2. 职称英语
  3. Given their role in the 2008 meltdown, and their subsequent branding as toxi

Given their role in the 2008 meltdown, and their subsequent branding as toxi

游客2023-10-12  58
问题     Given their role in the 2008 meltdown, and their subsequent branding as toxic sludge, it is not surprising that " secu-ritized" financial products have had a quiet few years. Yet the transformation of mortgages, credit-card debt and other recurring cash flows into new marketable securities is enjoying something of resurgence. Once apparently destined for the financial history books, the alphabet soup of ABSS(asset backed securities), MBSS(their mortgage version), CLOs(collateralized loan obligations)and others had a bumper year in 2013. More growth is expected next year.

    Not everybody is thrilled. Some observers argue that the risks securitization poses are too grave. But its revival should be welcomed, for it is probably essential to continued economic recovery, particularly in Europe.
    Use carefully
    In its simplest form, securitization is straightforward and beneficial. For example, a carmaker expecting lots of monthly payments from customers who have taken out financing can get investors to fund its business more cheaply by selling them its claim to those payments. A bank on the receiving end of mortgage repayments or credit-card receivables can do something similar: bundle the loans up and sell them, or use them as collateral to get funding, which it can then use to issue more loans. This boosts both credit and growth.
    Used recklessly, though, securitization can be dangerous. It fuelled the catastrophic boom in American subprime mortgages. Some banks, aware that home loans would be sliced, diced, repackaged and sold on, gave up even cursory checks on their borrowers’ creditworthiness. Investors piled in blindly, snapping up supposedly safe "tranches" of bundled-up debt that proved to be anything but. The boom turned to bust and bail-outs.
    Yet structured finance cannot bear sole responsibility for the crisis. It was more the conduit for irrational financial exuberance than its cause. Lax lending standards in boom times predate the e-mergence of securitization(in the 1970s)by several centuries at least. Most structured products performed well through the crisis, with the notable exception of those related to American residential mortgages. Default in Europe remained low despite the recession.
    And although there are still risks, securitization should be safer in the future than in the past because of new, post-crisis regulations to reduce the danger of excesses. The principle that the party creating a new security needs to retain some exposure to the underlying credit(the " skin in the game" rule)should help ensure that underwriting standards do not get too slack. That will hamper the desirable transferring of risks but, given recent history, it is probably prudent to put a little sand in the gears.
    Europe stands to benefit most from securitization’s return. Lenders across Europe are under pressure to improve the ratio of capital they hold to loans made. One way of doing this is to stop extending credit, which is, unfortunately, what many banks have done. If they instead slimmed themselves through securitization, by bundling and repackaging loans and selling them to outside investors such as insurance firms or asset managers, they could lend more money to credit-starved companies. That would have the added benefit of spreading risk away from wobbly banks.
    Securitization certainly has a black mark against it, but it is far too useful to be banished for good. Almost all financial innovations, from the humble mortgage to the joint-stock company, have had to re-establish their reputation after a bust at some point in their history. Society benefited from their eventual rehabilitation—as it most probably will from the revival of securitization.
Questions 71 to 75
    Complete the summary below with information from the passage, using no more than three words for each blank.
    Securitization regains public attention along with the transformation of mortgages, credit-card debt and other recurring cash flows into new marketable securities. However, some researchers adopt a conservative attitude towards its【E1】______ , which poses great risks on economy. But securitization is stilled supported for its potential promotion of【E2】______. In its simplest form, securitization is straightforward and beneficial. It boosts both credit and growth. If used recklessly, securitization can be dangerous. For example, it has brought about a harmful effect on American subprime mortgages.
    Although there is still disagreement on securitization, it should be safer in the future than in the past due to the【E3】______of the danger of excesses under the control of new regulations. It is far too useful to be【E4】______for good. Almost all financial innovations, from the humble mortgage to the joint-stock company, have had to re-establish their reputation after a bust at some point in their history.【E5】______benefited from their eventual rehabilitation—as it most probably will from the revival of securitization. [br] 【E4】
选项
答案 banished
解析 (最后一段首句作者表明了他对证券的看法，他认为不应禁止证券使用，即“it is far toouseful to be banished for good”。因此填写banished。)
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3092142.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)