Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Business/Finance
See other Business/Finance Articles

Title: US subprime crisis costs global 7.7 trillion dollars: Bank of America
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/article.ph ... 202021.5qwu7lx0&show_article=1
Published: Feb 14, 2008
Author: staff
Post Date: 2008-02-14 22:49:08 by DeaconBenjamin
Ping List: *unUsual Suspects*     Subscribe to *unUsual Suspects*
Keywords: None
Views: 3080
Comments: 16

The meltdown in the US subprime real-estate market has led to a global loss of 7.7 trillion dollars in stock-market value since October, a report by Bank of America showed Thursday.

The crisis, which has spread beyond US shores to banks and other sectors worldwide, is "one of the most vicious in financial history," according to Bank of America chief market strategist Joseph Quinlan.

Quinlan said in the report that the losses are worse than any in the past few decades, including Wall Street's Black Monday of 1987, the 1999 Brazilian real currency crisis and the collapse of hedge fund Long Term Capital Management (LTCM) in 1998.

An analysis by the US bank showed that in the most recent episode linked to subprime, or high-risk, real estate loans to people with shaky credit, world market capitalization was down 14.7 percent three months after a peak in late October.

That compared with a similar loss three months later of 13.2 percent after the LTCM crisis, 9.8 percent for Black Monday and 6.1 percent for the Brazil crisis.

The losses were also greater than those suffered after the September 11, 2001, terro attacks, the Asian financial crisis starting in 1997, Argentina's default on its debt in 2001 and the 1994 Mexican peso crisis.

"It could take months or even years before Wall Street and others get a handle on the true cost of the US subprime meltdown and the attendant global credit crunch," Quinlan said.

"While subprime loans were once thought to be relatively small in scale and contained to just one segment of the US financial sector, the opposite has become painfully evident over the past few months."

A report last week by Standard & Poors ratings agency showed global stock markets were walloped with a collective loss of 5.2 trillion dollars in the month of January alone.

Quinlan said it is not clear that the massacre in equities is over yet.

"Against this backdrop, any investor that has been buying US equities on the dips over the past few months has, in general, dug himself a deeper hole," he said.

"In the end, the current financial crisis is one for the record books and one, more ominously, not over yet." Subscribe to *unUsual Suspects*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: DeaconBenjamin, not that the diversity mob cares, but here's the root cause of the meltdown (#0)

http://realestatelatino.com/pages/viewer.asp?show=true&rID=27&rflag=N

Nearly Four in 10 Mortgages to Minorities Were Subprime in 2006

PR Newswire

WASHINGTON, Oct. 4 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Mortgage lending to minorities was down seven percent in 2006, according to a new analysis released today at the 3rd Annual Mortgage Lending Industry Emerging Markets and Diversity Conference outside Washington, D.C. The only exception was among African Americans, which showed an increase of 0.6 percent over the prior year.

The 2007 Annual Minority Lending Report, compiled and released by Compliance Technologies and Genworth Financial, found that the greatest decline in minority homebuying was among Asian buyers -- down 21 percent. Hispanic homebuying declined 5.2 percent.

"The momentum we've been seeing in minority homebuying unfortunately came to a halt in 2006," stated Maurice Jourdain-Earl, Managing Director of Compliance Technologies. "The level of subprime lending to minorities that the report shows is troubling, which is something we will examine closely at our Mortgage Lending Diversity Conference this week."

Nearly four out of every 10 mortgages extended to "all minorities" in 2006 were subprime loans -- more than double the rate for white borrowers, according to today's report (39 percent compared to 18 percent). Among minorities, subprime lending was most prevalent with African-American borrowers (48 percent of all 2006 loans) followed by 42 percent of Hispanics and 17 percent of Asians. By comparison, 18 percent of white borrowers received subprime loans in 2006.

Using newly released 2006 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data, the report analyzes the change in minority home purchase loans between 2005 and 2006 nationally, and the percentage of new loans that were subprime. It provides an analysis of "all minority" home loans and a more in-depth look at activity among African-American, Hispanic, and Asian borrowers specifically. It also includes 2005 - 2006 homebuying information for white borrowers for comparison.

