lehman brothers, everybody knew lehman brothers and they didn't make it.s important to remember that criminal activity on wall street led to the 2008 collapse. everyone who fell on tough times had these guys to blame. meanwhile, the government didn't prosecute anybody on wall street. hell, we helped them out. we bailed these anyways out with a big check. you taxpayers out there. me, included. on october 3, 2008, our government bailed out the financial system. president obama signed the emergency economic stabilization act of 2008. he had to do it. the bailout provided $700 billion of your taxpayer money to wall street big banks plus much more was spent in the following months and thankfully it worked. basically, this is what we did so they could open their doors and function the next day. we did that. the economy since then has seen 54 straight months of private sector job growth. over 10 million private sector jobs have been added and that's a turnaround. wall street is doing better than ever and yeah, we've had a couple of rocky days and the dow jones hi

six years after lehman brothers collapsed, the financial war games. we begin this news hour with breaking news from baghdad. there have been three bombings, one of them a suicide attack that has killed at least 30 people. on mainly shia neighborhoods and follow a string of similar attacks on recent days. al jazeera's imran khan is on the phone from baghdad. what do we know? >> reporter: let me give you the latest figures. these bombings took place, first one cardamia northern baghdad, nine were killed there and 22 were injured and then a suicide bomber blew himself up driving a car in a car showroom, at least 15 people killed there and 32 were injured and then there was an improvised explosive device in a very crowded marketplace in sadr city. they wait until people are out doing their late night shopping going to restaurants et cetera. these attacks are designed to strike panic and fear into people. this is a pattern we have seen increase over the last few months and especially the last few weeks. when we are seeing i.s.i.l. squeezed in areas three t

. >> hee lehman brothers in 2008 went bust. officials at u.s. federal reserve by cutting the interest rate to almost zero. that wasn't enough to help the economy. so they upped the antewith unconventional measures. they had already been buying up mortgage backed securities and started acquiring long term government bonds. these kept on buying them. it was last year the american economy started to recover. person spending and housing sales picked up. in june, the fred chairman made announcement that surprised everyone. >> if the data a is broadly consistent with this forecast, the committee anticipates it would be appropriate to mad rat monthly purchases later this year. >> the message through global markets entered confusion. investors started shipping out of emerging economies and back to the u.s. volatility in financial markets made officials more careful about how to phase out monetary stimulus measures. another six months passed before they decided it was time to start scaling back. since then, they've been steadily winding down size of thei

when everything hit the fan, lehman brothers, they were saved, as we know, lehman brothers was the next one up, decision made not to save it. we can talk about whether they could or couldn't and legalities and all that stuff. in your opinion is that right decision? the aig crisis came right after. so lehman brothers handled right, handled wrong? >> i think handled right. they made the call they could at the time. every financial institution would encounter the reckless behavior and the government made the decision that has been second-guessed many times. i was sleeping on my couch, working continuously for six weeks. you are making hundreds of decisions everyday.

lehman brothers, bear stearns had been saved as we know. lehman brothers wa the next one up. decision was made not to save it. we can talk about whether they could have and the legalities and all the stuff but in your mind, was that the right decision as we know when lehman fell, the aig crisis came immediately after, t.a.r.p., a lot of the other things. so lehman brothers handled right, handled wrochk? >> you know, i think it was handled right. i think they made the call with the facts at the time which was essentially that this government should not be the full symptom for every financial institution out there, which would encourage the kind of reckless behavior that we were trying to to avoid. i think the government was making a statement, a courageous statement that has been second-guessed many times. i lived through the financial crisis as you did. i was sleeping on the couch in my office many nights. we were working you know continuously for six weeks. you were making hundreds of decisions every day. and for the way the government stepped in at that point, listen, you c

when everything hit the fan, lehman brothers, they were saved, as we know, lehman brothers was the next one up, decision made not to save it. we can talk about whether they could or couldn't and legalities and all that stuff. in your opinion is that right decision? the aig crisis came right after. so lehman brothers handled right, handled wrong? >> i think handled right. they made the call they could at the time. every financial institution would encounter the reckless behavior and the government made the decision that has been second-guessed many times. i was sleeping on my couch, working continuously for six weeks. you are making hundreds of decisions everyday.

