Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 52

Thread: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    That's true, F&F did purchase securities backed by subprime and Alt-A loans going back some time. But the GSE's had much higher standards than the private banks they were competing with. As underwriting standards eroded leading into the real estate bust, F&F's share of the subprime and Alt-A mortgage was essentially cut in half. Why? Because they wouldn't purchase the absolute garbage that private banks were buying up.

    I'm not saying that they didn't contribute to the problem, but I think that a lot of people assign them way more blame than they deserve.
    Is it really a worthwhile arguement to say that a corrupt entity might not be as bad as some think?

    Fannie Mae's potentially misleading disclosure comes at a crucial time for the company. Fannie Mae was severely penalized last year for overstating earnings and for a lack of oversight. As part of its punishment, the amount of home loans that Fannie Mae can make was limited.

    But now influential members of Congress, including Senator Charles Schumer, want Fannie Mae's watchdog, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), to temporarily lift the portfolio limits on the company and its rival Freddie Mac. Legislators want both lenders to buy more subprime mortgages to help stave off foreclosures.


    Note, this is before the crash. They were fudging the books and were in really bad shape. Shumer then argued that they should take on even more bad loans. So yes, this was the dog that was taught to bite, biting someone but that dog aint going to change.

    Fannie Mae bad loans: Worse than reported? - Nov. 15, 2007

  2. #32
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    Is it really a worthwhile arguement to say that a corrupt entity might not be as bad as some think?

    Fannie Mae's potentially misleading disclosure comes at a crucial time for the company. Fannie Mae was severely penalized last year for overstating earnings and for a lack of oversight. As part of its punishment, the amount of home loans that Fannie Mae can make was limited.

    But now influential members of Congress, including Senator Charles Schumer, want Fannie Mae's watchdog, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), to temporarily lift the portfolio limits on the company and its rival Freddie Mac. Legislators want both lenders to buy more subprime mortgages to help stave off foreclosures.


    Note, this is before the crash. They were fudging the books and were in really bad shape. Shumer then argued that they should take on even more bad loans. So yes, this was the dog that was taught to bite, biting someone but that dog aint going to change.

    Fannie Mae bad loans: Worse than reported? - Nov. 15, 2007
    Yes, I think it's well worth mentioning that Fannie and Freddie backed only about a quarter of the subprime and Alt-A mortgages, while unregulated private banks held 75% of the garbage. It's also worth mentioning that the quarter that F&F held are performing much better than the private bank loans due to F&F's stricter underwriting standards. I think it's worth remembering that F&F's subprime and Alt-A losses were not particularly dramatic, but rather, that they tanked because of the dramatic losses from the private banks that rocked the whole real estate market. Fannie and Freddie were no angels, but they weren't responsible for the crash, either.

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Yes, I think it's well worth mentioning that Fannie and Freddie backed only about a quarter of the subprime and Alt-A mortgages, while unregulated private banks held 75% of the garbage. It's also worth mentioning that the quarter that F&F held are performing much better than the private bank loans due to F&F's stricter underwriting standards. I think it's worth remembering that F&F's subprime and Alt-A losses were not particularly dramatic, but rather, that they tanked because of the dramatic losses from the private banks that rocked the whole real estate market. Fannie and Freddie were no angels, but they weren't responsible for the crash, either.

    Yes, it's no big deal because they were only a little bit dishonest.

    OFHEO Wants Fannie Mae Bonus Money Returned

    Barney Frank Says Multi-Million Dollar Bonuses for Government-Owned Freddie, Fannie

    With attitudes like this there is no reason to ask why America is going broke and, unless the public gets educated quickly, will eventually collapse.

  4. #34
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Yes, it's no big deal because they were only a little bit dishonest.

    OFHEO Wants Fannie Mae Bonus Money Returned

    Barney Frank Says Multi-Million Dollar Bonuses for Government-Owned Freddie, Fannie

    With attitudes like this there is no reason to ask why America is going broke and, unless the public gets educated quickly, will eventually collapse.
    No one said that it was okay. But the fact that they were partly to blame is no reason to lose sight of the big picture.

  5. #35
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,727

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Yes, I think it's well worth mentioning that Fannie and Freddie backed only about a quarter of the subprime and Alt-A mortgages, while unregulated private banks held 75% of the garbage. It's also worth mentioning that the quarter that F&F held are performing much better than the private bank loans due to F&F's stricter underwriting standards. I think it's worth remembering that F&F's subprime and Alt-A losses were not particularly dramatic, but rather, that they tanked because of the dramatic losses from the private banks that rocked the whole real estate market. Fannie and Freddie were no angels, but they weren't responsible for the crash, either.
    F&F were a lot deeper into the market by every indicator and story I see, unless its from a left outlet. Then, the wording becomes very precise using things like "originated" and "held" or it breaks it into categories like you are doing rather than considering the market as a whole.

    Fannie and Freddie underwrote mortgages then sold them with an implied guarantee due to the fact they were GSEs and thus got those mortgages a higher rating than they otherwise warranted and better insurance guarantees than they warranted as well. It was part and parcel of why the mortgage market dipped so dramatically. They were artificially inflating mortgage values and the ease of lending also inflated home costs. If you have information to the contrary please post it, Im interested in seeing what research you have.

  6. #36
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,089

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    F&F were a lot deeper into the market by every indicator and story I see, unless its from a left outlet.
    So you are saying that because Fox News and CO have for the last many years pushed the ideological idea that the whole crisis was F&F fault, then somehow that was factual accurate?

    The facts are very clear. F&F have very specific rules and regulations on which they can buy a mortgage from the banks. 80% of the sub-prime mortgage market did not meet said rules so could not be pushed onto F&F. That is why companies like Countrywide went belly up. Had the mortgages met the lending standards enshrined in F&F, then the banks would have been able to pass off the loans to F&F, making their loan giving risk free.

    Now you might not like the idea of F&F, but spreading lies about the companies is just immoral.

    Then, the wording becomes very precise using things like "originated" and "held" or it breaks it into categories like you are doing rather than considering the market as a whole.
    So you are into the same word games as Fox News and the conservative media ...

    Fannie and Freddie underwrote mortgages then sold them with an implied guarantee due to the fact they were GSEs and thus got those mortgages a higher rating than they otherwise warranted and better insurance guarantees than they warranted as well. It was part and parcel of why the mortgage market dipped so dramatically.
    LOL where do you get this stuff from. F&F sole job is to underwrite and buy loans so to inject capital back into the banking system. Those loans were given ratings by ratings agencies... you know S&P, Moody's... who earn their profits from the very same companies that were pushing the loans onto Fannie and Freddie and the rest of the world. As for the mortgage market dipping so dramatically... yea house prices started to fall, and the private sub-prime lending market that had pushed bad loans on people in an unregulated market, was built on the fact that house prices always went up. Again, F&F were not total angels, but they also were not a large part or even a part of the blame for the mortgage market dipping as it did... it was the unregulated private system run by the private banks and their ratings agencies.

    They were artificially inflating mortgage values and the ease of lending also inflated home costs. If you have information to the contrary please post it, Im interested in seeing what research you have.
    Okay.. how can 20% of the market suddenly artificially inflate mortgage values? Why do you ignore the elephant in the room? The private run banking system... THEY were the ones that was pushing bad loans on unsuspecting people who then went out and bought homes pressing up prices and mortgage values. F&F did very little wrong (other than morally wrong bonuses.. but then again so are the bankers) compared to the private banking sector... and yet you and your conservative friends only blame F&F....

    Chances are that the only reason you are in your home or many other conservatives.. is because Fannie and Freddie bought your mortgage..
    PeteEU

  7. #37
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,351

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    So you are saying that because Fox News and CO have for the last many years pushed the ideological idea that the whole crisis was F&F fault, then somehow that was factual accurate?

    The facts are very clear. F&F have very specific rules and regulations on which they can buy a mortgage from the banks. 80% of the sub-prime mortgage market did not meet said rules so could not be pushed onto F&F. That is why companies like Countrywide went belly up. Had the mortgages met the lending standards enshrined in F&F, then the banks would have been able to pass off the loans to F&F, making their loan giving risk free.

    Now you might not like the idea of F&F, but spreading lies about the companies is just immoral.



    So you are into the same word games as Fox News and the conservative media ...



    LOL where do you get this stuff from. F&F sole job is to underwrite and buy loans so to inject capital back into the banking system. Those loans were given ratings by ratings agencies... you know S&P, Moody's... who earn their profits from the very same companies that were pushing the loans onto Fannie and Freddie and the rest of the world. As for the mortgage market dipping so dramatically... yea house prices started to fall, and the private sub-prime lending market that had pushed bad loans on people in an unregulated market, was built on the fact that house prices always went up. Again, F&F were not total angels, but they also were not a large part or even a part of the blame for the mortgage market dipping as it did... it was the unregulated private system run by the private banks and their ratings agencies.



    Okay.. how can 20% of the market suddenly artificially inflate mortgage values? Why do you ignore the elephant in the room? The private run banking system... THEY were the ones that was pushing bad loans on unsuspecting people who then went out and bought homes pressing up prices and mortgage values. F&F did very little wrong (other than morally wrong bonuses.. but then again so are the bankers) compared to the private banking sector... and yet you and your conservative friends only blame F&F....

    Chances are that the only reason you are in your home or many other conservatives.. is because Fannie and Freddie bought your mortgage..
    Let's try something different for a change. You are both partially correct. The housing crisis had many bad payers. F&F were two of them, there are many more. One different is that Countrywide had to be bought out, I think by BAC which is taking the losses. F&F are essentially wards of the state and will drain more of our finances for a few more years.

  8. #38
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,089

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    Let's try something different for a change. You are both partially correct. The housing crisis had many bad payers. F&F were two of them, there are many more. One different is that Countrywide had to be bought out, I think by BAC which is taking the losses. F&F are essentially wards of the state and will drain more of our finances for a few more years.
    ... and people continue to protect the private sector.

    Countrywide "had to be bought" out is about the biggest bull**** I have ever heard. Countrywide was forced on Bank of America as part of saving the US banking industry from utter and total destruction. Countrywide also committed so many crimes before being "bought up", that now Bank of America is at risk... the rumour for months has been that Bank of America is in fact insolvent due to the crap from Countrywide (on top of Bank of America's own crap). Countrywide was not the only sinner in the private mortgage market, but it was certainly one of the biggest. CITI was another, but it was protected big time by the US government.. it still has tons of bad loans but they were ring fenced.. the list goes on.

    No matter how much you want to spin it, F&F was a very small part of the problem... a very very very small part. They are not without blame, but the way you and other conservatives say it, then it is F&F that have ALL the blame. It is dishonest and factually wrong but it fits in the right wings decade long attack on F&F, despite most on the right only being able to own a house because of F&F...
    PeteEU

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    I do not know anyone here saying it was all F&F's fault but for some reason the only defense is that FOX says it was all their fault and that's wrong. Really, if that's the best defense you can come up with you are on pretty thin ice.

    Getting caught cooking the books wasn't just a one time thing. Fannie Mae has made Enron look like an amatuer pick pocket. I've railed on Goldman Sachs also but for some reason we get these excuses that F&F weren't the only ones at fault.

    The government (correctly) went after Enron and brought them down. For some reason we are on the hook for who knows how many billions and nobody at Fannie or Goldman Sachs has been charged with anything.

    Hell, they went after Martha Stewart with more zeal.
    Last edited by 1Perry; 08-06-11 at 09:18 AM.

  10. #40
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,351

    Re: Fannie wants 5 billion more.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    ... and people continue to protect the private sector.

    Countrywide "had to be bought" out is about the biggest bull**** I have ever heard. Countrywide was forced on Bank of America as part of saving the US banking industry from utter and total destruction. Countrywide also committed so many crimes before being "bought up", that now Bank of America is at risk... the rumour for months has been that Bank of America is in fact insolvent due to the crap from Countrywide (on top of Bank of America's own crap). Countrywide was not the only sinner in the private mortgage market, but it was certainly one of the biggest. CITI was another, but it was protected big time by the US government.. it still has tons of bad loans but they were ring fenced.. the list goes on.

    No matter how much you want to spin it, F&F was a very small part of the problem... a very very very small part. They are not without blame, but the way you and other conservatives say it, then it is F&F that have ALL the blame. It is dishonest and factually wrong but it fits in the right wings decade long attack on F&F, despite most on the right only being able to own a house because of F&F...
    I get tired of simple minded people on this site. It is especially interesting because during my life in corporate America I was joked upon because I was the house liberal. Now on this site I am called a conservative because I do not agree with your views.

    I was going to say that countrywide went bankrupt because that is what essentailly happened but did not want to get corrected by some wordsmith like you. I know that it will costs BAC tens of billions of dollars, and might even take down BAC. But to ignore F&F and call them bit players, when they have already cost the American public in excess of $100 billion and that number will go much higher is to be so blind to the facts it is sad.

    Not sure if you really come from california or Europe. Either of which is in much more dire straights than the Federal government.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •