I am against both ideas, but the latter one is far more acceptable, as Alan Greenspan points out:
Alan Greenspan said he could support the use of public cash to help struggling US homeowners on Sunday, in remarks likely to fuel growing political pressure for a more radical response to the housing crisis.
The former chairman of the Federal Reserve told ABC's This Week programme the least harmful way of intervening would be to give direct financial aid to distressed homeowners.
He appeared to criticise the plan brokered by Hank Paulson, US Treasury secretary, for an interest rate freeze on some subprime loans, warning that freezes would protract the crisis, not resolve it.
"Cash is available and we should use that in larger amounts, as is necessary, to solve the problems of the stress of this," Mr Greenspan said.
"It's far less damaging to the economy to create a short-term fiscal problem, which we would, than to try to fix the prices of homes or interest rates. If you do that, it'll drag this process out indefinitely."