April 23, 2007
Mod Squad Containment
by Mike Shedlock
I recently talked about some of the bailout plans in The Fatal Flaw in Housing Bailout Plans. But somehow I missed the "Bear Stearns/EMC Mod Squad" to Help Keep Customers in Their Homes.
Should we bailout anyone?
The San Francisco Chronicle headline reads Why we shouldn't be bailing out subprime lenders or borrowers.
Dumb: Buying a house you can't afford with no down payment and a loan whose monthly payments will explode in a few years.
Dumber: Lending money to people who can't afford a traditional mortgage, especially when they have lousy credit ratings and don't substantiate their income.
Dumbest: Bailing out dumb and dumber, especially with taxpayer money.
State and federal lawmakers, community groups and housing advocates are proposing schemes to prevent the victims of the subprime loan crisis from losing their homes. I hate to sound callous, but it's hard for me to know who the victims are in this mess.
If mortgage brokers or lenders used inflated appraisals or made false or misleading statements, they should be prosecuted or at least forced to restructure the loans. If borrowers lied about their income or assets to get a bigger loan, they too should be prosecuted.
But many people got into the subprime mess because they were willing to believe a fast-talking broker who told them they could buy a home, or a bigger home, or take more cash out of their home than they could with a conventional mortgage.
Keeping people in homes they had no business buying is wrong in many ways.
For starters, there's no easy way to bail out homeowners without bailing out the lenders and investors who were largely responsible for the subprime mess.
Many experts say we are in the early innings of the foreclosure cycle. If we bail out people today, will we be willing and able to help people who fail later in the game?
Propping up borrowers who took a gamble on a house and lost reinforces gambling.
"If people think they can take out a bad mortgage and they get bailed out, that's called moral hazard in social insurance and it's a very bad thing," says Thomas Davidoff, an assistant professor in the Haas Real Estate Group at UC Berkeley.
Bailout advocates say they want to help people who were duped, not gamblers. But even if you could separate the swindled from the speculators, there's no guarantee that people who get a bailout will keep their homes. It could be an expensive form of life support.
Nobody offered to bail out investors who bought tech stocks in 1999. Nobody bailed out Enron employees who lost their jobs and chunks of their 401(k) plans because the company was a fraud. Nobody offers to bail out credit card abusers.
http://www.safehaven.com/article-7415.htm