Baling Out The Rich: Fed Cuts Discount Rate

thoughtone

Rising Star
Registered
source: Bloomberg.com

Bush says he is against helping home owners who are getting foreclosed, but bad loan givers are given welfare for the rich. They are just delaying the inevitable. Who is going to cover the bad loans? Answer, taxpayers.

Aug. 17 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve lowered the interest rate it makes to banks and acknowledged for the first time today that an extraordinary policy shift is needed to contain the subprime-mortgage collapse that began roiling the world's financial markets two months ago.

The Fed, in a surprise announcement in Washington, lowered the so-called discount rate by 0.5 percentage point, to 5.75 percent. Policy makers dropped language indicating their bias toward fighting inflation, and instead highlighted a rising threat to economic growth.

``This telegraphs their intention to cut rates at the next meeting,'' said Chris Rupkey, senior financial economist at Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd. in New York. ``This discount rate cut calms the market and helps financing.''

This is the first reduction in borrowing costs between scheduled meetings since 2001, and Ben S. Bernanke's first as Fed chairman. Officials kept the benchmark federal funds rate target for overnight loans between banks at 5.25 percent. Policy makers next meet to set the rate on Sept. 18. Futures indicate traders anticipate at least a quarter percentage point cut.

The Fed said while recent reports indicate economic growth continues at a ``moderate pace,'' risks to the expansion have risen ``appreciably.'' The statement is a marked change from just 10 days ago, when officials kept rates unchanged and reiterated that inflation was their ``predominant'' concern.

`Restrain' Growth

``Financial market conditions have deteriorated, and tighter credit conditions and increased uncertainty have the potential to restrain economic growth,'' the Federal Open Market Committee said today. ``The committee is monitoring the situation and is prepared to act as needed to mitigate the adverse effects.''

Stocks rose. The Standard & Poor's 500 index gained 0.8 percent to 1,422.35 as of 10:50 a.m. in New York.

FOMC members convened in a conference call at 6 p.m. Washington time yesterday, Fed spokeswoman Michelle Smith said. The Fed's Board of Governors then accepted requests by the New York and San Francisco banks to cut the discount rate.

Today's action also includes an extension in so-called discount window borrowing, allowing 30-day financing that's renewable, instead of a standard overnight loan. The Fed's board sets the discount rate while the FOMC, which includes the governors and heads of five of the 12 district banks, determines the federal funds target rate.

Cash Injections

The Fed loosened terms on discount-window borrowing after its injections of cash into the federal-funds market in the past week failed to ease companies' access to capital. The amount of commercial paper outstanding, a key financing tool, had fallen the most since the 2001 terror attacks.

Lowering the discount rate ``will basically do more to unclog the credit channels than a fed funds rate cut would have,'' said Drew Matus, senior economist at Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. in New York, who used to work at the Fed. ``It was exactly the right thing to do.''

The central bank will ``continue to accept a broad range of collateral,'' including home mortgages and ``related assets,'' it said.

Fed policy makers next meet on Sept. 18, when economists said they are likely to reduce the benchmark rate by at least a quarter percentage point from 5.25 percent. Officials have kept the rate unchanged since last raising it in June 2006.

Housing Recession

The Fed's action reflects alarm that more restrictive lending conditions and volatility in financial markets will deepen the housing recession, weaken employment and erode economic growth. As recently as the Aug. 7 meeting, the FOMC said inflation was still the biggest danger to the economy.

The Fed noted then that ``financial markets have been volatile,'' though the economy was still expected to continue to expand at a ``moderate'' pace. Today's FOMC statement, approved unanimously by 10 Fed governors and presidents, didn't mention inflation.

Figures released by the Fed yesterday showed that discount lending failed to rise much over the past week after the central bank issued a statement on Aug. 10 saying that ``as always, the discount window is available as a source of funding.'' Total loans outstanding totaled $264 million on Aug. 15, compared with $255 million on Aug. 8.

Today's decision shows policy makers understand ``the various different tools the central bank has at its disposal,'' said Neal Soss, chief economist at Credit Suisse in New York, who worked as an assistant to former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. ``This is a masterful move because it doesn't actually feed some of the concerns about moral hazard'' of bailing out investors, he said.

Biggest Challenge

The subprime rout is the biggest challenge for Bernanke, 53, since he took office in February 2006. Under predecessor Alan Greenspan, the Fed in 1998 cut interest rates three times as currency crises in emerging markets roiled Wall Street.

In the past week, the Fed and central banks in Europe, Japan, Canada and Australia have been compelled to add money to the banking system. The collapse in demand for securities backed by subprime mortgages has forced at least 90 lenders out of business.

The European Central Bank began adding liquidity on Aug. 9 after BNP Paribas SA, France's biggest bank, was forced to halt withdrawals from three of its investment funds. The Fed followed, along with counterparts from Sydney to Oslo.

Mortgage defaults by Americans with poor credit histories prompted the collapse in June of two hedge funds managed by Bear Stearns Cos. and triggered a worldwide rout in the debt markets. Companies such as London-based Cadbury Schweppes Plc have delayed asset sales, and banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Deutsche Bank AG have been left on the hook for as much as $300 billion of debt they've agreed to provide.

Yesterday, Countrywide Financial Corp., the biggest U.S. mortgage lender, had to tap an entire $11.5 billion bank line to obtain funds.

Economists and policy makers anticipate a slower expansion in the second half. For the year, Fed governors and presidents expect growth, on average, of about 2.25 percent to 2.5 percent, Bernanke told Congress last month. The projections are about a quarter-point below the last round in February, mainly on weakness in homebuilding.

To contact the reporters on this story: Scott Lanman in Washington at slanman@bloomberg.net .

Last Updated: August 17, 2007 11:10 EDT
 
newfrontlogo2.gif


<font size="5"><center>Save Subprime Borrowers, Not Bloated Bankers</font size></center>


by Dean Baker
Monday, August 20, 2007

There is a simple and direct way in which the federal government can help out millions of moderate income families struggling to keep their homes. They can simply change the rules on foreclosure to allow moderate income homeowners the option to remain in their homes indefinitely as renters, paying the fair market rent.

This proposal would immediately give moderate income homeowners a guarantee that they would not be thrown out of the street because they cannot meet the terms of a predatory mortgage. It accomplishes this goal without requiring any elaborate new bureaucracy and without requiring a single dollar from the taxpayers. And this plan does not bail out the bankers, hedge funds, and other financial industry types who were speculating in mortgage debt.

Here’s how the plan works. Currently, if a homeowner is not able to make their mortgage payments, the holder of the mortgage can go to court to place the house in foreclosure. This means that if the homeowner is not able to come up with back payments on the mortgage, or work out an acceptable arrangement with the mortgage holder, the bank or financial institution that holds the mortgage retakes ownership of the house and can have the homeowner evicted.

Under this security of housing proposal, the foreclosure process would be changed so that the current homeowner would have the option to remain in their house as a renter paying the fair market rent. If a homeowner chose to go this route, the judge in the foreclosure proceeding would appoint an independent appraiser to determine the fair market rent for the house, in the same way that a bank hires an appraiser to determine the value of the house before issuing a mortgage.

The former homeowner could then remain in their home as a renter for as long as they liked. The rent would be adjusted at regular intervals in step with the change of other rents in the area. There could even be an appeal process in which either party could request that the judge get a second appraisal, at the expense of the person complaining about the original appraisal. This should ensure that the rent set for the house is fair. After the foreclosure, the mortgage holder would now own the house and be free to sell it to another person, but the former homeowner would still have the right to remain as a renter, regardless of who owned the house.

This program could be restricted to homes that cost less than the median house price for an area to ensure that high income homeowners do not take advantage of it. The program would also only apply to people who lived in their homes, not investors. In short, it is a very simple and low cost way to help moderate income homebuyers. It does not give them any windfalls, but it can ensure that they don’t end up being thrown out on the street.

In contrast, the politicians are lining up with plans that ostensibly protect homeowners, but would most immediately benefit the mortgage holders who speculated in predatory mortgage debt. For example, one popular proposal being circulated in Congress would vastly expand the role Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government created mortgage intermediaries, in the mortgage market. This proposal would allow them to buy up hundreds of billions of dollars of subprime and other mortgages that the private sector does not want.

Of course, the private sector doesn’t want these non-prime mortgages because the default rate is soaring. If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac suddenly got in the market for this debt, those who are currently speculating in these mortgages stand to make a fortune. It’s not clear that the government’s largesse will necessarily benefit moderate income homeowners facing foreclosure, but there is certainly a possibility that some of the windfall will trickle down.

The point here is simple. We can design a mechanism that will directly benefit millions of moderate income homeowners who are struggling to hang on to their homes. Or, we can come up with schemes that will benefit the banks and hedge funds who speculated in mortgage debt. Place your bets.

Dean Baker is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer (www.conservativenannystate.org). He also has a blog, “Beat the Press,” where he discusses the media’s coverage of economic issues. You can find it at the American Prospect’s web site.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/20/3297/
 
QueEx said:
Is that really a solution :confused:


Not really. There are 2 main problems:

The homneowners either by design or were tricked into a mortgage they now can't afford.

The unregulated mortgage companies and Wall Street investors definately put these people into mortgages they knew would blow up years down the road. No one is going to convince me otherwise.

None of this would have happened if the Federal Reserve hadn't loosened credit standards about 8 years ago. Thereby unleashing the free money beast. Now credit is tightening back to where it was before when most of the people who got loans during the past 8 yrs. wouldn't have.


Bailing out Wall Street investors gets under my skin because they knew what the risk was but actively participated in what I consider a ponzi scheme. Regardless of what anybody says putting your money in Wall Street is no different than walking into a casino and putting your money on the roullette table, picking 12 black then spinning the wheel. If it comes up 3 red....tough shit you lose, or the poker player thats on a hot streak with a stack of chips, he's holding a flush running up the pot,goes all in lays his cards down but the mofo across the table is holding an full house. Guess what,you lose and no one is going to replace the money you lost.

As far as the homeowner is concerned they shouldn't be let off the hook completely. They signed the contract so they are on the hook also. Best I could do for them is re-work the mortgage capping the upper range of the ARM so it won't become prohibitively expensive to hold onto the property. But pay they will and if they can't keep to the new rate structure...fuck'em kick them out.



PEACE
 
BigUnc said:
Not really.

As far as the homeowner is concerned they shouldn't be let off the hook completely.

They signed the contract so they are on the hook also. Best I could do for them is re-work the mortgage capping the upper range of the ARM so it won't become prohibitively expensive to hold onto the property. But pay they will and if they can't keep to the new rate structure...fuck'em kick them out.



PEACE


I kinda agree with your points. It takes and educated and sophisticated buyer to take on an ARM without him understanding how market conditions change. After I purchased my home, within 2 years I re-financed out of my ARM into a Fixed. For me as a buyer, at least I knew how much my monthly home payment would be and could set my budget accordingly.

I was with the FEDs back during the S&L bailout. I don't see this as an issue where the government needs to intercede in the lending markets.
 
I say if conservatives and republicans want to hold people to “you made the decision, bale yourself out” mentality then I say we should resend limited liability to corporations. Its time to stop the hypocrisy. (See the “When Is Corporation Like A Freed Slave” thread).
 
Bumped from the archives.

Interesting how the threads I started in the past are now topical. You need to read all of my posts. I lot of them are poison for the so called centrists, republicans, right wingers and corporists. Don't be skerred!
 
LOL. I bumped em, I ain't skerred.

Now the question is why are they now relevant;
because they keenly demonstrate foresight into
the present conditions, or because they show
just how wrong you were, originally ???

LOL

QueEx
 
LOL. I bumped em, I ain't skerred.

Now the question is why are they now relevant;
because they keenly demonstrate foresight into
the present conditions, or because they show
just how wrong you were, originally ???

LOL

QueEx

The latter. If people were more sophisticated about how the right twists patriotism against those that don't follow their political ideology, may be we wouldn't even be in this mess. The main is issue that until it hits people personally, they could give two damns. Reagan said government is the problem, now the only institution capable of doing anything about this debacle is the government. I have been vindicated. Just for the record, I don't think that the government should bail out any corporation.
 
Back
Top