Inside the Meltdown

The public was uneducated in how the process worked but seemed not to be bothered because it got them into the house. They don’t want a mortgage, they want a home. A home they can raise a family, build equity, build a life, have a sense of freedom. That “boom” market gave it to them. The lenders probably told them to just sign here for now and we’ll get your mortgage down to where you really want it and in a couple of years and we’ll figure out the rest. When you have no idea that the market would crash as it did, are you prepared? No, because who is thinking that your home is losing value, that people are going to lose their jobs or that the economy would turn into a recession. Not the banks or the public thought that. The perception was that the market was going to go up or stay steady, so the homeowners were going to be able to refinance and get rid of their current payment. People were going to make more money, they were going to get a raise in a couple years at their jobs and everything would be better. So when the homeowners refinanced their loan they would get a fixed rate mortgage for 30 years. But that never happened.

Pay options were also available allowing the borrowers to choose lower payments and the balance of what you should pay and what you actually paid was added to the loan to have a negative amortization. The introductory low rates were called Teaser Rates. The goal was to make home ownership more affordable for more people. Michael Francis and other brokers in Wall Street knew that some of these loans are bad loans but they didn’t cared because they transferred all these loans to whoever wanted to buy them such as pension funds. They are just the intermediary or the pipeline. These pension funds could only buy AAA mortgage loan. The investors wanted to sell their loans to the pension funds but they needed to be rated AAA by these agencies. Their job was to evaluate the risk of the securities. What was the ethical issue here with the agencies? The riskier BBB looked as good as the triple AAA and they looked much safer than they used to be and they started to look more like a AAA security. So AAA requirement got lower as the market got smart. Moodies, S&P, and Fitch are the three rating agencies. They didn’t give price but based on their ratings they got priced. The suggestion is that these agencies would come with the investment bankers. The business was getting more competitive so you just wanted to get more business or more business than the other agencies. When Anne Arundel was asked if standards lower she

In the case presented both AFLAC and L.L. Bean had their own distinctive ways of utilizing their products in order to enhance the total compensation for its employees. The factor that has deterred more employees away from their current employer is that of benefit packages, and reward systems. As stated by () “compensation affects a person economically, sociologically, and psychologically. For this reason, mishandling compensation issues is likely to have a strong negative impact on employees and, ultimately, on the firm’s performance” (p.313). Many felt just a bump in pay wasn’t enough to substantiate their hard work or the efforts that the performance efforts provided to their organization. As stated by () “the right total rewards system a blend of monetary and non-monetary

The responsibilities of the mortgage brokers to the borrowers, lenders, and investors were to promote the subprime mortgages to these groups of people in order for them to take out a loan. Although they did fulfill their responsibilities of promoting and having people sign up for it, they mishandled on how people should be granted for a mortgage loan. These brokers were to desperate about earning huge amount of money due to the expanding market that they ignored the proper precaution that they should have taken when they

The primary issues in this case are: why did the Wall Street bankers blindly trust that the risky mortgages were good assets to invest into? And why did everyone involved allow the whole thing to go this far?

The Federal Government needs to make sure to enforce strict guidelines on who can and cannot be accepted for a home loan, and not allow big investors to borrow excessive money at low interest rates to inflate the investor’s financial advantage. If the government starts allowing lower standards on mortgages, we are going to end up in the same catastrophe once again. In an article written by U.S. News and World Reports entitled Should the Federal Government Provide Support to the Mortgage Market?, the Federal government and the President attempted to get involved with the housing market. The passage implicated that Obama wanted to do away with federally funded conglomerates Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and implement another type of government assisted program ("Should the Federal Government"). The program would prevent the mistakes made by Fannie and Freddie which created the original “housing bubble burst” ("Should the Federal Government"). One of the Senate bills suggests the government create “a new agency, the Federal Mortgage Insurance Corporation to replace Fannie and Freddie” ("Should the Federal

In the midst of the current economic downturn, dubbed the “Great Recession”, it is natural to look for one, singular entity or person to blame. Managers of large banks, professional investors and federal regulators have all been named as potential creators of the recession, with varying degrees of guilt. No matter who is to blame, the fallout from the mistakes that were made that led to the current crisis is clear. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the current unemployment rate is 9.7%, with 9.3 million Americans out of work (Bureau of Labor Statistics). Compared to a normal economic rate of two or three percent, it is clear that the decisions of one group of people have had a profound affect on the lives of millions of

Before the advent of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in 1933 and the general conception of government safety nets, the United States banking industry was quite different than it is today. Depositors assumed substantial default risk and even the slightest changes in consumer confidence could result in complete turmoil within the banking world. In addition, bank managers had almost complete discretion over operations. However, today the financial system is among the most heavily government- regulated sectors of the U.S. economy. This drastic change in public policy resulted directly from the industry’s numerous pre-regulatory failures and major disruptions that produced severe economic and social

The banking crisis of the late 2000s, often called the Great Recession, is labelled by many economists as the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Its effect on the markets around the world can still be felt. Many countries suffered a drop in GDP, small or even negative growth, bankrupting businesses and rise in unemployment. The welfare cost that society had to paid lead to an obvious question: ‘Who’s to blame?’ The fingers are pointed to the United States of America, as it is obvious that this is where the crisis began, but who exactly is responsible? Many people believe that the banks are the only ones that are guilty, but this is just not true. The crisis was really a systematic failure, in which many problems in the

I think this so far was my favorite chapter. I was raised in Latvia until I was 16teen years old and saw my country come up couple times in the chapter, it was a nice surprise since usually nobody ever hears of Latvia. I watched the "European Meltdown" video and I have couple thoughts on it. I agree and disagree with this video. First of all, they are stating that the German government is spending way too much money of the immigrants and shouldn't be doing this, I believe that when a human being needs help, we come together and help. I do not think that they should deny help to the immigrants, these people left their own country because they were in danger, a lot of them are just looking for a safer environment for their families and children.

There were many red flags early on that should have been questioned by the Federal Reserve. First of all, some of the worst practices in the housing market were in place and known to the public. Appraisers were overvaluing properties, banks were paying credit companies for the rating of their bonds and mortgage backed securitizes loosened their standards (Baker, 2008). This is the equivalence of taking the debt and moving it elsewhere with no worry of when and how the repayment would occur. The biggest red flag that was not addressed was the rapid

The Meltdown is a PBS special on the events of the financial crisis of 2008, in a timeline format, revealing the thinking behind decisions made during the fateful months before the stock market crash in August of that year. Some financial gurus on Wall Street devised a plan to bundle several mortgages together into a group, and then selling that bundle to another group of investors looking to invest in securities. The lender did not need to earn money from the loans he was giving out, he merely gained enough of a profit from the bundling operation that billions were being made on Wall Street from 2005-2008. The problem is that these bundles were risky, and as credit unworthy individuals defaulted on their mortgages, the entire system crumbled into what is now known as the Stock Market Crash of 2008, and have subsequently lived during the Great Recession.

The problem was everyone who qualified for a mortgage already had one. Lenders knew if they sold a mortgage to a person that defaults the lender gets the house, and houses were always increasing in value in that market, that would be a valuable asset to sell. To keep up with the demand from investors, lenders started selling mortgages to borrowers who wouldn’t have qualified before because of the risk for default. These mortgages are called sub-prime mortgages and lenders started creating tons of them. In the unregulated market, lenders employed predatory tactics to get more borrowers with attractive offers such as no money down, no credit history required, even no proof of income. People never would have qualified before were now buying large houses, and the lenders sold their mortgages to Investment bankers. The investors packed subprime mortgages in with prime mortgages so credit agencies would still give a AAA rating. The rating Agencies who had a conflict of interest by receiving payments from the investment banks, had no liability if their credit ratings were correct or not. They turned a blind eye to the risky CDOs and kept giving AAA ratings. This worked for a while and everyone was happy including the new homeowners. The housing market became hyper inflated with more homeowners than ever. Wall Street continued to sell their CDO’s which were ticking time bombs. The subprime mortgages began

Did you know there’s more Water and Wildfires then 2 years ago. The reason there's a lot of water is because of climate. The earth is getting hotter this summer has been the hottest year that I've been

On top of all these, the regulators went lax. They failed to regulate the subprime lending market, mortgage brokers (non-banking mortgage underwriters) and the derivatives like MBS were unregulated. SEC loosening the capital requirements for the five Wall Street banks and Federal government’s overriding the anti-predatory law acerbated the situation and made it convenient for I banks to tap the bottomless CDO market.