Subprime was innovated on the back of de-regulation in US banking. In banking parlance, subprime customers are borrowers with less-than-preferred credit history. I’m convinced with the benefits of Subprime as it has resulted in productive gains and enabled economic activity.
Access to credit helps people to keep them afloat during bad times. On contrary, curtailing access to credit creates disparity and leads to economic divide. Developed nations have highest economic disparity despite having de-regulated banking sector. When India is trying to catch up with developed countries, we will also be exposed to rising economic divide. Will banking de-regulation and bringing in less-stricter lending criteria enable financial inclusion and address financial needs of larger section of the economy?
Financial regulation leads to better governance, protection of capital, reduces volatility and ultimately reduces risk of run on banks. However, we have to agree that this comes with risk of shrinking the economic development and creates greater diversity among people. Invariably, most of the banking regulations commissioned earlier have prevented lesser-privileged people from having access to capital.
Whenever there is a change in regulation the opinion on the new policies have been always divided. Currently, we are experiencing one of the greatest financial crisis, which is exerting huge pressure on the economy. Different parties are putting together various solutions such as $700bn bail-out package. Globally, market pundits are advocating against subprime lending but doing so is nothing but judicially approved financial discrimination.
Subprime is not bad and should not be looked with contempt. Subprime hasn’t created all the havoc, some blame is due to the financial astrologers and fragile financial markets backing these loans. So, the solution lies in developing efficient financial market to support subprime loans. Further, it calls for optimal methods to regulate the subprime market rather than constraining them.