We know, big yank. The "offering Circular" is lame because it does not support your opinion, and you hate it that I refuted your position that fannie shareholders owe their whole life to the US Government who provided an "alleged" government guarantee, which turned out to be a private insurance guarantee, with nothing to do with the government. The "implicit" guarantee politicians cite, has been "explicitly denied" by fannie offering circular.
It can not get any more clear that informed investors in fannie securities did not expect a government guarantee, nor was their ever one. The guarantee's, instead, were Private Mortgage Insurance for borrowers who put less than 80 % down and the loans where borrowers put massive chunks of their own money into the home did not need a guarantee, they were already guaranteed by the borrowers own funds!
People very rarely default on a loan where they put big bucks of their own cash into it. It has a "double protection":
1. If you put 200 grand down, on a 250 grand home, then the lender of the 50 grand is extremely well protected as that home would have to be decline to less than 50 k in value before the lender is exposed.
2. Also, people generally dont like throwing away money, so, unless they are pretty sure they can make the payments, they dont put a massive down payment, Kabisch?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
