Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 6, 2008
F&F Bust

Sarah Palin just offered a solution for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Sell ’em on Ebay.

No, not really. But Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the big news today. Over this weekend they will, in effect, get nationalized and in the end the U.S. taxpayer will take responsibility for their losses.

The mechanism Secretary of the Treasury Paulson will use to put F&F into ‘conservatorship’ is yet unknown. The most likely way is for F&F to issue preferred stock and for the treasury to by these. Common stocks would thereby get diluted to penny levels.

China, Russia, Pimco and others who own F&F issued mortgage backed securities will not have to bear losses.

Current owners of preferred F&F stock will not have to bear losses either. Most of them are smaller U.S. banks and if these stocks would have been wiped out, many of them would have failed.

Barry asks:

  •     How much is this going to cost the taxpayer?
  •     Is this anything more than a temporary band aid?
  •     Does this do anything for the Housing Market? For other Financials?
  •     What is the political fall out from this?

My answers:

  • $500 billion to $1+ trillion
  • No.
  • No and no.
  • Nationally: Nothing. International: Further loss of U.S. influence.

This is not the endgame for F&F yet. That is about two years out when all the bad mortgages they bought in  2007 and 2008 will show their real ‘quality’ in the books. The U.S. will have to print a lot of money to inflate that debt away. There goes the triple A rating …

Comments

Why oh why can’t the dems make straightforward talking points out of these economic issues?
The public – 80% “country is on wrong-track”-ers know the US is in dire straits.
Also:
the United States economy has grown faster, on average, under Democratic presidents than under Republicans

Data for the whole period from 1948 to 2007, during which Republicans occupied the White House for 34 years and Democrats for 26, show average annual growth of real gross national product of 1.64 percent per capita under Republican presidents versus 2.78 percent under Democrats.
That 1.14-point difference, if maintained for eight years, would yield 9.33 percent more income per person, which is a lot more than almost anyone can expect from a tax cut.

Over the entire 60-year period, income inequality trended substantially upward under Republican presidents but slightly downward under Democrats, thus accounting for the widening income gaps over all. And the bad news for America’s poor is that Republicans have won five of the seven elections going back to 1980.

The two Great Partisan Divides combine to suggest that, if history is a guide, an Obama victory in November would lead to faster economic growth with less inequality, while a McCain victory would lead to slower economic growth with more inequality. Which part of the Obama menu don’t you like?

Yeah I know – god, guns, gasoline. Drill baby drill.

Posted by: Hamburger | Sep 6 2008 12:39 utc | 1

So, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are finally nationalized, with the entire top brass of both companies being sacked. Man, as a lefty it’s hard not to love this socialist US government. Although, I could imagine that dismissing all top executives at the same time has its risk and might backfire. Whose going to answer questions during the initial months after the take over?
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae supply insurance cover for $5 trillion in mortgage loans, meaning that as of now the US government provides indemnity for $5 trillion. Don’t pay your mortgage and it’ll be the Feds coming after you. And the best part is the certain knowledge for renters, who themselves can’t afford to buy a house, that their taxes will be spend on supporting other peoples mortgages. That’s gotta hurt.
While we are on the issue of good news for people who like bad news, this from today’s The Australian

Hedge funds ready to blow as positions liquidated
DEBT-GORGED hedge funds are the next ticking bomb in the global credit crisis as they liquidate their positions in equities and commodities ahead of an expected spike in quarterly redemptions by investors throughout September.
The first hedge fund victim was Ospraie Management, which announced earlier this week it would close its flagship hedge fund and liquidate its stock after it plunged 27 per cent in August due to losses in energy, mining and natural resources equity holdings.
Other hedge funds are expected to topple as investors seize an opportunity to withdraw their poorly performing investments at the end of the September quarter. If there are too many redemptions, it will cause a run on hedge funds and create mayhem…

Bought myself another fishing rod.

Posted by: Juan Moment | Sep 6 2008 13:38 utc | 2

Major implications of the Fannie Freddie bailout
many thanks to VietnamVet for his link to the Calculated Risk website.
just when I thought it couldn’t get much worse……

Posted by: dan of steele | Sep 6 2008 18:29 utc | 3

@Dos – it will get much worse – F&F are hiding their bad state
U.S. home foreclosures hit record level, boosted by California

Seriously delinquent loans — those with payments at least 90 days in arrears — totaled 7.73% of all adjustable-rate prime loans in California in the second quarter. The Oregon percentage was 3.04% and in Washington state it was 2.41%, the MBA said.
Such figures have spooked lenders and investors in loans, driving rates higher for even the best California borrowers. Mortgage broker rate sheets show Californians are paying half a percentage point more than borrowers in Washington and Oregon for all prime loans except those eligible for purchase by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored loan buyers, Green said.

Now that’s sounds nice in the first read: F&F offers lower interest rates because borrowers are “eligible”.
But when you think about it again you might want to conclude that F&F miss-calculated the risk of those loans and applied lower interest rates for those even when others declined to do so and those rates are/were not justified by the risk (and because some idiots in congress demanded them to do so).
Prudent people who didn’t load up debt during the bubble will get screwed by this scheme. Irresponsible borrowers and lenders will get rewarded. Moral hazard anyone?

Posted by: b | Sep 6 2008 18:46 utc | 4

In this financial crisis, I’ve assumed we’re in an extended dog-eat-dog time: Some will lose, and others with more liquidity would increase their holdings and control. It’s what entrepreneurial free-marketeers and speculators dream of: a slow, but relentless meltdown of an economic system that allows Players to gain control of this or that portion of a market for pennies on the dollar — and more quickly, and with less meddlesome scrutiny, than the normal merger and acquisition process allows.
I expect that at the end of all this, there may be fewer corporate Players left standing who will own majorities of the various international Market pies (financial, manufacturing; food; transportation, media; leisure; energy).
And, in the case of America — the largest debtor nation, the originator of the financial rot that brought it all about — it appears the bulk of risk and loss may be pushed off into Public Debt, to be paid for by the Lumpen rubes who chant U-S-A !! U-S-A !! and don’t have the ability to comprehend how they and their next few generations are being sold a Cat In A Sack.
And against this backdrop, the Right appears (in the mainstream corporate media, at least) resurgent and strong. Democrats (with the help of that same media) by comparison are painted as listless and weak. There is some possibility that McCain and his choir-girl helpmeet may win in November.
The rest of the world may have to ready themselves to deal with a “third Bush term” — continuing danger from incompetent military brinksmanship by a nation-state in decline, or from actions of other players moving to fill a perceived power vacuum; and the continued unraveling of international financial markets.
For the majority of people on earth, an uneasy and uncertain time. For political players, a chance to press their ideologies and realize personal desires for power. And for a small number of the financial and corporate elite, the times are a wonderful dream come true.

Posted by: Jemand von Niemand | Sep 6 2008 19:21 utc | 5

This is a simple story…
but not an easy one to tell.
Like a fable, there is sorrow…
and, like a fable, it is full of wonder and happiness.
I sing what I see. Nothing gets by me.
“Here I am,” said I to Chaos.
“I am your slave!” Said He: “Good!”
“For what?” said I.
Free in the end, I am!
What good is a caress when Bliss…
the Man came to possess?
Here I am, ready. Evict me!
The trains are gone, the brakes are gone.
And I can resist no more.
Go, sweet Bacchus, take me!
The brakes are gone! The brakes are gone!
The King is coming! All this is mine.
And here starts the Prince’s Principate.
I’ll call this place Addis Ababa. Or Abu Dhabi.
I’ll change it all. Out go the cows, in come the camels.
Camels?! Camels??!! CAMELS???!!!

Posted by: Addis Ababba | Sep 6 2008 19:26 utc | 6

“And the best part is the certain knowledge for renters, who themselves can’t afford to buy a house, that their taxes will be spend on supporting other peoples mortgages. That’s gotta hurt.”
Well that’s already been true, been true ever since they began allowing people to deduct mortgage interest. That deduction is a de facto tax on renters, who have to make up for what the property owners don’t pay. As well as higher rent because policies like this to subsidize property owners encourage speculation and hence drive property prices up.
A single mother who makes $800/month can’t deduct her rent, but Bill Gates can deduct the cost of his $50 million dollar house. What’s wrong with this picture? If they allow rich people to deduct their housing expenses, then they should allow poor people to deduct their rent.

Posted by: mike | Sep 6 2008 19:40 utc | 7

Do foreclosures on homes only happen along party lines? I’m guessing the right wing will associate all foreclosures solely as a left wing phenomemom! no puns intended.

Posted by: gus | Sep 6 2008 20:26 utc | 8

Try looking at this, so long as your head doesn’t explode:

The problem [i.e., the Subprime lending crisis] will never be explained correctly because it involves the perversion of socialism. The foundations of the housing racket were based on greedy socialists that wanted anyone they could get their hands on buying a house and paying local property taxes on those houses.

That is why Sally coffee shop worker that earned 20K per year was allowed to acquire a mortgage for 300K on a house that would be impossible for her to afford, as an example. No money down, variable rate interest loans with spikes of 4 – 5 %, the deluded that believed they could buy/sell at will for profit regardless of market conditions, the jokers building $350 million dollar high schools and then throwing the bond debt on local homeowners with impunity and in an undemocratic way, well, it is the recipe for revolution.

The key to the con though was making it easy for the conned to pull equity out of these properties, thus masking the real nefarious nature of the housing Ponzi problem. This mess will take decades, not years, to fix.
Posted by: Capitalist | Sep 6, 2008 7:09:03 AM

This same clown observed that “the folks renting are the smart ones, not slaves. … When 60% of a community rents but wants a new $300 million dollar school, or some other wasteful socialist project, do the 40% of property owners get their say at the ballot box?”
Sigh.

Posted by: Jemand von Niemand | Sep 6 2008 20:42 utc | 9

Hamburger,
Growth is not the answer, but rather our destruction. I vote no to Growth. We now need Anti-Growth, as the following so aptly articulates:
But the deceptive ‘obvious fact’, which rarely anybody ever acknowledges, is that constant growth in a planet of limited resources is an impossibility. Sooner or later, such growth will reach the material, physical limits of planet Earth. Only the cancer cell displays such unrelenting, single-minded, absolute growth, an unregulated growth that does not know when to stop and ends up killing its biological host by diverting all resources to its single-minded pursuit of bigger and bigger.
As that somewhat eccentric US environmental activist, Edward Abbey, had famously pointed out, “Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.”
In the first decades of the Industrial Revolution, which set this pattern of unrelenting economic growth, the limit to economic growth was not visible. The imprint of human activity was yet relatively small compared to the size of the planet and its resources. There were some people even then who spoke against economic growth and its baneful influence on the planet but these were, invariably, romantics out of touch with reality and based their critiques of industrialisation and economic growth on a desire to retain the status quo of feudal stagnation and hierarchy.
The unrelenting growth of the economy unleashed by capitalism, especially in its industrial phase, has been responsible for the flowering of the productive and creative powers of the human race. It is not merely reactionary, but futile, to talk about a return to the pre-industrial past. Yet, one cannot escape the obvious fact that limitless growth is not possible in a planet of limited resources. The point is to be able, using the very technological and intellectual tools provided by the sustained economic growth of the past two centuries, to determine how this growth has impacted its biological host and whether we have reached the limits of such growth.
I would argue, based not on some longing for a return to an innocent pastoral utopia but on hard material reality, that we may not only have reached this limit, but are mindlessly breaching it, imperilling our very existence.

Link to the rest of the article
I penned an essay in 2003 several months prior to the invasion of Iraq. I saw it coming….hard not to when you remove the blinders. Since then, I have learned, nay, we have learned much, but the general tenets of the essay still hold true.
The Last Crusade
The concept of Materialism is an extremely appropriate, and I would say urgent topic, considering the serious issues currently confronting Man and the Globe. I believe the topic lends itself to a multi-faceted analysis, however, I will limit my discussion to the facets that appear to me, to be the most crucial and pertinent.
Materialism, the word itself, in my opinion is somewhat of a misnomer in that Material refers to something concrete, physically identifiable, tangible and measurable. As such, the term precludes something less tangible such as services. Therefore, I feel it more appropriate to refer to the issue as Consumerism; the purchase or acquisition of wants versus needs.
It has been my observation that the discussion of this topic centers around the assumption that Consumerism has been adopted wholesale by the inhabitants of the Globe, or in the least, will be, and as such the analysis of the issue proceeds according to this precept. I do not agree with this assumption/precept as a given, however, for the sake of the point I am about to make I will allow the assumption in the hypothetical. My second point will address the validity of this assumption, so hang in there.
Assuming that Consumerism is fully accepted and adopted as the way of life under the New Global Order, then I fear, the implications of such will be destructively far-reaching and ultimately catastrophic. I will attempt to illustrate my point through the use of an analogy, given the disclaimer that analogies are not foolproof; nonetheless, I will do my best to come close.
Try, if you will, to envision mankind collectively as a fetus in its Mother’s womb. Ideally, the Mother and Fetus coexist in a state of equilibrium for the entirety of the gestation period; the Fetus requires exactly what the Mother can provide. Suppose the Fetus has a genetic defect though, a defect that alters the nourishment equilibrium and leaves the Fetus yearning for more than the Mother can provide; an unquenchable yearning that must be satisfied regardless of the implications.
The Mother, in an attempt to quench the fetus’s “unreasonable” nourishment requirements, diverts life- sustaining nutrients from herself to her Fetus, thus depriving herself of vitality. The Fetus’s requirements increase exponentially to the point where it is defecating in the womb. Alas, the Mother can no longer provide any additional nourishment, in fact, her yield to the Fetus declines precipitously, and she is on the verge of death, while the Fetus wallows in a cesspool of its own excrement with an unquenchable and veracious hunger.
It is no longer receiving satisfaction from the Mother so it proceeds to devour its host. It begins with the umbilical cord and proceeds to the uterine lining, consuming layer upon layer.
The Mother is in physical arrest at this point, she is writhing in pain; the internal bleeding is massive and irreversible. She succumbs and the Fetus is violently vomited from the now deceased Mother’s womb.
Such is Man’s destiny if we continue to globalize the concept of Consumerism; the production and/or the delivery of wants.
As I mentioned earlier, I do not believe that Consumerism will be adopted under the New Global Order, in fact, the resistance to such will ultimately lead to a Global clash and human self-annihilation. An analogy of such could be likened to two diabolically opposed fraternal twins in the Mother’s womb fighting for position in the birth canal and ultimately destroying each other in the process.
I believe the current clash between many of the Arab nations and the West (exemplified by the U.S.) is a clash over ideology; that ideology being Materialism or more appropriately, Consumerism.
There is no doubt in my mind that Western Civilization is marked by among other things, Consumerism. It is “our” way of life. There is no need for me to elaborate on what is obvious, one need only turn their head about and observe to prove this point.
However, since I do not have the luxury of observation related to the Arab world, I have to rely on the observations of others; for example, T. E Lawrence.
Lawrence gives a profound (given that he was speaking to the issue in the early part of the 20th century) insight into the Arab, Semitic, Bedouin disposition, specifically as it relates to Western Materialism/Consumerism.
In his book, Seven Pillars OF Wisdom-A Triumph, Lawrence expounds,
“The common base of all the Semitic creeds, winners or losers, was the ever present idea of world-worthlessness. Their profound reaction from matter led them to preach bareness, renunciation, poverty; and the atmosphere of this invention stifled the minds of the desert pitilessly. A first knowledge of their sense of the purity of rarefaction was given me in early years, when we had ridden far out over the rolling plains of North Syria to a ruin of the Roman period which the Arabs believed was made by a prince of the border as a desert-palace for his queen. The clay of its building was said to have been kneaded for greater richness, not with water, but with the precious essential oils of flowers. My guides, sniffing the air like dogs, led me from crumbling room to room, saying, ‘This is jessamine, this violet, this rose.’”
“But at last Dahoum drew me: ‘Come and smell the very sweetest scent of all’, and we went into the main lodging, to the gaping window sockets of its eastern face, and there drank with open mouths of the effortless, empty, eddyless wind of the desert, throbbing past. That slow breath had been born somewhere beyond the distant Euphrates and had dragged its way across many days and nights of dead grass, to its first obstacle, the man-made walls of our broken palace. About them it appeared to fret and linger, murmuring in baby-speech. ‘This,’ they told me, ’is the best; it has no taste.’ My Arabs were turning their backs on perfumes and luxuries to choose the things in which mankind had had no share or part.”
Western civilization cannot buy the Arab world. We may think we can, witnessed by the various puppet governments placed in power and kept in power by the Western Multinational Corporations, however, that device is only temporary, and we are beginning to see the dismantling of it before our very eyes. The Royal families and the Puppet dictatorships of the Arab world are not a true representation of the Arab people. The renunciation of Materialism/Consumerism is woven into the life-breathing fabric of Arabs. Conversion, considering this pretext, is impossible.
One might well say, nonsense, look at the Royal families of Saudi Arabia and Jordan. I would say, yes, let us look at them. They appear to me to be irresponsible and contradictory individuals according to Western logic. Their life of opulence is a conflict for them and their erratic behavior exemplifies this.
T.E Lawrence writes,
“To live, the villager or townsman must fill himself each day with the pleasures of acquisition and accumulation, and by rebound off circumstances become the grossest and most material of men. The shining contempt of life, which led others into the barest asceticism, drove him to despair. He squandered himself heedlessly, as a spendthrift: ran through his inheritance of flesh in a hasty longing for the end.
……The Semite hovered between lust and self-denial.”
So you see, the Arabs are not at peace, at home, amongst Materialism/Consumerism, and as such, will ultimately squander their fortune due to a un-conscience longing to return to worthlessness.
What we are seeing now, in the resurgence of fundamentalist Islam, is not so much a religious revival, as much as a Cultural revival. According to Lawrence, these revivals have come in waves as follows,
“Since the dawn of life, in successive waves they had been dashing themselves against the coasts of flesh. Each wave was broken, but, like the sea wore away ever so little of the granite on which it failed, and some day, ages yet, might roll unchecked over the place where the material world had been, and god would move upon the face of those waters. On such wave (and not the least) I raised and rolled before the breath of an idea, till it reached its crest, and toppled over and fell in Damascus. The wash of that wave, thrown back by the resistance of vested things, will provide the matter of the following wave, when in fullness time the sea shall be raised once more.”
Lawrence experienced a wave that predicated his novel. There have been waves since, and, I believe, we are in the midst of a wave right now; a tidal wave of astronomical proportions. One that may perhaps strip the granite clean in one fell swoop and clear the Earth of Materialism/Consumerism once and for all. Of course, Mankind would be a casualty, leaving only Purity (God).
T. E. Lawrence, when he mentioned, “ages yet”, obviously, had no knowledge of Nuclear Weaponry. With the advent of such, and his knowledge thereof, I’m certain he would have asserted “years yet.”

Posted by: Pro Anti-Growth | Sep 6 2008 23:48 utc | 10

This is not the endgame for F&F yet. That is about two years out when all the bad mortgages they bought in 2007 and 2008 will show their real ‘quality’ in the books.
For starters 8and not unexpected):
Loan Giant Overstated the Size of Its Capital Base

The government’s planned takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, expected to be announced on Sunday, came together after advisers poring over the companies’ books for the Treasury Department concluded that Freddie’s accounting methods had overstated its capital cushion, according to regulatory officials briefed on the matter.

Freddie Mac’s capital position was worse than initially imagined, according to people briefed on those findings. The company had made decisions that, while not necessarily in violation of accounting rules, had the effect of overstating the companies’ capital resources and financial stability.
Indeed, one person briefed on the company’s finances said Freddie Mac had made accounting decisions that pushed losses into the future and postponed a capital shortfall until the fourth quarter of this year, which would not need to be disclosed until early 2009. Fannie Mae has used similar methods, but to a lesser degree, according to other people who have been briefed.

The accounting issues that brought so much urgency to the bailout appear to center on Freddie Mac’s capital cushion, the assets that regulators require them to keep on hand to cover losses.
The methods used to bolster that cushion have caused serious concerns among the companies’ regulator, outside auditors and some investors. For example, while Freddie Mac’s portfolio contains many securities backed by subprime loans, made to the riskiest borrowers, and alt-A loans, one step up on the risk ladder, the company has not written down the value of many of those loans to reflect current market prices.
Executives have said that they intend to hold the loans to maturity, meaning they will be worth more, and they need not write down their value. But other financial institutions have written down similar securities, to comply with “mark-to-market” accounting rules. Freddie Mac holds roughly twice as many of those securities as Fannie Mae.
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have also inflated their financial positions by relying on deferred-tax assets — credits accumulated over the years that can be used to offset future profits. Fannie maintains that its worth is increased by $36 billion through such credits, and Freddie argues that it has a $28 billion benefit.
But such credits have no value unless the companies generate profits.

For years, both companies have effectively recognized losses whenever payments on a loan are 90 days past due. But, in recent months, the companies said they would wait until payments were two years late. As a result, tens of thousands of loans have not been marked down in value.

That’s the way its donw. F&F aren’t the only ones who have fudged the books like this, but they are the biggest. The smaller ones on Wall Street who did so and many (200?) local banks will blow up to.

Posted by: b | Sep 7 2008 4:21 utc | 11

I’m still shaking my head over the fact that F&F a few months ago changed the time that a mortgage was overdue from 90 days to two years so that those that were past due would not show up as a loss.

Posted by: R.L. | Sep 7 2008 6:22 utc | 12

P.A.G. – I opened the door of my little Alaskan yurt late one frigid wintry night to a city guy who’d been living in the valley, trying to, in a borrowed cabin, who shivered: “Can I come in? I’m tired of God’s Creation.” He bailed.
I opened the door of my little Cascades hut late one rainy winter night to a city gal who’d been living in a borrowed cabin down the road, trying to, for the 40 days and 40 nights that it had been raining constantly. She shivered, “How the hell do I get down-valley!” She bailed.
I rode the crests of the Bering Sea with a guy just up from Seattle, in January, beating the ice off the railing in an infinity of darkness, no other boats in sight on the horizon. He asked me how long it would take to catch enough crab to go back in again. I told him that all depends, and anyone who lives only for the road home should just take it, so he did, dropping a 400 pound crab pot on his foot, so he could get medivaced by helicopter.
You could start walking tomorrow, being constantly supplied with your every need so all you have to do is walk, and sleep, then looking left, and looking right, you’d see a swath 25 miles wide as you walked, but before your life was over, you’d have walked through and seen only an infinitesimal fraction of the earth’s surface.
If you started building tomorrow, and laid one brick every minute, being constantly supplied with your every need, so all you have to do is mason, and sleep, putting 4×2 bricks together into a short wall, then before your life was over, you’d have built a wall less than 500 miles long.
If you shook one person’s hand and talked with them about their lives for five minutes, in an endless procession, being constantly supplied with your every need, so all you have to do is greet, and sleep, then before the end of your life, you would have only met 1/1000th of the people living on earth when you started.
The only thing in life is growth.

Posted by: Holman Jenkins | Sep 7 2008 7:13 utc | 13

Pro-Anti-Growth
Sounds like a winning campaign slogan to me guaranteed to put a dem in office, resurrect local economies and prevent Roe from being overturned.

Posted by: Hamburger | Sep 7 2008 9:44 utc | 14