LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein is back after his proposal that the government step in with low cost loans to families thatwould help homeowners reduce what they owed the bank by 20%, for those homeowners who are close to negative equity but not there yet. This is needed to prevent the next big wave of defaults on loans, from homeowners who see that walking away from their loans is a rational solution once they reach the point of negative equity. Feldstein hammers away at some critical points that point out that reducing rates risks more than it accomplishes. Food prices globally do not benefit from lower rates, as governments may have to raise interest rates to cool inflation in their economies. Rising food prices threatens the livelihoods of poor and working classes in the global economy, especially in developing countries of Asia and Africa. It also does little to stimulate the economy in the USA and actually helps increase inflation for commodities like oil and food products. So why is the Fed lowering rates even though the costs are more significant than the benefits. Lowering rates would be counterintuiive in this situation as Feldstein points out. Bernanke's response would be that its a temporary crisis response, lower interest rates helps financial firms restructure their debt and helps them restore health to their balance sheets in the fragile financial markets, where the financial architecture itself is being questioned. And the immediate crisis was in the financial markets, whereas some other solutions could be found for the damage this caused to the overall world economy in terms of inflation. Feldstein quotes estimates of inlation at 4% in the last 12 months and of 4.8% this year. The inflation rate in China is estimated much higher at about 8.5% and has become the focus of government efforts including relaxing the exchange rate, as the rise in prices especially of food affects the large working poor in China. Another aspect of lower interest rates is that lower rates surely would do little when there is such a large inventory of unsold homes. Significant also is the fact that lowering rates for fed funds by 3% from this time last year, has done little to lower mortgage interest rates which have come down only by 0.5%. So it does not give much relief to homeowners either. So is lowering rates a medicine that comes with a lot of side effects that you adminster only because the patient is in a critical condition, as the financial and credit markets appeared to Bernanke and Paulson that weekend only a few weeks ago? Probably so,which takes one back to Feldstein's main point. That main point is that the only way to get to solutions that strike at the core of this crisis is to help homeowners avoid default on their home mortgage loans, by reducing the loan amount by something like 20%, through government loans which can later be recouped to some extent. It cautions the Fed to use the medicine of lower rates sparingly, and urges the market participants and the public that insists that there be no "bailouts" to come to their senses, and accept that their will be tolerable losses for all if there are not to be intolerable losses for all.