I think this, "we need to raise $234B ASAP", is one of the core fundamental differences in investment philosophies between some jps and cs holders.
You quoted the CNBC interview, but you forgot to quote the next sentence didn't you? Wasn't the sentence he uttered with less than a one second pause, "But the capital raise is event driven, NOT calendar driven."
I believe in almost every interview he has given, he says capital raise as early as 2021 or 2022, BUT then quickly follows with the event driven language.
MC has quite a few options available under HERA, but he has also emphasized that his job is to set milestones and let the Board of Directors decide how to reach these milestones.
Furthermore, I think there has always been a line of credit from UST available to the Gses', to placate MBS investor fears about the safety and soundness of MBS. This implicit government guarantee seems to be the only way for this public private partnership to work, despite the wish for list of an explicit government guarantee in the September 2019 Housing Plan.
For the last 50 years, the Gses' have operated with a lot less than 4% capital, and this idea that they need to get to 4% ASAP to provide safety and soundness to the Secondary Mortgage Market, I believe is a red herring.
Then there is the issue of the "conservator" and UST acting in bad faith by draining the capital since 08/17/12. This will be resolved administratively or judicially or both, but for the government to on the one hand, drain their capital for the last 8 plus years, then demand they hold $234B ASAP, is an unlikely outcome.
What is likely, is that the "conservator" and UST will come up with a plan that is event driven and not calendar driven and allow the Board of Directors to make the tradeoff decisions necessary to reach the milestones.
You have consistently advocated for the "do it now" approach, whereas I believe others see a more gradual measured approach.
Do you know what exactly happens to the SPSA in 2028?
