tagged w/ Fannie Mae
-
ITS TIME TO FORECLOSE ON FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC
Its time to foreclose on the foreclosurers!!!
Occupy Fany.Fredy is calling for direct action to end the unnecessary foreclosures. We the people are calling for a joint effort to occupy Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to force Congress to foreclose on F&F to facilitate, and economic recovery in our country, if they do not agree to a monthly mortgage principle reduction policy and the use of new mortgage terms.
For more information go to:http://goo.gl/tMfAWor www.foreclosurecrisissolved.wordpress.com/
LEARN HOW FREDDIE MAC HAS BEEN BETTING AGAINST YOU MAKING YOUR MORTGAGE PAYMENT.
http://www.npr.org/2012/01/30/145995636/freddie-mac-betting-against-struggling-homeowners?sc=fb&cc=fp/
There is article, after article written about how Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the giant mortgage securitization corporations, are unwilling to reduce principle balances on underwater mortgages they hold, even tho other financial businesses
have been able to reduce foreclosures by using principal reduction to keep families in their homes.
Still have doubts, read the article, posted on my web site "Fannie and Freddie Stand In The Way Of Debt Reduction" is the headline of an article that recently appeared in the New York Times.
Here is a few paragraphs from that article.
LIMITED IMPACT
(Any settlement would not apply to mortgages owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, which together own or guarantee most of the U.S. mortgage market. The regulator that controls the two government-sponsored enterprises has resisted cutting their loans, arguing it would cost U.S. taxpayers more money than other options would.
But lawmakers and top administration officials have pushed for a broader principal reduction program, and this settlement could lay the groundwork for that if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are swayed to test it out themselves as an alternative to the costly process of foreclosing on struggling borrowers.
Earlier on Wednesday, House Democrats sought to force the housing regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, to explain its calculations in deciding not to offer principal reductions.
In addition, the Federal Reserve said in a rare 26-page white paper delivered to Congress this month that lawmakers need to do more to stabilize the housing market. But it stopped short of endorsing any plans to have Fannie and Freddie slash borrowers' loan balances)
Still have doubts, read the article "Fannie and Freddie Stand In The Way Of Debt Reduction" is the headline of an article that recently appeared in the New York Times.
Banks are trying to limit their responsibility for the damage the have done to people lives and our economy, as pointed out in his paragraph from an article Published on Monday, January 23, 2012 by Common Dreams says it all!
Obama's Choice on Housing: A Sweetheart Deal for the 1% or a Fair Deal for the 99%
by Van Jones and George Goehl
Rumor has it that as early as today, after months of negotiation with big banks, the White House may announce a settlement that would let the banks off the hook for their role in the foreclosure crisis -- paying a tiny fraction of what's needed in exchange for blanket immunity from future lawsuits.(Daniel Goodman / Business Insider
Now is the time to demonstrate, petition, convince, and occupy F&F to change their policy of no principal reduction. This is where the occupy groups should focus all their efforts to end the foreclosure and unemployment crisis.
Millions of American families are being kicked to the curb by the banks, and the financial sector. It is our contention that most foreclosures, and home abandonment's are unnecessary, or preventable.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac hold the key to improving the primary home market, and the economy, as explained in The "People's Economic Recovery Plan". www.foreclosurecrisissolved.wordpress.com
We should occupy, march, and hold demonstrations at Fany & Fredy headquarters.
We are not alone in this effort. The Federal Reserve, and members of Congress are putting pressure on the GSEs to reduce principal balances, and lower the interest rate on mortgages. Our efforts to bring attention to this inaction by F&F will reinforce our Representatives in Congress that are working to solve the foreclosure and unemployment crisis.
Occupy Fany.Freddie invites all the Occupy, and other concerned groups to join your fellow citizens to convince F&F, for their own benefit, and for your benefit, to change their mortgage terms and adopt a policy of principal reduction.
If we want to help millions of people stay in their homes, and find employment, F&F must purchase the "Ascending Interest Rate Mortgage" (AIRM), from banks and mortgage originators, and adopt the monthly principal reduction plan for underwater mortgages. If F&F will purchase the new mortgage, the banks and mortgage originators will offer the new mortgage terms to homeowners and home buyers. There-by eliminating the foreclosure inventory, and improving the primary home market and the economy.
F&F owe taxpayers over 150 billion dollars. If F&F do not agree to purchase the "AIRM" from the mortgage originators, the tax payers of the United States of America should kick their executives, and Mr.DeMarko, the head of Federal Housing Finance Agency, to the curb, and foreclose on them by petitioning President Obama, and the US Congress.
We the people should then adopt the "Plan" ourselves to facilitate an sustainable economic recovery, to put people back to work in the private sector, and prevent more foreclosures.
The "Plan"outlines three changes that need to occur to empower the people to create their own economic recovery. Changes to the bankruptcy laws, a change to mortgage terms, and a change to the income tax, as outlined in the "Plan".
View and sign our Petitions to "Stop Unnecessary Foreclosures" at: http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-the-unnecessaryforeclosures-and-uneployment-crisis-with-new-mortage-terms/
To view a video about bankruptcy go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7YPR_p7DYQ%2F
If you want to increase job opportunity, and reduce foreclosures without increasing the deficit, please become a friend of Occupy Fany.Fredy and "Like" us at: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Occupy-FanyFredy/177079029043062?sk=wall
Not ready to get involved yet? What if it was your home, or your family's home that was being foreclosed? The way the economy is going, you could lose your job tomorrow, and your home could be in foreclosure in a few months. Help others now, to improve the economy, so it doesn't happen to you.
This is important!!Please forward this information to your friends, contacts, the news media, other occupy groups, and concerned organizations. Thank You!ITS TIME TO FORECLOSE ON FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC
Its time to foreclose on the... more
-
-
Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcCs1yGO6aADemocrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused... more
-
-
By Eric W. Dolan
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Protesters affiliated with the “Occupy Wall Street” movement on Wednesday interrupted Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich during a speech at the University of Iowa.
“Mic check,” the protesters shouted. “We are here to protest your speech today. We object to your callous and arrogant attitude toward poverty and poor people.”
The protesters also denounced his “vilification of people as shiftless and unwilling to work” and his “disgusting suggestions that we bring back child labor.”
Some of the protesters were escorted out of the room but were not arrested, according to the Los Angeles Times.
The “mic check” is a reference to the system of communication used by the “Occupy Wall Street” protesters in New York City’s Zuccotti Park.
Unable to use microphones because they lack the proper sound permits, the protesters repeat in unison what a speaker says. The speaker begins by saying “mic check.”
The “mic check” later evolved into a form of protest. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, President Barack Obama, Republican strategist Karl Rove, and Republican presidential Ron Paul have all recently been interrupted by the “99 Percent” movement. Gingrich was previously “mic checked” by protesters in Florida and Massachusetts.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/14/protesters-mic-check-gingrich-in-iowa/
Watch video, courtesy of CBS News, below:
"Look at that Clown, he didn't even have a Clue what was going on or why these folks interrupted, talk about being out of touch, Sheeesh!!!"By Eric W. Dolan
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Protesters affiliated with the... more
-
-
KB723
-
added this
-
1 month ago
- |
-
Newt rose to power in the ‘90s by running against alleged Democratic corruption, but soon faced multiple accusations before the House Ethics Committee. Gingrich eventually had to pay a $300,000 fine for misusing his tax-exempt foundations for political gain – making him the only House speaker in American history to be disciplined by Congress for ethics violations.
http://veracitystew.com/2011/12/13/to-know-newt-gingrich-is-to-despise-newt-gingrich-video/Newt rose to power in the ‘90s by running against alleged Democratic corruption,... more
-
-
Gretchen Morgenson: "Fannie Mae, the mortgage finance giant, learned as early as 2003 of extensive foreclosure abuses among the law firms it had hired to remove troubled borrowers from their homes. But the company did little to correct the firms’ practices, according to a report issued Tuesday."Gretchen Morgenson: "Fannie Mae, the mortgage finance giant, learned as early as... more
-
-
Cabal
-
added this
-
4 months ago
- |
-
-
It’s no secret the role of government-controlled mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has grown out of control.
Reuters says Fannie and Freddie now back 85 percent of new mortgages.
According to Bloomberg, between the two companies and the Federal Housing Administration the three groups own or insure almost 97 percent of all mortgage bonds.
The fate of the mortgage giants has been discussed for a while now, but today action has been proposed.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner announced his recommendation for the future of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and it involves a lot less involvement for the government-controlled mortgage finance companies.
The Obama administration supports this proposal to “wind down" the market share currently held by the government mortgage buyers, but says we should continue to count on Fannie and Freddie as a “backstop” in times of crisis.
The proposal offers three long-term options to reduce the government role and a few short-term steps to raise the cost of government-backed mortgages.
When they were created the two companies insured bond buyers against losses, with an implied promise that the U.S. government would make investors whole if the system failed.
Today, taxpayers have been supporting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the tune of $150 billion since September 2008. All three of the options proposed today would end taxpayer support.
The Three Options
1. Extreme Change
Involves a “privatized” system of housing finance and little help from the government. In this options the government's only role is to help “narrowly targeted” low-income and veteran buyers.
2. Middle Ground
This option would replace Fannie and Freddie with a system aimed at helping low-income and veteran buyers (FHA's traditional target) in normal times and also provide a backup in a crisis. According to the Treasury Department this option is possible through the use of high-priced guarantee fees and restricted amounts of public insurance.
3. Big Government Role
The third option most closely mirrors the current system for the GSEs. Option three would impose even more regulation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and carve out the government's role as “catastrophic reinsurance behind significant private capital.”
Short-Term Steps
* Increase the monthly insurance premiums, or guarantee fees, now charged by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Higher premiums would in theory give other companies incentive to compete for lending.
* Increase Federal Housing Administration premiums by .25 percent/lower the ceiling for loans that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac can insure. Jumbo loans are currently capped at $729,750 but are scheduled to fall to $625,500 on Oct. 1 if Congress doesn’t act.
* The administration also endorsed an existing law that forces the GSEs to shed loans in their $1.5 trillion portfolios by 10 percent a year as a way to reduce government exposure to failing mortgages.
* Phasing in higher pricing for Fannie, Freddie to a level even with private sector. This move would take place over several years.
Read the full article here: http://www.thinkglink.com/blog/2011/02/11/obama-administration-calls-for-housing-overhaul-winding-down-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac
or read the Industry Reaction to Obama Admin Proposal to Phase Out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac here: http://www.thinkglink.com/blog/2011/02/11/industry-reaction-to-obama-admin-proposal-to-phase-out-fannie-mae-and-freddie-macIt’s no secret the role of government-controlled mortgage finance companies... more
-
-
U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner presented Congress with a set of options for weaning the $11 trillion mortgage market from its dependence on the government, while calling for changes to be phased in “responsibly and carefully” to avoid economic disruptions.
The report delivered today by Geithner and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan presents three approaches for a future housing finance system. It also calls for the government to shrink “and ultimately wind down” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the bailed-out government-sponsored enterprise companies that helped fuel the housing bubble before being felled by investments in subprime mortgages.
Read more at:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-11/obama-administration-calls-for-ultimately-winding-down-fannie-freddie.htmlU.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner presented Congress with a set of options... more
-
-
There’s a dangerous — and misleading — argument making the rounds about the causes of our current credit crisis. It’s emanating from Washington where politicians are engaging in the usual blame game but this time the stakes are so high that we can’t afford to fall victim to political doublespeak.There’s a dangerous — and misleading — argument making the rounds... more
-
-
Two giant mortgage lenders bailed out by the U.S. government are using the taxpayer cash to defend their senior executives against fraud allegations - levied by the U.S. administration.
Financial houses Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taken over by the government in September 2008 after suffering massive losses in the subprime lending crisis.
But according to the New York Times, the firms are spending millions of dollars in legal fees to fight off various securities suits and government investigations into accounting irregularities that occurred before the companies went broke.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350103/Taxpayers-spend-160m-defending-Fannie-Mae-Freddie-Mac-executives.html#ixzz1BzTNrSI2Two giant mortgage lenders bailed out by the U.S. government are using the taxpayer... more
-
-
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): "You can reach out to your fellow young people and make it clear to them, that when [sic] they may not be satisfied with everything we've done -- we're not satisfied with everything we've done. The way to cure that is to give us more authority and more ability" Giving either side more authority is a scary thought. Be careful what you wish (vote) for!Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): "You can reach out to your fellow young people and make... more
-
-
The Republican party will launch aggressive inquiries into alleged abuse of mortgages for low-income buyers if it takes control of the House of Representatives next month.
Darrell Issa, who would head the lower chamber’s main investigative committee, told the Financial Times in an interview: “We should look at financial entities and either reform them or kill them.”
The conservative Republican from California, who would become chairman of the powerful House oversight and government reform committee, said hearings would focus on whether the federal government should be involved at all in sponsoring home loans for the poor.
The investigations would centre on the roles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the nationalised government-sponsored lending institutions, which Republicans say contributed strongly to the 2008 meltdown by promoting subprime lending.
Mr Issa said the role of Countrywide, the bankrupt subprime lender, would also be investigated.
He did not spell out whether he would investigate alleged connections between subprime lenders and Democratic politicians.
“We need to look not only at the failure of Freddie and Fannie but even after that whether the federal government should be involved in financing home loans at all,” Mr Issa said.
Bernanke Weighs Risks of New ActionFive Ways More Fed Easing Could Make Things WorseForeclosure Freeze Won’t Help Recovery: Ex-Fannie CEO
“By promoting these loans we have artificially raised the price of homes – it is anti-wealth creating. The problem still hasn’t been addressed and everyone assumes it’s a system we are going back to.”
However, Mr Issa, who would replace Henry Waxman, the California Democrat, if the Republicans win next month, tried to play down talk there would be a witch-hunt of the Obama administration, as many Democrats are predicting.
He also shied away from parallels with 1995 when Newt Gingrich, the Republican Speaker, went head to head with the Clinton administration – and lost.
“Newt was engaged in shutting down the government,” said Mr Issa.
“My committee will be about opening up the government. I think [Barack] Obama would love to get in the same situation as [former president Bill] Clinton, where he can blame the Republican House. If I have a toe-to-toe with Obama it will be about the American people’s right to know. My job is to chase the failure of bureaucracy beneath Obama.”
Examples of the type of investigations that would “open up government” included looking into the role of the department of agriculture in regulating the food industry.
Mr Issa also said he would investigate the Wikileaks disclosures, which he said “animated him at a time when we are at war”.
And he spoke vaguely about “looking into dangers to democracy, dangers to the well-being of people and issues that distort democracy”.
Elsewhere, Mr Issa has hinted he would investigate last year’s “climategate” scandal as part of the alleged “politicisation of science”.
And he has also mentioned the White House’s alleged role in trying to interfere in Democratic primary elections to influence challengers to drop out.
“If you have the power of subpoena, then your letters get answered,” he said.
“People say: ‘Issa will serve 1m subpoenas’. Well no. We won’t need to do that. Just having the power of subpoena should be enough to bring in the whistle- blowers.”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/39717404The Republican party will launch aggressive inquiries into alleged abuse of mortgages... more
-
-
by Zach Carter, Media Consortium blogger
Over the past decade, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac transformed themselves into some of the worst-run companies in recent history. But contrary to current talking points, the firms’ failings had almost nothing to do with their programs for low-income borrowers. As policymakers debate what should be done with the mortgage giants, a battle is now beginning in which the very availability of affordable housing for the middle class may be at stake.
