Thread: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

Yeah - I'm agreeing, here, with keeping size limited.

Since a huge company failling to do their job and maintain good order has proven disasterous NUMEROUS times I'd say they've lost their priveldge. We need to enact something more beyond monopoly laws.

These businesses (Fannie and Freddie) were created by the government, while being owned by shareholders.
It is a private public partnership.

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

These businesses (Fannie and Freddie) were created by the government, while being owned by shareholders.
It is a private public partnership.

yeah, I know - asking government to monitor something it created is just a stupid idea, hunh?

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

Holy **** - 104 Billion already?

Where - how? Just WHY is it so damn much?

If a home costs 120,000 - and that's ALL in default - then that's 866,000 homes - ok, so that's just some very crude math. but - seriously - HOW is ther eso much liability and faulted assests? I don't ge twhere these numbers come from and how they aren't possibly enough.

If it costs 104 B to keep just barely afloat then is it really WORTH IT?

Look at it this way... if it was not Fannie/Freddie then it would be the banks directly you would be bailing out hand over fist.

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

yeah, I know - asking government to monitor something it created is just a stupid idea, hunh?

People were monitoring it, warnings were issued and ignored.
How about we just not create incentives for these things to happen.

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

People were monitoring it, warnings were issued and ignored.
How about we just not create incentives for these things to happen.

How about punishing those that broke the law in the first place....? Bank of America is still around.. as are many of the financial institutions who sold all the crap that caused the problems.. and none of them have paid any compensation what so ever.. in fact quite the opposite.

Originally Posted by PeteEU

Look at it this way... if it was not Fannie/Freddie then it would be the banks directly you would be bailing out hand over fist.

No we wouldn't. Banks would not have made all these bad loans if they had to keep them on the books.

Originally Posted by PeteEU

How about punishing those that broke the law in the first place....? Bank of America is still around.. as are many of the financial institutions who sold all the crap that caused the problems.. and none of them have paid any compensation what so ever.. in fact quite the opposite.

Nearly all of the money loaned to banks was paid back with interest.
What more do you want?

Which people at Fannie and Freddie should be punished and how?

Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla

People were monitoring it, warnings were issued and ignored.
How about we just not create incentives for these things to happen.

That's a little too laissez-faire for my taste, in this situation. We should not be reinforcing or forgiving the bad habits of business, whether or not they are our creations.

If we just let the companies die that acted irresponsibly, the market would likely replace them with ones who have learned from their mistakes. You also can't overlook the fact that even after the bailout packages, not much was done to regulate the behaviors that caused the financial crisis in the first place.

No more public dollars to bail out these big businesses. They've already received too much money.

Originally Posted by Temporal

That's a little too laissez-faire for my taste, in this situation. We should not be reinforcing or forgiving the bad habits of business, whether or not they are our creations.

If we just let the companies die that acted irresponsibly, the market would likely replace them with ones who have learned from their mistakes. You also can't overlook the fact that even after the bailout packages, not much was done to regulate the behaviors that caused the financial crisis in the first place.

No more public dollars to bail out these big businesses. They've already received too much money.

We're providing public dollars to encourage home purchases both ways, not just for businesses but also for people, who shouldn't necessarily be purchasing homes.

Ever hear of the NSP program?
It gives up to $20k to people to purchase a home.
The catch is that is gives more money to people to have greater debt and where the mortgage payment is a greater share of their monthly income.

It encourages people to buy more house than what they can necessarily afford.

Originally Posted by 1Perry

No we wouldn't. Banks would not have made all these bad loans if they had to keep them on the books.

It wasn't F&F that allowed them to get the loans of their books -- it was collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). Fannie and Freddie were killed by the falling real estate market -- not by subprime mortgages that they backed. This is a myth perpetuated by right wing pundits.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were victims, not culprits - BusinessWeek

Give this a read if you want to understand how the meltdown happened:
Understanding the Securitization of Subprime Mortgage Credit --Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Incredibly, republicans are presently trying to kill the agency tasked with correcting many of these errors.