Facebook
TwitterThe number of home sales in the United States peaked in 2021 at almost ************* after steadily rising since 2018. Nevertheless, the market contracted in the following year, with transaction volumes falling to ***********. Home sales remained muted in 2024, with a mild increase expected in 2025 and 2026. A major factor driving this trend is the unprecedented increase in mortgage interest rates due to high inflation. How have U.S. home prices developed over time? The average sales price of new homes has also been rising since 2011. Buyer confidence seems to have recovered after the property crash, which has increased demand for homes and also the prices sellers are demanding for homes. At the same time, the affordability of U.S. homes has decreased. Both the number of existing and newly built homes sold has declined since the housing market boom during the coronavirus pandemic. Challenges in housing supply The number of housing units in the U.S. rose steadily between 1975 and 2005 but has remained fairly stable since then. Construction increased notably in the 1990s and early 2000s, with the number of construction starts steadily rising, before plummeting amid the infamous housing market crash. Housing starts slowly started to pick up in 2011, mirroring the economic recovery. In 2022, the supply of newly built homes plummeted again, as supply chain challenges following the COVID-19 pandemic and tariffs on essential construction materials such as steel and lumber led to prices soaring.
Facebook
TwitterThe average resale house price in Canada was forecast to reach nearly ******* Canadian dollars in 2026, according to a January forecast. In 2024, house prices increased after falling for the first time since 2019. One of the reasons for the price correction was the notable drop in transaction activity. Housing transactions picked up in 2024 and are expected to continue to grow until 2026. British Columbia, which is the most expensive province for housing, is projected to see the average house price reach *** million Canadian dollars in 2026. Affordability in Vancouver Vancouver is the most populous city in British Columbia and is also infamously expensive for housing. In 2023, the city topped the ranking for least affordable housing market in Canada, with the average homeownership cost outweighing the average household income. There are a multitude of reasons for this, but most residents believe that foreigners investing in the market cause the high housing prices. Victoria housing market The capital of British Columbia is Victoria, where housing prices are also very high. The price of a single family home in Victoria's most expensive suburb, Oak Bay was *** million Canadian dollars in 2024.
Facebook
TwitterAfter a period of rapid increase, house price growth in the UK has moderated. In 2025, house prices are forecast to increase by ****percent. Between 2025 and 2029, the average house price growth is projected at *** percent. According to the source, home building is expected to increase slightly in this period, fueling home buying. On the other hand, higher borrowing costs despite recent easing of mortgage rates and affordability challenges may continue to suppress transaction activity. Historical house price growth in the UK House prices rose steadily between 2015 and 2020, despite minor fluctuations. In the following two years, prices soared, leading to the house price index jumping by about 20 percent. As the market stood in April 2025, the average price for a home stood at approximately ******* British pounds. Rents are expected to continue to grow According to another forecast, the prime residential market is also expected to see rental prices grow in the next five years. Growth is forecast to be stronger in 2025 and slow slightly until 2029. The rental market in London is expected to follow a similar trend, with Outer London slightly outperforming Central London.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Housing markets are often characterized by price bubbles, and governments have instituted policies to stabilize them. Under this circumstance, this study addresses the following questions. (1) Does policy tightening change expectations in housing prices, revealing a regime change? (2) If so, what determines the housing market’s reaction to policy tightening? To answer these questions, we examine the effects of policy tightening that occurred in 2016 on the Chinese housing market where a price boom persisted in the post-2000 period. Using a log-periodic power law model and employing a modified multi-population genetic algorithm for parameter estimation, we find that tightening policy in China did not cause a market crash; instead, shifting the Chinese housing market from faster-than-exponential growth to a soft landing. We attribute this regime shift to low sensitivity in the Chinese housing market to global perturbations. Our findings suggest that government policies can help stabilize housing prices and improve market conditions when implemented expediently. Moreover, policymakers should consider preparedness for the possibility of an economic crisis and other social needs (e.g., housing affordability) for overall social welfare when managing housing price bubbles.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Housing Index in the United Kingdom increased to 517.10 points in October from 514.20 points in September of 2025. This dataset provides - United Kingdom House Price Index - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Average House Prices in New Zealand increased to 902020 NZD in October from 900521 NZD in September of 2025. This dataset includes a chart with historical data for New Zealand Average House Prices.
Facebook
TwitterThe average Canadian house price declined slightly in 2023, after four years of consecutive growth. The average house price stood at ******* Canadian dollars in 2023 and was forecast to reach ******* Canadian dollars by 2026. Home sales on the rise The number of housing units sold is also set to increase over the two-year period. From ******* units sold, the annual number of home sales in the country is expected to rise to ******* in 2025. British Columbia and Ontario have traditionally been housing markets with prices above the Canadian average, and both are set to witness an increase in sales in 2025. How did Canadians feel about the future development of house prices? When it comes to consumer confidence in the performance of the real estate market in the next six months, Canadian consumers in 2024 mostly expected that the market would go up. A slightly lower share of the respondents believed real estate prices would remain the same.
Facebook
TwitterPortugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain were widely considered the Eurozone's weakest economies during the Great Recession and subsequent Eurozone debt crisis. These countries were grouped together due to the similarities in their economic crises, with much of them driven by house price bubbles which had inflated over the early 2000s, before bursting in 2007 due to the Global Financial Crisis. Entry into the Euro currency by 2002 had meant that banks could lend to house buyers in these countries at greatly reduced rates of interest.
This reduction in the cost of financing contributed to creating housing bubbles, which were further boosted by pro-cyclical housing policies among many of the countries' governments. In spite of these economies experiencing similar economic problems during the crisis, Italy and Portugal did not experience housing bubbles in the same way in which Greece, Ireland, and Spain did. In the latter countries, their real housing prices (which are adjusted for inflation) peaked in 2007, before quickly declining during the recession. In particular, house prices in Ireland dropped by over 40 percent from their peak in 2007 to 2011.
Facebook
TwitterAttribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The best fit of log-periodic power law parameters near policy implementation.
Facebook
TwitterThe Federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Fannie Mae, was created by the U.S. congress in 1938, in order to maintain liquidity and stability in the domestic mortgage market. The company is a government-sponsored enterprise (GSE), meaning that while it was a publicly traded company for most of its history, it was still supported by the federal government. While there is no legally binding guarantee of shares in GSEs or their securities, it is generally acknowledged that the U.S. government is highly unlikely to let these enterprises fail. Due to these implicit guarantees, GSEs are able to access financing at a reduced cost of interest. Fannie Mae's main activity is the purchasing of mortgage loans from their originators (banks, mortgage brokers etc.) and packaging them into mortgage-backed securities (MBS) in order to ease the access of U.S. homebuyers to housing credit. The early 2000s U.S. mortgage finance boom During the early 2000s, Fannie Mae was swept up in the U.S. housing boom which eventually led to the financial crisis of 2007-2008. The association's stated goal of increasing access of lower income families to housing finance coalesced with the interests of private mortgage lenders and Wall Street investment banks, who had become heavily reliant on the housing market to drive profits. Private lenders had begun to offer riskier mortgage loans in the early 2000s due to low interest rates in the wake of the "Dot Com" crash and their need to maintain profits through increasing the volume of loans on their books. The securitized products created by these private lenders did not maintain the standards which had traditionally been upheld by GSEs. Due to their market share being eaten into by private firms, however, the GSEs involved in the mortgage markets began to also lower their standards, resulting in a 'race to the bottom'. The fall of Fannie Mae The lowering of lending standards was a key factor in creating the housing bubble, as mortgages were now being offered to borrowers with little or no ability to repay the loans. Combined with fraudulent practices from credit ratings agencies, who rated the junk securities created from these mortgage loans as being of the highest standard, this led directly to the financial panic that erupted on Wall Street beginning in 2007. As the U.S. economy slowed down in 2006, mortgage delinquency rates began to spike. Fannie Mae's losses in the mortgage security market in 2006 and 2007, along with the losses of the related GSE 'Freddie Mac', had caused its share value to plummet, stoking fears that it may collapse. On September 7th 2008, Fannie Mae was taken into government conservatorship along with Freddie Mac, with their stocks being delisted from stock exchanges in 2010. This act was seen as an unprecedented direct intervention into the economy by the U.S. government, and a symbol of how far the U.S. housing market had fallen.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for All-Transactions House Price Index for Billings, MT (MSA) (ATNHPIUS13740Q) from Q2 1985 to Q3 2025 about Billings, MT, appraisers, HPI, housing, price index, indexes, price, and USA.
