It seems the only reason the government should give up ~$28B in revenue PER YEAR for literally nothing is to put the government in more debt and give free money to Bill Ackman.
It seems the only reason the government should give up ~$28B in revenue PER YEAR for literally nothing is to put the government in more debt and give free money to Bill Ackman.
Of course the big caveat is that once private, the government needs to ensure another bailout is not possible.
Ackman is not getting screwed.
When the government essentially nationalized Fannie and Freddy, they made it clear that the stock in those companies was worthless.
Ackman bought it, thinking his billions would be enough to lobby the government into zeroing out their share and handing him $600B.
He's not getting screwed if they say, "you bought worthless stock, and it's still worthless, sorry."
Sure he is. He's just doing it to himself.
I assume the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that Trump is still figuring out how to tank Fannie/Freddie shares beforehand so he and his cronies can buy them up like they did with the on-again off-again tariff threats.
It's both parties--and it's been this way since the end of the cold war. There's no longer a need to say we're better than the alternative. The dems cancelled student debt--a gift to both debtors in the investor class. Harris's campaign trail housing push was also a gift to the investor class. And the Fed printed $9T while dems were in office.