The March of the Sovereign Debt Crisis

The place for measured discourse about politics and current events, including developments in science and medicine.
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

The March of the Sovereign Debt Crisis

Post by Túrin Turambar »

This has come up at odd times in other threads, but given that it is continuing more or less unabated I thought it could have a thread of its own.

Greece and Ireland have now been bailed out by the Eurozone and IMF, with heavy consequences for the taxpayers of both countries. We are also getting mixed messages from the government of Portugal.

Seeing as we’re getting near the end of the year, I thought I’d start with a retrospective. I found this article on Gavin Hewitt’s blog on the BBC website today. The whole thing is worth a read, but here’s an extract:
It is early morning in Madrid. A pre-school hour. The street is narrow and dark, where the sun rarely reaches. There is already a line of people - perhaps 250 - hunched together against the morning chill. They are waiting to collect their unemployment benefit. What catches my eye is how many of them are reading. These are mainly young, intelligent people. A young woman turns her back to the camera. She is a part-time actress and doesn't want to be seen on the line. Beyond her the queue snakes around the corner and in that moment I glimpse a lost generation.

On another day I am in Dublin, at a technical college on the outskirts of the city. I am in a room with engineering students. They are bright, alive with ambition. I ask how many are considering emigrating in search of work. Every hand bar one goes up. That's the image. There is no hesitation or reluctance, only certainty. For Ireland once again the best and the brightest are heading out - a generation lost to the still new worlds of Canada and Australia.

Then in Italy, in the late year's sun. A vast crowd is walking from the Colosseum towards Piazza Venezia. They are mainly students. Many have linked arms. At their sides hang motorcycle helmets which they will wear when they confront the police. In their shoulder bags they have thunder-flashes, flares - even rocks. Some are here to fight. Many don't want to be breakers, but they will get drawn in anyway because their frustration runs deep. This is a tinder-dry generation - with youth unemployment running at over 20%. As we neared the river they chanted "if you block us we'll bring down the city!" Let Rome in Tiber fall. And later the image - the numbers, helmets firmly on, fighting the police.

Three snapshots that for me go to the heart of Europe in 2010. A story that cannot be understood through the procession of largely sterile summits. It had to be felt on the streets. A new generation is angry and resentful. In Spain unemployment remains at over 40% for those aged between 16 and 24. The stats are shocking. Hundreds of thousands of young people across Europe are not in work or in education. Many cannot afford to leave home. Most doubt they will be able to match the way of life lived by their parents.

They live in the new age of austerity - Europe's recently-acquired religion. After Greece was revealed as having faked its accounts the markets cast a critical eye on the country's deficit and forced up its borrowing costs. Greece stood on the verge of bankruptcy and had to be bailed out. Europe took fright and austerity package after austerity package was unveiled. They were deemed necessary to appease the markets but, in truth, Europe had been living beyond its means, cheered on by an indulgent political class careless of future generations.
The future of the European Union is shaky. It seems certain that another country, sooner or later, will need a bailout. Who will it be? And for how long will the rest of the Eurozone (notably, Germany, rapidly rising to the status of de facto leader) be willing to pick up the tab?

And, of course, we can’t ignore the looming deficits over Japan and the United States. 2011 may be a critical year for the western world.
elfshadow
Dancing in the moonlight
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:36 am
Contact:

Post by elfshadow »

This has less to do with Europe specifically than with the global recession, but I have to say that as a young person, I find myself feeling increasingly bitter that my generation has been so acutely affected by the financial decisions of the generations ahead of us. It has happened in nearly every Western country, and far more so in Europe than in the States. Tuition at public universities is increasing to pay for public debt (I can't help but to think at this point, "The debt that someone else accrued"), and then upon graduation there are fewer and fewer good jobs available to young, entry-level workers. In the US, we are paying taxes to a Social Security system that may not even be solvent by the time we are of retirement age. It is difficult to blame young people in Europe for rioting, even though I doubt that would ever be a for of protest I'd participate in. I was shocked when I read about the tuition increases in the UK, for example. The proposal is to triple student fees. Triple them. So students in the UK will pay three times the money to attend university, with only a small tlikelihood upon graduation of finding a good job. I can understand their anger.

