Debates are good now for the fate of FnF. Politicians could say anything they want, but they cannot beat hard numbers. The more intensified the debates, the more truth would come out. It's not all gloom and doom from this point and on. It is the natural process of resulting in some eventual resolution on the fate of FnF. It has to start somewhere. We have been waiting for 4 long years, and 1 or 2 more shouldn't be that hard, would it?....: )
Paulson's remarks are actually good for the two GSEs. Why? Because, with remarks of the former Treasury secretary who helped place the GSEs under "Conservatorship", the issue is now more exposed to the public for an open debate. Nobody denies the share of responsibility of the GSEs in the housing bubble that caused the recent recession and nobody denies the GSEs need "overhaul", reforming, etc. But, what about the banks? Did they behave any better in the whole financial crisis? If they had been clean and had not passed on bad mortgage loans to GSEs, they would not have needed to pay huge amounts of settlement money or buy back bad loans from GSEs. Then, take Goldman Sachs for example. Paulson was its CEO before coming to head the Treasury. That bank was near bankruptcy in 2008 and survived only through a multiple billion bail-out from Warren Buffet. And only yesterday a former Goldman Sachs trader was reported to admit guilty to a fraud concerning a 83 billion affair. Banks or GSEs, each has its own problem and they all need reform and "overhaul", but such reforms or re-organization should be done in a way that is best for the recovery of US economy and hence best for the nation as a whole.