A history of affordable housing
As Tim Fernholz emphasizes for The American Prospect, before the U.S. government created Fannie Mae in 1938, mortgages were very pricey 5-year loans, so expensive that only very wealthy Americans could ever hope to own a home. Fannie Mae changed all that by rolling out the 30-year mortgage, which lowered monthly payments for borrowers by providing a government guarantee against losses for banks. It worked.
But as Fernholz notes, without some kind of government involvement in the housing market, home ownership will revert to its pre-Depression status a privilege reserved for elites. Policymakers will have to implement significant changes in the mortgage finance system to ensure stability in the U.S. housing market, but whatever changes may come, a robust role for the government in housing will be essential.
Fannie and Freddie have been justifiably but inaccurately maligned in the aftermath of the mortgage crisis. In recent years, their executives ran the firms like out-of-control hedge funds, lobbied Congress like arrogant Wall Street banks and did nothing beyond the bare minimum required by law to help low-income borrowers. But Fannie and Freddie did not go headlong into subprime mortgages—the primary source of their losses came from loans to relatively high-quality borrowers.
The terrible mortgages that crashed the economy were issued by banking conglomerates and Wall Street megabanks—Fannie and Freddie were almost entirely divorced from that line of business. The problem with Fannie and Freddie was largely structural– investors and managers saw the potential for big profits from taking on loads of risk, but believed (accurately) that the government would eat losses if those risks backfired. So Fannie and Freddie ramped up risk, taking on as many mortgages as they could while keeping as little money as possible on hand to cushion against losses. Eventually the strategy destroyed them.
Fixing the mortgage system
Exactly how the government stays involved in the mortgage market is still open to debate, as Annie Lowrey emphasizes for The Washington Independent. Nearly every member of the private sector who testified at a recent housing forum sponsored by the Treasury Department endorsed some kind of government backing for the housing market. This was a meeting of private-sector bigwigs—no community groups or affordable housing advocates were invited to speak at the meeting. Proposals ranged from scaling back government support for some types of mortgages, to the full nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (Fannie was a nationalized entity for the first 30 years of its existence).
In other words, the government is going to have to keep subsidizing housing, but it will have to find new ways to do it. The old Fannie and Freddie model didn’t work, but the private sector will be unable to get the job done by itself. Private-sector banks and mortgage brokers, after all, were the source of all the predatory loans issued during the subprime crisis, and the source of all of the most offensive loans that drove the economy off a cliff.
Inefficient and often predatory players on Wall Street are still causing problems today. As Ellen Brown highlights for Yes! Magazine, the mortgage system is so bizarre that banks are finding themselves unable to document their right to foreclose on properties—and courts are (fortunately) refusing to let them do it.
It’s a rare situation in which borrowers may actually hold the higher legal ground against powerful corporations. About 62 mortgages are registered through an electronic documentation system called the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS), which helps banks with the foreclosure process. But MERS has repeatedly been unable to show proper documentation assigning a mortgage to a specific bank, and courts are now challenging its right to foreclose on behalf of big banks.
That’s good news, Brown notes, because MERS’ shoddy documentation has made it very difficult for borrowers to figure out who actually owns their loan. If you don’t know who owns your mortgage, it’s impossible to modify it if you find yourself unable to pay it off.
As Shamus Cooke argues for Truthout, even successful innovations like the 30-year mortgage are beginning to look a little outdated in an era of heavy, chronic unemployment. Many people can no longer expect to be gainfully employed for three decades on end. If the government refuses to repair our damaged jobs infrastructure, even simply maintaining the status quo in housing could become impossible.
Deficit reduction is not a cure-all
That brings us to another favorite conservative bogeyman, the federal budget deficit. The deficit and jobs generally stand in direct opposition. Creating jobs costs money, and spending that money expands the deficit. Cutting the deficit, by contrast, means cutting support for jobs.
