FOX Translator
No data currently available.
No data currently available.
We like to think that when we deposit a dollar at the bank, it goes into a big vault and we can pull out that same dollar at any time. But that¿s not how the U.S. banking system works. Banks take that money and invest it to make money themselves, so cash gets spread around. This, naturally, leads to a big risk: What happens if those investments go sour? Well, you¿d be out of luck. You can¿t get your dollar back.
The Federal Reserve doesn¿t like that scenario, so it prohibits banks from putting all the cash it has on deposit on the line. In fact, the Fed forces banks to keep a portion of their assets at the Federal Reserve itself, to make sure that some of your assets won¿t get squandered if the bank¿s bets go south. These are called ¿reserves,¿ (hence, Federal Reserve. Got it? Good), and usually amount to 10% of the total cash kept in checking accounts.
These reserves are never exactly 10%, and banks like to keep a little extra in reserve ¿ not, as you might think, to make you more comfortable that they¿re in good financial shape, but rather so they can take that excess and lend it to other banks and make money off it. (They¿re banks, they can¿t help themselves.) The rate at which they make these loans is called the Federal Funds rate, which is set by the Federal Reserve¿s Federal Open Market Committee.
When you hear people chattering about how the Fed cut or hiked interest rates, this is what they¿re talking about: the interest rate banks can charge for lending money from their reserves. This begs the question: If these are essentially loans between banks, why is the Fed Funds rate so important for the rest of the economy?
Well, simply put, because loans make the financial world go round. Bank A lends Bank B $10,000 at a Fed Funds rate of 5%. Bank B then lends out $10,000 to a small business at 7%. The small business then takes that money and expands the business and hires new workers. Now someone is employed, Bank B has made interest off the loan, and Bank A is the richer for making it all happen. It¿s perhaps overly simplistic, but you get the idea. When you want the economy to thrive, you make lending cheaper.
Of course, sometimes you don¿t want the economy to thrive. In fact, you might want it to cool down, mostly to avoid money flooding the system and causing inflation. In that case, the Fed raises interest rates, making it difficult to lend or borrow.
Home
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
US House set to pass sweeping housing rescue bill
Reuters
By Patrick Rucker
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House is due Wednesday to begin debating a housing rescue package that could see the government buy up $15 billion of abandoned homes and help an estimated half million homeowners facing foreclosure.
The sweeping bill would offer fresh spending, tax credits and a new government guarantee on many risky loans in order to bolster the national housing market.
Declining home values and rising foreclosures over the past 12 months have darkened the mood of consumers and pushed the economy toward recession. Recent reports show consumer confidence hit a five-year low in April, while home prices booked a record drop in February.
The Democratic plan combines a variety of new measures as well as some already-passed legislation in a bulky bill that is expected to garner significant Republican support.
"We will pass a bill," Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services committee, which approved the bill last week, told reporters on Tuesday.
Significantly, nearly a third of Republicans on Frank's committee voted for his portions of the housing bill.
Also on Tuesday, the White House threatened to veto an aspect of the housing plan that would deliver $15 billion of federal grants to cities and towns so that they could buy foreclosed homes in disrepair.
Such spending would wrongly benefit the mortgage investors who now own those empty homes, the White House said in a statement, though it did not threaten to veto other elements of the bill.
GOVERNMENT BACKSTOP
A key aspect of the legislation would provide a cash infusion and new mandate for the Federal Housing Administration to guarantee up to $300 billion of home loans when the property has sunk in value since the mortgage was written.
Lenders would have to erase a portion of the original loan in order to secure a government guarantee on future payments. An independent government study estimates that 500,000 borrowers could be helped under that program.
In a separate statement Tuesday, Washington's leading housing agency faulted the Democrats' plan for putting too much federal money at risk and contended that it could help many homeowners by using administrative tweaks that do not require such legislation.
Another element of the plan would give a $7,500 tax credit to new, first-time homebuyers and allow states to issue $10 billion in tax-exempt bonds to refinance shaky loans. (Reporting by Patrick Rucker; editing by Gary Crosse)
Market Snapshot
| Symbol | Last Price | Netchange | Volume |
|---|---|---|---|
| -- | -- | -- | -- |
| -- | -- | -- | -- |
| -- | -- | -- | -- |
| -- | -- | -- | -- |
| -- | -- | -- | -- |






