CSI: Mortgage Giants

Posted by John Carney, Sep 09, 2008, 10:35am

Who killed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Andrew Ross Sorkin today says it was Hank Paulson in the Treasury with the bazooka.

Sorkin argues that Fannie and Freddie were essentially prevented from raising new capital once Paulson was given authority to intervene with government cash. The power of the Treasury coupled with an uncertainty about how that power would be used frightened off potential investors, Sorkin argues.

Counter-factual guessing games is fun but even Sorkin doesn't come out and explicitly say that if Paulson hadn't received the authority to rescue the companies Fannie and Freddie would have been able to raise enough money to stay afloat. He simply says the authority made certain they couldn't.

0Recommend this! 22Comments

Comments

1

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 10:49AM

Too long, didn't read.

2

Posted by strangebrew, Sep 09, 2008 10:57AM

LEH ouch!

3

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 10:57AM

sham wow!

4

Posted by diablo, Sep 09, 2008 10:58AM

Carney makes a good point in the last paragraph. So the question goes back to whether the authority granted was necessary or not.

5

Posted by AJ, Sep 09, 2008 10:59AM

Holy f LEH just fell off a cliff

6

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:00AM

# 1 you rule you david spade sounding lil' shit.

7

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:01AM

apparently there's some kind of "uncertainty" around leh. dick got dicked!

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080909/lehman_brothers_mover.html?.v=1

8

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:02AM

what the heck is going on there. Story please DB

9

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:05AM

is it wrong to feel bad for Lehman?

10

Posted by beentheredonethat, Sep 09, 2008 11:10AM

Message to Bess:
You demean yourself and impugn whatever professional credentials you may have with that vitriolic attack on the President. First, you should be very leary of passing on the NY Times version of anything, as their credibility is somewhere beneath MSNBC. Secondly, if you consider the structure of the executive branch of the government, you will realize by necessity, the SecTreas would be the lead guy. That is, after all, why we have Treasury Secretaries.

11

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:10AM

# 1 you rule you david spade sounding lil' shit.

12

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:14AM

@10-- you impugn whatever professional credentials you have by leaving that comment on the wrong post.

13

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:17AM

@9

Considering that a lot of good people, possibly your friends and mine, are getting Cayned, laid off and shafted in the shitter (for lack of a better term) I would say no it is not wrong to feel bad.

14

Posted by beentheredonethat, Sep 09, 2008 11:24AM

@12
no comment space under the post, but holy shit, did she catch her boyfriend in bed with the housekeeper?

15

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:25AM

Bueller any guesses/intelligence on LEH.

Is this the one that goes down without a bailout. And what are the consequences?

16

Posted by diablo, Sep 09, 2008 11:31AM

beentheredonethat

Do as favor and stay THERE.

Now, lets talk LEH Carney.

17

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:31AM

Seems like the Koreans aren't that dumb after all...

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article4717709.ece

18

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:31AM

@beentheredonethat-- it's laughable that you think someone-- especially a dem-- would've had to been unjustly maligned to make a comment on the less than stellar skills of President Bush.

19

Posted by beentheredonethat, Sep 09, 2008 11:34AM

LEH-
they guys who provided capital at 26 dollars a share just a few short weeks ago are puking it out is my guess.....they're probably thinking where is the possible upside here and can't come up with any.....

I'll take all bets: NO BAILOUT. Especially since LEH has been on a death watch for weeks now, there is no systemic risk to the system if they don't open tomorrow. And don't forget, as a primary dealer, Treasury can close them down.

20

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 11:36AM

this has to be a serious (and probably valid) case of earnings jitters.

How many quarters can their stock sustain the earning losses at this level? These analysts keep falling for the big bath line only to be burned in the next quarter

21

Posted by beentheredonethat, Sep 09, 2008 11:43AM

@18
Trying to peg the FRE & FNM mess on Bush is objectionable to anyone dealing in facts. That was a thirty year time bomb that when off due to political cowardice by both parties by leaving the question of guarantees vague.

22

Posted by guest, Sep 09, 2008 1:51PM

Paulson will be running Citi as soon as he leaves office Jan 20, 2009. He will need the bazooka.

Post Your Comment