The Daily Republic
Published Wednesday, April 22, 2009
U.S. Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., introduced legislation today that would require the secretary of the treasury to use taxpayer funds returned by financial institutions under the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) to reduce the national debt, according to a news release from Thune's office.
From the release:
"Several financial institutions that received TARP funding have returned or expressed an interest in returning billions in taxpayer funding.
“'Congress is responsible for allocating taxpayer dollars and this legislation will prevent the Obama Administration from attempting to turn this money into a revolving slush fund,' said Thune. 'TARP was designed for the President to report back to Congress and seek approval for additional funding. This legislation ensures the returned funds are not reallocated by the administration for other priorities. Instead, this bill would work to reduce the size of the national debt in this country, something that seems to be a forgotten idea with the current Democrat leadership.'
"Recently, Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner has indicated that he intends to spend these funds on additional TARP activities without Congressional approval."
Showing posts with label bailout. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bailout. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Gingrich: We Need Action Now
From Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich in his email commentary today.
Replace Secretary Paulson and Suspend Mark to Market
by Newt Gingrich (more by this author)
Posted 10/01/2008 ET
Following Monday's failure of the Paulson plan in the House, it is imperative that our leaders not hesitate to bring stability to our financial markets.
We need action now.
The Paulson Plan - is dead. The time has come for Congress to turn its attention to a plan that does the right things the right way instead of trying to fix the wrong way of this monstrosity of a Wall Street bailout bill.
As I said to Fox News' Greta Van Susteren Monday night, and spoke about at the National Press Club on Tuesday, there are two steps that could be taken that would send a needed signal to the world financial markets that America has leaders who recognize the gravity of the crisis and are capable of putting aside narrow partisan self-interest for the good of the country.
Step One: Replace Secretary Paulson
A plan that relies on the former chairman of Goldman Sachs presiding over disbursing hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street is a terrible concept and inevitably will lead to crony capitalism and the appearance of - if not the actual existence of - corruption.
The American people understand this and they don't trust the Paulson plan. Congress should never have been faced with this as its only option to solve the financial crisis. Congress never should have been confronted with this bill. And one man, above all others, is responsible.
That man is Henry Paulson, who may have been a great deal maker for Goldman Sachs, but has been an utter failure during this economic crisis.
It's time - passed time, in fact - for President Bush to fire Secretary Paulson.
President Bush should replace Paulson immediately with someone more capable of forging a deal that the American people can trust. Secretary Paulson's Deputy at Treasury is Robert Kimmitt. He does not have the Wall Street background that made Secretary Paulson so difficult to trust as a negotiating partner and should be much more open to alternatives because he has less invested in the "Paulson" plan.
Kimmitt need not go through the actual confirmation process to immediately take over negotiating with Congress. The sooner Paulson is replaced as the chief negotiator for the administration, the sooner we will have a deal the American people can support.
Step Two: Suspend the Mark-to-Market Accounting Rule
The second thing our leaders should do immediately is simple and uncontroversial: Suspend the "mark-to-market" accounting rule that is exacerbating this crisis.
Under this artificial rule, the value of assets of banks moves up and down with economic conditions, regardless of their underlying worth. So in a time of economic crisis - such as the current subprime mortgage crisis - the value of bank assets gets caught in a downward spiral, causing investor panic and a drying up of credit.
In 2004, the European Central Bank issued this now eerily prescient opinion of the mark-to-market rule:
"With a real estate crisis or a stock market crash... [a bank] under [mark-to-market] accounting might aggravate the effects of the shock. Banks may be encouraged to react by panic selling and tightening lending standards, thus contributing to a further deepening of the crisis."
A Smart First Step
I've spent the past few days talking with businesspeople across the country - from Oklahoma, Georgia, Nevada and California - and they agree: this artificial accounting rule is needlessly making the financial crisis worse.
On Monday I appeared on Fox News' On the Record with Greta van Susteren and called for mark-to-market to be suspended.
I also wrote this op-ed yesterday for forbes.com urging the same course of action.
I gave a speech at the National Press Club in which I discussed in depth the need to end this problem now. You can read the text and view it here.
Then, later that afternoon, the Securities and Exchange Commission took a smart first step by issuing a "clarification" giving companies more leeway in estimating the value of mortgage related investments. You can read more here. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Chris Cox deserves credit for recognizing how this accounting requirement is needlessly exacerbating our current financial difficulties.
The Bush Administration's Expensive Legacy
Taking these two steps - replacing Secretary Paulson and suspending the mark-to-market rule - are absolutely necessary right now to give Congress the breathing room to develop a plan to replace the Paulson Plan and to re-establish trust with the American people.
The Bush Administration has now provided three case studies that have badly damaged the cause of conservatism.
First there was former FEMA head Michael Brown during Hurricane Katrina, whose incompetence convinced Americans that Republicans can't be trusted with governing.
Then there was Ambassador Jerry Bremer in Baghdad, whose decisions as the head of the American occupation of Iraq convinced Americans that Republicans can't be trusted to manage foreign policy.
And now we have Secretary Paulson at the Treasury, whose intransigence during the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression has convinced Americans that Republicans can't be trusted with their money.
It's a tragic and very expensive legacy. No conservative and no Republican should doubt how much it has hurt our cause and our party.
Rebuilding Public Trust with a Work Out, Not a Bailout
As I told Greta Van Susteren Monday night on Fox News, the fundamental flaw in the Paulson Plan was that it was seen by the American people as a deal designed by and for Wall Street.
Congress needs to go back to the drawing board and develop, not just a financial markets rescue bill (which should be a work out, not a bailout) but also an economic growth bill.
This economic growth package should do two fundamental things:
First of all, it needs to provide relief for our financial markets that is based on lending troubled institutions the capital to restore our credit markets, rather than buying their bad assets. The taxpayers should be asked to extend these institutions a line of credit until they can get back on their feet, rather than blindly acquire these institutions' toxic paper. This is the essential difference between a workout and a bailout.
Second, the plan should stop the flow of $700 billion each year out of our economy and into the coffers of foreign dictators by achieving energy independence. Not only would our national security be improved, but this much new energy income would cause our economy to boom and government revenues to grow.
A Final Warning: Don't Allow the House Democrats to Move the Plan Left
A lot of people are scratching their heads over what would cause House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to deliver such a bitterly partisan speech minutes before the House voted down the Paulson Plan - a plan she purported to support.
I think it's likely that Speaker Pelosi deliberately delivered her highly partisan speech at the last minute to get precisely the result that she got - the defeat of the Paulson Plan. The danger now is that she and the liberal Democrats in the House will spend the next couple days re-loading the bill with all the leftwing pork projects that Senator McCain and the House Republicans were able to remove from it.
This danger makes it imperative that Republicans unify behind Minority Leader John Boehner in resisting moving any rescue plan to the left. The stakes are too high for the American people to allow liberal Democrats to use the current crisis to line the coffers of their special interest allies.
Replace Secretary Paulson and Suspend Mark to Market
by Newt Gingrich (more by this author)
Posted 10/01/2008 ET
Following Monday's failure of the Paulson plan in the House, it is imperative that our leaders not hesitate to bring stability to our financial markets.
We need action now.
The Paulson Plan - is dead. The time has come for Congress to turn its attention to a plan that does the right things the right way instead of trying to fix the wrong way of this monstrosity of a Wall Street bailout bill.
As I said to Fox News' Greta Van Susteren Monday night, and spoke about at the National Press Club on Tuesday, there are two steps that could be taken that would send a needed signal to the world financial markets that America has leaders who recognize the gravity of the crisis and are capable of putting aside narrow partisan self-interest for the good of the country.
Step One: Replace Secretary Paulson
A plan that relies on the former chairman of Goldman Sachs presiding over disbursing hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street is a terrible concept and inevitably will lead to crony capitalism and the appearance of - if not the actual existence of - corruption.
The American people understand this and they don't trust the Paulson plan. Congress should never have been faced with this as its only option to solve the financial crisis. Congress never should have been confronted with this bill. And one man, above all others, is responsible.
That man is Henry Paulson, who may have been a great deal maker for Goldman Sachs, but has been an utter failure during this economic crisis.
It's time - passed time, in fact - for President Bush to fire Secretary Paulson.
President Bush should replace Paulson immediately with someone more capable of forging a deal that the American people can trust. Secretary Paulson's Deputy at Treasury is Robert Kimmitt. He does not have the Wall Street background that made Secretary Paulson so difficult to trust as a negotiating partner and should be much more open to alternatives because he has less invested in the "Paulson" plan.
Kimmitt need not go through the actual confirmation process to immediately take over negotiating with Congress. The sooner Paulson is replaced as the chief negotiator for the administration, the sooner we will have a deal the American people can support.
Step Two: Suspend the Mark-to-Market Accounting Rule
The second thing our leaders should do immediately is simple and uncontroversial: Suspend the "mark-to-market" accounting rule that is exacerbating this crisis.
Under this artificial rule, the value of assets of banks moves up and down with economic conditions, regardless of their underlying worth. So in a time of economic crisis - such as the current subprime mortgage crisis - the value of bank assets gets caught in a downward spiral, causing investor panic and a drying up of credit.
In 2004, the European Central Bank issued this now eerily prescient opinion of the mark-to-market rule:
"With a real estate crisis or a stock market crash... [a bank] under [mark-to-market] accounting might aggravate the effects of the shock. Banks may be encouraged to react by panic selling and tightening lending standards, thus contributing to a further deepening of the crisis."
A Smart First Step
I've spent the past few days talking with businesspeople across the country - from Oklahoma, Georgia, Nevada and California - and they agree: this artificial accounting rule is needlessly making the financial crisis worse.
On Monday I appeared on Fox News' On the Record with Greta van Susteren and called for mark-to-market to be suspended.
I also wrote this op-ed yesterday for forbes.com urging the same course of action.
I gave a speech at the National Press Club in which I discussed in depth the need to end this problem now. You can read the text and view it here.
Then, later that afternoon, the Securities and Exchange Commission took a smart first step by issuing a "clarification" giving companies more leeway in estimating the value of mortgage related investments. You can read more here. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Chris Cox deserves credit for recognizing how this accounting requirement is needlessly exacerbating our current financial difficulties.
The Bush Administration's Expensive Legacy
Taking these two steps - replacing Secretary Paulson and suspending the mark-to-market rule - are absolutely necessary right now to give Congress the breathing room to develop a plan to replace the Paulson Plan and to re-establish trust with the American people.
The Bush Administration has now provided three case studies that have badly damaged the cause of conservatism.
First there was former FEMA head Michael Brown during Hurricane Katrina, whose incompetence convinced Americans that Republicans can't be trusted with governing.
Then there was Ambassador Jerry Bremer in Baghdad, whose decisions as the head of the American occupation of Iraq convinced Americans that Republicans can't be trusted to manage foreign policy.
And now we have Secretary Paulson at the Treasury, whose intransigence during the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression has convinced Americans that Republicans can't be trusted with their money.
It's a tragic and very expensive legacy. No conservative and no Republican should doubt how much it has hurt our cause and our party.
Rebuilding Public Trust with a Work Out, Not a Bailout
As I told Greta Van Susteren Monday night on Fox News, the fundamental flaw in the Paulson Plan was that it was seen by the American people as a deal designed by and for Wall Street.
Congress needs to go back to the drawing board and develop, not just a financial markets rescue bill (which should be a work out, not a bailout) but also an economic growth bill.
This economic growth package should do two fundamental things:
First of all, it needs to provide relief for our financial markets that is based on lending troubled institutions the capital to restore our credit markets, rather than buying their bad assets. The taxpayers should be asked to extend these institutions a line of credit until they can get back on their feet, rather than blindly acquire these institutions' toxic paper. This is the essential difference between a workout and a bailout.
Second, the plan should stop the flow of $700 billion each year out of our economy and into the coffers of foreign dictators by achieving energy independence. Not only would our national security be improved, but this much new energy income would cause our economy to boom and government revenues to grow.
A Final Warning: Don't Allow the House Democrats to Move the Plan Left
A lot of people are scratching their heads over what would cause House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to deliver such a bitterly partisan speech minutes before the House voted down the Paulson Plan - a plan she purported to support.
I think it's likely that Speaker Pelosi deliberately delivered her highly partisan speech at the last minute to get precisely the result that she got - the defeat of the Paulson Plan. The danger now is that she and the liberal Democrats in the House will spend the next couple days re-loading the bill with all the leftwing pork projects that Senator McCain and the House Republicans were able to remove from it.
