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