"This new report indicates that, for a variety of possible reasons, many minorities who took out a new mortgage last year are financing their home with a subprime loan," said Kevin Schneider, president of Genworth Financial's U.S. mortgage insurance business. "This meeting will explore ways to increase minority homebuying with an emphasis on safe, secure solutions. Mortgage insurance can play a part because it allows low down payment borrowers to avoid risky combo loans thereby reducing their risk significantly."

Genworth Financial is a leader in the mortgage insurance industry, which has seen new policies increase over 40 percent so far in 2007.

Topics to be addressed at this year's conference include assessing the damage from the mortgage meltdown, making diversity a core business value; reducing the minority homeownership gap; and ways in which state and local governments are breaking through minority homeownership barriers. For more information about the conference, visit http://www.mortgageindustrydiversity.com/.

Below is a snapshot for each minority category from the report. The full analysis is available upon request.

Highlights of the report for all minorities include:

All minority groups and whites experienced a decline in homebuying last year compared to 2005 except African-Americans (+0.6 percent). Nearly 4 out of every 10 (39.1 percent) mortgage loans made to minorities in 2006 were subprime. This was more than double the rate for white borrowers (18 percent). Utah, Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Louisiana top the list of states that experienced minority homebuying growth from 2005 to 2006.

Highlights of the report for Hispanics include:

Nationally, homebuying among Hispanics declined by five percent from 2005 to 2006, but Hispanics did outpace any other minority group last year with 692,014 loans (followed by African Americans with 448,082). North Carolina reported the strongest positive growth in Hispanic homebuying from 2005 to 2006 (up 21.6 percent), followed by South Carolina, Utah, North Dakota and Louisiana. The highest rates of subprime loans to Hispanics in 2006 were found in Rhode Island (52.3 percent), Massachusetts (49.2 percent), Florida (48.7 percent), Arizona (48.4 percent) and California (47.1 percent).

Highlights of the report for African Americans include:

African-American homebuying increased in 26 states and territories from 2005 to 2006. This compares to five states showing increases in homebuying among whites. In 12 states, more than one half of all mortgage loans to African Americans in 2006 were subprime. Michigan had the highest percentage of subprime loans to African-Americans in 2006 (70.7 percent), followed by Wisconsin (61.6 percent), Missouri (59.4 percent), Illinois (58.8 percent) and Indiana (57.4 percent).

Highlights of the report for Asians include:

Seventeen percent of all mortgage loans to Asians in 2006 were subprime, less than half the national subprime rate for all borrowers (39 percent) and lower than the national subprime rate among whites (18 percent). States experiencing the steepest 2005-2006 declines in Asian homebuying were Virginia (-44.8 percent), Arizona (-41 percent), North Dakota (-39.4 percent), Maryland (-35.2 percent) and California (-33.3 percent). Only 10 states saw Asian homebuying growth in 2006.

About Compliance Technologies

Compliance Technologies is a Washington D.C.-based emerging mortgage markets and lending compliance consulting firm. LendingPatterns.com is a trade name of ComplianceTech.

About Genworth Financial

Genworth Financial is a leading insurance holding company, serving the lifestyle protection, retirement income, investment and mortgage insurance needs of more than 15 million customers, and has operations in 27 countries. For more information, visit http://www.genworth.com/. Genworth Financial

Web site: http://www.mortgageindustrydiversity.com/http://www.genworth.com/

Source: PR Newswire


Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-14   22:57:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: DeaconBenjamin (#0) (Edited)

So the solution is a $ 150 billion rebate program? A 2.1% solution?

We demand our United States Constitution be restored.

angle  posted on  2008-02-14   22:58:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: angle (#2)

No, the solution will be bank holidays.

The U.S. Constitution is no impediment to our form of government.--PJ O'Rourke

DeaconBenjamin  posted on  2008-02-14   23:06:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Jethro Tull, DeaconBenjamin (#1)

but here's the root cause of the meltdown

Jethro, you are so dense at times that it shocks the mind to even consider it.

