Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Housing starts slip 1.5% in July
Marketwatch ^ | 8.16.11 | sgoldstein@marketwatch.com

Posted on 08/16/2011 6:05:56 AM PDT by Free Vulcan

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Housing starts slipped 1.5% in July, according to data released Tuesday that highlight the lack of demand for new homes.

Starts fell to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 604,000, down from a downwardly revised 613,000 rate in June, the Commerce Department said.

Economists polled by MarketWatch had anticipated an annualized rate of 600,000 for July, and many had thought June’s initial reading of 629,000 was too strong.

Single-family starts slipped 4.9% last month to 425,000 from a downwardly revised 447,000.

(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: building; economy; homes; housing
This is one butt ugly report. When combined with yesterday's home builders report it looks like the single family market is dead and getting revised downward on a monthly basis.

The only bright spot is apartment units, if you can call that a bright spot.

1 posted on 08/16/2011 6:06:07 AM PDT by Free Vulcan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan

wow.


2 posted on 08/16/2011 6:07:38 AM PDT by ken21 (ruling class dem + rino progressives -- destroying america for 150 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan
Wait till the "establishment" starts bulldozing vacant homes. That will make starts go up.

The ultimate solution:


3 posted on 08/16/2011 6:11:55 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan

“Starts fell to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 604,000, down from a downwardly revised 613,000 rate in June, the Commerce Department said.

Economists polled by MarketWatch had anticipated an annualized rate of 600,000 for”

The numbers were better than what was expected.


4 posted on 08/16/2011 6:17:09 AM PDT by HereInTheHeartland (I love how the FR spellchecker doesn't recognize the word "Obama")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland

By six tenths of one percent.


5 posted on 08/16/2011 6:29:19 AM PDT by John W (Natural-born US citizen since 1955)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan
I'm sure commercial real estate is equally bad. This should be a surprise to no one. We've got a massive oversupply of homes. We've got a banking crisis. And we've got a recession at least as bad as '74 and '82, if not worse. How exactly is the housing supposed to suddenly rebound under those conditions?

I am no expert, but I think our economy relied too much on housing, housing starts, new construction. It's just another form of debt-based consumption. Sure, everyone needs a home. But you can't base an economy on that. We need to produce exports, it seems to me, or we will stagnate as we are now. And people need to go on credit detox. That debt unwinding means a long, slow recovery.

6 posted on 08/16/2011 6:39:29 AM PDT by Huck (Here's the bad news--Gov. Perry is the best we've got.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

47 Days And FR Is Still Short Of Its Goal

We Are In A Fight For Our Republic

Are You In Or Are You Out?

Support Free Republic

7 posted on 08/16/2011 7:03:27 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson