Image source: http://7c6084b8d8abb1234a0e-5cd858dd44aa0163416e9813b139fdcd.r33.cf2.rackcdn.com/yzHws8U9Na_1389909168802.jpg?rasterSignature=354209769e666adf73bfd60442ebaa99&theme=Five%20Seven%20Five&imageFilter=false
Booming genuine estate investments fostered an explosion in mortgages. These were funded by banks, government groups' guaranteed loans through Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and newly created mortgage-backed investments.
The government wants to be on top of concerns of the economy as plenty as it'll so politicians and regulators can take credit whenever concerns improve and further blame others and take hold of greater control when concerns get worse. That's where their power and benefits keep.
So, the result of the government forcing low attention rates through over expansion of the money give was to destroy the free market forces leading to runaway booms driven by 'easy cash'. The booms included the mortgage-backed genuine estate boom, the boom in all the financial investment supporting it, and the debt boom for consumers.
Government regulates the money give to foster improvement in the markets to elevate productivity and employment, especially to offset current or impending recessions that cause reduced productivity and rising unemployment. Yet at the same time, it attempts to minimize too plenty inflation from occurring. But this perverts and destabilizes the markets.
And of course, the government guaranteed the ones loans which undoubtedly enhanced opportunity-taking since the government would be choosing up the 'check' under any defaults. Mortgage-backed investments packages obscured the underlying mortgage risks to higher compete for offering higher attention rates to investors.
I wager we would possibly not know. That's since of several circumstances.
It regulates lending institutions, guarantees home mortgage loans - under Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac form investment groups - presumably to guard bank consumers and lend a hand citizens purchase homes.
But making too plenty cash available in the hands of consumers and government without a commensurate elevate in goods and capabilities will bid up the price of the ones goods and capabilities. This ends up in inflation - a reducing of the dollar's buying power. Too plenty inflation will force savers and lenders to demand higher attention rates to offset their cash's lack of buying power during the time they lend it.
The recent boom and bust crisis of our financial markets is not the failure of free market capitalism. It's a result of government intervention into the financial markets.It's this intervention that prevents the free market forces from bringing markets into balance to offset the choice of runaway booms or busts.
Such low attention rates made direct saving pay very little go back, whilst making investment and borrowing very more cost-effective. The result was a massive housing boom as people - nervous about the lately busted equity markets - invested in genuine estate. It also frustrated stable savings rates, and highly aggravated the quantity of debt consumers incurred.
For lending institutions and the numerous cash suppliers to compete and remain in industrial under the demands for mortgages with unnaturally low attention rates and rising house prices, they lowered their mortgage qualifications - and thereby increased the opportunity to fate investors in all mortgage-backed investments.
Government intervenes and interferes in the financial markets - undermining free market forces - through its financial policies. Such policies control the give of cash which, in turn, effects the attention rate.Increasing the give of cash can force down the attention rate (cash's price) - just like the over abundance of any product, and vice versa.
Slowly we must come out of recession. Business will pick up and depressed housing prices may also slowly work their manner up. Down the road we can anticipate greater booms and busts.
*What's government's position?
Unfortunately, by seeking to adjust the money give to government's purposes, regulating the banks, and guaranteeing loans, the government undermines or destroys the free market forces that preserve the markets balanced with appropriate incentives, de-incentives and obligations for savings and investments.
'Capitalism - i.e. the free market - doesn't pretty work'.
*How would Capitalism - i.e. a free market - cope with the economy?
The changing price for any commodity, good, or service in a free market areas assistance about the markets associated with that product, coordinates the give and demand for that product, and areas incentives or de-incentives about supplying or demanding greater of that product.
By this time, the money and mortgaged-based investment boom had infiltrated the investments of maximum of the key financial institutions. Many of those 'default-related' investments have become next to worthless causing them enormous losses. Such investment were often called 'toxic asset'. With such assets, many sizeable financial institutions, themselves, began to fail. The financial crisis instigated in the U.S. put additional countries into recession.
From 2003 to 2007, the government, to offset the recessionary fears from the end of the century equity market bust, expanded the money by 50% through its financial polices to stimulate investment through 'easy available cash or credit'. This unnaturally forced down attention rates to near zero levels and created enormous cash availability for making an investment.
Without free market forces operating, the markets move far from equilibrium and have nothing to preserve them from a running away toward boom or bust.
Lending institutions- along with the government-related groups Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae lowered their mortgage application requisites so even the noncreditworthy borrowers got loans.
It needs greater legislation by government. They say that the whole crisis is the fault of 'greedy lenders' who made irresponsible loans for profits. Of course, the government prevented the free market from working with the natural market forces which could have held lenders to guilty concepts. Government forced irresponsible lending by perverting the markets and attention rates by infusion of available cash.
The recession then made financial institutions wary of lending any cash they had for fear of further mortgage defaults and loss.
Get the word out.
And worst still is that there are specific attention groups that depend on government intervention. They will push to preserve greater government intervention since they that's how they make cash their cash too. All this takes place when government just gets to important.
That surely will throw greater 'wrenches' into the workings of our institutions.
The financial markets are driven by attention rates which is the price of cash. The attention rates determine the matching of the give of cash from savings with the demand for cash in the investment and debt-related markets. Increasing attention rates favor the give of saving however makes making an investment greater expensive. Lower attention rates frustrate the give of savings however makes making an investment more cost-effective. There's a rate that fits those markets under prevailing conditions of institutional incentives and responsibility.
But of course, all booms end when the missing benefits that a free market would give turns into apparent. What was missing in this government fostered financial crisis was the natural de-incentive for lending - i.e. defaults and the associated investment losses. The bust began in 2008 when the overabundance of noncreditworthy borrowers began defaulting on their loans.
They're bailing out banks with an expansion of the money give and forcing bankers to lend when they don't feel guilty lending. They desire to adjust the banks greater and determine what they can and can't invest in. They even desire to adjust how bankers can in reality pay themselves salaries and bonuses.
*What's government's solution?
And so we're brought back into recession again with productivity down and employment high, after government's interference in the financial markets. But the boom and bust economy has been with us for without equal 100 years that the Federal Reserve System has regulated the money give.