Nearly four out of every 10 mortgages extended to "all minorities" in 2006 were subprime loans -- more than double the rate for white borrowers,

Just out of, I don know, thinking, why don't you try and read the posts before you comment.... or, for that matter, post something.

Nearly 4 out of ten mortgages MADE TO MINORITIES WAS A SUBPRIME LOAN. That, Jethro, does not mean that 4 out of every 10 subprime morgages went to minorities. It also says that this rate is double the rate of white borrowers.... which means, Jethro, that 2 out of every 10 loans made to white borrowers were subprime loans. Which means that subprime loans to white borrowers far out numbered subprime loans to minority borrowers.

But actually, that means nothing anyway, cause the root cause of the meltdown was cheap rates on loans/fradulent appraisels that pushed the valuations of homes/land far beyond where they should have been... creating a bubble. The subprime mess simply blew the top off of that bubble. The other bubble that is now unwinding is on commercial real estate. Are you going to claim that was caused by 'minorities' as well?

As another for-instance, Jethro, borrowers took out about 600 billion dollars in second mortgages last year, many times pushing the total loans on their houses past the highest possible inflated price possible for the house. That is another BIG BIG piece of the bubble that is now crashing.

You really should try reading some of the really excellent posts that people have put up over the last month or so, and learn a little.

Start with the fact that the cause of the subprime mess is the bankers, and no one else. They created the problem, earning millions and billions doing so, and to think that the poor slobs who got ripped off are somehow responsible casue they saw a chance to own a home is worse than ridiculous, it is stupid.

When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.

richard9151  posted on  2008-02-14   23:46:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: richard9151 (#4) (Edited)

Nearly 4 out of ten mortgages MADE TO MINORITIES WAS A SUBPRIME LOAN.

Still into fuzzy math?

Nearly 40% of the subprimes that went to subhumans - amazingly - can't or won't be payed back.

I'm shocked!!!!!!

Not

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-14   23:59:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: richard9151 (#4)

Start with the fact that the cause of the subprime mess is the bankers, and no one else.

Not entirely true.

The root cause is the Federal Government and their "home ownership" programs, quotas, and whatnot. They changed the rules on mortgages and leaned on the banks to get them to write mortgages, ESPECIALLY to minority applicants.

So the banks did as they were told.

The Bush Administration was desperate to get home ownership up -- and Greenspan, when he was in charge of the Fed, refused to get involved in regulating subprime mortgages because he was taking his orders from the Administration. It was on Greenspan's watch that the Fed relaxed the rules on subprime despite many warnings.

I'm not making this up either. This is how it all got started. Dumbass Government Luminaries.

America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.

mirage  posted on  2008-02-15   5:16:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: mirage (#6)

So the banks did as they were told.

Just asking here, was adjustable rate lending a government directive or a banker's banquet ?

noone222  posted on  2008-02-15   5:18:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: noone222 (#7)

Just asking here, was adjustable rate lending a government directive or a banker's banquet ?

Remember, Greenspan himself went out and told the American Public to take an adjustable rate loan while he was busy jacking up interest rates.

The adjustable rate loans were used because they were one of the few ways they could make a borrower qualify for a mortgage, thereby increasing home ownership levels and making the bureaucrats happy since the numbers were coming in. More minorities owned homes. This made for happy regulators.

So after the paperfest, the banks had this stack of dodgy debt, less anything they could sell to Fannie Mae - so they securitized it and sold it off. Smart move on the banks' part there. Obey the master, dump the risk on someone else. Collect a fee in the middle. What's there not to like?

But like most Government interventions, it blew up.

America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.

mirage  posted on  2008-02-15   5:27:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: mirage, Richard2468, All (#8)

It was another affirmative action, government feel-good program.

Bush Here

Greenspan Here

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-15   6:11:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: mirage, noone222 (#6)

So the banks did as they were told.

The banks do not 'do as they are told.' Ever hear that the borrower is slave to the lender? That program, and every program like it, originated with the bankers, and this is why there was no regulation or oversite. Everyone in DC knew exactly what was going on and what was going to happen.

This 'credit system' only survives with ever-increasing numbers of outstanding loans. Without that, it collaspes. We are near the end of what is possible to sustain without a MAJOR correction; deflation and collaspe of outstanding loans. What you would call a depression. What the bankers call an opportunity.

When the United States government went bankrupt, and the bankers offered this system (to their toadies in office), it was with the guarentee that the United States government would be responsible for all of the credit thus created. Which means that the United States government taxes United States citizens to keep the interest up to date on the outstanding loans. It was never designed to be payed back, but to act as a permenant excuse to tax. Which explains the 85% accumulative tax rate now in place within the United States.

I know you have a rosy view of all these types of things, mirage, and you think that, somehow, cause you is an attorney, it all works for you. Sorry, and you will over the next couple of years learn some about how this works if you will simply pay attention.

All of the debt that is out there, and bad, will gradually be transferred to the so-called government; cause the government is responsible for it. This is like what happened, if you will remember back, with the defaulted debt from Brazil, and there was a big row about how much of that debt somehow ended up being absorbed by the United States government. Well, that is how the system works.

Then you have all of the talk about 'debt relief' for the nations in Africa. Remember that? And how each nation, western nations, are supposed to help with this. Got any clue what they mean?

It means that the banks ain't forgiving ANYTHING! Debt relief means that the government who agree to it accept the debt from those nations which can no longer pay the god damn bankers. Now, this is done through some kind of a payment from the nation...... BUT NONE OF THOSE NATIONS RUN SURPLUSES. They all operate on borrowed money, therefore all they have done is monitize that bank debt and pile it on their citizens.

Pretty neat deal for the bankers. Never have to write off a loan. Perhaps, however, it is not quite as good a deal for the taxpayers, which is why I decline to participate.

When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.

richard9151  posted on  2008-02-15   9:57:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Jethro Tull (#5)

subhumans

Ummmm, subhumans..... that would be everyone named Jethro? Not that many of them around, I'd wager.

When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.

richard9151  posted on  2008-02-15   9:58:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: richard9151 (#11)

Ummmm, subhumans..... that would be everyone named Jethro?

No. They'd be your neighbors in the maquiladora.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-02-15   10:45:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: richard9151 (#10) (Edited)

Dude, pull your head out and realize that you have it backwards in this instance.

There is always an exception to every rule. In business the exception is this:

When you owe the bank a thousand dollars, the bank owns you. When you owe the bank a million dollars, you own the bank.

This is the second case, not the first.

America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.

mirage  posted on  2008-02-15   13:30:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: mirage (#13)

When you owe the bank a thousand dollars, the bank owns you. When you owe the bank a million dollars, you own the bank.

Yeah, in normal circumstances that could be true..... IF you discount the nasty attitude of the bankers, and, what they have said/planned in the past;

THE BANKERS’ MANIFESTO OF 1934

Capital must protect itself in every way, through combination and through legislation. Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as soon as possible. When through a process of law, the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm of the law applied by the central power of wealth, under control of leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principle men now engaged in forming an IMPERIALISM of capital to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd. Thus by discrete action we can secure for ourselves what has been generally planned and successfully accomplished.

Article from: http://www.mayanmajix.com/art430.html

When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.

richard9151  posted on  2008-02-16   16:27:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: richard9151 (#14)

Yeah, in normal circumstances that could be true..... IF you discount the nasty attitude of the bankers, and, what they have said/planned in the past;

Well, its just as true today as it was in the 1930s when the banks went under left and right.

Sure they have nasty attitudes, but look at Donald Trump and how they kow-tow to him when he gets in trouble.

Thus, I like how The Donald thinks. "When you get in trouble, go do a BIGGER deal!"

The banks will continue to throw good money after bad chasing profit. Thus, methinks that with the egomaniacs like The Donald, we have a pretty good check and balance on their rapaciousness.

America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.

mirage  posted on  2008-02-16   19:39:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: mirage (#15)

You misers. SHAME on YOU!!

The Tribe NEEDED that STOLEN $7.7 Trillion (I actually think the figure is $4.6 Trillion) to buy their 12th mansion on Chinese beach front property as the latest in a 5000 year series of victim "we been diaspora-ed agin !!" takes place

JCHarris  posted on  2008-02-16   19:53:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest