A Market Based Alternative To The Wall Street Bailout

by Icarus on September 24, 2008

File this one under a moment of personal privilege, as it has nothing to do with “GA” politics, except for the fact that our GA delegation in Congress is currently deciding on how it will vote regarding the largest bailout in the history of the world.

While not gleeful about the prospects of the Paulson bailout plan announced last week, I’ve resigned myself to the position that, absent strong federal government intervention, the current crisis on Wall Street will result in a total collapse of our banking system, economic system, and in many ways, our republic.

While I think the plan is workable, it needs some tweeks, at a minimum.  The dilemma, at least to me, is how do we fix the underlying liquidity and structural problems with our banking system without rewarding the bankers who created this mess in the first place?  Yet, if the fix is too punitive, those same bankers are forced out of business, with a similar result as if no “fix” ever took place.

There’s an excellent analysis here , and I would encourage anyone who is having difficulty understanding the basics of what is going on to read that gentleman’s diary’s.  (Yes, it’s from RedState, but his analysis is detailed, yet in layman’s terms, and is not partisan).   

I came to the conclusion yesterday, after absorbing Paulson’s testimony to Congress, that there has to be a better way.  Paulson intends to pay higher than current market prices for the toxic loan portfolios in order to flood the market with capital.  I think this is too much of a wealth transfer to the taxpayers, with dubious expectations of results.   Yet, I would still admit, I would prefer it to doing nothing.

While it may be too late for counter proposals, this one kept me up last night.   But if we’re already at the point of acknowledging that the mortgages currently on the books are indirect liabilities of the taxpayer, and we have created a bailout of Wall Street in order to save main street, why don’t we just bite the bullet and bail out main street?

Instead of buying “toxic” portfolios with dubious value, why not allow the Fed to create an RTC type entity to refinance and hold mortgages?    Anyone with a mortgage currently on the books would be allowed an automatic refinance into the new fed pool of mortgages, at a rate of 5%.   The loans would be subject to a limit of 100% of current appraised value.   If the mortgage amount is higher than 100% of the new appraisal, the fed and the mortgage holder would split the amount.  (There’s your bailout, Wall Street).   Given the low doc nature of these refis, it would seem that closing costs could be minimized to appraisal, title search, origination fee capped at .25% of the loan amount, and attorney’s fees. 

As a bonus, the loans would be assumable.  This would encourage people who are at or near 100% loan to value to stick with their mortgage, knowing that when interest rates go up, (and they will), their home will have additional value because it has a 30 year fixed rate loan at 5%.   This will help create equity in exisiting homes, while not encouraging additional new construction (oversupply) because new construction will not qualify for this program.

This would have much of the same effect as the proposed bailout.  Capital would be freed up overnight on Wall Street.   Homeowners would see relief across the board, not just the ones who borrowed over their ability to pay.   Wall Street would be able to sort out its own winners and losers based on who has the most loan exposure to loans over 100% LTV, but wouldn’t have Congress dictating how to run their business.  (After all, Congress has yet to prove they can run Congress).

So, it’s an idea.  I’m throwing it out there.  Clearly would need additional details to be legislation, but it may get some conversation started.

But if you like the idea, and you know a GA Congressman or Senator who hasn’t decided on how to handle the bailout, you may want to send this idea their way.

{ 63 comments }

Three Jack September 25, 2008 at 6:56 pm

there’s affordable food on the shelves, plentiful fuel in most places outside the se, stock market hovers around 11,000, people are not jumping out of high rise windows; why is the government attempting to bail itself out of a self inflicted jam that seems to only be effecting a relatively small number of people within the high end financial market?

for once i agree with ron paul. let this thing run its course without (more) government intervention.

Doug Deal September 25, 2008 at 8:27 pm

Thanks, John. See, we don’t always disagree.

Game Fan September 25, 2008 at 9:15 pm

Perhaps I jumped the gun with Warren Buffett. Looks like he’s a supporter of the bailout. :(
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26852539

Daniel N. Adams September 25, 2008 at 10:49 pm

Game,
Of course he is, now. He just bought low with a guarantee to buy more at the same price. Now he wants others to buy into the financial industry… even if the buyer is BIG GOV.

Bill Simon September 25, 2008 at 11:23 pm

Daniel,

Ask yourself this: AIG operates as both a primary insurer and a re-insurer.

A re-insurer is a company that sells an insurance policy to cover losses of, say a really big sugar factory explosion in Savannah. That reinsurance policy doesn’t kick-in until losses hit a certain dollar amount, and then the policy covers the amount over that high limit.

NOW…picture a disaster of some sort, not a natural one (no hurricanes, no tornadoes in Tornado Alley) that happens with a REALLY big loss…and AIG, the reinsurer, is out of business.

Tell me all about the “good” that this “screw the financial industry” mentality will do to help get THAT enterprise back on its feet…after it already purchased its policy.

You (and Konop, and whoever else is bleating about how dare the government “bail” out AIG) don’t know jack-doo-doo about how things like insurance works.

And, hopefully, the folks in Washington won’t listen to you….because, in the end, there will be an even BIGGER financial hand-out that will have to come into play if an insurer like AIG goes under.

Bill Simon September 25, 2008 at 11:23 pm

Correction: Remove the “Ask yourself this” in the first sentence of the post above.

Game Fan September 26, 2008 at 8:01 am

Yep
I was about to jump all over Bill Simon for that. I didn’t see a question mark in the entire post.

Bill Simon September 26, 2008 at 9:18 am

?
?
?
?

Here are some to make up for the lack, Game. :-)

Taft Republican September 26, 2008 at 9:36 am

I know jack doo-doo about insurance.

And I know even more jack doo-doo about the U.S. Constitution. And I don’t see anywhere in there where it comes close to allowing the Federal Government to buy up all of the crap they’re proposing to buy up. Or to do about 95% of the rest of the crap they do up there, either.

I don’t care if you call it a “bail” out or corporate welfare or jack doo-doo, it’s just plain wrong, and I look forward to the day when the people who have played havoc with our economy, our banking system, our financial markets, and our money end up rotting in jail.

“Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves.” President Andrew Jackson

Taft Republican September 26, 2008 at 9:37 am

Other great Jackson quotes:

“If Congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given to be used by themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations.”

“I am one of those who do not believe that a national debt is a national blessing, but rather a curse to a republic; inasmuch as it is calculated to raise around the administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the country.”

Dang, those are good.

GreenAllTheWay September 26, 2008 at 6:19 pm

Fishman was the new chief executive officer for Washingon Mutual — WaMu — the nation’s largest savings and loan, which was taken over Thursday night by federal bank regulators and quickly dumped in a fire sale to JPMorgan Chase for the Wal-Mart-like price of $1.9 billion.

But don’t cry for Fishman, who reportedly was sky-high — literally — last night, on a flight from New York to Seattle, when WaMu collapsed. Even though he’s only been on the job for less than three weeks, he’s bailing out with parachute worth close to $20 million, according to an executive compensation analysis conducted for the New York Times by James F. Reda Associates.

That’s right, $20 million for 17 days on the job … and his company failed.

Fishman, who formerly was chairman of Meridian Capital Group, apparently was much coveted by WaMu, which was counting on him to lead the failing thrift out of mortgage troubles that pushed the bank to a $3.3 billion second-quarter loss.

According to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, WaMu threw a $7.5 million bonus at Fishman when it hired him on Sept. 8, and guaranteed him an immediate cash severence of $11.6 million — both of which he gets to keep.

He also was eligible for annual bonuses of up to 365 percent of his annual base pay — set at $1 million — to go with millions of shares of company stock.

IndyInjun September 26, 2008 at 8:16 pm

How much did Fishman give Saxby?

Bill Simon September 26, 2008 at 11:29 pm

Indy,

None, it appears. This is who he did give to, according to OpenSecrets.org:

FISHMAN, ALAN
BROOKLYN,NY 11201
MERIDIAN CAPITAL
11/28/07
$2,000
Recchia, Domenic M Jr (D)

FISHMAN, ALAN H MR
NEW YORK,NY 10004 MERIDIAN CAPITAL GROUP/CHAIRMAN
5/10/07
$2,300 Romney, Mitt (R)

FISHMAN, ALAN MR
GHENT,NY 12075
MERIDIAN CAPITAL GROUP/CHAIRMAN
5/7/07 $500
Wager, Richard C (R)

Comments on this entry are closed.