Posts Tagged ‘GSE’

1120 2011 Discussions and feedback from the OWS folks in early October

Sunday, November 20th, 2011

Over a month ago out of curiosity, I had my first encounter with the Occupy Wall Street folks on-line. Although the majority of them seemed to be quite hostile to anyone who do not share their extreme left-wing oriented views, there were a few others that did set themselves apart from the madding crowd by showing some intellectual capability.

Now that they have been kicked out from occupying Zuccotti Park, I think they clearly need some intellectual leadership in setting some clear actionable goals in an OWS 2.0 movement effort next. Trying to solicit sympathy alone will most likely get them no where and offer really nothing to remove the crony establishments out of our system.

As far as our recommendation of actionable goals goes, how about trying to bring housing finance from the crony hands of Wall Street back to the common people on Main Street? That will immediately create many jobs that they could occupy themselves with, let alone getting a decent shelter for themselves, back on Main Street.

For a detailed plan, here again is the link to our public response officially submitted to FHFA, the regulator of the Fannie and Freddie, from PeoplesAlly Foundation in early September. http://www.box.net/shared/hpfqqajd1aremco716lr

Here below are some excerpts of our blog post exchanges on their site that I would like to give them an equal chance to voice their views to readers of our site.

============
Oh, I see. PAF makes the mistake of living in utopian-capitalism-fairy-land, and judging others from atop the throne in his ivory tower there ­ all the while just dividing himself from the common ground and letting himself be conquered by oligarchs who would laugh at him behind his back…

My short message to all the Mises / Libertarian crowd:

I know that the current system is not the ”capitalism” you regard religiously as near-utopia. But how in the hell do you not realize that the real world that people are living in today could not be brought to your free-market utopia for many, many, many years? How do you not realize that the money powers will not ever give you your utopia? This system is a one-way ticket to permanent, institutionalized, oligarchical collectivism. Oligarchy for the elites, collectivism for the masses.

Free-marketeers: you will be disenfranchised in the near future the way this system is going. Your idiocy is useful in think tanks and editorial pages when it comes to encouraging or justifying neoliberal economic globalization, or the latest privatization scheme, but your pesky idealism and your essential anti-authoritarianism leaves little room for you in the future of real capitalism ­ the capitalism of the real world. You need to realize that you are part of the 99.9% too, and you have to act on common ground with the rest of us now before we are divided and conquered into oblivion.

The unrealistic progressives are in the same boat as you are, and if you won’t help them now, they won’t be able to help you in the near future when Big Brother starts coming to oppress you, you unrealistic libertarian. This is about putting the brakes on a runaway capitalist machine heading for total fascism.

Why are you so paranoid that the Occupy Wall Street movement is more dangerous than the status quo? I too have grave reservations about what may come of nationalizations. The solution must be to come to the table and stand up against any tyranny that may come from any socialism that we enact to break the power of the big banks and the modern big politicos.

We don’t want to become the tyranny we despise. We don’t want to create a worse system. But the system right now is selling us out, totally abandoning us, and it will abandon you too. You won’t get your utopian free market capitalism from the status quo, ever. Just hold onto your highest ideals of liberty, opportunity, and justice and come to the table with us, and demand an end to the political bribery system, and an end to the power of the massive money-lending institutions known as the big banks and the Federal Reserve.
…………….

Okay, I checked out your website for the first time.

I see you are pitching a new way of home-ownership. By all means, continue your business and continue trying to convince people who have jobs or savings that your business is a better way for them to own a home.

Your system, which pretends that the dollar won’t collapse, and pretends that ”equity” isn’t just debt-based dollar ponzi speculation, is woefully inadequate to re-empower the people. As long as money only comes from debt, the banking money cartel will be the true government of governments and of corporations.

The ”free market” is predicated in large part upon rational individuals using their money, their savings, or their capital to make free economy. It requires a fair and just system of law. But our very system of money is too far corrupted at this point to pretend we can use a free market to save ourselves. Likewise with our system of law.
………………..

But I do respect your attempts to engineer something more fair for the common, Main Street people. Maybe your ideas will come into greater utility after we break up the money cartel and the Federal Reserve System.

1003 2011 Let FARJHO and SwapRent bring housing finance from the sleight-of-hands on Wall Street to the common people on Main Street – Food for thoughts for the Occupy Wall Street protesters

Monday, October 3rd, 2011

The Occupy Wall Street protesters’ movement seems to be gaining steam and momentum but what do they want to accomplish?

How about telling Wall Street to stop meddling with our housing finances? Furthermore, the angry protesters that occupied Wall Street seemed to be only able to focus of what have been stolen but they are definitely out of touch on what is about to be stolen again by the very same thieves while they are risking their lives physically protesting to on Wall Street.

First, the best economic solutions and/or new economic systems could be totally ruined if left in the wrong hands again. We need more people’s active participation and the support of PeoplesAlly Foundation to further our causes of FARJHO and SwapRent for the benefits of the people on Main Street. Let’s work together to keep Wall Street big banks’ dirty fingers off these new democratic solutions.

Second, we will need to prevent another financial heist like those happened in 2008 from happening again. In Russia and other third world countries the oligarchs have to make some special efforts to steal the national assets behind closed doors. It would actually be a lot of hard work for them and perhaps a few investigative journalists would have to be poisoned or murdered along the way. Here in America, they do it right in the open by spinning the media with wrong information and manipulating the public sentiment with political influence. They did it times and again right in front of our eyes and there was not a thing that we, the folks on Main Street could do about it. The case in point is FHFA’s current plan to sell the REOs (foreclosed homes) that they own to privileged private sector firms.

The distrust of the federal government’s housing plans is not unwarranted. Remember when the financial crisis first emerged in 2008 and the federal government came up with their first solution that left many of us flabbergasted? While people are losing homes and jobs left and right everywhere, the first thing they did was to come up with a plan to use tax payer’s money to give more than one thousand dollars to the mortgage servicing firms owned by their crony friends for each of the loan mods that they worked on? (Goldman Sachs used to own a major mortgage servicing firm Litton Loan Servicing and only sold it in June this year after many robo-signing scandals.)

You may also have seen how “housing experts” or securities analysts from the investment banks such as Morgan Stanley etc. keep spinning the story on TV and in the press media that the federal government has no experience in running the renting business as the sole reason why GSEs/FHA should sell their REOs to the private sector firms in bulk at discounted prices. It would be another big feast, if not steal, for their crony friends in Washington DC and on Wall Street again while being empowered by the almost zero cost of fund to build up their war chest, thanks to Bernanke and the Federal Reserve Board. It is like hitting another Super Jackpot again!

Let’s hope the cronies would not get it their way to buy in bulk at deep discount our national assets owned by the GSEs/FHA again. If they get it their way, they would become the new serfdom landlords to millions of working class people on Main Street. It will turn America into an oligarch state without a middle class. Can you imagine United States of America is about to become a nation of renters to a few handful of oligarchs!

The availability of the information of FARJHO and the services to the GSEs/FHA may have a chance to stop these pending thefts if more information is made public and understood properly by people on Main Street on what kind of financial heist is about to happen all over again.

Don’t wait to protest after it has happened again. Protest to stop it from happening at all!

0910 2011 Our response to FHFA’s RFI – FARJHO and SwapRent from PeoplesAlly Foundation and InvestorsAlly, Inc. – A letter to the Fed, the Administration, GSEs, HUD, SEC, CFTC, other Agencies and the State Governments

Saturday, September 24th, 2011

Here below is a recent update letter to many of my academic friends who possess well established expertise in economics, economic history, finance, derivatives, laws, mathematics, housing, housing finance, urban planning, real estate, business studies, public policy and political science in various leading universities around the US and in selected foreign countries. I thank them for the various feedbacks and support through the years.

Transparency in our federal government’s policy making process is always a good thing for our country and for our democratic society. As one public figure recently said, the best way to keep a secret is to do the right thing.

============
Dear AcademicAlly,

How are you?

Here below is the latest development regarding our efforts to help solve our nation’s housing-led economic crisis. As you know I have been in touch with many of the government folks regarding FARJHO and SwapRent on an academic basis within the past few years since 2007. Please feel free to let me know if you would like review some of their earlier feedbacks. Yours and your colleagues’ academic input and critiques on our proposal would be highly appreciated.

We have provided our FARJHO and SwapRent solutions to the FHFA and submitted our response to their August 10th RFI project (see below) from both PeoplesAlly Foundation ( http://www.PeoplesAlly.org ) and InvestorsAlly, Inc. ( http://www.InvestorsAlly.com ). The non-profit will provide the educational services and the counseling of home owners which we have spent tremendous time to build and to create a political voice within the past year. InvestorsAlly will focus on providing the technology platform for the FARJHO matching services at http://www.farjho.com as what it was always set up to do since the inception on a free market basis.

For a thorough understanding of the new FARJHO methodology to own homes one home at a time, here is the link to my draft paper on FARJHO ( http://www.box.net/shared/yfhkjbqre4idf1kgrtc4 ) which is to be published by the housing finance journal HFI in their upcoming September or December issue as a sequel to my earlier article on SwapRent ( http://www.box.net/shared/v24qtqip4hlgff5l1646 ) published in the December 2009 issue.

Please note again the link to a copy of our response is at http://www.box.net/shared/hpfqqajd1aremco716lr . There could be many area that you and your colleagues could help improve this project. Your active participation to further fine tune our proposed methods, the deployment channels and delivery procedures would be very welcome. It is all for saving our country’s economic future. Let’s work as a team.

Let’s hope that these unwise policy decisions made or to be made by our federal government, intentionally or not, will not turn our country into an oligarch state without a middle class soon. Your active participation may help change the course of history. Please feel free to let me know if you have any questions. Thanks.

===============
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:54:07 -0700
To: Email addresses suppressed
From: Ralph Liu
Subject: Our response to FHFA’s RFI – FARJHO and SwapRent from PeoplesAlly Foundation and InvestorsAlly, Inc.

Dear Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Regional Presidents, Administration, Treasury, FDIC, HUD, GSEs, SEC, CFTC, Congressional Staff and Other Relevant Agency Officials,

cc. State Governments, State Housing Authorities

How are you? I would like to give you guys an update on the latest developments of our FARJHO and SwapRent efforts.

On August 10th FHFA, the regulator of GSEs issued a RFI asking for ideas from the public on how to deal with their REOs portfolios. Here is the link to their original request. http://www.fhfa.gov/webfiles/22366/RFIFinal081011.pdfrding

We have submitted our public response to FHFA from PeoplesAlly Foundation and InvestorsAlly, Inc. in early September. Here is the link to a copy of our response for your kind review and comments. http://www.box.net/shared/hpfqqajd1aremco716lr

The advantages of our FARJHO based proposal are:

1. It eliminates the need to let privileged private parties have access to and engage in quick short term buy-low-sell-high flipping activities at preferential bulk sale discount prices to profit from the potential privatization of our national assets owned by the GSEs and FHA.

2. It helps avoid the federal government, the elite private equity firms in DC or hedge funds on Wall Street from becoming new long term serfdom landlords to low income working families on Main Street by allowing renters to become partial co-owners of the home properties through FARJHO LLCs.

3. Potential wealth created from a future recovery of the US housing market will be able to be channelled through FARJHO back to small town investors, mom’n'pop’s self-directed IRAs, state, county and local pension funds, church groups, non-profit endowments etc. on Main Street to fix the local government’s pension liabilities and budget deficits by investing on a more level playing field with other elite institutional investors on Wall Street who already have exclusive access to the use of leveraged low cost of funds as a result of the Fed’s loose monetary policies to profit from the potential price appreciation.

4. Through the new Borrow-Pool-Buy (BPB) member level borrowing concept that replaces the old Pool-Borrow-Buy (PBB) property level financing practice in other conventional equity sharing schemes, future foreclosure possibilities could be totally eliminated once and for all in this new FARJHO home ownership structure.

In addition, I would like to take the opportunity to invite your attention again to the applications of SwapRent as a new economic policy management tool that goes beyond its initial objective of creating housing affordability. A successful implementation could provide the governments with a new way of economic stimulus method similar to how governments have been managing the countries’ economic activities by adjusting the interest rate levels at the moment.

Since 30′s and 40′s Keynesian economy and 50′s and 60′s Monetarism could not function well in a technologically very different modern world in 2011 where hot money flows freely and instantaneously across borders, a new economic policy management tool has to be created so that the stimulus money could have “the stickiness effect” and stay in local communities to have the desired economic stimulus objectives of creating local jobs for the domestic economy. That is exactly what a new SwapRent market could deliver.

For an introductory description of how this could work please kindly review Chapter 6 of the SwapRent article published at the December 2009 issue of the Journal of Housing Finance International published by International Union of Housing Finance (IUHF) at http://www.box.net/shared/v24qtqip4hlgff5l1646 . The following two blog posts also explain how this could be done in local communities through championing by local politicians on a free market basis without relying on any handouts from the federal government.

http://peoplesally.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/02202011-it-is-not-keynesian-it-is-not-monetarist-perhaps-we-could-call-it-swaprentism-any-better-suggestions/

http://peoplesally.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/0802-2011-implementation-strategies-of-farjho-and-swaprent-good-economic-stimulus-public-policy-or-cornering-the-real-estate-market-by-investors-for-profits/

All information contained in our proposal to FHFA are non-confidential in nature and therefore are free for public distribution. Please feel free to share with us your thoughts and comments. Thanks.

Ralph Y. Liu
Managing Director
PeoplesAlly Foundation
23 Corporate Plaza Drive, Suite 133
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Tel: 1-888-456-8881 x 888
Fax: 1-888-315-3831
Direct: 1-949-371-9139
peoplesally@gmail.com
http://www.PeoplesAlly.org
http://www.twitter.com/SwapRent
http://SwapRent.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ralphyliu

0830 2011 Helping the GSEs and FHA – Some historical background, a few thoughts and the call for union and transparency

Thursday, September 1st, 2011

The following letter is the touched up version of a recent response addressed to members of Community Development Banking email listserv regarding some of their member’s interests in working with us on FARJHO. The list members include thousands of community development practitioners, credit unions, banks, CDCs, loan funds, trade associations, regulators, academics, governments and other non-profits.

===============
Dear FARJHO Ally,

Thanks for the many responses, inquiries and requests to work together on the FARJHO program. By now I think many of you have already had a reasonable understanding of what FARJHO is as a new form of home ownership structure and what it might be able to do to help solve our country’s current economic problems, perhaps with the further assistance of using the more powerful but more complicated SwapRent contract to prevent home owner foreclosures at a later stage as well.

At the moment we are planning to respond to FHFA’s recent call for assistance on August 10th of ideas from the public regarding how to deal with their massive REO portfolios. I have a few thoughts to share with this group for the transparency purpose and I would like to call for many of you to consider joining hands with us in one united proposal.

Why do we need your help? First, we do not even know whether this latest attempt is a genuine call for ideas or is it simply another facade to prepare the pubic that the well-connected crony forces may come in again to buy the national assets (since they were funded by the taxpayer’s money) in bulk at a deep discounts, like how the many crony Russian oligarchs siphoned the national assets at an unbelievable great bargain price with preferential loans to private hands with a Midas touch after the Soviet Union had collapsed.

