Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

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

  • Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

    For the last few weeks there has been a strange rumor circling around. Probably some of you have already heard about it.

    It's about a new government "rescue" plan or "mortgage replacement loans", which IMHO is a disguise for a plan to make serfdom legal and supported by government enforcement in the US.

    When I heard initially about it I dismissed it quickly as just another autocratic enormity and a closeted wet dream of some sick financial Golums.

    Well I may have been wrong ... Tonight on Charlie Rose the great "rescue" idea was put forward by Martin Feldstein , who is not only an AIG board member (where he did a great job ), but also a member of G30 (aka the "Gang of Thirty pieces of silver" or the "geniuses" who started to promote the derivatives lunacy in the late 90's)

    Let me first peel the onion for you and tomorrow we may get a link to the Charlie Rose interview and judge for yourselves.

    Problem:
    About 10 million homeowners have negative equity in their homes (the mortgage they payed is way higher than the current market value of their houses). About half of those have more than 20% .

    That freezes the banks that conned them into signing those mortgages and were responsible for for the whole housing bubble (OK not only banks, ...add more from your own list)

    Blah blah blah ... financial crisis .... blah blah blah ...hurting financial institutions ....blah blah blah... house prices are in a downward spiral... many homeowners have actually incentives to foreclose their mortgages (Duh!!!) .. that furthers lowers the rice of houses ... bank credit... blah blah blah .... those people who foreclose their mortgages put more pressure on people which still have a positive equity.

    And the root cause of this problem is that mortgages are a no recourse loan.( ie if you stop payments the bank can't do anything else than take the house back, only the house and nothing else)

    Reaction:

    We must do something to "save" the homeowner! In addition to the Wall Street bailout, so we can a "alleviate" the burden of negative equity.

    Of course that doesn't mean the homeowners should be forgiven a proportion of the mortgage ... nah .. because that would produce a sharp decline in home prices and the Wall Street would loose more money.

    We have to do something to stop people from choosing foreclosure instead of continuing to pay exorbitant mortgages.

    The government has to build a firewall to stop the downward spiral of house prices.


    Solution:
    We have to bailout J6P from being ripped off completely by offering him an "incentive" to continue the obscene payments on a home worth nothing. A part of his mortgage would be replaced by a low interest government loan (loan provided by J6P from his tax money) that will lower the mortgage payments.

    But we have to be "responsible" with J6P's tax money when we use them to bailout ... well...Mr J6P . The government "partial replacement loan" would not be a non recourse loan like a normal mortgage, like his existing mortgage.
    Those "mortgage replacement loans" will be full recourse loans, which will not go to the individual but to the mortgage holders...

    And of course, since this is actually a "swap and not a loan";) probably the "rescue" of the homeowners would be roughly somewhere around (an additional) $700 bil (from J6P's tax money, of course)

    If home prices will continue to go down and J6P cannot pay his mortgage he will loose his home, he will loose all the money he did pay for that home, but he will still have to pay to the government about 20% of his initial obscene mortgage, i.e. the full-recourse "mortgage replacement loan"

    So J6P would loose everything and will become a debt slave and pushed by the government into debt bondage because the government cannot waste taxpayer's (J6P's) money.

    I was yelling at my TV : "You moron, if you want to stop house prices form failing let them reach to the bottom of the bubble faster . It is idiotic to artificially prop prices after a bubble burst, and it's immoral to do that with taxpayer's money!!!!"

    WTF is this ??? :eek: the financial/banking system of the USA ...United Somali Alliance ???
    Last edited by Supercilious; October 01, 2008, 01:15 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

    Originally posted by $#* View Post
    ...WTF is this ??? :eek: the financial/banking system of the USA ...United Somali Alliance ???

    It's called the American Dream.

    Circa 2008...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

      Mortgages in the UK are already attached to the person, not the property. What separates us from peonage is the ability to declare bankruptcy.
      It's Economics vs Thermodynamics. Thermodynamics wins.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

        Thanks for the heads up.

        Video up:

        http://www.charlierose.com/shows/200...rtin-feldstein

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

          This is interesting, but it already is occurring.

          I've seen a couple of proposed loan modifications - and buried deep within were all clauses converting the loans from non-recourse to recourse.

          Even the state regulations for first mortgages being non-recourse are being circumvented by conversion of these debts into other forms.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

            Originally posted by $#* View Post

            And the root cause of this problem is that mortgages are a no recourse loan.( ie if you stop payments the bank can't do anything else than take the house back, only the house and nothing else)
            Are you sure that mortgages are non recourse, I thought that was only in a few states.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

              I am an attorney and I can guarantee you that there is no such thing as a non-recourse home loan (with the possible exceptions of some HELOC's). Anyone who walks away still owes the excess of the mortgage over the foreclosure price. Worse yet, the borrowers usually owe an additional default charge of about 15% of the outstanding balance, plus accelerated interest from the time of the default (i.e interest rate jumps much higher), plus attorneys fees (I don't mind that in my profession;)).

              The only non-recourse loans out there are for commercial properties, usually held in LLC's or Limited Partnerships (which sometimes provide for guarantees unless the deal is great and competing banks want to make the loans). Hedge fund loans for instance are non-recourse to the partners.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

                Originally posted by Brooks Gracie View Post
                I am an attorney and I can guarantee you that there is no such thing as a non-recourse home loan (with the possible exceptions of some HELOC's).
                Can you provide some credible source for this statement. My grandma is a Real Estate attorney and she tells me that most of primary mortgages on residential homes (no refis, homeqs and an adequate PMI ) are non recourse and the mortgager usually cannot get a deficiency judgment against the mortgager.