lehman brothers gets its start as let's call it a sort of a pop-up firm that comes into into the south with a little bit of capital after the panic of 1837 and 1839 nobody down there has much liquid capital. although the guys that are running the cotton mills in mobile have gone broke because they had so many deaths and so many complex financial and germans etc. and just stopped buying cotton. from there they gave ultimately get into other things. they come into being because of one financial disaster and they perish and another one is created by somewhat similar methods. >> a question here. >> hi. what do you think is behind the nature desire to empathize with enslavers that seems to crop up from time to time in presenting their view as being equal with activity while presenting the enslavers view as more objective than the slaves? >> and about 1835, there is a slave narratives that appears right about the same time as charles ball's narrative and people were able to authenticate a lot of details about charles ball but this other narrative written by a guy named james williams man he

to where are they now files, it has been six years from anybody heard from the former ceo of lehman brothers, the investment bank that collapsed at the height of financial crisis. he is reportedly back and doing deals again. his new firm, matrix advisers is advising a company called match holdings to acquire the stock exchange, they shut down in may because of trading activity, but they are helping match to reopen. >>> and a number of people on the stand in hank greenberg's trial against the government over the terms of the insurance giant's bailout. tim geithner ended his testimony, while former reserve chairman ben bernanke began his. mary thompson has more from federal claims court in washington. mary, what happened in court today? >> reporter: well, you know, it was interesting to watch ben bernanke's testimony today, tyler, because he appeared vaguely annoyed and slightly combative when he took the witness stand. he replied to the questions with curt answers like yes, sir, and i don't recall. but he did defend the government's actions with the aig bailout saying the tough terms of the p

here we are six years after lehman brothers filed and still very fragile. >> you can see the entire interviewight at 7:00 and 10:00 new york time here on bloomberg. next guest says the dovish comments have stabilized risk asset. alex young is an investment strategist at oppenheimer funds in new york and joins me from his firm's headquarters. welcome back and good to see you. we have had a wild ride the past couple of days. esther bullard telling our economics editor that the lightning the end of the bond purchase program would halt a decline in text based -- in inflation expectations. >> i am not surprised it has stabilize the markets. i am not sure how much extending and tapering can do, given how long it has been going on. i think a lot of investors have other are expecting voting members will allude to either extending the tapering or throw commentary out there that gets people less concerned about rate hikes in 2015, pushing out expectations. the consensus expectation for the first rate hike for the later part of 2015. but -- but a little bit of floor underneath that. >> the markets are a

there is not bear stearns or lehman brothers to hold securities. it is a game of hot potato and they are more security and when one wants to go to sell, it can be difficult. >> you just used the term in times of stress. times you define in of stress? >> it is when they determine what the equity ratio to be. >> is that when they see fundamentals changing? >> it is in part fundamental and psychological, too. was year, ben bernanke indicating that there would be a tapering of the fed's bond buying. there was a paper tantrum. investors, speculators, their fromd to show this, went long to short the bond market. ever since last summer, positions only grew and grew and grew. there are various ways to measure this. there was a massive short base treasuryr the 10-year got out of its 2.5, three % range that existed for near a 3% range that existed for a year. and itlt a lot of pain was time to get out. it became psychological. a classic capitulation trade. >> so, we have so many geopolitical crises at the same time. how should fixed income investors be posit

s bankruptcy could have been more damaging than the lehman brothers failure. what were the reasons? >> he was concerned because lehman failed and fanny may and freddy mac had been taken into conservativeship, he had a set of dominoes starting to fall, and a.i.g. is the biggest insurance company in the world. you'd have the two largest guarantors of mortgages in the united states, the biggest investment bank going down in sequence. it was a time to try to build a firewall or to stop the damage. >> i want to go through a line of questioning. hank greenberg's attorney had questions, there was a meeting in 2008, and the a.i.g. bailout was discussed and approved by the fed board of governor's, what did he want to know and how did geithner respond. >> he was interesting in knowing - a key question, element, is the interest rate that a.i.g. is charged for the bailout loan. it is effectively 14%, according to the complaint by the a.i.g. openers bringing the case, which is higher, three or four times or more than the interest rates charged to investment banks who were in trouble at the same

lehman brothers had gone into bankruptcy the day before, and fannie mae and freddie mac has gone intorvatorship earlier, and hank pahlsson -- they all testified that they were worried about harm to the overall economic system. >> it has been a who is who on the stand. i want you to tell me about edward quince. >> yeah, that's just apparently the way of reducing the amount of email. this is a way of reducing the amount of email that bernanke got by having certain people in the no. send an email to edward quince, so he kind of had a smother email traffic. >> so ben bernanke, aka edward quince. >> that's right. >> andrew thank so much. >> thank you. bye-bye. >>> coming up big spendingers are getting into small town politics. plus what is tesla's man of mystery have up his sleeve? we'll tell you. ♪ >>> n wa wa stat jshgs rich doen ar s snchl [ technical difficulties ] >> some experts estimate up to $2 billion could be spending in outside money during this election season. well, america's first name in online shopping reportedly plans to open a real store. the wall street journal says the

incorrect or inconvenient to admit it but there's a certain reality and that is this, unlike lehman brothers this is an organization that is too big to fail. differences with respect to iran strategically, with respect to america's concept of a two state solution versus netanyahu' but none of this really matters. because in the ends for many reasons, including value affinity, domestic politics and the reality that no president unless there is sufficient reason, will willfully pick a fight with the israelis. >> there was one thing that came out of these discussions that i thought was interesting, is that netanyahu brought up the possibilities of aligning with moderate arab states, bringing moderate arab states into the peace process. that's something i haven't heard before because he thinks their interests have alined much more than in the past. do you think that's an idea that would ever fly? >> it's a movie that has been playing for avery long time. if the government was willing to endorse the peace initiative it's not a road map but a set of principles, into the legitimate peace process an

the government could let it go into bankruptcy, which is what happened to lehman brothers, very messyss. or they could bail the company out with taxpayer money. and people were very worried that a that would give banks a sense to take risks. and at least now something is written down that would give the government the authority to take over the bank, keep the good parts running and wind down the things that are sick and ailing and hopefully not poison the entire economy. >> this is different from the stress tests. stress tests were designed to say if certain economic changes happen are these banks healthy enough to stay afloat. this is if we have to actually shut this bank down. >> right. now the aniedal reserve does a stress test. they do that twice a year, and you may remember that citigroup famously failed back in march. and there are some examiners going into the banks and saying is there enough to survive. so what happened today is a little different because it's global. you have the top regulators from the u.k. and u.s. talking to each other, and that is really important because

prior to the crisis they were number one -- was number two to lehman brothers ranking and the combination of j.p. morgan and bear stoerns has been strong. >> matthew boss. i mentioned he was among the top of the list. matthew congratulations to be named to the list. >> thanks a lot. >> people are obviously going to listen to what you have to say on retail going forward. just a couple months ahead of the holiday shopping season. what is you outlook. >> i think it is going to be a stable holiday. it's not going block bluster, i don't think but also not as as bad tot choppy trading over last couple of months. i also think athletic is going to be the category. health and well nts so we like nike and foot locker in that space as well. >> i agree on macy's, and you had today as opposed to prior years one of the retail associations come out and actually increase their forecast for retail sales this holiday season. we get what you say, but what do you think the expectations are from the vast number of clients that you talk to? >> institutional investors we talk to, i think the successi discretion

unlike lehman brothers, the u.s. relationship is too big to failment regardless of the dysfunction that exists at the top, differences over issues, tactically with respect to iran, strategically with respect to america's conception of a 2-state solution, versus binyamin netanyahu's. none of this matters. in the end, for many regions, including domestic politics and the reality that no president, unless there is sufficient reason, will wilfully pick a fight with the israelis. >> there was one that came out of the discussions that i thought was interesting, was that binyamin netanyahu brought up the penalty of aligning with moderate arab states, bringing them into the peace process. that's something i have not heard before, because they think the interests have eye lined. do you think that's a good idea, or an idea that would even nigh? >> it's a movie that has been played for a long time. it's a series of principles, not a blueprint or a roadmap. if the government of israel wanted to bring the arab world into a legiti

david einhorn unveiled short on lehman brothers in 2008 at the robin hood conference.t's interesting is carl is there, carl is going to battle larry fink. they're going to have a debate over activist investing. larry fink is the ceo of black rock. carl does his thing. larry is critical of activist investing. i said to myself, who's right in the battle right now? i like what carl does, but his record hasn't been very good lately. what's interesting, i thought to myself, would carl icahn the activist investor be protesting his own record? if he was a public company and investing in it. i think yes. and you look at aside from his apple investment, he's done very well with apple. liz: and forest labs. >> paypal, very good. rig, not very good. liz: transocean. >> not very good. herbalife, so far this year, horrendous, ackman is on the right side of that one. and the biggest one of all, i think is netflix. we should take a look at stock chart of netflix. this is fascinating he's taken a huge loss. netflix plunged more than 20%. liz: where did he buy it? i guess the question,

communication and excellence this was lehman brothers. [laughter] >> were you in the meeting when i first saw this but i thought this is a stupid marketing phrase that conversation about a product the boundary halfway through they'd basically said that is evil in the conversation stopped i thought oh my god. after link the hour of debate it was agreed to not move forward. then it gave this particular engine your a moral question to ask about his actions. >> host: my favorite was when h.r. had the culture meeting polling old-timers together to say don't the evil that was number six. someone said you cannot have of negative corporate value. can you rephrase back? to good. >> you can have fun without bring a suit. the first mine was to focus on. >> we talk about this and the book with a framing principal if you look at the challenges a corporation faces today we retreat successfully doing it for the end user we can get through anything. >> host: one of the things i learned a long subway that was tactical was meetings. jonathan and i and all

getting a call from somebody we all know and love and saying there will be an orderly bankruptcy of lehman brothers this weekend and then, of course, aig became a huge story. but today hank paulson, did he say i don't recall? >> you know, he didn't. hank paulson, we should point out, former ceo of goldman sachs, took goldman public, became the treasury secretary for president bush back in 2006, a job that he really didn't want at first. bush had to coax him to take it, and he was considered a very good ceo of goldman sachs. but he did take it eventually, and he was right in the middle of the financial crisis. there were three major players all giving testimony this week, powerfulson today -- pretty quick, about an hour or two -- geithner will probably be tomorrow, bernanke will be after that. you know, here's the thing, and i'll say this again, you know, he said some interesting things. he said -- remember, hank greenberg's lawsuit, which this is about, against the federal government, it was that the terms imposed on aig were harsher than the firms -- liz: higher interest rates. >> government wiped

had not been bailed out it would have caused a massive global emplosion, way more damaging than lehman brothershank greenberg told you had he been given the chance he would have amassed money, whether from southern france or chinese money, you know how good a friends he is with the chinese government. he could have done thissar aig and used aig as a sieve and that it was outright unfair. >> whether or not it was unfair, one of the worst financial panics. a panic with a possibility of producing a worse outcome than the crash of 1929. what the government really knew is they couldn't restore the economy without saving the major banks. no one can save an insurance company that is often in a different sector. unless banks start lending and you had to bail them out by any means necessary in order to get lending and business moving again. that's the rationale and it's the classic rationale that central banks used for 130 years. make money available in a crisis but charge a high hlt rate, and they did that. liz: we'll have you back, hank greenberg has to testify. a lot more to come. >> and nobody makes

. >> will lehman brothers sue them next week?agree with you. >> i think it is water under the bridge. >> i agree with you. no offense to hank. this is a very confusing time. sometimes you just throw money at things. melissa: yeah. as isis gains footing across syria, many are still questioning the effectiveness of our quote, coalition. even late-night tv is getting in on the joke. "piles of money" coming right up. >> mr. president, much has been made of the coalition you assembled but it sound like america is bearing the brunt of this campaign. >> hey, steve, that is just how we roll. we roll slow an deliberately. almost like we have no idea what we're rolling too. it's monday. a brand new start. your chance to rise and shine. with centurylink as your trusted technology partner, you can do just that. with our visionary cloud infrastructure, global broadband network and custom communications solutions, your business is more reliable - secure - agile. and with responsive, dedicated support, we help you shine every day of the week. c

they got paid off because lehman brothers was allowed to go bankrupt and no one would step in to saveat had a very negative effect on the economy. people stopped lending each other money and the economy was grinding to a halt. under the existing law there were two possibilities and either aig went bankrupt or the fed had to step in and pay those debts and under existing laws, the companies at aig had a legal right if they didn't ago bankrupt, that's something we changed. in the future if you deal with one of those big companies, the federal government if it has to step in will give you some repayment, but not all. they did not have that option. so they required that everyone would be paid in full. that was the result of the legal structure at the time which has now been amended. >> it's a detail at times and as for the law you're referencing, paul drugman did a victory lap saying it went a long way. >> i can make one other point? >> in ten seconds, go ahead. >> aig in 2009 had paid bonuses to the very people who had caused the crisis. one of the worst outrages we've seen and this was

bernanke and certainly paulson and geithner did not believe there was legal authority to save lehman brothers>> so there is a structure that would make it better and make it possible to have a much more effective response, a lot depends, right f if next financial crisis happens when president cruz and ron paul are running, but the tools are there for a good administration to do a much better job. again,. >> rose: a perfect but better, imperfect but better tools. >> yes. even when fdr did social security, he onlyovered half the workforce, he didn't include healthcare, which upset a lot of people. presidents who appear in the rear-view mirror to have been great and transformative even if they were often appear to have done only a half job when they were in office, so when you say, oh, we haven't gotten everything we wanted from obama, a lot shorter of what we wanted but we got a lot more than from anybody since lbj and lbj, you know -- so that makes him a big died den deal as president. >> rose: so what do you think of this lawsuit in washington in which .. hang greenberg is suing. >> unbelieva

trying to -- we were reacting -- remember, this is -- the bail out began on september 16th, 2008, lehman brothers failed, gone in to bankruptcy the day before. and fannie mae and freddie mac had gone in to conservatorship by the u.s. government a few days earlier. so that was real panic in the air and bernanke, geithner and henry paulson, hank paulson the former treasury secretary all testified that they were worried about harm to the overall economic system. >> it's been a real who's who having everybody on the stand, you ever paulson and quite they are and bernanke. i want to to tell me about the new star we didn't even know about, this guy edward quince, can you tell me about him? >> reporter: yeah, that's just a -- apparently a way of reducing the amount of e-mail the way it was remember explained in court it was the way of reduction the amount of email bernanke got by having certain people in the know send an e-mail to edward quince so that way he had a smoother e-mail traffic. >> so ben enter back i aka edward quince now we all know. >> reporter: right. >> andrew, legal reporter bloomberg n

they had two options let if go in to bankruptcy which is what happened to lehman brothers, very messi a lot of people lost their jobs or bail the company out with taxpayer money and that was very unpopular and people were really worried that that was going to give banks a sense of, you know, over confidence to take risks. so since then dodd frank legislation passed in 2010 to outline a methodology for an orderly winding down of a failing bank. and it hasn't been tested yet but at least something is written down that would give the government the authority to take over the bank, keep the good parts running, and wind down the things that are sick and ailing and hopefully not poison the entire economy. >> this is different from the stress test that we saw. the dress tested were designed toe say if certain economic conditions changed are these banks healthy enough to stay float. this is a different game. this is a if we have to actually shut this bank down. >> right. what would happen? so right now the federal deserve does a stress test of all the american banks, they do that twice a year

yesterday we saw the biggest move since the lehman brothers collapse. where do we go from here?ah. well, first of all, yesterday was absolutely epic. the volatility that we witnessed yesterday was really off the charts. it was over a six sigma event. i think that's really important. i think it really speaks to the skittishness in the market and the positioning in the market. so i think that's a really important baseline to start with. as far as yields are concerned though, i really don't see yields moving dramatically higher from here. we've been long duration for most of the year. we're kind of flattish now but we think bigger opportunities is in the spread markets more so than the treasury market. >> you don't see yields going much higher. do you see them going much lower? >> well, you know, what i think the bias is there more than rates moving higher. i think it's a harder call now than it was but i see a bias towards lower yields than higher yields. more importantly what i see happening in the market is pricing out the rate hikes. so the market moves on bullard's comments to

. >> that era basically takes place with a recession or major bank going over like lehman brothers inshale and oil production is a very positive trend for us, but not a free market because sooner or later, if it goes below 80 bucks, people, saudi arabia stops producing, people stop drilling. we're stuck. >> we're stuck, but probably stuck in a range that's going to be much better than what we lived with the past four years. the cheapest since 2010, paying 2.70 in 2010 and so we're not going back to that. you know, the price of finding oil on the margins overseas is $80 a barrel. getting close to that now. consumers have to recognize is stop recognizing to the notary public sense of $5 or $6 in the middle east events. if we have that, it's because we raise revenue from a fuel tax, not because of wholesale prices. we produce too much more oil, and that's going to continue to ramp up unless we see a decline to $60 a barrel. >> does that mean opec is broken? >> you know, they have been broken. broken on the way up. they did not regulate things, and they are ineffective on the way up. opec

asia did this in the first four years following the collapse of lehman brothers. the u.s.owhere. japan went nowhere. in that first four-year period, asia cap going up and up. in the process, it puts an entire germany on the map right here. asia will slow down. it will continue to slow down. it doesn't take four years anymore to do that. the base gets bigger. today, asia put a germany on the map in 3-5 -- 3.5 years. it is all about trade. when you talk about asean and hong kong, it is all trade flows. all of a sudden about inter-asian trade isn't really inter-asian trade. are you still confident with that? >> absolutely. we are getting strong flows. hong kong is in the middle of it. the stuff may be touches hong kong's soil if you want to go that far. it isn't the sense of what you normally think of. a country wants to produce this and sell it here. in hong kong, it is the import-export trade. that is where the value added comes from. if you look at exports in the traditional sense, domestic inputs and domestic labor and getting jobs that way, that is not the way it works f

. >> there was a recent story in the new york times suggesting lehman brothers the company was possiblyvent. you've done work on the company. do you think the company was solvent? >> no. at that moment, the company was not solvent. reality is everyone has revisionist history. conceivably five weeks later, it might have been solvent. no different than ber sterns weekend. people take things out of context. remember the week before secretary paulson basically put into receivership, following wednesday, lehman brothers was failing, and we were already engaged with aig, a huge impairment prior to announcement a week later, and there was the weekend, and, you know, the courts sometimes are not as p what i call straightforward as one thinks. i was pleased with the findings because the u.s. government was to stabilize a world that at the time, they did not want to have headlines of bankruptcies and did the best they can in a very troublesome times in a short time frame, and i think it's unfair the way some people in the private sector try to recant history, and i do believe secretary geithner t

>> as you know, six years ago, i was there for that infamous lehman brothers weekend.as one of the few executives called in that friday. we did not have the right tools than. the tools today are much better. whether you like every aspect of is hard towhich fathom something north of 10,000 pages. if you look at the principals and whether it is the systemic regulator or a derivative transparency or a living will for resolution authority, some of those things are incredibly needed. is, in a dynamic industry such as wall street community to be more principled than think you can put everything on a piece of paper. it's marked the places like goldman sachs and others are looking at conflict resolution. for myself, i have missed all the runs because i never invested in stocks because i/o is felt running the firm that i had information. the one time i did buy a stock, all of a sudden in asia, the stock went from x up fivefold and i could not sell it and it went down fivefold and you get your friends and family in and they ask what i should do and i said i don't know on the sto

just like if the wall street firms like lehman brothers did not have an appetite for no documentation loans -- too much appetite for yield, they believe that this market would never correct. that ultimately put millions of americans in jeopardy, losing their homes, damaging credit, and help to stimulate a broader recession. fannie and freddie are in conservatorship right now and we need to think about what that system should look like going forward to make sure that that can never be repeated. mortgage bankers have a role in the 2008 meltdown? guest: absolutely, no question about it. while the vast majority of these companies are no longer in business anymore, and their portfolios have been taken over by the remaining large financial institutions, companies like countrywide are gone, walkover you are gone, washington mutual are gone. let alone the wall street firms -- our industry really owns its share of responsibility, but is not limited to that. inre were programs created congress that motivated homeownership, programs that were completely unsustainable hfa.harm the f without quest

officials refused to save lehman brothers, setting off the biggest bankruptcy filing in u.s. history and triggering a word wild economic crisis. the regulators now have the tools to isolate another big bank collapse, and at minimal cost to the public. banes are now required to build up more of their own hard assets against in our outstanding loans and debts and need bankruptcy plans in place. bank executives are held personally responsible for reckless lending, even a few individuals behind the last meltdown have faced criminal charges. >> they got away with compensation packages, they got arm without sanction. maybe they weren't at the best table in society after that, but they were still at the best golf courses and on and on. that has to change. >> the international monetary fund warns of storm clouds ahead. if new financial bubbles suddenly burst. >> we're witnessing a return of risky behavior in marketing. asset valuations are at historically high levels, spreads and volatility are at all time lows, suggesting that there may be mispricing of risk. >> the financial sector

just like if the wall street firms like lehman brothers did not have an appetite for no documentationoans -- too much appetite for yield, they believe that this market would never correct. that ultimately put millions of americans in jeopardy, losing their homes, damaging credit, and help to stimulate a broader recession. fannie and freddie are in conservatorship right now and we need to think about what that system should look like going forward to make sure that that can never be repeated. mortgage bankers have a role in the 2008 meltdown? guest: absolutely, no question about it. while the vast majority of these companies are no longer in business anymore, and their portfolios have been taken over by the remaining large financial institutions, companies like countrywide are gone, walkover you are gone, washington mutual are gone. let alone the wall street firms -- our industry really owns its share of responsibility, but is not limited to that. inre were programs created congress that motivated homeownership, programs that were completely unsustainable hfa.harm the f without questio