Nice spin, Blackangst1. The sad truth is that most people aren't financial experts- they depend, to some degree or another, on the acumen of their lenders. For decades, people could depend on the idea that the likelihood that they could repay any mortgage they qualified for was very high. In watching out for their own interests, lenders also watched out for those of borrowers. Fast forward to 2006, when all that had gone out the window. Lenders had a whole new attitude, based on their ability to offload risk via securitization, and on the pie in the sky notion that prices and payments could keep climbing well in excess of the ability of borrowers to repay. Yeh, sure, securitization has also been around a long time, but various permutations are very recent developments. Somehow in the process, subprime ARM's came to be regarded as lower risk than conventional 30 year subprime mortgages, and the cost to consumers reflected that. How in the name of sweet freakin' Jebsu that happened is beyond my comprehension. It's obvious malarkey. Back in the 80's, when they first became legal, subprime arm's were more expensive than ordinary mortgages, because of the risk, and were mostly used in credit repair scenarios. they were also a very small % of the market. If the borrower could successfully meet the monthly obligations of the ARM, then it was obvious that they could meet the lesser monthly obligations of a 30 year fixed mortgage, and lenders were amenable to that when the mortgage was due to reset. ARM's were seldom securitized, either, but rather held by the lender as a nice high return investment. who'd been rather careful in their selection of borrowers...
And a lot of the behind the scenes financial dealings that made this all possible were only possible themselves because of serial deregulation of the financial industry, all in the name of "free markets"- remember? Now those advocates got what they wanted, and something extra, too, something they were depending on all along- It's called the Greenspan Put, and it's based on he idea that they're too big for us to allow them to fail, that the Fed will find a way to bail them out, or at least bail most of them out... basically, they're holding the whole economy hostage...
So I'll offer what is really a conservative idea, rather than the reactionary ideas that spawned the current crisis- that we need to return to the kind of regulations that existed prior to the Reagan era, to the regulations and concepts of the New Deal. Like them or not from an ideological standpoint, they worked, unlike the current scenario,which obviously doesn't...