Facebook
TwitterCC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
This is not going to be an article or Op-Ed about Michael Jordan. Since 2009 we've been in the longest bull-market in history, that's 11 years and counting. However a few metrics like the stock market P/E, the call to put ratio and of course the Shiller P/E suggest a great crash is coming in-between the levels of 1929 and the dot.com bubble. Mean reversion historically is inevitable and the Fed's printing money experiment could end in disaster for the stock market in late 2021 or 2022. You can read Jeremy Grantham's Last Dance article here. You are likely well aware of Michael Burry's predicament as well. It's easier for you just to skim through two related videos on this topic of a stock market crash. Michael Burry's Warning see this YouTube. Jeremy Grantham's Warning See this YouTube. Typically when there is a major event in the world, there is a crash and then a bear market and a recovery that takes many many months. In March, 2020 that's not what we saw since the Fed did some astonishing things that means a liquidity sloth and the risk of a major inflation event. The pandemic represented the quickest decline of at least 30% in the history of the benchmark S&P 500, but the recovery was not correlated to anything but Fed intervention. Since the pandemic clearly isn't disappearing and many sectors such as travel, business travel, tourism and supply chain disruptions appear significantly disrupted - the so-called economic recovery isn't so great. And there's this little problem at the heart of global capitalism today, the stock market just keeps going up. Crashes and corrections typically occur frequently in a normal market. But the Fed liquidity and irresponsible printing of money is creating a scenario where normal behavior isn't occurring on the markets. According to data provided by market analytics firm Yardeni Research, the benchmark index has undergone 38 declines of at least 10% since the beginning of 1950. Since March, 2020 we've barely seen a down month. September, 2020 was flat-ish. The S&P 500 has more than doubled since those lows. Look at the angle of the curve: The S&P 500 was 735 at the low in 2009, so in this bull market alone it has gone up 6x in valuation. That's not a normal cycle and it could mean we are due for an epic correction. I have to agree with the analysts who claim that the long, long bull market since 2009 has finally matured into a fully-fledged epic bubble. There is a complacency, buy-the dip frenzy and general meme environment to what BigTech can do in such an environment. The weight of Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft, Facebook, Nvidia and Tesla together in the S&P and Nasdaq is approach a ridiculous weighting. When these stocks are seen both as growth, value and companies with unbeatable moats the entire dynamics of the stock market begin to break down. Check out FANG during the pandemic. BigTech is Seen as Bullet-Proof me valuations and a hysterical speculative behavior leads to even higher highs, even as 2020 offered many younger people an on-ramp into investing for the first time. Some analysts at JP Morgan are even saying that until retail investors stop charging into stocks, markets probably don’t have too much to worry about. Hedge funds with payment for order flows can predict exactly how these retail investors are behaving and monetize them. PFOF might even have to be banned by the SEC. The risk-on market theoretically just keeps going up until the Fed raises interest rates, which could be in 2023! For some context, we're more than 1.4 years removed from the bear-market bottom of the coronavirus crash and haven't had even a 5% correction in nine months. This is the most over-priced the market has likely ever been. At the night of the dot-com bubble the S&P 500 was only 1,400. Today it is 4,500, not so many years after. Clearly something is not quite right if you look at history and the P/E ratios. A market pumped with liquidity produces higher earnings with historically low interest rates, it's an environment where dangerous things can occur. In late 1997, as the S&P 500 passed its previous 1929 peak of 21x earnings, that seemed like a lot, but nothing compared to today. For some context, the S&P 500 Shiller P/E closed last week at 38.58, which is nearly a two-decade high. It's also well over double the average Shiller P/E of 16.84, dating back 151 years. So the stock market is likely around 2x over-valued. Try to think rationally about what this means for valuations today and your favorite stock prices, what should they be in historical terms? The S&P 500 is up 31% in the past year. It will likely hit 5,000 before a correction given the amount of added liquidity to the system and the QE the Fed is using that's like a huge abuse of MMT, or Modern Monetary Theory. This has also lent to bubbles in the housing market, crypto and even commodities like Gold with long-term global GDP meeting many headwinds in the years ahead due to a demographic shift of an ageing population and significant technological automation. So if you think that stocks or equities or ETFs are the best place to put your money in 2022, you might want to think again. The crash of the OTC and small-cap market since February 2021 has been quite an indication of what a correction looks like. According to the Motley Fool what happens after major downturns in the market historically speaking? In each of the previous four instances that the S&P 500's Shiller P/E shot above and sustained 30, the index lost anywhere from 20% to 89% of its value. So what's what we too are due for, reversion to the mean will be realistically brutal after the Fed's hyper-extreme intervention has run its course. Of course what the Fed stimulus has really done is simply allowed the 1% to get a whole lot richer to the point of wealth inequality spiraling out of control in the decades ahead leading us likely to a dystopia in an unfair and unequal version of BigTech capitalism. This has also led to a trend of short squeeze to these tech stocks, as shown in recent years' data. Of course the Fed has to say that's its done all of these things for the people, employment numbers and the labor market. Women in the workplace have been set behind likely 15 years in social progress due to the pandemic and the Fed's response. While the 89% lost during the Great Depression would be virtually impossible today thanks to ongoing intervention from the Federal Reserve and Capitol Hill, a correction of 20% to 50% would be pretty fair and simply return the curve back to a normal trajectory as interest rates going back up eventually in the 2023 to 2025 period. It's very unlikely the market has taken Fed tapering into account (priced-in), since the euphoria of a can't miss market just keeps pushing the markets higher. But all good things must come to an end. Earlier this month, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics released inflation data from July. This report showed that the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers rose 5.2% over the past 12 months. While the Fed and economists promise us this inflation is temporary, others are not so certain. As you print so much money, the money you have is worth less and certain goods cost more. Wage gains in some industries cannot be taken back, they are permanent - in the service sector like restaurants, hospitality and travel that have been among the hardest hit. The pandemic has led to a paradigm shift in the future of work, and that too is not temporary. The Great Resignation means white collar jobs with be more WFM than ever before, with a new software revolution, different transport and energy behaviors and so forth. Climate change alone could slow down global GDP in the 21st century. How can inflation be temporary when so many trends don't appear to be temporary? Sure the price of lumber or used-cars could be temporary, but a global chip shortage is exasperating the automobile sector. The stock market isn't even behaving like it cares about anything other than the Fed, and its $billions of dollars of buying bonds each month. Some central banks will start to taper about December, 2021 (like the European). However Delta could further mutate into a variant that makes the first generation of vaccines less effective. Such a macro event could be enough to trigger the correction we've been speaking about. So stay safe, and keep your money safe. The Last Dance of the 2009 bull market could feel especially more painful because we've been spoiled for so long in the markets. We can barely remember what March, 2020 felt like. Some people sold their life savings simply due to scare tactics by the likes of Bill Ackman. His scare tactics on CNBC won him likely hundreds of millions as the stock market tanked. Hedge funds further gamed the Reddit and Gamestop movement, orchestrating them and leading the new retail investors into meme speculation and a whole bunch of other unsavory things like options trading at such scale we've never seen before. It's not just inflation and higher interest rates, it's how absurdly high valuations have become. Still correlation does not imply causation. Just because inflation has picked up, it doesn't guarantee that stocks will head lower. Nevertheless, weaker buying power associated with higher inflation can't be overlooked as a potential negative for the U.S. economy and equities. The current S&P500 10-year P/E Ratio is 38.7. This is 97% above the modern-era market average of 19.6, putting the current P/E 2.5 standard deviations above the modern-era average. This is just math, folks. History is saying the stock market is 2x its true value. So why and who would be full on the market or an asset class like crypto that is mostly speculative in nature to begin with? Study the following on a historical basis, and due your own due diligence as to the health of the markets: Debt-to-GDP ratio Call to put ratio
