Skip to main content

Never trust the banks

I've collected a few simpler articles on the crisis. Check this one in the Washington Post, this one about the foreclosure that started it all, and this one about a Florida man (to be mentioned later). As usual, Paul Krugman has the clearest explanation:
The story so far: An epic housing bust and sustained high unemployment have led to an epidemic of default, with millions of homeowners falling behind on mortgage payments. So servicers — the companies that collect payments on behalf of mortgage owners — have been foreclosing on many mortgages, seizing many homes.

But do they actually have the right to seize these homes? Horror stories have been proliferating, like the case of the Florida man whose home was taken even though he had no mortgage. More significantly, certain players have been ignoring the law. Courts have been approving foreclosures without requiring that mortgage servicers produce appropriate documentation; instead, they have relied on affidavits asserting that the papers are in order. And these affidavits were often produced by “robo-signers,” or low-level employees who had no idea whether their assertions were true.

Now an awful truth is becoming apparent: In many cases, the documentation doesn’t exist. In the frenzy of the bubble, much home lending was undertaken by fly-by-night companies trying to generate as much volume as possible. These loans were sold off to mortgage “trusts,” which, in turn, sliced and diced them into mortgage-backed securities. The trusts were legally required to obtain and hold the mortgage notes that specified the borrowers’ obligations. But it’s now apparent that such niceties were frequently neglected. And this means that many of the foreclosures now taking place are, in fact, illegal.
Emphasis mine. When I started hearing about this, my first thought was that, well, at least my parents own their house free and clear, but the case of this Florida man surprised even me. (He will get his house back, but only because he notified the local media. My parents' properties are likely in no danger.) Unwinding this crisis in a just fashion is probably not going to happen, but here's hoping. As Krugman says, Obama, like political elites of both parties generally, will protect the financial sector first and foremost.

Beyond the specifics, this is a reason why I would be homeless before I'd be an financial employee of any kind. I trust businessmen in general very little, but I see the basic legitimacy of a company like, say, Wal-Mart. Government must restrain its worst impulses, but it is not wholly evil. There exists a correspondence between the interest of an average person (to buy cheap things) and the interest of the company (to sell cheap things).

I see no such basic legitimacy in the financial sector. Banking is a necessary function for a modern economy, but as Atrios says Wall Street is "...a giant casino industry with a side gig in banking, and that banking side gig has meant the government will always guarantee the house bets." The first response of the banksters to the massive problem with foreclosures has been, yet again, to pump the smallest and most helpless among us as hard as they can, laws be damned. They can't help themselves. The financial sector as a system is thoroughly stupid and evil, and the first assumption for any sensible regulatory regime should be that bankers will make the cruelest and dumbest decisions that can be imagined, decisions that will in the medium term crush both the helpless and themselves.

UPDATE: Atrios piles on:
I think too often many of us have tried to come up with elaborate financial/economic rationalizations for why the banksters have approached all of this the way they have. The simpler explanation is that they're sociopathic assholes who think that everyone else must suffer for their mistakes. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with their companies' bottom lines. Remember, they already destroyed their companies once.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Did Reality Winner Leak to the Intercept?

So Reality Winner, former NSA contractor, is in federal prison for leaking classified information — for five years and three months, the longest sentence of any whistleblower in history. She gave documents on how Russia had attempted to hack vendors of election machinery and software to The Intercept , which completely bungled basic security procedures (according to a recent New York Times piece from Ben Smith, the main fault lay with Matthew Cole and Richard Esposito ), leading to her capture within hours. Winner recently contracted COVID-19 in prison, and is reportedly suffering some lingering aftereffects. Glenn Greenwald has been furiously denying that he had anything at all to do with the Winner clusterfuck, and I recently got in an argument with him about it on Twitter. I read a New York story about Winner, which clearly implies that she was listening to the Intercepted podcast of March 22, 2017 , where Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill expressed skepticism about Russia actually b

On Refusing to Vote for Bloomberg

Billionaire Mike Bloomberg is attempting to buy the Democratic nomination. With something like $400 million in personal spending so far, that much is clear — and it appears to be working at least somewhat well, as he is nearing second place in national polls. I would guess that he will quickly into diminishing returns, but on the other hand spending on this level is totally unprecedented. At this burn rate he could easily spend more than the entire 2016 presidential election cost both parties before the primary is over. I published a piece today outlining why I would not vote for Bloomberg against Trump (I would vote for Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, or Biden), even though I live in a swing state. This got a lot of "vote blue no matter who" people riled up . They scolded me and demanded that I pre-commit to voting for Bloomberg should he win the nomination. The argument as I understand it is to try to make it as likely as possible that whatever Democrat wins t

Varanus albigularis albigularis

That is the Latin name for the white-throated monitor lizard , a large reptile native to southern Africa that can grow up to two meters long (see pictures of one at the Oakland Zoo here ). In Setswana, it's called a "gopane." I saw one of these in my village yesterday on the way back from my run. Some kids from school found it in the riverbed and tortured it to death, stabbing out its eyes, cutting off its tail, and gutting it which finally killed it. It seemed to be a female as there were a bunch of round white things I can only imagine were eggs amongst the guts. I only arrived after it was already dead, but they described what had happened with much hilarity and re-enactment. When I asked why they killed it, they said it was because it would eat their chickens and eggs, which is probably true, and because it sucks blood from people, which is completely ridiculous. It might bite a person, but not unless threatened. It seems roughly the same as killing wolves tha