Flintlock1776 Posted September 7, 2008 Report Share Posted September 7, 2008 Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac taken over by the Government. Times are scary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nativetexan Posted September 7, 2008 Report Share Posted September 7, 2008 Not really. Pretty common actually. Pro's and con's though definitely. Here's a little tidbit from a Fox news article.. “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are so large and so interwoven in our financial system that a failure of either of them would cause great turmoil in our financial markets here at home and around the globe,” Paulson said, speaking at a press conference in Washington D.C. on Sunday morning. “A failure would affect the ability of Americans to get home loans, auto loans and other consumer credit and business finance." The Sunday announcement and themes of "too big to fail" brought stark reminders of the government’s March intervention of Bear Stearns, which came within hours of filing for bankruptcy. It also brings both Fannie Mae, which was created by Congress during the Great Depression to help with home ownership, and Freddie Mac, created in 1970 as a competitor to Fannie Mae, back into the fold of the government after a multi-decade attempt at privatization. As part of the plan, both Fannie and Freddie’s day-to-day operations will be under the direction of Lockhart. Officials provided no indication of when the government conservatorship will end – that will be up to the health of the U.S. housing economy as well as the next administration. "Conservatorship will give the enterprises time to restore the balances between safety and soundness and provide affordable housing and stability and liquidity to the mortgage markets," Lockhart said. As part of the government's plan of taking over the companies, and to protect taxpayers, Paulson said the Treasury will receive $1 billion in senior preferred stock, with a yield of 10% a year, in both Fannie and Freddie, and will also receive "warrant for the purchase of common stock of each company representing 79.9% of the common stock of each company on a fully-diluted basis at a nominal price." The government’s plan will close to wipe out any worth that common or preferred stock holders have in the two mortgage companies. All dividends for Fannie and Freddie will be eliminated, Paulson said. All company political lobbying efforts will cease as well. While under the direction of the government, the two companies will then take additional mortgage-backed securities to help stabilize the mortgage markets through the end of 2009, Paulson said. As the market begins to recover in 2010, both Fannie and Freddie will reduce the size of their mortgage portfolios at a rate of 10% a year. The ultimate goal is to reduce the size of Fannie and Freddie's mortgage holdings -- around $1.5 billion altogether -- to about $250 billion each. Now because the government controls the liabilities of Fannie and Freddie, it could potentially cost the taxpayers billions of dollars in losses. However, Paulson emphasized that, because of the long-term value of these securities, the taxpayer would have “a large stake in the future value of these entities.” "The ultimate cost to the taxpayer will depend on the business results of (Fannie and Freddie) going forward," Paulson said. The plan was endorsed and planned in cooperation with the Federal Reserve and Congress, including House Financial Committee Chairman Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. “These necessary steps will help to strengthen the U.S. housing market and promote stability in our financial markets,” said Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke in a statement. Rating agency Standard & Poor's affirmed Fannie and Freddie's long-term AAA credit rating. "We believe the government has now clearly reinforced its support of (Fannie and Freddie)," said S&P's credit analyst Victoria Wagner, in a statement. Democratic Presidential Candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said "given the substantial role that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac play in our housing system, I believe that some form of intervention is necessary to prevent a larger and deeper crisis throughout the entire economy." The implications to consumers and taxpayers are not immediately clear. Unlike the bailout of Chrysler in the early 1980s or the Airlines after 9/11 where the amount of money loaned to Corporate America was clear, the U.S. government could be on the hooks for potential losses that could linger for years. Paulson could not provide an estimate of how much the plan would cost taxpayers. Mortgage rates are expected to be unaffected in the short-term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flintlock1776 Posted September 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2008 excuses Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJL Posted September 8, 2008 Report Share Posted September 8, 2008 They're in trouble because of the Government..............Now the Government is going to fix it. Where have we seen this before................... Education Welfare Health care Social Security OIL Prices Utility Companies Agriculture Auto Industry The list goes on and on and on and on............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig mack Posted September 9, 2008 Report Share Posted September 9, 2008 They're in trouble because of the Government..............Now the Government is going to fix it. Where have we seen this before................... Education Welfare Health care Social Security OIL Prices Utility Companies Agriculture Auto Industry The list goes on and on and on and on............ This might be a little bigger (cost wise) than anything they have done before. I just want to know why none of these CEOs are going to jail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted September 9, 2008 Report Share Posted September 9, 2008 This might be a little bigger (cost wise) than anything they have done before. I just want to know why none of these CEOs are going to jail.Well, one reason is that Jim Johnston, the ex-CEO of Fannie Mae when they chalked up the $11 BILLION dollar loss, was also in charge of Obama's VP selection team. You don't seriously think anyone from Team Obama will ever do time, do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig mack Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 If he was on Team McCain I dont think the outcome would be any different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetucker Posted September 10, 2008 Report Share Posted September 10, 2008 thats all forieng language to me!!!But i think something is being covered up!!I bet all the big wigs and or the ceo's are millionaires and have really laxed spending habbits!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flintlock1776 Posted September 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 Now AIG. Some few weeks this has been Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted September 17, 2008 Report Share Posted September 17, 2008 If he was on Team McCain I dont think the outcome would be any different. oh 'cmon. get real. it would be all over the news, pointing fingers and assessing blame. since when is mccain treated like a democrat. history says you're quite wrong with your statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.