721

COMMENTS

PRINT

TEXT SIZE:

A A A
Panic ButtonThe Great Recession wasn't the result of subprime mortgage madness, according to a new report from the National Bureau of Economic Research. It was just a plain old bank panic. Yeah, but weren't bank panics supposed to be a thing of the past, thanks to the creation of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 1934?

That's the problem.

The report, by Yale economics professor Gary Gorton, says subprime mortgage securitization was a mess -- a house of cards probably doomed to fall -- but subprime by itself simply wasn't big enough to put the entire financial system at risk. That required a failure of the Renew Sale and Repurchase (REPO) market for collateralized securities that over the last 30 years had come to backstop global finance.

The problem here, of course is that hardly anyone has even heard of REPO, which manages to be an unregulated, uninsured $20 trillion business that is absolutely essential to keeping money flowing in the world. Subprime is only $1.2 trillion -- not big enough by itself to wag this dog.

According to Gorton, the entire basis of global banking changed in the 1980s, thanks to money market funds and junk bonds, which took all the profit out of being a traditional bank. So banks began securitizing loans to regain those lost profits.

The REPO market of interbank loans had always existed but it grew dramatically in the 1990s to support securitization. But since there was no deposit insurance for institutional loans measured in hundreds of millions of dollars, counterparties demanded collateral to back these overnight REPO loans that generally replaced demand deposits in the banking system.

While the subprime mortgage crisis began in January, 2007, the ensuing bank panic didn't happen until August of that year when lenders began making collateral calls and demanding haircuts (collateral fire sales at discounted prices) from borrowers that led to all the big banks being seriously under-capitalized.

The government, while well prepared to respond to a demand deposit bank panic like those of 1907 and 1933, was not only unprepared for the 2007 panic, they didn't even know there was a panic until it was well underway.

The panic meant that the value of all types of bonds declined, trillions of bank capital evaporated and the REPO market, itself, collapsed as all counter-parties lost faith in each other and the basis of the entire banking system literally disappeared.

So what does this mean? Well it explains why the banks still aren't lending money, because they don't have the means to back the loans they'd like to make, absent government intervention. It means that until the REPO market regains some steam there isn't going to be much natural progress in getting the economy to start growing again (take out the government stimulus and we're screwed). And it shows that the Fed and Treasury in the United States were no better able to protect us than you could keep your dog from running into the road and being hit by a car.

But it wasn't strictly a subprime mortgage crisis.

Why is it I don't feel better?
Add Your Comment

Tags: bank panic, financial crisis, National Bureau of Economic Research, securitization, subprime lending

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 37)

1. John on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 06:17:AM said...

The thing that brought down rverything was the gasoline prices that caused everyone not to be able to pay for things.
all this other crap is an after-thought.

2. Jim on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 06:51:AM said...

Gas prices were not the main cause, they are jsut what everyone readily see's everyday so its an easy target. IF you paid $2.50 to fill up 10 gallons it costs you $25, if the price jumps .50 your cost goes up a whopping $5 big deal ( althought it sucks, not a big enough jump to cause the kind of financial mess we have)

3. Troyski on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 01:36:PM said...

Not many people can rely on 10 gallons per week. Most take at least 20 or more. Also fuel prices control the prices of everything else from food to clothing. Small businesses also have to charge more for their goods to offset the cost of both unleaded/diesel and natural gas.

4. Ray on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 07:53:AM said...

Youre not thinking big enough on the gas thing. People look at it as Spending more at the pump. Look at Semis, they pump in 200 gallons at a time, using that amount, roughly, everyday. And when deisel hit 4.85 a gallon, Well. you see what the price when to. the owner of that truck needed to recoup the extra expense making it more costly to ship anything, and everything needs to be shipped by truck. There was no geverment subsidy or bailout for truck owners. now to pay for the increased cost of shipping stores had to raise prices for items, thus costing you more for everything.

5. harold on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 08:18:AM said...

During the Carter Oil Fiasco, Jimmy Boy wanted to implement a 50 cent tax per gallon of gasoline-- guess what the OMB found it to be an ecomonmy wrecker--luckily the tax went no where.

6. darthofer on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 09:01:AM said...

Absolutely!

7. Kyla on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 09:24:AM said...

This posting is just rediculous. Gas prices did not crash the economy. Yes, the fuel industry is a multi billion dollar industry... However, the fact that gas prices were raised did not cause trillions of dollars in bank loans to default; and subsequently then for those defaults to be impossible to be paid back. The two are not even related.

8. Larry on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 09:33:AM said...

It wasn't that gas was $2.55 per gallon it was $3.95 -$4.25...Take that at 45 gallons per week for a working couple and it was a big hit out of the budget... In about 2 yrs. that goes from $68 per week to $190. spent per week... That's $488 more per month in this area... That is a good portion of a middle income mortgage...

9. Wyatt Gragg on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 09:44:AM said...

Read any of the above...our population has gotten into such a fragmented and rushing state that (we) don't even care about the correct spelling of our written thoughts, anymore! How can we expect security if (we) can't even spell it!?! How can we expect results in Washington and NY if we trust them as much as (we) evidently trust Spell Check?

10. carlalute on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 10:20:AM said...

No, the gas prices did not cause the current recession. However it would be in the best interest of everyone except the oil companies for us to seek geener, cheaper, renewable fuel sources.

The recession was caused by several things. It was never just a mortgage recession, though that was a part of it. Business/corporate/interbank loans were being handled just as poorly. When you have a debt based economy, it's going to collapse in every now and then.

Also the U.S. pumped billions and billions into a war that Bush started to get reelected and we're still trying to clean up that mess. You can't tell me that doesn't have some negative effect on the economy.

11. Inkling on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 10:28:AM said...

HAROLD-How soon we forget the debale of the Nixon administration and his fake "oil embargoes" that caused gas prices to soar from 27 cents a gallon to well over $2.00 a gallon. The Republicans started this mess long ago with that crook NIXON, and their NEED for GREED has consumed us all ever since.

12. JohnG on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 10:15:AM said...

Agree with the gas prices. it affected everyone where the subprime only affected the few that were foolish enough to get sucked into thinking they could afford something that they couldn't.

13. Ronnie on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 10:15:AM said...

Gas prices pushed up the cost on EVERYTHING, not just what people paid at the pump, and remember, it wasn't a fifty cent jump, it was more like a double jump in two years, the recession didn't happen all at once, it followed the price of oil as it climbed month after month following Hurricane Katrina through September 2007 when the banks started failing. As people started reaching deeper into their pockets draining what little savings they had (because most Americans don't have a lot in their savings to begin with) it stopped them from making purchases on all non essential items beyond food(dining out, electronics, clothing, housewares, appliances, cars), and so began the failure of the giant machine that drives the entire US, CONSUMERISM.

14. repukeslie7 on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 10:22:AM said...

80% of the people who drive in this country do not travel more than 40 miles in a day. This would blow a big hole in your theory. If it were true, the economy would have started booming again when the bottom fell out of the gas market. If people were smart and drove fuel-saving vehicles, the increase, at its worst, would have been about $2.00 per day. If they were driving a gas guzzler, I have no pity for the added increase they would have paid. I think this writer should have focused more on Credit Default Swaps as a leading cause of the Great Bush Depression.

15. Ed on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 11:06:AM said...

John, HooRay!! Have finally found someone who agrees with me. Keep it simple!! Conservatively speaking, if 200,000,000 households require 20 gallons of gas a week, gas is $4.00 vs 2.00/gal., that's $40.00 per week gone from discretionary spending times the 200,000,000 families equalling $4 billion out of the economy per week - and we haven't even begun to talk businesses yet.

16. Joe Mama on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 12:22:PM said...

I agree. I was wondering how oil is 4 letters. The oil companies were allowed to suck too much money out of the economy with all of their record profits. That is disposable income. Money that kept everyone employed. It all started when the companies were allowed to rape California and Bush blamed California for not building power plants. We never had a problem before deregulation with energy shortages and look, we haven't had a problem since. Turns out they manipulated the energy prices and we get the fall of Enron. Californnia represents 1/10 of the us population. The same amount of people unemployed. Too much money was taken out of circulation from California, and later the whole country to keep this economy going. It only takes a rock to stop a wheel.

17. AMERICAWAKEUPNOW on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 11:44:AM said...

WOW. I CAN NOT BELIVE THAT YOU THINK THAT GAS COSTS STARTED IT. I CAN SEE HOW YOU MAY THINK THAT, SINCE THAT IS PROBABLY ABOUT THE TIME THE COSTS STARTED GOING UP, BUT THAT IS OUR GOVERNMENT ALWAYS KICKING WHEN YOU ARE ALREADY DOWN.

OPEN YOUR EYES.

WWW.AMERICAWAKEUPNOW.NET

READ SOMETHING, GET EDUCATED. IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE.

18. Dic on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 01:05:PM said...

Well, everyone is right and also wrong. Energy prices, sub-prime loans, ARMs and overspending are all a part of the house of cards that we were calling the economy. What upsets me is when our elected leaders, financial experts and we the people say "who knew". We all should have known. It's a repeat of the last recession of only 30 years ago. Same reasons, same effect. Do we really have to do it again in 30 years, or is that the definition of stupidity?

19. Jed clever on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 01:11:PM said...

Idiots. Relatively speaking, gasoline is as cheap as ever when properly analyzed using the Consumer Price index. In 1979, gas first hit $1 per gallon in California. It is now only 3 times that. Meanwhile, a loaf of bread, a gallon of milk, and your housing costs have risen by 4 times that.

20. Bobby on Tuesday, Mar 2nd at 02:03:PM said...

The cost of fuel and the ave. american paying for it does have a major effect on the dollars that is left to buy the normal stuff needed just to get buy. When fuel cost goes up the extra dollars left to buy any extras goes away for the ave. american. To think that when fuel cost went over the $4.00 range per gallon did not effect the econemy then back up and look at what happened to folks max. out there credit cards and then not having the extra dollars to pay for that and it then went to letting other bills not get paid to just have enough to pay for the important needs such as food, water, eletc.clothes, Etc. The cost of fuel effects the cost of everything we have.

721 Comments / 37 Pages

 

Add your comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog post. First-time comment? Enter your name and e-mail address, and you'll receive an email confirming your comment and issuing you a password. Your name will be displayed with your comment, but your email address will not. To create additional comments, use that same password. Comments may contain up to three live links; line breaks and paragraphs will automatically be converted to HTML.

Poll

Rob Hahn asked, now you get to answer: What is your attitude towards owning a home vs. renting longterm?

Most Popular Stories

Follow Us

Local Homes for Sale