The distrust is not unwarranted. Remember when the crisis first emerged in 2008 and the federal government came up with their first solution that left many of us flabbergasted? While people are losing homes and jobs left and right everywhere, the first thing they did was to come up with a plan to use tax payer’s money to give one thousand dollars to the mortgage service firms owned by their crony friends for each of the loan mods that they help close?

Don’t be surprised to hear later on about how many genius businessmen will have made another hero of themselves in those public private partnerships (PPP) or joint ventures with GSEs from buying low and selling high again. We already have plenty of those well-connected “heros” who bought the distressed loan assets at extreme discounts from the federal governments over the past few years. Why do we want to let our inactions to make us sit and watch those crony heros back in actions again?

In the proposal from the consortium that includes PeoplesAlly/InvestorsAlly there is no bulk sale of assets necessary. It would be the most fair and equitable way to channel the potential profits and wealth in a recovery directly back to the local communities on Main Street. The GSEs could simply alter theirs and HUD’s current individual REO selling process by adding the FARJHO way. Therefore the bargain price level could be maintained for all types of FARJHO JPIs (joint property investors) directly, irrespective of whether the potential buyers are Tom, Dick and Harry in your neighborhood, some powerful private equity firms in DC or elite hedge funds on Wall Street. Under free market principles, all private capital could form various funds to co-invest with other small potato individual JPIs to directly participate together to help create FARJHO LLCs to own homes one home at a time.

This way, the individual investors in various local communities on Main Street could at least participate on a level playing field by buying at the original REO price. We need more capitalist solutions designed exactly to serve these independently wealthy individuals, small businessmen and entrepreneurs in local communities who may have access to cash or borrow individually at member level to invest at the same price with the same terms as those Wall Street elite financial institutions would to buy these distressed REO assets. These elite institutions are the one who have the exclusive access to the almost zero cost of fund already, thanks to Bernanke. They should not be dished out another advantage given to them to buy these assets in bulk at the expense of the small town investors.

There is really no need for any other crony hedge funds and private equity firms to get to buy these assets in bulk at deep discounted prices and for them to jack up the prices by doing nothing first and then engage us later to resell the REO homes through the FARJHO structure again. Even worse, the dark forces behind these elite financial institutions may simply blatantly steal the FARJHO related ideas and call it something else with a new name to do it themselves without any respect of legal intellectual property rights or ethics.

Catch me if you can seems to be the modus operandi for some of them because they always bet on the fact that you would not have a deeper pocket for legal fees to fight with them to enforce justice. We have learned that in a hard way within the last 10 years of dealing with some of those unscrupulous and unethical institutions but this is more of a future memoir material and not to be expanded further here.

The FARJHO method is really a very simple concept but you would be surprised why it has not caught on by the government and many other powerful institutions already with our relentless campaigning efforts within the past 6 years. Turning a deaf ear seems to be too simplistic as a reason for it.

As explained in the previous CDB list serve posts, the campaign work to create the awareness and adoption acceptance has been a long journey. Over the past 6 years, I have met up many key Congressional staff, high level Fed officials and the Treasury TARP team in the Treasury Department back in October, 2008 when I was in DC to speak at the Housing Finance Innovation Lab sponsored by the Milken Institute. I have also spoken with both the Democratic and Republican presidential economic teams back then. Many of these historical high level discussions, comments and feedback are available to those who may be interested on a confidential basis.

The dealings with the private sector banks, major mortgage lenders and Wall Street firms started way back in late 2006. After spending our own money flying around the country to their headquarters to make presentations and have our brains picked, torn apart and examined by their top mortgage strategy teams, senior executives and technical staffs from before the crisis even started in 2006 to early 2008, although there was plenty of interest and enthusiasm, nothing concretely resulted from them. Later on it became very clear to us that these major private sector financial institutions have no more credibility to launch anything new in the consumer markets. Try to imagine if some folk from Countrywide knocks on your door trying to sell you a new kind of mortgage or a new home ownership structure? What would you do?

The only positive experience that I had from dealing with them is perhaps the Pasadena based IndyMac Bank at the time. In a statement to its board members and key staffs, its CEO was very excited about the SwapRent idea to fix their own distressed mortgage loan portfolios, He instructed his staff back in 2007 to engage us and not to study to death of our proposal until it is too late like what their staff had done with the new ABX idea before. However, studying to death was exactly what his staff team did. By mid 2008, they were taken over by FDIC.

We are not opposed to working with the big banks as long as they consider themselves the “good banks” and start doing the right things from now on, although there are a few exceptions. I still have direct email correspondences with many CEOs and senior management teams and some of their fully owned private equity arms which are searching for solutions to help the banks to manage their troubled mortgage portfolios. After picking our brains on FARJHO and SwapRent what they have been brooding in their strategy meetings is beyond anybody’s guess at this moment. It is very unlikely that they will share the same egalitarian mission-driven values that many of you in this group pursue.

Since it did not seem to get anywhere with these federal Administration folks, Congressional politicians, big banks and the Wall Street firms in the US, I spent the whole year in 2008 campaigning to and dealing with various state, county and city governments and the housing agencies. Some prominent head of housing finance authority once indicated that they had been working with Goldman Sachs in terms of new ideas or strategies on mortgages and they were therefore “in good hands” as the reason not to pursue a deeper discussion with us. I don’t blame her. Who else wasn’t charmed and enamored by those sexy investment banks before in happier time? The problem now may be that many of them may still have that poisonous infatuation or fatal attraction for doing business with those Wall Street firms for some reason, no matter how dangerous it may mean and turn out to be again for those local residents that they serve.

Our FARJHO/SwapRent work has since evolved into a grassroots effort. Rather than seeking endorsements from the politicians we are getting direct votes from the consumers instead. The movement has finally started picking up momentum in 2011. What we will need now is to find some major organizations to affiliate ourselves with as far as the political force and the political will are concerned in order to provide the economic benefits directly to the American people.

The best economic ideas or new innovations would have no teeth and they are useless if there is no political power or monetary power behind them. Back in 2005 I made a miracle happen by introducing the first Yuan denominated Interest Rate Swap into the Chinese interbank market. As a result of the new ability to lock in the long term cost of funding from a bank’s asset/liability management perspectives, we, China Everbright Bank where I worked as the Chief Investment Officer and an EVP, became the first bank in China to introduce the long term fixed rate mortgages to the entire Chinese home owners market. The RMB IRS market that we had started has since evolved into a trillions of dollar financial market by now. Please see the attached WSJ article ( http://www.box.net/shared/sz6uij0f0q0shkye0l7o ) as one of my previous track records of making new financial innovations and new financial markets happen.

The reason why I was able to do it within a very short time of only a bit over a year to introduce the most capitalistic concept and method of financial derivatives to the biggest communist country in the world at the time was due primarily to the hire-and-fire power that I had at the time. I was among the top executive board level management leaders in the sixth largest bank in China. At the high management level, there wasn’t a lot of endless debate by committee discussions on whether to proceed or not to proceed since I was brought in and reported directly to the president of the bank who is a strong and forceful leader. Any junior managers who did not understand the new project were allowed to go back, study and come back to execute it. If they still could not handle it they would have to step aside to let other more competent persons to make their assigned tasks happen. Nobody is allowed to sit there as a bottleneck and study new ideas at their own pace for their own enjoyment. That was how an unstoppable execution team was formed.

I had never been a political person and financial rewards have never been among the prime motives for doing the things that I do. As described in the WSJ article, that I am builder, not a keeper. I simply enjoy the hard work to blaze the trail. Along the way, the things that I have created have over and over again helped many others advance their political careers and most other people who had lent a hand and participated in the early stage eventually made much more money for themselves while I left and moved on to build other new projects.