Facebook
TwitterThe average house price in Nova Scotia in 2024 stood at approximately ******* Canadian dollars. In the next year, house prices are forecast to further increase by about five percent. Compared to other provinces, Nova Scotia ranked below the national average in terms of house prices. However, the average price of a house in Nova Scotia was twice lower than in Ontario or British Columbia. Exploding population growth in recent yearsNova Scotia is the second-smallest province after Prince Edward Island, and had a population of just under *********** in 2018. The population of this province was relatively steady between 2000 and 2015, but has taken off since then. This sudden growth may be a factor in the increasing house prices, as demand also increases due to the greater number of residents looking for homes. The future of housing affordability in Nova ScotiaHalifax, the provincial capital, had an affordable housing market as of 2018, with mortgage payments only constituting about ** percent of average household incomes. The number of housing starts in the region has increased in the past few years, which also suggests an increase in demand. Only time will tell whether this will ensure a sufficient supply of homes for the region in response to its growing population.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://mobilityforesights.com/page/privacy-policyhttps://mobilityforesights.com/page/privacy-policy
In Global EV Crash Structural Plastics Market, A cutting-edge, multi-material housing for an electric vehicle battery has been introduced by Continental Structural Plastics of Auburn Hills.
Facebook
Twitterhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domainhttps://fred.stlouisfed.org/legal/#copyright-public-domain
Graph and download economic data for Resident Population in Fauquier County, VA (VAFAUQ1POP) from 1970 to 2024 about Fauquier County, VA; Washington; VA; residents; population; and USA.
Facebook
TwitterThe Global Financial Crisis of 2008-09 was a period of severe macroeconomic instability for the United States and the global economy more generally. The crisis was precipitated by the collapse of a number of financial institutions who were deeply involved in the U.S. mortgage market and associated credit markets. Beginning in the Summer of 2007, a number of banks began to report issues with increasing mortgage delinquencies and the problem of not being able to accurately price derivatives contracts which were based on bundles of these U.S. residential mortgages. By the end of 2008, U.S. financial institutions had begun to fail due to their exposure to the housing market, leading to one of the deepest recessions in the history of the United States and to extensive government bailouts of the financial sector.
Subprime and the collapse of the U.S. mortgage market
The early 2000s had seen explosive growth in the U.S. mortgage market, as credit became cheaper due to the Federal Reserve's decision to lower interest rates in the aftermath of the 2001 'Dot Com' Crash, as well as because of the increasing globalization of financial flows which directed funds into U.S. financial markets. Lower mortgage rates gave incentive to financial institutions to begin lending to riskier borrowers, using so-called 'subprime' loans. These were loans to borrowers with poor credit scores, who would not have met the requirements for a conventional mortgage loan. In order to hedge against the risk of these riskier loans, financial institutions began to use complex financial instruments known as derivatives, which bundled mortgage loans together and allowed the risk of default to be sold on to willing investors. This practice was supposed to remove the risk from these loans, by effectively allowing credit institutions to buy insurance against delinquencies. Due to the fraudulent practices of credit ratings agencies, however, the price of these contacts did not reflect the real risk of the loans involved. As the reality of the inability of the borrowers to repay began to kick in during 2007, the financial markets which traded these derivatives came under increasing stress and eventually led to a 'sudden stop' in trading and credit intermediation during 2008.
