Max Sawicky writes:
"Even if you grant that all the people who bought mortgages because of CRA, or
just in general, were scoundrels,"
Your words, not mine.
"it seems to me that at bottom the crisis is not in the mortgages but in the
pyramid of bets based on mortgages."
I confess I don't see a material distinction. The "crisis" is that everybody,
from Joe Six-Pack homebuyer, to investment banks on Wall Street, to banks in
Iceland, acted as if a 2500 sq ft. house on a 6000 sq ft lot in Riverside
California actually was worth $600,000, and now discover that the house is only
worth $250,000. Ooops. Somebody is going to lose a lot of money and it is
going to take us another year to do the accounting of the losses. The
transition to reality is our present crises. Call it the mortgage, call it the
bet on the mortgage, I don't see the difference.
"And attributing any blame to home buyers, no matter how misguided they were,
is utterly beside the point, not to mention odious."
Again, you are so judgmental. Why "blame" anybody? Why shouldn't somebody
sign a nonrecourse mortgage with no money down, which is exactly what the rules
of the game encouraged? It's risk free -- you either flip the house when it
appreciates or you mail the keys to the lender if it doesn't. At the same
time, I am not sure why it would be "odious" to argue that somebody shouldn't
have speculated, but that is not my argument.
David Shemano
----- Original Message -----
From: David B. Shemano
Sent: 10/08/08 05:40 pm
To: Progressive Economics
Subject: RE: Re: [Pen-l] Community Reinvestment Act at fault -- NOT
Raghu writes:
>> Excellent. So lets stop blaming the CRA then for subprime mortgages
>> then. At worst, the CRA was ineffective. At best, it helped reduce
>> discrimination in availability of credit for minorities.
You go too far. The CRA is an example of how the rules of the game were changed
to expand homeownership to people who could not obtain loans under traditional
standards (like the ability ot make a 20% downpayment, a solid credit history,
sufficient income, etc.). So while I agree nobody forced anybody to make a
subprime loan, there was certainly a lot of political and economic pressure to
relax standards, as exemplified by the CRA. As the unfairly maligned Mr.
Liebowitz points outs, companies like Countrywide that played the new game the
best enjoyed the most applause.
>> A good case can be made that predatory lending practices were
>> borderline coercive.
>> http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/sfh/pred/predlend.cfm
>>
>> In general, poor people are easier to coerce and intimidate than rich people.
I would point out the irony of arguing that poor peope don't have the capacity
to understand the mortgage process, but believing the exact same people are
fully capable of owning a home and performing all of the responsibilities that
entails.
David Shemano
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