It's hard for me to read my own visceral reaction to all of this. After all, the Silent Generation went through a much worse youth-hood than my generation is going through now, without the angry reaction. Probably, people in my generation had a greater sense of entitlement to begin with, growing up in the 90s, and so we are more acutely feeling the effects of any injustices. Still, it boggles my mind that in the US, education is one of the first areas to be subject to budget cuts, while any mention of raising the retirement age (even when people are living much longer!) is met with fierce opposition. And it is my generation and the Gen Xers that will likely have to deal with the majority of the deficit, particularly in the US where a real solution is being pushed into the future to a greater extent than in Europe.

To the topic more at hand, I read the article in Time magazine a couple of weeks ago about Ireland's drastic financial problems. It is sad to see a country that just recently started to become a big economic player suffer so much from the global recession. Still, I tend to think that the resilience of the Irish people will be of great help in getting through their financial woes.
"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived." - HDT
Image
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Post by Túrin Turambar »

elfshadow wrote: I was shocked when I read about the tuition increases in the UK, for example. The proposal is to triple student fees. Triple them. So students in the UK will pay three times the money to attend university, with only a small tlikelihood upon graduation of finding a good job. I can understand their anger.
We’ve gone over this pretty heavily in the U.K. politics thread, but I don’t agree that the increases are in any way unjust. The cap is still nine thousand pounds per year, and the students can still borrow the money from the government. And as compensation, the repayment threshold income has risen to £21k per year. That’s still a good deal by world standards, comparable to, for example, the Australian HECS system. Basically the fee increase amounts to a higher tax on educated middle- to high-income earners, which I have no problem with.

The U.K.’s legislators are, at least, showing some courage and resilience which is distinctly lacking in their counterparts in Washington. I don’t have all that much faith in the Republicans, but I really hope the upcoming Congress will do better than the last.

That said, the austerity measures in the U.K. must be matched by some sort of sustained economic growth for them to be effective. In particular, to soak up public sector layoffs and people who will be looking to enter employment as a result of their benefits being cut. But if things turn out OK, they may well have averted disaster. Italy and Spain probably won’t be so lucky.

ETA: I should mention, though, that I agree with the broader point that the older generation has mortgaged the younger.
elfshadow
Dancing in the moonlight
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:36 am
Contact:

Post by elfshadow »

Lord_Morningstar wrote:
elfshadow wrote: I was shocked when I read about the tuition increases in the UK, for example. The proposal is to triple student fees. Triple them. So students in the UK will pay three times the money to attend university, with only a small tlikelihood upon graduation of finding a good job. I can understand their anger.
We’ve gone over this pretty heavily in the U.K. politics thread, but I don’t agree that the increases are in any way unjust. The cap is still nine thousand pounds per year, and the students can still borrow the money from the government. And as compensation, the repayment threshold income has risen to £21k per year. That’s still a good deal by world standards, comparable to, for example, the Australian HECS system. Basically the fee increase amounts to a higher tax on educated middle- to high-income earners, which I have no problem with.
Don't want to spend too much time on this if it's in another thread, but I'll make a quick response. Certainly students in the UK have a much better time than students in the US, where you are lucky to get federal assistance and where repayment is not contingent upon employment, but I still think the drastic increase in fees was a little unreasonable. When students are eventually employed and making enough to begin repayment, they will be burdened with debt for much longer than they are now. Also, while tuition increases are quite common, reducing tuition is almost unheard of (at least in the US). I don't like the precedent of tripling tuition.
The U.K.’s legislators are, at least, showing some courage and resilience which is distinctly lacking in their counterparts in Washington. I don’t have all that much faith in the Republicans, but I really hope the upcoming Congress will do better than the last.
I agree with you fully. It is frustrating as an American to see many European countries (the damn socialists, for Pete's sake! ;) ) impose strict austerity measures while the US has barely begun to discuss the deficit beyond vague generalities. I don't agree with most Republican politics, but they have a much higher likelihood of passing a deficit reduction plan than the Democrats simply as a result of the party's cohesiveness--and, frankly, stubbornness. But we'll see. I hope they can take a lesson from their European conservative counterparts.
"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived." - HDT
Image
User avatar
River
bioalchemist
Posts: 13431
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:08 am
Location: the dry land

Post by River »

elfshadow wrote:This has less to do with Europe specifically than with the global recession, but I have to say that as a young person, I find myself feeling increasingly bitter that my generation has been so acutely affected by the financial decisions of the generations ahead of us.
I know what you mean.

A few years back, I was late to the new grad student recruiting dinner. It was a buffet and the food was supposed to be free. By the time I got there, though, almost everything was gone and the vegetarian dishes had been completely eaten, down to the last noodle. So I took off and tried my luck with the off-campus student dives, but there was some sort of to-do going on and every place was packed and if I tried to buy food I'd miss thenew grad student recruiting poster session. So I grumped back to campus and bought a pack of PopTarts from a vending machine and ate those. And hoped I'd find something decent at the poster session, but the food was pretty scarce there too. The way I felt that night, getting gipped out of a free dinner, crowded out of a good paid dinner, and then settling for trash, is sort of how I feel about my future in the next five years. Except, when it comes to the future, the stakes are a few orders of magnitude higher than they were for my dinner that night.

I try not to dwell on it though, because it's pointless. If I sit around and mope, I get nowhere. I just have to accept that I'll never have what my parents have and get on with it.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6806
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Post by Dave_LF »

elfshadow wrote:I don't agree with most Republican politics, but they have a much higher likelihood of passing a deficit reduction plan than the Democrats simply as a result of the party's cohesiveness--and, frankly, stubbornness. But we'll see. I hope they can take a lesson from their European conservative counterparts.
The GOP has a reputation as the party of fiscal responsibility, but they don't deserve it. Deficits have risen much more under Republican administrations than Democratic ones. The fact is that no one is going to pass austerity measures in the US, not until austerity finds us anyway. Ponzi could tell you why not. He and Alexander Tytler. And I honestly think that someone; probably lots of someones, has decided that the US can get away with it because we're exceptional and all that. Or more seriously, that the money system is going to come apart anyway, and that it will come down to a game of who has the most actual material wealth. If that's what you're expecting, it makes sense to spend money on material things as fast as you can while it's still worth something.
User avatar
vison
Best friends forever
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:33 pm
Location: Over there.

Post by vison »

Dave_LF wrote:
elfshadow wrote:I don't agree with most Republican politics, but they have a much higher likelihood of passing a deficit reduction plan than the Democrats simply as a result of the party's cohesiveness--and, frankly, stubbornness. But we'll see. I hope they can take a lesson from their European conservative counterparts.
The GOP has a reputation as the party of fiscal responsibility, but they don't deserve it. Deficits have risen much more under Republican administrations than Democratic ones. The fact is that no one is going to pass austerity measures in the US, not until austerity finds us anyway. Ponzi could tell you why not. He and Alexander Tytler. And I honestly think that someone; probably lots of someones, has decided that the US can get away with it because we're exceptional and all that. Or more seriously, that the money system is going to come apart anyway, and that it will come down to a game of who has the most actual material wealth. If that's what you're expecting, it makes sense to spend money on material things as fast as you can while it's still worth something.
Some good points there, Dave. :)
Dig deeper.
User avatar
Hachimitsu
Formerly Wilma
Posts: 942
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:36 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by Hachimitsu »

Just wanted to post I am reading this thread and thank you L_M for starting it. I don't know enough about economics to contribute meaningfully.
Image
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Post by Túrin Turambar »

From Business Insider, 16 U.S. cities facing bankruptcy if they don’t make deep cuts in 2011.

NYC, San Diego, San Francisco, Chicago, Cincinnati and San Jose are all in the list, although their shortfalls aren’t too serious. Even so, they’ve been making steady cuts which will probably continue. But some are in real trouble. Camden, NJ, is facing a 15% budget shortfall and is responding by laying off half its police force. Hamtramck, MI, with a 17% shortfall, has been bailed out with a loan from the already cash-strapped state after the city controller sought bankruptcy. Central Falls, RI, with a 22% shortfall, is in state receivership. And Paterson, NJ, has a 24% shortfall and is talking about ‘last resorts’.
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6806
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Post by Dave_LF »

Add to that the reams of smaller municipalities that have been going bankrupt more or less under the radar. The federal government can always print money, but cities and states cannot.
User avatar
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Posts: 1076
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:01 pm

Post by Cenedril_Gildinaur »

elfshadow wrote:This has less to do with Europe specifically than with the global recession, but I have to say that as a young person, I find myself feeling increasingly bitter that my generation has been so acutely affected by the financial decisions of the generations ahead of us. It has happened in nearly every Western country, and far more so in Europe than in the States. Tuition at public universities is increasing to pay for public debt (I can't help but to think at this point, "The debt that someone else accrued"), and then upon graduation there are fewer and fewer good jobs available to young, entry-level workers. In the US, we are paying taxes to a Social Security system that may not even be solvent by the time we are of retirement age. It is difficult to blame young people in Europe for rioting, even though I doubt that would ever be a for of protest I'd participate in. I was shocked when I read about the tuition increases in the UK, for example. The proposal is to triple student fees. Triple them. So students in the UK will pay three times the money to attend university, with only a small likelihood upon graduation of finding a good job. I can understand their anger.
All true.

