U.S. to take control of mortgage giants: reports

As the story sez..."Financial markets have come to expect that an investment by the U.S. Treasury would explicitly back the companies'$1.6 trillion in debt, but leave their shares nearly valueless."...and the actual cost to US taxpayers will be obfuscated by ongoing unspecified "quarterly infusions", a few billion here, and a few billion there.

The two companies were set up by federal law as "government-sponsored enterprises" that operate as private companies with profits and stockholders. They have used their clout and unusual status to create a sort of regulation-free zone around their businesses. When times are good, shareholders and executives of the companies are richly rewarded. When times are bad, as now, taxpayers could be left holding the bag.
Over the past decade, both Fannie and Freddie made the list of Washington's top 20 lobbying spenders. They spend heavily on lobbying and hire liberally from Capitol Hill's revolving door and their executives give top dollar to political campaigns. They've also funneled contributions into select charities and think tanks.
To help keep themselves free from regulatory and congressional oversight, the two mortgage giants have surrounded themselves with scores of well-connected allies. Fannie Mae's 51-member lobbying stable, Freddie Mac's list of 91 lobbyists.
Don’t know why people allow them to privatize the profits and socialize the loss, or welfare state for corporations and tough love for citizens, kinda robin hood in reverse.

Multi-TRILLION dollar Tax payer bailout of Privately Run Corporations ….
Put in a different way cost of one Fannie may bailout = Cost of 5 Iraq invasions,
Where IS the OUTRAGE?

Good

fannie and freddie used as atm for subprime gangsters. jesse jackson was getting $250,000.00 keep quiet money. bill gross, the bond guru, of pimco says u.s. facing financial tidal wave. highway trust fund empty. georgia gets $1,000,000,000.00. iraq will be $1,000,000,000,000.00+ war.

taxpayers! hold on to your wallets!

Their origins are in Liberalsim - aka the Left...Democrats.

"The two companies are so-called government-sponsored enterprises, created by Congress in 1938 (Fannie) and 1970 (Freddie) to help more Americans buy houses."

Fannie Mae was created in 1938, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt...you know, the guy who started our free Republic down the road to socialist Democracy.

Freddie Mac, grew out of LBJ's "Great Society" - the 2nd largest turn down the road to Socialism, AND the time when the robbing of Social Security coffers, to pay for LBJ's social programs, began.

Freddie Mac was created in 1970, by a Congress that was:

Senate

Democratic: 57 (majority)
Republican: 43

House of Representatives

Democratic: 234 (majority)
Republican: 192

September 30, 1999
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been UNDER INCREASING PRESSURE FROM THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

IN MOVING, EVEN TENTATIVELY, INTO THIS NEW AREA OF LENDING, FANNIE MAE IS TAKING ON SIGNIFICANTLY MORE RISK, WHICH MAY NOT POSE ANY DIFFICULTIES DURING FLUSH ECONOMIC TIMES. BUT THE GOVERNMENT-SUBSIDIZED CORPORATION MAY RUN INTO TROUBLE IN AN ECONOMIC DOWNTURN, PROMPTING A GOVERNMENT RESCUE SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE SAVINGS AND LOAN INDUSTRY IN THE 1980'S.

''FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF MANY PEOPLE, INCLUDING ME, THIS IS ANOTHER THRIFT INDUSTRY GROWING UP AROUND US,'' SAID PETER WALLISON A RESIDENT FELLOW AT THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE.''IF THEY FAIL, THE GOVERNMENT WILL HAVE TO STEP UP AND BAIL THEM OUT THE WAY IT STEPPED UP AND BAILED OUT THE THRIFT INDUSTRY.''

Taken from: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...

----------

Again, this article is from 1999 - the Clinton adminstration.

THEY are the ones who started the trend of lending to unqualified borrowers and subprime lending.

Liberalism is the origin of this current mess.

yaa wrote:

The two companies were set up by federal law as "government-sponsored enterprises" that operate as private companies with profits and stockholders. They have used their clout and unusual status to create a sort of regulation-free zone around their businesses. When times are good, shareholders and executives of the companies are richly rewarded. When times are bad, as now, taxpayers could be left holding the bag.
Over the past decade, both Fannie and Freddie made the list of Washington's top 20 lobbying spenders. They spend heavily on lobbying and hire liberally from Capitol Hill's revolving door and their executives give top dollar to political campaigns. They've also funneled contributions into select charities and think tanks.
To help keep themselves free from regulatory and congressional oversight, the two mortgage giants have surrounded themselves with scores of well-connected allies. Fannie Mae's 51-member lobbying stable, Freddie Mac's list of 91 lobbyists.
Don’t know why people allow them to privatize the profits and socialize the loss, or welfare state for corporations and tough love for citizens, kinda robin hood in reverse.

