Because it is not a evenly distributed phenomena across the nation, these risky loans are heavily concentrated in certain areas of the country, areas that tend to have heavier LOCAL building restrictions which have constrained the supply of housing causing the cost of housing to skyrocket far faster than in other areas, and guess what, most--if not all--of these areas are run by liberals...or are you suggesting that San Francisco is a hotbed of right-wing conservativism?

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Actually, I listen to 3 far left FM public radio stations almost everyday. So I get a good does of news and opinion from leftist sources. I also read (not the entire paper of course but articles of interest) the NYTimes and Washpost and prefer CNN over Fox news as I dislike the way they present the news.

Kramer

__________________
“It's time to admit that public education operates like a planned economy, a bureaucratic system in which everybody's role is spelled out in advance and there are few incentives for innovation and productivity. It's no surprise that our school system doesn't improve; it more resembles the communist economy than our own market economy."
Albert Shanker, former president of the American Federation of Teachers

This may have come about from the "The Community Reinvestment Act" of 1977.

I just read today that some economic experts say that we may see the worst recession since the 1930's. I hope they have greatly overestimated the negative fallout from the subprime mess.


Kramer

__________________
“It's time to admit that public education operates like a planned economy, a bureaucratic system in which everybody's role is spelled out in advance and there are few incentives for innovation and productivity. It's no surprise that our school system doesn't improve; it more resembles the communist economy than our own market economy."
Albert Shanker, former president of the American Federation of Teachers

I think many have been vastly understimating the tremendous resiliance and underlying strength that has been the foundation of this country's economy since the Reagan tax cuts. And for the record, there has seldom been a day in the last 25 years were some doom and gloomer economic "experts" were predicting the imminent near collapse of our entire economy...kinda like the malthusian/environmental wackos who are constantly predicting calamity around the corner...and yet we just keep going strong and getting better an better.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Wow.

Whatever you're smoking, make sure to pass it down the line.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

Smoking freedom and capitalism baby! The last 25 years since the Reagan tax cuts have seen unprecedented growth and prosperity with only two very mild recessions (the last one not even decisively a "recession" it was so shallow as to be within the margin of computational error). By almost every major forward looking indicator we are in fantastic shape. So strong has been our economy that the left has had to invent new concepts of "misery" out of their asses:

- "Jobless recovery" (a lie obfuscating the fact that what we really had was a virtually job loss-less "recession" with unemployment peaking at its lowest level of any downturn in history)

- "growth recession" ( to call periods of growth which are NOT recessions a "recession")

And let's not forget that:

- Deficit has steadily declined since the full phase-in of the Bush tax cuts (if they were responsible for the deficits, shouldn't the deficits have INCREASED as the tax cuts were phased in?
- Interest rates were supposed to skyrocket as a result of higher deficits, yet interest rates are still near historic lows by any long-term measure
- Unemployment near historic lows
- Inflation - mild bump due to excess liquidity which was mopped up over a year ago, now core inflation is well in check
- Productivity gains FANTASTIC!
- Home ownership near historic highs! And even if the worst case scenarios in the houseing market comes to pass, we will still have home ownership rates (a fantastic indicator of long-term prosperity) above what it was when Bush took office.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

The deficit is not including the 2T in war spending.

The Reagan tax cuts are responsible for the shrinking of the middle class and the drastic expansion of the gap between rich and poor.

The strength in this country came from two things: a strong middle class and our ingenuity. Reagan killed both, but we haven't seen the second part wholly yet. His cuts and devaluation of education will haunt us for at least another 20-30 years, if we do something about it now. Otherwise, it may very well be the downfall of this great nation.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

I'm curious what do you consider reasonable restrictions on building and what do you consider unreasonable ones?

Personally, I take advantage of green spaces and the pathway network in my city. I have lived in four different places and have never been more then a five minute bike from any of the pathways. I like knowing that industry will be a certain distance away and that people are not free to build a high-density housing complex across the street. If I did not value these things I would eventually choose to live somewhere where there were less restrictions.

I think it is bizarre to blame a lack of personal responsibility on something like this especially without looking at the benefits that such policies provide.

I assume your referring to the periodic "supplemental" appropriations for the war? Don't make the same utterly ignorant mistake that Americano made, which I corrected in the "National Debt Hits $9 Trillion - posting #13" thread that "supplemental" is the same as "off budget", it is not, the annual deficit calculations at the end of each fiscal year most definitely include every penny spent by the Federal Government, INCLUDING for the war. What the war supplementals are NOT included in is the beginning of the year official budget and multi-year PROJECTIONS. But despite the spending on the war the deficit HAS declined steadily since the phase in of the Bush tax cuts.

You see, the way the budget process works is that at some point prior to or early in a new fiscal year, the congress passes a series of primary "appropriations bills" each of which represents the bulk of the budget appropriations for the year for one or more cabinet departments. The official "budget" does not include even expected "supplementals" during the year in its projections.

Then, during the course of the year, congress continues to spend money, every spending bill for current spending (as opposed to entirely new programs like the Prescription Drug program) are called "supplemental" appropriations.

At the end of the fiscal year the government subtracts ALL the spending (regardless of whether it was in the official budget appropriations or from "supplemental" appropriations) from all revenues and that is the official deficit for the year.

So yes, EVEN with the spending on the war factored in, the deficit has plummetted.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Well, that depends entirely on the local market, and weighs in any number of factors. And I was not making any assessment as to whether or not I considered any particular restrictions "reasonable", I was merely pointing out that such restrictions have consequences (such as upward pressure on the cost of housing in an area) which those who want the restrictions should rightly accept responsibility for, rather than trying to point fingers at others.

The problem is, that people ALREADY living in areas who then seek to place additional limitations and restrictions on housing growth are not the ones who end up bearing the COST of those things, while receiving all the benefits (with the singular exception of escalating property taxes resulting from rapidly rising housing valuations).

Again, not assessing the "reasonableness" of any particular policy, merely pointing out that much of the CAUSE of the "problems" that so many on the left are bemoaning and suggesting all manner of ill-conceived government "solutions" for are actually perfectly predicatable results of existing government policies.

Don't blame mortgage lenders for people being forced into exotic mortgage products just to be able to afford homes anywhere remotely near where they work and currently live (for non-previous owners), when it is the overall public policy in those areas CAUSING the unaffordability in the first place.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Risky loans are concentrated in the areas where most of the loans are being made. Areas where the price of housing has been increasing rapidly, in other words areas where housing is in high demand, and yes these rapidly growing areas do tend to enact the most greenspace type zoning restrictions.

But I think you are confusing the effect with the cause, there are cities and towns that haven't set aside new parks and enacted restrictive zoning laws recently, place like Detroit, where there is an abundance of cheap housing, because the area is losing jobs and population.
In places like Silicon Valley, where there is a huge housing demand, because the area is producing job growth and attracting new residents with good pay, there is a shortage of housing, prices skyrocket, and the growth creates problems which local zoning changes address.

Sowell is seeing the link between bandaids and cuts, and making the assumption that bandaids cause cuts, because he looks at the world through ideologically filtered glasses.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

In absolute numbers yes, but they are disproportionately concentrated (rather predictably) in areas with higher property appreciation rates. A far greater percentage of total loans in those areas are "risky" or relatively exotic forms of loans.


Where it is easier to build new homes, supply rises to help meet demand far better than in areas where such building faces higher regulatory hurdles.

No, Sowell is applying basic logic and common sense where peopel with ideological filters have utterly irrational and disjointed thinking about cause and effect.

In areas where for a variety of reasons there are greater restrictions on building and development of residential real estate, supply has a harder time keeping up with rising demand, therefore under the basic law of supply and demand (ECON101), the causes prices to rise. It isn't rocket science, it isn't even terribly complicated economics.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

In case anyone is even remotely curious, the housing price bubble in the USA is consistent and contemporaneous with the housing price bubbles in England and Australia and half the western world.

Ergo, arguing that US domestic politics is causing the sub-prime mortgage meltdown is utterly without merit. Indeed, such an argument can only be dismissed as vehemently partisan, or entirely fact-free and agenda-driven.

Btw, it is Florida that (currently) has the most bubble-inflated housing prices. And we all know that Florida is a hotbed of housing activists pushing for wildly expensive building code requirements!

Colorado, Nevada and Arizona, are next in line. They too obviously have wild reputations for heavy bureaucratic red-tape and extreme consumer protection activists pumping up their building code!



As for the sub-prime mortgage issue, there is some very interesting data coming out right now about who is pushed for sub-prime mortgages. Here's a hint, it has little to do with income level or credit history and lots to do with sex or skin color...

And it is interesting to note that the Federal Reserve is running to the rescue of the poor capitalists here who financed these poor sub-prime mortgages and are left holding the bag for their ill-advised investments. Can't have capitalists subject to risk now can we?

Don't confuse common causes with common cause. Overly restrictive local zoning laws and residential home construction regulations are not unique to this country. That this is a common problem in many industrialized nations doesn't contradict the point. I think you will find that in those countries, just as in this one, skyrocketing housing prices are disproportionatly concentrated in areas of more restrictive new residential housing construction. That is why some areas of are fine while others are not.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Bullshit.



The national debt has skyrocketed under Bush, just like it did under Reagan. The only time it started to decrease was under Clinton.


I noticed you dodged my other points. can't refute them, can you?

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears