Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There is always a cost for subsidizing risk.

You shift the demand curve, but not the supply curve, so now more money is chasing the same asset, so buyers pay more and sellers benefit. Same as student loans.

You also increase money supply when taxpayers “eat” the loss for defaulted loans, lowering the purchasing price of the currency in general.

Finally, the decision makers can overshoot or undershoot how much to move the demand curves, resulting in a misallocation of society’s resources. Again, see student loans and even home loans.



Only if you subsidize it below the expected value of return.

Market rates are very different. There are a host of middle men making massive profits on loans. This is why there is an industry around it.

If you offer non-profit loans at break even cost, this is much lower than a company with higher overhead and a profit margin


>Only if you subsidize it below the expected value of return.

I do not see how anyone could know this, since it requires predicting economic conditions 30 years in the future. The government is guessing just as much as a non taxpayer funded lender would, except the government does not have to worry about running out of cash.


Even if it is unknowable, there is still the other factors I mentioned.

1) The government doesnt need to make a profit 2) The government has access to capital at a lower rate.

Put together, it should be clear that they could buy or back a mortgage at a rate below breakeven in the private market.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: