CONTACT INFORMATION :


About Me:
Real Name: Duncan Black
Age: 38
Location: Philadelphia





RSS Feed
Latest

Search Now:  
Amazon Logo


Blogroll:

Pandagon
Daily Kos
Matthew Yglesias
Josh Marshall
Hullabaloo
Unqualified Offerings
corrente
First Draft
AmericaBlog
Echidne
Firedoglake
Feministe
Crooks&Liars
Washington Monthly
Glenn Greenwald
General J.C. Christian
Crooked Timber
Pacific Views
Altercation
The Big Picture
Shakespeare's Sister
Feministing
Oliver Willis
Think Progress
Adventus
Sadly, No!
Poor Man
Whiskey Fire
Alicublog
TBogg
Talk Left
Orcinus
Roger Ailes
Suburban Guerilla
Upyernoz
Booman Tribune
She Flies...
Attaturk
All Spin Zone
Will Bunch
The Sideshow
Tom Tomorrow
Majikthise
TAPPED
MyDD
Dependable Renegade
Ezra Klein
August J. Pollak
NToddler
Open Left
LG&M
Calculated Risk


 
  Search this site:
check to have links open new windows


Saturday, August 26, 2006
 
Memories of Uncle Alan

Just so history doesn't forget:

One way homeowners attempt to manage their payment risk is to use fixed-rate mortgages, which typically allow homeowners to prepay their debt when interest rates fall but do not involve an increase in payments when interest rates rise. Homeowners pay a lot of money for the right to refinance and for the insurance against increasing mortgage payments. Calculations by market analysts of the "option adjusted spread" on mortgages suggest that the cost of these benefits conferred by fixed-rate mortgages can range from 0.5 percent to 1.2 percent, raising homeowners' annual after-tax mortgage payments by several thousand dollars. Indeed, recent research within the Federal Reserve suggests that many homeowners might have saved tens of thousands of dollars had they held adjustable-rate mortgages rather than fixed-rate mortgages during the past decade, though this would not have been the case, of course, had interest rates trended sharply upward.

American homeowners clearly like the certainty of fixed mortgage payments. This preference is in striking contrast to the situation in some other countries, where adjustable-rate mortgages are far more common and where efforts to introduce American-type fixed-rate mortgages generally have not been successful. Fixed-rate mortgages seem unduly expensive to households in other countries. One possible reason is that these mortgages effectively charge homeowners high fees for protection against rising interest rates and for the right to refinance.

American consumers might benefit if lenders provided greater mortgage product alternatives to the traditional fixed-rate mortgage. To the degree that households are driven by fears of payment shocks but are willing to manage their own interest rate risks, the traditional fixed-rate mortgage may be an expensive method of financing a home.

Conclusion
In evaluating household debt burdens, one must remember that debt-to-income ratios have been rising for at least a half century. With household assets rising as well, the ratio of net worth to income is currently somewhat higher than its long-run average. So long as financial intermediation continues to expand, both household debt and assets are likely to rise faster than income. Without an examination of what is happening to both assets and liabilities, it is difficult to ascertain the true burden of debt service. Overall, the household sector seems to be in good shape, and much of the apparent increase in the household sector's debt ratios over the past decade reflects factors that do not suggest increasing household financial stress. And, in fact, during the past two years, debt service ratios have been stable.


As I wrote at the time:


Has He Gone Insane?






Disclaimer:
This is a personal web site. It is not a production of Media Matters for America (MMFA). Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of MMFA. Preferences for electoral candidates posted on this site have not been expressed using any MMFA resources.



 

 
 












Drinking Liberally