Occupy the mortgage lenders

Simon Johnson
0 Comment(s)Print E-mail China Daily, October 25, 2011
Adjust font size:

The key to this proposal is that banks must agree; it is a voluntary debt restructuring, compelled by no legal authority. In principle, banks should be attracted to the proposal, because restructured loans are less likely to default. In practice, the banks have consistently dragged their feet on mortgage restructuring – and are laying off staff, rather than hiring people who could help them deal with an initiative of the required scale.

Feldstein calculates that the one-time cost of principal reduction would be around $350 billion. Of course, in our current fiscal environment, it will be hard to find additional resources from the budget.

But $350 billion is roughly what the financial sector as a whole earned in an average quarter during the credit boom – and profit levels in recent quarters have reached or exceeded those levels. So, if the entire write-down cost were covered by banks, most of them would lose the equivalent of no more than one year's profits – spread over several years.

Those boom-time profits were in any case overstated, because they were not adjusted for risk. And when the downside risks materialized, the losses were largely socialized – the primary reason why US public debt has soared in recent years. Asking shareholders and management to pay a relatively small amount is entirely fair and appropriate under these circumstances.

Some in the financial sector would, of course, threaten dire consequences. In fact, bank stock prices might drop, and it is entirely possible that compensation and bonuses would be curtailed, at least in the short term. On the other hand, a large-scale settlement that legitimately and finally removed the threat of future legal action would lift an enormous cloud that hangs over some of the largest lenders, including Bank of America, and creates significant risks for the rest of the financial system.

If the banks were ever really held accountable for the social costs of their behavior, the bill would far exceed $300-400 billion. Realistically assessed, the full downside legal risks to financial institutions are in excess of $1 trillion – particularly if it can be demonstrated that the "mortgage-backed securities" sold to investors were not backed by mortgages at all, because the proper legal paperwork was never done.

Any settlement should also include the banks' explicit agreement that they will support modifying America's bankruptcy law to enable inclusion of mortgages in the usual court-run processes. If the Occupy Wall Street movement tells us anything, it is that the last thing the US economy needs is more households overwhelmed by debt.

Simon Johnson, a former chief economist of the IMF, is co-founder of a leading economics blog, http://BaselineScenario.com, a professor at MIT Sloan, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, and co-author, with James Kwak, of 13 Bankers.

 

   Previous   1   2  


Print E-mail Bookmark and Share

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)

No comments.

Add your comments...

  • User Name Required
  • Your Comment
  • Racist, abusive and off-topic comments may be removed by the moderator.
Send your storiesGet more from China.org.cnMobileRSSNewsletter
主站蜘蛛池模板: 国产免费色视频| 欧美成人免费午夜影视| 国产午夜精品一区二区| 男人天堂2023| 国语自产精品视频在线看| 一本一道久久a久久精品综合| 欧美日韩亚洲成人| 国产一区二区精品在线观看| 欧美色图一区二区| 国产精品无码无需播放器| 中文字幕在线观看第二页| 日韩在线视频网| 亚洲综合无码一区二区三区| 精品人妻少妇一区二区三区在线 | 久久久久夜夜夜精品国产| 波多野结衣中文无毒不卡| 再深点灬舒服灬太大| 色综合色天天久久婷婷基地| 国产成人亚洲综合一区| AAA日本高清在线播放免费观看| 日韩免费小视频| 亚洲AV无码不卡| 欧洲熟妇色xxxx欧美老妇多毛| 再深点灬舒服灬太大了一进一出| 色多多视频官网| 国产在线观看91精品一区| 国产妇乱子伦视频免费| 在线观看成人免费| va天堂va亚洲va影视中文字幕| 日韩一级在线播放| 九九视频在线观看视频23| 校花的好大的奶好爽漫画| 亚洲色大成网站www永久| 秋葵app官网免费下载地址| 全高清特级毛片| 领导边摸边吃奶边做爽在线观看| 在线看欧美成人中文字幕视频 | 欧美成人午夜免费完成| 亚洲日韩欧美国产高清αv| 欧美激欧美啪啪片sm| 亚洲最大看欧美片网站|