Evin Daly is a
writer and the publisher of the ButlerReport
(www.butlerreport.com).
edaly@goldcoastmedia.net
Back to the
ButlerReport
Bailouts: Joe doesn’t get Jack
September 22, 2008
In bailing out the
banks for bad investment decisions – some would call them ‘criminal’
decisions– the Bush administration is sending two messages.
First the good news. The banks get bailed out, the employees - for the
most part - keep their jobs, the executives, investors and shareholders
breathe a collective sigh of relief. With luck the spreading cracks of
the financial crisis are arrested and won’t involve other aspects of the
markets. The world goes on. Or not; we’ll see.
Now the bad news. The average Joe in foreclosure sees none of the
benefit to the cash injection as he continues to lose his home. Why is
that bad? Apart from the obvious reasons, there’s this. This bailout
eventually trickles down to the taxpayer because somebody's got to pick
up the tab for the losses. So Joe gets to lose his home to a bank that
gets to keep it and get paid for it. Something’s wrong here.
There’s a cork being put on the top of the market but the drain on the
bottom is left open.
The reason sub-prime loans became problematic has, for the most part,
been ignored by the media, the government and bankers. The problem is
plummeting property values that are tied directly to the draconian
interest rates that sub-prime borrowers are forced to pay.
Bankers charged sub-prime borrowers twice, sometimes three times, the
interest rate that a good credit customer pays. Some interest rates were
running at 12%+. That doubles the monthly repayment amount when
comparing an ‘A’ credit loan to a sub-prime loan. Good credit pays $800,
bad $1,600. Wow.
Why do the sub-primers pay more? Banks will tell you that there is
additional risk involved in these loans. There isn’t. The lending
process is exactly the same for all borrowers. One is just more
profitable than the other. Did you know that 60% of Americas have less
than perfect credit? 60% - the majority of consumers.
The borrower is
required to repay the loan monthly just like an “A” credit client. If
they don’t, they’re charged a late fee, just like an "A" rated client.
If they don’t pay, they go into foreclosure. To reinstate the mortgage
they pay fees, attorney fees and back payments. Just like an “A” credit
customer. If not the bank takes over and sells the property. Same
process, different revenues, more profit.
A disturbing fact revealed today is that borrowers who can’t afford to
pay or go into foreclosure are being forced to sign agreements with
their lending banks to continue paying until the banks are made whole.
This despite the fact that the banks are getting bailed out. What’s
good for the goose is obviously not good for the gander.
A way to stall the problem for both lender and borrower is to readjust
all loans to “A” credit rates. This takes the pressure off the borrower,
it allows them to make reasonable payments and the bank keeps a
performing loan on their books. However the banks never explored this
option; they’d prefer to wait and see if the government would bail them
out. Or go bust, as Lehman found out. If we keep bailing nothing changes
- special interests and their Washington lobbyists prevail. It’s time to let a consumer bank go under
also. Otherwise we're being taken for suckers.
The bailout solution has to be made with the homeowners and borrowers in mind. A moratorium on any consumer foreclosures for six months would be wise, to allow defaulted borrowers the opportunity to renegotiate with their banks to a rate they can afford. Let the banks work for their money and help their customers. Banks make a great deal of their money from bad credit customers. If the banks deserve a break so do the borrowers. They’re ultimately paying for it no matter which way the cat jumps.
It is also worth noting that here we have a Bush White House bailing out banks again, just as Bush Senior did with the Savings and Loans during his term. An odd coincidence? Or are we seeing that the tail truly does wag the dog?
Oh, and on a parting
note, the reason the market is ‘rallying’ (even though it still
languishes when compared to where it was) is that
money has nowhere else to go. This also means that if this White House
gamble doesn’t pay off and the market collapses…well you know what it
means. Pity poor Joe.
Copyright 2008. ButlerReport.
May be used, unaltered, with link to
www.butlerreport.com, and
acknowledgement of authorship.
This column is the opinion of the
above-mentioned writer of the ButlerReport only and in no way reflects the opinions of our
advertisers, sponsors or news partners.