Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 11

• 0%

  nostalgia3 months, 1 week ago

  Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee about $5 trillion of mortgages, nearly half of all outstanding US home mortgage debt.

  These are the 2 companies that Congress plans on using to bailout the housing foreclosure mess

  "Key members of the U.S. Senate have reached a deal on a sweeping housing rescue plan that would see Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac backstop a government mortgage insurance fund, two industry sources said Thursday.

  "Sen. Dodd, chairman of the banking committee, said that a deal had not been finalized. But the plan outlined by the sources says the two mortgage finance giants would offer the funds to cover the costs of a $300 billion mortgage rescue fund."

  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2008/05/...

  So Congress expects 2 failing companies that need a bailout themselves to handle a $300 billion mortgage rescue

  Taxpayers are going to be on the hook for all of this - bailout of Fannie and Freddie and the bailout of the foreclosure fiasco

  Reply

  9 Replies

  • 0%

    willottica3 months, 1 week ago

    No, the government will just print more money. Whoops, your dollars just aren't worth what they used to be!

    Reply

    8 Replies

    • 0%

      nostalgia3 months, 1 week ago

      Willottica

      So are you against these plans?

      Reply

      7 Replies

      • 0%

        willottica3 months, 1 week ago

        How can Fannie and Freddy fail? Who gets hurt if they do? Not the borrowers, they OWE money to Fannie and Freddy. So it's the investers, or the companies themselves that get hurt. Investing carries risk. That's the simple truth. You can't get anything for nothing, so when you invest you're taking a gamble. Most of the time it's a pretty safe gamble, but some of the time you've got to lose because eventually the odds do come due.

        I really don't think that continued bailouts can succeed, especially if the taxpayers funding them are the low-income earners. Shift the tax burden to the higher income brackets if they want to keep reaping the bailouts. Low-income earners won't be seeing this kind of government intervention to save their homes.

        Reply

        1 Reply

        • 0%

          jordan113 months ago

          The loans held by Fannie and Freddy are subsidized by us, the taxpayer. They hold billions in sub prime mortgages that WE guarantee. Investors from all over the world would be bailed out by us.

          http://www.newsweek.com/id/145741

          Reply
      • 0%

        Dionys3 months, 1 week ago

        Against what plans? There are no real solid plans. Everyone should be against the continuing bailout of companies that engaged in lending practices that led to their failure. It's corporate welfare. If you screw up your investments, you don't get a bailout, do you?

        Reply

        4 Replies

        • 0%

          Gransater3 months ago

          Hear hear.

          Lax oversight, self regulation and less gvmnt regulation plus greed led to the crisis we have today.

          Why indeed should the public bail out private companies and their investors?

          If the US is going to be a socialist country, which it currently is, let it benefit all strata of society, not only those that comprises the wealthy. If not, lets remove corporate wellfare, and go on to a level playing field for all citizens. Invest smartly, and don't count on Uncle Sam bailing you out.

          Reply
        • 0%

          nostalgia3 months ago

          I'm against the bailout of private lenders but the Frank bill in the house and the Dodd bill in the Senate do just that

          Now they will have to write more bailout legislation to cover Freddie and Fannie

          As I noted above the Dodd bill uses Freddie and Fannie to cover the costs of a $300 billion mortgage rescue fund

          The Frank bill:

          In the name of preventing foreclosures, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank wants to transfer the risk of further declines in home prices to taxpayers from lenders and borrowers.

          Mr. Frank's idea is that, for mortgages originated between the start of 2005 and mid-2007, a lender and borrower would be able to agree on a federal refinancing plan. Lenders would have to write down their loan to no more than 85% of the current appraised value of the property â;; which means the banks will use this opportunity to unload the biggest stinkers in their loan portfolios.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            nostalgia3 months ago

            For the borrower, the deal is even sweeter: a low fixed monthly payment and a reduction in the principal to market value. The Federal Housing Administration would then guarantee the loan, up to a total of $300 billion in total Frank Refis. The deal is so sweet that even Mr. Frank is concerned that otherwise reliable borrowers may "purposely default" to be eligible for assistance. His solution is to require borrowers to "certify" that they really, truly aren't doing this simply to get on the taxpayer gravy train.

            http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120718217009085...

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              Dionys3 months ago

              "His solution is to require borrowers to "certify" that they really, truly aren't doing this simply to get on the taxpayer gravy train."

              Yeah. Those borrowers are so trustworthy, too.

              Reply
• 0%

  mmrhe3 months ago

  Once again, these traitorous pigs leave the taxpayer holding the bag!

  Funny how the Republicans so despise government regulation only to prove how badly needed it is!

  Reply