http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/js716.htmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
WASHINGTON, Sept. 10%u2014 The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.
''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.
''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.
''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.
[less]
Response by LICComment
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 3610
Member since: Dec 2007
Of course the partisan hacks will tell you to disregard the above, it is all Bush's fault.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 007
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 195
Member since: Nov 2008
and we keep electing them. it is a broken congress with self ideological interests. how can we get out of this? the same applies to NYC and NYS. I believe our top marginal rate for a NYC resident Is close to 60% and above if you calculate federal, state, city,medicare REtax and SS and the 8.75% on purchases. It is a broken system and there is no solutions. Should I sell all my RE holdings now and buy a place in one of the islands? south of France? What do you do with assets? how do you keep your money? stocks are manipulated by computers so it is not a solution either....
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by anonymous
almost 16 years ago
not only that 007, but Soylent Green is people.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
It was interesting to hear Paulson on Charlie Rose. Not sure if everything he said is to be believed, but it's interesting that George W avoided early on giving Wall Street people roles in Treasury. He only went with Paulson after Baker said you need Wall Street expertise. Before Paulson we had Snow and Paul O'Neil.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 007
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 195
Member since: Nov 2008
whatever solutions you can extract from the past will be defeated by the current dysfunctional government/congress. Since we do not have the will power to change the system (including our constitution), I wonder about our survival. NYC RE has gone up and within one year will be again at the bubble level. So if one offload everything where do you go to keep the sanity and the joy of life?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
It's the nature of politicians to avoid taking on tough issues unless they believe the world will end tomorrow. It's also especially hard when they are up for election. One reason why Bush found it easier to cut taxes and harder to cut spending.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by WideStance
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 41
Member since: Sep 2008
Yeah but in 2003 the Congress and the White House were controlled by Republicans. All you guys had to do ws vote for this measure along party lines and it woudl have passed. You didnt and it didnt.
I think this was right around the time that the Republican Administration was telling the American people to take out home equity lines of credit so we could "spend" our support of your pre-emptive wars and poor economic policies.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 007
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 195
Member since: Nov 2008
Both River and Wide represents what's the problem.both are right and will hold there position forever until the country is bankrupted. The question is how to escape or exit from here, since no one will back off?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
Not at all 007.
How we got here is not as important as how we make sure it doesn't happen in the future. Unfortunately nobody wants to learn from past mistakes. Banks are fighting the Volcker rule. Rules to regulate swaps are yet to be tackled and now this...
Credit specialists at Citi are considering launching the first derivatives intended to pay out in the event of a financial crisis. The firm has drawn up plans for a tradable liquidity index, known as the CLX, on which products could be structured that allow buyers to hedge a spike in funding costs.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009
The worst part about Bush is how much additional stupidity and corruption he has enabled in the *Democratic* party.... because they seem to think it gives them cover.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by 007
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 195
Member since: Nov 2008
So let's agree that human nature is greedy and selfish and corporate america is in control. What are the stratigic options to maxemize your exit and return on assets? what are the assets that will be imune to congress inefficiencies and waist of tax dollars? (just think about the defense budget/ Shelby or any other member of the exclusive club). As an owner of several R.E projects, do you unload now (soon) and than what?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
As an investor you focus on risk adjusted return. The asset most immune to higher taxes would be municipal bonds, although you do have the risk that you won't have a taxable income to make it worth your while in the future.. It's also not the end of the world, so don't plan on investing based on that.. even if the end of the world occurs. you won't be around to profit.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by WideStance
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 41
Member since: Sep 2008
You would think that the Republicans would have learned from their past mistakes:
1 - The Great Depression
2 - The S&L Scandal
before thrying to deregulate again and causing the Great Recession.
You guys are 3 for 3!
Palin in 2012!
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by The_President
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 2412
Member since: Jun 2009
and the same party thast rbought you the current financial crisis is now trying to PRIVATIZE Social Secuirty again!!! Oh boy, isn't that exciting...
