Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Subprime or Subcrime? Time To Investigate and Prosecute

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 01:18 PM
Original message
Subprime or Subcrime? Time To Investigate and Prosecute

Subprime or Subcrime? Time To Investigate and Prosecute
by Danny Schechter
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/11/3115/

There comes a time when the frame of a news story changes. It happened in Iraq when the “war for Iraqi freedom” became seen as a bloody occupation, not a beneficent liberation. It is happening as the war on terror is increasingly perceived a war of error and when voting problems are reframed as electoral fraud.

And it will happen in the economic arena too, when we see the “subprime” credit crunch for what it is: a sub-crime ponzi scheme in which millions of people are losing their homes because of criminal and fraudulent tactics used by financial institutions that pose as respectable players in a highly rigged casino-like market system.

Suddenly, after years of denial and inattention, the press has discovered hat they call “the credit crisis.” Vague words like “woes” are still being used to mask a financial calamity that some analysts are already calling an apocalpyse as lenders go under and the Stock Market melts downs.

A French bank froze BILLIONS Thursday saying, “”The complete evaporation of liquidity in certain market segments of the U.S. securitization market has made it impossible to value certain assets.” Translation from the French: We are all in deep shit.

On Thursday morning, President Bush was asked about this at a press conference. He blamed borrowers for not understanding the documents they signed. If you have ever tried to read the documents banks prepare for mortgage closings, you will know that are written by risk minimizing lawyers to be too long and dense to be understood. (Later in the day, the market reacted to his upbeat assessment with the Dow plunging 387 points.)

The financial insiders who watched were more than skeptical. Here are some quotes from a discussion on the Mi-implode website. One of the discussants calls our fearless leader, “President Pumkinhead:”

Why’d president pumpkinhead have a news conference in the morning? Probably hoping no one would see it and he wouldn’t have to lie to as many people.

Another described what he was watching with more than disbelief:

“He’s being hit with a lot of questions on mortgages, credit crisis, and the economy … and of course the economy is ‘in for a soft landing’, he’s been assured by the treasury that ‘there is plenty of liquidity’, yadda-yadda-yadda.

But he is stumbling over his words more then usual, not making eye contact, not finishing his sentences … and when he wonders a bit, he quickly goes back on script. It is very odd to watch, to say the least.

“Odd?” Not for him, but, of course, there more than one man to hold accountable. This is a deeper structural problem that implicates a whole industry and the process of “financialization” it promotes.. This crisis is an example of what goes around comes around as the companies that suspended their usual “standards” and “rules” and self-styled “due diligence” knowingly sucked money out of people with poor credit records and who now find their own companies imploding and collapsing worldwide. Many of the victims are people of color. They were targeted by predators.

Underscore that this was done deliberately, with forethought and malice, a well orchestrated plan to create armies of “suckers” and steal-yes, I said it-their monies to leverage even bigger deals. Their greed had no limits, until the scheme collapsed.

Behind it all were the so-called Masters of the Universe,” the wisemen of Wall Street who worked behind the scenes to turn mortgage brokers and small lenders into part of what will one day be seen as a criminal network worthy of prosecution under the RICCO conspiracy laws used against the mob and drug dealers. Read this account from the Wall Street Journal:

Lou Barnes, co-owner of a small Colorado mortgage bank called Boulder West Inc., has been in the mortgage business since the late 1970s. For most of that time, a borrower had to fully document his income. Lenders offered the first no-documentation loans in the mid-1990s, but for no more than 70% of the value of the house being purchased. A few years back, he says, that began to change as Wall Street investment banks and wholesalers demanded ever more mortgages from even the least creditworthy - or “subprime” - customers.

“All of us felt the suction from Wall Street. One day you would get an email saying, ‘We will buy no-doc loans at 95% loan-to-value,’ and an old-timer like me had never seen one,” says Mr. Barnes. “It wasn’t long before the no-doc emails said 100%.”

You don’t read many accounts like this of businessmen bashing Wall Street in the business press. Could it all have been stopped? Of course, if there were real regulators and rules protecting consumers and the public interest. And if there was a social movement that championed exonomic justice.

And also, if there were investigative journalists like the ones who just wrote a series on the “debacle” of the “debt bomb” in the Journa-but after the collapse, not before.
And what do they admit now? That this is NOT just a subprime problem but far more serious and global.

They note that “credit problems once seen as isolated to a few subprime-mortgage lenders are beginning to propagate across markets and borders in unpredicted ways and degrees. A system designed to distribute and absorb risk might, instead, have bred it, by making it so easy for investors to buy complex securities they didn’t fully understand. And the interconnectedness of markets could mean that a sudden change in sentiment by investors in all sorts of markets could destabilize the financial system and hurt economic growth.”

Will the rest of the media follow up and explain what is really going on?

This is very serious. folks, but far too many progressives, activists and politicians alike haven’t spoken out about the crime behind this rolling scandal. We should be calling for major debt reform in America like Bono advocates for Africa , We should demand criminal penalties for the profiteers who started out to enrich themselves and seem to have ended up destroying the very system they misused. We should press the Congress to use its subpoena power investigate the corporate criminals and their government enablers.

When they propose a bailout, we should demand a “jailout.” The Washington Post reports that the US has started a bail iout “pumping more than $150 billion into the financial system to keep it operating smoothly.” Where is this money coming from? Not from the military budget you can be sure.

Blogger Carolyn Baker writes, that we all must become more engaged with these issues saying she is: “profoundly aware of the role of economic issues-perhaps more than militarism, healthcare, education, politics, or any other institution, in the dead-ahead demise of empire.

‘I also notice that few in the left-liberal end of the political spectrum have a firm grasp on economic issues which I suspect comes from a fundamental polarization between activism and financial intelligence.”

She writes about a book by a conservative named Michael Panzner called “Financial Armageddon” criticizing his analysis as limited, and by extension, many of the left’s avoidance of these issues as well.

“What is most disturbing to me, “she writes, “about the book is what appears to be a total lack of perception regarding the role of fraud, theft, and malicious intent in the American and global financial train wreck which has been exacerbating over recent decades.”

Indeed! What are we going to do about this? How about starting with becoming more aware?
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/11/3115/
News Dissector Danny Schechter is “blogger-in chief” of Mediachannel.org, His new film is IN DEBT WE TRUST: America Before the Bubble Burst (Indebtwetrust.com) Comments to Dissector@mediachannel.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. Who knew that a much larger version of the Enron debacle could
be foisted upon an unsuspecing American populace. We can have a national holiday to represent these startling and new revelations concerning the health of the economy, perhaps Debtmas, or Fleecester, or even Paytriot Day since that is what our children's children are going to be doing for the duration.

Imagine whirrled peas:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libodem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. cool
They got away with the Enron collapse, scott free, now they are going to try it with the whole country. Whad they do put, Neil Bush, in charge of the Savings and Loan department? Motherfuckers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sarcasmo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
3. When the "Debt Bomb" comes it will make the Great Depression look like
a cake walk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
antigop Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
4. "Fundamental polarization between activism and financial intelligence"??? Oh, please...
Edited on Sat Aug-11-07 09:32 PM by antigop
Speak for yourself, Carolyn.
Some of us have known about this for a long time. Just check the daily Stock Market thread -- lots of people on DU have known about this for a long time.

So where are the regulators?

Isn't Chris Dodd head of the Senate Banking Committee? Where has he been on this issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
5. Surprised Bush didn't mention as usual how wonderful it is that he's the first "M.B.A." pResident.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Polemicist Donating Member (299 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
6. I've been a mortgage broker for many years....
And I can assure anyone that my business is not a criminal enterprise, nor am I a criminal. It's absurd to accuse everyone in my industry of being involved in some criminal racket. It's hyperbole and simply not accurate nor true and such wild claims are not in anyone's best interest.

Easy money policies always end up with profiteers as well as victims. Winners were people who purchased houses they couldn't afford and for awhile were able to live above their means. And industry professionals who made huge amounts of money selling houses, financing houses, and selling secularizations on Wall Street.The Wall Street bankers have made a killing for the last few years selling mortgage backed securities and they are the people who created and marketed the no income verification 100% loans. So they could create more and more secularizations and make more and more money. Oh, and their allies in Congress prevented Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from expanding their lending, by capping their debt limits, so these private Wall Street banks could fill the demand with their products.

If your house increased greatly in value over the last half dozen years, you also personally gained from these easy money policies. For easy money helped inflate the value of Real Estate. Did you refinance your house and pay off your credit cards? Thank easy mortgage money for that. We helped increase the value of your house and created programs to tap that equity. When the nation was mired in recession, easy mortgage money primed the economic pump to prop up consumer spending, pouring billions of refinance dollars into the nation's economy. No one called me a crook then.

Now reality has set in. I've been making mortgages for many years. I refused to market 100% no income verification mortgages. Why? I've been around the business long enough to know what a foreclosure is. I've had the people I've made loans to call me weeping when they couldn't make payments. I refused to be their accomplice in giving them a loan which I knew they couldn't repay. It's about having a personal conscience and some integrity. Plus I knew they would call me and blame me when the mortgage went bad. Those Wall Streeters didn't have that fear. Nobody could find them.

But there are plenty of other brokers who didn't care and marketed whatever made them money. That's certainly greed and I can't condone it. However, these brokers didn't create these programs, Wall Street did. If they weren't there, no one would have marketed them. So responsibility must be shared between brokers, banks, mortgage lenders, mortgage wholesalers, and securitizers on Wall Street. As well as by customers who's reach exceeded their grasp.

The losers? All the same players. New home purchase prices were inflated costing qualified borrowers more money, because of prices being bid up by buyers who previously wouldn't have qualified for financing. Existing homeowners who refinanced into questionable loans with high variable rates, due to poor credit, risking their equity in their home. I've made such loans to thousands of people and have yet to meet one who didn't understand that they would lose that home if they couldn't make the payments.

The losers also include the investors in these mortgage backed securities that are currently worthless. Mortgage brokers who are closing businesses and laying off employees. Banks stuck with worthless mortgages and investors who bought worthless securities backed by worthless mortgages.

Guess who won both ways? Wall Street. They made billions in fees and sold the paper. Bankruptcy attorneys would have won, if the GOP Congress hadn't changed the bankruptcy laws. So foreclosure attorneys will be the winners, along with bottom feeder Real Estate buyers of distressed properties.

The solution? Nothing wrong that some more easy money wouldn't fix. The Federal government needs to pump a bunch of liquidity into the market so we can recover and prevent all these foreclosures. Expand FHA to allow refinancing out of high rate mortgages into moderate rate federally insured mortgages. Establish bail out funds for this purpose.

Doing nothing an letting the market completely collapse will be the most expensive solution in the long term. The market can be stabilized, but not by do-nothing pumpkin head Bush.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Check! Pumped in billions of "liquidity! Friday! 3 TIMES!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. The FHA should not..
be asked to take on these subprime mortgages. That's just passing the risk on to taxpayers and artificially propping up a market that's inflated well beyond rationality. Let the banks fail and let prices fall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Polemicist Donating Member (299 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Taxpayers haven't lost a dime on FHA mortgages...
FHA is self funding with FHA mortgage insurance premiums charged to borrowers who utilize FHA mortgages. The money lent is not the government's money. It's the private bank's money, FHA just insures the lender against losses.

There isn't a whole lot of difference between the average sub prime loan and the average FHA loan. Both are typically for people with little down payment and some prior credit difficulties. There are millions of sub-prime borrowers paying 10 or 11% interest that should actually have an FHA mortgage at 7.0%. That lower interest rate will result in much lower monthly payments and result in way fewer foreclosures.

I'm not in favor of risking FHA to bail out sub-prime. But a whole lot of borrowers should never have been put in sub-prime loans to begin with and could be moved to FHA, but FHA won't allow it's products to be marketed by the average broker, like sub-prime does. All FHA has to do is establish an additional insurance premium for bailout loans and perhaps expand the marketing of their programs to brokers they previously excluded.

Why did FHA exclude most brokers? Because Wall Street business interests wanted to be free to market their much more profitable sub-prime mortgages and they didn't want to "compete with the government". So Republicans limited FHA's ability to market their products. Just like Republicans limited Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-13-07 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. You're right.
I was chatting with some Wall Street guys back in '02 and I remember the glee they were having over Freddie and Fannie's then troubles.

I don't believe that refinancing to fixed FHA products will solve our problems, though, since too many people just bought more house than they could afford, even at a 7% rate, or they cashed out too much equity. Prices in many places have gone well beyond what the average family can afford and builders have created excess inventory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Polemicist Donating Member (299 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-14-07 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. It won't cure everything....
But it will help some decent good people who were talked into loans with higher rates and/or adjustables with teaser rates who will soon experience huge payment increases when the teaser periods end. There are 50 Billion dollars worth of sub-prime mortgages with teaser rates (artificially low introductory rates) that will adjust upward from 3 to 5 percentage points in October '07 alone.

Some of those people won't be able to absorb $300 or $600 jumps in their monthly payments and there will be no new sub-prime products available to refinance them into a lower payment, as many expected to do to avoid this payment jump. Either we work together to create alternatives for these people, or we will see foreclosures like never before.

Some but not all could qualify for FHA or Fannie or Freddie. We just need to tweak the boundaries of these programs a bit to include more of these troubled mortgages and put as many as possible into stable fixed rate mortgages. You are correct that some people bought more house than they could afford. Nothing can be done for those folks, they made a mistake. But others can and should be helped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
angstlessk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-13-07 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
10. Neil boosh of Silvarado S&L was freed of conviction because he was deemed too dumb
to understand what being VP of a S&L really means, even having the best education money can buy, but us work a day peons should understand leaglese or be punished?

Do I have that right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC