Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “A full-throated defense of economic dynamism.” - The Wall Street Journal
  • “There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “Unintended Consequences provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.” - Nouriel Roubini, New York University; Chairman, Roubini Global Economics
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences
Buy the Books
  • Macro Roundup
  • About Roundup
  • About Ed Conard
  • Highlights
  • Topics
  • Subscribe
Edward Conard
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • youtube
  • Email
  • Text Message (SMS)
  • Twitter/X
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • WhatsApp Message
Subscribe to Macro Roundup Emails
  • Mentions 442
  • Primary focus 219
Showing 219 database articles primarily about Business Cycle
Currently filtering by:
  • Remove Business Cycle
  • Remove "primary topics only" restriction
  • Remove 'Database'
Show all 7,192 articles
For whatever topics you select (currently: Business Cycle):
Choose search scope

Your importance filter 'Database' shows fewer articles.

Remove filters to see full article counts

The Extraordinary Wealth Created by the Pandemic Housing Market

Emily Badger New York Times
Date Posted:
May 2, 2022
Is Database:
Database

Pandemic housing wealth surge hits $6tn: Benefits 65% of US households but widens owner/renter gap. Lowest-income owners see highest % gains while non-owners face affordability crisis.

Since the onset of the pandemic, total home equity in owner-occupied housing has surged by over $6 tn, driven by record appreciation due to high demand and limited supply. This wealth creation has been widespread, benefiting 65% of American households who own homes, with the poorest fifth seeing the largest percentage increases. However, this boom has exacerbated the housing affordability crisis for non-owners, as rising rents and inflation erode their purchasing power. The gains have disproportionately favored high-income households and white homeowners, yet Black homeowners have also benefited significantly due to their wealth being largely tied to housing. Despite potential risks like rising interest rates, economists expect this equity to remain largely durable. This period of rapid equity growth is enabling some families to build intergenerational wealth while delaying homeownership for others, amplifying existing inequalities in the housing market.

Over the past two years, Americans who own their homes have gained more than $6 trillion in housing wealthsum, estimated by the Federal Reserve,doesn’t count all the equity in rental properties. So it’s an underestimate of the riches piling up in the housing market late...The highest-income households, who own the most expensive homes, have seen the largest total gains. But because homeownership is so widespread in America, the poorest fifth of households have also added billions in home equity in the last two years. In percentage terms, they’ve seen the biggest increases in wealth.

Emily Badger and Quoctrung Bui, "The Extraordinary Wealth Created by the Pandemic Housing Market,"New York Times, May 1, 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/01/upshot/pandemic-housing-market-wealth.html

The Extraordinary Wealth Created by the Pandemic Housing Market

Over the past two years, Americans who own their homes have gained more than $6 trillion in housing wealth. To be clear, that doesn’t mean homebuilders have transferred to buyers $6 trillion worth of new housing, or that existing homeowners have made $6 trillion in kitchen and bathroom upgrades.

The Extraordinary Wealth Created by the Pandemic Housing Market: Extended Excerpt Image 1


Rather, most of this money has been created by the simple fact that housing, in short supply and high demand across America, has appreciated at record pace during the pandemic. Millions of people — broadly spread among the 65 percent of American households who own their home — have gained a share of this windfall.

It’s a remarkably positive story for Americans who own a home; it’s also inseparable from the housing affordability crisis for those who don’t. For them, rents are rapidly rising. Inflation is whittling away their incomes. And the very thing that has created all this wealth has pushed homeownership as a means of wealth-building further out of reach.

That dual reality follows what has been a mass wealth creation event with few precedents in American history.

“I really struggle to come up with a parallel to this,” said Benjamin Keys, a professor at the Wharton School of Business, trying to identify a moment when this many people gained this much wealth in this little time.

In percentage terms, the stock market has risen by more during the pandemic, but fewer Americans have profited from that. During the last housing boom, the run-up in home values was similarly dizzying but limited to fewer parts of the country. And that equity largely vanished in the kind of bust that economists say is far less likely to happen this time. Perhaps a better analogy, Mr. Keys suggested, would be the 1889 Oklahoma Territory land rush, or the 1920s Los Angeles oil boom, events that abruptly changed who owned land and how much it was worth.

The $6 trillion sum, estimated by the Federal Reserve, doesn’t count all the equity in rental properties. So it’s an underestimate of the riches piling up in the housing market lately.

Hard-to-predict events, like a painful recession, could still claw back some of this total, of course. Property taxes can go up. And this wealth is not the same as having money parked in a bank account. To use it, households must sell a home or tap its value through a tool like a home-equity loan, and that’s not risk-free. But evidence shows that homeowners wield home equity in real ways — to send their children to college, to start businesses, to invest further in housing, building even more wealth.

“There’s a rosy picture and a not-so-rosy picture,” said Emily Wiemers, an economist at Syracuse University who has studied how families tap their home equity to pay for higher education. “The flip side is pretty troubling. There’s this set of kids whose parents don’t own a home and so didn’t see this increase in wealth, and also whose parents may have seen declines in income.”

The cumulative effects figure to be sweeping, and divergent: This period of rising equity will enable some families to create intergenerational wealth for the first time. It will force other families to delay homeownership for years.

It will amplify inequality, as gains go disproportionately to baby boomers (at the expense of millennials who will one day buy their homes), and to white households, who have a homeownership rate that is 30 percentage points higher than that of Black households. But Black home-owning families will benefit in particular because Black household wealth is overwhelmingly in the form of housing.

“I don’t think that there’s a viable alternative to homeownership at this point in time” in terms of building wealth, said Cy Richardson, the senior vice president for programs at the National Urban League, which promotes homeownership among Black families. “And it’s an economic disaster for Black families who are unable to achieve homeownership.”

The highest-income households, who own the most expensive homes, have seen the largest total gains. But because homeownership is so widespread in America, the poorest fifth of households have also added billions in home equity in the last two years. In percentage terms, they’ve seen the biggest increases in wealth.

The Extraordinary Wealth Created by the Pandemic Housing Market: Extended Excerpt Image 2


Homeowners who recall the 2008 housing bust may feel nervous about all this. But this is a very different housing market, said Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s.

The bubble in the early 2000s was defined by risky lending and overbuilding. Today, home buyers are on much sturdier ground with their credit scores, conventional mortgages and pandemic savings. Today there’s also a housing shortage nationwide. And that has collided with soaring demand from historically low mortgage rates, from families in search of more space during the pandemic, and from remote workers who could relocate to more affordable places. Home values, as a result, have been up nearly everywhere (making many of those affordable places not so affordable any more).

Price growth will most likely slow now that interest rates are rapidly rising, but economists generally don’t expect prices to fall. There’s just too much demand for too little housing in America today. Rising rates will make it more expensive to access equity. But this equity, Mr. Zandi said, “will prove largely durable.”

Black Knight, a company that tracks the mortgage market, estimates that the average homeowner with a mortgage has gained $67,000 in “tappable equity” in the last two years. That’s actual cash households could access while still keeping 20 percent of the equity in their homes as lenders often require.

By that measure, the average mortgage holder in the San Jose, Calif., metro area has picked up $230,000 in two years. In Boise, Idaho, it’s $114,000. In Cleveland, it’s $27,000.

The Extraordinary Wealth Created by the Pandemic Housing Market: Extended Excerpt Image 3


“For large swaths of U.S. households, this is great,” said Michael Lovenheim, an economist at Cornell. “And it’s not just for the super rich, and it’s not just for those who live in the big superstar cities. This is happening in Ithaca, too.”

Mr. Lovenheim has found that families that experienced higher home price growth while their children were in high school were more likely to send their children to college. And the children who went to college were more likely to attend public flagship universities than community colleges.

He and colleagues have also found that households with rising home values were more likely to have children. Work by other researchers has shown that they’re more likely to start new businesses, too.

“Is this wealth real?” Mr. Lovenheim said. “People act like it’s real.”

The first home Julio Velezon II was able to buy in 2019 in Springfield, Va., has measurably changed his life. He and his wife had their first child in that townhome. Then they were able to buy a larger single-family home in December, keeping the first home as a rental property.

Had they not bought in 2019 — before today’s home prices, and today’s rental inflation — he knows exactly how his life would be different: Not buying a home, he said, would have meant not having a son.

“I wouldn’t have felt comfortable having a kid when we were moving and renting,” said Mr. Velezon, a 35-year-old Air Force technical sergeant. “Renting is such an unknown variable — it’s at the mercy of someone else, of the market.”

Now he imagines that his 18-month-old son could live as an adult one day in one of these homes.

Similar stories are increasingly out of reach for other families who come to First Home Alliance, a housing counseling nonprofit based in Northern Virginia that helped Mr. Velezon. Today a family making $70,000 a year can’t compete for a three-bedroom in the area.

“Some of them just have to wait,” said Larry Laws Sr., the president of First Home Alliance (a nonprofit he started with his own housing wealth). “We can educate them on the process, get them fully qualified for affordability. But they cannot purchase in this area.”

They’ll wait, instead, for their incomes to rise, or for home prices to cool, or for new home building to pick up.

But going forward, Mr. Keys, the Wharton professor, worries that all this housing wealth will only reinforce aspects of the American housing market that are fundamentally problematic: that families feel they have few alternatives to build wealth, that housing must act as both shelter and financial asset, that homeowners are motivated as a result to protect that asset.

“There’s actually something that’s kind of pernicious about this,” he said. In a sense, millions of people have made trillions of dollars the last two years by doing nothing.

“But it’s worse than that,” he continued. “It’s not that they’re not doing anything; it’s that they’ve aggressively blocked development in so many places.”

This wealth has been created, he said, precisely because it’s so hard to build housing in America. And that could make the case for building more of it harder still.

  • Business Cycle
  • GDP
    • Housing
Previous articleMay 2, 2022How Covid-19 Transformed the U.S. EconomyCOVID reshapes economic geography: Office occupancy drops 99% to 30-50% as remote work drives inland migration. New business applications increase +43% to 415k (March 2022).Next articleMay 2, 2022America's Homebuilding Boom That Isn'tNew housing starts are 12% higher than pre-COVID levels, but homebuilding per capita is near pre-2008 lows, exacerbating a housing shortage that could be the most severe in American history.
Showing 218 database articles primarily about Business Cycle

3% vs. 60%

AI Summary. Direct lending represents roughly 3% of total U.S. household and business debt, a fraction of the 60% share mortgages held at the peak of the housing bubble.

Torsten Sløk Apollo
Date Posted:
April 8, 2026
Is Database:
Database

Torsten Sløk notes the direct lending market is ~$2T or 3% of household and non-financial debt outstanding. To provide context, he shows that in 2006, on the eve of the crisis, mortgages accounted for ~60% of such debt.

Core argument: Direct lending represents a small but growing alternative to traditional bank financing for businesses and households.

The direct lending market is roughly $2 trillion, or about 3% of total debt outstanding for US households and businesses. By comparison, mortgages accounted for about 60% of total household and corporate debt at the peak of the housing bubble in 2006.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Direct lending represents a small but growing alternative to traditional bank financing for businesses and households.
  2. The mortgage market’s dominance has shifted dramatically since the 2006 housing peak, reducing systemic risk concentration.
  3. Non-bank lenders now capture meaningful market share in credit provision across the economy.

Related Articles:

  • JPMorgan Marking Down Loan Portfolios Of Private Credit Groups — JPMorgan has marked down the value of loans made to software companies by private credit groups. These loans are collateral for JPM’s lending to private…
  • Data Update 7 for 2026: Debt and Taxes — Damodaran argues that the private credit industry’s increasing financing of the AI buildout is another sign that “a shakeout is overdue, which will…
  • Business Cycle
  • GDP
    • Financial Markets

Top 10% of Earners Drive a Growing Share of US Consumer Spending

Jonnelle Marte Bloomberg
Date Posted:
September 17, 2025
Is Database:
Database

Mark Zandi finds Americans in the top 10% of the income distribution accounted for 49.2% of consumer spending in Q2, the highest level since 1989.

