no_free_lunch

Thinking similarly. Its not 100 pct but quite high all the same. Don't bet more than u can lose for sure. Always a chance of wind down is biggest risk imo.

Thanks wayne for your insights. I don't think this will be a problem. I still think that to make it politically palatable to Trumps base they need the warrants exercised but what do I know.

Another little basket of fannie mae preferred's. Now my 3rd largest holding. At least with fannie I feel like I can make some money with all this political non-sense instead of just arguing about it.

Why? Trump wants to get back at Obama. I know. It is a simple theory. Who knows though maybe it is just that simple.

Thanks for the advice as always Pauly. Hard to disagree with the conviction of someone who can dash out 800 words, drop of the hat. Nevertheless, I have a feeling the preferred's will end up as common at some point anyways so that is how I think I will play this one out. Too much easy upside with the pref's and just a few less variables.

PaulyMontreal, What do you see as the upside with fnma common? It looks like $20B-ish market cap already but then you need to recap the company. There are nothing but variables here I know but can you give the 30000 ft bull case?

Okay, just trying to catch up to you all. It looks like it still needs senate vote.

So mnuchin is in it looks like?

I am on your side, more or less, but this is not constructive.

Why does it matter what people think? There's morality and there's the law and then there's public opinion. Public opinion changes with the wind - there's even a quote from Buffett about this somewhere, something about weighing machine vs. voting machine? That poll was done 5 days ago, and I'm pretty sure if someone did a poll now after the protests and the reports about decent people being kept from their homes, separated from their families etc, the results would be drastically different. Another problem is that people place too much emphasis on feelings rather than facts. The reality is that 1) terrorists pose very little real threat to the U.S. Significantly more people are killed by the measles, car accidents, domestic abuse etc every year than terrorist attacks. 2) this ban does nothing to reduce that threat, and may very well increase anger towards the U.S. from the communities that are impacted 3) the ban doesn't even include Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Afghanistan (this point has been made many times so I will not repeat it again) But hey, it makes people feel better. Great. At the same time, it is hurting a lot of decent people. And there are very material, though hidden, costs to the American economy and it has done some very real damage to the moral fabric of society that people like you do not seem to notice or care. On point 1: All it takes is one real incident and your stats are F'd. I wouldn't be content to just ignore these issues. I think most will agree. On point 2: If it is so easy to stir up terrorism then that is just indication that it is a real problem. On point 3: The list was chosen based on a list Obama had put together to keep the politics a little bit more manageable. Obviously didn't work. Rb, Right, I can see how you would get that. I am not an american hence my angle. Folks, the left is full of violent, self-righteous individuals so for my own safety this will be my last post to the thread. Take care. Keep talking.

Also. I will say it again. If usa is so bad why is everyone fighting to be let in?

Saw a poll from rasmussen that majority of usa support the travel ban. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/january_2017/most_support_temporary_ban_on_newcomers_from_terrorist_havens One of the problems here is democrats are going around insulting their electorate rather than address their concerns. Even saw ref to deplorables on this thread. Point of an argument folks is to convince others not to insult them. Just my opinion.

In a banana republic, aren't people fighting to get OUT not IN?

WaynePolson,Thanks for the gselink link. Found a good article there on the fannie situation in general. http://www.fidererongses.com/params/post/1030318/the-187-billion-fannie-freddie-bailout-is-a-big-half-lie

Berkshiremystery, Thanks for the guy link. He makes some good points. EliG, Obamacare wasn`t without it`s implementation problems either you will recall. Did you trash the entire obama admin for that and will you be good with trump once the ban implementations are handled more smoothly. Is that really the problem you see here.

I am very biased here but I tend to agree. I still think the warrants get exercised but from the preferred perspective it looks great. He still needs to be confirmed but not long to wait.

the warrants might be legally legit but imo it doesn't mean they are set in stone. especially when looked under the lens of taxpayer returns on various bailouts + future ways for taxpayers to benefit financially on an ongoing basis rather than with 80pct of the companies for free. I just view that as a free option. I think so long as the sweep is taken out and they are set free, even without government recap, I think preferred's are a good investment.

So I am long Fannie and generally on your side here. However, wasn't the initial bailout of fannie under Bush? The sweep is totally obama and shouldn't have happened but the initial deal was started under a republican admin. The warrants and senior preferred are legit and will need to be included in any investing calculation. Best case the sweep is reversed and fannie only owes $15-20B on the senior preferred, IMO. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae#2008_.E2.80.93_crisis_and_conservatorship

Yes, building things in the US will create jobs. Even with robotics there are still people at the plants. Obviously there will be some industries, clothing for instance, where the cost increase might outweight the benefits and you are probably better off out-sourcing but who is saying the US will stop all imports? There is not going to be a complete shutdown of trade with the world. Mostly just attempts to plug trade deficits with more exports to counter balance. So Mexico runs a $60B trade deficit? All they have to do is buy $60 B of US goods and the problem goes away. With NATO, isn't this what the left has been calling for, for decades? I definitely don't like that they are pulling out of NATO I concede that point. It is scary. However why is the left upset? The left is anti-war right? Aren't people on the left calling for the US to meddle less with others affairs? That is what pulling out of NATO is all about, this is what it looks like. The left should be happy with this decision and people on the right should be concerned. Maybe not you in particular UCCMAL but people on the left are very offensive towards the military but then there is this NATO talk where all of a sudden they back the military. It doesn't make any sense.

I doubt the US is going to be having job losses here. At least not the result of in-sourcing. Incrementallly higher prices I can see but with robotics I am not even sure that prices go up. They rebuild these plants in the US with new technologies maybe the price goes down. It really depends on the industry. Economically, things are great in America, you don't have to like it but I think it's bad to mix ethics with business predictions.

So was just watching Mnuchin's testimony. I read it before but never watched it. Anyways, what I got out of it was quite consistent with what he said earlier about privatization. He didn't close the door at all to that he just limited the options a bit. He states that they need a bi partisan solution that balances the need for liquidity to the housing market (so NO WIND DOWN) with prevention of a monster bailout (So it CANNOT stay under government control). He was very clear on this point. So he basically just said fannie mae will continue with less government restrictions. Yes, something will change. They will put some regulations in place to force them to build up higher capital, or put limits on the government backstop, I don't know, who knows? I just see the companies running as private-ish at the end of it. Maybe the government will exercise the warrants and keep them in order to have more oversight and upside. They can't do straight-up recap and release but what does that even mean? By exercising and holding the warrants it is not recap and release by some definitions. I am very optimistic on this right now. I can understand everyone wants to play devils advocate and think of all the scenarios where trump admin crush investors. It could happen. However, I don't see it as likely to be frank. Too many legal and reputational issues with going after the investors IMO, especially for a republican party.

I would say that enforcing immigration laws is the definition of respecting the rule of law.

Cardboard, have you been to China in the last few years? It's nothing like you are saying or imagining. They've embraced capitalism in such a way, that it would make Adam Smith blush. I saw as many people suffering there, as I do in Canada or the United States...and the prosperity was equal as well. In terms of the deception, control, restriction of freedoms and rights, etc, it's probably no better or worse than any Western democracy. I would say that such behavior will become part of this new U.S. administration rather quickly as well...both driving the capitalist engine and censoring the press, freedoms, rights and deception is already part of their manifesto. Cheers! Thanks for this. Someone needed to say it.

Pauly, Rough day for me outside of the market but somehow your post made me smile. Cheers. And WTF buy some damned prefs!

this thread = ambush