As for this current FHFA proposal, we have until September 15th to send it in. I have had some not so pleasant experiences dealing with these federal agencies due to my economic policy-wise dissenting blog posts. I had been excluded from many opportunities to present my academic papers and speak to the housing and community development professionals in the FRB sponsored conference events due to my explicit economic policy dissents with the Fed’s monetary policies. I do not agree with their unwise monetary policies and the various QE programs.

For one thing, why did Bernanke and his cohorts even bother to raise the interest rates repeatedly in such a rush back in 2004/2005 to pop the housing asset bubble built during the Greenspan era to trigger a crisis? Wouldn’t a softer approach in raising rates have been much more prudent? After irresponsibly popping the housing bubble to create the crises without any prudent soft landing plans for the ensuing negative consequences, they went on a money pumping binge to reverse the damages by lowering the rates to the extreme in a panic. Jerking our economy through the unnecessary extreme ups and downs of interest rate manipulations seems to be the only things they thought they knew how to do under the disguise of an overly touted Milton Friedman style of Monetary Policy. Looking at the net effects since Bernanke took over in 2005 (a FRB member since 2002), do you really still think that they knew what they were doing?

The way they are trying to reflate the stocks, bonds and commodity asset bubbles now at a speed that would make Greenspan’s loose monetary policies considered a child play. All these new Bernanke led loose monetary policies were done at the expense of extreme negative consequences of an accelerated and unprecedented polarization of the economic wealth redistribution in America with the rich getting richer and the poor getting flat broke. Crisis is indeed too precious a thing to waste for many of those profiteering cronies who took advantage of these situations.

I think these incompetent policy makers owe our country a big apology.

I do not subscribe to Krugman’s simplistic throwing good money at the bad trying to hope for something to stick kind of Keynesian solutions either. If simply telling people to throw money at the problems to solve a problem could be considered a genius, then many people could easily become a genius. Our own government would be full of geniuses already then. Solving problems without squandering money away should probably deserve more credit.

When John Maynard Keynes lived back in the 30′s and 40′s there weren’t any fast telecommunication infrastructure, money wiring mechanism, fast speed trading technologies and convenient transportation means, money from either aggressive monetary policies or even fiscal policies could have stayed in the same country long enough to stimulate the domestic economy. Nowadays that the excess liquidity the federal folks have created would simply turn into hot money instantly by the elite minority private equity companies, banks, hedge funds and Wall Street firms to flow into high GDP growth emerging markets to benefit themselves personally with us average Americans still holding an empty bag with not even a bread crumb falling on our heads.

Remember the last time you read in the news about how some investment gurus on Wall Street and the big banks saying they are expanding in China and India as a new strategy and many are moving their operations to Singapore? That is where all our federally empowered low cost of money went and continue to head for. Therefore a new way has to be created that the stimulus money could become local property based and paid out directly to the local residents in local communities here in America for it to have the desired economic stimulus effects of creating local jobs and local economic activities. That is exactly what the SwapRent contract was created to do (please see more details below).

Bernanke often prides himself as a student turned expert of the 30′s depression but I wonder why we all have to buy into the more than 70 year old 30′s solutions and lessons that he and the Keynes worshiping Krugman gang are trying to sell to us to solve our country’s current economic woes. Those solutions may have worked to a minor degree to help countries get out of their depression/recessions in the 30s or 40′s but it is not likely to make any contributions to our country in any way now in this technologically very different world.

Some may also think that it was World War II that dug us out of the economic conundrum in the 40′s, but the two wars we had and still having now seem to have dug us into even deeper troubles. If you don’t have the manufacturing capability anymore, waging wars will only make China and other manufacturing oriented Asian countries even richer, and as for us, perhaps only a few more drone joy stick playing teenage billionaires. Economists and economic historians can tell you histories but what valuable contributions history could provide that is relevant in a totally different environment may be questionable. Managing a country in the modern world by asking them what they see in their rear view mirrors could only bring you a major head-on crash sooner or later.

In my humble views, incompetent government policy makers, like incompetent politicians, should be voted out of their jobs in a true democracy. They should be responsible for the precious time lost in having viable solutions early on to fix our country’s economic problems and the further deterioration of our national economy. A simple apology just won’t do it.

It may not make sense for us to simply sit there to wait for a pat on the back like a school boy by these incompetent policy decision makers and willingly hand over our dedicated research results and hard earned solutions to them to let them save their undeserved jobs, take credit and let their cronies profit from it. We would rather find some other new blood of policy makers just like we would like to find other new ambitious and forceful politicians to champion these causes to bring the economic benefits to our citizens in a new Administration through the election process. In that regard, we have indeed been waiting for these new generations of smart and capable politicians to emerge so that we could wholeheartedly support them behind their back with the implementations of these new solutions as a major part of their economic policy campaign platform.

People do not always get what is most economically beneficial to them. They only get whatever the politicians tell them to get. What we will need to do is to try to find those good future leaders for our country and rally behind their back with these newly invented economic solutions.

For a new alternative proposal on how to solve our country’s current economic problems on a pure free enterprise basis without spending any of the tax payer’s money or incurring further national debts we will need the new policy makers to seriously consider this “New Third Way” to economic policy management. Please kindly make sure you read the Chapter 6 of my introductory article on SwapRent that was published in the December 2009 issue of the Journal of Housing Finance International published by International Union of Housing Finance (IUHF) at http://www.box.net/shared/v24qtqip4hlgff5l1646 and the following blog post.

http://peoplesally.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/02202011-it-is-not-keynesian-it-is-not-monetarist-perhaps-we-could-call-it-swaprentism-any-better-suggestions/

Anyway, enough about the background info. The reason why I felt strongly that this complete transparency of what had happened to date is necessary so that I would not be advised and recommended to spend the next 6 years going round and round with the same people in power again. They already had their chances but they chose to lead our country down in a different path of what we have today. AAA credit and economic super power status could not be reversed back so easily and the debts that they have piled up won’t go away any time soon. The top Wall Street elites may pretty soon migrate to China to pursue further personal wealth for themselves. You and I will be left on our own and we’d better start planning our own futures together on our own soon.

The SwapRent solution should also better come after FARJHO has been successfully implemented. What I propose now regarding implementing the FARJHO program is that we would like to invite the state, county and local housing authorities, housing finance agencies, pension funds, endowments, foundations and local credit unions, community banks, non-profit groups, to join us in a proposal to create a national operational critical mass to handle large scale deployment to help FHFA implement the FARJHO based solutions and perhaps at a later stage, the SwapRent based solutions to avoid foreclosures as well. More on that later.

Each of your housing authorities, housing finance agencies and non-profit groups locally will handle the local FARJHO transactions and we will continue to advise and conduct the necessary training seminars to your staff and your trainers for your local organization to be able to conduct the actual local deployment yourselves. We will also work on creating a national standard of practice for these new FARJHO structures, taking each individual State laws into consideration. This could all be done on a non-profit basis but we do need funding and operational support to make this a reality.

I would like to sincerely invite each of you to step up to the task and do whatever you could from your end to make the necessary contributions in order to save our country’s economic futures together. Sorry about the long post but full transparency is probably the best way going forward to make this happen to the full benefits of the American people without any potential interference by biased politics or any privileged private groups.

Although the current purpose is to make a RFI response to FHFA together, our alliance should target a broader audience on a pure free market basis beyond simply helping the GSEs and FHA to clean up their own mess. While the need of GSEs and FHA may be a burden that we will need to address on patriotic grounds, they are not the one who would get to call the shots on what directions the FARJHO program should head in the future. Politically nobody has decided on their destiny yet since they are too big to fail at the moment. We should not let FARJHO be a sacrificial lamp to feed the monsters and let them refuel and grow again to postpone their eventual bigger ultimate implosion at very American citizen’s even higher expense.

Therefore, I hope there are some other alternative stronger organizations politically and financially out there who are willing and capable to take on the challenge to lead this project. We will be quite happy to play a secondary support role to provide the necessary intellectual properties and training efforts to make the team effort more successful. Please feel free to contact me directly for a further more private discussion. Thanks again.

Ralph Y. Liu
Managing Director
PeoplesAlly Foundation
23 Corporate Plaza Drive, Suite 133
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Tel: 1-888-456-8881 x 888
Fax: 1-888-315-3831
info@PeoplesAlly.org
http://www.PeoplesAlly.org
http://www.twitter.com/SwapRent
http://SwapRent.com/blog/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ralphyliu

11/08/2009 SwapRent as an economic policy tool – How GSEs could use SwapRent to free up FRB to manage monetary policy more independently

Sunday, November 8th, 2009

In two ways. First as an immediate solution to the current legacy mortgage assets problems so that it could free up the Federal Reserve Board to manage interest rate levels in a more independent way. Second, use SwapRent rates for different contract maturity as a new economic stimulus policy tool going forward to adjust the property value levels as a source of our national wealth that could stimulate or restrain the economic activities in local communities.

There have been many writings in the SwapRent web site or SwapRent.com blog sites about how SwapRent and HELM could be used in a concept similar to a debt-for-equity swap so that homeowners could hold on to their homes and mortgage investors could avoid financial losses. It will not be repeated in details here again. The most direct consequences of this new non-lending but rather co-ownership based housing finance system for GSEs are that homeowners will get to de-leverage through this new realization of the debt-for-equity swap concept, Fannie and Freddie could de-leverage because the mortgage assets would get to be fixed up and sold to other free market investors, and our nation could de-leverage because taxpayer’s money would no longer be tied up to rescue these troubled financial institutions. Nothing is more effective than tackling the problem right at its roots, i.e. to help homeowners avoid foreclosures and design new ways to increase home property value without inappropriate borrowing.

In this blog posting, I would like to focus on the second most important way that a liquid SwapRent rates market could help our nation’s policy makers manage the national economy. Let’s have a quick review what a SwapRent contract is first.

What a SwapRent contract does is to allow both existing and would-be property owners to switch between owning and renting economically back and forth with a very low transaction cost at any time they want for a specified period of time for whatever reasons they may have. Therefore the pricing of a SwapRent contract relies on the cost differential between the cost to own a property (say 5% of the current house value per annum) and the cost to rent a property (say 2% of the current house value per annum) for an intended period of time.

Using the same numerical example of a $800,000 house in Southern California, the annual 3% (difference between 5% to own and 2% to rent) own-rent cost differential will translate into a $2,000 monthly for a 100% “temporary own-rent switching” or “economic renting” for a period of time, say 5 years. That is where the monthly subsidy would come from. Whoever wants to own the future appreciation in 5 years’ time similar to a convention owner will pay the monthly subsidy to the current property legal title owner. For a 50% “temporary own-rent switching”, the monthly subsidy will be only half of that, i.e. $1,000 per month. Therefore the current property legal title owner could still enjoy the remaining 50% appreciation potential, hence the conventional understanding of the “shared appreciation” concept could be more flexibly and reversibly realized by a SwapRent contract.

The cost to own in the Western financial system such as the US is simply to current interest rate level derived from the interest rate term structure. The best proxy for the cost to own in the US is the corresponding Interest Rate Swaps (IRS) rate levels published by the Federal Reserve Board at its web site every day. The corresponding maturity SwapRent rate levels would be determined by participants at REIDeX or the interbank markets.

The Federal Reserve Board could go through GSE such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or even government owned Ginnae Mae and let them act as one of the free market participants to assume the role of the “economic landlord investors” themselves first to provide the monthly subsidy to homeowners. They could alter the supply and demand factors through being either more or less aggressive in bidding for the SwapRent rates in this freely traded marketplace, not unlike how the Fed currently conducts its interest rate policy through the short term repo markets with the banks.

Using the same 5-year contract as the example, if the Government wants to stimulate the local economy at grassroots level it could be more aggressive in granting monthly subsidy through being willing to accept a lower SwapRent rate of 1.5% or 1% (instead of the previous starting point of 2%). Therefore the monthly subsidy the homeowners receive would be equivalent to a higher annual 3.5% or 4% of the current house value instead when the homeowner decides to enter into a SwapRent transaction with the GSE.

As explained many times before, given an interest rate level fixed at 5% for a given contract maturity, the more aggressive (i.e. the more generous) the government is willing to offer the monthly subsidy amount to homeowners in the form of a lower SwapRent rate it is willing to receive, the more likely more property owners in the community will take up the offer as a free market choice, the more people have signed up that would create buying demand the more likely there is a perception that the local properties will indeed appreciate in the future and the local economy will indeed strengthen, the more likely the SwapRent contracts that capture the financial value of partial future appreciation of these underlying properties will then increase in value and the more likely the GSEs could sell them at a higher price to other free market investors in order for the GSEs to regenerate the capital to provide more assistance to other American homeowners to own homes. It is indeed a self-fulfilling expectation and perhaps reality, exactly similar to what adjusting the interest rate levels by the Fed could do to the investment psychology and perhaps reality of our future national economy.

From a local property owner’s perspective, a 100% ownership of future appreciation potential in five year’s time will mean zero financial gains when there is no appreciation at all. There could even be further losses when the property value further depreciates. Sharing and maintaining a remaining 50% appreciation potential in order to help stop foreclosure selling and increase overall buying demand in the local community may still entitle the property owner a 10% gain when there is an overall 20% rise on the value of the specific property or on a house price index. In short, 100% of zero is still zero but 50% of a 20% appreciation will be a 10% gain to enjoy. Not a bad deal when you are also getting paid handsomely every month for that to happen.

The homeowners could do the SwapRent transaction with GSE directly or the GSEs could decide to engage a fee-earning local financial intermediary, housing agency of a local governments etc. in order to better administer and better monitor the on-going credit risks.

The GSE or financial intermediary could also better manage the transaction through converting the homeowner’s existing mortgages into a SwapRent imbedded HELM (Home Equity Locking Mortgage). A HELM could simply take on the legal format of an AITD (All Inclusive Trust Deed) which would be a wrap-around package of the existing first mortgage and a contingent second mortgage that settles the payoff of the SwapRent contract at contract maturity date automatically as the new unpaid balance of HELM at that time, to accomplish all the desired economic outcomes with very little or no cost and admin hassles to the homeowners.

After offering that new HELM to the homeowners either directly or through local financial intermediaries, the GSE itself could then use another new offsetting SwapRent to cancel out the exposure of the embedded SwapRent contract in the HELM in order to lay off their property value risks and appreciation potentials (similar to an equity co-ownership piece) with other free market based investors through the inter-bank market or REIDeX. These ultimate investors of these co-ownership SwapRent contracts could be state and local pension funds, hedge funds, insurance companies, foreign sovereign wealth funds or in short, any free market participants.

As explained before, many state, county and city pension funds could benefit directly by acting as the ultimate “economic landlord” investors to provide the needed monthly cash flows to homeowners for a fair share of the future appreciation potential of the property in return. A successful implementation will not only help many state/county/city treasuries and the state employees’ pension funds with higher returns, but also it may help stabilize or boost the local property value and hence the entire state’s economic prosperity. At the same time, the program will get to accomplish its goal of maintaining social stability through helping the distressed homeowners in their state hang on to their homes very effectively without having to spend any taxpayer’s money for preferential bailout treatments that cause moral hazard and make things worse.

In a sense, as a temporary conduit, GSEs will finally be able to provide funding for American homeownership not just in the form of debt, but also through a new additional form of a non-lending based economic version of tradable home equity co-ownership. The new alternative system could greatly lower the chance of a repeat of the previous subprime mortgage lending abuse fiasco in a purely lending based housing finance system that may often create boom-and-bust cycles and hence social instability.

