Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly. Everyone remember his rant opposing the mortgage bailout bill? The trader next to him called it a moral hazard that taxpayer money was going to bail out those who defaulted on their mortgages. Watch:
Hear the mention of holding a tea party in protest? That was the origination of the TEA Party (taxed enough already).
Incidentally, we added an additional $2 trillion in national debt so that the federal reserve can buy the $2 trillion in compromised GSE (Fannie and Freddie) MBS they now own. And guess who gets to owe even more national debt to pay the federal reserve for any of those guaranteed MBS that default? Yep... taxpayers.
You really need to investigate the costs of the Fed owning the MBS, because it has been generating 40 to 50 billion dollars a year for the treasury for the last several years. Fannie and Freddie have also been quite profitable the US taxpayer. Fannie and Freddie have returned to the taxpayer more then they were given as a bailout. Bottom line the US deficit and debt has been reduced not increased.
You really need to investigate the costs of the Fed owning the MBS, because it has been generating 40 to 50 billion dollars a year for the treasury for the last several years. Fannie and Freddie have also been quite profitable the US taxpayer. Fannie and Freddie have returned to the taxpayer more then they were given as a bailout. Bottom line the US deficit and debt has been reduced not increased.
I find it interesting reading through this 3 year old thread concerning the number of jobs that would have to be added to reduce unemployment. Particularly since the US has exceeded those levels, yet some people still question the decrease in unemployment.
The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced preliminary unaudited results indicating that the Reserve Banks provided for payments of approximately $98.7 billion of their estimated 2014 net income to the U.S. Treasury. Under the Board's policy, the residual earnings of each Federal Reserve Bank are distributed to the U.S. Treasury, after providing for the costs of operations, payment of dividends, and the amount necessary to equate surplus with capital paid-in.
The Federal Reserve Banks' 2014 estimated net income of $101.5 billion was derived primarily from $115.9 billion in interest income on securities acquired through open market operations (U.S. Treasury securities, federal agency and government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) mortgage-backed securities (MBS), and GSE debt securities).
You really need to investigate the costs of the Fed owning the MBS, because it has been generating 40 to 50 billion dollars a year for the treasury for the last several years.
That's an insufficient return for the value of the investment. Best case scenario, that's only 2.5% yield per year. Who has a 2.5% or even 3% interest rate mortgage?
Santelli is a hero of wealthy Wall Street stockbrokers. His opinion isn't very relevant to the vast majority.
Oh gawd... so is Clinton and Obama, Boehner and Reid, most every other politician (save the TP gang) and certainly main stream media.
Nobody has to be told the jobs reports are spun. The question isn't if, but when the truth comes out and DC is caught with there pants down, what will they do?
The one thing I got out of the debate last night is that some of the Republicans answered some really tough questions, and answered them well.
I can't wait for the next DNC debate which will most certainly act as a sleep inducer with all the kumbaya "we love you guys" questioning. I'm still wondering why Bernie didn't lay a big wet tongue kiss on Hillary, the way he was fawning all over her... much to the delight of the audience.
No, the only thing that isn't relevant to the vast majority (of progressives) is making use of the common sense warnings that they (and we) are being duped.
It still seems like the majority of jobs being added are <$15/hr junk jobs or temporary work.
Yes. NAFTA (Bill Clinton) and all the other trade deals (Obama just signed a whopper - TPP) sent everything but service sector jobs (fast food, B&M retail, etc.) overseas to where labor is much cheaper.
That's an insufficient return for the value of the investment. Best case scenario, that's only 2.5% yield per year. Who has a 2.5% or even 3% interest rate mortgage?
Well since they are not doing it for the yield on the securities then the rate of return is kind of immaterial.
That's my point. Why are they doing it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
