reply to post by Justin Oldham
Now that the specter of State ownership has been unleashed...by Republicans...I'm not sure that the genie can be put back in to its bottle. How can
the proponents of Federalism NOT embrace it?
How? Well J/O, it is true that I live a lot “in the past.” It looks as if you have joined me. Just as my 12 year old grand-niece who was first on
her block to have an iPhone and has had one now for over a year, she is a light year ahead of me in operating such a device. So also is the millennium
generation ahead of us “old timers” who like to harken back to the good old days.
That’s not because the old days were in fact so good, it is because we know more about those days than we know about these days. And people are
always comfortable with the familiar. So our comfort zone puts us too often looking “backwards” instead of looking “forward.” You know the
rule in electronics, “double the capacity, halve the cost every 18 months.” For you and me this is progress at a rate we have never before
experienced. It’s mind boggling. But it’s real and it’s happening all around us.
Therefore, I repeat, we Dems have moved on. We are not going to nationalize the steel industry, the coal mines and the railroads. As the Brits under
Clement Atlee did in 1946. And he - say Labour - also created the national health service, known then as now as the NHS. Nationalized industries
failed not because of some philosophical imperative against state ownership, but because the industries were worn out, depleted and unprofitable to
operate in 1946.
If Labour could have seized the industries in 1906 instead of 1946 when easy profitability was still there, it might well have been a different
outcome. By the 1950s the British Government was ready to return the heavy industries to their former owners.
But not then, and not now, are the British people willing to give up the NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE. If anyone harbors any doubt about that, just ask
Margaret Thatcher! A British Neo Con, if that could have been done, she would have done it! You can be sure!
Now that the precedent is in place, it seems likely that future Democrats will make the most of it. If they are 'successful,' we could see future
Republicans going along to get along.
Well, it looks as if the home industry has replaced the auto industry as the most significant industry in America. Whereas once cars pulled the engine
of our economy, it is now the home industry in all its variations. New construction. Remodeling old buildings. Repairs caused by age or from natural
events. Additions as families enlarge or needs or preference change. Room for an indoor hot tub for example instead of outdoors in the back yard.
Turning carports into enclosed garages. Then turning those into play rooms. Knocking down inside walls to make a GREAT room. And etc.
So why not nationalize the owner occupied home mortgage industry? Would it not be better than leaving it in private hands who are profit driven?
Actually, the home mortgage business has been “nationalized” since 1933. Problem is we abandoned the rules that worked for a half century. We
experimented with a crazy scheme to let the market rule. That trip to the Neo Con’s economic Disneyland will cost us $2 t. to $7 t. Let’s not try
When an industry becomes central to the national economy should not the nation be involved? And who can best represent the nation? We don’t have to
re-invent the wheel. We already have all the necessary implements in place. The FHA, and whatever Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stand for. See Note 1.
Bear in mind that "success" for a State owned enterprise will be judged differently than it would be for a privately held company. It's two decades
away, but we should expect Federally held firms to support and encourage bloated bureaucracies. Those of you in Federal civil service right now will
know what I'm talking about.
Not necessarily. There were good reasons in the past for what looked to critics to be BLOATED bureaucracies. It’s called SERVICE. Suppose you live
in a small town. Not one as small as Wasilla (see Note 2) but in say, Glasgow, KY, a city I’m personally familiar with. The city’s population is
14,200 (2000) but the surrounding area including Barren County of which Glasgow is the county seat has 51,452 population per the official 2007
Such offices as US Department of Agriculture’s County Agent, the Public Health Service’s Nurse, a TB screening facility, a Federal courthouse with
its attendant clerks, the IRS, FBI, Armed Forces Recruiting Service, a Social Security office, a Department of Labor OSHA representative. And I could
go on but I’m trying to illustrate that people in small towns want and need and have a right to expect a reasonable level of service that may not
always be as efficient of personnel as in the large cities.
A BLOATED bureaucracy may not be the worst thing in the world! For one very important thing, surplus personnel are at the ready to go to New Orleans
when another Katrina strikes. Or to the Texas Gulf Coast if another Ike should hit it. And it will! It is not in the nature of government - SERVICE -
to always be 100% efficient. But is is always needed! Think of it more as the cost of doing business - and doing it WELL.
The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC) (NYSE: FRE), commonly known as Freddie Mac, is a government sponsored enterprise (GSE)
of the United States federal government. The FHLMC was created in 1970 to expand the secondary market for mortgages in the US. Along with other GSEs,
Freddie Mac buys mortgages on the secondary market, pools them, and sells them as mortgage-backed securities to investors on the open market. This
secondary mortgage market increases the supply of money available for mortgages lending and increases the money available for new home purchases.
The Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) (NYSE: FNM), commonly known as Fannie Mae, is a stockholder-owned corporation chartered by Congress
in 1968 as a government sponsored enterprise (GSE), but founded in 1938 during the Depression. Contrary to some beliefs, Fannie Mae does not make home
loans directly to consumers, but rather functions as a leading participant in the U.S. secondary mortgage market.
The Wasilla website gives the 2004 estimated population of 7,738 over the 2000 US Census of 5,469. The website does not say how made the
[edit on 10/21/2008 by donwhite]