Abolishing Fannie: Easier Said Than Done

Nick Timiraos, Wall Street Journal

Are Americans ready to give up government guaranteed loans?

More than half of all mortgages in the U.S. are guaranteed in some way by the U.S. government. Those guarantees have helped lower borrowing costs for homeowners, and they’ve allowed more Americans to access long-term, fixed-rate loans.

Those loans have been embraced by consumers because they provide stability of payment, but they were also devised in the wake of the Great Depression to create a forced-savings mechanism that helped homeowners build equity.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac play a key role in making the 30-year, fixed-rate loan available by purchasing loans from banks, which don’t want to keep loans on their books for 30 years. Fannie and Freddie then sell those loans to investors as mortgage-backed bonds, providing guarantees against losses when loans default.

Without the government guarantee, investors would likely charge a higher rate for such loans, and they’d require tougher lending standards. That would limit the number of borrowers who might be able to access long-term, fixed-rate loans. Many might instead opt for loans with shorter terms or with adjustable rates.

Of course, those guarantees have been very expensive. The government’s support of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will end up costing taxpayers tens, or even hundreds, of billions of dollars. The companies were thinly capitalized, and when mortgage defaults rose, the firms had to be rescued by the government.

Today’s WSJ notes that the dilemma facing policymakers is this: how do you protect taxpayers, and get the government out of the mortgage market, without destabilizing the fragile housing sector. If Fannie and Freddie are eliminated, “the problem is, what do you replace them with?” says Andy Laperriere, a senior managing director at ISI Group Inc.

Read more here: http://blogs.wsj.com/developments/2010/11/05/abolishing-fannie-easier-said-than-done/

Share

Is It Time To Give Wall Street A Sopranos Style Intervention?

Steve Dibert, MFI-Miami

The other morning while I was eating my eggs and venison hash, I was watching reruns of The Sopranos on the A&E network.  It was the episode when the whole crew decides that it may be time to do an intervention with Christopher about his heroin addiction after he killed Adrianna’s dog by sitting on it.  The intervention then escalated into a Quentin Tarantino version of The Waltons.

While watching this mayhem unfold, I began to realize that greed is as much of an addiction as cigarettes, drugs and alcohol.  The actions of Wall Street over the past 25 years could be classified as an addiction.

A generation of Wall Street hot shots drew inspiration from characters from movies, namely Gordon Gekko from Wall Street and Tony Montana from Scarface both of which were written by Oliver Stone.  Unfortunately, what these Gordon Gekko or Tony Montana wannabes took away from these morality plays was not the morality, but the sin.  They took Gordon Gekko’s line of, “Greed is good” a little too seriously.

Unlike these hotshots, I paid attention to Sister Margaret in 3rd grade catechism when she waved her yardstick while grilling into our heads with her Gaelic accent that greed, as one of the seven deadly sins, could be as addicting as alcohol or drugs.   Like a drug or alcohol addiction, the addiction doesn’t become noticeable until after the party is over and the person stumbling around intoxicated breaking furniture and lampshades really isn’t all that funny.

When the party of the housing market ended in 2007, Wall Street like an addict attempted to keep the party going only to make a bigger mess.  Then proceeded to blame everyone but themselves for the mess.

First, they blamed the mortgage brokers who sold their products for them and the public and the mainstream media bought it.  Wall Street was so convincing that this crisis was the fault of unscrupulous mortgage brokers that Consumer Law Specialists like Elizabeth Warren bought into it.  Job postings on Monster.com and in newspapers across the US actually read, “Former mortgage brokers or loan officers need not apply.”

Then Wall Street blamed the appraisers and the real estate agents.  Now, three years later, it’s the ‘deadbeat’ homeowner.

So before Wall Street can make total buffoons out of themselves by claiming demonic possession or being poisoned by alien anal probes, I think its time to dust off a copy of the Twelve Step Program from when I attended an AA meeting about ten years ago and was asked not to come back.

As I began reading the pamphlet, I was amazed at how relevant this is this really is to the way Wall Street is acting.

  • Step 1 – We admitted we were powerless over our addiction – that our lives had become unmanageable
  • Step 2 – Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity
  • Step 3 – Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood God
  • Step 4 – Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves
  • Step 5 – Admitted to God, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs
  • Step 6 – Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character
  • Step 7 – Humbly asked God to remove our shortcomings
  • Step 8 – Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all
  • Step 9 – Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others
  • Step 10 – Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it
  • Step 11 – Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood God, praying only for knowledge of God’s will for us and the power to carry that out
  • Step 12 – Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to other addicts, and to practice these principles in all our affairs

But before Wall Street can begin their Twelve Step Program. We as a society need to do an intervention and that won’t be easy considering we have been enabling Wall Street for more than a generation.   Americans individually have morphed into all five children from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. As long as we were getting plasma TVs and overpriced McMansions we turned a blind eye to their uncontrollable desire for greed.

Tough love is why I was asked not to return to AA.   Apparently, at AA, it’s not okay to tell a recovering alcoholic to be a real man and to quit whining about his problems and then proceeded to ask him if he needed a feminine hygiene product.  Although the AA people weren’t amused, the guy later approached me in the parking lot, shook my hand and thanked me for opening his eyes.  Wall Street needs some tough love.  A tough love intervention is the only way to get Wall Street under control.  Wall Street must be brought under control and as Americans we have an obligation to save it from it’s own demons and uncontrollable desires.

Share

How Countrywide Covered the Cracks

Gretchen Morgenson, NY Times

ON June 27, 2006, Countrywide Financial, the nation’s largest mortgage lender, was about to close its books on a record-breaking six-month run. The housing market was on fire and Countrywide’s earnings were soaring. Despite all the euphoria inside the company, some executives noticed that Angelo R. Mozilo, the company’s brash and imperious chief executive, seemed subdued.

At a town hall meeting that day with 110 of the company’s highest-ranking executives in Calabasas, Calif., Mr. Mozilo sat alone on a stage, fielding questions and offering rosy predictions about his company’s prospects. But then he struck a sober note in response to a question from one of his colleagues.

The questioner wanted to know what, if anything, worried Mr. Mozilo, according to a participant.

“I wake up every day frightened that something is going to happen to Countrywide,” Mr. Mozilo said.

A year and a half later, that day arrived. In January 2008, Countrywide, the company he had built from a two-man mortgage operation into a lending behemoth, had to sell itself to Bank of America at a bargain price because it was being smothered by losses tied to a mountain of sketchy loans.

Yet almost until the moment Countrywide was taken over, Mr. Mozilo was publicly buoyant about its ability to ride out the mortgage crisis. Privately, however, he occasionally offered a gloomier assessment of Countrywide’s prospects and practices, according to e-mail and interviews.

What Mr. Mozilo, now 71, knew about Countrywide’s problems, and precisely when he knew it, was what eventually led the Securities and Exchange Commission to file civil securities fraud charges against him last year. And on Friday, in the Los Angeles courtroom of John F. Walter, a federal District Court judge, representatives for Mr. Mozilo and for two of his top lieutenants — David Sambol, Countrywide’s former president, and Eric Sieracki, the company’s former chief financial officer — settled those charges.

As part of the settlement, Mr. Mozilo and his co-defendants didn’t admit to any wrongdoing. But Mr. Mozilo agreed to pay $67.5 million in a penalty and reparations to investors and is permanently banned from serving as an officer or a director of a public company. Mr. Sambol is paying $5.52 million in a penalty and reparations and agreed to a three-year ban from serving as an officer or director of a public company. Mr. Sieracki agreed to pay a $130,000 penalty.

Read more here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/business/17trial.html?src=busln

Share

Here’s That Devastating Report On Bank Of America That Everyone Is Talking About Today

Here’s That Devastating Report On Bank Of America That Everyone Is Talking About Today
The news just keeps getting worse for Bank of America.  The attached report is about Bank of America’s hidden liabilities from CDOs that they’re on the hook for due to their acquisition of Countrywide and Merrill Lynch
Share