Excerpt of the Day: On Borrowers’ Role in the Subprime Situation
Rob Asghar, a writer and editor based in Southern California, dished out unwanted but necessary medicine in a subscription-only Wall Street Journal op-ed on Thursday:
By and large, the lenders were no less irresponsible than the borrowers who aspired to live a bigger life than they could afford. But all of the strange creatures of subprime — the overpaid loan officers, bloated budgets, lavish Las Vegas “planning meetings” and the like — were nurtured by consumers who believed that incurring massive debt was the secret to becoming a rich landholder (or boat owner).
Regulation of the industry may address some problems — but not without creating the new ones that inevitably result from straitjacketing the free market. Besides, market forces were already slaying subprime’s monsters. By late 2005, most in the business knew the feast was entering its final moments.
The recent effort by the Bush administration to help a segment of subprime borrowers is, fortunately, a mostly cosmetic matter. (One mortgage executive tells me that only about 5% of the loans in his company’s loan portfolio will be affected.) Policy makers in Washington would do well to leave it at that. We need bureaucratic meddling far less than we need a sober and clear-eyed citizenry.
As my own friends bought and maintained homes, I quietly mused about how the homes owned them, not the other way around. I moved often, based on job commitments, with no interest in buying a house.
….. When the average person learns to treat those (market) forces with humility and respect, we’ll all be served far better than by any political promises that claim to stand up for the little guy.
With Barney Frank and John Conyers (second item at link) around, and a presidential campaign in progress, the chances of “leaving it at that” are lower than they should be.









