Slick Willie Calls For Broad Principal Mortgage Writedowns

Tyler Durden's picture

Bill Clinton, in what appears to be an attempt to succeed where the IEA failed so miserably to score some brownie points for the president, told Bloomberg's Al Hunt during an interview, that Bank of America Corp.’s accord with mortgage-bond investors may give more “underwater” homeowners a chance to cut the principal on their home loans. "You’d relieve the anxiety of countless Americans who would know they could hold onto their homes." That you would also bring moral hazard to the masses and demonstrate to the public that the alternative of prudent monetary management is not insolvency, but yet more bailouts, apparently was lost on the slick one. And confirming that he still has no clue how anything in the ponzi system works, he added: "You lift not only an economic, but a psychological burden off of the homeowners and the banks,” he said. “And we’re free to start lending again, we’re free to engage in normal economic activity." Apparently marking down one's assets, which would in turn lead to massive Tier 1 capital (as artificial as it may be) erosion, and a need to funnel hundreds of billions of new cash in on the balance sheet, while at the same time setting off a chain reaction whereby everyone else is forced to remark their assets (all currently at par thanks to FASB encouraged Mark to Unicorn), an act which QE 1, Lite and 2 have been doing all they can to avert, is stimulative to "lending". And this is the thought process of the person credit with generating the last American budget surplus...

This is one of those rare occasions when one must commiserate with Brian Moynahan:

Brian T. Moynihan, 51, the chief executive officer of Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America, said in April that “we do not see broad-based principal reduction as a sound policy decision” for the country.

“It’s hard to see how we could justify reducing principal for many delinquent customers who represent a small portion of borrowers, but not for the vast majority of our customers who have stayed current on their loans,” he said in the prepared text of a speech.

There really is nothing more to say on this one. Which means that Clinton's "modest proposal" will likely be enacted very shortly.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
buzzsaw99's picture

Mr. (ex)President, my offer is this: nothing. Not even the price of the property taxes, which I would appreciate if you would put up personally.

plocequ1's picture

Dont ever tell anyone outside the family what you're thinking again

citta vritti's picture

principal reduction. lol. like the scene where DeNiro as young Vito has the old lady’s landlord negotiating against himself for rent reduction.

pan-the-ist's picture

Against him.  The recent abuse of reflexive pronouns has gotten way out of hand.  I can't read this garbage.  LOOK PEOPLE, IF YOU DON"T KNOW HOW TO USE YOURSELF, HIMSELF, MYSELF, ETC, DONT!  Sorry for the rant.

FEDbuster's picture

Since politicians are getting principle reductions, why shouldn't the average Joe?  Oh that's right, we can't drop legislation that would make foreclosure harder in return.

his name is robert paulson420's picture

please remove the sand from your vagina.


now go fuck urself.

jeff montanye's picture

i think you are mistaken pan.  the landlord is negotiating against himself (i.e. the landlord) not vito.  vito offered extra money but asked that the landlord let the lady's dog stay.  although he, the landlord, initially refused, when he found out who vito was, he negotiated against himself, changing the offer vito made to one even more advantageous for vito's "principal", the lady (i.e. to a reduced rent and letting the dog stay).

max2205's picture

Funny, I actually wrote to Dick Obama the very same plan but said interest rates had to be Raised. No reply from Dick

Calmyourself's picture

Slick willie, your my brotha and I love ya, but don't ever, ever go against the family again..  The part of my brother played by J.P. Morgan, GS etc..

his name is robert paulson420's picture

What are you gonna do? Nice college boy, didn't want to get mixed up in the family business. Now you want to gun down a police captain. Why? Because he slapped you in the face a little? What do you think this like the Army where you can shoot 'em from a mile away? No you gotta get up like this and, badda-bing, you blow their brains all over your nice Ivy League suit.

laughing_swordfish's picture

It's not personal, Sonny, it's strictly business...


Village Idiot's picture

Give that man a cigar.

High Plains Drifter's picture

Cigar and Clinton?  Hmmmm..........

Cheesy Bastard's picture

That goes more to his policy on illegal immigration.  After all, if he didn't favor it, why would he go to those lengths to hide a cuban inside a cow?

Pegasus Muse's picture
When you absolutely, positively need a f***ed up idea to divert attention from the latest O’bummer leadership fiasco … the release of the nation's SPR ….. it is Slick Willie to the rescue.     Slick will say and do just about anything for a free cigar and a Jersey Shore bimbo. 
macholatte's picture

Clinton is the personification of the failure of Obama.

Let us not forget that the foundation for the demise of the USA was laid during Clinton's rule.


Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms.

Rodent Freikorps's picture

Among other evils which being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised.


RF's picture

Gun control means being able to hit your target.

RF (and many others)

jeff montanye's picture

imo the origin of the demise of the usa predates clinton.  and, again imo, it seems unlikely it has much to do with a lack of weapons at whatever level.  the usa has the best armed military and citizenry in the world.  and, apparently, almost an eagerness to use their guns.  

debt and mendacity seem a lot closer to the problem. 

HEHEHE's picture

Where'd he go to school again?

WestVillageIdiot's picture

Some place where you could major in being a cunt, that's for sure.

Cheesy Bastard's picture

Oh yeah, he did meet Hillary in school.

owensdrillin's picture

Sad to say, but I would rather have Hillary running the free world right now that idiot. Fuck me are we fucked.

Yen Cross's picture

 You neeed tooo stay out of those [Particle accelerators> POOF!!!

kengland's picture

It's about time the people get taken care of. Christ, if the morons are going to pass our money around, we might as well get some of it.

Bob's picture

But the moral hazzard! 

Eternal Student's picture

We? What's this freakin "we" bit? This is only going to help a small subset of people, while screwing over the vast majority of homeowners. You know, the ones who lived responsibly?

Oh, I forget. If you've lived within your means, and have savings, that's supposed to be given to those who partied and gambled.

Silly me.

kengland's picture

Look at it this way. The whole facking system is facked. You can't turn this ship. Think flying a jet into a mountain and you and I are on board.

With that being said, we can now fight over the last cocktail. I want a facking drink. The bank scum has been sucking off the damn thing now for year. I want to belly up while I can.

It's the system. We just opporate in it.

If it matters, I would not benefit from it, but I would much rather see "people" get something then wall st.

WestVillageIdiot's picture

I love how we have turned into a country of, "I can justify any wrong by pointing to a bigger wrong".  I'm really tired of that shit.  It is like little kids saying, "but Bobby got a cookie". 

Medea's picture

And "two wrongs don't make a right" is kids' logic. Right and wrong were lost long ago.

narnia's picture

when a bankruptcy court writes off debt, is that a wrong?  i don't view it that way.  i view it as a necessary part of any free market capitalist system.  

yes, the homeowner who purchased an irrationally priced asset made a bad decision.  well, so did the investor who purchased mortgages in a big package writted by a fraudulent entity without proper underwriting.  from my view, expecting the homeowner to take a bath while the investor remains whole (earning all stated interest with the taxpayer on the hook for deficiency through GSEs) is unconsionable.

in my opinion, mortgage invesors should volunteer to mark down ALL mortgages to ALL homeowners to 1% APR for the amount of years that corresponds to 5% reductions in home value from time of purchase.  should these mortgage investors not participate, they forgo their "implicit" government mortgage guarantee & face summary action by homeowners voiding any purchase contract with MERS involved.  


Osmium's picture

My mortgage is paid, I no longer have a loan on my property.  Should the bank then give me cash?

slewie the pi-rat's picture

i hear ya, sarge! 

yes, there is one drink left.  you and that fabulous wench blythe the bankster drank everything!  then, she took the only parachute and jumped. 

but i have the gun!  hahaha!  so finish the drink.  then i want you to take the gun and shoot me.  i can't take it anymore!   i can't wait for this damned plane to crash any longer.  i've had enough shitty stories and bad actors.  this is completely ridiculous!

XenoFrog's picture

I did everything right, purchased a house I could afford, with 25% down, and i'm now $60k underwater.  Why am I not deserving of a break while others are?

kengland's picture

Why do the banks deserve a "break" with your money? The systems broke. Savors have been punished for almost a century now. Enough with the "doing the right thing." In hell, doing the right thing get's you no where 

XenoFrog's picture

The banks need to do the right thing and write down the mortgages because they were the ones who inflated them with shoddy and rigged appraisals in the first place. They over-value the homes when times are good, and are now under-appraising them to keep people in their current mortgages.

In a fair world, the banks would have gone through bankruptcy, with bad loans separated from good. Instead, the too big to fails got even bigger, and continue ripping off people like you and I who are now stuck in homes even when we did every responsible thing before the whole system collapsed.

kengland's picture

If you and I were on a plane heading into a mountain, I would suggest we hit something else other than the booze :)

XenoFrog's picture

I could boil the water in your helmet.

pan-the-ist's picture

Hi Xeno, time for enlightenment.  What you don't realize (yet) is that the banks technically don't have any money.  They have your money and they have my money.  When they pay fines or go bankrupt, we lose.  That's why they get to do what they want until they REALLY fuck up and get taken over by the FDIC, right after they are looted.

XenoFrog's picture

Here's some enlightenment: If no one has any money, and it's all just a fucking shell game, then why not clear the board for everyone? This extend and pretend as all the banks are insolvent isn't helping anyone except for the banking executives.

pan-the-ist's picture

Seriously? You and I don't have access to the printing press.  This game has always been about power and control.  There are two sides, the owners and everyone else. Most people don't know that they are part of the game, for example, the upper lower class vs. the welfare recipiants...  The game has been the same forever.  If writing down our mortgages makes you belive in the system, then they've won, but they will never relinquish their financial control (peacefully.) By the way, this isn't class warfare, (unless class warefare is the game being played) it is about crowd control.

nmewn's picture

"This game has always been about power and control.  There are two sides, the owners and everyone else.Most people don't know that they are part of the game, for example, the upper lower class vs. the welfare recipiants..."

Bad example...we will have to get over this notion that because one chooses to be a welfare recipient, the welfare recipient becomes entitled to someone else's labor simply with the passage of time. 

Charity cannot be forced. It can only be given freely or withheld on a voluntary basis by the one being asked. Cohersion or threat do not play a part in charity or it is extortion/theft.

"The game has been the same forever.  If writing down our mortgages makes you belive in the system, then they've won, but they will never relinquish their financial control (peacefully.) By the way, this isn't class warfare, (unless class warefare is the game being played) it is about crowd control."

This is, in fact, class warfare. The elites against everyone else.

The elite class of politician attempted a model of finance in which the less successful among us could feel better about the circumstances they find themselves in. In doing this, they (the politician) teamed up with other elites (bankers) to become the "white knights" for those people...or Stockholm Syndrome, however one wishes to describe it.

However they, the elites, never take personal responsibility for their own actions. They always make only one group responsible for their actions.

The taxpayer...the common man...the prudent citizen.

This group is in the process of discovering the moral hazard that was very much discussed and commented on three years ago.

That event was when one class of elites decided to absolve the other class of elites of any obligation the former class of elites had placed upon them by, again, this notion of forced charity.

We are discovering these elites were not the white knights as presented at all but black knights and the destroyers of all that is good.

Now comes the age old tactic of elite guilt transference as a rear guard action. This time the common man sees it.

This time it will not work.


Eternal Student's picture

I'm truly sorry to hear that you are underwater. But I have also done everything right. I'm not underwater. So, allow me to (respectfully) ask you the same thing? Why am I not deserving of a break while others are?

This is a slippery slope, and punishes those who have been saving and not gambling. I really should've gone all out, is the message that this sends.

XenoFrog's picture

The problem is that people like you and I were victims of fraud. The greatest fraud in human history. The only real answer is to bust up the banks, let the insolvent ones fail, and face the consequences like citizens of this great nation. I'll gladly keep paying the mortgage on my underwater house if the loan is being held by a reputable bank.