After understanding the transaction mechanics, let’s take a look at how policy makers could influence SwapRent rates traded in the free marketplace in order to use it to stimulate or restrain economic activities in the local communities through out the country. As explained in blog posts before that in order for the SwapRent market to work as a policy tool the politicians will have to break out of their socialist mentality and treat the new SwapRent program as a 100% free market operation, i.e. let the local property speculators and entrepreneurs participate freely. Make the SwapRent transactions and the monthly subsidy available to anyone who wants it as long as they have a property to be able to share a part of the future upside appreciation with another investor, not just whoever needs it for survival purpose. There should not be any restrictions other than the credit quality, moral, ethical or legal eligibility to participate. Entrepreneurs who are willing to trade off some of the future appreciation potential of the properties they own in order to receive current monthly cash flows so that they could use it to start a new business or to hire more people represent a major target users profile that this SwapRent program is intended to accomplish with.

There are currently many other ineffective bailout plans that create moral hazards by giving preferential treatments to distressed homeowners already in place. That is a good thing since these politicians’ preceptory obligations are done and over with. Now the policy makers could put the free enterprise based SwapRent program in conjunction with or on top of those ineffective bailout plans to really get the necessary work done in order to be able to create wealth again.

So as explained above, when the 5-year IRS rate is at 5%, if the policy makers want to provide stimulus to the local economy they could bid for the 5 year SwapRent rate at 1.5%, 1% or even lower so that the monthly subsidy to property owners is larger (3.5% or 4% of the property value per annum). If they want to cool the heated economy down they could bid for it at 2.5%, 3% or even higher so that the monthly subsidy to property owners is smaller (2.5% or 2% of the property value per annum).

The most important intended concept to illustrate here is that all these could be done irrespective where the current interest rate levels are or will be at in the future. So that when the cost to own or the 5-year IRS rate moves up to 8%, the SwapRent rates would simply move up in tandem and be trading at 4.5% or 4% for a stimulative policy (the same larger subsidy of 3.5% or 4% of the property value per annum) or be trading at 5.5% or 6% for a cooling policy (the same smaller subsidy 2.5% or 2% of the property value per annum).

When the 5-year IRS rate moves down to 2%, the SwapRent rates would simply move down in tandem and be trading at -1.5% or -2% for a stimulative policy (the same larger subsidy 3.5% or 4% of the property value per annum) or be trading at -0.5% or 0% for a cooling policy (the same smaller subsidy of 2.5% or 2% of the property value per annum).

The main point is that the monetary policy of where the interest levels are will no longer be the main driving force of the property value any more. The property value in our nation could be determined in part by the SwapRent rates for local communities that the policy makers could use as an alternative to adjust. That is what it means to offer a new dimension in the economic policy tools for the policy makers. It would not just be the previous only two tools of using monetary policy on interest rates or using fiscal policy on tapping taxpayer’s money anymore.

The Federal Reserve could therefore freely increase the short term discount rates or fed fund rates to curb bubbles from happening in the stock markets, the precious metals markets and the commodity markets in order to avoid a possible run-away hyper-inflation. The high interest rates will no longer hurt the property value or be the sole force to negatively impact the economy anymore as the property value and job creations at the local communities through out the country could be accomplished separately through a very generous co-ownership monthly subsidy offered through influencing lower SwapRent rates in the marketplace by the GSEs. The Fed could finally be freed up to make these monetary decisions on a much more independent basis.

Through influencing the SwapRent rates, it is likely that we may have a double digits long term interest rates to fight inflation and still have a strong property market and a robust economy as the local home value could finally be properly detached partially from the Fed’s short term monetary policies. This is exactly the third dimension as a policy tool that the new SwapRent based non-lending or co-ownership housing finance system could provide as a part of its many advantages.

The beauty of this new SwapRent housing finance system is that capitalism will also be able to best manifest its value and become more politically popular with the mass population as the profit driven motives will allow the Main Street local property investors, speculators and business entrepreneurs at the local community grassroots level, instead of always having to rely on the fat cats on Wall Street as in the past in a primarily securitization based housing finance system, to all participate and to become the locomotive engine to help create wealth for our nation.

Adding this new alternative SwapRent housing finance system would only make everybody happier since it makes not only economic but also political sense due to its inherent more democratic way of wealth sharing capability. By helping create wealth at the grassroots local community level first to drive our country’s economic recovery and growth will certainly help de-polarize the current imbalance and tension between Wall Street and Main Street.

11/05/2009 SwapRent vs. Fannie Mae’s new Deed for Lease (D4L) program

Thursday, November 5th, 2009

Fannie’s new Deed for Lease program seems to add nothing new from the earlier “Own-to-Rent” attempt or those two Bill efforts by the two Congressmen.

As a refresher, Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) introduced H.R. 6116, the Saving Family Homes Act of 2008 on May 22nd, 2008, which requires banks to let homeowners rent their own homes after foreclosure. Congressman Gary Miller from California is similarly also contemplating on introducing another Bill again to require the banks to let homeowners rent for 5 years after foreclosure.

We have proposed these SwapRent and HELM related “temporary own-rent switching” and “economic renting” methodologies to Fannie, Freddie, HUD, Treasury Dept., the Fed and Congressmen since mid 2007, with frequent updates through out the past few years. It is great to see that the GSEs are finally moving in the right direction now and they are moving one step closer to the SwapRent concept. The market needs time to learn. Changes usually come gradually but it will get there sooner or later.

The simple question to the executives at Fannie is that why not let those homeowners who have the economic ability to pay the lower monthly rental payments simply do a “temporary own-rent switching” transaction for a period of time before they get foreclosed or DIL’ed? This new D4L effort after DIL would have the same effect of a foreclosure in the sense that it will trash the value of the mortgage in question and hurt the holders of these mortgages anyway. Fannie itself is the owner of these troubled mortgages.

Why wouldn’t they want to save the financial value of the mortgages they are currently holding on these distressed borrowers by adopting the SwapRent contracts instead? It would be able to save plenty of taxpayer’s money by saving these troubled mortgages while accomplishing the same social stability and property maintenance objectives of the Deed for Lease program at the same time.

09/05/2009 What does Federal Reserve, FannieMae, FreddieMac, Goldman Sachs and a rogue trader have in common?

Saturday, September 5th, 2009

Has anyone done a Value-at-Risk calculation or a stress analysis for Federal Reserve and the GSEs lately? If they have understood the severity of the problems, are their bosses doing anything about it? I am not talking about the management executives at these institutions. They are in fact the rogue traders themselves. I am talking about the stake holders who are the real bosses to prevent these rogue management executives from trying to blow up these institutions into pieces so that we all will have to pay for it in the end. The stakeholder bosses are indeed taxpayers ourselves, or maybe those naive foreign creditors who amazingly are still willing to continue to lend us the money at near zero interest rates to continue to watch our rogues traders punt. To be fair, the rogue traders today may indeed become the heros of tomorrow if they are lucky. Equally likely, we may all go down the tube with them if their luck runs out.

Despite on surface these rogue institutions are playing different gambling games but in essence what they are all relying on is the simple theory of having access to unlimited capital in their betting games. The way it works is very simple, a gambler loses $100 at the table, he doubles up to $200 the next bet, if he loses again, he doubles up to $400 and so forth, all he needs is one good luck to win back all the previous losses. If the money at risk is the use of OPM (other people’s money), he might as well triple or quadruple the bet each time so that he can not only recoup the loss but also win some profit and actually come out a hero if he gets lucky only once! To make this work, the access to these OPM capital for his next bet has to be unlimited.

