<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Alan Greenspan Can&#8217;t Escape His Role in the U.S. Housing Bubble</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jutiagroup.com/2009/05/19/alan-greenspan-cant-escape-his-role-in-the-us-housing-bubble/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jutiagroup.com/2009/05/19/alan-greenspan-cant-escape-his-role-in-the-us-housing-bubble/</link>
	<description>Market Jitters &#38; Political Critters</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:27:02 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ara</title>
		<link>http://jutiagroup.com/2009/05/19/alan-greenspan-cant-escape-his-role-in-the-us-housing-bubble/comment-page-1/#comment-10610</link>
		<dc:creator>Ara</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:24:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jutiagroup.com/?p=6385#comment-10610</guid>
		<description>Can you please explain why low short-term interest rates (fed funds rate) acted as a floor for teaser rates? 

Is it just because these low short-term interest rates are the bank&#039;s (or broker&#039;s) cost of capital? But the brokers and banks didn&#039;t hold the loans on their books. 

Can&#039;t an ARM be structured in any way, i.e. couldn&#039;t lenders make the teaser rates 0% if they wanted? I thought the whole point of an ARM was simply to defer payments (and I guess accumulate interest on interest) until later on anyways?  

Brokers simply wanted to make as many loans as possible, and then pass them on and collect fees. Because they didn&#039;t hold the loans on their books to earn a spread, the interest rate of the loan (relative to the bank&#039;s cost of capital) doesn&#039;t matter. And as long as prices continued to rise, people would simply sell their houses before their 1-7 years were up, and pay off their mortgage anyways.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can you please explain why low short-term interest rates (fed funds rate) acted as a floor for teaser rates? </p>
<p>Is it just because these low short-term interest rates are the bank&#8217;s (or broker&#8217;s) cost of capital? But the brokers and banks didn&#8217;t hold the loans on their books. </p>
<p>Can&#8217;t an ARM be structured in any way, i.e. couldn&#8217;t lenders make the teaser rates 0% if they wanted? I thought the whole point of an ARM was simply to defer payments (and I guess accumulate interest on interest) until later on anyways?  </p>
<p>Brokers simply wanted to make as many loans as possible, and then pass them on and collect fees. Because they didn&#8217;t hold the loans on their books to earn a spread, the interest rate of the loan (relative to the bank&#8217;s cost of capital) doesn&#8217;t matter. And as long as prices continued to rise, people would simply sell their houses before their 1-7 years were up, and pay off their mortgage anyways.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
