Differences in Mortgage Lending and Credit Cards

I live in one of the countries world wide that have gone way over the limit on personal debt. Credit cards and mortgages far over the ability to repay and savings basically non-existent. There will be repercussions coming. When? I don’t know.

The US consumer is not perhaps the worst, but with the way the banking and lending practices are allowed to be basically unregulated or very seldom watched, this makes it a highly volatile situation. What is remarkable in history is that the US is the ONLY country to go through this type of crisis, not once, not twice, but three times and a few lesser crises in between.

Why? Well, from what I can see, the government is seen as an enemy and regulations are seen to bind banks, lending and mortgages to unfavourable levels. Well, if unfavourable is the watchword here, then I would say the current situation is that.

JPMorgan just bought Washington Mutual, after the government seized it. One of the largest banking buys in history. The Treasury and Federal Reserve are trying, maybe in vain, to get a very unfavourable bailout of the lending industry passed using a very vaguely written bill.

Try looking at other countries, and see if those business practices would work for personal lending, mortgages and compare the differences.

In France, for example.

The BBC’s Emma Jane Kirby asks if other nations should take a leaf out of the thrifty Gallic book?
French credit cards are little more than debit cards, so there is no question of simply sticking a couple of flat screen TVs on your credit card and hoping to pay for them later – if there are insufficient funds in your account, your bank will immediately block the transaction.
“People here don’t believe you can just put your debts together and get them refinanced… But in London… it was as if wealth was something you could get from a bank, it’s a sort of miracle people seem to believe in England.
But France still believes in strict rules and regulations,
Finance Minister Christine Lagarde says.
“Expect two conditions – a down payment of 20% of the value of the house plus mortgage [repayments] which will not exceed 30% of income.
“You already have a pretty good safety net there and clearly no real estate financing similar to the sub-prime market that has existed in the US and which has hurt the financial system so much,” Ms Lagarde says.

Here, in Canada, all mortgages must be insured, must be registered and the banks insist on at least a 10% downpayment. This used to be lower, but with the way properties were selling to people who were noticeable way over their limit on the ability to repay, the regulatory agent, CMHC chose to change the qualification level and changed the amortization time. Just a short time ago, mortgages could be repaid over 40 years, now they are limited to 35 years.

Credit cards are still one of the highest risk debts out there, with up to 29% interest, and a lot of people here have done what is considered very high risk. They have put the debts into one consolidation loan, then started charging again on the cards.

North Americans, U.K. residents, are all very high consumers, with extremely high debt levels. This is now coming home to roost, unfortunately.

History has lessons, and I am not going to reiterate all of them. No point. But some of the historical commentary from people living during the Great Crash in 1929 ring ominously.

1929 Here is what happened.

“In August of 1929, the Fed began to tighten the money supply continually by buying more government bonds. At the same time, all the Wall Street giants of the era, including John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan divested from the stockmarket and put all their assets into cash and gold.

Soon thereafter, on October 24, 1929, the large brokerages all simultaneously called in their 24 hour “call-loans.” Brokers and investors were now forced to sell their stocks at any price they could get to cover these loans. The resulting market crash on “Black Thursday” was the beginning of the Great Depression.

The Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, Representative Louis T. Mc Fadden, accused the Fed and international bankers of premeditating the crash. “It was not accidental,” he declared, “it was a carefully contrived occurrence (created by international bankers) to bring about a condition of despair…so that they might emerge as rulers of us all.”

On Sunday, December 23, 1913, two days before Christmas, while most of Congress was on vacation, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law. Wilson would later express profound regret over his tragic decision, stating:

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world – no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

Sound familiar? It is long overdue that the American policy makers, the guy on the street, called for regulation, freedom from the “duress” of a small group of men in Wall Street and the credit markets.

I, personally, would love to see the American voter, worker, business man, corporate CEO outside Wall Street, all demand that regulations be put in place and the funds provided to make sure those regulations were obeyed. Right now there are over 50 different agencies, and consolidating those into a few lesser number would make the whole situation far more effective, far more efficient, and maybe, just maybe, the american taxpayer WOULD find themselves never, ever again facing another meltdown.

Stupidity Explained, Now It “Figures” Literally

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2008/09/economic_disasters_and_stupid.php

This one says a lot about the way this whole thing got so tangled up, so obscene in the ways banks, investment bankers, and insurance companies got into the game. Let it be no mistake, this was a game to them, without any families, any real touch with the pain that bad loans created.
The person who wrote this is NOT a politician, NOT someone whose specialty is economics, but IS someone with math skills, and logic.
I read just this posting and started to swear, my eyes bugged out completely at some of the sneaky, underhanded and just plainly obscene practices here.
Unfortunately it appears to be just another version of the Savings and Loan fiasco, with a few new twists.
How this all works out is beyond my capability to foretell, and what happens to those who pulled off some of the game strategies, I don’t know.
What I do know is that I live in a country where the banks, the investment firms, the insurance companies are regulated.
Paulson, the Federal Reserve Bank, and you, the unwitting tax payers, will be the ones to deal with this. International banks will get some of the funds here, but remember, they also built parts of your economy. Maybe some of them got suckered, like a lot of people apparently did, but with the international banks far more regulated, far higher scrutiny on them, at least your taxes will go to help you out with ethics being the underpinning on the international banks.
Paulson, the FRB, the Senate, the house of Representatives all knew the foreclosures, the money, the sucker loans and the insurance between each other were going on as long as two bloody years ago. This should never have come as a surprise, period. All of them experienced the fiasco with the Savings and Loans institutions, and definitely John McCain would be well aware because he was in with one of the Savings and Loans in Arizona.
However this works out, and it may well take a couple of DECADES to even get the strings unwound here, there will be some pain, there will be a serious slowing of the entire world economy, and maybe, although I hope not, a full recession which turns into a real depression.
Maybe this is what NEEDS to happen. People will learn to live without borrowing to buy a new tie, or a sandwich, by putting the charge to a bank charge card. People will learn that money that they put into deposits does have risk, some of it high, some of it very low. Maybe some will learn to be a lot smarter when dealing with the financial version of the Barnum and Bailey circus.
Remember, there is a sucker born every day. Maybe it is time even the bank CEO’s recognize their own faces in the “Great Mirror of Sucker”.
This is a harsh way to learn some lessons, but maybe that is what is needed now. I don’t know the future, and maybe that is a good thing. I DO know the day has come where the sucker punches to the economy finally took it down. Hard.

Tough Times

Most people know the news in the US and around the world has not been good this week.

Well, it seems that some banking institutions have done what most of us know is stupidity displayed.

I had to read several explanations to understand what in hell was going on.

So, I am going to try to put it into simple terms here, if only to clarify my own thinking.

A friend approaches me for some money to borrow. (read bank here)

I have some money set aside, but not quite enough to cover the entire loan. (read liquidity in bafflegab banking terms)

I ask why they want to borrow, and they say , ” Well, ya see, I just started working (read they are a bit of a risk to repay) and I want to borrow the money for a car.”

Now, if I were one of the banks that went under, at this stage, I would not even check out what make, model or year, but put my own interests (pun definitely intended here) and my own greed into play.

“Sure, I can lend ya the money, and you will have to just pay me a very low interest, but if you don’t pay it back ( I will use weeks here to represent years) then after 2 weeks the interest changes. I won’t bother to tell you right now what will happen, we will see then.”

Friend is anxious enough to borrow, to have the car for ego buffing, and has no intention of saving up for the same car. So, they agree.

We sign off an agreement.

What my friend does not know is that I don’t have all the money.

I get another phone call, asking to borrow money too!

So, I make a call.  Someone I know is interested in being a silent lender (read investment banker), and has taken steps with an insurance company to cover bad debts, sort of like betting that the debts will not get repaid.

I mention I have two people who want to borrow, but I am not “liquid”, and would my “investment” person back me with some funding. Of course they want interest on their money, but again, they have taken out insurance against failure. Either way they get paid.

What I don’t realize or am told is that the “investor” has no money at all, but they are “selling” this debt bundle to someone else! (read insurance or another investment dealer with no regulations overseeing all of his or her finances)

Sound complicated?? Yep, it is.

BUT! Here is the catch in the whole thing. The investor really does not have the money, the backer of the investor uses some paperwork to show a bundle owing, but has no money invested.

So, where does the money come from for me?

On a note to a bank from the backer.

The money is sent to the backer, then to the investor, then to me, then to the friends who borrow.

Is the picture getting clearer now?

Well, surprise of all surprises, friend pisses off his boss, loses the job, and instead of selling off the car, approaches me.

I have two choices, here. Take possession of the car (which I now find out is basically a wreck) and try to get what I can from it, or demand payment.

Friend cannot repay, so I am in a financial bind here (banks over-extending on sub-prime or high risk loans) so I talk to my silent friend (investment banker) who has the insurance.

But…. the debt is higher than the collateral is worth (wrecks go to the wreckers, right?) and the insurance does not cover the entire debt.

So… he goes to the backer!

Backer has taken out a paper on the debts and now is finding out that they should have investigated the original worth of the collateral and the ability of my friend, myself, my investor, to repay, but they did not.

The backer’s bank calls in the papers, the investor is facing some serious money problems, and I am now broke!

I can seize the car, and put it into the auction, but after doing that, I get maybe 10 cents on the dollar.

And, of course, my friend is out a car, has to declare insolvency (tells me they are totally broke, again) and I get told to sell of what I can to cover the debt I owe the investor. Damn!

So off I go to the pawn broker and sell off something.

Well, all is not rosy for the investor, because they have to pay the backer and I am broke too. Sorry.

They end up selling off some items because the backer has charged them interest on a larger amount, because the insurance company put the “investor” into a higher risk category now.

They end up with some money, the rest of us………. go to second jobs.

Basically this tale is what happened on wall street, with secret loans and bundling of loans to another level, with some of the insurers turning around and getting papers on the debts.

I did not check out the car, did not check out how often my “friend/s” repaid their loans or even how many hours they would work!

Neither did my “investor” , nor the backer, nor the bank who drew up papers check out the risk, the collateral worth, the trustworthiness of the layers below them.

I paid all my debts, so I would be a good risk, but I put my money on a debt that was high risk with someone who had trouble balancing a bank cheque and balance each month.

But, I put my own financial stability on very shakey ground.

Here is the bottom line.

Banks in the US should have always put money into savings, like I did, but neither of us put ENOUGH money into savings.

Instead we relied on credit, lines of credit and the greed.

If a bank is stupid enough to lend money without knowing the people, without checking out the area of town they people are buying houses in, and without having a truly secure basis for understanding the loans (read mortgages) here would be paid, then as far as I am concerned, they should get slapped.

Now, remember the original conversation?? Where I did not happen to mention that the interest would change to a definite amount??

Bubble interest, rising rate, whatever you call it, the banks who lent money to a hell of a lot of people did not happen to mention that the interest rate on the mortgages would rise, significantly.

The analogy here would be that I did lend my money at 3% for 2 weeks, then, if the debt was still there, no matter that it was all of it, or some of it, I would demand repayment at 8%.

Now my friend was budgeting on his repayment for 3%, right? I did not disclose that I would basically up the rate to over double the rate in 2 weeks!

No wonder he could not repay it! He overextended his own money, in the first place, then I hit him with a huge jump in payments.

This is why so many people got their home foreclosed on.

The banks used bubble mortgages on the loans.

So, yes, the shit has hit the fan, but perhaps the whole story boils down to a very simple, very obvious thing.

IF YOU CANNOT BUY IT NOW WITH CASH, YOU CANNOT BUY IT WITHOUT RISKING SOMETHING