This danger makes it imperative that Republicans unify behind Minority Leader John Boehner in resisting moving any rescue plan to the left. The stakes are too high for the American people to allow liberal Democrats to use the current crisis to line the coffers of their special interest allies.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
The Bailout Is a Band-Aid
The Bailout Is a Band-Aid: Housing Crisis Needs to Be Fixed
Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:18 PM
By: Christopher Ruddy
www.newsmax.com
Yesterday Sen. Orrin Hatch was hitting the airwaves.
The subprime crisis, he said, was the fault of the Clinton administration, who he said created the subprime mortgage crisis.
Other Republicans have been laying blame on the financial crisis on minorities and illegal immigrants who got mortgages they simply couldn’t pay. They offer no statistical proof on this point.
Nor does the usually sensible Senator Hatch offer evidence when it comes to pointing the finger at the Clinton administration.
The attempt to deflect blame for the crisis is not simply wrongheaded; I think it will compound Republican political woes and bring us disaster again in November.
Doesn’t Hatch and Co. know that Bill and Hillary Clinton voters in the swing states will decide who becomes the next president? They are wary of Obama, but love the Clintons and remember the good economic times of the’90s.
As a conservative Republican of the Reagan type, I find myself in this odd place cheering on some of the sensible things I hear from Democrats.
Barack Obama said any bailout to Wall Street must not be simply a cash payout or a loan, but be treated like an equity investment in these firms. We want our money back and then some. Yes to that, I say.
And demands by House Democrats that the secretary of the treasury alone not be given a blank check for more than a trillion dollars of our money, and that we have complete transparency in the transactions, I say yes to that, too.
Fiscal responsibility, transparency and accountability — aren’t these things Republicans believe in?
The Democratic complaints about the Bush plan shows that our government is working. The executive branch tried to put a gun to the head of Congress and told them, “Sign this check or the whole U.S. banking system will collapse.”
Congress didn’t blink.
Don’t get me wrong. I am for a bailout, but one that is sensible and is a win-win for Wall Street, Main Street investors and taxpayers like you and me.
But remember the government bailout plan proposed by the president and modifications supported by the Democrats won’t fix the underlying problem: the housing market collapse. Home prices are continuing to fall, and fewer people are buying homes than ever. Foreclosures will continue.
Unless this underlying problem is fixed, the economic symptoms will continue. There are some remedies. But before I get to them, let’s review what has happened.
The Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan gave the U.S. economy shock treatment back in 2001 and 2002 when it lowered interest rates to 1 percent — the lowest Fed Funds rate in recent history.
By pushing the pedal to the metal and backed quietly by the White House, the Fed injected massive liquidity in the U.S. economy, creating the largest asset bubble in history, according to the Economist magazine.
Incredibly low rates by the Fed were accompanied by an acceptance of the central bank for all sorts of exotic mortgage loans. No down payments. Interest only. No job and income verification. Get the picture?
Compounding this irresponsibility was then the “greed factor” that kicked in at several levels.
First were the local banks and mortgage companies that pushed mortgages, notably adjustable rate ones that offered extremely low introductory rates, and gave them to buyers who would not be able to pay back once the rates adjusted up.
Well rates have adjusted up and the crisis hit.
Many mortgage providers also encouraged loan applicants to lie about incomes and qualifications to approve these mortgages.
Wall Street as a whole had little role at this stage. But later, Wall Street took these mortgages, which had been rolled up into collateralized debt instruments, better known as mortgage backed securities, and sold them off to investors globally.
Wall Street failed to compute the risks involved in these securities. It was a failure, not a crime.
But many Wall Street firms, hedge funds and other investments took incredible, unwarranted risks using these securities. These firms would borrow money at low rates — say 4 percent — and invest in CDOs paying 6 to 7 percent. This small difference in rates of 2 to 3 percent, the arbitrage, would throw off enormous returns, especially considering little or no money had been placed on the table to buy the securities.
I have been told that Lehman and AIG played this leveraging game, investing only $1 for every $30 they held in such toxic suggestions. Again, what they did was not a crime. They took enormous risk and reaped huge returns — for a while.
Now they want us to pay for the huge losses that ultimately fell upon them.