Market Panic and The Great Recession
As borrowers failed to make repayments, this had a knock-on effect among financial institutions who were highly leveraged with financial instruments based on the mortgage market. Lehman Brothers, one of the world's largest investment banks, failed on September 15th 2008, causing widespread panic in financial markets. Due to the fear of an unprecedented collapse in the financial sector which would have untold consequences for the wider economy, the U.S. government and central bank, The Fed, intervened the following day to bailout the United States' largest insurance company, AIG, and to backstop financial markets. The crisis prompted a deep recession, known colloquially as The Great Recession, drawing parallels between this period and The Great Depression. The collapse of credit intermediation in the economy lead to further issues in the real economy, as business were increasingly unable to pay back loans and were forced to lay off staff, driving unemployment to a high of almost 10 percent in 2010. While there has been criticism of the U.S. government's actions to bailout the financial institutions involved, the actions of the government and the Fed are seen by many as having prevented the crisis from spiraling into a depression of the magnitude of The Great Depression.
Facebook
TwitterLehman Brothers, the fourth largest investment bank on Wall Street, declared bankruptcy on the 15th of September 2008, becoming the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history. The investment house, which was founded in the mid-19th century, had become heavily involved in the U.S. housing bubble in the early 2000s, with its large holdings of toxic mortgage-backed securities (MBS) ultimately causing the bank's downfall. The bank had expanded rapidly following the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, which meant that investment banks could also engage in commercial banking activities. Lehman vertically integrated their mortgage business, buying smaller commercial enterprises that originated housing loans, which allowed the bank to expand its MBS holdings. The downfall of Lehman and the crash of '08 As the U.S. housing market began to slow down in 2006, the default rate on housing loans began to spike, triggering losses for Lehman from their MBS portfolio. Lehman's main competitor in mortgage financing, Bear Stearns, was bought by J.P. Morgan Chase in order to prevent bankruptcy in March 2008, leading investors and lenders to become increasingly concerned about the bank's financial health. As the bank relied on short-term funding on money markets in order to meet its obligations, the news of its huge losses in the third-quarter of 2008 further prevented it from funding itself on financial markets. By September, it was clear that without external assistance, the bank would fail. As its losses from credit default swaps mounted due to the deepening crash in the housing market, Lehman was forced to declare bankruptcy on September 15, as no buyer could be found to save the bank. The collapse of Lehman triggered panic in global financial markets, forcing the U.S. government to step in and bail-out the insurance giant AIG the next day on September 16. The effects of this financial crisis hit the non-financial economy hard, causing a global recession in 2009.
Facebook
TwitterWith the collapse of the U.S. housing market and the subsequent financial crisis on Wall Street in 2007 and 2008, economies across the globe began to enter into deep recessions. What had started out as a crisis centered on the United States quickly became global in nature, as it became apparent that not only had the economies of other advanced countries (grouped together as the G7) become intimately tied to the U.S. financial system, but that many of them had experienced housing and asset price bubbles similar to that in the U.S.. The United Kingdom had experienced a huge inflation of housing prices since the 1990s, while Eurozone members (such as Germany, France and Italy) had financial sectors which had become involved in reckless lending to economies on the periphery of the EU, such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal. Other countries, such as Japan, were hit heavily due their export-led growth models which suffered from the decline in international trade. Unemployment during the Great Recession As business and consumer confidence crashed, credit markets froze, and international trade contracted, the unemployment rate in the most advanced economies shot up. While four to five percent is generally considered to be a healthy unemployment rate, nearing full employment in the economy (when any remaining unemployment is not related to a lack of consumer demand), many of these countries experienced rates at least double that, with unemployment in the United States peaking at almost 10 percent in 2010. In large countries, unemployment rates of this level meant millions or tens of millions of people being out of work, which led to political pressures to stimulate economies and create jobs. By 2012, many of these countries were