Casey Mulligan diagnosis the situation, taking off from this discussion by Stan Liebowitz.
What do you think? Does this evidence lend more support to the thesis that what the financial situation represents is a credit crunch or a insolvency crisis?
« One More Working Paper on Business Cycle Theory | Main | Can the Monetary System Regulate Itself? »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451eb0069e2011571b2cf3f970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What is really behind foreclosures?:
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Boettke & Aligica: Challenging Institutional Analysis and Development: The Bloomington School
Peter T. Leeson: The Invisible Hook: The Hidden Economics of Pirates
Philippe Lacoude and Frederic Sautet (Eds.): Action ou Taxation
David Prychitko: Markets, Planning and Democracy: Essays After the Collapse of Socialism
David Prychitko: Marxism and Workers' Self-Management: The Essential Tension
David Prytchitko: Why Economists Disagree: An Introduction to the Alternative Schools of Thought
Steven Horwitz: Microfoundations and Macroeconomics: An Austrian Perspective
Peter Boettke: The Political Economy of Soviet Socialism: the Formative Years, 1918-1928
Peter Boettke: Calculation and Coordination: Essays on Socialism and Transitional Political Economy
Peter Boettke & Peter Leeson (Eds.): The Legacy of Ludwig Von Mises
Peter Boettke: Why Perestroika Failed: The Politics and Economics of Socialist Transformation
Paul Heyne, Peter Boettke, & David Prychitko : The Economic Way of Thinking (11th Edition)
Peter Boettke (Ed.): The Elgar Companion to Austrian Economics
Pete,
Is the moral dimension not even a consideration? Have Ends come to rule our behavior?
Are economic man and moral man no longer compatible? ed
Posted by: e weick | July 04, 2009 at 11:04 PM
The problem, of course, is that mortgage lenders no longer require 20% down payments. I suspect that all or most banks were bullied into making this change by threat of prosecution for racism under the "Community Redevelopment Act" (and similar laws in the UK and Europe).
The argument that people are morally obligated to keep paying their mortgages if they possibly can is beside the point. It is simply unrealistic to expect someone who is "underwater" to keep paying if bankruptcy (or better yet, simply walking away from a nonrecourse mortgage) is a legal option.
(To those who do so expect, I must ask, would you abolish bankruptcy and go back to selling debtors into slavery? Because that's the only way I can see that your moral view can possibly be enforced.)
Posted by: John David Galt | July 07, 2009 at 04:50 PM