Entries Tagged 'News' ↓

One of my friends often makes fun of government economic reports and other news by repeating the numbers reported and adding some catchphrase the Obama administration, Geithner, or Bernanke has been spewing.   His favorite phrases are “green shoots” which references Bernanke’s report that the economy is getting slightly better and the ubiquitious “change we can believe in”.  He also likes to say “lols” at the news that are really stupid and refers to generally stupid things as a “clownshow”.   Here is an example of a reading of this week’s  news.

GREEN SHOOTS:

Unemployment rises to 10.2%, highest in 26 years – At least the pace is slowing!

JNJ cuts 7000 jobs. – Profitable companies found out that people are more productive in recessions, so they need less workers

Fannie Mae to allow borrowers in foreclosure to lease back homes – We are all landlords now.

CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN:

Obama signs unemployment extension bill – 99 weeks of unemployment benefits available now in California

CLOWNSHOW:

Fannie Seeks Another $15 Billion In Emergency Capital

Fannie Seeks Permission to Sell $2.6 Billion in Tax Credits – This is just oxymoronic.

LOLS:

Fannie Mae Files $15.8 Billion in Claims in Lehman Bankruptcy

We are also making some guesses on what the yield of today’s Bank Failure Friday will bring.

In all honesty, I don’t think things have improved much in the past 12 months.  Sure, the stock market has regained ground, but it is mostly due to the fact that the US dollar has lost value.  That is not really a good thing for those who get paid in US dollars.   Unemployment and foreclosure are still going up so it is no time to celebrate the end of the recession yet.  The good news is that there are a lot of shopping, restaurant, and travel deals for the consumer this holiday season because everyone is trying to sell something to someone out there.  This is definitely a good time to save money on the things you need and enjoy.

Share This

I have a friend from college who grew up here in San Mateo.  We often discuss things like Asian parents and also the ridiculous real estate here on the Peninsula.  He is also a pretty frugal guy who makes a good income.  We often exchange articles about bailouts and real estate and discuss them.  The most hilarious comment I got from him about these articles is, “I want to punch them in the face”.  Here are some examples of folks he wanted to punch in the face.

When CNN featured this gallery of people who went through foreclosure, my friend said to me, “Are we supposed to feel sorry for these people?  I want to punch them in the face, with the exception of the guy that became disabled”.  I thought the most egregious example of a deadbeat out of the four families is the third one here.  This is  a guy that obviously knew that he was walking away as a financial decision.  He actually said that he “landed on his feet in just about every way”.

Here is another guy that my friend would like to punch from the article titled “Mortgage-modification program questioned, protested. “

“The government cannot do anything to make Rafael Aponte’s home affordable.

Aponte has been unemployed for three years since being laid off after 17 years at National Display Co. That is how long he has owned his Northern Liberties rowhouse, now in foreclosure.

Protesting near the National Constitution Center, where a congressional panel yesterday tried to gauge the progress of homeowner-rescue programs, Aponte said his lender had agreed to modify his mortgage, then had withdrawn the offer.

“They said that without a job, how could I pay even that?” Aponte said. “They’re right, but it isn’t fair.” “

I thought that this article was hilarious since the guy admitted that the bank was right that he couldn’t pay, but still complained that it’s unfair.  The article actually went on to say that the mortgage bailout money should have been given directly to the borrowers.  Seriously? I say thank God now that there are banks that are smart enough to deny loans that they know wouldn’t be repaid.  Another precious quote from the above article is the following:

“Getting a homeowner’s DTI [debt-to-income] ratio to 31 percent won’t help the unemployed, since 31 percent of their income is zero,” said Paul Willen, a senior economist and policy adviser at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

This made me laugh pretty hard, too.  When did you learn that 0 multipled by  anything is 0?

If my friend were to be face to face with these folks, I am sure he wouldn’t actually punch them in the face, even though someone needs to knock some sense into them.  What we are frustrated about is that many of these foreclosees are painted as victims in the media and coddled like innocent babes by the politicians.  Yes, the economy is in the pits right now, and many people are unemployed, but that is not an excuse to throw away personal responsibility.   If the government continues to bully banks into making loans to people who they know have no intention or ability to repay those loans, then this situation will not get better.  Unfortunately, that is still what I am seeing.  The banks are still portrayed as the ultimate villains that aren’t helping enough homeowners in trouble.  The truth of the matter is that a lot of these folks intend to walk away from a vastly depreciated asset anyway, and the modification efforts will just give them a few more months of free housing.

Share This

According to a report based on new Census data, last year the homeownership rate amongst Asians fell 1.24% to 59.4% last year. This is worse than the decline of homeownership amongst all the other major ethnic groups.  Some economists quoted in the article were surprised at this development since Asians households in America generally have high income and low debt.   So why has this group dropped out of homeownership the most?

The article suggested that the effect may be regional because most Asians in America live in California, which is one of the states hardest hit by declining prices and the recession.  This is definitely a solid theory.  Asians are not immune to job losses and for many families the loss of even one job means that the  next mortgage payment is no longer affordable.  As I wrote in this article about Chinese/Asian  immigrants and real estate, Asians often ignore the basic debt to income ratio guidelines to buy a home because they figure they will save money on everything else.  If two people were paying 58% of their income on a mortgage then one job loss definitely puts the nail on the coffin.  California currently has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, and since the Asian community is concentrated here in California we are affected as a whole.

Next I think the speculative mania during the housing bubble was much more intense amongst the Asian community.  This is just my anecdotal experience, but my whole family and Indian coworkers talked about real estate pretty much 24/7.  These people mostly had significant amounts of savings for a downpayment, great credit, and all they were seeing is that the real estate market went up 20%  a year while stocks were not exactly catching up.   This prompted a lot of people to buy real estate that they did not even need.  Some of them intended to flip the properties quickly, and some became landlords with the intention to flip a bit later.   Another thing that spread the fire is that Asians talk about personal finance amongst family and friends very often so more and more people jumped on the bandwagon.  There are also folks who used their homes as ATMs to buy more property because they figured that they were  making a sound  investment.  For the most part, the Asians I have encountered that did all of these real estate deals knew exactly what they were getting into, and they were all sure that they were being smart about their money.  The phrase I heard the most often were that “real estate prices in the Bay Area will never go down” and “real estate is the best investment”.  I know that many non-Asian people did the same thing, but I feel that the Asian community got into real estate much more because owning real property is high on their priority lists.

Now after the crash, I actually do not personally know any Asian families that lost their homes.  I do know several that are fairly underwater, but they are still faithfully paying their debt because they are still employed.  Believe it or not real estate is still a really hot topic for my parents and their friends.  Now they are all talking about scooping up cheap properties as rental properties.  Now what I hear from my mom is similar to the following, “this property sold for $400,000 in 2005!  Now it’s 70% off! Positive cashflow!!!”.   I responded to her, “mom, remember when I told you a few years ago that real estate could come down by 40% and you didn’t believe me?”  She then said, “It’s more than 40% down!!”   I guess the obsession will never end.      Anyway, I wish them luck, and I hope some of the decline in homeownership was voluntary and not due to foreclosures.

Share This

On Friday the Federal Housing Administration Commissioner David Stevens admitted that the agency’s reserve funds has sunken below the legally mandated level of 2% of its insured loans.  However, the commissioner also said that the 75 year old agency will not need a taxpayer bailout. Is this remotely believable?   Lets look at some datapoints.

First of all, the FHA doesn’t make loans.  It simply insures lenders against losses on defaults.  This means that if a loan defaults completely, then the FHA is on the hook to make the lender whole.  The money it uses comes from mortgage insurance premiums that borrowers pay.  The current rate is 1.75% of the loan amount upfront, and some additional monthly insurance on 30 year loans.  The monthly mortgage insurance goes away when the borrower gains enough equity.  When you add it all together the premium is less than 3% of the loan.  The  borrowers will need a minimum downpayment of only 3.5%, and they can borrow up to $729k in high cost areas.  The problem with this whole scheme is that the lenders do not care if the FHA loses money because they will be compensated if things go wrong.  Since private insurers, Fannie, and Freddie tightened up their lending guidelines, the new subprime loans are practically all going to the FHA.  This has pushed the  mortgage loan  market share of FHA loans   from 2.7% in 2006 to 23% in the second quarter of 2009.

Basically, the FHA has taken on a vast expansion, and with that expansion it has taken on a lot more risk.  The 90+ late and foreclosure rate of FHA loans is now at 7.8% according to the Mortgage Bankers Association, and this is only expected to rise since those who take out FHA loans generally have very little downpayment, and their average credit scores are lower than the prime borrowers. Unemployment has not stopped rising and the economy isn’t totally recovered.    The FHA currently  insures about 5.2 million according to its website, and 7.8% means  that about 405,000 of these loans are practically lost.  Additionally, there are another 400 to 500k borrowers that have missed at least one payment.  Since the value of the FHA reserve funds are going to fall below 2% of the value of the insured loans, it is hard to imagine how the agency would cover all the losses when they come due unless all the loans that defaulted have balances much much lower than  the average loan.  It is pretty simple math when you think about it.

I really do not see how the FHA could build up its reserve fund in two to three years when the foreclosure rate of the loans it is insuring is not exactly decreasing.  The FHA is insuring many more loans than before, but those new loans are also defaulting and draining the reserve funds.  You have to remember that the insurance premium is very small, so in many instances the FHA is using the premiums from 20 to 30 homes to repay the lender for one default.  That is only sustainable if the default rate is very small, but a 30 day late rate of 17% is not exactly encouraging.

Anyway, the FHA does not expect to increase its insurance premium rates or downpayment limits, but it is requiring audits of the lenders that send loans to the FHA to prevent fraud.  I would have thought that those audits were already happening, but I guess not.  If the FHA really wants to decrease the amount of its defaults it would need to increase its downpayment limits so that people have more equity in their homes, but I don’t really see that happening.  Eventually this agency is going to need a bailout.  They may not call it a bailout, but I think it is pretty much inevitable unless the FHA changes course drastically.

Share This

If you haven’t heard by now, President Obama heeded the complaints of the United Steelworkers’ union and slapped a punitive 35% tariff on Chinese produced tires.  This has sparked anger in Beijing and China vowed to investigate poultry and automotive parts imports from the United States.  China is also filing a formal complaint with the WTO.  So who does this really benefit?

First of all, I don’t think this  benefits the Obama administration because they really need to sustain a good relationship with Beijing.  Even though the tire industry is a small part of the trade between the two countries, the Chinese government definitely sees this as a grave insult.  The Chinese commerce minister Chen Deming said that this act is “an abuse of special safeguard provisions and sends the wrong signal to the world”.  Frankly I don’t think it is worthwhile to anger China over a tiny percentage of trade between the two countries just to yield to  some political supporters.

Next, this will probably hurt Americans more than the Chinese. The poultry industry is now on edge because they export tons of chicken feet and wings to China at a premium price.  If China imposes a tariff on them they will lose quite a bit of profit.  The USA Poultry & Egg Export Council expressed that they are “upset with the way this has been handled by the administration“.   The New York Times published a particularly amusing article on this matter which said that the Chinese will still continue to buy the large juicy American chicken feet even if there are tariffs, but Chinese people are also very price conscious so any increase in price will bring consumption down.  The poultry industry is right to be concerned, because those chicken feet are fairly worthless here in America.  Suppose that this tariff protects $1 billion in domestic tires, but loses $2 billion in chicken exports, then American workers still lose as a whole.

Another way this hurts Americans is that the tariffs will increase tire prices.  Most of the Chinese tires are cheap low end products.  American manufacturers such as Goodyear and Cooper manufacture their low end products in China and import them to the United States.    The tariffs on Chinese tires will inevitably increase prices for American consumers who buy the lower end tires.   Additionally, if manufacturers had to increase the price of their low end products they would probably increase the price of their premium products to make their products seem more “premium”, and that means more expensive tires for everyone.Americans are also very price conscious right now, and the higher prices might mean lower sales, and ultimately that might hurt the American tire industry and decrease jobs in that sector anyway.  In that case this protectionist measure would have accomplished the exact opposite of its purpose.

So who really benefits from this?  I think the trade lawyers should be happy because Obama pretty much open the doors for more similar complaints from every other industry.  In Bush 43’s administration four similar industry complaints were rejected because Bush wanted to keep trade free.  Now Obama is sending a signal out there that he is willing to approve protectionist measures for small groups that he favors so more groups may be hiring up lawyers to file complaints because now they have a bigger chance of getting their petitions approved.  Although the complaints are not “expensive” according to this article, whoever files them will be getting a fee. So in the end, I think  the lawyers win.

Ultimately, I highly doubt that this tariff on 0.4% of China’s exports to the United States is going to turn into an all out trade war, but it is certainly making Obama less popular to everyone except the specific unions that he is agreeing to.  Decisions like this affect a lot more than just the people making the complaints, and it is probably wiser to reject them all like Bush did.  That way at least it looks like there are no favorites.

Share This