U.S. government expected to seize Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac

[thebuescherman]

I'm amazed that story isn't all over the news yet, minorwork! It really IS big, and needs to get out there.

[minorwork]

Quote by: thebuescherman I'm amazed that story isn't all over the news yet, minorwork! It really IS big, and needs to get out there.

If you watch any attempt to get Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly to discuss the Federal Reserve and the banking system in the United States you will notice the quick change of subject. The news is in the business of creating scapegoats to hide the true nature of the theft. Rupert Murdoch donates to both parties. How many votes were cast for the two power players Paulson and Bernanke? And don't forget that the International Monetary Fund is going to (for the first time) do an audit of the United States Banking system. To be completed sometime in 2010. Oh boy!

Politicians of both parties are guilty of casting their votes as the lobbyists want. Does the Keating Five ring a bell? Keating Five - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The money boys have a sweet racket. Socialize the risk and privatize the profit. The Savings and Loan crisis was in the late '80s and early '90s. Now the mortgage and investment banks are being bailed.

Next? Any predictions? I'll make mine. Unfunded pension plans. Solution? Inflate. Inflate. Inflate. Which means; steal, steal, steal.

So let's keep the representatives and senators in office. They have learned by now. Surely they have learned. As for me and how I'm going to decide where my vote goes; President don't matter. Dick Durbin is up for re-election so I just plug his name into the formula. John Shimkus is my house rep. His name goes in the formula.

The formula? If you're in, you're out. Simple.

I've some clue as to why the Congress responsibility is not exposed better. I used to visit the Illinois Better Government Association offices almost daily. They told of the enormous amounts of corruption in the state government then in the year 1973. I asked why they didn't publicize all the documents and proofs of which they had showed me only a small part. I'll not forget their answer.

"There is so much corruption in government that the public wouldn't believe it if they were told about it."

[tfox_60]

Quote by: minorwork The bankers lobbied politicians against limiting government regulations

Kind of creepy video in hindsight. CEO of Fannie gets new congress members standing at attention, prior to swearing in, to make their pitch that they are going to fix things "inside our company". Can you imagine the CEO of Exxon getting such access.
http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/34B2F7...-06CBE2989E7A/

[minorwork]

Quote by: tfox_60 Kind of creepy video in hindsight. CEO of Fannie gets new congress members standing at attention, prior to swearing in, to make their pitch that they are going to fix things "inside our company". Can you imagine the CEO of Exxon getting such access. http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/34B2F7...-06CBE2989E7A/

WOW. Nice digging. Doubt we'll see that video on MSNBC. I might be all wet here but it sure looks like our elected reps are the dupes of these high paid financiers.

[thebuescherman]

Where's all those goons blabbering about the media being "conservative"? If it was, you can guarantee this story WOULD be at the forefront. Rather, everyone I show it too had no clue it existed.

[Deadeye]

Quote by: minorwork Well, I might have reworded your question; Does the banking system own our government? Elected officials are no where to be found. No responsibility from Pelosi. Barney Frank? I guess I've not looked hard enough. But wait. See what I've found. A condensed history of the Glass-Steagall Act and its subsequent modification and destruction by the bankers, Federal Reserve, and our elected officials. frontline: the wall street fix: mr. weill goes to washington: the long demise of glass-steagall | PBS So who was in charge last week? Elected officials? No. Bankers. Bernanke and Paulson. It should be obvious by now that if there was any doubt about a shadow government the events of the last year and a half have shown us who is really in control of the country and their intentions for the furthering of socialistic slavery of the workers. We are now a nation of debtor slaves that will be providing trees, food, anything we have to those we've borrowed from. Exploration of space and high energy physics won't be done here. The United States will be paying back instead of paying for. The dupes in congress and the white house deserve some kind of reward for their part in the enslavement of the nation. They will be re- elected, of course, and continue to do the bidding of their banking masters. They surely have nothing to fear from the electorate.

I concur with your concerns. Fact is the finance mess is so engrained and so pervasive and so complex that even the wizards in the Congress have no idea what to do about it. Nor do they want to admit who caused it, because it's probably Dodd and Frank who were at the core. These two guys should have blown the whistle....I didn't even hear a toot.
Did you?

[minorwork]

Quote by: thebuescherman Where's all those goons blabbering about the media being "conservative"? If it was, you can guarantee this story WOULD be at the forefront. Rather, everyone I show it too had no clue it existed.

The reason?