The X-ers (13th Gen) are struggling to pay for everything, and the Y-ers (Millennial Gen) are struggling to simply find work and pay for school. Meanwhile every effort is made to sustain everyone else that came before.

It is a given that Gen X will be the first generation in American History to be overall poorer than the previous generation, paying both for the retirement of the Boomers and to support the next "Silent Generation" who are born after the Millennials.
elfshadow wrote:It's hard for me to read my own visceral reaction to all of this. After all, the Silent Generation went through a much worse youth-hood than my generation is going through now, without the angry reaction. Probably, people in my generation had a greater sense of entitlement to begin with, growing up in the 90s, and so we are more acutely feeling the effects of any injustices. Still, it boggles my mind that in the US, education is one of the first areas to be subject to budget cuts, while any mention of raising the retirement age (even when people are living much longer!) is met with fierce opposition. And it is my generation and the Gen Xers that will likely have to deal with the majority of the deficit, particularly in the US where a real solution is being pushed into the future to a greater extent than in Europe.
They didn't have an angry reaction? I wouldn't go so far as to say that. But the experiences of the former silent generation are not fresh in the minds of the public.

During the Great Depression One, Hitler rose to power in Germany, Franco rose to power in Spain, Mussolini rose to power in Italy, and Roosevelt rose to power in the USA. I'd hardly say that means that people in that era reacted in a calm and rational manner. In Europe, there were "general strikes", a concept that boggles the American mind.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
-- Samuel Adams
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Post by Túrin Turambar »

I’m reading an interesting article in Vanity Fair on the Irish economic crisis, which is appropriate, given that the count in the Irish general election is currently underway (just how long are the odds for Fianna Fáil?).

Michael Lewis, the author, makes the observation that “left alone in a dark room with a pile of the money, the Irish decided that what they really wanted to do with it was buy Ireland. From each other.”

So while Iceland suffered from reckless speculation in banking, Ireland suffered from reckless speculation in real estate. In both cases, I get the impression that the fact that those economies are small and somewhat isolated helped in allowing them to sink so deeply into an unsustainable path to (mostly illusory) prosperity.

The level of distortion is pretty staggering. For example, at the height of the boom, more than a fifth of the Irish workforce was employed building houses, accounting for a quarter of Ireland’s GDP (!?). At one stage as many new houses were being built in Ireland as in the U.K., 15 times as populous. From 1994 to 2010, some Dublin homes increases fivefold in value, while in some cases rents had fallen to 1% of the purchase price. There were million-dollar homes available for a little over two hundred dollars a week.

And so from 2000 onwards exports stalled and the economy basically started to revolve around everyone building homes for each other. And the banks then sank half the country’s entire national savings into property loans. It was a truly spectacular bubble.

All said, though, I think there’s some good news – the Irish crisis was caused by recklessness on behalf of a few, not deep underlying issues, so I think that the chance of an Irish recovery is fairly good. But it offers an important lesson nonetheless.
User avatar
vison
Best friends forever
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:33 pm
Location: Over there.

Post by vison »

The Irish government guaranteed the banks' loans, not the deposits. So the Irish taxpayers are on the hook for all those loans.

It was one of the weirdest things any government ever did.
Dig deeper.
User avatar
Alatar
of Vinyamar
Posts: 10596
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Post by Alatar »

As with all things, its substantially more complicated than it appears. House prices in Ireland were unnaturally low for decades. When I was first married, the ratio of wages to mortgage was much the same as it was for my parents. The most any bank would give as a mortgage was 90% of the purchase price. You were expected to save the first 10%. Your maximum Mortgage for a first time buyer was 1.5 times your combined annual salary, or 2.5 times one salary. Clare and I were married 15 years ago and spent IR£54,000 on our house, £5000 of which was provided from our combined savings, which was a real stretch financially. We were earning about £35,000 combined salary at the time. Interest rates were at 7%, down from a high of about 14% 5 years previously, during which time my brother almost lost his house.

