<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Freddie, Fannie, and so-called Privatization</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/freddie-fannie-and-so-called-privatization/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/freddie-fannie-and-so-called-privatization/</link>
	<description>taking the most charitable view of those who disagree</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:18:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.32</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom G</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/freddie-fannie-and-so-called-privatization/#comment-469715</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom G]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2016 10:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=7966#comment-469715</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Restricting gov&#039;t support to owner-occupied residencies is a fine move.

I was expecting you to call for elimination of mortgage interest, which seems very politically infeasible.  My own:
#3 Replace interest deduction with &quot;house payment&quot; tax credit of 30%, up to a maximum per year of median income of prior year (~$53k, slowly rising).  Plus a lifetime maximum of 10 times prior yr median income (~$530k).
For those who pay $1000/month, they&#039;d get a $300/month tax credit for their payment.

It&#039;s important to replace &quot;interest deduction&quot; with some other subsidy, to avoid the distortion of too much debt, too little equity, due to tax advantages of debt.  The same rate tax credit is also more equal than a deduction.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Restricting gov&#8217;t support to owner-occupied residencies is a fine move.</p>
<p>I was expecting you to call for elimination of mortgage interest, which seems very politically infeasible.  My own:<br />
#3 Replace interest deduction with &#8220;house payment&#8221; tax credit of 30%, up to a maximum per year of median income of prior year (~$53k, slowly rising).  Plus a lifetime maximum of 10 times prior yr median income (~$530k).<br />
For those who pay $1000/month, they&#8217;d get a $300/month tax credit for their payment.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s important to replace &#8220;interest deduction&#8221; with some other subsidy, to avoid the distortion of too much debt, too little equity, due to tax advantages of debt.  The same rate tax credit is also more equal than a deduction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: collin</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/freddie-fannie-and-so-called-privatization/#comment-469673</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[collin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2016 18:46:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=7966#comment-469673</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My guess the problem is a lot of the economy since WW2 depends on housing so the &#039;right&#039; Frannie program would probably cause a recession for 6 months.   So it seems having Frannie as government entity or completely private has to be the decision here.  And although the try to lower local regulation in urban cities for more and higher housing, these decisions are made local decisionmakers who like high housing prices and less traffic.  Living in California the less traffic has more impact.  Ask any Irvine, CA citizen if they want more housing?

In a lot of ways, the Trump administration is entering at Bush January 2004 of the housing bubble.  It needs to have slow growth and housing loans weren&#039;t a problem during Obama administration because everybody was acting conservative for a variety of mostly economic reasons.  (I say mostly because jobs and wages were down.) But:
1)  Jobs and wages are coming back.
2)  Rates will need to rise soon and my guess is we will see inflation next year.  The commodity and oil have hit bottom in 2015.  
3)  Wall Street get more aggressive during Republican Administrations.  (Sorry it is true.)
4)  Tax cuts are not paid for and government debt likely to go up.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My guess the problem is a lot of the economy since WW2 depends on housing so the &#8216;right&#8217; Frannie program would probably cause a recession for 6 months.   So it seems having Frannie as government entity or completely private has to be the decision here.  And although the try to lower local regulation in urban cities for more and higher housing, these decisions are made local decisionmakers who like high housing prices and less traffic.  Living in California the less traffic has more impact.  Ask any Irvine, CA citizen if they want more housing?</p>
<p>In a lot of ways, the Trump administration is entering at Bush January 2004 of the housing bubble.  It needs to have slow growth and housing loans weren&#8217;t a problem during Obama administration because everybody was acting conservative for a variety of mostly economic reasons.  (I say mostly because jobs and wages were down.) But:<br />
1)  Jobs and wages are coming back.<br />
2)  Rates will need to rise soon and my guess is we will see inflation next year.  The commodity and oil have hit bottom in 2015.<br />
3)  Wall Street get more aggressive during Republican Administrations.  (Sorry it is true.)<br />
4)  Tax cuts are not paid for and government debt likely to go up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lord</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/freddie-fannie-and-so-called-privatization/#comment-469672</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lord]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2016 17:30:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=7966#comment-469672</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not gonna happen since re establishment of pre 2008 is exactly what the election and political course of least resistance leads to.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not gonna happen since re establishment of pre 2008 is exactly what the election and political course of least resistance leads to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Curt</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/freddie-fannie-and-so-called-privatization/#comment-469670</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Curt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2016 17:06:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=7966#comment-469670</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Totally with you Arnold on this one!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Totally with you Arnold on this one!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Slocum</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/freddie-fannie-and-so-called-privatization/#comment-469665</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Slocum]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2016 15:31:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=7966#comment-469665</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Excellent proposals -- especially #1.  #2 would be a much harder sell given how widely real-estate prices vary across the country, but just implementing the ideas in #1 would be great.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent proposals &#8212; especially #1.  #2 would be a much harder sell given how widely real-estate prices vary across the country, but just implementing the ideas in #1 would be great.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Handle</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/freddie-fannie-and-so-called-privatization/#comment-469663</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Handle]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2016 14:47:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=7966#comment-469663</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Would it be better to have these &#039;tamed but public&#039; Fannie and Freddie, or just eliminate them entirely?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Would it be better to have these &#8216;tamed but public&#8217; Fannie and Freddie, or just eliminate them entirely?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
