ChaseDream

标题: 【每日阅读训练第四期——速度越障23系列】【23-16】经管_Fannie and Freddie [打印本页]

作者: 小鱼上树 时间: 2013-8-22 00:03
标题: 【每日阅读训练第四期——速度越障23系列】【23-16】经管_Fannie and Freddie
Official Weibo: http://weibo.com/u/3476904471

大家好，今天开始我来负责周三的经管，第一次发作业，一切还在摸索中，希望大家喜欢，今天的文章都是从奥巴马最近的一个演讲课题开始，围绕这两个不同寻常的公司的，各种过去和未来，小伙伴们要奋起做作业呦！狂奔回来还是木有赶到12点之前，泪奔！

Part I: Speaker

Article 1:

Obama To Endorse Privatizing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac

[Rephrase 1]

http://public.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/npr/atc/2013/08/20130806_atc_13.mp3

[Dialog, 4:23]
Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=209584959

Part II: Speed

Article 2:

Obama Outlines Plans for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

[attach]126249[/attach]

[Time 2]

President Obama hailed both this city’s and the country’s comeback from the housing bust on Tuesday, and said it was now time to reduce the federal role and risk in the mortgage market “to make sure the kind of crisis we went through never happens again.”

He proposed to “wind down” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, for the first time outlining his approach to overhauling the two giant mortgage-finance companies that were taken over by the government when they failed nearly five years ago. The companies, which Mr. Obama described in an appearance here as “not really government, but not really private sector,” recently began to repay taxpayers.

“For too long, these companies were allowed to make big profits buying mortgages, knowing that if their bets went bad, taxpayers would be left holding the bag,” the president said. “It was ‘heads we win, tails you lose.’ ”

Since early 2011, the administration has voiced support for overhauling Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which long benefited from an implicit government guarantee. Years ago the companies came to symbolize a self-dealing Washington culture beneficial to both parties, and especially Democrats, but Mr. Obama’s remarks on what comes next were his most specific. For several years, the administration held back from revamping the mortgage-finance system for fear of rattling a weakened market.

Mr. Obama on Tuesday endorsed the thrust of bipartisan legislation from a Senate group that would “end Fannie and Freddie as we know them.” The so-called government-sponsored enterprises for decades bought and sold mortgages from financial institutions to provide money for the banks to keep lending to home buyers.

[269 words]

[Time 3]

Under Mr. Obama’s principles, which he said were reflected in the Senate bill taking shape, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would further shrink their portfolios and lose the implicit guarantee of a federal government bailout. Instead, private investors would be most at risk, with the government a secondary guarantor.

“First, private capital should take a bigger role in the mortgage markets. I know that sounds confusing to folks who call me a socialist,” Mr. Obama said, drawing laughs and applause. “I believe that our housing system should operate where there’s a limited government role,” he added, “and private lending should be the backbone of the housing market.”

The president said that any measure he signed into law “should preserve access to safe and simple mortgage products like the 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage.”

“That’s something families should be able to rely on when they’re making the most important purchase of their lives,” he said.

Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia who is part of the bipartisan effort on the Senate banking committee, welcomed the president’s endorsement. “It’s good to see additional momentum,” he said in a statement.

Brian Gardner, a senior vice president in Washington at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, wrote to clients that Mr. Obama’s address on mortgage finance was “important because the administration has not discussed it in some time.” Despite the presidential push, he said, Congress is not likely to approve a bill before 2015.

Separate legislation in the Republican-controlled House would remove the government from the mortgage market, including from the decision whether to keep providing the 30-year mortgage. But Mr. Gardner wrote that even “many free market proponents acknowledge that the government will play some backstop role in a future system” and be compensated for it.

[291 words]

[Time 4]

After years in which the formerly formidable Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their Congressional allies blocked proposals requiring some kind of fees or risk premiums, Mr. Obama is calling for an assessment to be paid to the government on the value of mortgage-backed securities.

Under his proposals, the revenue from an assessment would help finance aid for borrowers and the construction of houses and rental properties that lower-income Americans could afford.

Mr. Obama’s focus was homeownership. But he emphasized the need for more affordable rental housing more than he had before. Advocates have called for a “rebalance” of government subsidies, which they say have too long been skewed toward homeownership and mostly benefit the affluent.

“In the run-up to the crisis, banks and the government too often made everyone feel like they had to own a home, even if they weren’t ready and didn’t have the payment,” Mr. Obama said. “That’s a mistake we shouldn’t repeat,” he said. “Instead, let’s invest in affordable rental housing.”

Mr. Obama purposely spoke in Phoenix, where weeks after taking office he first announced his ideas for providing relief to homeowners and stemming foreclosures. Here, as in much of the nation, home values and sales are up, and foreclosures are down. Before arriving at a high school gym packed with an enthusiastic crowd, he visited a housing construction company that has quintupled its work force since the bust.

But as he often does, Mr. Obama tempered his celebration of better times, and his administration’s role in helping to reach them, with acknowledgment that the recovery was not complete.

“The truth is, it’s been a long, slow process,” he conceded. “But during that time we’ve helped millions of Americans save an average of $3,000 each year by refinancing at lower rates. We’ve helped millions of responsible homeowners stay in their homes, which was good for their neighbors because you don’t want a bunch of foreclosure signs in your neighborhood.”

[326 words]

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/07/us/politics/obama-fannie-mae-freddie-mac.html

Article 3:

Fannieand Freddie Should Pay Dividends to You and Me

[attach]126253[/attach]

[Time 5]

In the days before the housing crash and the financial crisis, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—two private companies existing under government “sponsorship”—played a key role in the country’s housing finance system. By buying up mortgages from banks nationwide and then repackaging them as mortgage-backed securities, they allowed lenders to make more loans. These government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, also shaped the nature of the national mortgage market, ensuring the existence of the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage that’s standard in the United States but rare elsewhere. In the meantime the companies made lots of money for shareholders. The implicit federal seal of approval gave them access to low-cost debt, which made it easier to make money by buying up home loans. That meant hefty salaries for executives and nice returns for shareholders. A good time was had by all, until the mortgage market came crashing down in 2008 and Fannie and Freddie found themselves in need of more than $100 billion in bailout money.

This textbook example of privatized profits and socialized losses has outraged normal people from the moment it was announced. But the Fannie/Freddie bailout was handled differently from the bailouts of major banks: Fannie and Freddie are now owned by the United States government. As the housing market has turned around, they’re once again earning profits—profits that are paid to the Treasury as dividends. Big dividends. So far the Treasury has gotten more than $146 billion from the GSEs; later this year the total amount of dividends paid will exceed the $187.5 billion they’ve gotten from the government. The investment, in other words, is actually looking pretty smart over and above the economic benefits of keeping the mortgage market going.

[283 words]

[Time 6]

The only problem is that this gusher of federal revenue is actually an economic disaster.

In normal times, government coffers filled with dividends would be good because they could be put to some use. The government could spend that money on building Hyperloops or repairing schools or vaccinating children. Alternatively, the government could do the exact same things it was doing before, but reduce taxes and put more money in working peoples’ hands. But that would require a functioning political system. Today’s gridlocked Congress isn’t doing anything with the money.

Still, under ordinary circumstances the reduced government borrowing that results from a dividend windfall could be useful. A smaller deficit often allows the Federal Reserve to run lower interest rates without sparking inflation. That makes it easier for people to buy houses or for firms to invest in new production. Today, though, the Fed’s preferred measure of inflation is running at its second-lowest level on record, even though short-term interest rates have been at zero for years now.

So the Treasury is earning tons of Fannie/Freddie money. But the profits aren’t letting us spend more, they aren’t letting us tax less, and they aren’t freeing up private investment capital either. They’re doing nothing. It’s as if the money were sitting around as cash in a storage locker somewhere.

What’s more, the money is very likely to keep piling up for quite some time. Essentially everyone in Congress agrees that the current situation, in which Fannie and Freddie are government-owned and dominate the mortgage market, should end as soon as possible. But they disagree about what, specifically, should happen next. Back on Aug. 6, the White House tried to put housing finance reform on the agenda with a speech endorsing legislation by Sens. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Mark Warner, D-Va., that largely tries to restore the pre-crisis status quo while drastically reducing the odds that the federal government will have to step in with bailout money in the future. But in the House of Representatives, Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, steered a much more radical bill through committee that would eliminate Fannie and Freddie and replace them with nothing at all, leaving the mortgage market without the government backing it’s enjoyed since the Great Depression.

This is a fundamental clash of visions that’s hard to compromise away. What’s more, even though everyone says they want to end government ownership of the GSEs, there’s no particular deadline for getting it done. That means the issue is likely to stay on the back burner than get resolved.

[376 words]

[The Rest]

Under the circumstances, it’s worth wondering if there isn’t something more economically constructive we can do with Fannie and Freddie while waiting for Congress to figure out the long-term picture.

Rather than paying dividends to the Treasury, the GSEs should pay dividends to the American people—writing checks to you and me. That way, conservatives can stop grousing that the reverse bailout is an Obama plot to make the deficit look small. More importantly, the profits can recirculate through the economy rather than sitting inert in the vault. People with more cash in their pockets will buy more goods and services. Firms facing increased demand will boost production and hiring. The increased tax revenue and decreased social service payments associated with a greater level of economic activity will partially offset the lost money to the Treasury.

As long as we’re stuck with the government owning two big companies nobody thinks it should own, we might as well let John and Joan Q. Public in on a little fun.

[218 words]

Source: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/08/fannie_mae_and_freddie_mac_dividends_pay_to_the_public_not_the_treasury.html

Part III: Obstacle

Article 4:

“Capture”of Regulators by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-Becker

[attach]126257[/attach]

[Paraphrase 7]

Political economists describe the process whereby government officials end up being the servants rather than the masters of the firms they are regulating as the “capture” by the industry of their regulators. When regulators are captured, much of what they do is motivated, consciously or not, by a desire to help the companies they are regulating, even when the social goals that the regulators should pursue are very different.

A famous illustration of capture is given by the way airlines were regulated under the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) from 1940 to 1978. Large airlines of those times, like American and Delta, naturally had a strong incentive to try to keep new airlines from entering the industry. As a compliant ally of the airline industry, the CAB did not approve one new interstate airline during this almost 40-year period. Many airlines entered the industry when President Carter abolished the CAB, and some of the old standbys, such as Pan Am and Eastern, ceased operations because they could not adjust to a competitive environment.

An economically disastrous example of the capture theory is provided by the disgraceful regulation of the two mortgages housing behemoths, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, before and leading up to the financial crisis. In their fascinating recent book, Reckless Endangerment, Gretchen Morgenson and Joshua Rosner explore in great detail how Fannie Mae used political connections and intimidation of anyone who stood in their way to gain a highly dominant position in the residential mortgage market. The authors’ show that various government officials, including congressmen and presidential cabinet members, closed their eyes to what these two government-supported enterprises (GSE) were doing. They allowed them to take on enormous risks, while publicly defending their behavior as not being highly risky.

Fannie Mae was created in 1938 as a government enterprise that purchased mortgages from banks that loaned money to homebuyers. It eventually became a private investment company regulated by the government, where investors expected that the government would help out if these companies got into trouble. By the beginning of the crisis in 2008, Fannie and Freddie held or guaranteed about half of the United States’ $12 trillion of assets in the residential mortgage market. In September 2008, both Fannie and Freddie were taken over by the federal government when they became insolvent. The loss to taxpayers is likely to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars because many of the mortgages are subprime and of little value.

Reckless Endangerment shows how the chief executive officers of Fannie Mae furthered the reach and reduced the regulatory control over their company by assiduously courting congressmen, Fed officials, the Congressional Budget Office, high-level officials of the U.S. Treasury, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and major economists. The prominent and well informed congressman, Barney Frank, gets especially sharp criticism for his continual support of Fannie and Freddie while he was initially a member, and later chairman, of the House Financial Services Committee, the powerful committee charged with oversight of the housing and financial sectors. Barney Frank remained an unwavering supporter of Fannie and Freddie until 2010, when he admitted that they should have been more closely regulated. In a bit of irony, he is a principal author of the 2010 Dodd-Frank act that attempts to reform the financial sector mainly by giving even greater discretion to the regulators.

Fannie and Freddie had so much money and political power at their disposal that it became risky for anyone to oppose what they wanted: large increases in their holdings of subprime and other mortgages, with no questions asked. Different government agencies that were supposed to either regulate or oversee these GSEs ended up as advocates instead. Well-known economists wrote favorable articles downplaying the riskiness of the holdings of Fannie and Freddie. These articles were sometimes published in journals or other publications sponsored by these companies.

A few government officials were brave enough to risk the wrath of Fannie and Freddie. The authors give particular praise to June O’Neill (I am proud to say she is a former student of mine), who was then head of the Congressional Budget Office. A member of her staff wrote a report that was critical of the degree of risk to taxpayers from the assets held by Fannie and Freddie. These companies tried to get June to suppress the report- she refused- and then a few members of the House of Representatives in cahoots with Fannie and Freddie subjected her to vicious attacks when she steadfastly defended the report in testimony before Congress.

The Fed also comes in for sharp criticism by the authors. One example discussed was a Boston Fed publication in October 1992 claiming that minorities were widely discriminated against in gaining access to mortgage credit. The media, many regulators, and some economists widely praised this study as offering definitive evidence of extensive discrimination against minorities in the credit market. Fannie Mae’s head, the politically astute James A. Johnson, seized on this reaction to promote a large increase in mortgages to poor residents of African-American and Hispanic communities with bad credit histories.

Since I had written a book on discrimination against minorities in the economy, I was curious to see how the authors reached such definite conclusions about mortgage discrimination. I became convinced after reading their study that it was deeply flawed, and failed to show what they claimed about discrimination in the market for mortgages. The theory of discrimination against minorities implies that minority applicants for mortgages would need to have better credit records and higher employment stability than comparable whites in order to obtain mortgages. This suggests that default rates would be lower and profitability higher on loans to minorities.

The study’s authors presented no evidence to support these implications of discrimination theory. All the circumstantial evidence, and some real evidence, showed just the opposite. I published my criticisms in a column for Business Week in 1993 (reprinted on pp. 119-120 in The Economics of Life, a collection of my Business Week articles). The Boston Fed and their supporters tried defending this article against my attack and those by others, but their arguments were weak. Nevertheless, the view persisted that the Fed had “proved” widespread discrimination in the credit market against minorities, and this helped justify an expansion of mortgage loans to families with low incomes and poor employment records.

The Fannie and Freddie story does not demonstrate that government officials, congressmen, economists, and others who sang their praises were corrupt, although undoubtedly some were. But rather that powerful companies and industries can bring massive resources to bear in promoting their interests through lobbying, congressional testimony, financial support to help political candidates win elections, attacks on critics, hiring experts to promote their views, and in many other ways. The result is, as Simon Newcomb, an outstanding American economist and astronomer of the 19th century, said a long time ago, “one cent per year out of each inhabitant would make an annual income of $500,000. By expending a fraction of {their} profit, the proposers of policy A could make the country respond with appeals in their favor…Thus year after year every man in public life would hear what would seem to be the unanimous voice of public opinion on the side opposed to the public interests” (p. 459 of his 1885 Principles of Political Economy).

I am not claiming that the reckless behavior of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was solely, or even mainly, responsible for the financial crisis. Enormous blame must go to the commercial and investment bankers who took on vastly excessive risks that endangered their companies and the economy. Nevertheless, that officials charged with overseeing Fannie and Freddie protected the interests of the companies instead of the interests of taxpayers and the general public does not only offer resounding support for the capture theory. For this capture of regulators also inflicted great harm on taxpayers, the American and world economies, and many of the families who exposed their life savings to undue risks in the mortgage market.

[1336 words]

Source: http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2011/06/capture-of-regulators-by-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-becker.html

作者: Mint静默 时间: 2013-8-22 00:11
板凳~~
谢谢小鱼上树！辛苦了！

Speaking
President Obama proposes to unleash the housing market in a recent speech. The problem is that there is not enough landing. Moreover, middle-class people have not enough credits to get loans to buy houses. However, if the housing market returns to ordinary level, the economic growth will be 2.5%. So some solutions should be taken to solve those problems. The most effective solution is to wind down FM&FM. White House provides some other proposals.

T2 1’38’’
This part briefly demonstrates Obama’s proposal to wind down FM&FM.

T3 1’50’’
The further demonstration of Obama’s proposal and different view towards this proposal

T4 2’02’’
Mr. Obama focuses on providing more affordable rental housing.

T5 1’52’’
The past and current condition of F&F
The government has got a lot of money from such companies.
生词：
Bailout
n. 紧急救助；跳伞

T6 2’25’’
The large amount of money taken from F&F is economic disaster because the government does nothing with the money.
生词：
Gridlock
n. 僵局；极端严重的全面交通壅塞
vi. 交通阻塞
Windfall
n. 意外之财；被风吹落的果子；意外的收获
Federal Reserve（美国）联邦储备系统

Obstacle 9’31’’

The definition of “capture”

Take the airline industry as an example to demonstrate the definition of “capture”.

Another famous example of “capture” is FM&FM.

Several criticisms towards FM&FM.

The government ignoredthe great risks exposed to taxpayers.

The author disagrees with the opinions held in certain book. (sorry…I forget what the opinion is )

Enormous blame must go to the commercial and investment bankers.

作者: olivia瓜瓜 时间: 2013-8-22 00:27
嘿嘿。。。。。。。。。谢谢小鱼，这个两个房贷公司，很涨姿势噢，，赚到了。。
Time1: 2m10s
& president obama propose to overhaul the two gaint mortage companies Fannie and Freddie.
Time2:1M52s
& Obama plan to change the role of government from redumently to seondary and many financiers support Obama’s outline.
Time3: 1m59s
  & The too much government subsidy make eveyone American people think they have aready possess the house, so government should do something to change  the situation.
Time4: 1m41s
Although the financial crisis is break out,  Fannie and Freddie also have significant profits for the responser by government.
Time5：The Fannie and Freddie sponsored by government make many profits ,but these profits cant better people’s life ,cant spent more in people. For this reason,The government support to Fannie and Freddie should end as soon as possible.
Rest: 48s
& the profit made by Fannie and Freddie should distribute to american people that can improve the people’s spending power.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Obstacle: 7m15s
& The,first , article  gives a captury theory of an airline company.
& The article introduce the same capture story of Fannie and Freddie.
& Fannie and Freddie sponsored by government,and related to many political officiers. Because of this regidity, it’s hard to reform the Fannie and Freddie mortgage system.
& A study point out the minority discriminatin in mortgage market, but the athor fail to show the evidence.
& The athor of this article research the discrimination and give some evidence.
& The Fannie and Freddie capture story not only endanger the financial and economic ,but also harm the American taxpayers.

作者: yhspark 时间: 2013-8-22 00:35
抢！好几天没做了，，
Speaker:
Real estate matters greatly in the US economy, it's recovering but not recovered.about Obama's speech at Pheonix：there should be more private investment in real estate.

Speed:
1'44
2'00
1'50
1'48
2'13
Obstacle:
7'25
-what's "capture"
-a exampl. of captr.: airline
-a bad exampl. Fanni& Fredi
-history of 2 F.s, how they operate.
-ppl.& governm. ignored risks
-governm. starts to reaction
-academic critics(but flawed)
-authors opinion: economic power affect critics
-greed of investment bankers and governm. should be blamed.

作者: sherryv 时间: 2013-8-22 00:43
深夜福利抢首页啊！

Housing market is recovering but not recovered. Problems include insuffient lending and tight credit.
But as housing is a fiftn of the U.S economy, President Obama claimed to take certain measures: to get more family their first houses.
Government-sponsored enterprise like Fannie Mae is supposed to solve lending problem.

2 269w 2'18 President Obama decided to reduce federal role played in the two FMs since the subprime mortgage crisis.
3 291w 2'05 The two enterprises are going to let more private investors in their financing process. Several politicians conveyed their supports to the president's endorsement.
4 326w 2'38 President Obama is calling for an assessment to be paid for those govenment-owned securities. The revenue can help solve people's housing problems, for example, help build affordable rental housing.米国也要大力搞廉租房啦！
5 283w 2'27 Fannie and Freddie made big profits and when they are handed over to the government, the huge dividends are now flow into the Treasury.
6 376w 3'30 Money filling in the Treasury is not a good thing because it can do nothing. The author blames the unfunctioning political system and low inflation

Obstacle 1336w 9'42

作者: vincytao 时间: 2013-8-22 01:00
我也是首页吗？
起床做

Speaker 奥巴马改变房地产市场。提出了新的策略，也提到了旧的。一些数据显示市场正在恢复但是没有复原。房地产市场在经济贡献中只占第五，但是其潜力远远大于此。原因是信贷问题，好多人拿不到该有的额度。如果能达到，则会有显著的增长，这对经济也是有大大的好处的。奥巴马的一些话，还有政府官员的一些措施。

Time 2 1’50’’

Time 3 1’49’’ the house market should be supported by private forces.

Time 4 2’08’’ there should be more houses for rental instead of purchase.

Time 5 1’50’’ the two companies making profits again.

Time 6 2’52’’ the money earned by these two companies wasn’t been put in to use. And there were disputes about how to do with these two companies. Still be gov owned or back to the situation before the crises.

Obstacle 9’20’’

作者: kimwang53 时间: 2013-8-22 01:40
已经16了好快~ 谢谢小鱼以后再也不用抢沙发了，升级成楼主了==+

1.19
obama proposed to "wind down" Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
1.52
further demonstration obama's proposal and oppinions from other people about the proposal
2.02
people should afford their bills
the government has heped millions of people stay in their house
1.32
intro of FF
now FF earn a lot money for the government
2.31
government earns money from ff but do nothing with the money

8.08

作者: FrancisEvens 时间: 2013-8-22 02:21
2. 1‘53
3. 2’36
4. 2‘06
5. 1’53
6. 2‘37

7. 8’39

作者: yudihelisa 时间: 2013-8-22 03:19
1'54
2'10
2'
2'08
3'03
0'58
9'18

作者: diweiwang 时间: 2013-8-22 06:51
二环了......

1:22 PresidentObama proposed to wind down and overhaul two giant mortgage companies.

1:03 Mr. Obamaaddress that private capital is important in the mortgage market and governmentfunction should be removed.

1:35 He focuses onthe homeownership and emphasize the need for more rental housing

1:19 this twoprivate companies are now owned by the government and it is more easier forthem to make money

1:57 governmentcould get benefits from the companies, but nothing to do with the money. So thegovernment should end up this relationship as soon as possible.

作者: lxskyfly 时间: 2013-8-22 06:58
谢谢小鱼！！
--
Speaker:
- topic: housing and panics+ new/old proposals
- how is the housing mkt: recovering but unrecovered
- problem: tight credit
- suggestions from Obama: get more people buying house
- receptivity: still long way to go (public prefer gov out of mortgage insurance not back
- option(not capture further info): a lot for wide housing can do
* Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 房利美和房地美

去年，美国国会签署了一项空白支票给财政部以补偿抵押贷款融资巨头 房利美和房地美 （ Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ）的损失，
并制定了7000亿美元的问题资产救助计画来应对银行危机。今年早些时候，国会还通过了一项7870亿美元的经济刺激方案。
Speed:
TIME2  1'33
- Obama is determined to make proposals to end up with risks in mortgage and take suitable federal role in housing mkt.
- One big step: overhaul Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which benefits from and for the parties in washington.
TIME3  1'39
- Obama states that pirvate investors should take a lead in mortgage instead of following gov, being backbone of investing mkt.
- both pros and cons are raised based on the presidential proposal.
- still, concerns goes that despite of determination, federal gov would be forced to interfere with the mkt, opposed to proposal slight.
TIME4  2'25
- proposal1: assesment to gov for mortgage secruity.
- proposal2: homeownership, especially for more rental housing offer.
* foreclosure: 丧失抵押品赎回权
TIME5  1'34
- goals of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before 2008 recession: offer more loans and make money for shareholders.
- nowdays condidition: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has been making profits again since recovering of housing mkt thanks to its ownership-US gov.
TIME6  3'05
- problem occurs: F and F got more earnings, while meanwhile the money can do nothing for ordinary people.(interpretation for reasons by comparing)
- voices are spreading for end up with subsidy for FF, while not any agreement has been achieved due to the complexity of this issue.

作者: cherry6891 时间: 2013-8-22 07:00
占座

Obstacle 9:10

Main idea:Capture regulation(be servant not master of captured company ) and the bad influence to state and taxpayer

Attitude :neutral

Structure:give two examples of capture regulation and make detail analysis of FF , who did FF capture and which industry did FF capture . Then the government make regulation good or loose supervise to them

EG: FF turn to a private investment bank run by government that will help the company regardless the interest of taxpayer

How they capture the regulation : ff bring a lot of resource to bear in promoting their interest through lobbing official to help candidate win the election

2 2:00

Obama outline the method to overhaul FF company

3 1:58

People f endorse obama’s decision but the action can be approve by congree until 2015

4 2:18

Obama emphasis the importance of affordable renting house

5 1:45

How the crisis come ?

6 and rest

How to spend the money in treasury get from FF and how to deal with the ownership of GSE

作者: xiaosunflower 时间: 2013-8-22 07:27
1:56
1;52
2:05
1:49
2:36
7:30

看得我头疼，，，

作者: flonacui 时间: 2013-8-22 07:31
1. 1'20''
Mr Obama took actions to wind down Fannie and Freddie.
2. 1'28''
3. 1'13''
Obama advocated an affordable rent.
4. 1'18''
The introduction of the Fannie. make lots of profits.
different:sponsored by the government and paid dividensdirectly to the government.
5. 2'04''
The dividens received by the government have no use. They did not do something good for people.
This situation is expected to last. although there are some reforms and voice against the GSEs.
The rest 50''
The thing we could do to benefit ourselves instead waiting for the goverment's decision. -GSE should also pay dividens to people.
The advantages.
obstacle 5'33''
example: arilines
An economically disastrous example of capture theory-Fannie and Freddie.
market risk
The history of F and F
The bad influence F and F brought about.discrimination against minorities

作者: sunflower542100 时间: 2013-8-22 07:48
Time 2 1’ 45
Time 3 1’ 56
Time 4 1’ 55
Time 5 1’ 58
Time 6 4’06
Obstacle 6’21

作者: 晓野的野 时间: 2013-8-22 08:02
占一个座儿~

作者: sophia王晗 时间: 2013-8-22 08:28
1'43.75''introduction of the kind of company and the speech
1'33.83''the government will take the second place while the private investors take the first
1'47.17''the benefit and Obama also focuse on the house renters
1'46.98''the two companies have indeed play an important role when the house market is busting ang the after the finacial risk they started make profit again
2'04.81''the problem and the two company should not be owned by government
0'31.73''the solution
obstacle:
6'46.01''
the capture theory
an example about capture theory in the airline industry
the example in economic industry--mortage
there are some critism about the mortgage
minotiry discrimination theory about the mortgage and thus it takes the chance to expand
the author thind the author's minority discrimination theory is unconvincing
not only the mortgage itself should take responsible for the economy critic but also the bank and others
compliant服从者 interstate洲际的 standby备用的 disastrous灾难性的 disgraceful可耻的，丢脸的 behemoth巨兽 intimidation恐吓 congressman国会议员 cabinet橱柜，内阁 insolvent破产者 mortgage贷款 assiduously勤勉的 unwavering坚定的 discretion判断力，谨慎 wrath愤怒 comparable可比较的 column专栏 implication含义 testimony证词 resounding响亮的，彻底的 inflict造成，使遭受

作者: Victoriagirl 时间: 2013-8-22 08:35
好吧，这么远了
01'40 Obama took steps in the mortgage and overhaul the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

01'50 Under Obama's principles,the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae would srhink in the profits and the grovenment play a indispensable role in the mortgage.

02'10 The assessment to be paid to the government help the borrowers,while the focus on the homeowers is truly towards the affluent.

01'49 The Fannieand Freddie benefit a lot under the implicit federal seal of approval.

02'01 The gusher of the revenue spends not on the other places, not like before on the repairing schools or vaccinating children. People want to end the FF,but it can't be solved by the government.

作者: nsnxy 时间: 2013-8-22 08:40
速度占座了
1:11
1:10
1:40
1:09
2:07
5:18

作者: qiuzhongbo 时间: 2013-8-22 09:21
掌管 6 00:08:27.74 00:20:33.41
掌管 5 00:03:07.62 00:12:05.66
掌管 4 00:02:06.20 00:08:58.03
掌管 3 00:02:38.67 00:06:51.82
掌管 2 00:02:01.76 00:04:13.15
掌管 1 00:02:11.39 00:02:11.39

作者: kia小铁侠 时间: 2013-8-22 09:30
又木有首页啦呜呜.. 永远把握不到大神们的作息>< 稍后补作业~

作者: 750750 时间: 2013-8-22 10:18
1min50s
1min49s
2min01s
1min53s
58s

8min01s
政府对于国企的行为向来都是睁一只眼闭一只眼，介绍了capture理论，并通过航空公司举例论证
介绍了Fannie Mae 的巨大经济影响力和政治力，介绍了Fannie Mae通过各种手段获得更大的政治权利
举例了几个实例：Fannie Mae通过利用经济学家使公众相信他们的产品是低危险的
Fannie Mae通过少数民族歧视来进行什么（这里没看懂），但是作者对其进行了反驳
指出了这些行为背后的原因

作者: m1nt 时间: 2013-8-22 11:14
SPEED
TIME1 1'30'' Obama proposed to “wind down” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and introduction about the proposal
TIME2 1'30” Obama suggested that private capital should take big role and this suggestion is supported by many people
TIME3 1'30” Obama’s focus was homeownership although the recovery is long and slow process
TIME4 1'10” The history of American house mortgage, Fannie and Freddie have indeed play an important role when the house market is busting and they started make profit again
TIME5 2'10'' the problem and the two company should not be owned by government
0'31.73''the solution

OBSTACLE
5’48”
the capture theory
an example about capture theory in the airline industry
the example in economic industry--mortage
history of the 2 companies
different vies about the 2 companies
the author thinks the author's minority discrimination theory is unconvincing
not only the mortgage itself should take responsible for the economy critic but also the bank and others

作者: 饼干小熊 时间: 2013-8-22 11:24
P1 5’45
P2 5'03
P3 7'15

作者: pgjason 时间: 2013-8-22 11:41
1'23"
1'20"
1'44"
1'36"
2'31"

6'48"

謝謝小魚

作者: dericklx4la 时间: 2013-8-22 11:42
1'47''
2'02''
2'18''
2'10''
3'15''
9'35''

作者: nickychen 时间: 2013-8-22 12:31
Time 2: 1'58" 269words
wind down平静下来，放松下来，（钟表等）慢下来
overhaul彻底检修，详细检查
revamp改进，翻修，修改
endorse背书，签署，赞同
Obama planned to overhaul and revamp Fennie Mae and Freddie Mac, promising "end Fannie and Freddie as we know them".

Time 3: 1'57" 291words
In Obama's proposal, private market would take a bigger role in the mortgage market. Some senators showed optimism on this bill that is supported by government.

Time 4: 2'37" 326words
Obama planned to expand the rental housing scheme and promised would help responsible homeowners stay in their homes with lowering foreclosure.

Time 5: 1'58" 283words
implicit 含蓄的，暗示的，盲从的
Fannie and Freddie used to make a lot profit for shareholders, as RE market going up, they started to earn profit again, making the government investment smart.

Time 6: 2‘50“ 376words
The US government did not use the profit from Fannie and Freddie properly. Senators have different ideas on what is next plan after closed these two big mortgage companies.
（可以再读的句子：Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Mark Warner, D-Va., that largely tries to restore the pre-crisis status quo while drastically彻底地 reducing the odds that the federal government will have to step in with bailout money in the future.）

Time 7: 9'15" 1336words
wrath愤怒，激怒
How and why did Fannie and Freddie influence upper society and media before the crisis?

作者: wangziann 时间: 2013-8-22 14:17
1 President Obama outline his approach to overhalling two martgage-finance companies so as to reduce the federal risk in the mortage market.
overhauling 大修

作者: simonhg11 时间: 2013-8-22 15:43
obama economy
housing phoenix
covering not covered
      not to the booming cycle
mid hard time
housing important
OBAMA more people home
mortgage
FF CREDIT
MORE FAMILY
O CLAIM4
T2 2:01.44
O mortgage
two company
before now
government sponsor
T3 2:16.25
obama FF private--.government
   private be backbone
G support B important but not discussed
         obstacle but can overcome
T4 3:09
obama affordable
   not repeat mistakes
not recover benefit
T5 3:04
GSE PROFIT for shareholder FROME G
   not private  ,get more profit from treasury
T6 5:58
一一gusher e disaster
丨 money 1.doning nothing 2.pilling up
一一>clash hard to compromise  no deadline
T7 1:42
more economically constructive
1dividen to G & P
1low deficit 2more money circulate
benefit
p3 o
servant-capture n -
eg: airline
FF many bad effect
loss tax
less regulate
risk
author no brave
critism
discrimation (not wide spread)
against public interest
conclusion:i banker overload
         g overlook the risk

作者: johnnykong 时间: 2013-8-22 16:30
2. 2.40
3. 2.43
4. 3.08
5. 2.28
6. 3.40
7. 13.00

作者: angel0428 时间: 2013-8-22 16:46
Thx 小鱼，今天的文章很精彩哟~

Speaker: First introduce the real estate market current condition: recovering but not recovered yet. The main problems are the lack of lending and the tight credit. President O want to private the 2 FMs to ensure people can afford their first house. And there are many other methods could address the problem.
2’12 President Obama announced to wind off Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, in order to reduce the federal role and risk in mortgage market.
2’16 The private capital will replace the government to take important role in the mortgage market. The government will play a backstop role in the future system. Mr. Obama’s endorsement is welcomed.
2’35 The proposal of Mr. O charges Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for a assessment to the value of mortgage-back securities. And Mr. O suggests people to invest in affordable rental housing rather than owning one.
2’02 As GSEs, the FMs got a big profit before the financial crisis by buying up home loans with low-cost loans from FED. FMs got bailout from major banks, as earning profits now, they pay the Treasury dividends.
3’10 The dividends paid to the Treasury is an economic disaster, as the congress will not spend it in the effective way. Although the congress agree with the withdraw of government from the mortgage market, they haven’t got a consensus about what to do next.
9’32
1) Introduce the theory of capture, and illustrate this theory by an example of airline and its regulator CAB.
2) FMs are the most disastrous examples for the capture theory, as illustrated in the book.
3) The book demonstrates the beginning, expanding, and culminate of the FMs
4) Fed’s publication tried to pretend to care the discrimination against the poor families, while the true attend is to promote the mortgage
5) Not only the banker, but also the regulator should take the responsibility of the financial crisis.

作者: marjoriema 时间: 2013-8-22 16:57
1'29
1'39
2'04
1'51
2'20
0'52
7'14

作者: change17251 时间: 2013-8-22 17:34
好久没读小分队~~~
真是鄙视自己！

1,59
2,15
2,43
2,19
3.02
1,17

obstacle: 11,30
the government caputured the F&F, one famous example of capture is that the airline were regulated under the CAB.
the F&F take advantages in mortgage market,and introduce the development of F&F.
the F&F own so much power that few people are brave enough to critism the two companies.
then talking about the mortgage discrimination.
pointing out the F&F can made some authorities cheat the public, just standing on their own profit but not the taxpaters

作者: moniquez 时间: 2013-8-22 17:34
SPEED
TIME2 1'47
-President Obama proposed to wind down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two companies were taken over by government
TIME3 1'38
-Obama said that private capital play a more important role in mortgage market, and private lending is the backbone of housing market.His talk and suggestion are supported by some politicians.
TIME4 2'11
-Obama focused on homeownership in his talking, he emphasized providing more affordable rental house.
TIME5 1'56
- The two GSEs made lots of money for shareholders, as the housing market turn around, they earned profits again and pay to Treasury as dividends
TIME6 2'39
- Treasury earned lots of money from F&F but the congress is not doing anything useful with the money, the public agree to end government ownership of GSEs but the issue is unlikely solved sooner.
OBSTACLE 8'11

作者: sunlight841206 时间: 2013-8-22 18:31
加油！

作者: winghty 时间: 2013-8-22 19:58

Will_I-AM 发表于 2013-8-22 02:06
首页~ 有木有~

Will看到你拉！好激动！

作者: winghty 时间: 2013-8-22 20:14
Time2-1:32
Time3-1:59
Time4-2:16
Time5-1:41
Time6-2:52
Time7-7:58

作者: 修一一 时间: 2013-8-22 21:18
谢谢小鱼儿~
time2  Obama cited in his speech that we should overhaul the two companies which thorough failed 5 years ago.

time3  Obama suggested some other mortgages that are safe enough. And some one else approved his suggestion.

time4  Obama concluded his speech.

感觉一些地道的单词好多不认识。。。但大意还是能明白的。学了一天，脑子都糊了。做不下去了唉。。

作者: Kya 时间: 2013-8-22 22:04
无金融BG表示看起来好吃力。。。

1’’27
President Obama plan to reduce federal role on the mortgage market, in case the financial crisis will happen again
?’’??
The private capital will undertake more risk in mortgage market. The federal housing institution may be a backstop in the market in the future!
1’’44
Mr. Obama called for an assessment to be paid to the gov…. He also focused on the homeownership and advocated that people invest on rental housing capital.
4’’52
The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac play a great role in the mortgage market during 2008 financial crisis, now they are owed by gov, it is proved to be a very smart decision because it has make great profits and maintain the housing market stable.
The federal revenue is a disaster.(Round 2: its because that all revenue is more likely a storage locker , investors cant spend more or give less tax, it just keep piping up)

作者: happybwj 时间: 2013-8-22 22:20
1:32.6
1:33.7
1:34.2
2:02.3
1:54.5
00:36.0
哎呀呀，昨天没看成，打卡晚了，罪过啊罪过

作者: olivia瓜瓜 时间: 2013-8-22 22:32
Native speaker：
Main idea ：Obama propose some new
The situation ： 1 （the hosing market )recovering but not yet recovered
                     2 boom and  bust circle
                     3a lot of people have tight credits to buy home，if it can deal with this situation
                     4 if the housing market rise, the whole economy will grow.
solutions： help more people to get mortgage to buy home.
Top ideas: wind down the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and  use government as a sort of backstop role.
LAST : we need the congress act,and passed bill.

作者: ssun10 时间: 2013-8-22 22:34
2.04
2.07
2.39
2.13
3.13

作者: Cri倩 时间: 2013-8-22 22:39
1'10“ obama is determined to end up with risks in mortgage and to take a suitable federal role in housing market
1'20" obama's opinion to the role of private investors and the pros and cons related to the presidential proposal
2'10“ the details of the two proposals
1'20" the goals of the two companies before 2008 and nowadays conditions
2'50" problems caused by the increasing earnings of the two companies and the spreading opinion to ff
5'50"
the capture theory
an example of capture theory in the airline industry
an example in economic industry
history of the 2 companies
diff vies about the 2 companies
author's opinion -- who takes the responsibility of the financial crisis

作者: rcurly 时间: 2013-8-22 22:44
speaker:
housing market is recovering but not recoverd
President Obama said we have to help the middle class have their first house in his speech.
The government would be the fannie mae and freddic mac backup.
time 2: 2'15''
Obama talks about the sponsor of housing market.
time3: 2'09''
Obama said they will reform the provision in housing market. The private lending would be the larger portion and government will limited their role. However, Congress is not likely to approve this bill before 2015.
time4: 2'31''
the housing market are not recovered at all but are recovered in some degree.
time5: 2'24''
introduction about the subprime crisis.--> however, the Fannie and Freddie can still got dividend from Treasury which is a good bargain.
time6:1'42''

残念。。。

作者: royaucla 时间: 2013-8-22 22:45
第二次跟帖
(我水平很差也没做过什么练习怀疑男播音以前是唱rap的)
1 speaker:
obama focus on housing in PHO~
housing market-- situation --solutions by obama-- then the man gives
some explaination

2-2:39
to face the housing crisis, obama decided to privitlize two company
-- fm and fm
-- why -- sold the two companies -- get money then can solve crisis

3-3:00
to avoid the risk that the investor may faced
president make privite investor bigger role in mortgage market
and why

4-2:50
obama focus on the housing crisis ,making the low-paid people could
afford rent --- some measures have to be done
last he gives a promise?

5-2:35
before the crisis, the two companies are belong to goverment ---
lend money to low-paid people ---
government-sponsored enterprises
the investment is pretty smart

6-3:30
there is a problem that is tbe huge profit not something good
---explaination

早几天前就报名了一直没有勇气跟帖既然开始了就一直坚持下去吧
希望用我的坚持在小分队的带领下早日成为别人眼中的大牛
不过路还很长

作者: lindberghya 时间: 2013-8-22 22:55
刚起床,...落下几天状态超烂....可恨的纽约和波士顿，破酒店上网超贵
Time2: 1:46 words 269
Time3: 2:30 words 291
Time4: 2:22 words 326
Time5: 2:14 words 283
Time6: 3:30 words 376
The Rest: 2:20 words 218

Obstacle:
time: 9:49 words 1336

作者: lisa_chan 时间: 2013-8-22 23:09

Thursday [23-16] 经管

Time2 1‘27” [269]

Time3 1‘33” [291]

Time4 1‘44” [326]

Time5 1‘33” [283]

Time6 2‘29” [376]

越障
Time7 7‘08” [1336]
1. Public officials are supposed to regulate the firms and industries. However, they are sometimes captured by these firms and become servants of the firms.
2. One good example is the airline industry. The regulator did not let new competitors come in to the market for 40 years.
3. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These companies are too big that regulators dare not to ask questions and to challenge them.
4. There are rarely some brave people to challenge them.
5. The author wrote books to criticize Fannie and Freddie. But regulators were busy defending themselves.
6. Conclusion is that Fannie and Freddie may not be the figures to be blamed to risk taxpayers’ money and the economy. The investment bankers are more to be blames. The most should be blamed are the regulators who don’t regulate the firms anymore, but serve them.

作者: ufoufo1102 时间: 2013-8-22 23:20

Speed

02:34
Obama’s action-> the background and history of two compaines’ on mortage → the reason why need to stop → the conclusion of Obama’s action

Obama hailed to comback from housing bust with his reason
Two financial companies made profit from mortages by relying on govements’supports
It is a bet behavior for taxpayer and these companies.
The advocator comes from the administration for profits
Obama’s decision to stop

02:08
what obama said for future mortage mkt is private capital will be backbone, where government will backstop. However the congress may not approve this 30 years fixed mortage rate until 2015,
02:34
His detailed action to make it happen, his focus on homeownership, he wants to change people’s opinion regarding housing, and he knows it will need time to complete.

01:44
how the two companies made profit after government sponsored, their sharholders and CEO earned much money from the low debt rates and made the standard 30 fixed mortage rate rare elsewhere.
Housing bust made the change. But their bailouts different from the others, they sponsored by government, and once the bust over, they earn profit, treasury got big dividents – the investments for government is above what the economic got from them.

02:42
the problem behind the profit. Is a disaster, but it seems to be pending for quite long instead of getting resolved for many reasons.

作者: lucinehu 时间: 2013-8-22 23:39
time 2 2'00 obama propose to wind down the two company and tell why.
time 3 2'15 obama think the private capital should take a role in the mortgage markets, some senators support the goverment's proposal
time4    2'17 the proposal aims to afford by the lower-income american,but a long slower process
time5    1'55  before crisis, two companys played a key role in the finance system,afer crisis, the goverment interposed the market to turned around the housing market ,and benefit the mortgage market going
time6    2'04 the goverment help the two companys to benefit own profit
time7

作者: mirror118 时间: 2013-8-22 23:47
2. 1m30s  Obama said the housing industry will bust, and he proposed that 2 giant housing morgage companies should back on privately so that american gov can reduce the risk.

3. 1m45s  Obama claimed that private should take more responsibilities to the housing morgage market, and gov should be the back bone. But congress seems not prove the bill before 2015

4. 2m38s  Affordable rental housing are putting on a more important position than buying a house. The recovery is processing, but in a slow pace.

5. 2m07s  F&F are belonging to gov's now and earning huge number of profits since the housing industry is under recovery and low rate of loans from gov.

6+the rest: 3m55s Gov holds profits but do nothing, some congressmen proposed that the situation should be end immediately but no any specific schedule to execute the transformation. In the end, the author make a sharp criticism to the gov's performance.

7. 8m29s

- Capture of regulators was condemned by writer and the writer points out that the GSEs took too much  dangerous risk without limit.
- An airline company and F&F case were described, in FF case, since too much gov&political elements involved, they became too big and risky but the system is hard to be reform.
- discrimination theory made by authors are flawed since lacking evidence. writer then made a book to justify the theory.

作者: lyslj001 时间: 2013-8-23 01:08
2：30
2：14
2：01
2：08
2：15

obstacle：7：25

作者: franciszfy 时间: 2013-8-23 03:00
Speaker听了2遍还是听不懂；
time2 第一遍3分多钟没看懂，第二遍4分钟还是没怎么懂，本人工科背景，基础真的好差，总结了一下，主要还是两点原因：一，单词好多不认识，包括第一句话中就3个词不认识；二：背景知识太差，里面好多概念不能理解，如房利美业务内容等不熟悉，所以就算是中文的这篇报道，也看得迷迷糊糊，如果拿同样篇幅的甚至更难的体育内新闻报导，我想就算有好多个单词不认识我一遍看下来也能看懂大致框架，因此中文的背景知识真的好重要；
好迷茫啊现在对这个阅读这一块，目前也在做SC，感觉大家公认最难的语法我反而觉得比阅读要简单得多，我在做OG SC的时候基本上错的还不是太多，真希望有我这种亲身经历的高手给我指条明路哈，真的是太迷茫啦。。。

作者: franciszfy 时间: 2013-8-23 04:59
Time 3
3'42"
President Obama Made A Speech On Tuesday Endorsing That Private Investors Would Be Encouraged In Mortgage Instead Of Government，And His Proposal Was Well Supported By Social.

作者: franciszfy 时间: 2013-8-23 05:15
Time 3
3'38"
President Obama Was Called For Calculating A Assessment To Be Paid To The Government On The Value Of MBS By The Congress，He Emphasized That Government Has Already Helped Too Much And It Is Time To Leave.

作者: Will_I-AM 时间: 2013-8-23 05:30

winghty 发表于 2013-8-22 19:58
Will看到你拉！好激动！

哈哈~ 你也来了呀~ 加油~~

作者: Will_I-AM 时间: 2013-8-23 06:02
最近怎么觉得读的慢了求教~ 还是先把作业补了吧呵呵
1: 1:55
2: 2:14
3: 2:24
4: 2:09
5: 3:05
6: 9:09

作者: winghty 时间: 2013-8-23 09:34

Will_I-AM 发表于 2013-8-23 05:30
哈哈~ 你也来了呀~ 加油~~

看你的头像就知道是你哈！

作者: 严翊轩 时间: 2013-8-23 09:39
一片浆糊。。。。
1：34
1：51
1:  57
1:  57
2:  33
7：30
注意力不集中是个大问题，读完跟没读似的

作者: Laurielin 时间: 2013-8-23 13:16
感谢小鱼！

先越个障
OBSTACLE
8'45
MI: the capture of regulators is harmful to economic
attitude:negative
:::
when regulators are captured, they always desire to help the campaniles they r regulating
disastrous example→ FM lead to financial crisis; how↓
they capitalize on its political connection& intimidate anyone who impedes their way to dominate the mortgage market + BUT the government officials ignored their behavior ;
a few brave people criticize FM's behavior: officials and authors including the author(e.g mortgage discrimination)
major blame certainly go to the bankers who took excessive risk, but the capture of regulators also inflict great harm on taxpayers & ecomonies

作者: Markk丶 时间: 2013-8-23 13:21
先收藏着，回头看看

作者: justinlee17 时间: 2013-8-23 14:47
Speed

2'04
Obama decide to overhaul 2 mortage-finance companies to provide money for the bank and lend money to citizens.

2'02
2 ways to overhaul the 2 mortage-finance companies:
<1> shrink the importance role of government and endorse privacy capital to mortage finance.
<2>provide a safe 30-year mortage

2'28
government would provide more help to lower income people via cutting their premium fees.
it's a long term plan but with great advantages.

1'38
the company which is owned by government from 2008 crisis now make money, and citizens actually share the "dividends".

2'25
government do nothing with the revenue of 2 companies, and the deadline for them to step out of the mortage-finance company is unknown.

0'58
the 2 companies should allocate their revenue to citizens rather than Treasury to reduce the deficit and boost the economy

Obstacle

9'24
history and side effects about the minority company control majority profits in one industry(airline company)

2 mortage company dominated mortage industry with high risk but many economists and government ignored that risk.

several economists and company voiced the high risk of that situation of mortage industry

2008 crisis bursted and the 2 companies pay for that former risky situation.

作者: kala6yjf 时间: 2013-8-23 20:08
2:01
2:19
2:23
2:34
2:49
7:51

作者: 小鱼上树 时间: 2013-8-23 22:25

royaucla 发表于 2013-8-22 22:45
第二次跟帖
(我水平很差也没做过什么练习怀疑男播音以前是唱rap的)
1 speaker:

有了开始就好了，贵在坚持，刚开始的时候不要担心自己速度和别人的有差别，关键是一段时间以后和自己比，这个比较重要捏~有时遇到不喜欢的题目也不要气馁，如果在能跟小分队的同时再做点题辅助，GMAT是一场了解自己战胜自己的旅程，加油~

作者: royaucla 时间: 2013-8-23 22:57

小鱼上树发表于 2013-8-23 22:25
有了开始就好了，贵在坚持，刚开始的时候不要担心自己速度和别人的有差别，关键是一段时间以后和自己比， ...

小鱼你好谢谢你的建议辅助的题选什么好一些呢？求推荐。。。

作者: 小鱼上树 时间: 2013-8-24 05:31

royaucla 发表于 2013-8-23 22:57
小鱼你好谢谢你的建议辅助的题选什么好一些呢？求推荐。。。

辅助的题的话，如果你还没看manhattan的话还是要看看滴，OG也是必要的呀，还是要看看你自己的基础，还有复习的长度什么的仔细想想，然后去困境版看看大牛的心经，也许会找到合适自己的方式~

作者: franciszfy 时间: 2013-8-24 05:47
Time 2

For Several Years，The Two Giant Mortgage Companies Fannie Mac And Freddie Mac Have Already Made Big Profits For Governmental Support，And Now It Was Time To End，And President Obama Endorsed On Tuesday The Proposal Overhauling The Two Giant.

Time 3

Obama Tried To Persuade People To Trust His Proposal Removing Government From The Mortgage Market And Managed To Get Some Support From Some People，And Related Department Would Perfect The Endorsement

Time 4 11'47"

Obama Is Calling For An Assessment To Aid for borrowers and the construction of houses and rental properties that lower-income Americans could afford。His Focus Was Homeownership，Encouraging To Invest In Affordable Rental Housing，And He Also Concede It Would Be A Long,Slow Process

Time 5

Introduced The Textbook Example Of Privatized Profits And Socialized Losses By F&F，Also By GSE，And Now They Are Once Again Earning Profits，The Investment By Government Made In 2008 Looks Pretty Smart；

Time 6 And Rest

Author Cited A/B/C To Tell Us That GusherOf Federal Revenue Is Actually An Economic Disaster And Everyone Is Likely To Delay The Issue.
Author Claimed The Dividends Should Be Paid To American People Rather Than To The Treasury With Some Reasons

作者: belinda_cao 时间: 2013-8-24 19:24
PartI:
Obama to endorse privatizing fannie Mae, Freddie Mac

After 2008 crash in housing, the phonix experience the booms and the bust.

For lending is limited ,many mid-class people who have good but not great credit

cann't get loans for a mortgage.President Obama want to unleash this market.

Part II

Article I:

Obama outliens plans for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Obama wants to revamping the mortgage-finance system of two giant company.

Article II:

After 5 year of 2008 crash Was happened ,Obama want to revamp the system of two giant company.

He proposal some measures and want to sign it into law.some people welcomed the predident's endorsement.

Article III:

It is focus on the lowe-income americans to get a loan or rental a house.

Article IV
It is introduce before 2008,how did fannie Mae and freddie Mac operate.and at 2008,they found themselves need 100 billion in bailout.

Now the fannie/freddie have already give treasury nearly 187.5 billion.

Article V

The only problem is that this gusher of federal revenue is actually an economic disaster.
the government keeps a lot of money ,but lack of a system to benifit people.

Obstacle III
Explain the capture.
disgraceful regulations of two mortgage company and the reason behind this.
Fannie Mae ,Reckless Endangerment ,lack of regulation and the reason behind it .

作者: pengze00 时间: 2013-8-25 19:32
Thanks,,,小鱼上树
SPEED
TIME1:1min46sec; TIME2:2min01; TIME3: 2min19;TIME4: 2min26; TIME5:3min13; TIME6andTIME the rest:3min 44;
OBSTACLE:
TIME7:10min01

作者: lysiane 时间: 2013-8-29 11:58
Time2 1'45
Obama propose winding down two government owned companies FMs
Time3 2'15
Obama encourages more private investment and MW and BG supported this idea.
Time4 3'00
Obama is calling for an assessment to be paid to the government on the value of mortgage-backed securities and for affordable renting housing
Time5 2'20
Two FMs did well before the housing crash. After owned by goverment, two FMs earned profites
Time6 2'15
However, without functioning political system the revenues are disaster. Members of Congress disagree about what will happen after ending the two FMs.

作者: wensd1111 时间: 2014-7-21 06:53
1 A 10:05
capture theory from the ail line firm
house morgate frim do a lot of thing to benefit its won advantages, politic, porfessor. as the author did in 1990 attack boston case.
not blame the two frim creating the crisis, but the i bankers.

作者: 奎尼米兰达 时间: 2019-7-21 22:45
Time2 1:56
Time3 2:23
Time4 2:54
Time5 2:09
Time6 2:13

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)