Skip to main content

Cardboard, Lipstick and the Housing Crisis

 

While economists clutch their spreadsheets and politicians claim "steady growth," the real economy is screaming warnings that almost nobody wants to hear. The signals are there, hiding in plain sight: in the cardboard boxes piling up at recycling centres, in the lipstick tubes sliding across checkout counters. And they're both pointing toward the same grim destination—a housing market collapse that will make 2008 look like a dress rehearsal.

UK house prices fell 0.3% in September, erasing August's gains and bringing the average home to £298,184. The Halifax tries to spin this as "broadly stable," but stability is precisely what we don't have. What we have is a market teetering on the edge, propped up by nothing more substantial than collective delusion and the desperate hope that somehow, this time, the fundamentals don't matter.

Here's what does matter: the economy that underpins housing demand is crumbling, and the establishment indicators you've been taught to trust are looking in entirely the wrong direction. GDP figures, unemployment rates, inflation data—these are lagging indicators, rearview mirrors that tell you about crashes you've already had. By the time they register a recession, families have already lost their homes.

The alternative indicators—dismissed as quirky curiosities by the economic priesthood—are actually far more revealing. Alan Greenspan, who chaired the Federal Reserve for nearly two decades, tracked cardboard box demand as a measure of real-time economic activity. Why? Because close to 75-80% of all non-durable goods are shipped in corrugated cardboard containers. When box orders fall, it means companies expect weaker consumer demand. It's that simple, that brutal, and that predictive.

And what's happening now? The U.S. has shed about 9% of its containerboard production capacity in about eight months—about twice as much as during the 2009 recession. International Paper reported U.S. box shipments fell about 5% year-on-year in the second quarter, its fourth consecutive quarterly decline. This isn't noise in the data. This is an air raid siren.

Then there's the Lipstick Index. Coined by Estée Lauder's Leonard Lauder, it tracks how consumers shift to small affordable luxuries during economic stress. When people start buying £20 lipsticks instead of handbags or holidays, they're signalling economic anxiety while trying to maintain some semblance of normalcy. During the 2008 global financial crisis, cosmetics sales jumped 4.4% even as the economy tanked. These "little pick-me-ups" are actually distress signals.

Now connect the dots. Consumer demand is weakening. Production is falling. People are clutching at small comforts while abandoning big purchases. And what's the biggest purchase most people will ever make? Property. What happens when the economic engine that's supposed to drive housing demand starts sputtering?

Affordability remains a challenge, with only relatively lower mortgage rates and steady wage growth supporting buyer confidence. But mortgage rates aren't falling fast enough, wages aren't rising fast enough, and confidence—that most fragile of economic ingredients—is evaporating. When recession hits, and the cardboard and lipstick indices suggest it's not a question of if but when, that confidence will shatter completely.

Housing markets don't decline gracefully. They cascade. Falling demand leads to falling prices. Falling prices lead to negative equity. Negative equity leads to repossessions. Repossessions lead to forced sales. Forced sales accelerate price falls. And house building? Builders breaking ground on new homes signal confidence that buyers are ready. When that confidence disappears, construction doesn't slow—it stops.

The tragedy is that none of this is inevitable in the sense of being natural or necessary. It's inevitable only because we've built an economic system that lurches from bubble to crash, enriching speculators while devastating ordinary families. We've treated housing as a commodity rather than a right, and now we're going to reap what we've sown.

The cardboard boxes are trying to tell us something. So are the lipstick sales. The question is whether we're willing to listen, or whether we'll keep trusting the official statistics until the roof quite literally falls in.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Leadership and Seductive Innovation

Whatever sector, whatever industry you are in, these are challenging times. It is all hands to the pump to find the right course. And for those fearing their very survival, it is understandable that the search for that new, powerful idea should dominate. But success will never lie in new technology alone; it is also critical to look in the right direction, not to get waylaid into seemingly seductive solutions. Look at the business and be honest, are a series of technological innovations likely? And if they are, will they make the impact on your industry that you anticipate? For service organisations in particular, constant technomania is probably an absolute distraction from the core business. Worse, it will beguile you into believing there is a promised land; that there is a magic bullet that will solve the organisation’s problems. The techno-fetishists earn their crust by promoting ever whackier and unachievable ideas. New jobs are being created, innovation labs are springing up. Cha...

Homing in on the public sector

  Published in The Guardian, 8th February 1995

Shared Ownership - a housing market fix?

Shared Ownership has given homes to around 180,000 families and it’s claimed that it offers a third way, an opportunity to house many more at a lower cost, another tenure that broadens the landlord offer. Some housing association websites go further and claim “It’s about getting your foot on the housing ladder. It’s a great alternative to renting and perfect if you can’t afford to buy a house outright.” Really? Whilst housing associations like selling them, the experiences of the occupiers can be quite different. Higher entry costs, administrative charges, rents rising annually, plus the responsibility for all repairs can mean the worst of all worlds. Why do increasing numbers feel trapped in the tenure?   “It’s a step on the ladder” , yet Cambridge University found ( 2012 ) that over 12 years only 27,908 had staircased to 100%, and in many rural areas freehold ownership is expressly prohibited. They concluded that many shared owners simply cannot afford to buy their property in fu...

Redefining acceptable conduct: Using social landlords to control behaviour

  Abstract The 1996 Housing Act brought ‘antisocial behaviour’ within the remit of housing legislation for the first time. This legislation is directed exclusively at those living in council housing. There still remains uncertainty about the exact nature of ‘antisocial’ behaviour. This has implications for the reasons for outlawing it and for the application of this legislation. Using data from the British Crime Survey, it is argued that there is insufficient evidence of a growth in antisocial behaviour. This legislation is directed exclusively at those living in council housing. What appears to be occurring on local authority housing estates is that a combination of, among other things, high unemployment, high child densities and lack of public funding in community and associated facilities is resulting in higher rates of vandalism. The legislation, in reality, seeks to legitimise opposition to a range of previously acceptable behaviours. For publication click here . For complete ...

1984 and Truth Social

How Orwell’s masterpiece can predict Trumps next steps I decided, with a grim sort of duty, to re-read Orwell. Pulled my old, dog-eared copy of Nineteen Eighty-Four from the shelf, expecting, perhaps, a historical curiosity. A powerful warning, yes, but one whose specific horrors belonged to the mid-20th century, to Stalin and the nascent Cold War fears that birthed it. Instead, I found myself gripped by a chilling, nauseating sense of déjà vu . Page after page wasn't just resonant; it felt like a dispatch from the present. Not the whole terrifying architecture of Airstrip One, not yet. But the tools, the language, the psychological distortions – they leaped off the page, smeared across the news reports from Donald Trump’s second presidency, barely four months old. It’s uncanny, and frankly, terrifying. Orwell wasn't just writing about totalitarianism; he was dissecting the mechanisms by which truth is dismantled and power becomes absolute. And seeing those mechanisms depl...

Who should cast the first stone?

  Published in The Guardian 18th April 1998

Will Housing Investment be Pivotal?

  Rachel Reeves’ Spring Statement on 26th March is poised to be a defining moment. We stand at a crossroads, with stark choices before us. The Chancellor must resist the siren song of austerity and instead embrace a bold vision of investment, especially in housing, and safeguard the vital safety net of welfare. The idea that we can achieve economic growth by slashing benefits and public spending is not just misguided, it’s downright dangerous. It’s a cruel delusion to think that we can starve the very people who need support the most and somehow expect the economy to flourish. Cutting wages and benefits for the poor, the old, the sick, and the disabled is not just morally reprehensible, it’s economically illiterate. It will only deepen inequality and stifle any hope of real progress. Instead of these shortsighted cuts, Reeves must prioritise investment in social housing. A decent home is not a luxury; it’s a fundamental human right. Building more social housing will not only provid...

A National Scandal: Empty Homes and the Housing Crisis

Everyone deserves a safe and secure place to call home. Yet in England today, a growing number of people struggle to access this basic need. While hundreds of thousands of properties sit empty, the housing crisis deepens. A Growing Problem, a Missed Opportunity But there's a glimmer of hope. Studies show that repurposing empty properties could create up to 40,000 affordable homes within four years. It wouldn't solve everything, but it would offer a lifeline to countless individuals on the brink of homelessness. This is a wasted opportunity. No one should face homelessness when solutions exist. Families with children are crammed into single rooms, forced to prepare for work in drafty cars, or uprooted from jobs and support networks due to a lack of affordable options. The government's inaction on empty properties is unacceptable. Long-term empty homes, vacant for over six months, have skyrocketed to over 248,000 – a 24% increase in just six years. This coincides with recor...

Time catches up with Eric Pickles

  Eric Pickles has been in the news again. He’s a busy man. Almost exactly a decade before his reappearance, I attended ‘Herefordshire 2020: A Vision for the County’, a half day conference in Hereford. It was a brave attempt to demonstrate how the private and public sectors could work together for a positive future. The star of the show was the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, who gave a bizarre and disturbing performance . The theme of Eric Pickles’ speech was that we need to get away from the central control of policy; we need to deregulate and stop the tick box mentality where there are regulations for everything. Make government officials with clipboards get a sense of perspective. On entering his department, he proudly told us, he gave his civil servants his three priorities; localism, localism and localism. “Localism will support growth and growth will support localism”. His confidence grew. To a Parish Councillor trying to achieve change he chided, “...

How social landlords must respond to Trump tariff impacts

Economic turmoil will have knock-on impacts for affordable housing supply chains in the UK, but it also presents an opportunity for social landlords to demonstrate resilience, argues Peter Brown Trump's tariff barrage, with a 10% baseline tariff on its goods exports to the US includes a 25% tariff on steel and aluminium imports , materials fundamental to the construction industry. Manufacturing and construction supply chains are directly in the firing line and perhaps more importantly, unforeseen turbulence creates uncertain future costs, risks of contract failure and possibly more company insolvencies. This is no longer a distant concern. How should the sector respond? Decisive action is needed. The potential impact of these tariffs, particularly on steel and aluminium, will ripple through our supply chains, inflating construction costs and jeopardising project viability. Housing organisations, from the largest G15 to the smallest community-led associations, must adopt a war-room...