Fast forward 10 year later. The Celtic tiger was roaring, we all had more money than we knew what to do with, so we poured it into cars and houses. Mortgage interest rates were at 1.5% and banks were offering 110% mortgages (to allow for furnishing and decorating). Money was cheap and housing prices were rocketing. People were panicking to get on the property ladder before prices rose too high. People in the Dublin area were buying houses in Kildare for half a million euro because an apartment in Dublin would cost that much, and commuting from outside the county.

Then Lehman Brothers went. The domino effect took our banking system with it. With a population of only 3.5 Million, and a huge percentage of them with large mortgages on very low interest rates, we were in trouble immediately. Because of the banking crisis, Developers could no longer continue to function with no capital available. Those who were lucky to have finished houses available sold them off cheap to get liquidity. Those who had half finished developments couldn't raise the cash to finish them. Housing prices started to plummet. The massive industry of builders, plumbers, electricians etc were suddenly unemployed and with huge negative equity on their houses.

I bought my house for IR£54000, or roughy €70,000 in 1996. In 2006 it was worth €350,000. Its now worth about €240,000 at most, maybe as low as €200,000. Its hard to know, because nobody can buy. The bank guarantee didn't work as it was hoped to. The Banks don't have the liquidity to offer mortgages, and the developers are mostly bankrupt. Their employees are on the dole. Their unfinished developments are ghost estates because nobody has the capital to finish them or the mortage to buy them.

The Bank Guarantee went too far, but it absolutely needed to happen. Without it we would have had the Irish equivalent of the Wall Street Crash. As it is, we're not far off that. People are buying cars again, but housing is dead. Unemployment is at 10% and rising. We have a tough 10 years ahead of us.
Image
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
User avatar
vison
Best friends forever
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:33 pm
Location: Over there.

Post by vison »

You had the crash but you're still stuck with the debt. It's awful.

The previous situation, where you describe how people used to buy houses, is the way people are supposed to buy houses. You are supposed to save a down payment and buy something that you can afford - as in proportion of your income, etc. That will always be true, nothing can change that, no matter how often people try. When easy money policies took hold, the crash was inevitable, and certainly not only in Ireland!

The worst of it is that even sober, sensible people get hammered - the ones who bought wisely into property they could afford. The market value of their property drops along with the rest. But IF you bought your house to live in, and not as some kind of "investment", you can wait it out and eventually things will come right. Providing you're working and can keep making those mortgage payments. :( People who used their houses as cash machines? Got what they had coming, unfortunately.

In Canada we had a brief flirtation with 100% mortgages but it's over. Our banking system is pretty old-fashioned. And we also had a fling with very long-term mortgages, up to 40 years. Those are gone. But the trouble isn't over yet, the long-term effects of 2008 are by no means done.

Ireland was not the only nation that went mad on property/mortgages, obviously. But being so small and with such an undiversified economy it hit terribly hard. With the best will in the world it is hard to see just who was going to buy all those houses.

During the 80s, some mortgage rates were at 22%, some even higher. It was insane. We were paying 25% for an operating loan on the farm - and because we had no mortgage at the time, we were able to keep going. Otherwise we would have been out of business, like so many others. My sister lived in Toronto at the time and she got caught up in the real estate mess, bought an unbuilt downtown condo. "Real estate CAN'T drop in Toronto!!!!!!!!!" was the cry. Well, it did. Big time. She lost more than $250,000 - being on the hook for the mortgage even though she never set foot in the finished building. She declared bankruptcy.

It is an appalling thing that no one has gone to jail over the financial crash. There were frauds on a massive scale, so huge that it's probably beyond human ability to sort them out. Those men bloody near brought the whole world to its knees - and they still live in their grand houses and get flown to work in private helicopters.

While I am ordinarily opposed to the death penalty, I sometimes think they should all be taken out and shot. Let god sort them out.
Dig deeper.
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Post by yovargas »

"Real estate CAN'T drop in Toronto!!!!!!!!!" was the cry.
Several people were telling me that here during the peak madness as people tried to convince me I should buy some big house. Fortunately, my wiser brother advised that, um, yes, they can drop. And if they do? You're screwed.
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
Aravar
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:15 pm

Post by Aravar »

vison wrote:You had the crash but you're still stuck with the debt. It's awful.

The previous situation, where you describe how people used to buy houses, is the way people are supposed to buy houses. You are supposed to save a down payment and buy something that you can afford - as in proportion of your income, etc. That will always be true, nothing can change that, no matter how often people try. When easy money policies took hold, the crash was inevitable, and certainly not only in Ireland!