Washington played a role in the mess too. The White House pushed for easy money and easy lending practices, many weighted in favor of the banks and lenders and against the consumer.
Congress, dominated largely by Republicans from 1994 to 2006, did an awful job in oversight. This is especially true after President Bush took the oath of office.
When Bill Clinton was president, the Republicans acted beautifully, working diligently to keep President Clinton on a center-right economic course. The results were great.
This seems like ancient history, but it’s important to have a clear picture of how we got into this mess. It may help us get out of it.
First, we need to know the “crisis” the Bush administration presented to us just last week is not a crisis that just popped up. It was apparent to many two years ago the real estate market was in a bubble and would bust.
And when the Fed moved in 2004 and raised rates from 1 percent to 5.25 percent by 2006 — a more than 400 percent increase in two years, it also led directly to those adjustable mortgages re-adjusting at very high rates. Homeowners got struck hard — with monthly mortgage payments on medium size homes mushrooming literally overnight.
The Fed increase rates started the credit crisis. The first tremors were apparent over a year ago when the Fed took emergency steps to give banks liquidity.
It’s important to remember that most adjustable mortgages created in the boom years still have not reset – and will continue doing so through 2011.
This problem will worsen unless Washington tackled the underlying problems.
The first thing the Fed must do to reduce the continuance of the problem is drop rates. It doesn’t have much wiggle room, because the dollar needs to be protected, but a small decrease in rates could have an enormous impact on those readjusting mortgages.
The second-most-important thing to do is for Congress to give a significant tax credit for new home buyers. Congress just passed a $7500 tax credit for new home buyers, though it’s not actually a credit but a loan at no interest.
The famed economist Edward Leamer of UCLA’s Anderson School says a $25,000 tax credit to new home buyers would put an immediate end to the fall in home prices. He suggests it would spur economic activity and government tax revenues would grow, more than covering the cost of the program.
Already home prices have fallen to reasonable prices and it should be a buyer’s market. But government can spur home buyers who keep staying on the sidelines think prices will fall more.
If this is done, home prices will stabilize and likely begin rising. All of the sectors that relate to the housing market will find relief.
And, most important, the value of those mortgage backed securities will increase as the underlying mortgages become current. Foreclosures will also abate.
The key to solving the financial crisis is not to simply send a blank check to Wall Street, but to get consumers buying homes again.
Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:18 PM
By: Christopher Ruddy
www.newsmax.com
Yesterday Sen. Orrin Hatch was hitting the airwaves.
The subprime crisis, he said, was the fault of the Clinton administration, who he said created the subprime mortgage crisis.
Other Republicans have been laying blame on the financial crisis on minorities and illegal immigrants who got mortgages they simply couldn’t pay. They offer no statistical proof on this point.
Nor does the usually sensible Senator Hatch offer evidence when it comes to pointing the finger at the Clinton administration.
The attempt to deflect blame for the crisis is not simply wrongheaded; I think it will compound Republican political woes and bring us disaster again in November.
Doesn’t Hatch and Co. know that Bill and Hillary Clinton voters in the swing states will decide who becomes the next president? They are wary of Obama, but love the Clintons and remember the good economic times of the’90s.
As a conservative Republican of the Reagan type, I find myself in this odd place cheering on some of the sensible things I hear from Democrats.
Barack Obama said any bailout to Wall Street must not be simply a cash payout or a loan, but be treated like an equity investment in these firms. We want our money back and then some. Yes to that, I say.
And demands by House Democrats that the secretary of the treasury alone not be given a blank check for more than a trillion dollars of our money, and that we have complete transparency in the transactions, I say yes to that, too.
Fiscal responsibility, transparency and accountability — aren’t these things Republicans believe in?
The Democratic complaints about the Bush plan shows that our government is working. The executive branch tried to put a gun to the head of Congress and told them, “Sign this check or the whole U.S. banking system will collapse.”
Congress didn’t blink.
Don’t get me wrong. I am for a bailout, but one that is sensible and is a win-win for Wall Street, Main Street investors and taxpayers like you and me.
But remember the government bailout plan proposed by the president and modifications supported by the Democrats won’t fix the underlying problem: the housing market collapse. Home prices are continuing to fall, and fewer people are buying homes than ever. Foreclosures will continue.
Unless this underlying problem is fixed, the economic symptoms will continue. There are some remedies. But before I get to them, let’s review what has happened.
The Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan gave the U.S. economy shock treatment back in 2001 and 2002 when it lowered interest rates to 1 percent — the lowest Fed Funds rate in recent history.
By pushing the pedal to the metal and backed quietly by the White House, the Fed injected massive liquidity in the U.S. economy, creating the largest asset bubble in history, according to the Economist magazine.
Incredibly low rates by the Fed were accompanied by an acceptance of the central bank for all sorts of exotic mortgage loans. No down payments. Interest only. No job and income verification. Get the picture?
Compounding this irresponsibility was then the “greed factor” that kicked in at several levels.
First were the local banks and mortgage companies that pushed mortgages, notably adjustable rate ones that offered extremely low introductory rates, and gave them to buyers who would not be able to pay back once the rates adjusted up.
Well rates have adjusted up and the crisis hit.
Many mortgage providers also encouraged loan applicants to lie about incomes and qualifications to approve these mortgages.
Wall Street as a whole had little role at this stage. But later, Wall Street took these mortgages, which had been rolled up into collateralized debt instruments, better known as mortgage backed securities, and sold them off to investors globally.
Wall Street failed to compute the risks involved in these securities. It was a failure, not a crime.
But many Wall Street firms, hedge funds and other investments took incredible, unwarranted risks using these securities. These firms would borrow money at low rates — say 4 percent — and invest in CDOs paying 6 to 7 percent. This small difference in rates of 2 to 3 percent, the arbitrage, would throw off enormous returns, especially considering little or no money had been placed on the table to buy the securities.
I have been told that Lehman and AIG played this leveraging game, investing only $1 for every $30 they held in such toxic suggestions. Again, what they did was not a crime. They took enormous risk and reaped huge returns — for a while.
Now they want us to pay for the huge losses that ultimately fell upon them.
Washington played a role in the mess too. The White House pushed for easy money and easy lending practices, many weighted in favor of the banks and lenders and against the consumer.
Congress, dominated largely by Republicans from 1994 to 2006, did an awful job in oversight. This is especially true after President Bush took the oath of office.
When Bill Clinton was president, the Republicans acted beautifully, working diligently to keep President Clinton on a center-right economic course. The results were great.
This seems like ancient history, but it’s important to have a clear picture of how we got into this mess. It may help us get out of it.
First, we need to know the “crisis” the Bush administration presented to us just last week is not a crisis that just popped up. It was apparent to many two years ago the real estate market was in a bubble and would bust.
And when the Fed moved in 2004 and raised rates from 1 percent to 5.25 percent by 2006 — a more than 400 percent increase in two years, it also led directly to those adjustable mortgages re-adjusting at very high rates. Homeowners got struck hard — with monthly mortgage payments on medium size homes mushrooming literally overnight.
The Fed increase rates started the credit crisis. The first tremors were apparent over a year ago when the Fed took emergency steps to give banks liquidity.
It’s important to remember that most adjustable mortgages created in the boom years still have not reset – and will continue doing so through 2011.
This problem will worsen unless Washington tackled the underlying problems.
The first thing the Fed must do to reduce the continuance of the problem is drop rates. It doesn’t have much wiggle room, because the dollar needs to be protected, but a small decrease in rates could have an enormous impact on those readjusting mortgages.
The second-most-important thing to do is for Congress to give a significant tax credit for new home buyers. Congress just passed a $7500 tax credit for new home buyers, though it’s not actually a credit but a loan at no interest.
The famed economist Edward Leamer of UCLA’s Anderson School says a $25,000 tax credit to new home buyers would put an immediate end to the fall in home prices. He suggests it would spur economic activity and government tax revenues would grow, more than covering the cost of the program.
Already home prices have fallen to reasonable prices and it should be a buyer’s market. But government can spur home buyers who keep staying on the sidelines think prices will fall more.
If this is done, home prices will stabilize and likely begin rising. All of the sectors that relate to the housing market will find relief.
And, most important, the value of those mortgage backed securities will increase as the underlying mortgages become current. Foreclosures will also abate.
The key to solving the financial crisis is not to simply send a blank check to Wall Street, but to get consumers buying homes again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)