3a) If you do manage to buy a home as a young person, be prepared to spend 400% or more of your yearly income on the property when you're done, unlike people from the 70s/80s who could find decent homes for <100% of their yearly take-home pay.
4) No Jobs available once you graduate.
5) No manufacturing as a fallback industry.

Fuck old people, they have no fucking clue the absolute shit they've dumped on the young. I'm not even young but I'm not so ignorant as you to recognize how fucking awful most under 35 have it at this point compared to those 55+.

Just the other day, I was at the bar, a really nice quiet bar. I got into a conversation with an old timer, who must be in his 70s. He started a discussion with the phrase, "Well, I've been retired for 40 years now..."

I nearly spit out my drink. That guy has no fucking clue in the world how lucky he is, to get 40 years of no need to work... most people under 35 today will be lucky if they see even 5 years off work before they die.

Fuck the ignorant old, they have no fucking clue how hard life is for the young people now.

Richard Head's picture

WTF are you talking about? Free community college, $15 minimum wage jobs, plus myRA.

nuubee's picture

1) There's no such thing as free community college anymore, that was something that existed for boomers only.

2) $15 minimum wage, and there's still no apartment/house that you can afford to live in by yourself, unlike 30 years ago.

3) myRA? really? you think that money will be there when we're old? fucking old people, they just assume things will work out while they take, take, take, take, take....

Abbie Normal's picture

Beg to differ about the higher housing cost.  When my parents bought their first house in the '60s, it was $22000 and Dad made $8K/yr.  When they bought their second house in the '70s, it was $70K (over 3X increase in price!) and Dad's salary was only up to $15K so Mom had to find work too.  When I bought my first house in the '90s, it was $200K (another 3X increase) and my salary was in the low 50K range, but my wife also worked so we could afford the payments.  So over this 40-year span, housing has always cost 3-4X the annual salary of the average homeowner.

Kprime's picture

Sad to have to inform you young-ins.  You are going to have to arm up and clean house on Washington dc if you ever want to see the light of day, economically.  You will have to muster up an armed rebellion and millions of Americans will have to kill millions of Americans.  There is no way out.

You have youth in your favor. Technology is in your favor.  And, tho you may not suspect it, your parents and grandparents will happily supply you with billions of dollars of funding once they see you organizing for war against the sociopaths destroying this nation.  It's just the way it is.

OldPhart's picture

Graduated 1977, when I got home from GradNight there was a stack of suitcases on my bed.  I took the hint and worked to leave.  Enlisted in Marines and had knee injuries that put me out (no disability) in April 1978.  Nursed knees for a couple weeks then took a job at Disneyland and lived in a van on the employee's parking lot, right in front of Space Mountain.  It was summer, and I worked graveyard.

Disney offered me a permanent position at Disney World, paid my way there and put me up in a motel for a week.  Got promoted three levels and took a nickle an hour pay cut.  (I went from Baker's Assistant to Lead Baker.)

Friends came to visit one day at my parent's house.  They were amazed that I had managed to move away.  I've been on my own since 17.

Victor von Doom's picture

I've said this before - legals/illegals - it's irrelevant. What is relevant is cultural acceptance within and contribution to the community.

Otherwise they're just barbarians and social outcasts.

Treat all as such, regardless of their "papers".

847328_3527's picture

Once the Chinese Government shuts down the massive flow of illegal and embezzled money out of their country, house prices and sales in USA, Canada, NZ and Australia will begin to normalize. Legitimate buyers, ok, but not the money launderers with millions, if not billions in Loot. We do not want their corrupt gubmint officials --- we have enough of our own!

MalteseFalcon's picture

Flush the worker visa programs as well. 

Encourage post HS training that is economically oriented. Remove social engineering from schools



ILLILLILLI's picture

Needs to be more vocational programs in the Trades and Healthcare...

Debt-Is-Not-Money's picture

"Change you can believe in" is right!

That's because all that is left is "change"!

Bunga Bunga's picture

> 100000 new low iq migrants

They are the best consumers and debtors ever.

daveO's picture

"I don't know how seniors who relied on SS benefits to survive are living when their COLA has been 0.01% the past several years despite soaring food, health costs, utinilites, etc."

Pre 2008, refi's. Post 2008. reverse mortgages. This will guarantee that the poor stay renters forever. Hey, at least, Fred Thompson gets to invoke Ronald Reagan's name relentlessly on the boob tube. Fred basically says, 'Wasn't Ronny great?' He gave you a way to live beyond your means AND screw your children in the process. What could be more American than that?' Aw, shucks! 


apoorboy's picture

New construction companies have a great scam to bury seniors in new homes using reverse mortgages. The FHA gets to eat the losses!!!

847328_3527's picture

The American Scam-O-Meter is at the highest level it's been at in my lifetime.

NidStyles's picture

Naw, pretty sure the US invaded some countires on fake and bullshit evidence before. 


I could name Iraq, but I would have to say it twice to be accurate. 

JC_is_a_SpaceMonkey's picture

They have two words for that:  smaller government.

Heterodox economics's picture

I think you might be on to something.  I'm a clerk in a law firm--thats all I will say about that.  I've noticed a couple of our clients have reverse mortgages .  Pre 2008, as you say, I did not see any of our clients have reverse mortgages.

slightlyskeptical's picture

Screw the kids. Every retiree deserves to live a decent existence. If they have to borrow from their homes that is completely within their rights.

AGuy's picture

"I don't know how seniors who relied on SS benefits to survive are living when their COLA has been 0.01% "

Simple: many still work while collecting SS. Some have part-time jobs (aka Wallmart) others maintained thier full time jobs. If you look at the employment chart, Employment for those 55 and older has risen considerably. I believe employment for the 70+ group has also increased.

However, for many 65+, The have a lower cost of living. (ie no mortgage payments, no college loans, lower healthcare -on Medicare, etc).  They can afford to take on one part time job to meet ends since they have SS.




ToSoft4Truth's picture

Dang.  Can you imagine working 50 years and you have to ‘rely’ on Social Security.  Might as well blow yourself up at the mall. 

cynicalskeptic's picture

You were never supposed to 'rely' on Social Security. It was a program to keep you out of abject poverty and the poorhouse - it was NEVER supposed to be a full retirement program.

When it was started not many people lived for long after they stopped working (and many never stopped working).  It was the norm for old parents to live with children or grandchildren after America industrialized.  Prior to that when most lived on farms, people kept their farm until they died or stayed in place with a son or sons taking over the work.   

Where inflation is REALLY killing people is the devaluing of savings and retirement funds - TRILLIONS have been stolen from people who 'did the right thing' and saved for their retirement.

Augustus's picture

People were not supposed to rely upon SS, correct.

However the tax rate was not supposed to be greater than 1.5% on employer and employee.

That total takeout has been greater than 10% for a long time, now up to 12.5%.

If those individuals had been allowed to actually save that cash they would not have to rely upon SS.

All a part of the Democrat plan to increase govt. dependency.

847328_3527's picture

Good comments. It's clearer to me now. But even with SS + part-time job, few expected food and some other essentials to rise by more then 12%/year while COLA and any part-time wages remained stagnant.


There's lots of other unexpected matters that have bashed even the most frugal workers/savers who don't rely on SS. For example, most seniors figured a return of at least 4% on their savings. The joke is on them! No one figured the hardest war fought by the government would be war against the nation's own middle class by forcing savings yield to zero for years and years.

That's why Trump has so much support; people hate the present screw-job and want a real change to make this country great again with a strong middle class backbone!

ersatz007's picture

I hate to say it but we're unlikely to get the change we deserve regardless who is elected.