What is different in the case of rogue traders at banks that rogue traders such as Nick Leeson, John Rusnak or Jerome Kerviel worked at is that the perpetual machine to access unlimited capital did not exist. But that certainly does not stop the next rogue trader from hoping it does. Hence Geithner and Bernanke may have to visit China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, etc. and round and round and round …

So even if they eventually get lucky to win it all back in just one lucky bet during this wild gambling game, it is hard to imagine why that may prove them to be good economists other than lucky punters. Or in the case of many idol worshippers, the successful management of an economic turn-around by a depression era specialist. When a father mortgages the family house to come up with the cash to temporarily bail out a shop-aholic, borrowing addicted, debt laden daughter while doing nothing to fix her borrowing addiction and compulsive shopping behavior, it is similarly hard to imagine how people could let him declare himself a hero when he has literally just put the entire family at risk and closer on the verge of a total ruin. Everybody in the household may all go down together with her. The transient calmness obtained from mortgaging the family house may have provided a false sense of security but the daughter is still on the loose. Nothing has changed. Instead of sending her to rehab for her consumption compulsiveness and train her to get a job to start producing instead, mortgaging the family house is indeed a crime to other responsible family members.

Spending money to solve problems could hardly be interpreted as heroic acts. Money could indeed make wonders. Anybody with no real talents or even no education at all know how to thrown money to solve problems. Shouldn’t the real heros be those who could come up a way to solve problems without spending any money at all? If that is not possible, at least those who could try to spend the least money to get the problems solved. Doesn’t that make simple common sense?

The celebration of the reappointment of Bernanke seems puzzling as well. I would imagine although Larry Summer may have asked Obama for the job but he would be really stupid to take on the job now after all that money having been spent already. The next few years to come will be the judgement day and time to face up the consequences of all the superficial Band-Aid fixes. Why would there be somebody else willing to be lynched for the misdeeds done by the original spinster who may have retired with accolades by then already? As in the analogy used in many previous blog posts before after a few more heavy Cocaine sniffs to calm down a Heroin addicts it would be quite stupid to volunteer to be the next caretaker, especially if the cure administered to the Heroin addict now is not just a few Cocaine sniffs but rather a few shots of Propofol.

In the case of Goldman Sachs, top management or trading talents seems to mean good political connections. If they ever lose in their gambling activities, their cronies in Washington will swiftly give them a banking license so the taxpayers would have to bail them out. If other people owe them money, taxpayers will also bail out those institutions first so that nobody will dare to owe Goldman money and not to pay them back. So heads Goldman wins and tails we taxpayers lose in all their business activities. On top of that, good connections may also certainly help trading information of upcoming government policies. In fact the policies may have been formulated by these traders. Hmmm, no wonder they get to make more money from trading than others. Gretchen Morgenson of New York Times may be right. The relationship between Goldman and the government administration is too close for comfort. Crony wunderkind institutions like that exist in many third world countries all over the world. The difference is that those in the third world countries usually stay in a low profile and do not call themselves a trading genius at the same time. Many questions we kept hearing in the press is that when will all these crony abuses ever be stopped. Do we have to wait for another socialist revolution, or something even worst to put an end to all this?

So the game is still on. Goldman will continue to make bigger wild bets to create more genius trading success stories or more taxpayer bailouts. They are a bank now and they are even more too big to fail. Fannie and Freddie will also continue to replay the movie “Weekend at Bernie’s” to keep up the appearances of a live US housing market. Let’s hope the Federal Reserve Board, the biggest rogue trader of all, will continue to be able to charm those faithful Chinese, Japanese and Saudis governments to keep bumping their hard earned money to us. Our future prosperity does indeed rely on their continuing blind faith in our US dollar.

If by any chance all this fails for some reason and the money flows stop all of a sudden, the rogue traders could always make it known to the world that their bosses in fact knew their activities all along, as they always do. In fact, they may be quite right. The bosses, the American taxpayers, do seem to be sleeping at their jobs right now.

07/20/2008 An SSE (State Sponsored Enterprise) or called LGSE (Local Government Sponsored Enterprise) to replace the GSEs

Sunday, July 20th, 2008

FAQ #23: (originally posted at http://www.SwapRent.com on July 20th, 2008) Why are you championing the idea of getting the local state, county and city governments involved in a new national housing finance system for our country going forward, given the failure and pending collapse of Fannie and Freddie? What does de-centralizing or localizing credit risk management of home mortgages mean? Why are the new SSEs (State Sponsored Enterprises) or LGSEs (Local Government Sponsored Enterprises) that you proposed better than the current GSEs?

Yes. This is something new and few have been convinced so far. Ruthless critics said the effort would prove to be as futile as teaching pigs how to fly. Many local governments officials themselves are not excited about the ideas either. Most of them are quite scared by the thought of having to do something new themselves, out of their 9 to 5 daily routine. Job security, not flying with innovative accomplishments, is usually what their priority is. They either try to push this to be a private sector business or even if government needs to get involved it should be the federal government’s job to do something about it. They failed to understand that these wrong ideologies and hands-off approach in the past contributed in a major way to our nation’s housing finance problems. Many of them bureaucratically viewed adopting an innovative approach to save their own government finances, their homeowners and their local economies is not worth granting a favor to a private business. Similar to the refusal of the parents of a cancer child to buy a cancer cure from a pharmaceutical company which has diligently invested heavily in the past to develop a viable solution, they seem to rather let the child die than taking up the offer to help, unless the pharmaceutical company turns to be a non-profit organization and practice socialist medicine. Wrong ideology or personal emotion like that is often what kills, not the lack of innovative solutions. Banks and mortgage lenders such as American Home Mortgage, Bear Stearns, Countrywide and IndyMac may have gone to their demise in a similar way, despite the tremendous efforts we had spent to visit and communicate the worked out SwapRent (SM) solutions with the executive management teams since mid 2006.

Fannie and Freddie will be gone for sure. Many still try to fool themselves and are not willing to face up the reality. We saw recently that the Treasury Secretary went to Congress to beg for a blank check to back them up. It looks like a gambling addictive son trying to ask daddy for his blank check book in order to bluff his fellow poker players. It may have bluffed some naive folks for a short while but many would see through it soon that daddy is more broke and full of debts than the son is. It won’t last.

I bumped into such an idea of getting the local governments involved by accident or by fate, depending on how you look at it. Let’s simply view it as a side effect derived from our tenacious efforts to promote the implementation of the SwapRent (SM) methodology. As we had come to the realization in early June, 2008 of the fact that many of the major banks and mortgage lenders we have had consulting/licensing discussions to for the last two years no longer have the credibility or ability to launch any new consumer financial products to save themselves (let alone our national economy), going through the financial institutions route to launch the SwapRent (SM) project will only be possible for a newly set up financial entity. That requires major capital investment and regulatory hassles which may further delay the offering of a timely help to the homeowners.

On the federal government and the congressional law makers side, they seem to have their own political agenda of doing things. For example, within the last two years we have approached the White House, the Fed, Treasury Department, HUD, all banking regulators, GSEs and the FHLB system with almost no stone unturned. Although many of the Republican administration officials loved the ideas of SwapRent (SM) and appreciated the fact that it could really help solve our current economic problems, some of them told us their positions may be too low at the totem pole to help put this proposed solution on a high political priority. We were advised to approach the congressional law makers and their staff members at the House Financial Services Committee and the Senate Banking Committee. We naturally made a lot of effort in that regard. Among all the numerous academic referrals and social introductions to approach the decision makers, our Boston-based business partner even went as far as attending a gay party event trying to hand-deliver a copy of our SwapRent (SM) proposal to an influential Congressman! I don’t have much detail on what exactly happened next later that night. My poor straight partner may have had to bend over backwards to please some Congressmen, literally … and so forth. My point is merely that those federal people who need to know were indeed all well informed about the availability of the viable SwapRent (SM) solution to effectively stem mortgage defaults and foreclosures during the last two years already.

