Thread: Fannie Mae foreclosures

[quote name='International Underwriter' date='19 October 2009 - 04:38 PM' timestamp='1255966681' post='40954']

Fannie Mae did not ORIGINATE a single subprimne loan.



Yes, Fannie Mae stupidly bought some on the open market from Wall Street. But those loans were all originated by wall Street. After all, this what happens when corporate executive compensation is tied to short term revenue................not long term profit.



btw - do you know the difference between a prime, ALT-A and subprime loan?

[/quote]



Most of the sub-prime loans, if not all of them, were created because the bankers knew the government would back many of them (among other incentives) that made it seem as though they'd be ultimately profitable investments.



That's what everyone was saying.



The bankers are to blame for making the subprime loans, but it was utterly fucking STUPID to think they wouldn't if the government kept backing them.



Bankers are to blame, but it wouldn't have happened if the government hadn't been sticking it's fingers into the housing market.

[quote name='Feslin' date='19 October 2009 - 01:00 PM' timestamp='1255971616' post='40999']

Most of the sub-prime loans, if not all of them, were created because the bankers knew the government would back many of them (among other incentives) that made it seem as though they'd be ultimately profitable investments.



That's what everyone was saying.



The bankers are to blame for making the subprime loans, but it was utterly fucking STUPID to think they wouldn't if the government kept backing them.



Bankers are to blame, but it wouldn't have happened if the government hadn't been sticking it's fingers into the housing market.

[/quote]



I don't know that the bankers knew that the government would back them. To speak with such certainty may be a reach. As Wall Street only has a 6 month time horizon and bonuses are paid on short term profit whilst ignoring long term risk, it seems to me we have systemic problem. Next, Wall Street will securitizing life insurance policies. That is the nature of our "free markets" and "market efficiency" - both suck shit



I guess I think there is a difference between government laws (which there were none to specifically support failed Wall Street institutions) and the fact that the wealthy and their lobbyists have bribed and control our government. And until the financial institutions are downsized and adequate regulations or capital requirements are placed on leveraged instruments such as derivatives we will be stuck in the lost situation we presently find ourselves.

[quote name='International Underwriter' date='19 October 2009 - 07:35 PM' timestamp='1255977318' post='41054']I don't know that the bankers knew that the government would back them. To speak with such certainty may be a reach.[/quote]



No it isn't. The policies have been in place for decades.

[quote name='Feslin' date='19 October 2009 - 08:29 PM' timestamp='1255998581' post='41299']

No it isn't. The policies have been in place for decades.

[/quote]



you may have a point in that I believe it was in 1987 or 88 when the housing market collapsed and Citibank was going down due to no income check loans. It was common knowledge in the industry they were in serious trouble. then all of a sudden, everything was okay.



However, in our present time, I can't say there are "policies in place". However, i think it is more that Wall Street executives have so infiltrated the gov't that they can ensure that their rich breathren are always taken care of

[quote name='International Underwriter' date='20 October 2009 - 01:52 AM' timestamp='1255999939' post='41317']

you may have a point in that I believe it was in 1987 or 88 when the housing market collapsed and Citibank was going down due to no income check loans. It was common knowledge in the industry they were in serious trouble. then all of a sudden, everything was okay.[/quote]



Your timing is off again. Not the 80s, earlier.



By the time of our recent crash government programs were backing over half of subprime loans. These backings are the ONLY things that made the subprime market even considerable by the banks.

However, in our present time, I can't say there are "policies in place".

I know. Being a leftist, your programming demands that you not speak the truth.

[quote name='Feslin' date='19 October 2009 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1256000109' post='41321']

Your timing is off again. Not the 80s, earlier.[/quote]



Actually, working in the industry, my timing is spot on. the fact that you didn't know about it is no big deal.........most didn't. the fact that you came to the conclusion that if you didn't know about it, it just didn't exist, is simply advertising your lack of knowledge in economics.



[quote name='Feslin' date='19 October 2009 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1256000109' post='41321']By the time of our recent crash government programs were backing over half of subprime loans. These backings are the ONLY things that made the subprime market even considerable by the banks.[/quote]



backing? please specifically state what you mean by backing? fannie/Freddie are GSE's, but they did not originate even one subprime loan. Eventually, on the open market fannie stupidly purchased some in maybe 2005 or 2006. But outside of a few FHA loans (these virtually disappeared with Wall street inventing new gimmuicky loans on a monthly basis), the subprime market was exclusively Wall Street backed. Please cite specific examples to support your wacky, loony, uninformed position.



[quote name='Feslin' date='19 October 2009 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1256000109' post='41321']I know. Being a leftist, your programming demands that you not speak the truth.

[/quote]



Ah! when one can't substantiate their position, back to square 1 - the old leftist accusation. It is your right to feel that way. I worked in the industry and/or had an ownership interest in the business since 1988 and can cite specific information to support my knowledge. If you can cite specific statistics to support your "over half" government backed theory, then I'll respect you. As I have done with dozens of other conservatives here, I challenge you to substantiate your position with real world data.

[quote name='International Underwriter' date='20 October 2009 - 02:29 PM' timestamp='1256045390' post='41574']Actually, working in the industry, my timing is spot on. the fact that you didn't know about it is no big deal.........most didn't. the fact that you came to the conclusion that if you didn't know about it, it just didn't exist, is simply advertising your lack of knowledge in economics.[/quote]



Ooh, fancy.



When did we start backing sub-prime loans?

backing? please specifically state what you mean by backing? fannie/Freddie are GSE's, but they did not originate even one subprime loan. Eventually, on the open market fannie stupidly purchased some in maybe 2005 or 2006. But outside of a few FHA loans (these virtually disappeared with Wall street inventing new gimmuicky loans on a monthly basis), the subprime market was exclusively Wall Street backed. Please cite specific examples to support your wacky, loony, uninformed position.

Gee, they became Wall Street backed?



Why is that?



Could it be because they were MADE profitable for the banks, for some reason?

[quote name='Feslin' date='20 October 2009 - 02:05 PM' timestamp='1256061903' post='41662']

Ooh, fancy.



When did we start backing sub-prime loans?[/quote]



Who is "we". If you mean taxpayers, it was threefold:



1. FHA/VA - some were subprime in terms of credit score - but with wall Street offering much better terms to these type of applicants they were a very small % of subprime loans as part of the 21st century "meltdown"



2. When Fannie purchased subprime loans on the open market from wall Street - please note Fannie purchase the loans, but they did not originate a single subprime loan - and if we did not have retarded executive compensation pay disguised as free market this prolly never would have happened.



3. When george Bush allowed Paulson to bail out Wall Street - and Obama allowed Geithner to continue on the path - this is where the lions share of subprime "assets" that taxpayers are presently "guaranteeing"



The reality is that our government has been bought off by big corps. and their wealthy owners to write rules that are favorable to them. That is the reason for the significant redistribution of income/wealth from the middle class to the wealthy the last few decades.



[quote name='Feslin' date='20 October 2009 - 02:05 PM' timestamp='1256061903' post='41662']Gee, they became Wall Street backed?



Why is that?



Could it be because they were MADE profitable for the banks, for some reason?

[/quote]



"made" profitable - "for some reason" - sigh! in a little over your head; aren't you? When in doubt; punt!

[quote name='International Underwriter' date='21 October 2009 - 03:49 PM' timestamp='1256136563' post='42071']

Who is "we". If you mean taxpayers, it was threefold:



1. FHA/VA - some were subprime in terms of credit score - but with wall Street offering much better terms to these type of applicants they were a very small % of subprime loans as part of the 21st century "meltdown"[/quote]



They came to be.

2. When Fannie purchased subprime loans on the open market from wall Street - please note Fannie purchase the loans, but they did not originate a single subprime loan - and if we did not have retarded executive compensation pay disguised as free market this prolly never would have happened.

They don't need to originate the loans. They just need to encourage them by backing them as they come.

"made" profitable - "for some reason" - sigh! in a little over your head; aren't you? When in doubt; punt!

No, you're simply incapable of understanding what I'm saying.



Sub-prime loans are BAD for the banks, in their natural state. When the government starts backing the loans they start looking like profit to be made, not loss to be avoided.



Simple stuff.

[quote name='International Underwriter' date='19 October 2009 - 11:49 AM' timestamp='1255967363' post='40960']

Clinton did lower the bar somewhat, then under Bush it was lowered significantly more. Interest only, neg-am stated income were all products that only came around during the Bush term

....

[/quote]

Show me exactly what Bush did to lower the standards of Fannie Mae backed loans.