by Dale Hannah
The United States Government laid another $5,000,000,000,000 in potential liability on the shoulders of the taxpayers with the seizure of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, the two giant mortgage companies that were so poorly run by the private sector, in a 10 year attempt at privatization, that they are in danger of collapsing. Investors in the companies will cease to receive dividends, and any worth of common or preferred stocks will be eliminated.
The drastic measure was deemed necessary to prevent Freddy and Fanny from defaulting, which would have a major negative effect on the national economy. I’m pretty sure the takeover will NOT have a good effect on the economy of the taxpaying public, either. I guess anyone who bails out of a mortgage will end up OK, but someone (can you say ’taxpayers’?) will have to pick up the tab. Seems grossly unfair to me.
What do you think the government should have done? How could this great of a problem have gotten past federal watchdogs for the past few years? I assure you it did not go South overnight.
Should the taxpayers have been made liable for the ineptness of the private companies which took over ten years ago?
Any and all comments are welcome!!
I am a life-long resident of Erie County, twenty years of which were spent living in the City of Erie. I retired from the tool-and-die trade two years ago, and now have time to enjoy the opportunity to observe city and county goings-on in more depth.
I hope to create a venue to suggest new ideas and solutions to exisiting problems with my blog, 'What If?'.
Mike
September 8th, 2008 at 8:13 am
I don’t like the bailout either, but I don’t know what else they could do at this point.
When things were going good in the mortgage industry, the “watchdogs” looked the other way and ignored the fact that it was a house of cards that was going to eventually collapse.
Brokers, appraisers, loan officers, people flipping houses were among the many who made a nice piece of change when the going was good. People bought overpriced houses that they couldn’t really afford, and now figure they might as well walk away since they are upside down. Now Joe Taxpayer is going to have to pay for all of it.
George Vietze
September 8th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae play an important role in guaranteeing mortgages in order to expand home ownership and allow people who otherwise would not be able to qualify for home ownership. Underwriting guidelines need to be upgraded and more regulatator oversight is going to have to be required if the taxpayers are gong to be the source of bailout every time these agencies get over extended. One consideration that should be looked at is that an insurance premium may need to be set aside by ALL mortgages guaranteed by these agencies in order that a loss reserve be accumulated by the many successful loans as well as the loans that ultimately end up in the loss area. In order to be able to sell loans to investors in the future and still fund mortages it is going to be necessary that Fanny and Freddie continue to do business but guidelines need to be upgraded,
over-sight regulation needs to be viliglent and an insurance reserve needs to be set up to help off-set future losses.
john morris
September 9th, 2008 at 11:58 am
“[The socialists declare] that the state owes subsistence, well-being, and education to all its citizens; that it should be generous, charitable, involved in everything, devoted to everybody; …that it should intervene directly to relieve all suffering, satisfy and anticipate all wants, furnish capital to all enterprises, enlightenment to all minds, balm for all wounds, asylums for all the unfortunate, and even aid to the point of shedding French blood, for all oppressed people on the face of the earth.
Who would not like to see all these benefits flow forth upon the world from the law, as from an inexhaustible source? …But is it possible? …Whence does [the state] draw those resources that it is urged to dispense by way of benefits to individuals? Is it not from the individuals themselves? How, then, can these resources be increased by passing through the hands of a parasitic and voracious intermediary?
…Finally…we shall see the entire people transformed into petitioners. Landed property, agriculture, industry, commerce, shipping, industrial companies, all will bestir themselves to claim favors from the state. The public treasury will be literally pillaged. Everyone will have good reasons to prove that legal fraternity should be interpreted in this sense: “Let me have the benefits, and let others pay the costs.” Everyone’s effort will be directed toward snatching a scrap of fraternal privilege from the legislature. The suffering classes, although having the greatest claim, will not always have the greatest success.” — from Journal des Economistes
Frederic Bastiat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Bastiat
R Sylvester
September 11th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
The most disgusting part is in these following articles.
http://www.reuters.com/article/bankingFinancial/idUSN3023856920080131
Fannie Mae (FNM.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) CEO Daniel Mudd received $12.2 million in total compensation last year, down 15 percent from 2006, the government-sponsored enterprise said on Wednesday. Mudd’s pay included his $990,000 salary, a $2.23 million bonus and a $9 million “long-term incentive” award, the company said.
And the CEO of freddie Mac is getting 19.8 million .
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25740405/
NEW YORK - Freddie Mac Chairman and Chief Executive Richard Syron pocketed nearly $19.8 million in compensation last year, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Friday, even though the mortgage company’s stock lost half its value in 2007.
They should be made to pay back all those bonuses. It is such a slap in the face to tax payers.
john morris
September 12th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Dude, that doesn’t scratch the surface. The previous CEO of Fannie and other members of top management walked off with I think hundreds of millions in stock options (obviously which they cashed out a long time ago) and bonuses.
A legal settlement with federal regulators requires former senior executives of Fannie Mae, including former Chief Executive Franklin Raines, to donate about $2 million to charities and give up stock options that may turn out to be worthless.
It looks like just the bonus cash to 3 top former execs totaled $115 million.
“The settlement, announced Friday, brings the government far less than it had originally sought over alleged violations of accounting rules. Fannie’s regulator, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, in 2006 sought to require the three former executives to pay back more than $115 million of bonuses and pay fines that it said at the time could total more than $100 million.”
john morris
September 12th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Sorry, Here’s the supporting link.