As
I see it, the issue of solutions to address the problems revealed by the
financial crisis is not breaking up Big Banks deemed too big to fail, but rather
preventing the risk of contagion once problems arise. Once panic sets in it spreads throughout the interconnected financial world, whether
it's 10 big banks or 50 smaller ones.
Example--
securitizations were actually designed and thought to contain and reduce risk through wide
spread diversification and broad dissemination of risk across a very wide
universe of investors.
In
fact when the housing bubble burst those securitizations actually spread the
contagion to those many interconnected investors. Rather then reduce the risk
as everyone thought, this interconnectedness actually spread the
contagion of the initial panic.
Once
again I go back to my view that the root cause of the financial crisis
was unregulated subprime lending; made by relatively small and under
regulated lenders, virtually none of whom were Big Banks.
Of
course the banks that securitized those loans are culpable as well , but
breaking them up won't solve that problem. Lehman Brothers was actually pretty
small.
The
whole subprime phenomenon was allowed to happened based on the political
decision ( both parties) to push for home ownership for " everyone",
regardless of creditworthiness. "Liar" loans to NINJAS ( no income, no jobs, no
assets, and of course no money down).
Once the collapse started with the subprime loans, even well underwritten loans went under with the plunge in property values. When that happened the whole global financial market eventually froze. The rest is history.
As
Paul Krugman pointed out years ago, Canada only had 5 Banks in the whole
country and they were all too big to fail; yet Canada didn’t have the same
financial crisis problem we had. By law, Canada had virtually no subprime lending. Only
credit worthy borrowers, who put down 20% , could get mortgage loans there.
That's
how you solve a problem ( at least the last one) . Banks should be more
tightly regulated in a way that insures ( to the extent possible) that they
make only "good " loans rather than simply be broken up.
If that reduces their profits , so be it.
Eric
No comments:
Post a Comment