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by The_President
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 2412
Member since: Jun 2009
if it was up to the Republicans, your child's public school would be privatized and turned into a publicly traded company. They would even do the same for the police and fire. The Blackwater Police Department and the Exxon Mobil Fire Department.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
Theorists of the "Austrian School" who wrote about the Depression include Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek and American economist Murray Rothbard, who wrote America's Great Depression (1963). In their view and like the monetarists, the Federal Reserve, which was created in 1913, shoulders much of the blame; but in opposition to the monetarists, they argue that the key cause of the Depression was the expansion of the money supply in the 1920s that led to an unsustainable credit-driven boom. In the Austrian view it was this inflation of the money supply that led to an unsustainable boom in both asset prices (stocks and bonds) and capital goods. By the time the Fed belatedly tightened in 1928, it was far too late and, in the Austrian view, a depression was inevitable. According to the Austrians, the artificial interference in the economy was a disaster prior to the Depression, and government efforts to prop up the economy after the crash of 1929 only made things worse. According to Rothbard, government intervention delayed the market's adjustment and made the road to complete recovery more difficult
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
Privatizing social security would be a wonderful idea. I don't trust the gov't and prefer to make my own decisions. With the gov't running it, you have beurocrats tinkering with cost of living adjustments and elligibility requirements. We should also private the post office and sell it off to Fed Express who would do a better job of it.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by LICComment
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 3610
Member since: Dec 2007
Agree about privatizing social security. It is amazing that people would rather hand their forced savings over to the government rather than having control over it themselves. Privatize with strict controls on the types of investments available for it.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by WideStance
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 41
Member since: Sep 2008
We listened to the Republicans when you said we wouldnt sleep until you got Obama dead or alive...
We listened to the Republicans when you told us Sadam had Nukes and we had to attack him...
We listened to the Republicans when you told us you knew where Sadams WOMD were...
We listened to the Republicans when you told us to spend our home equity on buying crap to stimulate the economy and to support the wars....
We listened to the Republicans when you told us the wars would be a cake walk and they would treat us like liberators.
We listened to the Republicans when you told us that the fundamentals of the American Economy were sound..
We listened to the Republicans when you told us that Sarah Palin was qualified to be President...
I think that listening to you guys got us into all sorts of trouble....why should we ever listen to you again?????
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by The_President
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 2412
Member since: Jun 2009
Privatizing Social Security is indeed a good idea. We can let Dick Fuld and Bernie Madoff run it. They can put all of the funds into mortgage backed securities. I'm sure they will do a better job than the government. You can blame the big bad evil govt. all you want, but ever since the great recession started, not a single social security payment has been missed. NONE.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by The_President
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 2412
Member since: Jun 2009
"It is amazing that people would rather hand their forced savings over to the government rather than having control over it themselves."
The truth is that most people are too stupid to invest their money themselves.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by WideStance
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 41
Member since: Sep 2008
We listened to the Republicans when you told us the it was for sure an accurate that the Niger Yellow cake for nukes was a legitimate threat...
We listened to the Republicans when you told us that you did not know who revealed the identity of the CIA agent....
We listened to the Republicans when you told us that if we gave the richest Americans tax breaks that the government coffers would fill up and we would have surpluses again and that the rich woudl create jobs....
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009
Its pretty funny that "The Market is NOT down 20%, show me just one example "Alpo and "The Republicans have Controlled Congress for the last 8 years" Perfitz are the only two folks defending the Democratic Party here.
ROTFL.
Clearly, Democrats are doomed.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009
self referential statement of the month...
"I think that listening to you guys got us into all sorts of trouble....why should we ever listen to you again?????"
-"market will be up 20% by spring [2008]" Perfitz
oh my god, my side is hurting from laughing this hard.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009
"The truth is that most people are too stupid to invest their money themselves"
So better to hand it to stupid *and* corrupt Democrats?
I agree that Perfitz and Alpo should have their allowances taken away from them...
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
Social Security is expected to pay out more than it receives if it isn;'t in that state already. SOCIAL SECURITY IS A PONZI SCHEME. We don't need Bernie Madoff for that!
Keep in the mind the government is already ready to do things like this. They're talking about requiring folks to be defaulted in to 401k deductions...
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
I'm starting to think the gov't acts based on the stock market, which is damn close to minpulating it...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35270673/ns/meet_the_press/page/3/ MR. GREENSPAN: Well, it's more than a warning sign. It's important to remember that equity values, stock prices, are not just paper profits. They actually have a profoundly important impact on economic activity. And if stock prices start continuing down, I would get very concerned
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009
What if folks on this board had listened to perfitz in 2007?
They'd be broke.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
Bottom Line.
Republicans & Democrats both play games..
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/ The Administration is taking two tax provisions from the 2009 stimulus bill -- expansions of the child tax credit and the EITC -- and claiming them as part of the "current policy" Bush tax cuts. And they are doing something similar for Pell grants: assuming that they will receive sufficient funding to pay out the maximum grant level set in the stimulus bill.
The Administration didn't inherit these policies, they created them. And worse, still, they created them as explicitly temporary, under a stimulus bill which they claimed was meant only to help bring us out of this recession.
Yet the White House wants to continue these policies, and they don't want to pay for them. So what do they do? They hide these policies in their baseline, in the hopes that they won't have to.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by The_President
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 2412
Member since: Jun 2009
"Bottom Line.
Republicans & Democrats both play games.."
Yet nearly everything you post is anti Democrat. I don't see you posting anything critical of Republicans. Your posts might have well have been written by Rush Limbaugh and Micheal Steele.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by moxieland
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 480
Member since: Nov 2009
Is anybody reading there facts off of their hand?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Hugh_G
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 223
Member since: Aug 2009
"We listened to the Republicans when you said we wouldnt sleep until you got Obama dead or alive... "
I think you meant to say Osama, but I can understand how you might confuse the two. One is totally dedicated to destroying the American way of life...and the other lives in a cave!
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
LOL Freudian slip
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704362004575001042824028862.html Fannie and Freddie, for their part, remain at the core of a housing-finance system that inflated a dangerous housing bubble. After prices collapsed, sending shock waves around the world, the federal government put America's housing-finance system on life support. It has yet to decide how that troubled system should be rebuilt.
On Dec. 24, Treasury said there would be no limit to the taxpayer money it was willing to deploy over the next three years to keep the two companies afloat, doing away with the previous limit of $200 billion per company. So far, the government has handed the two companies a total of about $111 billion.
The government is willing to tolerate such open-ended exposure for two reasons. First, it sees the companies as essential cogs in the fragile housing market. Fannie and Freddie buy mortgages originated by others, holding some as investments and repackaging others for sale to investors as securities. Together with the Federal Housing Administration, they fund nine in 10 American mortgages. Worries about potential insolvency would cripple their ability to fund home loans, which would hamstring the market.
Second, the companies are a convenient tool for the administration to use in its campaign to clean up the housing mess.
******************************************************************
By using Fannie and Freddie for such initiatives, the White House doesn't have to go to Congress for funding. The Treasury and White House can simply issue instructions to Fannie and Freddie via their federal regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, or FHFA.
The government is "running Fannie and Freddie as an instrument of national economic policy, not as a business," says Daniel Mudd, who was forced out as Fannie Mae's chief executive in September 2008 when the government took control.
Former FHFA head James Lockhart, the companies' top regulator until last August, says the U.S. is unlikely to ever fully recoup its investment in the two companies.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by somewhereelse
almost 16 years ago
Posts: 7435
Member since: Oct 2009
"We listened to the Republicans when you said we wouldnt sleep until you got Obama dead or alive... "
ROTFL.
Now THAT one is funny. Democrat's biggest supported can't tell 'em apart...
'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
Of course the partisan hacks will tell you to disregard the above, it is all Bush's fault.
and we keep electing them. it is a broken congress with self ideological interests. how can we get out of this? the same applies to NYC and NYS. I believe our top marginal rate for a NYC resident Is close to 60% and above if you calculate federal, state, city,medicare REtax and SS and the 8.75% on purchases. It is a broken system and there is no solutions. Should I sell all my RE holdings now and buy a place in one of the islands? south of France? What do you do with assets? how do you keep your money? stocks are manipulated by computers so it is not a solution either....
not only that 007, but Soylent Green is people.
It was interesting to hear Paulson on Charlie Rose. Not sure if everything he said is to be believed, but it's interesting that George W avoided early on giving Wall Street people roles in Treasury. He only went with Paulson after Baker said you need Wall Street expertise. Before Paulson we had Snow and Paul O'Neil.
whatever solutions you can extract from the past will be defeated by the current dysfunctional government/congress. Since we do not have the will power to change the system (including our constitution), I wonder about our survival. NYC RE has gone up and within one year will be again at the bubble level. So if one offload everything where do you go to keep the sanity and the joy of life?
It's the nature of politicians to avoid taking on tough issues unless they believe the world will end tomorrow. It's also especially hard when they are up for election. One reason why Bush found it easier to cut taxes and harder to cut spending.
Yeah but in 2003 the Congress and the White House were controlled by Republicans. All you guys had to do ws vote for this measure along party lines and it woudl have passed. You didnt and it didnt.
I think this was right around the time that the Republican Administration was telling the American people to take out home equity lines of credit so we could "spend" our support of your pre-emptive wars and poor economic policies.
Both River and Wide represents what's the problem.both are right and will hold there position forever until the country is bankrupted. The question is how to escape or exit from here, since no one will back off?
Not at all 007.
How we got here is not as important as how we make sure it doesn't happen in the future. Unfortunately nobody wants to learn from past mistakes. Banks are fighting the Volcker rule. Rules to regulate swaps are yet to be tackled and now this...
http://www.risk.net/risk-magazine/news/1590861/citi-plans-crisis-derivatives
Credit specialists at Citi are considering launching the first derivatives intended to pay out in the event of a financial crisis. The firm has drawn up plans for a tradable liquidity index, known as the CLX, on which products could be structured that allow buyers to hedge a spike in funding costs.
The worst part about Bush is how much additional stupidity and corruption he has enabled in the *Democratic* party.... because they seem to think it gives them cover.
So let's agree that human nature is greedy and selfish and corporate america is in control. What are the stratigic options to maxemize your exit and return on assets? what are the assets that will be imune to congress inefficiencies and waist of tax dollars? (just think about the defense budget/ Shelby or any other member of the exclusive club). As an owner of several R.E projects, do you unload now (soon) and than what?
As an investor you focus on risk adjusted return. The asset most immune to higher taxes would be municipal bonds, although you do have the risk that you won't have a taxable income to make it worth your while in the future.. It's also not the end of the world, so don't plan on investing based on that.. even if the end of the world occurs. you won't be around to profit.
You would think that the Republicans would have learned from their past mistakes:
1 - The Great Depression
2 - The S&L Scandal
before thrying to deregulate again and causing the Great Recession.
You guys are 3 for 3!
Palin in 2012!
and the same party thast rbought you the current financial crisis is now trying to PRIVATIZE Social Secuirty again!!! Oh boy, isn't that exciting...
if it was up to the Republicans, your child's public school would be privatized and turned into a publicly traded company. They would even do the same for the police and fire. The Blackwater Police Department and the Exxon Mobil Fire Department.
Theorists of the "Austrian School" who wrote about the Depression include Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek and American economist Murray Rothbard, who wrote America's Great Depression (1963). In their view and like the monetarists, the Federal Reserve, which was created in 1913, shoulders much of the blame; but in opposition to the monetarists, they argue that the key cause of the Depression was the expansion of the money supply in the 1920s that led to an unsustainable credit-driven boom. In the Austrian view it was this inflation of the money supply that led to an unsustainable boom in both asset prices (stocks and bonds) and capital goods. By the time the Fed belatedly tightened in 1928, it was far too late and, in the Austrian view, a depression was inevitable. According to the Austrians, the artificial interference in the economy was a disaster prior to the Depression, and government efforts to prop up the economy after the crash of 1929 only made things worse. According to Rothbard, government intervention delayed the market's adjustment and made the road to complete recovery more difficult
Privatizing social security would be a wonderful idea. I don't trust the gov't and prefer to make my own decisions. With the gov't running it, you have beurocrats tinkering with cost of living adjustments and elligibility requirements. We should also private the post office and sell it off to Fed Express who would do a better job of it.
Agree about privatizing social security. It is amazing that people would rather hand their forced savings over to the government rather than having control over it themselves. Privatize with strict controls on the types of investments available for it.
We listened to the Republicans when you said we wouldnt sleep until you got Obama dead or alive...
We listened to the Republicans when you told us Sadam had Nukes and we had to attack him...
We listened to the Republicans when you told us you knew where Sadams WOMD were...
We listened to the Republicans when you told us to spend our home equity on buying crap to stimulate the economy and to support the wars....
We listened to the Republicans when you told us the wars would be a cake walk and they would treat us like liberators.
We listened to the Republicans when you told us that the fundamentals of the American Economy were sound..
We listened to the Republicans when you told us that Sarah Palin was qualified to be President...
I think that listening to you guys got us into all sorts of trouble....why should we ever listen to you again?????
Privatizing Social Security is indeed a good idea. We can let Dick Fuld and Bernie Madoff run it. They can put all of the funds into mortgage backed securities. I'm sure they will do a better job than the government. You can blame the big bad evil govt. all you want, but ever since the great recession started, not a single social security payment has been missed. NONE.
"It is amazing that people would rather hand their forced savings over to the government rather than having control over it themselves."
The truth is that most people are too stupid to invest their money themselves.
We listened to the Republicans when you told us the it was for sure an accurate that the Niger Yellow cake for nukes was a legitimate threat...
We listened to the Republicans when you told us that you did not know who revealed the identity of the CIA agent....
We listened to the Republicans when you told us that if we gave the richest Americans tax breaks that the government coffers would fill up and we would have surpluses again and that the rich woudl create jobs....
Its pretty funny that "The Market is NOT down 20%, show me just one example "Alpo and "The Republicans have Controlled Congress for the last 8 years" Perfitz are the only two folks defending the Democratic Party here.
ROTFL.
Clearly, Democrats are doomed.
self referential statement of the month...
"I think that listening to you guys got us into all sorts of trouble....why should we ever listen to you again?????"
-"market will be up 20% by spring [2008]" Perfitz
oh my god, my side is hurting from laughing this hard.
"The truth is that most people are too stupid to invest their money themselves"
So better to hand it to stupid *and* corrupt Democrats?
I agree that Perfitz and Alpo should have their allowances taken away from them...
Social Security is expected to pay out more than it receives if it isn;'t in that state already. SOCIAL SECURITY IS A PONZI SCHEME. We don't need Bernie Madoff for that!
Widestance, doesn't seem to have an issue with our war in Afghanistan or Pakistan
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6131X520100204
Pakistan faces backlash after U.S. troops attack
privatize our SS to GS? AIG? BS? Lehman? BoA? who else is better qualified than the government to sell derivatives of nothing and make money?
"The truth is that most people are too stupid to invest their money themselves."
that's what cat food is for...
lol
actually, we need those people to die off for the sake of civilization.
Unfortunately, subsidizing the offspring not fit to survive - like alpo and perfitz - just makes things worse.
actually, we need those people to die off for the sake of civilization.
Unfortunately, subsidizing the offspring not fit to survive - like alpo and perfitz - just makes things worse.
Well maybe they could offer themselves as live in maids and buttlers...That is if they're not capable of saving for retirement.
People should invest based on their ability, risk tolerance and retirement needs.
For many a CD or annutiy would be fine, For others S&P index fund matched with a bond index and for
others..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL6KHJdEMlc&feature=player_embedded#
Keep in the mind the government is already ready to do things like this. They're talking about requiring folks to be defaulted in to 401k deductions...
I'm starting to think the gov't acts based on the stock market, which is damn close to minpulating it...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35270673/ns/meet_the_press/page/3/
MR. GREENSPAN: Well, it's more than a warning sign. It's important to remember that equity values, stock prices, are not just paper profits. They actually have a profoundly important impact on economic activity. And if stock prices start continuing down, I would get very concerned
What if folks on this board had listened to perfitz in 2007?
They'd be broke.
Bottom Line.
Republicans & Democrats both play games..
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/
The Administration is taking two tax provisions from the 2009 stimulus bill -- expansions of the child tax credit and the EITC -- and claiming them as part of the "current policy" Bush tax cuts. And they are doing something similar for Pell grants: assuming that they will receive sufficient funding to pay out the maximum grant level set in the stimulus bill.
The Administration didn't inherit these policies, they created them. And worse, still, they created them as explicitly temporary, under a stimulus bill which they claimed was meant only to help bring us out of this recession.
Yet the White House wants to continue these policies, and they don't want to pay for them. So what do they do? They hide these policies in their baseline, in the hopes that they won't have to.
"Bottom Line.
Republicans & Democrats both play games.."
Yet nearly everything you post is anti Democrat. I don't see you posting anything critical of Republicans. Your posts might have well have been written by Rush Limbaugh and Micheal Steele.
Is anybody reading there facts off of their hand?
"We listened to the Republicans when you said we wouldnt sleep until you got Obama dead or alive... "
I think you meant to say Osama, but I can understand how you might confuse the two. One is totally dedicated to destroying the American way of life...and the other lives in a cave!
LOL Freudian slip
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704362004575001042824028862.html
Fannie and Freddie, for their part, remain at the core of a housing-finance system that inflated a dangerous housing bubble. After prices collapsed, sending shock waves around the world, the federal government put America's housing-finance system on life support. It has yet to decide how that troubled system should be rebuilt.
On Dec. 24, Treasury said there would be no limit to the taxpayer money it was willing to deploy over the next three years to keep the two companies afloat, doing away with the previous limit of $200 billion per company. So far, the government has handed the two companies a total of about $111 billion.
The government is willing to tolerate such open-ended exposure for two reasons. First, it sees the companies as essential cogs in the fragile housing market. Fannie and Freddie buy mortgages originated by others, holding some as investments and repackaging others for sale to investors as securities. Together with the Federal Housing Administration, they fund nine in 10 American mortgages. Worries about potential insolvency would cripple their ability to fund home loans, which would hamstring the market.
Second, the companies are a convenient tool for the administration to use in its campaign to clean up the housing mess.
******************************************************************
By using Fannie and Freddie for such initiatives, the White House doesn't have to go to Congress for funding. The Treasury and White House can simply issue instructions to Fannie and Freddie via their federal regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, or FHFA.
The government is "running Fannie and Freddie as an instrument of national economic policy, not as a business," says Daniel Mudd, who was forced out as Fannie Mae's chief executive in September 2008 when the government took control.
Former FHFA head James Lockhart, the companies' top regulator until last August, says the U.S. is unlikely to ever fully recoup its investment in the two companies.
"We listened to the Republicans when you said we wouldnt sleep until you got Obama dead or alive... "
ROTFL.
Now THAT one is funny. Democrat's biggest supported can't tell 'em apart...
How much snow will we get in 2016?