LyrArc Article Gist
A decade after a precipitious decline in its stock price during the global financial crisis of 2008 stemming from its GE Capital unit, GE struggles with faltering stock price and poor performance stemming from other strategy errors in its core infrastructure business.  GE Capital is being shut down. Now one of its subprime lending units is likely to be put into bankruptcy protection. WMC Mortgage had losses under its GE Capital parent  of $1 billion during the financial crisis in one year alone. It has since faced a series of legal settlements and investigations. GE Capital has turned out to be a poor investment and a huge distraction for management for a company which considered its core business as infrastructure related.

LyrArc Article Gist
As the graph vivdly shows in 2005 and 2006 there is surge in subprime lending to Hispanics and blacks, with almost as many subprime loans to Hispanics and Black people as to whites. It slows down in 2007 by which time foreclosures were starting to take shape. WaMu, Countrywide, Ameriquest and other lenders who pushed subprime lending were backers of an initiative called Hogar which worked to spread lending to redline areas, in what an organization for responsible housing lending calls reverse redlining- in which high cost loans were pushed on those least able to sustain payments for a long time. Previously these areas did not get much lending because of the lack of good credit history.

LyrArc Article Gist
The 2002 decision for HSBC, a British bank, to buy Household International, which was into subprime lending in the USA, has turned out to be a disaster. Now it will close the 800 offices of Beneficial and Household Financial. HSBC's losses from Household are a big reason for the need to raise $18 billion in new capital. In getting into this business of subprime lending HSBC also sullied its high credit rating and its reputation. In doing so it also added its reputation to make it look like the subprime business was a good one and got it going in a big way. With the securitization process older standards of safety disappeared, as so called financial engineering and its engineers made it believable that inherent risk of a borrower's weak ability to pay could just be reduced or eliminated by packaging it differently and spreading it all around.

LyrArc Article Gist
Shows what the different states are doing and why the response at the state level is slow even though its better than the respose at the federal level. Most of this action willhelp future borrowers and rlieve some of the effects on current borrowers but only to a small degree otherwise the foreclosure process will probably continue to play out.

LyrArc Article Gist
A study by the Pew Research center shows minorities are the ones hardest hit in the millions of foreclosures taking place in the US. Counties with black or Latino majorites and the New York region are hit severely. What appeared to be a boon five years ago as black home ownership rose sharply after decades of discriminatory lending and zoning practices, has now turned into a curse with families losing homes to foreclosure, neighborhoods seeing increasing crime and declining house values, and renters being evicted. Lenders like Mozilo's Countrywide and other similiar lenders simply used the idea of home ownership as a flag to get political support for a wild west in lending practices, which allowed predatory lending to take place in the deregulatory atmosphere of the time. See the link to the impact on minorities. Nowhere has it been shown more pointedly that prudence and character in leaders in all areas is the essential conditon for progress, making free enterprise a necessary condition but subject to this essential condition, than in the way the housing and foreclosure crisis is hitting the American and the world economy in so many ways. This is evident in neighborhoods like this one on 145th st. in Jamaica, Queens, whaere black households making more than $68,000 a year are five times as likely to hold high interest subprime mortgages as whites of similiar incomes. Defaults occur three times as often in minority census tracts as mostly white ones. And 85% of the worst hit neighborhoods have majority of black and Latino homeowners. Which may also explain why there is not agroundswell of support for serious government foreclosure prevention measures like bankruptcy legislation and other legislation such as that suggested by Martin Feldstein and others for homeowners nearly or already under water, when faced with fierce lobbying by the banks and financial institutions. Consumer advocates say years ago many banks drew red lines around black neighborhoods and refused to lend, then as deregulation became the rage five years ago, these banks under unscruplous leaders targeted these neighborhoods for subprime lending. A dozen banks and lending companioes that made big profits from subprime loans accounted for half the loans given to the New York region'sblack middle -income borrowers in 2005 and 2006, a case of reverse redlining that the N.A.A.C.P. says in its lawsuit against these lenders. Housing and Urban Development Sec. Shaun Donovan, in aspeech to New York University said that 33% of the subprime mortgages given out in New York City in 2007, went to borrowers with credit scoresthat should have qualitifed them for conventional prevailing-rate loans. For anyone taking out a $350,000 mortgage, says the NYT, a difference of three percentage points - a typical spread between conventional and subprime loans- tacks on $272,000 in additional interest over the life of a 30 year loan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ reporters Corkery and Yoon give a remarkable account of the individual homeowners and investors inside one toxic subprime mortgage security from Countrywide Financial Corp. named CWABS- 2006-2007. There is Amanda Gavini of Fort Myers who continued making mortgage payments against the odds after a illness and death in the family. And a couple Donald Mudd- Patricia Starr who were approved by Countrywide for a $171,000 adjustable rate mortgage loan at 8% with a $10,000 down payment for a home in Port Charlotte, Florida. The approval came only 3 months after the couple emerged from personal bankruptcy in 2006, and by 2009 Mudd was missing payments. Other borrowers such as Mrs. Gavini in Florida took out two loans at 7% and 11% in 2006, have continued making payments and are still unable to refinance under the HAMP or HARP government programs. It is because of these homeowners who continue to make payments helping the security price recover, that one of PIMCO's funds which owns a stake in this security has made good returns. Hedge fund Marathon Asset has also made good returns on this security because of the U.S. government's Public Private Investment Program to help banks recover by providing government incentives for purchase of these securities from banks. This was a way to get banks holding these subprime securities to resume normal lending in financial markets....

LyrArc Article Gist
The resistance to serious government assistance to make a large impact on foreclosures stems from arguments like these. They only tell one side of the story, as the mortgage industry and politicians pushed high cost loans on minorities like Hispanics and Black people who did not understand the risks, and dispensed with even the basic requirements for ability to pay on a sustained basis. Instead pushing them into higher amount loans which raised the chances of aquick default on the loan. See the link to this, a detailed article on Hispanics experience in the WSJ, with a graph that shows that more subprime loans were made to minorities than whites in 2004 and 2005, and especially to Hispanics. The other thing about this is that its a very shortsighted approach and one that will end up costing more money. Its also ending up having effects on the global economy which comes back to affect US exports, and make this a severe prolonged downturn that could last anywhere upto ten years if its not tackled in its most serious dimensions, with this one being crucial. Its crucial because the bank bailouts which are approaching a trillion dollars as the bill mounts after each passing month, and the lack of lending thats crimping businesses and leading to huge job losses of 500,000 a month are directly a result of the inability to fix this problem. Its like trying to find out who started the fire when irresponsible borrowers, speculators, the mortgage industry, the credit rating agencies who signed off on irresponsible securtization, the regulators who fell asleep on the job, and central bankers and treasury secretaries who lauded the innovation and the depth and sophistication of the US financial system ignoring the risks of too much liquidity in markets, all lit the matches that got the fire going. The longer the fire burns and bigger it gets, the harder it becomes to put it out the and more fire fighting resources it will take....

LyrArc Article Gist
Credit card companies do not disclose how much of the profits are from penalty fees. These companes target borrowers who rarely default but often pay penalty fees. The new bill makes high margins from this practice and lending to subprime borrowers difficult.

LyrArc Article Gist
How the ECB provided a good hand in handling the recent credit crisis under its Chairman Trichet. Details of the way the crisis evolved and how ECB responded. The decisive action by Trichet and the six governors and the work by ECB staffers leading to that action, lending about 95 billion euros to calm the financial markets in Europe, has increased the confidence in the ECB and the euro. Since the ECB is a new institution formed in 1998 and the euro a new currency, this is one of the first occasions when the ECB had to meet a challenge of this nature after the subprime exposure of European banks led to a general loss of confidence.

LyrArc Article Gist
European banks have been slow to get rid of risky assets such as collateralized debt obligations, subprime mortgages and other risky assets after the 2007 financial crisis. As a result sixteen top European banks hold 386 billion euros of suspect credit-market and real estate assets, according to Credit Suisse analysts. The Royal Bank of Scotland has 79.6 billion of assets dating from the 2007 financial crisis. Over the three year period since the 2008 financial crisis, the top three U.S. banks shed 80% of this type of risky assets, compared to 50% for European banks. The four largest British banks have reduced these risky assets by more than 50%, and four French banks have reduced these assets by only 30%. At 29 billion euros, French bank Credit Agricole had the largest amount of such risky assets among the leading French banks. This adds to the difficulties facing French banks which also have large amount of loans to customers in Greece and Greece's sovereign bonds. Deutsche Bank has 20.2 billion euros in commercial mortgages and whole loans and 2.9 billion euros in U.S. residential assets including subprime loans. Mediobanca analysts estimate that Deutsche Bank's exposure to such assets is more than 150% of its tangible equity....

LyrArc Article Gist
The experience of Michael Winston, a former executive of Countrywide Financial. Winston acted as a whistleblower at Countrywide warning of the actions that led to crazy lending at the peak of the subprime mortgage boom. He was fired when Bank of America acquired Countrywide. He recently won a lawsuit for wrongful temination, the jury awarding him $3.8 million in damages.

LyrArc Article Gist
The impact of foreclosure in one Detroit neighborhood called Boston-Edison, where Henry Ford once lived and how the residents who have a neighborhood association going back many years to the 1920's are coping. The human consequences of foreclosures for a neighborhood. How could either side win, the lenders or the borrowers in a foreclosure situation and the need for the government to step in and bring some sense to the whole thing before it sinks both and blights towns and neighborhoods across America. One home bought for $179,000 in April 2006 was sold in the Boston-Edison area for guess how much, $6,500. Which shows that by the time thieves who for the copper and metal mining of these homes can destroy tens of thousands of dollars in value in minutes, and the deterioration of the neighborhood with crime and boarded up looks, and the very presence of foreclosures on each street destroys enormous amounts of value so that in this case the bank and its lenders got how much, less than $6500 or less than 4% of its original price. Repeated all across America this just does not make sense. Just as it never made sense for those who benefitted from the housing boom to say that subprime lending was a good thing because it brought home ownership to the less well off. Only lending that is at rates that are reasonable and considers the borrowers true finances, and on ethical and fair terms can be good lending and only government regulation designed to be easily enforceable and keeps lenders responsible, can ensure that this happens, as a free market is not good for this sort of thing. And this is all the more true for lending to those who are less well of because their ability to screen these contracts and their wording is not adequate and their own understanding of their finances inadequate. Barclay's Capital estimates that there are 811,000 bank owned homes in the USA, up from 129,000 in 2006, and predicts that it will grow by 60% before peaking in late 2009. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The ABX Index which tracks subprime bonds is showing signs of recovery. The prices for representative parts of the subprime bond market have doubled from a low of 30 cents on the dollar to about 60 cents. This is happening as investors and some companies are taking on more risk and finding lenders. This is helping push up prices of commodities, junk bonds and stocks. The larger yields on the subprime bonds are attracting investors. Non-agency bonds- bonds not backed by Fannie and Freddie- yield between 5% to 7%, above the 4% yield on high quality corporate bonds and the 3.5% yield on U.S. government bonds. Demand for these bonds is growing. Companies that invest in these sub-prime bonds such as MFA Financial were buying $100 million of these bonds in 2010, and have increased this to $300 million a month recently. MFA Financial is able to do so because it can find funding from lenders who are now not as worried about the risks of these subprime bonds. Another development in this market is the offer of AIG to buy back apool of bonds that the Federal Reserve had taken over from AIG during the financial crisis of 2008. AIG offered to pay $15.7 billion for the pool of bonds with a face value of $30 billion. The Fed cited a high level of interest from investors and rejected that offer. The Fed will now let investors bid for these bonds to maximize its gain on these bonds. In another development even conservative investors such as four large life insurers are looking at buying these subprime bonds. Scott Robinson, a senior vice president of Moody's Investors Service, says the high levels of capital available is leading to a re-risking of balance sheets, even though it is not back to the old days yet. Considerable risks still remain in the housing market according to Nouriel Roubini and other experts....

LyrArc Article Gist
Roland Arnall who sold his Long Beach Mortgage Company to Washinton Mutual which became WaMu's subprime arm, and ran his own mortgage company Ameriquest. He helped start the whole subprime business when in the early 1990's his company Long Beach Savings and Loan began selling subprime mortgages to financial instituions on Wall Street, where the mortgages were packaged into securities and sold to investors. This packging of securites backed by mortgages and later the shopping for ratings which enabled these securites to get the the AAA rated seal of approval was to get this business the financing and backing on Wall Street. Ameriquest was invoved in questionable practices in its lending. His company and its 270 offices closed in 2006 and $325 million was put up by his holding company ACC Capital Holdings to settle regulators claims of charging excessively high mortgage rates. His origins are with a family that survived the Holocaust by taking refuge in a Catholic church and he became an altar boy, and later immigrating to the Los Angeles area. He was diagnosed with late stage cancer in March 2007 and died the same month. This is one of the individuals who pioneered the whole business of packaging subprime mortgages as securities. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration's foreclosure prevention programs were designed for subprime lending situations. They were not designed for the high unemployment experienced in the U.S. A Treasury Department effort allows jobless people to postpone mortgage payments for 3 months, the average length of unemployment however is 9 months. Only 7,397 participants are in this program. As part of the bailouts Treasury had $46 billion to spend to prevent foreclosures, as of May 2011 Treasury has spent only $1.85 billion. Because housing provide so much of the underpinnings for the U.S. economy, it is essential to put housing back on a stable footing for an economic recovery. The lack of a sensible plan in this area is simply incomprehensible. Morris Davis, a former Federal Economist, has estimated that a million more homeowners went into foreclosure because of a lack of help for the unemployed. Davis is an associate real estate professor at the University of Wisconsin. He says its simply outrageous that the Obama administration has done so little. President Obama recently took credit for a recovery and jobs saved in the auto industry in Detroit. The failure to come up with a workable plan and to do so little in the larger area of housing and unemployment, is likely to overshadow everything else. This is especially so with the Fed approaching its limits after QE II, and with the administration and the Congress in a stalemate over further stimulus and the deficit....

LyrArc Article Gist
Abut 3 million homeowners are expected to default on their mortgages in the 30 months ending in mid 2009, and two thirds of this or 2 million will go into foreclosure, according to Moody's Economy.com. So what led to all this which eventually hit the financial markets in the U.S., and also to a lesser degree in Europe, through the opacity of the mortgage securities created from bad mortgages with falsely tagged triple AAA ratings that ended up in the assets of banks and investment firms? The motivations of each group were perverted as things unfolded. When the packagers of securties were not responsible for what they were doing they pursued profit before ethical behaviour and all sorts of securities were created. As these packagers were allowed to shop for ratings the ratings companies gradually lowered their standards to attract business. Politicians failed in the free market atmosphere of the Republican Bush administration and Republican led Congress. Senator Bachus and Congressman Frank introduced legislation during the later period of the bubble but failed to draw support to curb the bad lending. Republicans blocked a new antipredatory lending law in North Carolina from being enacted for the country from 1999 onwards. And Bush without realizing the ramifications prodded HUD to push Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to require higher percentage of loans to go to low income borrowers. Fannie and Freddie in turn met this requirement by increasing the demand for these subprime loans by buying the mortgage securities, which the packagers of these securities backed by subprime mortgage loans and incorrectly rated AAA by conniving ratings agencies were happy to supply. It was a sad situation with a happy -everyone could say the were bringing home ownership and the American dream to low income people, and business was signing up for this ride with short term gain in mind. And in all this financial innovation lost its legs as packaging these securities and constructing new investment vehicles like the conduits were being used in perverse ways. The basics of labeling something correctly was torn apart. You could not turn a subprime loan to low income borrowers or a loan without documentation to flippers and speculators into something different by simply labeling it as AAA. What the confidence in financial innovation in the American system did was help spread these securities all over the globe, where they were held with confidence by towns in remote parts of the Scandinavian north country as well as financial centres in Europe and Asia. At the state level politicians in California saw this as one of the state's star industries and protected it from legislation to curb bad lending, as most of the big lenders were based in California. Due to a strange set of affairs the Department of Corporations was left with the tasks of oversight of mortgage lenders in the state. It was concerned more with issues like protecting senior citizens from financial scams and was not staffed to meet the supervisory role of a huge mortgage lending business. When it comes to the Fed's role Greenspan also took the laissez fairre stand of not interfering with free markets, even when a lot of the bad lending was obvious and one Fed Governor Gramlich was pushing for better lending standards. The Fed supervisory role was over banks and banks were required to follow lending standards, but most of this lending had shifted to mortgage brokers and financial companies which were beyond the supervision of the Fed. Had the Fed extended its supervision to mortgage affiliates of the banks this could have increased the level of supervision and made a difference. But state regulation mechanisms in California by Department of Corporations show that the regulatory mechanism did not take into account the realities of mortgage lending and how it had changed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jumbo loan mortgages in dollars accounted for 20% of first lien mortgages in 2014, the first time since 2005, and back up from 5.5% in 2009 at the height of the subprime mortgage crisis. This part of the market for homes priced over $417,000 or $ 625,500 in pricier regions, has gained its footing faster than the rest of the market. Sales of existing single family homes between $750,000 and $1 million, were up 21% in June from the prior year, compared to an increase of 12.5% for homes between $100,000 and $250,000, with homes below $100,000 declining by 3%, according to the National Association of Realtors. The jumbo originations are closely correlated with the stock market. The loan performance criteria were tightened after the 2009 crisis leading to requirements of larger down payments and higher FICO credit scores. The strong loan performance is shown in the credit score for May 2015 of 770, and down payment of about 32% for jumbo loan originations, according to CoreLogic. Interest rates are also very close between smaller Fannie conforming mortgage loans and jumbo mortgages, 4.05% compared to 4.07% on jumbo loans. The higher demand is leading to competition between JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Bank of America in this part of the market. Chase is focussing on this part of the market with the strong loan performance- only 1.9% of jumbo mortgages being late 30 days or more compared to 6.5% for Fannie Freddie conforming loans, according to Black Knight Financial Services. As part of its strategy Chase offers minimum down payments of 15% and credit scores of 680 for single family homes as primary residence, starting August 5, 2015, down from 20% and 740 earlier, for mortgages between $1.5 million and $3 million, a change already made in 2014 for jumbo mortgages upto $1.5 million. Similiar move is made by Chase for lowering down payment on vacation homes and second homes. Wells Fargo also cut the minimum down payment- to 10.1% from 15% for jumbo mortages upto $1 million. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A landmark ruling and a huge win for consumers and for the country, as the Supreme Court says states can enforce fair-lending laws and other consumer protection measures against the largest banks in the USA. The Suprem COurt said that the rules issued by the federal banking regulators like the Comptroller of the Currency under the NationalBank Act - a law passed in 1864- could not block sfforts by the states to enforce their laws. For the country its a win because the lack of enforcement of state laws only allowed abuses in the subprime area to continue and helped create the subprime mortgage crisis. The case began with letters by the New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in 2005 to several national banks including CItigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo inquiring about lending practices to minorites. The letters referred to "troubling" disparities that suggested black and Hispanic borrowers were being charged disproportionately higher interest rates on mortgages compared to whites. THe letters asked for information "in lieu of subpoena." Protection of minorities and the weak in American society is part of the moral fabric of America and that it had eroded in recent years is evident in the manner the banking sector responded. A banking trade group and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency brought a lawsuit to block the New York Attorney General's request saying that the National Bank Act nd rules issued by the Bush administration in 2004 gave that type of authority to comptroller and prohibited such efforts by the states. And then afederal district court ruled against the states, aand the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Court affirmed that decision. These are instances where the system failed to protect the weak even with the laws that states had on their books. Justice Scalia voted in favor with a 5-4 vote to allow states to enforce consumer protection laws, even though his written opinion was based on an interpretation of what "visitorial powers" of a federal regulator were, and not about the importance of fair lending in the proper functioning of the American economy. Justices Roberts, Alito, Kennedy and Thomas voted against....

LyrArc Article Gist
Joe Nocera of the New York Times, says that it is the Attorney Generals of the 50 states in the USA, that have taken up the rights of homeowners, not the federal authorites. He points out that the Obama administration, the Treasury department and the federal agencies, have failed miserably in getting the banks and servicers to take loan modification seriously. It was the attorney generals of the states that were with homeowners from the beginning, to prevent predatory lending and outright fraud. Until they were stopped by federal bank regulators, who sided with the banks in court. The subprime lending crisis might never have ocurred, says Nocera, had the states not been obstructed in this way. As the subprime lending mounted, the state AG's were talking to people in their communities, and knew the reality on the ground. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision, two primary regulators of the banking industry, saw their role as protecting banks from consumers rather than protecting consumers. Professor Prentiss Cox, of the University of Minnesota Law School, who was an assistant attorney general in Minnesota in charge of consumer enforcement, says federal regulators should have been listening to us, instead of trying to shut us down....

LyrArc Article Gist
The losses for investors from mortgage loans won't go down by much by Treasury's plan. Barclay's Capital Research estimates that losses could go down by 1% point from 13 to 15% losses that are expected on the subprime loans. And the economy would only be helped at the margins according to Roubini, a NYU economist who heads Roubini Global Economics, who doesn't see it doing much for the foeclosures and defaults leading to a housing recession for the next 3 years. Out of some 1.8 million borrowers, 600,000 not current on their payments will get no help, and of the remaining 1.2 million only 600,000 who are current on their mortgages but need help will qualify, those with better credit scores such as above 660 and having the means to pay will be excluded.

LyrArc Article Gist
A lot of the same subprime lenders who had questionable ethical practices and in many cases defrauded homeowners are back in business as FHA guaranteed lenders. The FHA gets to pick up the tab for faulty lending by these brokers and companies. Inside Mortgage Finance, a research newsletter, estimates that over the next 5 years fresh FHA loans that go sour will cost thaxpayers $100 billion more. Risk Mitigation Group, a consultancy, says over the next 12-18 months there is going to be a FHA Insurance Armageddon. Founded in the New Deal years the FHA is supposed to promote first time home purchases by allowing small down payments, as little as 3%, and lenient standards on borrower income , as long as mortgage and related expenses do not exceed 31% of household earnings. Buyers pay a modest fee for the taxpayer backed insurance. Lenders and brokers can get a license to participate in FHA programs by showing industry experience and knowledge of agency rules. BUt experts say the FHA does not have the staff to deal with its expanded responsibilities under the new Bush programs like HOPE for homeowners, and does not have the IT systems to show if the brokers had violations and convictions in the past in their records. Overburdened, lacking the computer systems to track brokers records, and understaffed, the FHA has licensed some of the same brokers who caused the subprime disaster as they applied under different names and as different companies. After the subprime market evaporated in 2007 FHA loans are all thats available for many borrowers. In fact by fall 2008 FHA loans accounted for 26% of all new mortgages issued nationwide, up from only 4% a year earlier. The Bush administration and FHA extended $300 billion in loan guarantees to HOPE. And these brokers who defraud investors with deceptive practices are known to put down even disabled people as employed, and show incomes that are not verified. Once these loans are sold as securities these brokers engaged in deceptive practives have collected their fees and being FHA guaranteed they hold their value as securities, except that the losses as they default are the taxpayers responsibility. This is the $100 billion in losses that Inside Mortgage Finance is warning about. Along the way it leaves a trail of trouble for homeowners, state agencies trying to stem these practices, and taxpayers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Reviews of "End of Wall Street" by Roger Lowenstein and the "Big Short" by Michael Lewis show not only how the traders like Michael Burry and Steve Eisman built up credit default swap positions and bet that the housing market with subprime lending would collapse. The Big Short says Gross is a portrait of misfits, which is how the traders are shown in their personal lives. For Eisman a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and the Harvard Law School, his own wife is quoted as saying, that even on Wall Street he was seen as "rude, obnoxious and aggressive." About lives of the men of finance, Lowenstein describes one incident in which Vikram Pandit is spotted at lunch in "Le Bernardin," a top rated restaurant in New York. Pandit sees nothing by the glass and orders a $350 bottle so he could savor a glass of wine worth drinking. All this for doing what Loyd Blankfein described as "doing God's work."

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Boskin of Stanford University, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under the elder Bush, on the risks of protectionism and higher taxes to the economy in the long run, and the need for the Fed to balance the need for providing help with rate cut with the need to keep inflation at low levels. He suggests workouts of the losses from subprime mortgages not bailouts is the correct answer. P.S. A note on December 6, 2008, after the crisis with Bear Stearns in early 2008, and the severe October credit crisis and a series of bailouts of banks, financial institutions and the Detroit auto industry. If one looks for the thinking that was behind the Republican Bush administration's early stand to take no proactive steps to improve things in the economy, then Boskin's article summarizes some of the thinking behind it. Lowering rates at the time except gradually,after the Greenspan moves in preceding years to lower rates and let them stay that way too long (leaving too much liquidity and loose lending in the financial markets), was not to be taken lightly with additional concerns of pushing inflation upwards. And Boskin way underestimated the losses from subprime in December 2007 when he used the estimate of $300 billion investor losses centred in real estate made by the OECD at the time, or as he puts it just one-half of 1% of American's net worth. Concluding that in a $14 trillion economy such losses could be absorbed. He anticipated delays in financing and the need to mitigate that but did not anticipate a collapse of credit markets. Part of this may stem from not realizing the impact of highly leveraged debt on the books of financial institutions and what it could do if fear gripped the financial markets, and underestimating the impact of subprime debt with mortgage securities that had no transparency and distorted credit ratings. Which is why he says that policy should be for workouts not bailouts, emphasizing that the worst idea out there is for a broad interest rate freeze for mortgage borrowers which would throw into question the sanctity of private contracts and thus deter investment. This policy of resisting loan modifications continued as policy of the Bush administration even as Martin Feldstein, another Harvard economist and Reagan administration economic advisor, advocated just that from early 2008 with repeated oped articles in the WSJ throughout the rest of the year....