In 1600, Sir John Harrington wrote these immortal words: "Treason doth never prosper; what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

Treason. When treason is everywhere, none dare call it treason. From the laws of the United States of America, Title 18, Chapter 115, Section 2381:
"Whoever owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years ... and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

So if it is found that minorities are refused loans to a greater degree than whites, with no mention of the fact that defaults are equally shared by all sectors, then the justification for sub-prime loans can be established as a socially redeeming action by our finance institutions Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. A good thing then that those unable to get loans can now get them guaranteed by the national treasury. A good thing that is accomplished by destroying the value of our money. And the top managers still get their millions in salary.

If they're in, they're out.

[tfox_60]

Quote by: minorwork Funny, I would have said not enough.

I suspect he is refering to the governmental interference in the form of the
Community Reinvestment act and FHA and the influence of groups like ACORN and NCRC are given over CRA enforcement.

[minorwork]

Quote by: Deadeye I concur with your concerns. Fact is the finance mess is so engrained and so pervasive and so complex that even the wizards in the Congress have no idea what to do about it. Nor do they want to admit who caused it, because it's probably Dodd and Frank who were at the core. These two guys should have blown the whistle....I didn't even hear a toot. Did you?

I used to attend local John Birch Society meetings in the early '70s. Great historians. A little ornery too. When the local college was picketing a store one December in support of Caesar Chavez and the farm workers, the birchers dressed one member as Santa, bought every head of lettuce in the store and passed out free lettuce across from the picketers. I didn't go but I saw the pictures.

Anyway, the birchers have forseen the banking theft of the citizens money. There is little resistance in Congress to this. There have been a few though. Where is all this financial unrest headed? It is to make our society compatible with the Soviet Union. My opinion. Oh boy. A one government world is the goal with the families of the wealthy and powerful in roles of leadership in an oligarchy of governmental dictatorship. About JBS

Lawrence Patton McDonald Larry McDonald - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia was one of those resisting the socialization of the United States. Larry was a Democrat member of Congress representing the seventh congressional district of Georgia elected in 1974. While serving, he became the president of the John Birch Society, an anti-communist conservative organization. He disappeared September 1, 1983. His plane was shot down by Soviet fighters. Korean Air Lines Flight 007 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is next? Look for attempts to do away with our Constitution. A new Constitutional Convention. Look for it. Fight against it.

"We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box." Larry McDonald

[xyzer]

Here is another synopsis of the problem..This by Thomas Sowwell an economistThomas Sowell :: Townhall.com :: A Political "Solution"

Shows what politicians and politically correct thinking can do to the free enterprise capitalist system. Insist on financial institutions make more loans even to those whose credit history and ability to pay is limited?

[minorwork]

Quote by: xyzer Here is another synopsis of the problem..This by Thomas Sowwell an economistThomas Sowell :: Townhall.com :: A Political "Solution" Shows what politicians and politically correct thinking can do to the free enterprise capitalist system. Insist on financial institutions make more loans even to those whose credit history and ability to pay is limited?

Apparently it is a bad thing to be turned down for a loan. Can't have any body being demeened by refusing their loan. This feeling bad must be spread amongst the populace by destroying the value of the money.

These plays on emotions are subtle and used to nefarious ends.

[minorwork]

Slick Willie was on the Daily Show yesterday. Imagine my surprise when he claimed no responsibility for the sub prime mortgage debacle. Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - New York Times

Quote by: September 30, 1999 New York Times Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

[minorwork]

Who do we blame for the sub-prime mortgages? Who urged Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to give credit to those not previously credit worthy? Who gets the most money from their ceo's? What the hell happened? YouTube - Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?

[maximdewinter]

Quote by: minorwork Who do we blame for the sub-prime mortgages? Who urged Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to give credit to those not previously credit worthy? Who gets the most money from their ceo's? What the hell happened? YouTube - Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?

That link is down. This one is up for now. It was posted to you tube two days ago.

YouTube - Democrats Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Economic Crisis

[minorwork]

Quote by: maximdewinter That link is down. This one is up for now. It was posted to you tube two days ago. YouTube - Democrats Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Economic Crisis

Thank you. Both are damning indictiments. The lack of leadership is more apparent everyday. No one will own responsibility. The following is working but is not the same video as I first mentioned.

YouTube - Re: Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?

[Charlatan]

This is a big one - does the government need to buy up things that nobody wants to keep a business functioning? If the business fails - in this case being a real estate business - what are the reasons for buying it to keep it 'afloat'? If the government takes taxpayer's money and buys it, it figures into their own agenda as the tax payers still pay the same taxes. This means that the government must make cut backs elsewhere to pay for the business purchase, meaning more debt elsewhere quite possibly, and that debt or lack of funds means that taxes get pushed up after a while, or that the government pays itslef less, or that services are diminished in value or at least funding. When something goes bottom up it needs to be fair game for the people, as you will find certain entrepreneurs will buy up lots of property and sell it off at a profit for themselves, so the changing of where the money goes is safe, meaning that the country will not suffer. It will not suffer because the property will be bought at good prices, and then even better prices as entities are forced to lower their prices competitively to attract the investors.

