Follow this topicFollow this topic Knowledge » The economy

Greedy Bankers Are Bailed Out Yet Again

Bruce Jackson
by Lovemoney Staff Bruce Jackson on 19 January 2009  |  Comments 22 comments

All the pieces are now in place. Economic stability will come. It will still take time, but it is coming. But watch out for Global Financial Crisis II.

Four months into the global financial crisis proper, and we're still no closer to solving `the problem'.

Summarising how we got here, in a rather long nutshell.

 Greedy banks lent too much money to greedy consumers, often in the form of massive mortgages to people who couldn't afford them over the long-term.

 Some greedy and some naïve consumers bid higher and higher prices for property. The greedy banks happily lent more and more money to greedy and naïve consumers.

 Greedy banks and greedy bankers repackaged pools of mortgages into exotic, opaque and ridiculously-named `structured products' which were then sold onto other greedy banks and generally greedy yet stupid financial institutions. Greedy bankers were paid massive bonuses, the bankers.

 Not surprisingly, in hindsight, greedy consumers struggled to maintain their mortgage repayments as interest rates rose. As house prices fell, the `structured products' slowly and surely turned toxic. This is turn forced the greedy bankers to write off billions of pounds, dollars and euros, amongst other currencies, in losses.

 House prices continued to fall. Greedy consumers felt desperately indebted as many struggled to meet their monthly mortgage repayments. Greedy banks felt desperately indebted as they stopped lending in the face of massive mortgage and `structured product' losses.

 As desperate banks stopped lending, the economy started contracting. Unemployment started rising. More desperately indebted home owners missed their mortgage repayments. House prices kept falling.

 Desperate banks, despite raising billions in new money, couldn't afford to lend, even to credit-worthy consumers and businesses because the value of their existing assets - mortgage and `structured products' -- was still falling.

 The downward spiral continues, down, down, down.

`The Problem' Hasn't Been Solved, Yet

Policymakers around the globe have attempted to tackle `the problem' -- the problem being falling asset values. Interest rates of not much above 0% haven't solved `the problem', yet. Injecting billions into the banks hasn't solved `the problem', yet. Massive government spending programmes haven't solved `the problem', yet.

The latest attempt to solve `the problem', according to FT.com, involves the government insuring banks "against potential losses on risky loans in return for firm commitments to increase lending to credit-starved consumers and businesses."

Just like a normal insurance arrangement, the government is expected to charge a fee to the banks for insuring their loans. As to how this insurance premium will be calculated is anyone's guess.

Pouring Petrol Onto The Fire

Will this solve `the problem'? Remember, `the problem' is falling asset values. I don't know. It's a creditable attempt, although one that is easy to pick holes in, the biggest hole being that lending more money in an already overly indebted economy is akin to throwing petrol on a fast burning fire.

Many respected economists, including Chairman of the US Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke, have said the key to stabilising the economy is to restore the flow of credit from banks to credit-worthy consumers and businesses.

This is exactly what the latest bank bail-out is attempting to achieve. For banks, their asset values will stop falling because government insurance caps their losses. It won't mean all asset values stop falling. For example, I still believe house prices will keep falling, because they are still unaffordable based on historical multiple of incomes.

Global Financial Crisis II

Of course, you can think of all sorts of undesirable outcomes from this whole sorry debacle we conveniently call the global financial crisis. For example, `bailed out' banks are forced to lend money. Greedy consumers obtain a £400,000 mortgage from majority government owned Royal Bank of Scotland (LSE: RBS), paying interest of just 3.5%. Today those repayments, based on their current salary, are affordable. Tomorrow, when interest rates rise again, as they surely will, those mortgage repayments become unaffordable. Cue Global Financial Crisis II.

Back to `the problem' - today's problem that is, of falling asset prices. It won't be solved by the latest banking bail-out. But it will likely help. What with record low interest rates, massive government spending programmes, and now banks having their losses capped and at the same time committing to lend to the credit-worthy, all the pieces for firstly stabilising the economy and then growing it again are in place.

Now we just need patience and time.

More: Naive 20-Year Olds Make The Best Investors | My 5 Stock Market Resolutions For 2009

Now might be a great time to check out just how low you can get your mortgage rate. Try the Motley Fool's no-fee mortgage service for starters. All you've got to lose is your existing high mortgage rate.

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (22)

  • carloswhizz
    Love rating 0
    carloswhizz said

    Surely the main UK problem is that we are too dependent on the financial services sector in our economy and that it has become an over priced casino?

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • turnpike01
    Love rating 0
    turnpike01 said

    I agree totally with the above.Since time immemorial,Banks have held this total superiority complex over everyone,be they pauper or royalty.Bankers have to be taught a lesson.They must be forced to accept responsibility for their actions.Their vastly accumulated wealth achieved on poor advice and reckless granting of foolish loans must be taken from them.Imagine they still expect and GET bonuses after all the mayhem they have caused.Sack the lot of them and give the opportunity to people willing to do the right things.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Chorlton1
    Love rating 61
    Chorlton1 said

    I always thought banks were based on savers loaning the bank money at a favorable interest rate and the banks then used these funds to lend to borrowers. If we are getting a poor interest rate on our savings this doesn't attract savers so the banks won't have sufficient funds to lend to borrowers. Perhaps I am over simplifying things and someone can put me straight.

    I have always lived within my means but it depresses me to hear of friends who struggle to get by approaching banks for a loan and are then encouraged to lend more than they originally intended. If someone approaches a bank for a loan their ability to repay the debt should be carefully assessed money shouldn't be handed out like sweeties.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Terrapin1
    Love rating 0
    Terrapin1 said

    Is this a good time to say 'Told you so' ?

    My thoughts on the banks are well known over the years, but the problem is not the complexity of the instruments- it is the clear lack of understanding by bank bosses, who draw fat salaries while they are utterly out of their depth.

    I heard that(allegedly) RBS bosses are so stupid they don't know how to hedge their own holdings-that's like a mechanic not knowing how to fix his own brakes.

    The old boy network that has kept the city afloat, has had its day- we own these underachievers, and should be allowed to pursue them for overpayment, undeserved bonuses and Fat Cat expenses.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • thriddle
    Love rating 0
    thriddle said

    Your headline repeats the media myth that the bailout is for the benefit of the greedy bankers.

    The bailout is to prevent the total collapse of the economy.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MindTheBlog
    Love rating 0
    MindTheBlog said

    I think the main outstanding issue is still worring people.

    That is, what policies are being put into place both local government level, and Global, to avoid the same thing happening again?

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • peepobaby
    Love rating 49
    peepobaby said

    As far as I understand it, this insurance will only extend to new loans made into the UK and not old loans which were made all over the world.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • bobfruit
    Love rating 0
    bobfruit said

    I presume the article means £400,000 mortgage, not "400,00". I'd love to have just a £40k mortgage (even WITH a comma in the wrong place)! :o)

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Yorkstyke
    Love rating 89
    Yorkstyke said

    So where does this article fit in with your "Give Yourself The Mother Of All Pay Rises" article Bruce?

    As I see it, one contradicts the other.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Chorlton1
    Love rating 61
    Chorlton1 said

    The priciple of how a bank works is simple as I stated in my previous post however the problem is Banks can legally extend considerably more credit than they have cash. The people that should be pumping money into banks are savers not the Government using tax payers money and for that to happen savers need to be rewarded with more attractive rates of interest.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • TMFDonna
    Love rating 1
    TMFDonna said

    Sorry Bobfruit - that was a typo! I know what you mean though... If only... :)

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • churchill123
    Love rating 0
    churchill123 said

    It would be a more pleasant surprise if the Government decided to plough £200bn into tax cuts rather than £200bn burden for later. That would really release some liquidity, and I'm sure most people would be far happier about it.

    Conspiracy theorists will be having a field day with this shower for years to come.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • LastChip
    Love rating 92
    LastChip said

    This whole sorry tail is doomed to fail. I've said it before and I'll say it again: just like water, this situation needs to find its own level and no amount of government intervention is going to bypass that.

    Throwing more money at an already astronomical debt problem is indeed feeding the fire and that's more about short term saving political arses, than any economic strategy.

    I really don't think that those that say, it's all going to be all right, comprehend the scale of the problem.

    Those that say "heads should fall", damn right they should, and those individuals should be banned from ever working in finance again and, never be allowed to be directors of any company at all.

    Directors have a "duty of care". It's blatantly obvious they have no understanding of what that means!

    But you watch; the old school boys will close ranks and a couple of years down the line, they'll all be doing it again. As I said elsewhere here, the whole system is corrupt, but I wouldn't hold your breath for it to be decontaminated.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Ashfield100
    Love rating 0
    Ashfield100 said

    Where are shares heading in all this?. The daily swings are massive. We must be heading below the 3500 mark for the footsie. The next bull market seems a long way off.

    Report on 19 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • kazbert
    Love rating 0
    kazbert said

    There is little confidence in the economy, people are at risk of losing their jobs as businesses are not supported by government and the banks and are shedding jobs to protect and stabilise themselves as much as possible. People will not make steps to buy property or "spend our way out of recession" under such uncertain conditions.

    Report on 20 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • LOJON
    Love rating 0
    LOJON said

    thriddle "Your headline repeats the media myth that the bailout is for the benefit of the greedy bankers.

    The bailout is to prevent the total collapse of the economy."

    Actually the bailout is to prevent the total collapse of Gordon Brown's job - being one of the best outcomes of the situation after 11 years of his meddling and dabbling and shafting the British taxpaying public.

    HAHA

    LOJO

    Report on 20 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • PRMARJORAM
    Love rating 0
    PRMARJORAM said

    Chorlton, its ironic that savers only get good interest rates when there is alot of others out there spending and borrowing.

    Report on 20 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • inki12
    Love rating 0
    inki12 said

    regarding throwing petrol on the fire. i was a saver but have decided to spend now as with this latest bailout my savings are going to lose even more value. Lets get rid of our savings before GB loses us the lot

    Report on 20 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • loocan
    Love rating 0
    loocan said

    With interest rates at 2% and my cash isa paying 6.1% for the next 15 months (i`m lucky tied in @6.1% for 2 yrs)) how are these banks going to cover this?

    Report on 20 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • LastChip
    Love rating 92
    LastChip said

    "With interest rates at 2% and my cash isa paying 6.1% for the next 15 months (i`m lucky tied in @6.1% for 2 yrs)) how are these banks going to cover this?"

    By screwing everyone else!

    Report on 20 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • BenDoverForTaxes
    Love rating 0
    BenDoverForTaxes said

    If greedy bankers, then also greedy shareholders! How long would the Chief Executive of a bank have lasted last year if he had been cautious and returned less profit compared to the competition?

    Banks work within the free market - governments are there to apply the morality.

    Gordon Brown is angry at RBS because they exposed him and his policies. He has been recklessly spending without regard for where the money was coming from - didn't he think to ask himself why everyone is richer? Is he THAT deluded that he thinks he is a financial alchemist?

    This is just human nature the have-nots cry about the haves until they have, then suddenly, they don't care about the have-nots.

    Report on 20 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • DavidJHearn
    Love rating 0
    DavidJHearn said

    FAO Chorlton1 and any who think banks rely foremost upon savers' money:

    http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279&q=money+as+debt

    95% of all money is created as debt by banks. Only 5% of money is created by the mint.

    It doesn't matter what form money takes, what matters is how money is created. Whether paper, metal, or electronic, more than 95% of the world's money is CREATED by private banks as DEBT i.e. conjured from thin air. Banks DO NOT just (as is commonly believed) lend out other people's money. For the most part, banks lend money they don't have. Thus we are chained to an ever growing debt as more loans are conjured by a closed loop of banks.

    "Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave with them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your slavery, let them continue to create deposits."

    - Sir Josiah Stamp. [Civil servant, industrialist, economist, statistician and a director of the Bank of England, at a talk in Texas during the 1920s, in the run up to the Great Depression.]

    Report on 22 January 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 27Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 27 months (2.98% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee reduced from 3.9% to 2.98% (T&Cs apply).

Barclaycard 26Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 26 months (2.47% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee reduced from 3.5% to 2.47% (T&Cs apply)

NatWest Platinum MasterCard

0% for 26 months (2.65% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.95% PA (variable).
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV2