Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Taibbi: the Ownership Society

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Taibbi: the Ownership Society

    Here's yet another form of hidden bailout the federal government doles out to our big banks, without the public having much of a clue.

    This is from the WSJ this morning:

    Some of the biggest names on Wall Street are lining up to become landlords to cash-strapped Americans by bidding on pools of foreclosed properties being sold by Fannie Mae...
    While the current approach of selling homes one-by-one has its own high costs and is sometimes inefficient, selling properties in bulk to large investors could require Fannie Mae to sell at a big discount, leading to larger initial costs.



    In con artistry parlance, they call this the "reload." That's when you hit the same mark twice – typically with a second scam designed to "fix" the damage caused by the first scam. Someone robs your house, then comes by the next day and sells you a fancy alarm system, that's the reload.

    In this case, banks pumped up the real estate market by creating huge volumes of subprime loans, then dumped a lot of them on, among others, Fannie and Freddie, the ever-ready enthusiastic state customer. Now the loans have crashed in value, yet the GSEs (Government Sponsored Enterprises) are still out there feeding the banks money through two continuous bailouts.

    One, they continue to buy mortgages from the big banks (until recently, even from Bank of America, whom the GSEs were already suing for sales of toxic MBS), giving the banks a permanent market for home loans.

    And secondly, they conduct these quiet bulk sales of mortgages, in which huge packets of home loans are sold to banks at a "big discount."

    By now we've come full circle. Banks create the loans, make money selling them off on the market at high prices, then come back and buy them again when they're low. When the GSEs are in the middle of this transaction, it makes mortgage lending a basically risk-free proposition: Banks get paid for creating home loans and they end up owning valuable property on the cheap, but in between, they offshore the market risk to a government entity and/or to the idiot individual who bought the home mortgage in the first place.


    Even better, many of the banks/investors who buy these home loans back from Fannie/Freddie will rent out their properties instead of reselling them, which can vastly increase their revenue streams. From the WSJ:

    Economists at Goldman Sachs estimate the annual yield on an investment on rental property nationwide averages about 6.3%, but can exceed 8% in cities that were hit hard during the housing bust, including Las Vegas, Detroit and Tampa. By contrast, mortgage bonds have average yields of just over 3%, and investment-grade corporate bonds are yielding about 3.5%, according the Barclays Capital U.S. Investment-Grade Index.



    It gets better:

    Warren Buffett, considered a sage investor and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in an interview with CNBC-TV last month that he would buy up "a couple hundred thousand" single-family homes if he could do so easily, given the high yields on rental investments.



    Another potential buyer, according to the article, is John Paulson, the pillaging hedge-fund billionaire who was behnd Goldman's notorious "Abacus" deal (in which Goldman allowed Paulson to pack a portfolio full of loser mortgages he was shorting before those same mortgages were dumped on a pair of Euro banks).

    So congratulations, America, your quasi-governmental housing entity is about to subcontract out mass-landlording/slumlording jobs to the likes of John Paulson and Warren Buffett, so that they can add to their bottom lines collecting rent payments in the middle of a nationwide housing slump.

    As one hedge fund analyst put it to me this morning: "Help inflate the bubble, create a foreclosure crisis, buy homes in bulk, and rent them out to the same average homeowner."

    Is this what we had in mind when we created the "ownership society" – helping billionaires collect your rent?

  • #2
    Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

    I'm still trying to figure out the dynamics of buying a house now with a very low interest rate and buying one later with a high interest rate and presumably lower principle. If the the monthly note and term are the same, obviously the lower the principle (and thus higher the interest rate) the better. You pay the same amount per month and in total, but the principle is always much lower making it more flexible (easier to sell; more beneficial to pay a little extra in some months). If that's true, then clearly a larger monthly note for the same term may be worth it, but how do you put a price on that flexibility?

    In other words, I'm wondering precisely what higher interest rates will really do to home prices over the next 5 to 10 years. If my job was stable, would it be better to buy now at somewhat reduced price and very low rates, or later at more reduced price and much higher rates?

    What if there is a hyperinflation? In that case, home prices ought to go up making a current fixed rate loan a bargain (although not nearly as much as say gold).


    I'm just thinking out loud. I really don't know what I'm talking about here.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

      Being the official moron ( with papers and test scores to prove it ) and the slow-learner here, I would ask: Why couldn't the deadbeats who wanted to buy a home so much a few years ago ( pre-2007 ) have postponed their home purchase? Thus why did these deadbeats believe homes could go up forever--- very much like the gold-bugs now believe gold could and will go up forever? Why did these deadbeats ( x-hippies, pot-heads or whatever they were ) believe homes would be an investment?.......... Even more upsetting to me, why should these deadbeats resent when the lender inevitably forecloses, throws their lazy duffs out on the street, and sells the property or rents it out?

      NO, NO, NO, deadbeats: the lenders did NOT inflate the housing bubble; you did with your buying into the bubble. No-one asked you to buy except for your own greed.

      Yes, America (and Canada and the UK) is about the "ownership society", certainly. But America is not about a free-ride for anyone including speculators, deadbeats, bankers nor anyone else.

      It's amazing that house prices inflated for decades and governments just let it happen. If interest rates would have been set high enough and held high for long enough, the housing bubble would have been punctured long ago and de-flated permanently. Most likely, the house-price inflation would not have happened in the first place, because there would not have been enough demand for housing to create price inflation ( a bubble ) in the first place.

      Again, for this housing crash now which has helped to precipitate the Great Recession, we can thank central bank policies, again the Keynesian economic policies they have followed for decades. We always hear about the successes of Keynesian economics in lifting economies out of recession, but we never hear about the long-term inflationary (bubble) effects of such cheap money policies are. We never hear about the policy failures of Keynesian economics that happen when interest rates are kept too low for too long.
      Last edited by Starving Steve; March 20, 2012, 11:41 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

        Originally posted by davidstvz View Post
        ... I'm wondering precisely what higher interest rates will really do to home prices ...
        It will reduce home prices.
        EJ has commented on this in the past, but I can't find the old archived articles.
        Perhaps Metalman can assist to find them.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

          Originally posted by thriftyandboringinohio View Post
          It will reduce home prices.
          EJ has commented on this in the past, but I can't find the old archived articles.
          Perhaps Metalman can assist to find them.
          It would reduce prices, if interest rates actually went up.

          I don't see how that can happen anytime soon. Looks like zirp forever, or at least well into the foreseeable future.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

            EJ's mantra was a smaller principal always trumps a lower interest rate.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

              the best time to buy a house is when interest rates are high and prices are low. then, as interest rates drop you get the advantages of both refinancing at lower rates and the nominal asset value rising because of the lower rates.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

                Assuming you can afford the monthly nut. Does the monthly payment for both competing situations have to be roughly equal to make this true? Or is there an equation or even a rule of thumb so a potential home buyer can determine when the price/rate combination is a good buy?
                "I love a dog, he does nothing for political reasons." --Will Rogers

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

                  Originally posted by jk View Post
                  the best time to buy a house is when interest rates are high and prices are low. then, as interest rates drop you get the advantages of both refinancing at lower rates and the nominal asset value rising because of the lower rates.
                  That was a bit of logic that was eluding me. Or even THE bit. Thanks!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

                    Originally posted by jk View Post
                    the best time to buy a house is when interest rates are high and prices are low. then, as interest rates drop you get the advantages of both refinancing at lower rates and the nominal asset value rising because of the lower rates.
                    so '81...'91... and then never again...just kidding.

                    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LWTx5pPVp0...rest+rates.png

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

                      if i read finster correctly, he thinks the next really good time to buy a house will be 2040!
                      for those not inclined to wait 30 years or so, sometime within the next 5 years [i forgot ej's prediction, but it was around 2015-16 iirc] housing will really bottom nationally, but it may have already bottomed in some locales. one problem with waiting for the bottom, aside from the obvious one of being able to recognize it, is that it will be accompanied by even stricter credit than is currently the case, so if your credit and documented income are not pristine, you might not be able to qualify for the mortgage.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

                        Originally posted by photon555 View Post
                        Assuming you can afford the monthly nut. Does the monthly payment for both competing situations have to be roughly equal to make this true? Or is there an equation or even a rule of thumb so a potential home buyer can determine when the price/rate combination is a good buy?
                        That's the assumption, that house pricing is/should be based on the ability to pay. Lower interest rates = higher home prices with the reverse being true as well. A smaller initial principal affords the buyer with the option to re-fi if rates drop. (The inverse is a buyer's re-fi deadend. A higher principal with rising interest rates.) The 800 hundred pound horse fly in the oitment is FIRE's manipulation of the housing market. Only rents consistently rely on the ability to pay. If America becomes renter nation expect some 'new' financial innovations in that field as well.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Taibbi: the Ownership Society

                          NO, NO, NO, deadbeats: the lenders did NOT inflate the housing bubble; you did with your buying into the bubble. No-one asked you to buy except for your own greed.
                          ...
                          But America is not about a free-ride for anyone including speculators, deadbeats, bankers nor anyone else.
                          not sure how you can possibly believe the parts in bold in light of...
                          • the FBI warned of mortgage fraud & many FBI agents got rezones to Homeland Security.
                          • states tried suing to stop some of the bad mortgage practices & the federal government blocked them.
                          • honest appraisers were blacklisted by banksters
                          • banks had documents for getting around their underwriting limitation software, Citibank stated that 80% of their loans were not conforming, and in some cases loans were given by "just trust us" people to folks who couldn't even read the contracts they were signing.
                          • pension plans bought misrepresented mortgage products ... in some cases the mortgage was sold off multiple times over
                          • AIG insured misrepresented mortgage products & had to waive their right to sue the criminals who had them insure that trash to receive bailout funding
                          • the banks paid less than a penny on the Dollar as a fine for their robosigning frauds
                          • absolutely no bankster "bonus" clawbacks


                          if you are not a party engaged in the mortgage fraud you still got screwed by it through not having the opportunity to buy a house at a fair price, through overpaying for a house if you did buy one, through potentially losing your job after the collapse of the economy, through the money printing that made a thanksgiving dinner cost 13% more last year, through loss of purchasing power of savings, through being underpaid below the rate of inflation on your savings, and through bailing out the criminals who created the bubble through various other forms.

                          somewhere there is a banker sailing on his second yacht right now...and like it or not you paid for it.

                          if a person is routinely lied to in marketing materials from the government + media that "lie x is true" and that they were an inferior person for not buying into a state-sponsored fraud, then a lot of people are going to buy into the scam. when I moved to California a friend tried social pressuring me into buying a house...I passed on that opportunity, but millions of others who were not as strong as math bought in.

                          math is important, but our debt-based society tries to keep people ignorant of applying it to real life situations. and you have to have a pretty cynical view of the world to think/realize/appreciate that the government is a party conspiring with scammers to rip you off & that the rule of law will only apply to you as the bankster thieves will have no penalty (and free bailouts) for their frauds.

                          people are emotional & irrational creatures. but in spite of being deceived, they probably won't get a free ride - unless they are a bankster - then they can count on it & build their business model + bonus structure around it.

                          people go to jail for drug dealing & Wachovia ran HUNDREDS OF BILLION OF DOLLARS in drug money with 0 days of jail time.
                          http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...ico-drug-gangs
                          clearly there are two books of law.
                          Last edited by seobook; March 20, 2012, 11:35 AM.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X