As Steve Benen emphasizes for The Washington Monthly, conservative lawmakers are still harping on deficit reduction as a cure for everything that ills the nation, when the real solution to our problems is a serious jobs bill.
Even if the deficit were a huge problem, trying to cut important social services in the middle of a deep recession is not a good way to go about solving it. Drastic cuts to government spending in a recession result in lower tax returns for the government, which can often be self-defeating, especially in the face of expanding joblessness. The resulting push for deficit reduction—known in economic circles as an “austerity policy,” is better understood as the active pursuit of economic decline. As economist Robert Johnson notes in a New Deal 2.0 piece carried by AlterNet:
Deterioration of government services is bad enough, but imposing austerity due to lack of trust in a time of high unemployment and slack resources is tragic. It is a means to accelerate the decline of living standards of those who have taken a beating since 2007. Double dip or stagnation is too subtle a distinction. We are amidst an unfolding collective choice to pursue a downward spiral.
The government has taken several dramatic steps to repair the nation’s financial system, but it has done almost nothing to help troubled borrowers and not nearly enough to create jobs. Some of this is due to misguided policies enacted by President Barack Obama, and much of it is due to cynical obstructionism. But we cannot repair the economy without fixing jobs and housing. Both are still in a full-blown crisis, and policymakers should feel an urgent need to deal with them.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the economy by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Audit for a complete list of articles on economic issues, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, environment, health care and immigration issues, check out The Mulch, The Pulse and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.by Zach Carter, Media Consortium blogger
Over the past decade, Fannie Mae and... more
-
-
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have become gigantic financial black holes that the U.S. government endlessly pours massive quantities of money into. Unfortunately, if the U.S. government did allow Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to totally implode, both the mortgage industry and the housing industry in the United States would completely collapse. So essentially the U.S. government finds itself between a rock and a hard place. Prior to the financial crisis of the last few years, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were profit-seeking private corporations that also had a government-chartered mission of expanding home ownership in America. But now that they have been officially taken over by the U.S. government, they have become gigantic bottomless money pits. It is hard to even describe just how much of a mess Fannie and Freddie are in. However, the unprecedented intervention by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the mortgage market over the past couple of years has been about the only thing that has kept it from plunging into absolute chaos. So what does the future hold for Fannie Mae and for Freddie Mac? Well, according to one estimate, it could take another 5 trillion dollars to "fix" Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac.Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have become gigantic financial black holes that the U.S.... more
-
-
Main Street may be about to get its own gigantic bailout. Rumors are running wild from Washington to Wall Street that the Obama administration is about to order government-controlled lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to forgive a portion of the mortgage debt of millions of Americans who owe more than what their homes are worth. An estimated 15 million U.S. mortgages – one in five – are underwater with negative equity of some $800 billion.
Recall that on Christmas Eve 2009, the Treasury Department waived a $400 billion limit on financial assistance to Fannie and Freddie, pledging unlimited help. The actual vehicle for the bailout could be the Bush-era Home Affordable Refinance Program, or HARP, a sister program to Obama’s loan modification effort. HARP was just extended through June 30, 2011.
The move, if it happens, would be a stunning political and economic bombshell less than 100 days before a midterm election in which Democrats are currently expected to suffer massive, if not historic losses. The key date to watch is August 17 when the Treasury Department holds a much-hyped meeting on the future of Fannie and Freddie...
Continued at: http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2010/08/05/an-august-surprise-from-obama/Main Street may be about to get its own gigantic bailout. Rumors are running wild from... more
-
-
Dagum
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
SAN FRANCISCO — The Obama administration is devoting $150 million in stimulus money for programs that help homeowners install solar panels and other energy improvements, which they pay for over time on their property tax bills.
