7 Fixes for a Market Failure

May 9, 2008 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (6)

These costs will be steep. But the alternative is worse: a market collapse that could result in the loss of millions of jobs.

I suggest seven reforms:

1. The government should have a central regulatory focus to assess risk across financial markets, regardless of corporate form. The government should have the power and capacity to intervene, when appropriate, either by forcing companies to cut back on leverage or by raising their capital requirements.

2. Any financial institution that stands to benefit from Federal Reserve assistance in a crisis must be subject to regulatory scrutiny to make sure it is managing its risk prudently. The Federal Reserve should have the right to command the information it needs to make judgments and to impose the biggest capital requirements on those who take the greatest risk.

3. Regulators must be given the ability to do their own assessment of capital liquidity and risk and not leave the task to banks and credit rating agencies.

4. Credit rating agencies should be required to certify to their boards—with corresponding liability—the independence of the rating process from borrower influence.

5. Mortgage brokers must be licensed nationally. In the housing bubble, we've had too many inappropriate or fraudulent mortgages.

6. The banks must enhance the transparency of their financial risks and exposure. They should be obliged to retain a significant part of the risk on their own balance sheet, if they originate securitized obligations, so that they will bear some cost if things go wrong.

7. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be forced to raise adequate additional equity capital quickly.

The categorical imperatives are: greater disclosure, more oversight, improved risk-management by our banks and investment institutions, and new regulatory agencies to make sure this all happens. The current system of voluntary codes and industry standards is broken.

Tags:
Federal Reserve,
economy,
stock market,
credit

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I do have some respect for Mort because of his views on Mclaughlin group. however what I find missing in articles like these is how to increase demand for housing. one is to let the prices fall more and more till more buyers find it affordable. The other is to fix the broken immigration system and to process residency a bit faster for legal immigrants (note - I mean legals who are already in the US ..because of the broken system it takes around 8 years for them to get a green card ..after paying around 15 thousand dollars in fees - (lawyer and other)).

Krish of GA 12:24AM July 07, 2008

I already knew that people who wield alot of power never told people the truth, but to suggest that the Fed, which is NOT the government but a PRIVATE institution controlled by PRIVATE banks(the seven largest shareholders are not even listed!), have MORE control over markets IS JUST SHAMEFUL.

IF you do not understand how a fiat money system works vs. a hard currency system, like the gold standard, then I will explain it to you.

If I deposit gold into a bank then that bank can put out loans on said gold as long as I keep it in that bank....that bank cannot put out more loans than it has in collateral b/c it would make the bank insolvent if everyone were to pull their gold back out. In this system, credit cannot just be created and this system gives the free market more stability b/c it puts more lending and credit restrictions on a bank than could ever be put on a bank by regulations written in a book.

Fiat money systems, like the Federal Reserve, work on a credit/debit system that makes every man, woman, and child be forever in debt to the Fed b/c they print money and lend it to banks on a percentage. This credit, however, is NOT backed by any collateral and is created for banks, basically out of thin air(but is based on a complicated algorithm that includes GDP, inflation, confidence of other central banks in the growth of our economy, and many other things), to artificially stimulate investment in whatever market investors think they can make a quick buck in. This "artificial credit" that is created can only benefit the first receivers of that credit b/c they are allowed to buy credit on loan and possibly make more money then they owe....which is not always the case as is true in any "bubble" for it is this artificial creation of credit that CREATES the bubble.

So it is the LACK of a gold system that creates monetary instability b/c the banks are allowed to control the flow of money, the direction of the economy, the direction of the government, and in effect basically control the ENTIRE country.

So, in summary, you are a FRAUD and you should be ASHAMED that you had enough gall to even write your column!

Me of KS 10:57AM June 10, 2008

Mr. Z -

What you suggest is, in concept, like allowing the DMV to regulate the way cars are built. They are tangentially connected, but allowing a government agency more power over the free market smacks of a losing ideal.

It would be wonderful to believe that the government can swoop in and fix the problems accrued by private lenders, and individuals - but in the end, it is in the market's best interest to allow these institutions, and again - individuals - to fail. I hear tell of hard-luck stories of people being given mortgages that knew they wouldn't be able to pay back - and I wonder, who signed the documents? I know there is a lot of fine print, but in all honesty, you are signing away a majority of your income for thirty (or more) years. I would imagine someone would make the effort to understand what it is they are signing. And if they don't, and sign regardless, they should be allowed - yes, allowed - to fail, lose their home and be sent on their way. That, to the best of my knowledge, is how the mortgage industry is designed: you promise, on the collatoral of your home, to pay on time, and in full. When you don't, you forfiet your home. Just one thought.

As for the multitude of your suggestions - they sound like so much Democratic tongue whapping. If there is so much need to help, and regulate, why has the system worked as it has for so long? Why the sudden need? And why not ask wealthy Democrats - who should line up for this one - just open their pockets and help others out?

I've got 60,000 in college debt, I'll take a check.

William Bulck of WI 10:50AM June 07, 2008

advertisement

Debate Club

Should There Be Such a Thing as 'Reporter's Privilege'?

Experts debate the ability reporters to protect their sources even in the face of a government investigation.

Latest Videos

advertisement

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

Poll Finds Congress' Popularity Hits Historic Lows

Polling shows Congress has achieved historic unpopularity.

House GOP 20 Week Abortion Ban Vote Was a Waste of Time

Abortion should be left up to the states.

The NSA, Guns and Privacy in the Obama Administration

The Obama administration’s needs to take a long look in the mirror after revelations about government surveillance.

Polls Show American People Hate Almost Everything About Politics

The American people are breaking up with politics.

Do You Believe NSA Leaker Edward Snowden or President Obama?

Should we take the word of the NSA leaker or Obama?

Obama, Boehner and the GOP Crisis of Leadership

It’s tough for anyone to lead when some in the GOP seem committed to their own destruction.

Obamacare Opponents Have to Keep Pushing Repeal

The way to repeal Obamacare is to hasten its ugly results.

Can Obama's Berlin Speech Match John F. Kennedy's and Ronald Reagan's?

The two famous Berlin speeches almost never were.