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.
Well, he's had 4 years, so maybe he has no inclination to do anything. But it seems DJT and SM threw MC under the bus in furtherance of expanding the Unitary Executive Principle. SM could have at least tried to settle with the Collins Plaintiffs, moot the case, and let MC finish his term to 2024. But they didn't, and I don't think they are really that concerned.
ON SALE AGAIN,TODAY! How low will she go? Looks like investors are skeptical about the future of the gses given the new majoritys desire to keep them in perpetual conservatorship.
Are you asking yourself, 12 fricking years, where is the light at the end of the tunnel?
He did defend the nws in front of the SCOTUS, he did tell the D's that he wanted a "return" on the UST's "investment", BUT NOW he is faced with the prospect of handing over billions to a party that I am pretty sure he is idealogically opposed to.
One could argue that the nws was defended by SM BECAUSE his boss, DJT, wants the SCOTUS to move the needle a little more on the Unitary Executive Principle and that when he made the "return on the UST's investment" comment he was posturing for a stronger negotiating position and placating the concerns of the D's in the SBC.
Who knows, BUT 2 THINGS ARE CERTAIN:
(1). HE HAS LESS THAN 2 WEEKS TO ACT.
(2). HE WILL HAVE FAILED IN HIS STATED GOAL OF GETTING THE GSES OUT OF GOVERNMENTAL CONTROL WHEN HE WAS CAPABLE OF DOING IT BY SIMPLY AMENDING THE PSPA.
At this point, do you really think the current administration cares if they piss off the D's?
And what do you think is "best for his kind"? He clearly is idealogically opposed to Maxine and Sherrod, he is aware of the currently untenable situation with the gses, he knows they need to increase their retained earnings cap, and he should want MC to be able to follow through with the 2019 Housing Plan, by giving him the tools he needs to accomplish it.
With what appears to be total control of 2 of the 3 Branches of Government, it seems that for SM to leave the gses in their currently untenable situation (i.e., all profits going to the government, instead of protecting taxpayers with 1st Loss Capital) which has been endorsed by Maxine and Sherrod, would be negligent.
We will have to see what happens.
One thing I do know is that MC is likely to call SM soon and tell him Fannie Mae is going to blow through the retained earnings cap with 4Q20 earnings and he needs to raise the cap! Oh and btw, why don't you do some other things to the PSPA since you may be gone in 2 weeks!
Steven T. Mnuchin continuing to defend the nws is unbelievable! How can he defend the undefendable?
Spot on!
I think they just locked down the US Capitol...
You know Chuckie can't wait to get his hands on the gavel of power! Will JB choose Jim Parrot as the NEW FHFA Head?
At least SM and DJT know now, that if they leave the gses profits to JB he will be using them for his agendas, you would think the current administration would act while they still can, it would be consistent with their modus operandi with other federal agencies.
They should do a straight appropriation and the SCOTUS may end this shakedown of the gses profits, but does SM and the DJT Administration want to go down in history as condoning this Nationalization by doing nothing? We will find out within 2 weeks!
"New Programs In The Biden Housing Plan
A new “Homeowner and Renter Bill of Rights.”
A new renter’s tax credit.
Creating the Public Credit Reporting Agency, a federal credit reporting agency that will accept rent and utility bill payment history when creating credit scores similar to FICO scores.
Legal Assistance to Prevent Evictions Act of 2020.
Identify existing federal grant programs that can be changed to require recipients to have to reform their zoning.
Legislation similar to the proposed HOME Act of 2019 to withhold some federal funds from states unless they develop “inclusionary zoning.”
Applying the Community Reinvestment Act to mortgage and insurance companies.
Expand the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit for real estate developers.
Apply the 10-20-30 plan to all federal programs – at least 10% of the money must go to areas that have had 20% or more poverty over the last 30 years.
Continue to require communities receiving certain federal funds to be subject to the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule.
Expand the Good Neighbor Next Door program down-payment assistance for first responders and educators buying homes in areas with high rates of poverty.
Ensuring 100% of formerly incarcerated individuals – at the federal and state level – have housing upon release, and require entities in federal housing programs to participate.
Create a comprehensive housing grant program tailored to survivors of domestic and sexual violence.
Tackle racial bias that leads to homes in communities of color being assessed by appraisers below their fair value.
New Money For Old Programs In The Biden Housing Plan
According to the policy paper, “As President, Joe Biden will invest $640 billion over 10 years so every American has access to housing that is affordable, stable, safe and healthy, accessible, energy efficient and resilient, and located near good schools and with a reasonable commute to their jobs.”
Within the HOME program, establish a $100 billion Affordable Housing Fund to construct and upgrade affordable housing, including;
$65 billion in new incentives for state housing authorities,
$10 billion to make homes more energy efficient, and
$5 billion to increase the stock of affordable housing as part of larger community development efforts.
$20 billion increased funding for the Housing Trust Fund.
$13 billion over five years to enact the Ending Homelessness Act.
$10 billion over ten years to expand flexible funding for the Community Development Block Grant.
$5 billion every year to expand the New Markets Tax Credit program.
$300 million for Local Housing Policy Grants.
Increase resources for mental health services and substance use disorder treatment, including through the Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness program.
Increase funding for the Multi-Family Direct Loans and the Single Family Direct Loans programs at USDA.
Expand funding for the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.
Expand access to the Supportive Housing for the Elderly (“Section 202”) and Supportive Housing for Individuals with Disabilities (“Section 811”) programs.
“For all of these new housing investments, those receiving assistance will be required to abide by Davis-Bacon Act wage requirements” and the use of project labor agreements is encouraged."
There never really is enough money for all their ideas, I wonder where they will look for funding, any ideas?
Could be on the Chinese telecoms the NYSE is not delisting, just a guess. SM called the head of the NYSE to lodge his displeasure.
There are definitely problems, especially when corporations act badly (how much should a corporation charge you for a life saving pill?). I think that ideally the USA would be better off taking the best from both philosophies, but easier said than done!
You know, the gses were created by FDR and the D's and turned into private corporations by the LBJ Administration. I don't think that the gses COULD have originated from a R philosophy!
But the reality is that the gses may have saved us from the Great Financial Crisis turning into a Great Depression! Not bad, yet it was the OBama administration that came up with the nws, which has really turned them into governmental wards, go figure!
This is my last post of the day, so I will give you any response tomorrow, nice chatting with you!
Thanks, I hadn't seen that Tweet!
So if the US Corporate Income Tax Rate increases, then US Corporations will or will not have to allocate more limited resources to "loopholes in the Tax Code" (e.g., Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Alternative Energy Credits, etc.)?
Don't you think that some of the corporations that pay low or no taxes have invested in areas of the economy that the US Congress has given special tax breaks for like Research and Development, Low Income Housing Tax Credits, Alternative Energy Tax Credits, Disadvantaged Business Zones, etc., that help Society or by risking their limited resources on speculative business ventures (which if successful create jobs) that failed but get to write those off against profitable operations.
JB has promised to raise corporate business taxes, won't that lower earnings across the board and ultimately lower stock prices to the detriment of the hard working Americans who managed to squirrel away precious capital in their 401k's?
I'm asking for a friend....
Plus, as TH pointed out this afternoon about "the Zand", as a possible replacement:
"There are many rumors swirling around about a potential Fourth Amendment and what might be in it. Other than a higher retained earnings cap (or an indefinite suspension of the net worth sweep), I don’t have any good information about what else might be included in any amendment agreed to prior to January 20. On your capital question, no, the current FHFA Director cannot bind what a future director might do on Fannie and Freddie’s capital requirements.
As to the rumor that Mark Zandi might be on a short list for FHFA Director in the Biden administration, he wouldn’t be the worst choice. He at least has an understanding of the credit and financial dynamics behind Fannie and Freddie’s risk-based capital rule, and also of the problems caused by a capital standard that is disconnected from the economics of the companies’ credit guaranty business, as the current Calabria standard so obviously is."
Good points, I think everyone learned a big lesson from 2008 - giving EVERYONE access to homeownership doesn't always end well!
Plus, there's the who wants to be the party that lowers Americans home values!
Could you imagine if Senator Sherrod Brown headed the Senate Banking Committee?
https://mobile.twitter.com/MattCalabrese10
What does this mean?
That's unlikely, even Franklin Delanor Roosevelt failed to get the US Congress to go along with the packing the court idea! But it may have rattled some of the Conservative Justices who continually struck down his New Deal Legislation into submission. I think Justice Thomas briefly alluded to this in his Seila opinion!
If either party packs the USSCT, then they can expect the other party to do the same when they are in power. Pretty soon the situation would become unmanageable and unworkable.
Just like when governments Nationalize privately owned corporations, court packing ends up being untenable in the end.
Hilarious, pretty good, maybe I will get me a fox tail hat when the nws is cancelled!
I believe we will ALL do well, it seems unlikely that the SCOTUS will put any type of stamp of approval on the nws, especially as there is almost overwhelming evidence that the government has unclean hands in this 12+ year "conservatorship"!
Thanks for your contributions over the years and I believe I see some light at the end of the tunnel on this one!
But check out the Guitar licks from Angus and the boys on this one:
Nice, POST CONSERVATORSHIP! Now is Steven T. Mnuchin going to get the ball rolling on this "exit from government control" (4 YEARS AGO HE SAID THIS!) OR IS HE TRYING TO GET THE HUGO CHAVEZ TREASURY SECRETARY AWARD FOR BIGGEST EXPROPRIATION OF TWO PRIVATLEY OWNED CORPORATIONS IN HISTORY?
I don't think Uncle Sug wants to be the proud owner of $6.7T in MBS on THEIR BALANCE SHEET!
They just wanted to steal all their capital and profits without the $6.7T liability hassle of ownership!
I wonder if Steven T. Mnuchin will go down in history as the defender of the Net Worth Swipe? We will know shortly!
Happy New Year to you and yours! Hope we have some fun in '21!
"The GSEs have served an invaluable service over the years as stabilizing forces that brought down the cost of homeownership in America. The next stage in their evolution is within reach to ensure that legacy while protecting taxpayers."
I know, it was Justice Sotomayor who egged David Thompson on, asking, "Shouldn't we INVALIDATE all actions of an unconstitutionally headed federal agency head?"
But I think with a case involving so much money, a definitive SCOTUS ruling is inevitable to resolve this matter.
Couldn't the SCOTUS rule that the NWS was implemented by an unconstitutionally headed federal agency head and under the APA CLAIM IS VOID AB INITIO?
In Collins, I think the SCOTUS will stick to its knitting and likely provide for the relief sought by the Plaintiffs and limit their rulings on the questions presented.
I know but this investment has highlighted the need to understand the limitations on Governmental Power and its implications for a Democracy founded on Private Property Rights!
And what does it say is the appropriate remedy for a Taking by the government?
Here, they took ALL THE PROFITS INTO PERPETUITY WITH 0 COMPENSATION, that my friend is a NATIONALIZATION NOT EMINENT DOMAIN!
Quite frankly, that "may" versus "shall" argument lasted way too long in the courts and who really likes bankers and hedge fund guys, especially when coupled with the great Financial Crisis?
I think public sentiment is finally coming to realize the important role the gses play in Society and the heavy hand of the government here.
We will see what happens, there are opportunity costs with everything in life, but I can't think of a better time in the last 12 years were there are so many possible positive catalysts for change.
Plus all my other investments are so boring and predictable compared with this one!
I know but for the last 20 years I have taught MBA Students as an Adjunct professor part time and I haven't taught any since March of this year. He is young and a little cocky like some of the students, but as irritating as the jps people are, I believe that hearing opposing views helps reduce myopic thinking and we have nothing to fear from them, although they are irritating at times!
If they somehow lower the common price vis a vis jps, good for them, because I am still accumulating!
Stay long and strong, Justice will eventually prevail!
Yes, I got a little excited on August 17, 2012, when the Net Worth Swipe was announced and they were relegated to the pink sheets!
Naturally I loaded up on the shares right after the announcement and have been in accumulation mode ever since.
Why? For one simple reason, the US Government would be setting a horrible and self defeating precedence by nationalizing 2 private shareholder owned corporations that the US Congress set up as privately shareholder owned in 1968!
It's written in a little document called the US Constitution that the government will NOT expropriate privately owned property for its personal use.
So long as the Net Worth Swipe is in place, BOTH the common and jps have ZERO ECONOMIC VALUE!
YES THERE IS A HUGE HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NATIONALIZATION AND THE GOVERNMENT TAKING OVER A BANKRUPT CORPORATION! Look at HERA, it CLEARLY makes this distinction.
So, Quote: "Do you think fannie and freddie were nationalized and all economic value went to the government with no value for shareholders or do you think they were exacted from? In either case does it matter? What is the relief provided for nationalization and are shareholders better off under that scenario or under the exaction theory?"
Yes, the twins WERE NATIONALIZED BECAUSE THE "CONSERVATOR" TOOK ALL THEIR PROFITS FOR ITSELF INTO PERPETUITY, WERE ALL ECONOMIC VALUE WENT TO THE US GOVERNMENT!
Yes, it matters because:
(1) Under Conservatorship Law, a conservator is suppose to preserve and conserve the assets of its ward, NOT TAKE THEM FOR PERSONAL USE.
Conservators that steal their wards assets typically end up incarcerated for long periods of time.
(2) Here, I think the SCOTUS gets it and can provide the retrospective relief the Collins Plaintiffs seek.
They were never bankrupt and make great earnings!
That's right! I think Boeing refused federal government money because the US Government has not been a good partner, one need only look at how they have expropriated the shares of the twins!
EXPROPRIATION IS A HORRIBLE PRECEDENT FOR ANY GOVERNMENT TO SET MUCH LESS THE US GOVERNMENT!
Why do you think Judge Brown, said that "the US Government has acted no better here than a Banana Republic"!
Venezuela is not a good way to run a government!
The question is WILL Steven T. Mnuchin go down in history as a "capitalist" WHO DID NOTHING TO END THIS NATIONALIZATION OF TWO PRIVATE CORPORATIONS!
We will find out shortly.
Let me make it SIMPLE FOR YOU: There is a TREMENDOUS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NATIONALIZATION OF PRIVATE CORPORATIONS BY A GOVERNMENT AND HAVING THE GOVERNMENT COME IN WHEN A CORPORATION IS BANKRUPT AND THE GOVERNMENT COMES IN TO TAKE OVER!
YOU provided 3 examples: (1) RTC-Here the government took over BANKRUPT CORPORATIONS THEY DID NOT NATIONALIZE THEM! (2) AMTRAK - Do you maintain that the Federal Government EXPROPRIATED PRIVATELY OWNED CORPORATIONS, GIVING THE OWNERS NOTHING or close to nothing? Or did the federal government simply decide to start a corporation (without expropriating private corporations) to serve losing money routes that private corporations refused to service? (3) TVA, was it a EXPROPRIATION (HENCE NATIONALIZATION) OR did the TVA over to buyout the Tennessee privately shareholder owned utility for fair compensation?
I think you are CONFUSING NATIONALIZATION with the government taking over BANKRUPT CORPORATIONS OR STARTING A NEW GOVERNMENT RUN BUSINESS TO SERVE AMERICANS THAT OTHERWISE WOULDN'T BE SERVED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR (e.g., TVA and CONRAIL).
Here is the definition of NATIONALIZATION from Black's Law Dictionary:
"A government takes over a privately owned corporation, industry, and resource, often without compensation, but sometimes with."
The "sometimes with" compensation could be like HUGO CHAVEZ did to SO MANY US AND OTHER CORPORATIONS, when he NATIONALIZED private shareholder owned corporations by forcing them to accept a buyout at grossly below fair market value.
The Venezuelan Economy doesn't work very well does it?