                My grandma says also that most subprime morgages offered to the NINA Joe Shmoes are non-recourse ... that's the essence of the CDO crisis.. this is what makes the paper toxic.

                Again if you can provide a credible source that the banks are able to recover their money from foreclosure please tell me, I might buy some CDO's at face value.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

                  I really cannot believe we are having this discussion, but here goes. A mortgage is merely a security instrument in real property. It does not obligate the borrower to pay in the case of default. The default terms of the mortgage include the failure to timely pay the promissory note. Promissory notes for residential real estate always are in the name of the individual borrower. The note is a contract that can still be enforced just as any other debt where there is partial payment, through the lender suing for a deficiency judgment.

                  Now whether lenders will sue for the deficiency judgment depends on whether the borrower is insolvent, or there are wages to attach. Often that is the case and it is not worth the effort to go to court to get a judgment that is not worth the paper it is written on.

                  Besides if you doubt I am an attorney, just ask EJ--I used to represent his boss and some of the companies he invested in.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

                    Recourse options for lenders vary by state and are controlled by state statute.

                    Foreclosure processes differ by state as well, some being non-judicial (i.e. via deed of trust held by a public trustee or equivalent) or judicial (i.e. via a court of law). Some states allow for the lender to choose.

                    Some states, like California where the largest amount of sub-prime loans have been originated, are non-recourse for "purchase money" (e.g. 1st mortgages) but not for subordinated debt (e.g. HELOCs).

                    I am not an expert on this. I know the laws for the states in which I invest only. I do know that it varies, a lot. The only way to be sure is to look at the specific state statutes or consult a real estate attorney in the jurisdiction of interest.

                    I do believe, though I am not certain, that both California and Florida are non-recourse states. Since these are two of the biggest hot zones for sub-prime, alt-a and option arm loans, it would not surprise me if most of the toxic CDOs are non-recourse.

                    In any event, what good does "recourse" do when you're going after borrowers that are already broke?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

                      Originally posted by Brooks Gracie View Post
                      I really cannot believe we are having this discussion, but here goes. A mortgage is merely a security instrument in real property. It does not obligate the borrower to pay in the case of default.
                      This is what was trying to say before getting hit by excessive legal semantics. My point was that in the current system if:
                      - Joe Shmoe of the NINA nation, is conned by the bank into taking a sub-prime ARM obscene 0% down, mortgage for $400k home
                      - the current market value of that home is $200k
                      - the ARM resets to higher rate
                      - Joe Shmoe cannot make the obscene mortgage payments and walks away

                      The mortgage servicer (that NINA mortgage has been long time shredded into little slices and spread in CDO's allover the world) is stuck with a $200k house that cannot be sold and Joe Shmoe has no other financial obligations.

                      AFAIK, there were cases in which foreclosures could not go through because the mortgage servicer could not even prove they were the lender:
                      http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/fi...ssal-Boyko.pdf

                      Anyway, Brooks Gracie, thanks for your professional opinion. I'm sure it would be a great service for the rest of us if you could change the wikipedia page regarding this issue:
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreclosure

                      Deficiency judgments can be used to place a lien on the borrower's other property that obligates the mortgagor to repay the difference. It gives lender a legal right to collect the remainder of debt out of mortgagor's other assets (if any). There are exceptions to this rule, however. If the mortgage is a non-recourse debt (which is often the case with residential mortgages), lender may not go after borrower's assets to recoup his losses. Lender's ability to pursue deficiency judgment may be restricted by state laws. In California and some other states, original mortgages (the ones taken out at the time of purchase) are typically non-recourse loans, however, refinanced loans and home equity lines of credit aren't.
                      The RE layers in charge with that page may be unintentionally misleading the public by submitting inaccurate information.

                      Originally posted by Brooks Gracie View Post
                      Anyone who walks away still owes the excess of the mortgage over the foreclosure price. [...]plus attorneys fees (I don't mind that in my profession;)).
                      [...]
                      Besides if you doubt I am an attorney, just ask EJ--I used to represent his boss and some of the companies he invested in.
                      I will refrain from making further comments here ... I should consult my lawyer first ... , but I can assure you I have a very good opinion about corporate/investment lawyers and risk rating specialists. They are essential for the health of the financial system, and giving sound and clear advice essential in preventing questionable, immoral and predatory lending practices.

                      Well, going back to our poor Joe Shmoe, based on what my grandma was saying (which, according to Books Grace, may or may not be true,.. I couldn't figure that out yet from her message), in the current system our Shmoe can walk free from a predatory mortgage, leaving the mortgage servicer with a $200k loss. This why Wall Street is hit by the toxic CDO storm and fears further writeoffs.

                      In the new system proposed by Martin Feldstein (who is also a distinguished member of the Board of Directors of the Conounce on Foreign Relations), Joe Shmoe would be "rescued" by a government "mortgage replacement loan" for 20% of his mortgage (80k in his case), he will be never be able to walk away from.

                      Brooks Gracie, would you be so kind to offer a personal opinion (if a professional one cannot be offered in the absence of an adequate fee) on the legal moral/ethical implications resulting from the implementation of such a "rescue" plan?

                      Here is the clip of that Charlie Rose interview:

                      http://www.charlierose.com/shows/200...rtin-feldstein
                      Last edited by Supercilious; October 03, 2008, 12:05 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Government sponsored serfdom/debt-bondage

                        California is the only state that requires non-recourse mortgages. Lenders almost always get their way with recourse mortgages, mainly due to the golden rule.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X