"No one pushed harder than Congressman Barney Frank to force banks and other financial institutions to reduce their mortgage lending standards, in order to meet government set goals for more home ownership. These lower mortgage lending standards are at the heart of the increased riskiness of the mortgage market and of the collapse of Wall Street securities based on these risky mortgages. Senator Christopher Dodd has played the same role in the Senate as Barney Frank played in the House of Representatives. [They] also voted for the very legislation that enabled contracted bonuses to be paid by companies like AIG that received government bailout money." --Thomas Sowell
http://www.theatheistconservative.com/tag/barneyfrank
"To force banks" is an exterior explanation obfuscating reality, since the U.S government is the agent of the Federal Reserve bankers in the first place, who intentionally engineered this upheaval while making it appear otherwise. Mr. Frank was one of their main political lackeys to implement their planned "recession" or "depression". The billions in "bail-out" money and bonuses received by these tycoons and their companies was reimbursement for their participation and collusion.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26868968/the_dirty_dozen
"These two entities--Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--are not facing any kind of financial crisis." --Barney Frank, 9-11-03. Mr. Frank was also involved in a homosexual relationship with Herb Moses, a senior executive at Fannie Mae.
Showing posts with label Fannie Mae. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fannie Mae. Show all posts
16 April, 2009
02 February, 2009
Obama and The Banksters
Stealing from the rich, giving to the poor, Barack Obama is a self styled Robin Hood.
Now he has a chance to turn his arrows toward the Banksters. What will he do???
Last week, President Obama called it "shameful" that the bank executives, who took taxpayer money through the bailout last fall, paid themselves large bonuses. While the vast majority of the public agrees with this view, there is little that President Obama can directly do about these bonuses at this point.
However, with more bailout money on the way (probably much more), President Obama will be in a position to seriously constrain executive compensation in the future at the banks that are subsisting on government largess. However, before we even get to Round II of the bailout, there is some quick business that he should attend to right here in Washington.
Last month, on the day before Christmas, Fannie Mae announced that it had reconstituted its board of directors. According to The Washington Post, the nine directors will receive annual pay of $160,000 each (more if they chair a committee), while the chair of the board will take home $290,000 a year.
This pay seems rather high for two reasons. First, being a director is a very part-time job. A director's duties almost certainly require an average of less than one day a week. This means that the $160,000 annual salary for board members would translate into a full-time salary of more than $800,000.
The other reason this pay package is so disturbing is that Fannie Mae is currently in conservatorship. It is being run as a government company, with most of the oversight responsibilities of a corporate board being handled by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. In other words, Fannie Mae's new directors are effectively getting paid $160,000 a year at a part-time government job, which is even more part-time than usual, because a government agency is actually doing most of their work.
So, why are these people getting $160,000 for a part-time job, almost five times the pay of a typical worker? We can skip the "great skills" story. Three of the ten directors were on the board when Fannie slipped into bankruptcy last year. Obviously, these folks were sleeping at the point when a board's intervention could have made a difference. If this failure is not sufficient to keep a director from being reappointed, then there is no reason to believe that the seven new members have any special skills.
In short, the Fannie directors give us another classic example of people in business getting large paychecks in instances where they provide no obvious value. The unusual aspect in this situation is that they are actually on the government payroll at the moment, since Fannie is effectively bankrupt. This gives President Obama the opportunity to crack down on this abuse.
BUT WILL HE?
Read more at Truthout.org:
http://www.truthout.org/020209A
Now he has a chance to turn his arrows toward the Banksters. What will he do???
Last week, President Obama called it "shameful" that the bank executives, who took taxpayer money through the bailout last fall, paid themselves large bonuses. While the vast majority of the public agrees with this view, there is little that President Obama can directly do about these bonuses at this point.
However, with more bailout money on the way (probably much more), President Obama will be in a position to seriously constrain executive compensation in the future at the banks that are subsisting on government largess. However, before we even get to Round II of the bailout, there is some quick business that he should attend to right here in Washington.
Last month, on the day before Christmas, Fannie Mae announced that it had reconstituted its board of directors. According to The Washington Post, the nine directors will receive annual pay of $160,000 each (more if they chair a committee), while the chair of the board will take home $290,000 a year.
This pay seems rather high for two reasons. First, being a director is a very part-time job. A director's duties almost certainly require an average of less than one day a week. This means that the $160,000 annual salary for board members would translate into a full-time salary of more than $800,000.
The other reason this pay package is so disturbing is that Fannie Mae is currently in conservatorship. It is being run as a government company, with most of the oversight responsibilities of a corporate board being handled by the Federal Housing Finance Agency. In other words, Fannie Mae's new directors are effectively getting paid $160,000 a year at a part-time government job, which is even more part-time than usual, because a government agency is actually doing most of their work.
So, why are these people getting $160,000 for a part-time job, almost five times the pay of a typical worker? We can skip the "great skills" story. Three of the ten directors were on the board when Fannie slipped into bankruptcy last year. Obviously, these folks were sleeping at the point when a board's intervention could have made a difference. If this failure is not sufficient to keep a director from being reappointed, then there is no reason to believe that the seven new members have any special skills.
In short, the Fannie directors give us another classic example of people in business getting large paychecks in instances where they provide no obvious value. The unusual aspect in this situation is that they are actually on the government payroll at the moment, since Fannie is effectively bankrupt. This gives President Obama the opportunity to crack down on this abuse.
BUT WILL HE?
Read more at Truthout.org:
http://www.truthout.org/020209A
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)