Posts in "freddie mac"

Ryan Gilroy's picture
By Ryan Gilroy at 6:31AM

More Money, More Loans, More Time

I don't  know who this author of this story is or anything about his ideological leanings, but the headline alone should give anyone pause.  Something is definitely wrong when people seriously recommend manipulating the market and giving a failing enterprise more money, loans, and time will fix everything.

Brian Beyer's picture
By Brian Beyer at 6:49PM

Capitalism is Dead.

image

But Corporatism is doing just fine. Here is a chart of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after it was announced that they would essentially receive a "blank check" from the US taxpayer. 

Peter St.Jean's picture
By Peter St.Jean at 6:36AM

The Mortgage Mess

Here's a story that's not receiving a lot of coverage thus far, but really brings home what a mess the housing crisis really is.

Supposedly, when you buy a home the bank lends you money up front and agrees to be paid back gradually, with interest.  A simple, straightforward relationship. But as we all now know, lenders in the past decade or so have been securitizing their mortgages.  This means that the bank doesn't really own your mortgage.  Instead, mortgages are tossed into a pool and then sold to many different buyers.  So a piece of your mortgage is owned by a businessman in Taiwan, another by a retiree in Kansas, and so on. As the New York Times reports:

During the mortgage lending spree ... home loans changed hands constantly. Those that ended up packaged inside of mortgage pools, for instance, were often involved in a dizzying series of transactions.

To avoid the costs and complexity of tracking all these exchanges, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the mortgage industry set up MERS to record loan assignments electronically.


Read more here
Zachary Kurtz's picture
By Zachary Kurtz at 7:55PM

Why did Fannie and Freddie fail?

Brad Delong on Cato Unbound claims that demand shifted to private mortgage lenders, so that Fannie and Freddie's excessively risky loans weren't the primary reason why the two lenders failed. I'm not sure if I buy this argument.  First of all, F&F may have lost 10% of their market share, but the risky borrowers where still getting their subprime loans from private lender.  So the subprime collapse, which F&F where a part of, was still probably a result of the CRA a
Read more here