Thursday, September 17, 2009

Has the mortgage industry been nationalized?

I got this article off of Rush Limbaugh dot com, at the bottom. This article from the Washington Post states that the U.S. mortgage market has been nationalized and that this is leading to a lot of risky loans being made that are backed by the U.S. taxpayer--basically the same situation that lead to the current economic situation, except on a larger scale. I won't go off on how the government is growing in its size and power. The main focus is the economic ramifications.

"Only one lender of consequence remains: the federal government, which undertook one of its earliest and most dramatic rescues of the financial crisis by seizing control a year ago of the two largest mortgage finance companies in the world, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. While this made it possible for many borrowers to keep getting loans and helped protect the housing market from further damage, the government's newly dominant role -- nearly 90 percent of all new home loans are funded or guaranteed by taxpayers -- has far-reaching consequences for prospective home buyers and taxpayers. The government has the power to decide who is qualified for a loan and who is not.[...] At the same time, taxpayers are on the hook for most of the loans that are still being made if they go bad. And they are also on the line for any losses in the massive portfolios of old loans at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which own or back more than $5 trillion in mortgages. There is growing evidence that many loans being guaranteed by the government have a significant risk of defaulting. Delinquencies are spiking. And the Federal Housing Administration, another source of government support for home loans, is quickly eating through its financial cushion as losses mount.[...] Taxpayers could be hit with a staggering tab even if a small proportion of loans go bad. Fannie and Freddie now own or guarantee more than $5 trillion in home loans. (That equals two-thirds of the debt the U.S. government owes.) And many could be in trouble. Mortgages owned and backed by the companies often required down payments of no more than 10 percent. With housing prices down sharply, many borrowers are underwater, owing more than their home is worth, so they cannot sell or refinance to pay off troubled loans. As the economy has deteriorated, delinquencies are spiking and losses are mounting. In the past year and half, the companies have posted more than $150 billion in losses. Similar risks threaten to engulf FHA. Nearly 8 percent of FHA loans at the end of June were either 30 days late or in the process of foreclosure, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. That compares with 5.4 percent of such loans a year ago."

The recent economic crises has lead to very dramatic changes in the government's influence in the economy. The main point is that there are a lot of bad loans out there and the U.S. taxpayer is responsible for a lot of these bad mortgages. If you know how the current economic recession was caused; you can see that this is very similar to how it happened, except this time the taxpayers as a whole are responsible for these mortgages. This, combined with other factors such a national debt, could bring the economy much closer to a real collapse in the future than the recent economic troubles did about a year ago. I think this could possibly be a big factor in creating a real economic collapse in the future. Although the Nation will pull back from some of these bad economic policies and the proverbial cliff, I can gather from a lot of different articles that I read that the foundation for a near collapse of the economy is being laid that will be of concern some years down the road. Anyways an article worth reading that will keep one up to date on the current economic climate and possibly give an indication of where the economy could be going.

3 comments:

  1. That WaPo article was quite an education for me. I really didn't know how Fannie & Freddie Mac were set up or the extent of government involvement in Home Loans. I had a hard time figuring out where the author was going with the article: on one hand, he bemoaned the risk to taxpayers of holding onto all these potentially bad loans, on the other he whined about the tragedy of people who can't put 3.5% down being unable to get a loan.

    I've got to say I'm a little bit agnostic here. It's possible the government had to buy up all those loans to avert an even bigger disaster. But, regardless, we (taxpayers) are on the hook for them. And that sucks. Keep the bar for getting loans high.

    I noticed how the article did not mention that George Bush fought to get rid of the sub-prime loan policy in 2005, but was turned back by Democrats (and lack of fire in the belly by fellow Republicans).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Backing up your alarm, see this: http://consumerist.com/5362596/newsflash-the-next-tsunami-of-aggressively-irresponsible-loans-didnt-magically-disappear

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was not aware of the level of government involvement in the mortgage industry either. I remember reading about those option-arm loans from fool dot com.

    According to what I have read, if the government did not step in and buy up all of these bad assets there could have been an economic collapse or a depression. Remember that this is what they said about the stimulus package too. One needs to remember that the government caused this mess in the first place by forcing the banks to give out loans to people that could not pay them back. The government forced a choice upon the American people: either have an economic depression or have more government involvement in the economy which caused this problem in the first place.

    I don't know how the guy defines others that can afford a home are kept out of the market. I do believe standards should be kept high, even if the government is the one setting that standard.

    According to this article, the bottom line is that the government has basically nationalized the mortgage industry and there is a potential for another mortgage meltdown. America is not out of the woods yet in terms of potential for economic troubles--there is still a lot of risk from loans and debt and the dollar being destroyed. If this was necessary or not, it does not change the fact. This economic situation has forever changed our economy and the world by creating a reason for more government involvement and control over the economy, rightly so or not. The economy, politics, education, and religion are four key areas that need to be under the governments control in order to establish a parental, nanny, totalitarian state. Here we can see the economic part coming under its wing.

    ReplyDelete