The worst of it is that even sober, sensible people get hammered - the ones who bought wisely into property they could afford. The market value of their property drops along with the rest. But IF you bought your house to live in, and not as some kind of "investment", you can wait it out and eventually things will come right. Providing you're working and can keep making those mortgage payments. :( People who used their houses as cash machines? Got what they had coming, unfortunately.

In Canada we had a brief flirtation with 100% mortgages but it's over. Our banking system is pretty old-fashioned. And we also had a fling with very long-term mortgages, up to 40 years. Those are gone. But the trouble isn't over yet, the long-term effects of 2008 are by no means done.

Ireland was not the only nation that went mad on property/mortgages, obviously. But being so small and with such an undiversified economy it hit terribly hard. With the best will in the world it is hard to see just who was going to buy all those houses.

During the 80s, some mortgage rates were at 22%, some even higher. It was insane. We were paying 25% for an operating loan on the farm - and because we had no mortgage at the time, we were able to keep going. Otherwise we would have been out of business, like so many others. My sister lived in Toronto at the time and she got caught up in the real estate mess, bought an unbuilt downtown condo. "Real estate CAN'T drop in Toronto!!!!!!!!!" was the cry. Well, it did. Big time. She lost more than $250,000 - being on the hook for the mortgage even though she never set foot in the finished building. She declared bankruptcy.

It is an appalling thing that no one has gone to jail over the financial crash. There were frauds on a massive scale, so huge that it's probably beyond human ability to sort them out. Those men bloody near brought the whole world to its knees - and they still live in their grand houses and get flown to work in private helicopters.

While I am ordinarily opposed to the death penalty, I sometimes think they should all be taken out and shot. Let god sort them out.
I agree with just about every word of this, except that fraud was not only going on at the top.

In the UK there seems to an attempt to prop houses at their insane levels by putting interest rates to the lowest for 300 years.

The question many people need to ask is "Could you afford the house you live in at today's prices?" If not, there's a long way down.
User avatar
vison
Best friends forever
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:33 pm
Location: Over there.

Post by vison »

Considering that for centuries people counted on rents or government bonds at 3 or 4 %, returns on investment higher than that aren't something you can or should count on. Those are realistic numbers that were, and can, be sustained.

The rule is: if if sounds too good to be true, it isn't.

The other rule is: when ordinary people, working people, start speculating in property, the bubble is about to burst.

Another rule is: do NOT take out "home equity" loans, they are really mortgages at usurious interest rates and if you do manage to pay them off you are still mortgaging your restaurant bills and new shoes for 25 years.

As Aravar says, fraud was prevalent throughout the financial world. But I'm afraid we just have to recognize that and move along. No one is interested in dealing with it.

All an ordinary person can do is BE CAREFUL and trust no one.

I used to be on the board of our local credit union. We had to approve every loan over a certain amount and we had to approve EVERY mortgage. It was quite the education and I am glad I did it.
Dig deeper.
User avatar
Nin
Ni Dieu, ni maître
Posts: 1832
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 7:19 pm
Location: Somewhere only we go

Post by Nin »

Well, in Switzerland you have to have 20% of the house price put aside, or the banks do not give credit. Some French banks also working in the region accept only 10%.

But interest rates are terribly low - and have been for ages. Only to get the mortgage, the banks calculates with a hypothetic interest rate which is a lot higher. Only when you could pay this, you get credit.

Real estate prices are absolutely crazy. The house I bought with my ex, we bought it for 750.000 Swiss Francs (now, roughly same amount in $), added a room - now, 8 years later its worth has almost doubled. The property next door to where I live now was sold for 11mio francs. And it needs a complete renovation.

The only time, I ever saw real estates prices drop was in the 90ies during a few years - Matthias and I bought our houses then, at any other moment we could not have afforded.

This has huge disadvantages too: people with a "normal" income never manage those 20% and can't buy real estate. Or they have to take money from their pension founds and have to sell when the get old. As most people rent, rents are so expensive, it's the biggest problem in the area.

So far, Switzerland has been so preserved from the crisis, that I wonder when it will touch us here. But, so far, even the calculation for our pension founds are positive. This can change, but I do feel very sheltered.
"nolite te bastardes carborundorum".
User avatar
Túrin Turambar
Posts: 6153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:37 am
Location: Melbourne, Victoria

Post by Túrin Turambar »

The Prime Minister of Portugal has resigned after Parliament rejected his proposed austerity budget. The opposition parties claim that the measures go too far. He claims that this will inevitably lead to Portugal needing a bail-out.
Post Reply