Lou Barnes [Inman news] has an interesting thought on mortgage rates.
It's not enough to move low-fee
mortgage rates below 6 percent, but the 10-year T-note flinched at 4.5
percent all of last week, and on Friday morning retraced to 4.38
percent.
No data showing economic
weakness caused the rate decline: the newest information says the
national economy came through Hurricanes Katrina and Rita unimpaired.
Two things have helped long-term
rates to find a top: the painful understanding that if the Federal
Reserve is not yet tight enough to hurt, it soon will be; and second,
unstable weakness in the stock market.
In the perverse world of bonds,
inflation-scare stories help. It goes this way: if inflation is really
worse than we think -- under-measured, misunderstood -- then the Fed
will have to play catch-up, tightening longer-higher-faster. If the Fed
is behind, then catch-up raises the chance of a recession to probable,
and in a recession those who own bonds make a ton of money.
For the time being, I wouldn't
pay much attention to the hobgoblin in ketchup on the front porch.
People who should know better quarrel all the time with
inflation-measurement methodology; this time the quibble is with the
housing fraction of the core rate, measured near zero in a time of
double-digit home-price increases. Housing inflation is measured by
rental equivalence, and as rents everywhere are flat, housing cost is
not inflating. This approach is correct, as changes in the capital cost
of homes have little to do with consumption prices and the value of
currency.
Authentic concern for inflation
is flashing amber, not red. We are in an energy-cost-pushed moment, and
energy costs are likely to reverse in well-established cyclical
pattern. So long as the energy-cost pressure does not move into
consumer prices in general, or into wages, then the Fed is on track.