Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Sub-prime mortgage crisis in the united states
The housing loan crisis 2008
The housing loan crisis 2008
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Sub-prime mortgage crisis in the united states
Approximately 14% of homeowners are either behind in their house payments or are currently in foreclosure. The foreclosure crisis was not created by one issue but a combination of issues. It will take more than one idea to bring the crisis to an end and stabilize the housing market. Both individuals and financial institutions are responsible for the current mess. Individuals borrowed more than they could afford but they were allowed, and sometimes encouraged, to do this by the financial institutions. Part of the issue is individuals no longer see the value in saving, delaying gratification and acting responsibility. Our American materialism has gotten the better of us.
This does not dismiss the responsibility of the financial institutions. In the eyes of the buyer, the financial institutions would never allow the borrower to borrow beyond their means, right? Wrong. In pursuit of increased profits based on the additional interest from an overinflated loan, the qualifications began to lax and deals were made to ensure financing. Previously, banks did not allow mortgages greater than 100% of the value of a house. In addition, mortgages were traded like playing cards, continuing to inflate the value of property. With the expectation the market would continue to grow, financial institutions allowed mortgages over the value of a property. This entire situation has led to an increase in foreclosures but a necessary decrease in property value.
The financial institutions were bailed out by taxpayers but the financial institutions in turn have not had the same compassion for homeowners. The same banks that approved excessive mortgages are foreclosing on individuals who are unable to pay their mortgage. The overall economic situation ha...
... middle of paper ...
... all true in theory, theories don’t help when there is an immediate crisis which affects real people. We could do nothing, sit back and wait for the equilibrium but I don’t think this takes into account the periphery aspects of society which are affected. The government can either help keep people in their homes or they can help them via welfare and subsidized housing. By taking steps to assist in obtaining equilibrium, we can prevent an even farther downward spiral.
There is no one formula which will fix this situation. There is not a “one size fits all” approach which will work. The banks will need to tailor their response to the needs of the individual homeowner based on the options provided in this essay. By working cooperatively and viewing the larger issue, it is possible to stop the market freefall, encourage homeownership and stimulate local economies.
Leading up to the crisis of the housing market, borrowers got mortgages without understanding the terms. Banks were giving out loans to people the banks weren't sure could pay the money back. The closer to the crisis, the higher the frequency of illegitimate loans and mortgages. Because there were so many mortgages on houses that could not be paid back, millions of mortgages were foreclosed on, and the houses we...
Although the crisis came to head in 2008, there were people who had realized that trouble was coming for years. The largest warning sign was the amount of credit in the market place. Many of the big companies and banks had very little capital, and the lack of capital was brought on by the housing bubble. Companies were lending too much money to people who could not pay them back. And even before people started to default on their mortgages, people could see that this was a problem. During a meeting with the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in January 2007 the staff of the Federal Reserve admitted “that they were aware of [the] problem in the housing issue three years earlier” (Dodd). And they were not the only ones. As far back as 2001 there were people who saw the danger that sub-prime mortgages were and who were trying to have bills passed to stop the bad lending that was going on, but no one wanted to list...
First, the causes of the foreclosure crisis must be examined. I don’t think that the causes are all that complicated. In the end, the cause is twofold: First, people were buying houses they couldn’t afford, and banks were lending money to these people. Second, banks were engaging in unscrupulous lending practices. They were charging people money that these people neither were expecting to pay nor were able to pay. They were advertising one interest rate and actually putting another in the contract. I’m not sure what the law says about this last bit, but that sounds a lot like ‘fraud’ to me. If my reader disagrees, then I ask him to imagine the following:
Mortgage crisis can evidently be associated with excessive borrowing from the financial institutions without proper considerations of the terms and conditions of the deal. The prospects that surround business in real estate are always promising and this presumption got into the mind of all stakeholders involved in the subprime mortgage lending business. This is because in 2000, the mortgage rates were low and everybody would afford a mortgage. Unfortunately, the financial models were flawed as the rate was adjustable. After many people were nested in the mortgage bracket, greed propelled the rates to levels subprime cannot afford thus leading to foreclosures. It can be concluded that greed, lack of sufficient knowledge and flawed financial models led to the emergency of subprime mortgage crisis.
Subprime loans started out as a generous, philanthropic idea. Giving people who had bad credit the opportunity to own a home regardless of their income or past credit issues showed compassion and caring for the poor, middle class and elderly who couldn’t possibly qualify for a home loan under the previous strict lending standards. However, predatory lenders used this vulnerable groups desire to live the American dream, to own a home, against them. Billions of dollars were made by loan companies and similar financial institutions by writing relaxed standards loans for borrowers as fast as they could. (Jennings, 2012) To make matters worse, lenders knowingly wrote loans to speculators who had no intention of ever living in the home; or at least no longer than it would take to flip the property. In a marketplace with quickly rising property values, the adverse impact of this activity was completely shadowed, and yet lurking in the background is the one market constant, what goes up must come down.
...xistence as a nation have more to do with our economic viability and thus our ability to provide necessary services to each other and our communities? I would say that given the recent tragedies in Japan, it seems apparent to me that our very existence might depend more upon our economic solvency. If we have the resources, we need to rebuild our infrastructure. We need to reinforce our nuclear plants. We need to retrain and support our emergency responders. We need to make sure that we can survive the unthinkable, because that seems a more likely threat. The Media is following the dollars and perhaps so should our government. I am not arguing Fallows’ point. Instead, I am more concerned with what comes next. Perhaps we have to leave behind what we know in order to discover what is to come.
In essence, the problem leading to the foreclosure crisis is the recent decrease in people’s ability to make their loan payments due to job loss and lower wages brought on by the economy’s weak state. Rather than throw billions of dollars at big banks in the hope that they find ways to help the homeowners’ loans, the government should attack the problem through the individual. Simply, the government aid being spent in the hopes of stimulating the economy should be funneled toward reducing the balance of home loans to make the monthly payments affordable for the owner. By funneling the government aid directly to the American home owner in need, the economy would greatly benefit as homeowners regain their footing with their budget because the economy and foreclosure are directly related. When one hurts, so does the other; when one prospers, the other does as we...
In the early 2000’s the housing market boomed, real estate was a hot investment and everyone was looking to buy a home. However not everyone can afford a home and a majority of people were forced to take out a mortgage to purchase real estate. During the housing boom banks were supplying subprime loans and upping the risk in the real estate market. These loans were not only risky but irresponsible on the part of the banks’ lending them, and although individuals receiving the loans thought they were being helped at the time, these loans were a major reason why so many people their homes, almost crippling toe U.S economy as a whole.
...just as welfare helped people during the great depression, this new plan could help people during this extreme recession. It is so important to keep people in their homes and not on the street and with help from our government and each individual taking responsibility for their actions, the amount of people facing foreclosure can decrease. Every American wants to know that they have a place to go home to and to call their own. For many people placing their homes up for foreclosure was something they never thought would happen and it is easy to say what one would have done to prevent this. As American we must stop blaming and looking at what has happened to the housing market and start planning on ways to fix this situation. Our country should take the resources we have now in the present, and create a plane to insure that every person is taken care of in the future.
All of those bad loans and bonds are now becoming subprime mortgages and at alarming rates, the big banks and even smaller banks are targeting people who can’t afford them and other members of the working class. They began to persuade them in with low interest rates but with only the intention to hike up the prices after a short grace period. The worst part about this hole dilemma isn’t totally about loans themselves either, it’s about the people who are being taken for a ride. The people paying for these loans
Foreclosure in America has been a rising and prominent problem recently, and has destroyed many Americans hopes and dreams. Over 2.3 million homes were foreclosed in 2008, and an estimated four million homes will be foreclosed by the end of this year. Despite the efforts of many banks and lending companies, over half of homes will foreclose that have received their help. I believe that we have only started in the right direction in solving the foreclosure crisis. Giving money and lowering mortgage rates will help, but I believe we should find out why Americans are in this situation in the first place. We are being too stereotypical when we think the only reason someone is foreclosing is because of irresponsible payments or buying a home out of a person’s capabilities to pay for it. If we understand their situation, we will be better enabled to help and solve their crisis.
An argument can be made that someone should be held accountable for the subprime mortgage situation. The main focus now is to preventing a continuous meltdown. The first step to cure the situation is taking immediate and corrective action. Kevin Alexander Gray states “We‘ve got to do more to stem the tide of foreclosures and stabilize communities throughout the country,” (Gary, 2009). In order to thoroughly understand the impact this crisis has had on the economy, it will be important to look at what has really prompted this housing meltdown. The immediate cause or trigger of the crisis was the bursting of the United States hous...
Not since the Great Depression of 1929 has America experienced such economic chaos, job and housing loss. Perhaps housing loss was not as wide-spread then since there were fewer homeowners. The government supposedly put in measures designed not to let those on Wall Street cause the same thing to happen again. Yet, here we are some eighty years later in the same situation. It seems that history keeps repeating itself. The question is why? The answer is greed. Unfortunately, the question "how can we stop it from happening again"? cannot be answered in one definitive statement. Of course the solution to preventing home foreclosures is "prevention," which in itself comes with a lot of variables.
The foreclosure crisis has no simple solution since so many things affect it, but fixing each thing one by one will gradually help. Incentives for people to buy are fantastic ideas. The $8,000 tax credit to first time homeowners is a good start. There could be others that don’t exclude current homeowners. The first few months’ mortgage could be paid for, or provide furnished houses. President Obama is very intellectual and I think he has the capacity to make wise decisions and fix our foreclosure crisis.
Individuals like the two young and rambunctious mortgage consultants portrayed in the film gave loans to anyone and everyone that could sign the paper, regardless of the recipient’s ability to pay the loan in full. It is doubtful that all consultants fully understood the ramifications of their actions, but undoubtedly the overall disregard for consequence was the start of the collapse. Mortgage consultants mislead and tricked people into loans they could never afford by playing on their desire to live the American dream. Distributing adjustable rate loans to individuals without jobs, without collateral is unconscionable. Unfortunately, from their perspective they were helping these individuals. In a twisted way, these consultants were acting ethically from a utilitarian point of view. The consultants won because they received utility in the form of a bonus for distributing the loans, and the loanee won because they could now afford the home of their dreams. What the consultants didn’t consider in their calculations were the long term results and utility of their actions, unethically building the flawed foundation of the housing