Nationlised Morgages - Can it be done?

[Police State]

Now that it seems likely that the big banks (& mortage co's) are being underwritten by the gov (taxpayer) and that a large part of the bank's collatoral is people's mortgages; is this not a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to 'unbundle' the mortgage system from the banks control, and have the government run a 'non-profit' national mortage company for real with a fixed rate, say base +1%, instead of the planned proxy-version. Would this not enable the government to effectively fix the long term mortgage rate to an 'affordable' level and keep it outside of the mainstream money markets with all of its inherent ups and downs, and leave said market to deal in the standard stocks, shares, etc. At least then, any stock market investors would be people who wanted to buy into the market, mindful of its pitfalls and protect the 'omnibus man with a mortage' who unwittingly finds himself within the market because someone sold his mortage to someone else...

[JagLover]

Despite their recent problems I would say that bankers would make a better job at banking than civil servants.

[Mark H 1984]

JagLover said:

Despite their recent problems I would say that bankers would make a better job at banking than civil servants.

Like JagLover said I think (hope) we would do a better job then civil servants.

However I think the main issue is that the total value of UK homes is circa 5.8trillion pounds. Say 60& loan to value (prob higher) and you have total mortgages of about 3.5 trillion in outstanding mortgages. They would all want to move to a government backed scheme.

In 2006 the UK GDP was $1.9trillion. I don't think the government has the cash to offer everyone a mortgage.

[scotal]

Are you a banker from the North East Mark???

[Mark H 1984]

scotal said:

Are you a banker from the North East Mark???

yeah mate.

[johnfm]

Can I point you in the direction of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.

[scotal]

Mark H 1984 said:

scotal said:

Are you a banker from the North East Mark???

yeah mate.

Big firm..... used t be run by a guy called Applegarth?

[minimax]

scotal said:

Mark H 1984 said:

scotal said:

Are you a banker from the North East Mark???

yeah mate.

Big firm..... used t be run by a guy called Applegarth?

I have a soft spot for the reck, spent 3 years there... can't belive the shambles, but hey ho

[Police State]

Mark H 1984 said:

JagLover said:

Despite their recent problems I would say that bankers would make a better job at banking than civil servants.

In 2006 the UK GDP was $1.9trillion. I don't think the government has the cash to offer everyone a mortgage.

I think you have overlooked something. With the 'new' market condition rules on who is finanacialy fit to have a mortgage in the first place, I don't think the government will need the cash to offer everyone a mortgage.

Can anyone else think why this would not work?

[2something]

Mark H 1984 said:

JagLover said:

Despite their recent problems I would say that bankers would make a better job at banking than civil servants.

Like JagLover said I think (hope) we would do a better job then civil servants.

However I think the main issue is that the total value of UK homes is circa 5.8trillion pounds. Say 60& loan to value (prob higher) and you have total mortgages of about 3.5 trillion in outstanding mortgages. They would all want to move to a government backed scheme.

In 2006 the UK GDP was $1.9trillion. I don't think the government has the cash to offer everyone a mortgage.

I vaguely remember reading that only about 1/3 of residential properties had mortgages, but I am very happy to be corrected, as I think I read on some random post a long time ago and could well be very wrong.

[thinfourth2]

Yippee lets all run towards communism

I can just the government taking over all property to protect us

[Police State]

thinfourth2 said:

Yippee lets all run towards communism

I can just the government taking over all property to protect us

Do you actually know what communism is; and do you know the fundemental differences between that system and a capitalist one?

[JagLover]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

and can you imagine a business trying to get a loan. You would have to spend more time talking abhout your equal opportunities/environmental policy than about the commercial aspects.

[Tuna]

Police State said:

Mark H 1984 said:

JagLover said:

Despite their recent problems I would say that bankers would make a better job at banking than civil servants.

In 2006 the UK GDP was $1.9trillion. I don't think the government has the cash to offer everyone a mortgage.

I think you have overlooked something. With the 'new' market condition rules on who is finanacialy fit to have a mortgage in the first place, I don't think the government will need the cash to offer everyone a mortgage.

Can anyone else think why this would not work?

For the same reason that there should be a separation of state and church - the government should work for us, and should not be able to exert undue control over the population (haha). It might sound nice to have a benign dictatorship, but there's nothing in the system that ensures that it remains benign.

[JagLover]

Tuna said:

For the same reason that there should be a separation of state and church - the government should work for us, and should not be able to exert undue control over the population (haha). It might sound nice to have a benign dictatorship, but there's nothing in the system that ensures that it remains benign.

"The only difference between a welfare state and a totalitarian one is a matter of time"