<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>NPR Tells Listeners That House Prices Have Stabilized</title>
		<description>Comments for NPR Tells Listeners That House Prices Have Stabilized at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 1 out of 1 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.cepr.net</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:18:28 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>Free Marketeers Shut Down Free Markets</title>
			<link>http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/npr-tells-listeners-that-house-prices-have-stabilized#comment-1935</link>
			<description>The underlying message is that the housing market can't really be working to restore itself to &quot;normal&quot; lower prices, because that would directly contradict the broader message of the financial and real estate industry, thus the counter backstory message that the market has worked, but to stabilize prices, and is not expected to reduce them further.

The news story itself is about a consultant booted out for whistleblowing on servicers and investors who get the financial aid rather than homeowners, which agrees with Baker.  But note the emphasis on government failure for the usual reason, observable corruption as reported by the consultant.  Again, blame is placed on the government in an entirely different way than if HAMP was presented as flawed because of pressure to ignore falling prices in the housing market.

The news is not about market failure or government failure per se.  It's manipulated to cater to whether concentrated interests in the private sector benefit from either one.  In this case, the &quot;free housing market&quot; is not producing price changes in the desired direction, which is conveniently misreported to maintain its status as a &quot;free market&quot; which prouces &quot;stabilized prices&quot;.  From there, the usual story can be developed on how the government failed via intervention into &quot;free markets&quot;.

It's like a mirror image of reporting on Social Security.  When a government program is clearly superior to private markets, it's the one most reported as a failure because it heavily restricts the predatory power of the concentrated private sector.  But when a private housing market actually starts to work like a free market should, to correct itself to lower price levels, suddenly the same crowd turns against the result with propaganda designed not only to counteract the perception that prices are falling, but to intervene and keep them from falling on their behalf. - izzatzo</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 01:12:38 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