Consumers in the top 10% of the income distribution accounted for 49.2% of total spending in the second quarter, up from 48.5% in the first quarter, reaching the highest level in data going back to 1989, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data by Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics. In contrast, the bottom 80% of the income distribution, or consumers making less than roughly $175,000 a year, have seen their spending merely keep pace with inflation since the pandemic.

Related Articles:

  • The U.S. Economy Depends More Than Ever on Rich People — The top 10% of US earners now account for nearly half of all personal spending, according to Moody’s @Markzandi, up from 36% three decades ago. “The finances…
  • To Understand America Today, Study the Zero-Sum Mindset — Zero-sum thinking, in terms of political and policy views is strongly associated with lower levels of intergenerational upward mobility. @S_Stantcheva notes…
  • Zero-Sum Thinking and the Roots of U.S. Political Divides — Zero-sum thinking in terms of political and policy views is strongly associated with lower levels of intergenerational upward mobility. @S_Stantcheva…
  • Business Cycle
  • GDP
  • Workforce
    • Inequality

Litigation Nation, Engineering Empire

Jonathon Sine Cogitations
Date Posted:
September 2, 2025
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important

Jonathon Sine argues China “is moving beyond its breakneck industrial prime, facing similar dilemmas to those America confronted in the 1960s and 70s.” The ratio of science/engineering to humanities undergraduate majors is 2:1 in both the PRC and US.

Dan Wang’s “big idea” [is] “China is an engineering state, building big at breakneck speed, in contrast to the United States’ lawyerly society, blocking everything it can, good and bad.” I re-group US college majors according to Chinese disciplines to allow for rough comparison. Surprisingly, the ratio of science/engineering to humanities/social sciences is 2:1, the same as in China (if one groups management with science/engineering, as I also do for China). As with China today, America’s breakneck building phase was decidedly winding down by the 1960s. Urbanization went from 40% in 1900 to 70% by 1960, and grew much more incrementally over the next 60 years to 85% by 2020. The country simply did not need to continue building dams, expressways, and energy production facilities at breakneck pace. It became much more a matter of maintaining and upgrading (which has not gone well, at least according to the American Society of Civil Engineers’ report card). The American [building/investment slowdown that started after the 1970s] may be more about structural economic shifts than lawyers.

Related Articles:

  • Industrial Colossus: China vs 1950s America — Jonathan Sine argues China’s global manufacturing share is likely near its peak as growth has slowed from 1.5% to 0.5% btw 2010 and today due to…
  • The Real China Model — Electricity supplies nearly 30% of China’s energy use today and is growing at an annual rate of 6%. In the US, electricity accounts for 22% of energy use and…
  • America’s Housing Affordability Crisis and the Decline of Housing Supply — Why are constant-quality house prices 15% above their pre-2007 peak? Ed Glaeser notes that US housing grew just 0.6% annually in the 2010s, down from 4% in the…
  • Business Cycle
  • GDP
    • Growth

How America’s AI Boom Is Squeezing The Rest Of The Economy

Economist Staff The Economist
Date Posted:
August 19, 2025
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important

As AI-related investment has risen since 2023, residential and nonresidential investment have declined or flatlined. This may suggest that a relatively rate-insensitive AI buildout is crowding out more interest-sensitive forms of investment.

Something like a sixth of the 2% rise in American real GDP over the past year has come from investments in computer and communications equipment, including chips, and data centres. Add in the grid upgrades to power AI models, plus the intellectual-property value of the software itself, and one estimate puts the boom’s contribution to real GDP growth at 40%. The trouble is that the very sector powering so much of America’s economic growth is squeezing the rest of its output. Housebuilders, for instance, cannot afford to be blithe about higher borrowing costs. Data centres have also constrained the rest of the economy by keeping energy prices high. Average American electricity bills have risen by 7% so far in 2025, at least in part due to the extra strain data centres have put on the grid. Real consumption has flatlined since December. Housebuilding has slumped, as has non-AI business investment.

Related Articles:

  • Honey, AI Capex is Eating the Economy — Kedrosky estimates capex related to the datacenter buildout is ~20% of the railroad buildout in the 1880s and rising, though he cautions AI datacenter…
  • Back to Our Regularly Scheduled Programming — The four major “hyperscalers” continue to have a large gap btw AI spending ($440B in 2024 and $596B in 2025) and AI revenues. The four firms now account for…
  • The AI Boom’s Hidden Risk to the Economy — Btw 2016 and 2023, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta and Microsoft’s free cash flow and net earnings ~ tracked each other; since 2023, net earnings have risen 73%…
  • Business Cycle
  • GDP
  • Productivity
    • Innovation/Research
    • Investment

Is it Over?

Joseph Wang Fed Guy Blog
Date Posted:
August 18, 2025
Is Database:
Database

Following tepid reactions to the release of GTP-5, Joe Wang observes, “It is looking more like companies are spending hundreds of billions on rapidly depreciating GPUs that produce a commoditized product that most clients only modestly benefit from.”

GPT-5 users widely expressed disappointment in the capabilities of the new release, which seemed in some ways a step back. This sentiment is reflected in benchmarks that show a modest improvement in capabilities since the significant improvement in version 4 released two years ago. In addition, the benchmarks suggest a broader convergence in the capabilities of AI models. Commentary suggests this could be due to inherent limitations in the LLM technology and exhaustion of new training data. AI is fascinating technology, but it may not justify the enormous sums spent in its pursuit. It is looking more like companies are spending hundreds of billions on rapidly depreciating GPUs that produce a commoditized product that most clients only modestly benefit from. The entire macro landscape would look very different without the support of the AI boom.

Related Articles:

  • Honey, AI Capex is Eating the Economy — Kedrosky estimates capex related to the datacenter buildout is ~20% of the railroad buildout in the 1880s and rising, though he cautions AI datacenter…
  • Back to Our Regularly Scheduled Programming — The four major “hyperscalers” continue to have a large gap btw AI spending ($440B in 2024 and $596B in 2025) and AI revenues. The four firms now account for…
  • AI’s $600B Question — .@DavidCahn6 at @sequoia argues that because of lack of pricing power and rapidly improving chip technologies, multi-$B investments in current-generation GPUs…
  • Business Cycle
  • GDP
    • Financial Markets
  • Productivity
    • Innovation/Research
    • Investment

US Households and Firms Are in Great Shape

Torsten Sløk Apollo
Date Posted:
March 31, 2025
Is Database:
Database

​​Torsten Sløk notes that US household and banking sector debt has fallen to its lowest level in decades as a % of GDP, while corporate leverage has moved sideways. “The bottom line is that the private sector in the US is in incredibly good shape.”

Household sector leverage and banking sector leverage have declined significantly since 2008. Over the same period, federal government leverage has increased significantly, and corporate leverage has moved sideways. The bottom line is that the private sector in the US is in incredibly good shape.

Related Articles:

  • Global Debt Report 2025 — Over the next two years, the US must refinance debt exceeding 25% of GDP at sharply higher rates. Treasuries issued in 2024 carried an average yield…
  • The Long-Term Budget Outlook: 2025 to 2055 — Debt as a % of GDP will hit an all-time high of 107% in 2029 up from 98% of GDP in 2024, @USCBO forecasts. The forecast assumes 10-year Treasuries will yield…
  • Our Thoughts on Large US Deficits and Their Impact on Bond Yields — Bridgewater believes an increase in the deficit to 7-8% of GDP will not put undue pressure on bond yields. They argue rates reflect total credit creation…
  • Business Cycle
  • Fiscal Policy
    • Fiscal Deficits
    • Government Spending
  • GDP
© Copyright 2026 Coherent Research Institute · All Rights Reserved · Privacy · Terms