The Washington Beacon article claims that a man who was part of the banking industry that caused the housing crash is the key figure in writing the legislation to reform federal laws and organizations. Here's an excerpt from the article that should send up red flags to all of us: The bipartisan legislation would dissolve government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and replace them with a new federal agency called the Federal Mortgage Insurance Corporation [FMIC]. I don't think anybody doesn't feel we should get rid of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. But to replace it with another, single, massive government agency? Which will probably be staffed with the same bureaucrats who manned to old ones? What kind of reform would that be? Read the full article @ http://freebeacon.com/politics/bank...using-market-helped-crafting-mortgage-reform/ S. 1217: Housing Finance Reform and Taxpayer Protection Act of 2013 was introduced in June of last year and can be followed @ https://www.govtrack.us
Its not possible to regulate to avoid crisis. What is important is that we avoid neo-liberalism. This starts with a realisation that markets aren't self-correcting. But you have to go further. For example, if the divorce between productivity and wages continues, expect future macroeconomic problems!
Mebbe it's better to rent... Mortgages Are Too Risky, Consumers Say June 09, 2014 Even though mortgage rates remain at historically low levels, some consumers have negative attitudes towards home loans.
Mere reference to neo-liberalism and how the folly of 'free market economics' has delivered greater inefficient economic rent
Putting the mortgages in government hands directly likely makes it easier to pursue criminal prosecutions against abusers. One might ask themselves why a mortgage bundler in the original OP article would be opposed to this since bundling is a the root of the problems.
