第139章 参考文献(1)

2005issue of the Federal Reserve Bulletin，under the title “New Information Reported under HMDA and Its Application in Fair Lending Enforcement.”The decline in the Federal Reserve’s interest rate from 2001to 2003is from page 69of Jiitiinri？i/ior/I by Mark Zandi.The fact that the Federal Reserve reduced the federal funds rate to its lowest level in decades during the early years of the 21st century was mentioned on pages 276and 277of an article titled “Monetary Policy，Credit Extension，and Housing Bubbles：2008and 1929”in Critical Review，Vol.21，combined numbers 2and 3（2009）.The increased reliance on savings as the primary source of a down payment on a home airiong California home buyers after the housing bust is from page 24of the report State ofthe California Housing Market 2008-2009，published by the California Association of Realtors.The decreasing proportion of first-time home buyers in California in the early years of the twenty-first century is from page 13of the same study，while the disparity in the size of down payments between first-time home buyers and repeat home buyers in California is from page 39.The fact that the top ten areas with the highest rates of home price appreciation were in California is from page 4of the study “California’s Newest Homeowners：Affording the Unaffordable，”C？i/jerk Coa "s：Po]？ulation Trends and Profiles，published by the Public Policy Institute of California in August 2003.The increase in home prices in California after the decade of the 1970s is discussed on pages 232to 234oY Regulatory Talkings.-Las，Economics，and Politics，by William A.Fischel.The statement that in 2005the median-priced San Francisco Bay Area home cost more than three times the national average is from page A11of a front-page story from the October 16，2005issue of the San Francisco Chronicle，under the headline “Making Ends Meet：Struggling in Middle Class.”The fact that the median sales price of a home in San Francisco reached 1765，000in 2005was reported on page 3of the study “California’s Newest Homeowners：Affording the Unaffordable，“Cn/orziin Comm/i：Po ？ulatlon Trends and Profiles，published by the Public Policy Institute of California.The $2，000per day increase in the value of homes in San Mateo County，California，during March 2005is from page 1of the April 15，2005issue of the San Mateo County Times，under the headline “County’s“Median Home Cost over $lM，”while the relatively small size of these homes ismentioned on page 6of the same article.That the median sales price for homes in the state of California reached $561，000in 2006was shown on page 63of the study Stii/e oJ/he Ciz/oriti？Housing Market 2008-2009，published by the California Association of Realtors.The 13percent increase nationwide in home price appreciation from 2004to 2005，and the rates of appreciation for Arizona and Michigan were reported on pages 1，2and 15，16of the report “House Price Appreciation Continues at Robust Pace，”published by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight on March 1，2006.The quote about a graduate student in San Francisco ”visiting one exorbitantly priced hovel after another”is from page F1of the September 16，2007issue of the San Francisco Chronicle，under the headline “Squeeze Hits Landlords.”The fact that incomes were rising less rapidly in California than in the rest of the nation at the same time that the state’s home prices were soaring is from page 238of Regulatory Takings.-Law？，Economics，and Politics，by William A.Fischel.The rate of population increase in the San Francisco Bay Area during the 1970s compared with the national rate is from page 9of a 1982study by the Stanford Environmental Law Society tided Land Use and Housing on the l3an Francisco Peninsula edited by Thomas M.Hagler，while the nearly four-fold rise of home prices in Palo Alto，California，during the 1970s when the city’s population declined by 8percent was mentioned on pages 85and 89.The wide range in the cost of a quarter-acre lot in Chicago，San Diego，New York and San Francisco was noted on pages 15and 16of the study “The Impact of Zoning on Housing Af：fordabi1ity，”Working Paper 8835，written by Edward L.Glaeser and Joseph Gyourko and published by the National Bureau of Economic Research in March 2002.The amount of open space in San Mateo County，California，is noted on page 2of the December 10，2003issue of the San Mateo County Times，under the headline “Open Space.”The connection between home price increases and restrictive land use laws is quoted from page 35of the study ”The Planning Penalty：How Smart Growth Makes Housing Unaffordable，”written by Randal O’Toole and published by the Independent Institute in 2006.The fact that 23of the 26“severely unaffordable”international urban areas follow “smart-growth”policies isrestrictions enacted in Loudoun County，Virginia，were described on pages B1andB4of the July 24，2001issue of the Washington Post ‘in an article titled “Loudoun Adopts Strict Controls on Development，”while similar restrictions enacted in Fayette County，Kentucky，were mentioned on page 33of the study，“The Planning Penalty：How Smart Growth Makes Housing Unaffordable，”written by Randal O’Toole and published by the Independent Institute in 2006.The wide range in home prices between communities with and without growth-management policies is quoted from page 6of the same study.The comparison of home prices between Houston and San Jose is from page 8of the October 17，2007issue of Policy Analysis，No.602，in a study tided “Do You Know the Way to L.A.？：San Jose Shows.How to Turn an Urban Area into Los Angeles in Three Stressful Decades.”The realestate advertisement from the St.Loud Post-Dis]？atch is from page G7of the March 1，2009issue，and that from the San Francisco Chronicle of the same date is from page P6of its Real Estate section.The fact that the city of Houston experienced rising income during the 1970s while still maintaining housing affordability is noted on page 32of “The Planning Penalty：How Smart Growth Makes Housing Unaffordable，”written by Randal O"Toole and published by the Independent Institute in 2006，while the high income and low housing costs in Dallas are mentioned on page 33.The “skyrocketing prices”in Manhattan and the less than 10percent increase in the housing stock there from 1980to 2005were noted on pages 332and 333of the October 2005issue of the /onm？i/oJZiisc ？mid Economics，under the tide “Why Is Manhattan So Expensive？：Regulation and the Rise in Housing Prices.”The almost tripling of the population of the city of Las Vegas between 1980to 2000at a time when the real median home price remained unchanged was mentioned on page 332of the same study.The rise in Las Vegas home prices in recent years as a result of the increased resistance of environmental groups to land development was discussed on page 125of The Best-Laid Plans by Randal O"Toole.Information on the extent of development of the land area of the United States is from page 143of S/？r？i"iii/-zf C’om/？？ici ：fistoiy by Robert Bruegmann and pages 56and 57of 7’be bond /lfore Z’r？i"i"e/ed by Ted Balaker and Sam Staley.Congressman Dick Armey’s quote is from page 183of his book Armeys Axioms.The increasedconstruction costs was shown on page 26of the Fall 2002issue of Regulation，in an article titled “Zoning’s Steep Price.”That housing costs in the ten most expensive metropolitan areas were more than twice the national average in 2004is from page A1of the September 22，2004issue of the Wall Street Journal，in an article titled “After Big Run-Up in Real Estate，Some on Coasts Are Cashing Out.”The disparity in the share of income required to pay housing costs in high-priced cities like New York and Los Angeles compared to affordable communities such as Tampa and Dallas was reported on pages A1and C9of the December 29，2005issue of the /Ve"iii Purt T’imei，under the headline “Twenty Years Later，Buying a House Is Less of a Bite.”The fact that adjustable rate mortgages made up 90percent of subprime loans by 2006was noted on page 139of an article titled “A Crisis of Politics，Not Economics：Complexity，Ignorance，and Policy Failure”in Critical Review？，Vol.21，combined numbers 2and 3（2009）.That the average subprime borrower made only a 5percent down payment on a home in 2006is from page 131of that same article.That "stated income”loans or “liar loans”made up over half of subprime loans by 2006is from page 40of iuniirin/S6ncil，by Mark Zandi.The fact that subprime borrowers were committing more than 40percent of their incomes to their mortgages in 2006is from the same page.The statement that nearly 15percent of adjustable rate mortgages had initial interest rates below 2percent in 2005and 2006is from page 56of the Winter 2009issue of the University of Colorado Law Review，under the title “The Law 8c Economics of Subprime Lending.”That creative mortgage products such as interest-only loans and adjustable——rate mortgages kept initial monthly mortgage payments down in the early years of the twenty-first century was reported on page DI of the July 14，2005issue of the lhnn//Streri Jonruii/，under the headline ”Housing Gets Even Less Affordable.”Data on the growth of interest-only mortgage loans from 2002to 2005are from page A16of the May 20，2005issue of the Site Francisco Chronicle in a front-page story titled “High Interest in Interest-Only Home Loans，”and also from pages C1and C6of the July 15，2006issue of the New York Times in an article titled “Keep Eyes Fixed on Variable Mortgages.”The Chicago man who took out a homethe San Francisco Chronicle，under the headline ‘Foreclosed Family’s Last Goodbye to Home.”The soaring value of home equity loans from 2003to 2007was noted on page 165of the Financial Services Fa？t Book，2009，published by the Insurance Information Institute.The increase in the use of “cash-out refinancing”by homeowners during the housing boom was reported on page 167of the same study and also page 26of the February 2009issue oY TheAmerican Sf？ectator，‘in an article tided “The True Origins of This Financial Crisis."The statement that over a five-year period，Americans extracted $2.3trillion of equity from their homes is from page 6of a special section of the May 30，2009issue of The Economist，titled “Surviving the Slump.”The rise in reverse mortgages from 2001to 2005was shown on page 156of the Financial Senses Fact Book：，2007，published by the Insurance Information Institute.The decrease in homeowners’equity as a share of home value from 1945to 2003is from page 55of the April 19，2004issue o？Ne ？smeek in a column tided “Is Housing a New Bubble？”Accounts of speculators making large profits by “flipping”houses are from page 83of the April 2005issue oY Money，under the headline “They Call Them Flippers，”and also from page 71of the October 3，2005issue of Forbes，“in an article tided ”Diamonds in the Rough.”The rapid pace of home sales in California in 2004and 2005is from page 60of the study State of the California Housing Market 2008-2009，published by the California Association of Realtors，while the fact that more than half of the homes sold during these two years received multiple offers from prospective buyers is from page 33.The high percentage of homes purchased as investments in 2005and 2006was mentioned on page 33of the Winter 2009issue of the University of Colorado Law Review，under the tide “The Law 8c Economics of Subprime Lending.”The description of the general characteristics of subprime borrowers is from pages 55and 56of the same article，while the statement that the great majority of adjustable rate subprime mortgages entered foreclosure before a rise in interest rates occurred is from page 28.The description of mortgage-backed securities as a ”blizzard of increasingly complex new securities”is from page 11of iziiiziriii/S6ocI by Mark Zandi.The comments from the officials at Moody’s on the difficulties of rating