Comments on "Are the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) justified?"

Ingrid Gould Ellen, Mark Willis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In "Are the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) Justified?" the authors conclude that the benefits delivered by the GSEs (as structured prior to conservatorship) are minimal and do not exceed their costs. While many of the arguments made in the article have merit and raise serious questions about the structure of the GSEs prior to 2008, the article overlooks several important benefits and costs. More significantly, no one is arguing for a return of the GSEs as they were structured prior to conservatorship. Rather than debate the merits of a model that has already been rejected by policymakers, we argue that the far more important question is what the housing finance market should look like in the future.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)149-152
Number of pages4
JournalHousing Policy Debate
Volume22
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2012

Fingerprint

housing finance
costs
cost
finance
housing
market

Keywords

  • Government-sponsored enterprises
  • Housing finance
  • Mortgage-backed securities
  • Secondary market

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Development
  • Urban Studies
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Comments on "Are the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) justified?". / Ellen, Ingrid Gould; Willis, Mark.

In: Housing Policy Debate, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2012, p. 149-152.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a1b868a74f58405d8c656bbde9014aed,
title = "Comments on {"}Are the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) justified?{"}",
abstract = "In {"}Are the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) Justified?{"} the authors conclude that the benefits delivered by the GSEs (as structured prior to conservatorship) are minimal and do not exceed their costs. While many of the arguments made in the article have merit and raise serious questions about the structure of the GSEs prior to 2008, the article overlooks several important benefits and costs. More significantly, no one is arguing for a return of the GSEs as they were structured prior to conservatorship. Rather than debate the merits of a model that has already been rejected by policymakers, we argue that the far more important question is what the housing finance market should look like in the future.",
keywords = "Government-sponsored enterprises, Housing finance, Mortgage-backed securities, Secondary market",
author = "Ellen, {Ingrid Gould} and Mark Willis",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1080/10511482.2012.656473",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "149--152",
journal = "Housing Policy Debate",
issn = "1051-1482",
publisher = "Taylor Graham Publishing",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comments on "Are the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) justified?"

AU - Ellen, Ingrid Gould

AU - Willis, Mark

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - In "Are the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) Justified?" the authors conclude that the benefits delivered by the GSEs (as structured prior to conservatorship) are minimal and do not exceed their costs. While many of the arguments made in the article have merit and raise serious questions about the structure of the GSEs prior to 2008, the article overlooks several important benefits and costs. More significantly, no one is arguing for a return of the GSEs as they were structured prior to conservatorship. Rather than debate the merits of a model that has already been rejected by policymakers, we argue that the far more important question is what the housing finance market should look like in the future.

AB - In "Are the Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) Justified?" the authors conclude that the benefits delivered by the GSEs (as structured prior to conservatorship) are minimal and do not exceed their costs. While many of the arguments made in the article have merit and raise serious questions about the structure of the GSEs prior to 2008, the article overlooks several important benefits and costs. More significantly, no one is arguing for a return of the GSEs as they were structured prior to conservatorship. Rather than debate the merits of a model that has already been rejected by policymakers, we argue that the far more important question is what the housing finance market should look like in the future.

KW - Government-sponsored enterprises

KW - Housing finance

KW - Mortgage-backed securities

KW - Secondary market

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84868115898&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84868115898&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10511482.2012.656473

DO - 10.1080/10511482.2012.656473

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 149

EP - 152

JO - Housing Policy Debate

JF - Housing Policy Debate

SN - 1051-1482

IS - 2

ER -