At the same time, the two government-chartered agencies that buy and resell most home mortgages are threatening to derail the effort by warning that they might not accept loans for homes that take advantage of the special financing.SAN FRANCISCO — The Obama administration is devoting $150 million in stimulus... more
-
-
The Obama administration's signature foreclosure-prevention program is likely to be a failure and has not done enough to help struggling homeowners who owe more on their mortgage than their home is worth. This is according to a scathing new report by the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program. And the report found that the program may even be pushing these homeowners further underwater.The Obama administration's signature foreclosure-prevention program is likely to... more
-
-
I got a chance to pull Dr Tom Woods to the side for a short interview before he spoke at Campbell University’s Adam Smith Club Banquet. We discussed the Federal Reserve, Economics, Competing Currencies, the Tea Parties, Neoconservatism, Libertarianism, Anarcho-Capitalism, Ron Paul, Bush, Obama, GSEs like Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae and the two party (one party) voting system.I got a chance to pull Dr Tom Woods to the side for a short interview before he spoke... more
-
-
3/18/2010 Mike Shanklin interviews Dr Arnold Kling from the CATO Institute at Campbell University just before his lecture to a group of students. Discussed includes the Federal Reserve, monetary policy, taxation, GSEs (Government Sponsored Enterprises), toxic assets, and much, much more3/18/2010 Mike Shanklin interviews Dr Arnold Kling from the CATO Institute at Campbell... more
-
-
The American people simply do not matter to Barack Obama. He said so himself last night as he attempted his first State of the Union Address, declaring, “[W]hen I ran for president, I promised I wouldn't just do what was popular -- I would do what was necessary.” This was a nice way of saying he had heard the overwhelming opposition to his Big Government agenda — and he has decided to plow ahead anyway.
“I will not walk away” from the government health care takeover, he said, and “neither should the people in this chamber.” This, in spite of devastating resistance to the scheme that would ration care, raise premiums, drive people off of their insurance, cut benefits, and bankrupt the treasury with over $1.5 trillion in costs over ten years once fully implemented.
All told, 58 percent oppose the plan in Scott Rasmussen’s last weekly poll on the subject. His tracking has been way ahead of the curve on opposition to the health care takeover. While apologists were claiming majority support for plans like the “public option,” Rasmussen has polled clear opposition for most of 2009.
Barack Obama doesn’t care. With only an occasional glance at the glaring reality that the American people really are not in favor of his plans, Obama’s State of the Union was mostly a “stay the course” campaign rally, coupled with blind assertions as to the correctness of his position. Not to mention his bull-headed insistence that the Democrats get it done and “not run for the hills.”
For example, he came close to prevaricating (to put it kindly) about losses from the Troubled Asset Relief Program: “[W]e have recovered most of the money we spent on the banks. To recover the rest, I have proposed a fee on the biggest banks.” Only, the biggest banks are the ones who have paid TARP back in full, with interest.
Most of the $120 billion in losses have arisen under loans to AIG (not a bank), GM (not a bank), and Chrysler (not a bank). It was Obama’s own Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner who testified to Congress, “There is a significant likelihood that we will not be repaid for the full value of our investments in AIG, GM and Chrysler.”
But not to worry, Obama says, “I am not interested in punishing banks.” Only, he is. He asserted that “Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped cause this crisis.” By that, he means, take over, regulate, and monopolize. You know, punish.
Despite all of his bald distortions, Barack Obama’s greatest transgression in this speech was more a sin of omission than commission in his historical account of what actually happened. In fact, the only entities Obama is not interested in targeting are those most directly responsible for the mess.
Obama had positively nothing to say about Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Reserve (government-created entities all), whose errant policies of loose lending and easy money coupled together to incentivize borrowing on an unprecedented level, inflate the housing bubble, sell worthless securities worldwide, and bring the economy to brink of ruin. Not one word.
Even as George Bush was attempting to justify the unprecedented bailouts his Administration ushered in, he at least acknowledged the role played by, for example, too-low interest rates. Instead, Obama presented a bizarre, disjointed address that was almost completely disconnected from reality, save for the touch of icy indifference to the express will of the American people not to proceed on this course.
But then, by now, that is what the American people have come to expect from the imperial, impervious president.The American people simply do not matter to Barack Obama. He said so himself last... more
-