Despite all these efforts, Congress only came up with a Housing Bill which was given to a few well connected bankers to draft to save themselves and their earlier bad investment in a major defunct mortgage lender. The only conclusion we could draw is that the Democrat-controlled Congress may not have the urgency or intention to really solve the current economic problems before the 2008 national election in November. The worse the state of our economy the better chances there may be for a Democrat president to be elected in November. Although a speculation, there is really no other reason that could explain why they would not adopt some worked out innovative solution, no matter where it comes from, as they should not have the same mental block of a wrong ideology as mentioned above. Perhaps they do too and I may be wrong on that assumption.

After more than two years of our relentless efforts to spread the gospel, the economic merits and the social value of the SwapRent (SM) methodology have indeed been understood and acknowledged by most of the people who may hold the power to make a difference, it remains a challenge for us to get them to stand out from the shadow to help form that critical political force to have it implemented in a timely manner for the benefits of our nation. It is politics at work as usual. A few more years in the future, we might be able to look back at these people for political accountability based on hindsight historical chain of events, but that might be too little too late to save our national economy from spinning downward into a deep recession and the many displaced once homeowners along the way.

To understand the significance of the future roles of the local governments and a de-centralized homeowners’ credit risk decision making mechanism in a new national housing finance system, first let’s look at a few technical aspects of what the conventional mortgage really is. From a business risk management perspective, a conventional mortgage has financial risks, legal risk and operational risk for its providers. Within the financial risks there are credit risk, interest rate risk, prepayment risk and real estate market or property value risk all combined and mingled into one single financial product. The key to solve the current default/foreclosure crisis and to establish a healthy new housing finance system is to quantify and single out each of the four types of financial risks out of the conventional mortgage and manage them separately in a new approach.

When each individual risk of the home mortgage is properly identified and addressed by this “divide and conquer” approach, the chance of a potential systemic risk in the housing finance system that could bring down our banking system again in the future could be minimized dramatically.The interest rate risk will no doubt continue to be managed at the national level by the Federal Reserve or a central bank equivalent. The prepayment risk may be able to continue to keep the securitization game going and many in the industry employed. Both of these two risks will also continue to provide the investors the guessing games either through the secondary whole loans market or the new incarnation of a “Covered Bonds” market borrowed from certain European countries. The real estate market or property value risk will be best managed by the new SwapRent (SM) methodology to extract them out of a conventional mortgage as explained above in details. It will not be repeated here again. Local governments at all levels, on the other hand, will be the best candidates to participate to assume an active role to manage the homeowner credit risk since they have the vested interests and the geographical convenience to perform the due diligence required to ensure a sound new housing finance system.

The emphasis here is to create a new role or to expand some existing practices for the local governments to assume a stronger economic function of policing the granting of credit to homeowners and get compensated for it either as a non-profit agency or as a for profit entity similar to Fannie and Freddie.There are many ways this new role could be accomplished. The simplest way may be to assume the modified but similar mortgage insurance function of the FHA without the capital providing function rather than underwriting the entire mortgages directly that the Fannie and Freddie have been doing. They could set up new local state agencies to perform those similar roles of Fannie and Freddie at the local level and they could be called SSEs (State Sponsored Enterprises) or LGSEs (Local Government Sponsored Enterprises). The modified state version of a new Fannie or Freddie so to speak, with the homeowner credit decisions made at state or even county and city levels. Critical mass and scale of the operations could be accomplished through re-insurance at a national level or to private sector entities. In fact, at most states the state housing finance agencies may not be new but we should let them take on more active new roles. Extra care should be taken for the local governments not to repeat Fannie and Freddie’s many mistakes and abuses.

This new involvement by the local governments will not crowd out the existing private sector business by the financial institutions and will only perform the complementary functions that the original intentions of Fannie and Freddie were set out to deliver.

The main benefits of this approach will speak for themselves. Real estate business will go back to a be a regional or localized business as they used to be and where they belong. The unscrupulous behaviors of a few individuals in the mortgage system will no longer affect us as a nation. This could easily be understood if you look back at what had happened within the last few years. The disconnect of credit risk monitoring brought about by the securitization business and the personal abuse of the system by some mortgage brokers and underwriters had quickly brought the whole country down. Moral hazards were created by these centralized housing finance agencies. National monetary policies were held hostage by these inter-linked nation-wide epidemics. Forced low interest rate policies then brought about the sinking US dollar and the ensuing run away inflation led by high commodity prices … etc.

By having the credit risk management function performed at the local levels with different regional decisions being made independently we could have a much more diversified, resilient and stronger national economy. Economic problems such as what had happened recently could be compartmentalized at a regional level and will not trigger the ominous collapse of the entire empire that many wise guys having been predicting. National monetary policies and fiscal policies will no longer be held hostage by their failures since incompetent or abusive local housing finance agencies or these new SSEs could be punished and left hung dry without batting an eyelid by the politicians. “Too big to fail” will also no longer be a common phrase for the lobbyists or a convenient excuse for the special interest groups. Taxpayer bailout may be reduced to a regional or state issue. Pensioners in Norway, small bank depositors in Germany or central banks in China and around the world may also finally get to be spared by the consequences of local American’s credit indulgence.

To further use an analogy to compare practices in other countries, it may make sense to have one single interest rate policy for the entire Euro zone, but try to imagine how ridiculous that could be to set up one Europe-wide agency to offer mortgage insurance and make homeowners credit granting decisions based on one single standard to all European homeowners from Southern Italy to northern Lapland in Sweden and from remote Romanian villages to metropolitan London area in the UK? That would really be a paradise for the opportunistic local mortgage brokers and underwriters if they could simply sell the mortgage loan credit risks away to a centralized European version of Fannie and Freddie the same way they have been doing in the US all along. Pent up problems would similarly be waiting to explode if this were real. That is how ridiculously these GSEs in the US have been run in the past and grew to become such humongous monsters.

The recent discussions of borrowing the Covered Bonds market concepts as practiced in certain European countries may offer some cosmetic technical changes to the mortgage securitzation practices in the US. If these fundamental credit risk management issues are not properly addressed, letting local underwriters continue to sell homeowners default risks away to a centralized agency, developing a new Covered Bonds market will not be able to help change the situation. Changes in the technicality of the securitization process and methodologies may be helpful but the real evil is the idea of a centralized GSE itself to let the local underwriters off the hook so easily. Credit risk underwriting and monitoring will have to be kept locally, either with the original underwriters or with somebody who may have assumed these homeowner credit default risks subsequently but could continue to make decisions on monitoring and taking rescuing measures when necessary.

Put simply, accountability and responsibility of underwriting these credit risks should not be sold away or securitized away to people who do not have the ability to perform ongoing management. The responsibility of granting credit risks to homeowners and performing ongoing monitoring, in whole or in part, has to stay local with either the financial institutions or the local governments. Equipped with the flexible new housing affordability tools such as SwapRent (SM) and its embedded new mortgage products (HELM), they could also further provide timely assistance to financially distressed homeowners on an on-going basis. All this will happen naturally because they are made and remain the risk holders and will have the natural motivation to perform the required due diligence of risk underwriting and subsequent risk monitoring.

There seems to be many further research opportunities of the details in this de-centralizing or localizing of homeowner credit risk decision making process could be pursued. There also appears to be many options on how this could be best executed, both through the way how the mortgage credit risk insurance practice by financial institutions are structured and a much more active participation by the local governments in the housing finance process in order to set up a stronger and healthier new national housing finance system. Creating new State Sponsored Enterprises (SSEs) or Local Government Sponsored Enterprises (LGSEs) is just one of such ideas meant to be seeds for further discussions and debates.