Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by uiri 3110 days ago
It doesn't have to literally be equivalent to paying off people's mortgages for them. It could have been in the form of buying up housing that was in default or foreclosed upon. The government was in the perfect position to profit off of the crisis while allowing people to keep living in their homes. I realize this is simplistic because of the unemployment associated with the crisis, but a 12 or 18 month lease with discounted rent would have been one potential solution. The government would be unloading the housing stock 3-5 years later, depending on when it looked like the market was starting to recover but not all at once so as not to flood the market.
1 comments

why would the government need to profit ? they could evem do it in a loss
Any alternative scheme to the bailout ought to cost less than the bailout. I am under the impression that they profited from the bailout but if that's not the case, then they could do it at a loss so long as the loss is smaller than the bailout loss. And both of these profit/loss comparisons would be based off of projections rather than what actually happened.