Tag Archives: Bank

News

Why the mortgage cramdown bill would hurt consumers

1 Comment

The Democrats are pushing a “cramdown” bill which is a bill designed to allow federal judges to renegotiate the terms of delinquent mortgages when the person who entered into a contract to borrow the money cannot repay it. The problem with this bill is that it hurts the very people it is intended to help – because as soon as banks see that they cannot rely of the courts to enforce contracts, they will immediately stop making loans to those with mediocre credit ratings. So, the people who most need to borrow money will be the hardest hit. And it opens the door for the government to then seize control of the banks and force them to make the loans, so that we turn into Venezuela.

Consider this article from the Heritage Foundation:

Just as the housing market is showing definite signs that it is stabilizing after a lengthy drop in housing prices, the House of Representatives is about to vote on proposal that would destabilize it once again while also raising the cost of mortgages for future home buyers.

The proposal – to be offered by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) as an amendment to the financial regulation bill now before the House -would allow bankruptcy judges to reduce the principal owed on a mortgage, a practice often referred to as a “cramdown.” Judges would also be able to reduce interest rates or lengthen the term of the mortgage.

This is a huge policy mistake that would help only a few people while raising the cost of borrowing for thousands of moderate-income and first-time homebuyers.

Fortunately the bill failed to pass, but it does show you the fatal flaw of Democrat emotion-based policy-making. They hurt the very people they are trying to help – the cause the very crisis they are trying to alleviate. That is standard operating procedure for Democrats. They don’t understand the incentives they are creating when they pass “compassionate” laws.

Democrat secures TARP funds for unemployed homeowners

On another subject, take a look at this AP article. (H/T Michelle Malkin)

Excerpt:

Call it the $6 billion boycott.

By boycotting a key House committee vote last week and threatening to abandon support for banking regulations, members of the Congressional Black Caucus got $4 billion added to a Wall Street regulation bill and $2 billion to a proposed House jobs bill in spending they sought for African American communities.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., this week inserted $3 billion to the legislation to provide low-interest loans to unemployed homeowners in danger of foreclosure. He added $1 billion for neighborhood revitalization programs.

The money would come out of the $700 billion financial rescue fund.

“For those of us who walked out, it was absolutely essential that we have parts of that legislation directed toward helping people who have been left out of all of these bailouts,” Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., one of 10 black caucus members in the Financial Services Committee, said…Among the caucus’ demands were greater assistance for minority-owned auto dealerships and banks that lend in African-American communities and more government advertising in minority-owned media.

This is taking money out of the private sector, which creates jobs, and bailing out people who bought too much house. Taking money out of the private sector destroys economic growth. And that is why we have a 10% unemployment rate.

Commentary

Thomas Sowell explains how politicians cause recessions while getting elected

1 Comment

Article here at Townhall.com. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

After the cascade of economic disasters that began in the housing markets in 2006 and spread into the financial markets in Wall Street and even overseas, people in the private sector pulled back. Banks stopped making so many risky loans. Home buyers began buying homes they could afford, instead of going out on a limb with “creative”– and risky– financing schemes to buy homes that were beyond their means.

But politicians went directly in the opposite direction. In the name of “rescuing” the housing market, Congress passed laws enabling the Federal Housing Administration to insure more and bigger risky loans– loans where there is less than a 4 percent down payment.

A recent news story told of three young men who chipped in a total of $33,000 to buy a home in San Francisco that cost nearly a million dollars. Why would a bank lend that kind of money to them on such a small down payment? Because the loan was insured by the Federal Housing Administration.

The bank wasn’t taking any risk. If the three guys defaulted, the bank could always collect the money from the Federal Housing Administration. The only risk was to the taxpayers.

Does the Federal Housing Administration have unlimited money to bail out bad loans? Actually there have been so many defaults that the FHA’s own reserves have dropped below where they are supposed to be. But not to worry. There will always be taxpayers, not to mention future generations to pay off the national debt.

Very few people are likely to connect the dots back to those members of Congress who voted for bigger mortgage guarantees and bailouts by the FHA. So the Congressmen’s and the bureaucrats’ jobs are safe, even if millions of other people’s jobs are not.

Congressman Barney Frank is not about to cut back on risky mortgage loan guarantees by the FHA. He recently announced that he plans to introduce legislation to raise the limit on FHA loan guarantees even more.

Congressman Frank will make himself popular with people who get those loans and with banks that make these high-risk loans where they can pocket the profits and pass the risk on to the FHA.

