For years, critics of Fannie Mae have warned that it does not give them enough information to judge its risks.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Fannie Mae has never publicly disclosed how much money it could lose if interest rates rose 1.5 percentage points in a very short period of time.
And so Fannie Mae produces very strong results for investors in - when interest rates are high and when interest rates are low, in recession and during booms.
I don't think anybody has indicated that I did anything but do my job at Fannie Mae.
We think nothing of protecting consumers from faulty toasters or unsafe cars. Is it unreasonable to suggest that investors are entitled to information they can trust before investing their hard-earned money? I don't think it's unreasonable at all.
The bailout of Fannie Mae is completely off the books. It's going to cost us hundreds of billions of dollars. Yet nobody is placing this in any type of column in accounting for federal debt.
Fixing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in isolation, without looking at the big picture, would be short-sighted.
Investors don't like uncertainty.
If someone's criticism is completely unfounded on data, then I don't want to hear it. It doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
There have been a lot of critiques of the finance industry's having possibly foisted subprime mortgages on unknowing buyers, and a lot of those kinds of arguments are even more powerful when used against college administrators who are probably in some ways engaged in equally misleading advertising.
If bankers become overly conservative in response to past lending mistakes - or if examiners force such behavior - it will hurt bankers' own long-term interests and the economy in general.
No opposing quotes found.