By buying the properties owners you create a stable market, as if the property values go down more people will be able to buy houses, but that competition will push prices up as more people are willing to pay the reduced prices to own a new home. The homes that they live in will not dimish in value, so they will be safe in selling their own homes, but the speed with which the developers need to unload their 'stock' means that prices will be more affordable to buy in new areas, as new areas are more affordable anyway. If there is a good price going for a place there will be more competition for it pushing prices back up, but in a state where there isn't much money going around they might not be sold for a while, bringing it back down. So if the developers have gotten paid for their developments already they got paid at a rate they agreed to, so there should be no problem there. The problem comes in when the builders have finished building at the rate they agreed on and the sellers need to drop their prices for the sake of selling it at any rate. If this happens the business goes belly up and a few people are left with huge debt while the masses will eagerly buy the developments at the lower prices. This is good for the people but not the country as when it comes to developing new land they will need to buy at high prices and sell for a reduced price as nobody has money, otherwise you sit with a building that nobody can afford.

What is the solution? What happened is that the government bought the developments at the high price and made the people pay for it - which they would have if there wasn't this crisis. This avoids the loss of the developer who can then go and develop more land and will maybe sell it later to eager buyers. If the developers die off there will be no more development, so this is securing the future growth of the country. When nobody has any money though they cannot buy the developments, and this leads to our supply and demand curve, when supply is there, but there is no demand, prices go down, naturally. To say there is a demand will keep the developments out of the hands of the people, as then the government sits with unwanted developments. When this happens the government acts as an elastic to keep the prices high, while absorbing the pressure on it to sell, it delays the price drop to a time where they can affod to sell at a modest profit and avoid the loss alltogether.

This means though that the government suffers a loss when they buy the developments, as if there is a crisis like this, they need to lend money to bail them out, leading to more loans and a worse economy, making the people suffer as if they bought the developments as if they had money to spend. In this case though it is as if the government had money to spend deepening the rut they are in, so, the government loses more. So you could either have some rich people turning poor, or force 'poverty' on others and weaken your own financial situation.

If the developments are for sale at the high prices people cannot pay. The government however can play go between and deliver the money to the developers, and then the property to the people at the right prices, but this leaves a lag time between where more debt is incurred. The debt though does not dimish the value of the goods that the state sells, and reducing the debt is not essential. There will come a time where there can be no more debt as reserves run out, so is it worth it to spend your cash on housing?

When the property market plunges you get investors waiting until they reach rock bottom before they buy so as to maximise their investment. If this happens though there is less tax paid when people move and the government suffers, and if the government gets less money coming in they can do less, so, if the property market goes down it is worse for all people living in and moving to a new house. Take another asset, like a bed, if you buy that and sell it later you will probably get more for it as more money is used by that time.

[Deadeye]

Quote by: GHook93 What did you want to happen! I consider myself a fiscal conservative in the mold of a libertarian, but do you really think that letting FM and FM go under would be a wise thing? It might be a blow in which America couldn't stand up from!

Truthfully I don't know the answer to your question. Here however is what I don't want: I don't want those who did this to us to get away with it, no matter which party they are from.

Nor do I want to pay off losses that are due to stupid or greedy investing.

Lastly I don't want the people who caused this entire mess to fix it. They are, after all the source of the problem. I'd like to see them shot. I'll volunteer to do the trigger pulling.

[minorwork]

And now the the bribes come to get the votes needed for passage.

[namguy69]

Quote by: Clarence Government may soon back troubled mortgage giants - Yahoo! News Thing's like this are why I rely on Volconvo for perspective. What are the implications?

Wait a minute...isn't the 'big money interest people', hugh runaway milti million-billion corporations that don't want government in their business? The less government interference the better?

The government should have never bailed them out.

[minorwork]

Quote by: namguy69 Wait a minute...isn't the 'big money interest people', Hugh runaway multi million-billion corporations that don't want government in their business? The less government interference the better? The government should have never bailed them out.

Government was bought by them. Who do you think got the lobbyist's money? Those with the most influence in the mortgage holders' business. The banking committee members. Who did Obama call for advice on housing? Franklin Raines. What is his history? Does he own any responsibility for Fannie Mae's problems? On the Outside Now, Watching Fannie Falter - washingtonpost.com and Franklin Raines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And of course Raines is not alone. Those government officials that did a bad social engineering job in the name of home ownership at a reasonable cost were taken in by bankers such as Raines. They were taken in because they did not and still do not understand the Constitution and the limits of government.
The Most Devastating, Must-See Video of The Campaign | The Patriot Room