So long as the taxpayers don’t understand that all this political generosity and compassion are at their expense, Barney Frank is an odds-on favorite to get re-elected. The man is not stupid.

Can you guess which political party Barney Frank represents?

News

Canadian court rules that student need not repay 50K of student loans

4 Comments

Story from Yahoo News.

Excerpt:

A Nova Scotia court has ruled that a former university student does not have to pay back tens of thousands of dollars he borrowed from a bank.
Alfredo Abdo won his case in bankruptcy court this week, with the court concluding that the Royal Bank of Canada was at least partly responsible for what happened.

“I question whether advancing all that money at one time was prudent banking on the part of RBC,” registrar Richard Cregan said in a written decision.

Abdo was a promising engineering student at Dalhousie University in September 2004. He had good grades, a scholarship and lived at home with this family.

In his second year, at the age of 19, he borrowed $20,000 from RBC though a student line of credit. He made bad investments online, according to court documents, and he accepted an offer from the bank for another loan of $30,000 to solve his problem.

Abdo started having dizzy spells. Finding his engineering program very stressful, he switched to commerce. But he dropped out of university in his third year.

The dizziness and social anxiety never went away, Abdo said, and therefore he couldn’t work or pay back the bank loans. He filed for bankruptcy last November.

The Canadian court probably thinks that they are compassionate, good people sticking it to the corporations. But actually what they’ve done is caused the banks to think a second time about making loans to borderline cases, so that the poorest students will now be refused student loans. If the courts refuse to enforce contracts signed by both parties, then the banks just won’t enter in to those contracts.

Down in New Zealand, they have the same problem.

Excerpt:

Thousands of people with student loans are defaulting on payments, leaving the Government to chase hundreds of millions of dollars.

More than one in five borrowers – or 114,000 people – have overdue payments and thousands of students are leaving tertiary education with no qualification and big bills.

The Education Ministry’s student loan scheme annual report shows that $306 million in payments is overdue, a $100m increase from a year ago.

The substantial growth includes a big rise in the level of payments owed by people now living overseas, more than doubling to $114m.

New Zealand University Students Association co-president Sophia Blair said it was not surprising that students with loans were heading overseas and letting the bills mount. “You can earn higher wages [overseas].”

[…]Total student loan debt had reached $10.2 billion and is predicted to grow by an average of $875m a year to more than $20b by 2022.

The report also showed about 39 per cent of students who left tertiary education with a loan did so without achieving a qualification.

About 8000 students with loans who left study in 2005 had nothing to show for it by 2007.

New Zealand, if I understand correctly is a fairly left-wing country, which probably subsidizes tuition and taxes income. So, students would be incentivized to game the system by taking out loans backed by the government, and then leaving to work abroad in more capitalist economies. Socialism encourages people to game the system and avoid taking responsibility for their own decisions.

UPDATE: New Zealand blogger Madeleine Flanagan wrote to me in an e-mail:

It’s old news, it has been the same way for years and years and that story comes out every year but as always it is interesting.

Your assessment is pretty spot on. In New Zealand student loans are pretty much available to anyone who applies for one. Acceptance at University or an alternative tertiary institution is not difficult, especially once you are over 20 as the institutions want your money – they get more funding the more students they have. Student loans are interest free and you do not have to begin repayments until you finish study. The state funds something like 75% of the tuition fees directly anyway so the loan is only for 25% of the actual cost. There are benefits available for living costs and if you don’t qualify for them you can borrow living costs and have them added to your student loan. So it is set up to make it easy to get into debt.

Being a fairly left-wing country there is a lot of regulation in the market place so of course you can pretty much always earn more overseas and once overseas the state cannot garnish your wages to get your student loan repayment.

The system has some fairly bad holes in it. For example, people who are being funded for Uni by they employer, like I was pre-accident, to study can take the cash for tuition fees from their employer, invest it and then take out an interest free student loan to pay their tuition fees. At the completion of study they then pay off the loan with the invested funds and pocket the interest – compliments of the taxpayer. Only students with cash coming from somewhere can do that as your student loan gets paid straight to the education provider apparently a lot of students with wealthy parents do this too.

As if this situation were not bad enough, organizations like New Zealand University Students Association (NZUSA), quoted below whinging about the level of pay rates in New Zealand , typically also whinge that education is not “free” anymore like it used to be when the politicians went to Uni! They argue that being educated to tertiary level benefits society so therefore society should pay for all of it (and have much higher wages).

New Zealand is crazy.

Madeleine and her husband Matt write at MandM blog.