As I said, "It's pointless to quibble about the meaning of terms."
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 5:14 AM, Jurriaan Bendien <[email protected] > wrote: > I suppose you could argue, that the US home-owners who bought a subprime > mortgage were engaging in “leveraging”, since they were using their capital > deposit to borrow money, in order to buy an asset which they hoped would > appreciate in value. **** > > ** ** > > But to my knowledge, most of the subprime contracts did not actually > permit rescheduling the adjustable-rate mortgage to avoid the sharp hike in > payments occurring after the initial “lowdown” payment period. Once you had > the loan, you were stuck with its terms, and the only way to “deleverage” > was to forfeit the property and walk away. A lot of the subprimes were sold > to gullible buyers to buy properties which would not appreciate much in > value anyway.**** > > ** ** > > Actually, in May 2008 Martin Feldstein argued that the federal government > should bail out US home owners in trouble using cheap loans, in return for > the home owners giving up the legal right to default on their “no recourse” > mortgage (Financial Times, 8 May 2008).**** > > ** ** > > In Europe, a “no recourse” provision does not exist. If you have taken out > a loan, you remain legally liable for the loan.**** > > ** ** > > J.**** > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > -- Jim Devine / "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." -- Philip K. Dick
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