Sept 29, 2004

Franklin Raines, who has headed Fannie Mae since January 1999, is a formidable presence in Washington, having run...

President BILL CLINTON's

...Office of Management and Budget from 1996 to 1998 during which time he was key in engineering the bipartisan Balanced Budget Act of 1997.

Last week, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight said management including Raines reaped millions of dollars in bonuses thanks to the company's use of improper accounting techniques.

Fannie's problems began when the financial regulator issued a report accusing the mortgage company of using improper accounting to smooth its earnings, tolerating weak internal controls and postponing the booking of $200 million of expenses.

That postponement enabled the already highly paid Raines -- whose compensation came to about $20 million last year -- and other top executives to collect millions of dollars in bonuses that were pegged to the company's performance. The regulator's report says Raines received $1.1 million in bonus pay in 1998.

Lance Winslow wrote:

As the story sez..."Financial markets have come to expect that an investment by the U.S. Treasury would explicitly back the companies'$1.6 trillion in debt, but leave their shares nearly valueless."...and the actual cost to US taxpayers will be obfuscated by ongoing unspecified "quarterly infusions", a few billion here, and a few billion there.

From an article in the current issue of Rolling Stone magazine :

"In truth, Obama is still raising tons of money from big corporate donors. In June alone, as Obama was raking in more than $30 million from small donors, he also bagged $6 million in a single fundraiser at Ethel Kennedy's home in Virginia and another $5 million at an event in Hollywood. But time and time again, you see Obama aides boasting about how the day of the big-dollar donor is over. "More people are involved, and I think that necessarily dilutes the impact of any individual — which is probably a good thing," one prominent Obama supporter recently declared. This staunch champion of the small donor happened to be none other than James Rubin, son of former Goldman Sachs co-chairman Bob Rubin.

Obama's decision to embrace Clinton's moneymen coincided with his decision to attend a public forum on economic policy with an A list of Clinton-era economic advisors, including Rubin and Corzine. "The message is that he's going to be a friend to Wall Street, just as Bill Clinton was a friend to Wall Street," says Pollin. "Wall Street will want to be at the head of the table."

By now it should be clear what type of service Wall Street will demand. The financial disaster dumped on us by eight years of Bush's mismanagement has left America with the prospect of short-term solutions in the form of massive government bailouts, and long-term solutions in the form of reform and regulation. A big chunk of the $1 billion in cash that will be spent on the presidential race this year represents Wall Street's desire to make sure that both candidates can be counted on to make the short-term bailouts large and passionate, and the reforms gentle and halfhearted.

"They want to make sure there's socialism when they need it — bailouts — and capitalism when they need that," says Pollin."

So a bankrupt government is taking over some bankrupt companies.....?

How does that work?

Oh great! Anytime GOVT is involved in anything its going to be totally screwed up! Whatever problems the Mortgage Giants are having now expect it to TRIPLE once govt gets involved! I better start getting ready to pay more taxes so those in Govt can go on more vacations and get bigger jets and homes.

THE BIG PICTURE:

The "Neo-conservatives" have amply demonstrated that their ECONOMIC theories are are as baseless and unfounded as their FOREIGN relations are.

From Reagan to Bush II, with the attack on Bush's watch, by GW Bush's Saudi cousins, on the World Trade Center as a crown; and Bush's erosion of the US Constitution and with loss of our world hegemony; these incompetents have ravaged America.

Now McCain wants to do it some more?

Mr_Bill wrote:

THE BIG PICTURE:
The "Neo-conservatives" have amply demonstrated that their ECONOMIC theories are are as baseless and unfounded as their FOREIGN relations are.
From Reagan to Bush II, with the attack on Bush's watch, by GW Bush's Saudi cousins, on the World Trade Center as a crown; and Bush's erosion of the US Constitution and with loss of our world hegemony; these incompetents have ravaged America.
Now McCain wants to do it some more?

THE BIG PICTURE:

The "Neo-communists" and their monopolist allies have deftly manipulated Capitalistism to make it appear free market ECONOMIC theories are as baseless and unfounded as their FOREIGN relations are.

From Woodrow Wilson to FDR & from Jimmy Carter to the Clintons, with the attack by speculator George Soros on International Currency trading, Moveon.org and all his sleight of hand political manipulation as a crown; and the erosion of the US Constitution by the subversion of creeping socialism; these incompetents have ravaged America.

Now Obama wants to do it some more?

