|

FINANCIAL
APHASIA
by Paul Petillo
Managing Editor,
BlueCollarDollar.com
September 7, 2007
The first time I spoke
about the subject of sub-prime mortgages and the potential for this
seemingly endless fallout came during a live television show in February
of 2006. Granted, the
demographic for that medium market audience was not the same as those
watching the more affluent Bloomberg network or even the rowdy bunch who
tune in to CNBC. Yet it was
the very audience that needed to hear what must have seemed at the time
like a “sky is falling” report.
As I
revisited these thoughts over the next eighteen months, one simple fact
always seemed to remain constant: we, not the investor class but the
average person, continues to suffer from financial aphasia.
Closely related to semantic aphasia, a mental disorder that does
not allow the individual to understand the meaning of the words being
spoken even as they understand what the words are, the financial form of
this malady leaves the listener doing one thing while believing
something wholly different. It
has been best described as a little like hearing a love song - only
without knowing why those words were used or what the singer meant by
them.
Financial
aphasia, by my definition, offers a look at the mounting storm surge
that the housing market has become and the fact that, with so many
people speaking about it, affected by it, and promising to reform the
system, the words have lost their meaning.
We hear them but we no longer understand them.
Ben
Bernanke, the Federal Reserve Chairman wrote a letter recently to
Senator Charles Schumer that offered some form of agreement with the
outspoken lawmaker’s fear. “I share your
concern about the potential impact of scheduled payment resets on
homeowners with variable-rate sub-prime mortgages,” he wrote
suggesting a little further along that perhaps “developing a broader
range of mortgage products” might help those who are in the deepest
trouble. Really?
Didn’t
the problem begin with mortgage products, Mr. Bernanke? The end result
of the unceasing ingenuity and creativity of Wall Street to cater to
risk seeking investors who saw the mortgage market as the new potential
rainmaker is at the heart of this problem. More mortgage products Mr.
Bernanke, are not the solution.
Even
if the Fed has no direct impact on mortgage rates as many assume they
do, shouldn’t this traumatic event have been apparent at some point
before now on their economic radar?
As they sift through reams of data, is it possible that they
suffer from financial aphasia?
That
letter made Wall Street happy with anticipation.
The possibility that Bernanke has refocused his attention on the
economy, one in which he pronounced was doing just fine a month or so
ago, sent stocks soaring - again. Despite
what Wall Street wants and even lobbies so strongly for, and at the risk
of repeating myself, an interest rate cut would not be in this
economy’s best interest.
Many
of the newsworthy suggestions on how approach or even fix this problem
are akin to using a squirt gun on a forest fire.
The
most often heard solution suggests that Congress should raise the limits
from the current $417,000 for FHA insurance to $500,000, more if you
live in out-priced markets like San Francisco or New York.
By doing this, the burden of a default would eventually fall to
the taxpayer. The Federal Housing Authority insures home mortgages and
by doing so, makes them more saleable to investors looking for a safe
haven for excess dollars. Upping
those insurance limits for the people who would qualify for that size
loan would not have the desired effect that Washington would hope.
The
problem with this choice piece of legislation is whom it would help:
primarily, the homebuyer who should have known better – the very
people who saw the words on the contract and failed to understand them.
Financial aphasia.
President
Bush offered an extended hand as well.
Reaching out to less than one percent of the troubled homeowners
with his plan, shortly after he pronounced the economy as “doing just
fine” fell just shy of the mark. The
market greeted it with a shrug and most of those who examined his
offering saw it as disingenuous at best.
His plan to save eighty thousand homeowners by overhauling the
FHA, all while foregoing the other 1.4 million also smacks of financial
aphasia.
There
have been some good suggestions. The
idea to cut the tax penalty aimed at foreclosed home owners, a move that
would help the neediest borrower seems to have fallen to the wayside yet
would be among the easiest of fixes.
Because there is little belief that this would help anyone keep
the family home, the notion lacks political incentive.
If
you were not aware of this fact, a foreclosure, while damaging to your
credit report, the same report that was probably already somewhat
tarnished when the mortgage was first obtained, does not let the
borrower escape without penalty - courtesy of the IRS. The amount of the
forgiven loan, as the law is now written, is taxed as real income at the
rate of the defaulted borrower.
The
beauty of aphasia, if any can be found in the neurological disorder can
be best seen on Wall Street. They
were the ones who created the product, pushed for deregulation and
opened the financial markets to a new source of asset-secured revenue.
That product allowed us, the average American homeowner to tap
the equity in our homes for cash to use to buy products, many of which
were produced on foreign soil. Those
dollars were in turn, recycled back into these mortgage-backed
securities by the same entities that sold us those much-needed
wares.
Hopeful
that the Fed will begin to cut rates, Wall Street has taken a new tact.
They are not, one analyst recently suggested, concerned about the
broader markets resilience even if the Fed decides to leave the
short-term overnight rate alone. They
are worried they say, about Main Street.
And with good reason.
Wall
Street is worried about regulation.
The fear that, for some reason Congress will begin to take action
against the banks and financial institutions creating yet another
Sarbanes-Oxley type of fix or worse, begin force-feeding them ethics is
a very scary scenario for some of these folks.
It
boils down to this: is showing your worthiness for a mortgage, no matter
how large or small such a bad thing?
No its not. But to
Wall Street, this means less money spent as the consumer scrimps and
saves for a down payment. And then, perhaps, even buy a house they can
afford.
Could
proving to the lender that you have the ability to weather personal
economic storms and still keep your house actually cripple the economy?
Yes it could. The majority of Americans are watching this “crisis”
and wondering if it will reach them.
Eventually and unfortunately it will but the readjustment may not
be as painful as some might expect. Recessionary? Probably.
Inflationary? In all likelihood. Will we survive it?
Absolutely.
We
just have to remember that the words on those loan agreements have
meaning and failing to understand them can have lasting consequences
well beyond our own personal sphere of understanding.
Even as financial aphasia seems blissful, it is a dangerous
mistake to consider it inconsequential.

© 2007 Paul Petillo
Editorial Archive
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Paul Petillo
Blue Collar Dollar.com
Portland, OR USA
(501) 313-5252
Email
| Website
|