Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
he's got to be one of the shareholding brethern....
well, if we are writing essays on emotion, here's mine:
well, a lofty goal. hard for us ex-college baseball players and division I USA men's rugby players to always abide by. the spirit of competition, intensity, deep passion for cherished beliefs and a desire to work hard and win take over.
people in the world wired like me can be abrasive at times. what rugby culture taught me is that when someone punches you in the nose in the ruck, the better response is not to hit back, but buy the man a pint of beer after the match and sing songs together. no harm intended when all play the game without malice in the heart. sometimes, our emotions get the better of us when we are competitors at heart.
different personalities make the world go round. my wife is a nurse and should be a full fledged member of NVC, and her personality is perfect for her profession as a nurse and mother. and a mentor to me to tone it down when not on the field of play. for 8 years she has been a good force for that. coming from an english rugby family herself, she also understands the times when hyperbole, sharp words, and passion are needed to help a team cross the goal line. as long as the brotherly love is there when the game is finished.
sometimes I get that game face on with F&F. I have a lot of money at stake, and reputation among a select few. i ask in advance some grace for when I may vent on this board with others that are in this game with me.
good luck to all
4 cent is right, it's a pass thru TAX...they want the public to THINK it comes from F&F when it really just taxes every new homeowner or refinancing. And to think Grover Norquist, of all people, supported the payroll deduction TAX! what a hypocrite.
this it the s**** (stuff) ;) i'm talking about, nationalize F&F and tell the public they can pillage F&F for whatever spending they want to undertake.
(fair enough deleting the original reply 4 cent. was PG-13, a little harsh. I'll own that. I should set the standard as a moderator. I probably would have let it fly if it were one of the rest of us, but we should be setting the standard for discourse.)
he isn't consistent and further, only about one a year comments on GSE's for the most part. i haven't looked at his blog though, he has been posting a couple times a year on F&F topics on his blog...i haven't been checking cause there was a huge time gap at one point and there was never anything new
someone tried to short a TINY amount of stock in FMCCT, FMCKI and FMCCK 2 reporting periods ago, and backed out the whole position (88 shares in one case) two weeks later!
WTF???
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/FMCCK/short-sales
FMCKJ went up 39%
best find of day?? jemiller! (PS -- i posted the WSJ article six hours ago.)
whole article is on this board.
as for hensarling's website and F&F statement, I think it's fantastic??!!??!!
i think if this plan were followed, preferred would have to be taken care of and I think commons might even see light of day????
http://hensarling.house.gov/legislation/issues/reforming-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac.shtml
"My bill would privatize Fannie and Freddie over a 5 year transition period, gradually eliminating taxpayer subsidies in the secondary mortgage market. The legislation would begin implementing important reforms upon enactment, put a hard 2 year end date on conservatorship and eliminate the government charters after 5 years. My legislation is supported by Heritage Action, Freedom Works, National Taxpayers Union, and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste.
"* I am the only Member of Congress to have introduced comprehensive reform legislation for Fannie and Freddie since the start of the credit crisis, lauded in the media as “a concrete plan for fixing Fannie and Freddie.” (H.R. 1182, the GSE Bailout Elimination and Taxpayer Protection Act, (H.R. 4889 - 111th Congress), and H.R. 7094, the GSE Free Market Reform Act in the 110th Congress). "
no powerball for me
maybe another chance?
Powerball officials say they now believe there is a 75 percent chance that the winning combination of numbers will be drawn Wednesday night. There is currently no word on if and where a winning ticket was sold.
Read more: http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/20211602/2012/11/28/the-winning-powerball-jackpot-numbers#ixzz2Da8Y0Yut
US judge says FHFA cases against banks can proceed
Chicago Tribune
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sns-rt-us-fhfa-lawsuitsbre8ar1ee-20121128,0,3282638.story
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. judge kept alive a federal regulator's lawsuits against big banks including Credit Suisse Group AG and Bank of America Corp over allegations they misled Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into purchasing billions of dollars worth of risky mortgage debt.
The rulings, by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan, were the latest in a series of decisions allowing the Federal Housing Finance Agency to proceed with lawsuits against banks it blames for losses incurred by Fannie and Freddie.
The FHFA, which regulates Fannie and Freddie, last year sued 18 banks over the housing finance giants' losses on more than $200 billion in mortgage-backed securities. The lawsuits accuse the banks of misrepresenting the quality of the loans underlying the securities and violating U.S. securities laws.
The banks have denied the regulator's allegations and argued they should be dismissed. Among the arguments by the defendants is a contention that the lawsuits were filed after the statute of limitations had expired.
In a series of four brief orders, Cote allowed the FHFA lawsuits to move forward against several defendants, which also include HSBC Holdings Plc and Citigroup Inc . Representatives for those banks and for Bank of America and Credit Suisse, declined to comment.
In addition to these lawsuits, the banks face various investor lawsuits and government investigations into their roles in the sale of mortgage-backed securities. Those mortgage debt products were at the heart of the financial crisis following declines in housing prices and mounting foreclosures.
Cote has previously allowed FHFA lawsuits to move forward against defendants including Goldman Sachs Group Inc , Deutsche Bank AG , Bank of America's Merrill Lynch unit, JPMorgan Chase & Co , Barclays Plc , and Morgan Stanley .
Her newest decisions came two days after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments on whether to reverse a May ruling by Cote that allowed a FHFA's lawsuit against UBS AG to move forward. UBS, which faces a January 2014 trial date, was the first bank the FHFA sued and the first lawsuit Cote had allowed to proceed.
A ruling for UBS reversing Cote's decision would affect not just that lawsuit but the others, said Donald Hawthorne, a lawyer with Axxin Veltrop Harkrider who has been involved in suing financial companies over mortgage-backed securities.
"That would be the remaining potential stumbling block," he said. "With that out of the way, she clearly is intending to pursue these cases vigorously."
The four lawsuits Cote ruled on Wednesday targeted sales of $14.1 billion in mortgage-backed securities sponsored by Credit Suisse; $6.2 billion by HSBC; $6 billion by Bank of America, and $3.5 billion by Citigroup.
A day earlier, Cote largely allowed FHFA lawsuits against Nomura Holdings Inc , First Horizon National Corp and Societe Generale to proceed as well. Spokesmen for Societe Generale and Nomura declined comment. First Horizon was not immediately available for comment.
The cases in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York are Federal Housing Finance Agency v. Credit Suisse Holdings (USA), Inc., 11-06200, Federal Housing Finance Agency v. Citigroup, Inc., 11-06196; Federal Housing Finance Agency v. Bank of America Corporation, 11-06195; Federal Housing Finance Agency v. HSBC North America Holdings Inc., 11-06189.
(Reporting By Nate Raymond in New York; Editing by Martha Graybow and Steve Orlofsky)
no...he can move legislation out of his committee to the full house. another quote in the article states that the more sane GOP guys on the committee might block anything coming out of committee.
but, prepare for hearings, fanfare, blustering, yada, yada, yada.
i think this is deadlocked. obama thru FHFA can institute a recess appointment for DeMarco, can try to work grey areas of the 2008 conservatoship act, but I think that the only thing they can do without congress is release them when solvent. i think any other change or scenario requires an act of congress.
"several of Mr. Hensarling's GOP colleagues drafting legislation that would establish a mortgage-support system with a government guarantee.
"Partly because of these divisions, Republicans haven't been able to advance legislation on Fannie and Freddie in the two years since the party took control of the House. Any efforts to do so will likely face opposition in the Democratic-controlled Senate and White House."
"right-wing committee" that doesn't move significant legislation through Congress, said Rep. Brad Miller (D., N.C.), who is retiring after a decade on the committee."
"Camden Fine, president of the Independent Community Bankers of America, said Mr. Hensarling would be an ally of smaller banks in their push to rein in their bigger rivals"
"wants to abolish government-controlled mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but also opposes replacing them with a new system of federal support for home loans"
Hensarling Picked to Head House Committee
Texas Congressman Opposes Federal Support for Financial Sector
Wall Street Journal
By ALAN ZIBEL And VICTORIA MCGRANE
WASHINGTON—The House panel that oversees financial issues is getting a new leader: a conservative who could rankle big banks by opposing what he sees as unnecessary federal support for the financial sector.
Rep. Jeb Hensarling, a Republican from Texas, not only wants to abolish government-controlled mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae FNMA -0.73% and Freddie Mac FMCC 0.00% but also opposes replacing them with a new system of federal support for home loans. He has voiced skepticism of the government's ability to police large financial firms that pose a risk to the financial system.
"We can revive and strengthen the free-enterprise system—the best housing and jobs program known to man," Mr. Hensarling said Wednesday in a statement.
A protégé of former Sen. Phil Gramm's, Mr. Hensarling was named the House Financial Services Committee's chairman on Wednesday. He pledged in his statement to "end the phenomenon of 'too big to fail' and reinstate market discipline."
The 55-year-old congressman's tough talk against bailouts could help the GOP counter its image as too closely tied to the banking industry. Camden Fine, president of the Independent Community Bankers of America, said Mr. Hensarling would be an ally of smaller banks in their push to rein in their bigger rivals.
Still, Mr. Hensarling is likely to push for much of what the banking industry wants on numerous issues, including efforts to roll back pieces of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial overhaul.
At times, he has sided with larger institutions. Unlike some other lawmakers, he refrained from criticizing J.P. Morgan Chase JPM +0.20% & Co. after the bank disclosed a giant trading loss during the spring.
"I think we should be very careful about outlawing risk," he said at a hearing on the issue over the summer. Some lawmakers had backed tighter rules on the risky bets banks can take.
Conservatives cheered Mr. Hensarling's ascension. Peter Wallison, a co-director of the American Enterprise Institute's program on financial policy studies, said Mr. Hensarling's focus on the private sector is the "right attitude." A key ally on the financial panel, Rep. Scott Garrett (R., N.J.), called Mr. Hensarling "a strong advocate to make the reform that's necessary."
A representative of big banks struck a more cautious note. "We look forward to working with him and hope he continues to keep an open mind in areas where we don't agree," said Scott Talbott, chief lobbyist for the Financial Services Roundtable, which represents the largest financial firms.
The panel's current chairman, Rep. Spencer Bachus (R., Ala.), was required to vacate his position under party rules. Later this week, House Democrats are expected to select California liberal Maxine Waters to serve as the panel's top Democrat, succeeding retiring Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts.
Some Democrats don't expect Mr. Hensarling to seek bipartisan compromises.
"I expect it to be a very doctrinaire, right-wing committee" that doesn't move significant legislation through Congress, said Rep. Brad Miller (D., N.C.), who is retiring after a decade on the committee.
But Mikael Moore, Ms. Waters's chief of staff, said she and Mr. Hensarling have "always had a respectful relationship and I don't see any reason why that would change."
Among Mr. Hensarling's top priorities is tackling what to do with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The two mortgage-finance giants have received $137 billion in government support since they nearly failed in 2008.
Mr. Hensarling has long bucked financial-industry players on the issue, voicing firm opposition to replacing Fannie and Freddie with a new system of federal guarantees for mortgages, arguing that doing so would put taxpayers at risk for another bailout.
The issue has caused tension among Republicans, with several of Mr. Hensarling's GOP colleagues drafting legislation that would establish a mortgage-support system with a government guarantee.
Partly because of these divisions, Republicans haven't been able to advance legislation on Fannie and Freddie in the two years since the party took control of the House. Any efforts to do so will likely face opposition in the Democratic-controlled Senate and White House.
Mr. Hensarling spent the past two years in the fourth-ranking House Republican leadership post, a job charged with shaping the GOP message. Given those ties, Mr. Hensarling, will be "free to set the agenda with very little hand-holding from the Republican leaders," said Sam Geduldig, a former Republican congressional staffer who is now a lobbyist on financial issues.
Write to Alan Zibel at alan.zibel@dowjones.com and Victoria McGrane at victoria.mcgrane@wsj.com
Powerball jackpot rises to $550m as ticket sales frenzy continues
http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2012/11/28/powerball-jackpot-rises/UxuiZpDTq8WOw5P8QwEXAM/story.html
OT i know...anyway, if you got $2 burnin' a hole in your pocket, skip the starbucks and buy in. somebody will win, if not this draw, certainly the next one!
beta -- yeah, that hit was coming PR wise, but I think it has to stand if the idea is to privatize the market. they are also instructed to "crowd in" the private market (states timmy) in order to bring in competitor when it makes more sense with higher fees and lower risk. this was a natural and necessary step because big wall street wouldn't get in with any other system.
that said, here's to a LONG time before any wall street banks jump into the game!!!
that is pretty funny devil. i might not sell either, not sure I'd buy more. With a hundred mil in the bank, I might wait for the total green light and buy at 50 cents on the dollar if the shares jack up. I don't think I'd buy more though, maybe just enough to round up to $5mm RV. i certainly won't need the pfd's to live well, so that was my rationale to sell up and forget about it. on the other hand, I could quit the message board, stop reading the k's and q's and just "fire and forget"...let it ride without spending anymore time on it! that's probably the real plan.
I read this morning that there's only a 60% chance somebody will get the winning number unless a huge amount sell today. I can't believe all 170,000,000+ combinations haven't sold out! must be a lot of duplicates with people buying birthdays and anniversaries. i let the computer pick. 20/20 did the research last summer during the mega millions jackpot and found that 2/3 of winners are computer generated.
ah! the bringing debt on the balance sheet argument! i forgot that one, silly me!
well, I actually have 21 numbers in play. I have a 10/21 share of our jackpot. the boss chipped in $2, so that's why the strange number. another colleague put up the other $20. Da boss said "I never buy lottery tickets. It's a tax on the poor and I always considered it a sucker's game. But here's two bucks." Gave me a $1 note and some silver! His share will be about $10 million, so I told him it was a good asymmetric risk/reward scenario! He's a lawyer by training, but being in banking for 20 years, I think he understood my comment....
TO DA MOON! -- glad to see you back devil---
prices on a trajectory to beat even the most optimistic forecasts from earlier this year. The gains also are broad-based, with the 20 cities tracked by the Case-Shiller index—except Chicago and New York—showing year-over-year gains.
looks like the FHFA Best Case scenario gets better yet again!!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323830404578144910760036652.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs
somebody's gotta win. why not you? me?
powerball is hoping and dreaming! what, 1 in 173 million???
well, I'm going to buy $20 of lottery tickets. if the price of FMCCT and FMCCK tank on Thursday, it's because I put in a market order to exit as I collect my $500mm powerball.
nor do they agree with me YET!
i may be worried by politics, but man, these are money MACHINES! warren buffet wasn't stupid when he was invested a decade ago....
congress acted in 2008 to have conservatorship as a temporary way to get them on sound footing. four years later....no matter who took them down that path (it was right at the time I think...see Frontline's 3 hours of work on the financial meltdown, excellent reporting by a great PBS show) I think for the last two years the government (Congress and President) have not owned up to the responsibility before them...hopefully that will be soon...
devil
don't have time to back everything up, but for what it's worth, the quick take of what I believed about F&F:
Romney, spin them back out into the private market ala Millstein
Obama, nationalize, or keep them in forever holding pattern
Harry Reid, keep them in some form, but make sure to raise quota for low income borrowers
Bachus: KILL THEM KILL THEM KILL THEM!
so, romney bachus together, not the best set of outcomes either. As long as Obama avoids outright nationalization, then all will work out ok. we shall see....
i hope you are right 4 cent. others, like me, don't quite see it that black and white. if we did, I think that the pfd share price would be a lot higher today...
i did worry about this with an obama administration....using F&F as a permanent piggy bank. i thought the GOP would like to get it out of government and was more keen on GOP in handling "our" selfish interests. anyway, not even hugo chavez took companies to a nationalized state without compensation to private shareowners. but our government may argue they are worthless (which is a lie, otherwise, why would they keep them pumping money).
oh i don't know. venting my frustration with inaction. I have no crystal ball.
good luck to all.
jemiller....I'm even willing to give the govt an annual 10% return before releasing the co's. I hope they do that by converting a chunk to commons and selling on the market. net investment plus 10% ok with me.
commons doomed under all scenarios. well, maybe not over the long, long, long haul under the conversion AIG-type scenario. Let's hope Millstein prevails and not KBW analyst.
the only problem 4 cent is that if they decide to sweep revenue in perpetuity to fund the national government there will be no cash to pay a preferred dividend which would leave them essentially worthless.
highway robbery if that happens....
"the quarterly sweep of profits is likely to provide a revenue stream to the U.S. Treasury that will prove difficult for policymakers to abandon."
this is the scenario where preferred stock goes to ZERO.
ugh...pray this doesn't happen without just compensation!
Fannie, Freddie Will Live Forever: Street Whispers
Shanthi Bharatwaj
11/27/12 - 08:00 AM EST
(Got it from Yahoo news feed, it is still a good one even if we moved away from YMB)
http://www.thestreet.com/print/story/11775857.html
NEW YORK (TheStreet) - If you are waiting for a plan from Washington to wind down mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae (FNMA) and Freddie Mac (FMCC), don't hold your breath. They aren't going anywhere.
Far from ending their dominance, policymakers are drafting new rules governing the origination and securitization of mortgages that might only strengthen the stronghold of Fannie and Freddie, according to FBR Capital analyst Paul Miller.
"We foresee a continued dominance of the implied government guarantee. While Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may be ended "in name," Congress will keep the infrastructure in place to further its homeownership goals," Miller wrote in a report titled the "Future of the Housing Market: Winners and Losers."
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is in the middle of framing rules including the definition of a "qualified mortgage" and a "qualified residential mortgage" that are likely to have a significant impact on the ability of private-label securitizers to compete in the market, according to the analyst.
The qualified mortgage rule seeks to ensure that banks lend only to those borrowers who have an "ability to pay". Originators who make a non-QM loan, face the risk that the borrower will contest the foreclosure in court that would result at the very least in delays and legal fees. If they originate a "qualified mortgage" they are offered legal protection, though regulators are still debating the nature of the protection.
To avoid the legal risk, banks might end up originating only QM loans, which means there will be no more interest-only loans or no/low doc loans or sub-prime loans -the kind that have traditionally been underwritten by the private-label market.
A separate rule also requires banks to retain at least 5% of the loans they originate on their balance sheet. The rule is meant to prevent banks from originating bad loans and offloading them to investors. But to avoid raising the cost of mortgages, the rule exempts certain "qualified residential mortgages" from the risk-retention.
A draft of the rule Miller notes, exempts mortgages with loan-to-value ratio of more than 80% from risk retention as long as they were securitized by the GSEs.
This will create a preference for loans to be securitized by the GSEs. The preference, along with the guarantee on principal and interest on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac securities, and the end of sub-prime product features should make the return of "meaningful private securitization extremely unlikely," according to FBR.
While the government has talked about reducing the role of the GSEs in housing market, it remains to be seen if there is political will to do so.
For one, no one wants to shake up the housing market while the economy is still weak, though some believe that Obama as a second-term president might actually be best placed to take on GSE reform. No first-term President will wade into the political mess that is housing.
More importantly, as Miller notes, Fannie and Freddie's profits now go directly to the GSEs.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Treasury changed the repayment requirements on the capital provided to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as part of their conservatorship. Under the previous agreement, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had been responsible for a 10% annual dividend paid quarterly. The new agreement requires a quarterly transfer to the Treasury of all profits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
"Some have argued that this change is a reduced payment for Fannie and Freddie, as most quarters resulted in one or both of the GSEs borrowing funds from the Treasury to cover the dividend that was owed," the analyst said. "We believe that the true result of this change will be the establishment of Fannie and Freddie as a significant source of revenue for the federal government for years to come. It remains uncertain as to whether the federal government will recoup its overall investment in the GSEs; however, the quarterly sweep of profits is likely to provide a revenue stream to the U.S. Treasury that will prove difficult for policymakers to abandon."
--Written by Shanthi Bharatwaj in New York
if flanigan's right, let's hope SCOTUS denies the petition to speed up the settlement....
wow...didn't expect a quote like that from a lawyer in kansas city! these matters in the Mahattan courts rarely touch KC. He does have a 2nd office in NYC, so, presume he and his 155 lawyer staff have made pretty good inroads there too to get quoted.
been spending a lot of my time at their offices lately on client matters in another industry...good guys.
thx for posting the article.
indeed...give thanks...
for me, thanks for the fact that cool heads prevailed and I didn't bail out at a buck like every fiber of my being wanted me to.
will be a blessed holiday for us.
hope for you all as well.
Vern McKinley: The Fannie Mae 'Wind Down' That Isn't
The mortgage assets they own are declining, but the overall value of mortgages on their balance sheet has remained about the same.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324735104578117082930871430.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs
By VERN MCKINLEY
At the height of the presidential election campaign, the Treasury Department issued a press release called "Further Steps to Expedite Wind Down of Fannie Mae FNMA -0.37% and Freddie Mac FMCC -4.10% ." It highlighted a new policy to scale back the pair's mortgage-investment portfolio at a rate of 15% per year, as opposed to their stated 10% rate. Reports from the Securities and Exchange Commission, however, suggest that these two government-sponsored enterprises—currently under federal conservatorship—may not be shrinking much at all.
The Treasury announcement, coming near the fourth anniversary of the September 2008 government takeover of the mortgage behemoths, was made during an election campaign with a heavy focus on the health of the economy. The impression it left was that the most expensive of the 2008 bailouts was not much of an issue, as the transition back to stability in the mortgage market is well under way.
We've since learned that the mortgage market is still troubled—given the report on Friday that the Federal Housing Administration, a government agency, faces high losses on its mortgage loans and may need to get billions from the U.S. Treasury to shore up its finances.
Forbes magazine referred to the August Treasury announcement as "Obama's Victory Lap." Fannie and Freddie's caretaker and regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, chimed in that the "faster reduction in the retained mortgage portfolio will further reduce risk exposure and simplify the operations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
But these comments raise questions when you cross-check the claims against the annual and quarterly reports, Forms 10-K and 10-Q, that Fannie Mae filed with the SEC.
Fannie Mae, by far the larger of the two institutions, has a mortgage balance that has hovered at $2.9 trillion since early 2010, the reports show. Freddie Mac has managed to shrink its mortgages, but only slightly.
Exactly what 10% wind-down rate was the Treasury Department referring to in its press release? Once again, the SEC reports for Fannie are helpful as they explain the basis for some of the comments: "The senior preferred stock purchase agreement with Treasury includes a number of covenants that significantly restrict our business activities . . . the maximum allowable amount of mortgage assets [Fannie Mae was] permitted to own on December 31, 2011 was $729 billion."
In other words, when Treasury bailed out Fannie and Freddie, part of that deal was a cap on the mortgage assets they could "own." This cap has gone down 10% per year and will now go down 15%. At least in theory, this mandate could lead to sustained shrinkage in the assets and overall presence of Fannie and Freddie.
But the stated cap for "owned" assets, $729 billion in Fannie's case, represents only a small portion of the $2.9 trillion in mortgages on Fannie's balance sheet.
Fannie and Freddie have a great deal of risk exposure from "guaranteeing" mortgages. Measured as a proportion of Fannie's total mortgage assets, owned assets represent only a little more than 25%, while the bulk of its total mortgage loans fall into the category of loans it guarantees.
Treasury also failed to mention staff levels in its announcement.
Surely Fannie and Freddie are starting to rationalize and reduce their far-flung operations as fully private institutions after four years in government hands. They were placed in a legal conservatorship, after all; so what better way to conserve resources than to reduce excesses in payroll—especially when one considers Fannie's $16.9 billion net loss last year?
"Fannie Mae Laying Off Hundreds," read a Washington Post headline from early 2009, a few months after the government takeover. The headline focused on the Washington, D.C., office. Elsewhere, the article noted that Fannie's Dallas office was hiring, and overall staffing levels were expected to remain flat. Once again, cross-checking the SEC reports undermines any doomsday narrative about staff shrinkage.
Fannie Mae had 5,800 employees in late 2008, shortly after the government takeover. As of early 2012 it had bulked up to 7,000 employees. This was down from a peak of 7,300 employees in 2011, but still up 1,200 since the start of government conservatorship. Again, Freddie Mac has managed to reduce staff slightly, but the amount—about 90 total—pales in comparison to the 1,200-employee bump at Fannie.
These facts expose the Treasury announcement as misleading at best, and confirm that the wind-down mission has not been accomplished.
Certainly, the efforts to date don't deserve a victory lap, although Freddie Mac has made modest progress, which is more than can be said for Fannie Mae. If Treasury wants to trumpet shrinkage, Fannie and Freddie need to downsize their entire mortgage portfolio, owned and guaranteed, and scale back their army of employees.
Then, perhaps, a victory lap might be appropriate.
Mr. McKinley is a research fellow at the Independent Institute and author of the book "Financing Failure: A Century of Bailouts" (The Independent Institute, 2011).
Freddie Mac To Donate $1 Million To Support Hurricane Sandy Relief Efforts
Sacramento Bee
16, 2012 -- /PRNewswire/ -- Freddie Mac is helping ease the burden for families impacted by Hurricane Sandy by donating $1 million to nonprofits supporting relief efforts, including the American Red Cross. "We are helping families get the services they ...
wow...treasury ok giving up a million bucks????
4cent- could you sticky note any great posts till I get regular again? don't want to miss a huge piece of news or great insight.
it would be much appreciated if you don't mind. not that you owe me a thing.