25 Aug
Posted by: The Weakonomist in: banking, economy, government, investing, loans
There’s a great debate going on in the various offices in Washington lately. If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac go down, should we bail them out? You know me, I’m not one for opinions but I might include my two and a half cents. Read on and see that advantages and disadvantages of bailing them out versus letting them die.
Let them die advantages:
These companies were started by the government, and the government isn’t known for their efficiency. Given how large these companies are, there’s a pretty good chance its not being run in the smoothest possible manner. Letting them die would allow new companies to take over and develop a better process.
The two mortgage re-sellers have been running this industry for many years. We look at them as a government institution when they are not. They must die to sever the ties with the government.
Let them die disadvantages:
Fannie and Freddie own or guarantee half of all the mortgages in the country, this is trillions of dollar we’re talking about. Their collapse would be an absolute mess to clean up.
Together, if they go under its unknown what will happen to the mortgage industry. Will people still buy mortgages? If so, then from whom? If not, then we’ll see a drastic, and permanent decrease in the amount of money available for loans which would stagnate economic growth.
Let them live advantages:
Bailing out The Fraternal Order of Finance will allow mortgages to continue to be issued and sold at a steady rate which is vital for us right now.
The simple fact is letting them live may be the most important thing to the health of our economy.
Let them live disadvantages:
Uh, duh, the government would bail them out. If it isn’t bad enough that they’d use tax payer money, not something we have a lot of sitting around, the government would own parts of the company. That’s a big no-no since I don’t want more bureaucracy getting in the way of our financial markets.
We’ll be supporting a system that is broken somewhere along the chain. Eventually, it might break again, only this time the government will go bankrupt too. You can only hold up a broken bridge for so long.
There are good arguments from both sides, but that’s just un-American of me. I hope they are able to survive, but if they die I don’t want the government stepping in just to put them on dialysis. If they fail once, it will happen again and the government will suffer as well. When a company fails (even if Weakonomics failed), that’s Capitalism’s way of saying, you weren’t right for us.
To add another lever of stress to the matter. A recent (and long) article about the situation spoke of who actually owns stock in Fannie and Freddie. You see, the banks own a bunch of preferred stock, which is similar to the stock you buy and sell all the time. If the mortgage giants were to falter, all the banks would have to write off the loses of those stocks, meaning they’ll each suffer more than they already are. Check out the article to get a good write up of what’s going on.
Related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Weakonomics is the antithesis to traditional personal finance blogs. We bash the media, provide insider commentary on the financial services industry, and educate readers on the matters of finance in our every day lives. It is brought to you by an insider that thinks like an outsider.
Posting tweet...
Powered by Twitter Tools.
Leave a reply