What is Digg?207 Comments
- holzp, on 09/07/2008, -1/+82I guess this makes me an investor now. If they return to profitability do I see some of that money?
- Ninh, on 09/07/2008, -1/+75Good move, put them under control of the only other entity in the US that has shown less fiscal responsibility than Wall Street.
- syndustry, on 09/07/2008, -5/+70This is exactly what's wrong with our country. How many other (less connected) private businesses fail each year? does the government come in and say "it's okay we'll bail you out"? no. They say "too ***** bad that's capitalism, deal with it". This is institutionalized cronyism and we shouldn't stand for it.
- mfc5200, on 09/08/2008, -1/+61I'm re-posting this:
Just another example of the little guy getting screwed by government in the name of "helping" them. I was saving up to buy a house, because they've been too expensive these past few years. When prices started to fall, I looked at this in a good light, prices would come back to normal, and I could afford a house. But I guess the political establishments job is to maintain the status quo. Heaven forbid prices fall, hurting the people who bought them and bid them up in the first place, and allowing regular people to get their shot at home ownership.
I'm not a socialist in any manner. I'm not asking for any government help, I'm just asking them to get out of the way. There is supposed to be a churn in the economy. A regular person makes money, then loses it, and the cycle repeats. Its like when an old giant falls in the rain forest, for a few years, all the trees and plants on the bottom are able to see the sun (which was blocked out before by the giant) and have a race to become the next giant. Its a natural, competitive, and productive system.
I was also hoping the stock market would continue to tank, so I could use my savings to buy up a lot of companies at good prices. But that probably won't happen now, instead the government will inflate the currency (thereby taking away from my savings by making it less valuable) all in an effort to protect the wealth of the wealthy who have most of their money in stocks and bonds. So it is possible that all my saving could have been in vain, because the stocks and bonds I want to buy are still too expensive. Thanks a lot government.
Honestly though, I'm not asking for any help, I'm just asking you to stop being biased towards the wealthy, so that regular people like myself can have a shot. Is that so hard? - ryan83189, on 09/08/2008, -0/+56HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA No.
Signed,
The Government - inactive, on 09/07/2008, -2/+44Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress Wednesday that troubled mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are in "no danger of failing."
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D91V10J00& ...
Both companies were placed into a government conservatorship that will be run by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the new agency created by Congress this summer to regulate Fannie and Freddie.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D931VBU80& ...
****************************************************************************
Someone is lying and covering up the fact that these two have already collapsed, they just have not come clean with that fact. - inactive, on 09/07/2008, -3/+43What Would Ron Paul Do?
- borez, on 09/07/2008, -1/+38Nope
- V3n0M, on 09/07/2008, -3/+33This isn't some goodwill gesture - the United States government doesn't do anything unless it's getting something in return. They're only interested in growing their own power.
There's something very scary about the Feds being in the home ownership market. - PhantomRogue, on 09/08/2008, -1/+27As if the Government can even run themselves well. They only lose 2 Trillion a year... Fannie and Freddie are a success compared to our Government budget.
- alexforcefive, on 09/07/2008, -0/+24Not if they do some kind of byzantine half-nationalisation like the british government did with northern rock. Taxpayers bail out the company, then the profits go to the owners. There are people on the board who were paid million pound bonuses this year, despite letting their company go bankrupt o.O
- aekdbbop, on 09/08/2008, -2/+25Great, cause the federal government is known for its great money handling skills.
- falser, on 09/08/2008, -0/+23Socialized Economy + Fascist Police State + Endless Resource Wars = Project for the New American Century
- crocev, on 09/07/2008, -0/+18Let me recommend to you
http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/
for the best independent analysis on this takeover.
This is not funny, taxpayers and US dollar holders, be prepaired for a rough ride. - richmomz, on 09/08/2008, -2/+20Shake his head in disappointment, probably. This is further proof that he was right all along about our financial system being a complete mess, but still nobody gets it. The big bankers and financial institutions are on the ropes, but its the U.S. taxpayer that will have to take the final (and hardest) blow.
- inactive, on 09/07/2008, -7/+24You can hear people scrambling right now to get out of the markets and into commodities. With the striking collapse of the DOW at weeks end comes this news over the weekend. I am glad that I have no stocks in this market because this will cause a drag on the markets as credit will once again tighten.
I can hardly wait for the lame responses from the economic mental midgets McSame and OBushma. - Hangly, on 09/08/2008, -1/+18Abolish the Fed of course, and let Freddie and Fannie Fail.
- jimmies, on 09/08/2008, -4/+21Welcome to socialist America. Put your seatbelts on as GM/Ford are the next "too big to fail" institutions followed by a number of banks. This is bad for a whole host of reasons.
- casek, on 09/08/2008, -0/+16one more step into our lives.
the drums of revolution aren't far off now. - DutchGuilder, on 09/08/2008, -0/+15Does this mean the CEOs of Freddie and Fannie will have to return the $19.8M and $12.7M they earned last year?
- odigity, on 09/08/2008, -0/+14I agree with and respect you.
- LordRedSnake, on 09/08/2008, -0/+13Except Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are GSEs (Government Sponsored Entities) so the government has an inherent interest in them from the get-go. That's what created this problem in the first place. Investors and management benefited in boom times but had little motivation to prepare for a downturn because of the implicit government guarantee. Both companies ended up in a position they were never meant to be in, with much more risky mortgages on their books.
Keep goverment out of the market in the first place and it won't have to keep stepping back in to fix what shouldn't have happened in the first place. - pintomp3, on 09/08/2008, -0/+131. Privatize
2. Relax laws regarding contents of securities
3. Let the wealthy investors gorge until there is nothing left but a carcass
4. Buy it back
5. ?????
6. Loss
Another case of privatizing the profits and socializing the losses. - brentinkc, on 09/07/2008, -0/+12That's great it starts with an earthquake...birds and snakes and aeroplanes...
- borez, on 09/07/2008, -0/+11Only the preferred share holders are being allowed to keep their shares, so that's exactly what they are doing.
- DigitAl56K, on 09/08/2008, -0/+11Repost:
Here is what I like most: Given that the government is taking over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac there is no national health care but those with no property are now officially paying at least tens and more likely hundreds of billions of dollars for other people's houses.
Ironic much? - SilverBlade2k, on 09/08/2008, -1/+12I think the fall of all private banks was planned out years ago, so that they can be swept under control of the U.S Government, and, by proxy, the Federal Reserve.
The Federal Reserve wants to control all banking and wants to be the ONLY bank left, so that they not only control the money supply, but control all mortgages, bank accounts, and everything else involving money.
They tried it before, and the "Great Depression" followed. The U.S is headed straight into another Depression...one that will make the 1930's look prosperous.. - vault, on 09/08/2008, -8/+19I normally would agree with that, but they back half of all US mortgages. Can't let them fail.
- Y0tsuya, on 09/07/2008, -1/+12The only reason for the taking over FRE and FNM is because they are INSOLVENT. To say this is good is like cheering bankruptcy. Foreign investors (including sovereign funds) who invested in FRE and FNM bonds are demanding to get paid. Paulson had to put on a dog and pony show the past few weeks to reassure the foreigners that the U.S. taxpayer will honor FRE and FNM debts. Banks holding preferred shares may be thrown a bone, but holders of common shares along with U.S. taxpayers are simply screwed. Have fun paying higher taxes (they'll think of a way, and you will like it).
- PhantomRogue, on 09/08/2008, -0/+11Sorry, but our Government taking over FRE and FNM is the LAST thing that would restore confidence.
- zbor, on 09/08/2008, -0/+10It's ridiculous that people aren't recognizing that it was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who started the subprime mortgage crisis in the first place. HUD and Congress pressured them to make more "affordable" loans (aka, loans to poor people, aka subprime loans), and make more "affordable" loans they did. Unfortunately, even with the tacit promise of the US Federal Government behind you, Fannie and Freddie just couldn't fool the laws of economics forever. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are responsible for about half of our mortgage market, and given that they have subsidies which allow them to lend as below-market rates, they drive the rest of the industry down, chasing after them. Private corporations made these loans because they had to in order to keep up with Fannie and Freddie (remember, they're HALF THE MORTGAGE INDUSTRY), not the other way around.
But rather than recognize the mistake, save Fannie and Freddie, and then cut them loose forever, the response will probably be more regulation of loaning. And it's a damn shame, since it's that nudging that started this whole mess in the first place.
http://rationalitate.blogspot.com/2008/06/wapo-fin ... - ayeroxor, on 09/08/2008, -2/+12In other words: "We ***** you over and nearly ruined everything, but then we sort-of saved it by taking lots of your money (taxes) to un-***** that which we completely *****. It will cost you more while making an elite few rich(er). Oh, and YOU'RE WELCOME."
- ironclad26, on 09/08/2008, -1/+11What is scary/sad is that some Americans think this is a good thing. And by some, I mean most.
- alclone, on 09/08/2008, -2/+11Why are you digging this down? This guy is right. Our market will be ***** for 20 years at least unless someone bailed them out
- richmomz, on 09/08/2008, -0/+9I read somewhere that the total debt burden for U.S. taxpayers will end up being somewhere between 1 and 3 TRILLION dollars. The current national debt is just under 10 Trillion, so the Treasury Dept. just increased our national debt by 10-30% in ONE DAY. Think about that for a minute.
- borez, on 09/07/2008, -1/+9It's going to be very interesting watching these two over the next week:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=FRE
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=FNM - WishItWerePaul, on 09/08/2008, -0/+8kidding aside, did you know that many foreign (not necessarily friendly) governments including russia made good money on this bail out?
there are people who ***** up by handing out crappy mortgages. i mean they did well for themselves but left the taxpayers to hold the bag. so i guess not ***** up but ***** us over.
i say these companies should have been left to die, the responsible would have been sued by the owners (shareholders) and would have been held accountable. it would have sure been painful, but it all would have ended quickly like ripping the bandaid. ultimately long term this would have been a good thing because next time mortgage jocks would think twice before ***** people over. bailout basically sends out the message of "if you ***** situation up badly enough we'll bail you out".
just my $.02 - PhilLesh69, on 09/08/2008, -2/+10No.
Welcome to the final stages of the corporate takeover of the government.
We are now entering the era of public risk and private profit.
What we now have is corporations being promised the full faith and value of the US Government (You know, "the people") backing the risk taking profit enterprises of a few, so that they can take even greater risks in hopes of even greater profits, because the taxpayer has been completely subjugated into a position of insuring that risk with his tax money.
If you are fortunate enough to own a business, you can take EVERY risk you think might make you the world and the stars in profits, because the government will take everyone else's tax money to bail you out if you fail.
Now that this is a corporate government, this is the only logical way to go. It's all about profit.
The government is only there to protect your corporation from failing when your bad risk goes wrong.
Next step? Neocons create neoserfdom.
Ooops. I wasn't supposed to say that for another 2 years. Forget I said that. - pintomp3, on 09/08/2008, -0/+7it's actually corporatist america. if it were socialist, they would be bailing out people who were losing their homes instead of fatcats who caused this mess by lobbying for deregulation and then lined their pockets.
- LordRedSnake, on 09/08/2008, -0/+7Isn't it interesting that our Republican supposedly small-government administration is behind something completely anathema to the principles of the free market? This is why you should never believe politicians. This supposedly Republican administration has spent more than any Democratic administration and has actually seized businesses.
- mmzero, on 09/08/2008, -4/+11When you say it was acquired by the federal government you make a pretty big mistake. The fact is the Fed is a privately owned bank that the United States handed the ability to create money out of thin air with their system of creating cash out of deposits, in the form of loans.
- Iztikeit, on 09/08/2008, -0/+7We are not that stupid, but many Americans, apparently, are.
The country is being sold away to foreign and private interests. - Y0tsuya, on 09/07/2008, -1/+8Smart people shorted FRE and FNM. You are not one of them.
- Richandler, on 09/08/2008, -0/+7You mean the same Fed that cause the housing crisis in the first place with loose credit standards.
- abrasion, on 09/08/2008, -0/+6Ron Paul warned us all a few months ago - got a hell of a lot of diggs too, but diggs don't the economy.
- paulotto2007, on 09/08/2008, -0/+6If housing was "allowed" to fall there would be plenty of younger home buyers ready to buy or investors looking to buy foreclosed property - injecting much needed capital into the housing market as it bottoms. But that won't happen now.
Instead, home prices will remain artificially high and inflation will erode the purchasing power of what savings we do have.
Also, foreign investors expect to get paid back with a dollar that's actually worth something rather than have the government change the rules of the game whenever it feels like it. Expect less foreign investment now - not more.
Combine this mess with our enormous debt (9 Trillion and consumer debt now higher than the GDP of France) and it's only a matter of time before China stops taking our IOU's for their consumer goods. Since we have a weak manufacturing base and huge trade imbalance we're not going to be able to spendthrift our way out of it.
When China figures out it doesn't need us anymore Uncle Sam had better find another sucker to accept our worthless IOU's or... well, if you think inflation is a concern now... just stay tuned.
The problem is fiat currency... just printing money out of thin air backed by nothing really except the governments "word" and centralized planning of the financial system that is creating what Mises referred to as malinvestments like the tech bubble or the housing bubble ... it's not capitalism, it's corporate socialism. - paulotto2007, on 09/08/2008, -0/+6mfc5200,
Without sounding too Bill Clinton, I feel your pain. Like odigity above, I understand and completely respect where you're coming from. - PhilLesh69, on 09/08/2008, -0/+6What we now have is corporations being promised the full faith and value of the US Government (You know, "the people") backing the risk taking profit enterprises of a few, so that they can take even greater risks in hopes of even greater profits, because the taxpayer has been completely subjugated into a position of insuring that risk with his tax money.
If you are fortunate enough to own a business, you can take EVERY risk you think might make you the world and the stars in profits, because the government will take everyone else's tax money to bail you out if you fail.
Now that this is a corporate government, this is the only logical way to go. It's all about profit. - mavGuy, on 09/08/2008, -0/+5Oh wow, if only the government was this honest.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 208 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is