|
I have often said that humans are like rats in that they are extremely ingenious
when it comes to looking after their personal interests. Lock a rat in a metal
box and it will almost be able to figure a way out. Almost. A human would actually
have a shot at it.
In the debate about what went wrong with the economy and how to fix things,
the topic of loose credit standards usually arises early in the discussion.
And correctly so. Due to loose credit standards, people without the financial
resources to own a home were practically carried across the threshold by predatory
lenders.
Well, at least that's how the outraged political class and their adoring punditry
see things.
According to that section of the jeering crowd, these lenders were so avaricious,
greedy, and downright dastardly that they would actually hand the keys to a
$500,000 house to an individual with not just poor but pitiful credit and with
little or no money down. Bastards!
Of course, as a former banker (shudder), I have a somewhat different perspective.
Because no matter how devious or dastardly a lending institution might be,
it wouldn't even contemplate making such loans if it didn't have a fairly well-reasoned
plan in mind to actually get paid back... with interest.
Enter the government in the form of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
and the quasi-state-owned (and now absolutely state-owned) Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac. Absent their guarantees, the private sector would never, but never, have
made the loans just described. That's because...
(a) loan officers actually take professional pride and go to great lengths
in assuring that the money they loan out comes back. In fact, failing to get
loans paid back with even a sniff of regularity is quick cause for a pink slip
followed by a solemn escort to the front door for the approving loan officer.
And...
(b) foreclosing and all the attendant activities are difficult, time consuming,
and costly. To wit, trying to get juice out of a rock gets you little more
than dust.
As a result, within the acceptable tolerance range for any human endeavor,
banks are historically careful in setting lending standards.
But add into the equation a rate-slashing Fed looking to stimulate things
a bit, side by side with a bloated Uncle Sam looking to engage in some social
engineering by putting people without the credit or means into a house, and
the picture quickly changes. The FHA, the world's largest government insurer
of mortgages, whose "loans require small down payments" and provide "more flexibility
. . . than conventional loans," as its website states, has currently 4.8 million
insured single-family mortgages.
For the record, there are about 55 million single-family mortgages in the
U.S., so the FHA has about 10% covered.
But the FHA is just one of Uncle Sam's kissing cousins. Others, including
the aforementioned Fannie and Freddie, guarantee another 31 million mortgages between
them. So, in total, U.S. taxpayers now stand behind about 65% of all home mortgages
in the U.S. But it is worse than that, because ever since the credit crisis
began, over 80% of all new mortgages generated have been "conforming" in order
to go onto the books of a government agency.
Thanks to Uncle Sam's largess and no-risk lending guarantees - warmly applauded
by the nation's banks and sundry money shoppes, to be sure - since 1992 there
has been about a 50% increase in U.S. homeownership.
Is it any wonder, therefore, that until recently you could spot a loan officer
by the wide smiles on their faces, as well as their ink-stained fingers, the
result of producing prodigious quantities of freshly printed loan contracts?
The way it all worked was very simple. Uncle Sam shouts for all lenders to
hear, "Bring me your poor, your unqualified, your liars, and your wannabe speculators,
and I will buy up their loans, allowing you to make a quick profit for generating
them, and then passing them like a hot potato into my portfolio."
Given the opportunity to make money by giving money away - not a real hard
sale - the lenders rose to the occasion. A rat, sniffing out a crust of bread
down an unguarded alleyway, would do much the same.
Likewise the masses, equally quick to discern the opportunity, can hardly
be faulted for scrabbling to take the house, oftentimes along with a loan that
put extra money in their pockets in the process.
No one was much concerned about paying for the homes; the lender's risk was
assumed by the government and the unqualified buyer didn't have much of any
money in the game, and besides, everyone was certain that house prices could
only go in one direction, up. As for the government, well, the government doesn't
really pay much if any attention to the money it spends, because it's not their
money. It's yours - if you are a U.S. taxpayer, that is.
Of course, as the smell of free cheese and wealth without end spread throughout
the ether, more and more two-legged rats acted on what they perceived to be
their self-interest, causing a steady influx of new buyers to stream into the
alley of homeownership. And the next thing you know, you have a housing bubble
of historic proportions.
But you know all this, so why am I repeating history? Well, because this week,
I stopped in at a local sandwich shop and, to occupy myself with something
other than looking out the window, took hold of a regional real estate guide
that, as part of its editorial features, includes a table showing all of the
lenders who do business in the area - 16 in all.
Among other information, the lenders' table displayed whether or not the various
lending institutions offer "Mortgages to Buyers with Less Than 20% Down?"...
and whether they "Offer Mortgages with Credit Scores Under 600?"
Even today, after all the news and global angst, 9 out of 16 still advertise
that they offer loans to individuals with credit scores below 600, and four
of them actively promote the fact that they'll go down to 580 - which is roughly
the credit rating of an escaped felon on the run for credit card fraud. But
such a loan, each of the listing institutions further qualifies, is available "Only
w/FHA."
And 12 out of 16 will still give you a loan with less than 20% down... in
fact, "w/FHA," the solid majority will still provide a loan with less
than 5% down, and one touted the availability of a 103% loan.
Alas, despite the understandable desire of lenders to earn yet more cheese
by generating poor-quality mortgages for Uncle Sam, borrowers now believe real
estate can only go down. Given the oversupply, they are largely right for the
foreseeable future. On that basis, they whiff the downside, spot the trap that
waits behind the front door of Home Sweet Home, and scamper away.
The lesson in all of this, other than that once I get pounding away on the
keyboard, I seem to have no off-switch, is that the real cause of the housing-led
crisis was a failure to appreciate the similarities between humans and rats.
Every government interference in the market, no matter how well intentioned,
carries the seeds of dangerous unintended consequences. Just ask the twenty-something
welfare mothers of the 1980s who, when offered monthly pay for each new offspring,
quickly converted their wombs into baby factories.
I wish I could say that this lesson - that humans, like rats, will always
figure out a way to pursue their self-interest, even if it requires chewing
through a real or proverbial wall - has been understood, thanks to the crash.
Chances are it hasn't.
Fortunately, there is consolation to be had from the current trend towards
more and bigger government. Namely, if you can fully understand what's going
on and what's coming next, you have a rare opportunity to - in the words of
a stock promoter who used to speak at conferences some years ago - get "stinky,
filthy, sloppy rich."
Even in a deep crisis like the one we're seeing right now, windows of opportunity
open up all the time - if you only know where to look. Recognizing, analyzing,
and profiting from emerging trends in the economy is the objective of The
Casey Report. Learn how to get handsome rewards by making the trend your
friend - click
here now.
|