2005 Accountability Public Policy 
The Stoop (NYU Furman Center)
MARCH 4, 2024
As GSEs, they were highly limited in their permitted activities but given a preferred market position, along with the subsidies and privileges needed to deliver a public policy benefit to the public. As an example of their lobbying power, in 2004 and 2005 the George W. More political than commercial.
The Stoop (NYU Furman Center)
MARCH 10, 2023
taxpaying public. 12 This means that the taxpayers are now officially (again, using FHFA calculations) earning a sub-standard return on their investment, providing what amounts to a large, hidden, and never-congressionally-approved economic subsidy to the GSEs, 13 which is not good public policy. Also, the 0.10 See [link].
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Public Policy Blog
JUNE 16, 2013
Government decision makers should take these swarms and their access to democratized digital technologies into account in future planning scenarios” (p. Retrieved from h ttp://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/documented_briefings/2005/RAND_DB311.pdf. Arquilla, John, and David Ronfeldt, eds., Arquilla, John and Ronfeldt, David.
The Stoop (NYU Furman Center)
MAY 31, 2023
This was described on the one hand as unfair, since it relied on overcharging low-risk borrowers “who had played by all the rules” and, on the other hand, as unduly incenting bad loans at the GSEs (by charging too little for high-risk loans) in a quasi-replay of the lead up to the mortgage bubble of 2005 to 2008.
Public Policy Blog
JANUARY 3, 2014
These pages, open to anyone with a Facebook account, include ‘friends’ not only from one’s home country or state, but from throughout the world. In classic accounts, the problem of achieving effective coordination within movements was so great as to be central to the structuring of activism (Vragra, 2013).
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
88 
Let's personalize your content