Reality is wrote:

September 30, 1999
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been UNDER INCREASING PRESSURE FROM THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
IN MOVING, EVEN TENTATIVELY, INTO THIS NEW AREA OF LENDING, FANNIE MAE IS TAKING ON SIGNIFICANTLY MORE RISK, WHICH MAY NOT POSE ANY DIFFICULTIES DURING FLUSH ECONOMIC TIMES. BUT THE GOVERNMENT-SUBSIDIZED CORPORATION MAY RUN INTO TROUBLE IN AN ECONOMIC DOWNTURN, PROMPTING A GOVERNMENT RESCUE SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE SAVINGS AND LOAN INDUSTRY IN THE 1980'S.
''FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF MANY PEOPLE, INCLUDING ME, THIS IS ANOTHER THRIFT INDUSTRY GROWING UP AROUND US,'' SAID PETER WALLISON A RESIDENT FELLOW AT THE AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE.''IF THEY FAIL, THE GOVERNMENT WILL HAVE TO STEP UP AND BAIL THEM OUT THE WAY IT STEPPED UP AND BAILED OUT THE THRIFT INDUSTRY.''
Taken from: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...
----------
Again, this article is from 1999 - the Clinton adminstration.
THEY are the ones who started the trend of lending to unqualified borrowers and subprime lending.
Liberalism is the origin of this current mess.

You had 8 yrs to change things around: so what happened? It seems the Conservatives liked it enough to continue it. The way I see it 3 yrs under Clinton and 8yrs under Bush. Did I miss something?

This folks is exactly why we need regulations of Corporate entities. The greed is egregious. Re-regulate America, drive out the excesses of Capitalism. This is a replay of Reagan and the savings and loan debacle. Also, another Bush was invloved in that one - Neil Bush, the one you never hear about, and the Silverado Savings and Loan. Communism for the rich and Capitalism for the poor.

Eight vs Three wrote:

<quoted text>You had 8 yrs to change things around: so what happened? It seems the Conservatives liked it enough to continue it. The way I see it 3 yrs under Clinton and 8yrs under Bush. Did I miss something?

First off, I am not making excuses for GWB.

I am just sick of Leftist's & the weak minded who buy into the propaganda, disinformation & flat out lies - to avoid taking any blame and, thus, furthering their subversive agenda.

Their are a LOT of problems CREATED by the Left, then blame on conservatives & libertarians.

And, actually all of this started around 1991, when Jesse Jackson & company started threatening lawsuits if banks didn't start lending to minorities with bad credit - or no credit - and low income.

It will take some digging to relocate the 1991 article, but here is what it resulted in:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article...

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp...

THEN old Jesse has the NERVE to complain and blame others for the mess he got started:

http://www.reuters.com/article/Housing08/idUS...

----------

The goal of the left: Destroy capitalism - preferably from within.

Now, with the stage set since 1991, how politically likely is it that ANYONE could stand up and tell the truth - and stop the planned chaos that led to this lending crisis???

Eight vs Three wrote:

<quoted text>You had 8 yrs to change things around: so what happened? It seems the Conservatives liked it enough to continue it. The way I see it 3 yrs under Clinton and 8yrs under Bush. Did I miss something?

The way you see it is a good example of why you don't see clearly.

You could have taken the time to do some digging but, instead, you took the numbers fed to you and ASSUMED it was only "3 yrs under Clinton" - then chose to apply a full 8 yrs to GWB.

You manipulated the numbers to serve what you WANT to believe, instead of looking for facts & truth...the quintessential Modern Day Liberal.

Reality is wrote:

<quoted text>
THE BIG PICTURE:
The "Neo-communists" and their monopolist allies have deftly manipulated Capitalistism to make it appear free market ECONOMIC theories are as baseless and unfounded as their FOREIGN relations are.
From Woodrow Wilson to FDR & from Jimmy Carter to the Clintons, with the attack by speculator George Soros on International Currency trading, Moveon.org and all his sleight of hand political manipulation as a crown; and the erosion of the US Constitution by the subversion of creeping socialism; these incompetents have ravaged America.
Now Obama wants to do it some more?

Creeping socialism", as you say, is the public sector nationalizing Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and failed banks.

Lance Winslow wrote:

<quoted text>Creeping socialism", as you say, is the public sector nationalizing Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and failed banks.

Monopoly Capitalists, International Banking and International Socialism is all different tactics to the same end.

The three have colluded since the Federal Reserve, at least.

Rockefeller Democrat or Rockefeller Republican, they both seek an easy to manage population and a monopoly on power.

Two sides of the same coin, using divide & conquer tactics to get us to exchange our independence for dependence on a Collectivist government & society.