That presumes there are no consequences to "let it crash". A programmer for a respiration system software would not necessarily "let it crash", as this could k

That presumes there are no consequences to "let it crash". A programmer for a respiration system software would not necessarily "let it crash", as this could kill someone. The same applies for institutions that back the global economy. Letting Freddie and Fannie crash meant that $5 trillion in mortgage-backed securities would evaporate. That would trigger a global depression on par with an asteroid crash or super volcano eruption. "The reasons that they left are so high level, they are meaningless." The article is pretty concrete as to its summary of the situation with the GSEs, and ended with a conclusion (with backing paper link) that they should be replaced by a private system. I'm not sure what more you'd want? "How was this published with any degree of sincerity?" I have the same question for your post. You come across as "I don't understand it, therefore it must be wrong/insincere". Could it be possible that they have an idea what they're doing, and you are not the target audience for this article?