Read John Carney's op-ed in the New York Times:

by waiting for a recovery before reforming the government’s mortgage-backing trio, we are getting things backward. Far from being the last bulwark supporting the housing market, the F.H.A., Fannie and Freddie are very likely holding back the private loan industry. And, unfortunately, a little-noticed provision of the Dodd-Frank act threatens to undermine efforts at rebuilding an innovative and healthy private sector for mortgages. [...] lenders will find that it costs far more, and involves more risk, to offer mortgages they back themselves than those covered with a guarantee from the agency.

"Purely private mortgages will quickly be pushed out of the market," Carney writes. "Unbelievably, the two entities whose mortgage market follies led to their collapses may well be given a pass when it comes to managing risk."

Reason's Matt Welch has much more on the nightmare on main street we can't wake up from.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Mel Foil
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

If the federal government ever got into the catering business, people would be dropping and dying from food poisoning all around us...and "Bush's fault" no doubt.


Joined
May '10
David Jones
etoiledunord: If the federal government ever got into the catering business, people would be dropping and dying from food poisoning all around us...and "Bush's fault" no doubt. · Aug 12 at 11:05am

And then, after the inevitable congressional hearings, they would propose new, draconian regulations, a new Deviled Egg Czar, mandatory food poison insurance coverage for the guests, a new 5% tax on mini beef Wellingtons, and national oversight powers for the very same folks who sent out the tainted deli trays. Expect the cost of finger foods to triple.

Because that's how our government rolls.

the motley cow
Joined
Jun '10
the motley cow

The John Carney piece is informative. It's interesting the European Union had "outlawed governments from backing mortgage companies — avoiding entirely the implicit guarantees that let Fannie and Freddie grow without credit market discipline."

Plus I always appreciate it when someone interprets some of the details of these massive reform bills. In this case, Carney does a good job of laying out the ill effects of the 5% rule exemption for mortgages guaranteed by the F.H.A. under the Dodd-Frank Act...

Rob Long

It's strange, James, because in yesterday's NYTimes, William Poole had an op-ed heaping equal scorn on Freddie and Fannie. A snippet:

In principle, it ought to be possible for government financial agencies to be self-supporting. But decades of observation have convinced me that there is no practical way to prevent the government from inserting hidden subsidies and special interest mandates into the agencies’ operations. If there are to be more federal housing subsidies — and I hope there are not — they should be legislated transparently.

Fannie and Freddie could not be shuttered immediately; they are too large. A sensible transition plan would have them stop buying new mortgages, and their portfolios would decline as the mortgages they own are paid down. Within 10 years, the portfolios would shrink to insignificance.

Shut 'em down. Do it sensibly. But make them go away. I think taxpayers and the financial system as a whole would breathe a sigh of relief.

the motley cow
Joined
Jun '10
the motley cow

...However, I'm skeptical about his statement: "Just about everyone agrees that the government’s extraordinary role in supporting the housing finance market should be curtailed." Just about everyone agrees? Really? Whenever I discuss the housing bubble with liberal or even moderately conservative friends, I watch their eyes glaze over whenever I point out the part Freddie and Fannie played. Why get into the details of government backed institutions, when it's much easier and much more exciting to fault predatory lenders, CEO salaries, and greedy bankers and their greedy capitalist greed?


Joined
May '10
David Jones
Rob Long: Shut 'em down. Do it sensibly. But make them go away. I think taxpayers and the financial system as a whole would breathe a sigh of relief. · Aug 12 at 1:12pm

I know I would.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In