On 12/20/2012 12:26 AM, meekerdb wrote:
"Causing" and "allowing to occur" are not the same thing... Exactly
how was it that banks where capable of making a profit from the loans
that they could easily predict would have a very high default rate? How
did the securitization process occur that least to the bundling?
On 12/19/2012 8:44 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
That's a very biases analysis that implies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
bought subprime loans, which they did not. It was the banks and
private mortgage companies that created the adjustable rate loans with
teaser rates. FM's only bought fixed rate loans with substantial down
payments. The did however buy 'liar loans'. And their very existence
made private lenders assume (correctly) that they would be bailed out.
Here's a much more balanced view of the events:
from the article you linked:
"Fannie and Freddie had _purchased $4.9 trillion of the mortgages
outstanding as of the end of 2007, 70% of which the GSEs had packaged
and sold to investors with a guarantee of payment_, and the remainder of
which Fannie and Freddie kept for their own portfolios. The fraction of
outstanding home mortgage debt that was either held or guaranteed by the
GSEs (known as their "total book of business") rose from 6% in 1971 to
51% in 2003."
So did Fannie and Freddie buy "packaged" subprime loans? yes indeed
they did! 70%!
I invite you to dive deep into this and see the facts for yourself.
Don't take any one's summary as a fact, see the full picture for your self.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at