Big Government Responsible for Housing Bubble

 I wish more people understood the substance of this recent article from Ron Paul:

Big Government Responsible for Housing Bubble

The House passed two bills attempting to rehabilitate the housing and mortgage market this week.  There doesn’t seem to be any shortage of criticism and blame for the bad decisions, and rightly so.  Lenders and banks do share much of the blame for the overheated market.  Lending standards were relaxed, or even abandoned altogether, creating an exaggerated pool of homebuyers that led to ballooning home prices that many, especially real estate investors, expected to continue forever.  Now that the bubble has burst, the losses are staggering.

However, many in Washington fail to realize it was government intervention that brought on the current economic malaise in the first place.  The Federal Reserve’s artificially low interest rates created the loose, easy credit that ignited a voracious appetite in the banks for borrowers.  People made these lending and buying decisions based on market conditions that were wildly manipulated by government.  But part of sound financial management should be recognizing untenable or falsified economic conditions and adjusting risk accordingly.  Many banks failed to do that and are now looking to taxpayers to pick up the pieces.  This is wrong-headed and unfair, but Congress is attempting to do it anyway.

These housing bills address the crisis in exactly the wrong way, by seeking to hide the problem with more disastrous government bail-outs and interventions.  One measure, HR 5830 the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) Housing Stabilization and Homeowner Retention Act would allow the FHA to guarantee as much as $300 billion worth of refinanced home loans for those facing threat of foreclosure.  HR 5818 the Neighborhood Stabilization Act, would provide $15 billion in loans and grants to localities to purchase and renovate foreclosed homes with the object of then selling or renting out those homes.  Thankfully, President Bush has vowed to veto both of these bills.  It is neither morally right nor fiscally wise to socialize private losses in this way.

The solution is for government to stop micromanaging the economy and let the market adjust, as painful as that will be for some.  We should not force taxpayers, including renters and more frugal homeowners, to switch places with the speculators and take on those same risks that bankrupted them.  It is a terrible idea to spread the financial crisis any wider or deeper than it already is, and to prolong the agony years into the future.  Socializing the losses now will only create more unintended consequences that will give new excuses for further government interventions in the future. This is how government grows – by claiming to correct the mistakes it earlier created, all the while constantly shaking down the taxpayer.  The market needs a chance to correct itself, and Congress needs to avoid making the situation worse by pretending to ride to the rescue.

The only change I would make is to note that, despite its intentionally misleading name, the Federal Reserve is not a government entity; it’s a privately owned bank.

By the way, if everybody wants “change”, and everybody is worried about the economy, why does the Utah GOP (and the GOP in general) go out of their way to ensure that the only presidential candidate that is talking about meaningful change at the very root of our financial problems gets no serious consideration from the mainstream.  Ron Paul has been talking about sound monetary policy for years; and even thought the bubble has burst (making the validity of his tenets even more painfully obvious), he still gets no love from the powers that be at the Utah Republican Party Convention.

Be sure to follow Ron Paul’s weekly columns. They really are excellent.

If you liked this post, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

3 Comments

  • By Dyllionaire, May 14, 2008 @ 9:42 am

    Ron says: It is neither morally right nor fiscally wise to socialize private losses in this way.

    I agree. If those that suffered private losses are bailed out, how will they learn. It is a simple fact of life that people have to go through bad times. That is the only way to grow and become better.

    For the United States to become financially stronger, we have to have bursts. I say bring it on!

    Oh yeah, I’m also writing in Ron Paul for 2008.

  • By Andrew Jorgensen, May 14, 2008 @ 11:43 pm

    Ron is using the government’s bail-out as leverage to convince us that government regulation of markets is ALWAYS a bad thing. But the mortgage crisis was not caused by artificially low interest rates. As you (indirectly) point out yourself the Fed is really just a bank, a participant in the market not an outside force.

    The real culprit is greedy members of the market offering loans to people who did not qualify for them. Lenders lied to investors and and encouraged their clients to lie with them. This should have been illegal.

    In general market forces can be trusted to be more efficient than government manipulation. And a bail-out is a bad idea for the reasons stated in the article. But the current crisis demonstrates the NEED for regulation. It shows in living color how market forces can bring disaster if not kept in check.

  • By Jordan, May 15, 2008 @ 6:56 am

    Andrew –

    The mortgage crisis WAS caused by artificially low interest rates. The Fed is more that JUST a bank, because it sets the rate at which all banks borrow its funny money. The Fed is a government sanctioned CENTRAL BANK engaged in market manipulation through the control of money and credit.

    If all banks set their own rate according to MARKET pressures, this recession would not be happening.

Leave a comment