So? There's nothing disruptive to the housing market in introducing 10 new players that do the same thing as F&F and also have an explicit government guarantee and also have sufficient capital to support MBS issuance without needing some massive restructuring. And there is nothing disruptive to the housing market for the GSEs to go through a pre-packaged, structured receivership like GM where a smaller, safer, sounder enterprise quickly emerges in privater status... released from conservatorship and free to resume dividend payments and relisting to a major stock exchange.
What's wrong with any of that? I don't think Dan Berger would find any fault with any such receivership action, either. That would be a fresh start with the two enterprises with a huge head start in doing what the GSEs do, and with plenty of incentive for new capital entry because all the old problems get expunged and the Newco actually gets an actual government guarantee. All, assuming this is the course selected by the Trump/Mnuchin/Otting (maybe)/Calabria brain trust.
Why all the pro-housing advocacies will be happy and cheering "WE WON, WE WON" on this message board, bright and early each new morning.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
