This story about Fannie and Freddie has many interesting details (including the cost of cutting foreclosed lawns in AZ). Among those details is that the two entities (taxpayer supported) continue to favor ownership over rentership with taxpayer support--even beyond interest deduction. A good policy of redistribution? A doubtful policy of good money after bad?http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/20/business/20foreclose.html?hp"Fannie and Freddie are editing the results of the housing boom at public expense, removing owners who cannot afford their homes, reselling the houses at much lower prices and financing mortgage loans for the new owners.""Foreclosures punch holes in neighborhoods, so residents, community groups and public officials are eager to see properties reoccupied. But there also is concern that investors are buying many foreclosures as rental properties, making it harder for neighborhoods to recover."Real estate agents tend to favor investors because the sales close surely and quickly and there is the prospect of repeat business. But community advocates say that Fannie and Freddie have an obligation to sell houses to homeowners."