seeing declining unemployment rates, however, in France and Italy rates of joblessness continued to increase as the Euro crisis took hold. These countries suffered from having a monetary policy which was too tight for their economies (due to the ECB controlling interest rates) and fiscal policy which was constrained by EU debt rules. Left with the option of deregulating their labor markets and pursuing austerity policies, their unemployment rates remained over 10 percent well into the 2010s. Differences in labor markets The differences in unemployment rates at the peak of the crisis (2009-2010) reflect not only the differences in how economies were affected by the downturn, but also the differing labor market institutions and programs in the various countries. Countries with more 'liberalized' labor markets, such as the United States and United Kingdom experienced sharp jumps in their unemployment rate due to the ease at which employers can lay off workers in these countries. When the crisis subsided in these countries, however, their unemployment rates quickly began to drop below those of the other countries, due to their more dynamic labor markets which make it easier to hire workers when the economy is doing well. On the other hand, countries with more 'coordinated' labor market institutions, such as Germany and Japan, experiences lower rates of unemployment during the crisis, as programs such as short-time work, job sharing, and wage restraint agreements were used to keep workers in their jobs. While these countries are less likely to experience spikes in unemployment during crises, the highly regulated nature of their labor markets mean that they are slower to add jobs during periods of economic prosperity.
Facebook
TwitterThe Long Depression was, by a large margin, the longest-lasting recession in U.S. history. It began in the U.S. with the Panic of 1873, and lasted for over five years. This depression was the largest in a series of recessions at the turn of the 20th century, which proved to be a period of overall stagnation as the U.S. financial markets failed to keep pace with industrialization and changes in monetary policy. Great Depression The Great Depression, however, is widely considered to have been the most severe recession in U.S. history. Following the Wall Street Crash in 1929, the country's economy collapsed, wages fell and a quarter of the workforce was unemployed. It would take almost four years for recovery to begin. Additionally, U.S. expansion and integration in international markets allowed the depression to become a global event, which became a major catalyst in the build up to the Second World War. Decreasing severity When comparing recessions before and after the Great Depression, they have generally become shorter and less frequent over time. Only three recessions in the latter period have lasted more than one year. Additionally, while there were 12 recessions between 1880 and 1920, there were only six recessions between 1980 and 2020. The most severe recession in recent years was the financial crisis of 2007 (known as the Great Recession), where irresponsible lending policies and lack of government regulation allowed for a property bubble to develop and become detached from the economy over time, this eventually became untenable and the bubble burst. Although the causes of both the Great Depression and Great Recession were similar in many aspects, economists have been able to use historical evidence to try and predict, prevent, or limit the impact of future recessions.
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
Facebook
TwitterThe number of home sales in the United States peaked in 2021 at almost ************* after steadily rising since 2018. Nevertheless, the market contracted in the following year, with transaction volumes falling to ***********. Home sales remained muted in 2024, with a mild increase expected in 2025 and 2026. A major factor driving this trend is the unprecedented increase in mortgage interest rates due to high inflation. How have U.S. home prices developed over time? The average sales price of new homes has also been rising since 2011. Buyer confidence seems to have recovered after the property crash, which has increased demand for homes and also the prices sellers are demanding for homes. At the same time, the affordability of U.S. homes has decreased. Both the number of existing and newly built homes sold has declined since the housing market boom during the coronavirus pandemic. Challenges in housing supply The number of housing units in the U.S. rose steadily between 1975 and 2005 but has remained fairly stable since then. Construction increased notably in the 1990s and early 2000s, with the number of construction starts steadily rising, before plummeting amid the infamous housing market crash. Housing starts slowly started to pick up in 2011, mirroring the economic recovery. In 2022, the supply of newly built homes plummeted again, as supply chain challenges following the COVID-19 pandemic and tariffs on essential construction materials such as steel and lumber led to prices soaring.