A foreclosure sign in Denver in a crumbling housing market. (AP photo)
 |
Inequality and the sub-prime crisis
ASK THIS | February 13, 2008
The press doesn't write much about inequality in America -- that would be class warfare, wouldn't it? But now Henry Banta asks if inequality and the enormous money explosion for the very rich since 1980 are reasons for the sub-prime mortgage crisis, or at least for its severity.
By Henry Banta
henrybanta@aol.com
There is an obvious question that is not being asked. Perhaps out of thoughtlessness, but perhaps out of fear of the answer.
It appears widely accepted that somewhere around 1980 the share of the gross domestic product going to a very small number of the very rich exploded and the share going to everybody else began to slide downward. It also seems widely accepted that the current financial crisis was precipitated by problems in the sub-prime mortgage market. Shouldn’t we be asking if there is a connection? Had the income of the bottom 20 percent been greater – for example, had it kept up with their increase in productivity – would we have a sub-prime mortgage crisis, or would it be as severe? Certainly the banks should not have lent all that money to a bunch of deadbeats. But why were there so many deadbeats in the first place?
For a couple of decades we heard that it was the “supply side” that mattered. Our prosperity depended on giving corporations and their shareholders the incentive to invest. Money in the hands of the consumer was wasted. Income redistribution was good as long as it was from bottom to the top. The poor wasted; the rich invested. The road to prosperity was simple: tax consumption; subsidize investment. Few reporters and editors – and few political leaders – ever questioned this principle, and, despite recent events, few are questioning it now.
For a long time it has been accepted wisdom that inequality is not an appropriate concern for economic policy. What mattered was business confidence. Any talk about inequality raised the specter of “class warfare” and could undermine investor confidence. It may be a matter of fairness, social justice, equity, and other mushy things that liberal politicians worry about, but not a matter to be discussed among serious people, much less a concern for economic policy. But now the tough, practical people are in a panic over whether the ordinary consumer will keep spending. There is an almost comic scramble to get a few hundred dollars in the hands of consumers in the fervent hope that they will quickly spend them.
The whole situation is ripe with irony. Were those who conjured up the idea of repackaging risky sub-prime mortgages as high-grade investments among the few whose income exploded while all the rest lost ground? Did they help create a system that socked it to the middle class and to those aspiring to be middle class, then lent them a lot of money they couldn’t pay back? Could it be that twenty years of stagnant wages, rising debt, and shrinking savings are threatening the very stability of the economy? Could it be that inequality was an important issue after all?
Where are Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, and Ronald Reagan to tell us it isn’t so?
|
|
Henry M. Banta is a partner in the Washington, DC, law firm of Lobel, Novins & Lamont. 
E-mail: henrybanta@aol.com
|
Social Class Indifference
Posted by
Hugh McGuire
-
02/19/2008, 08:00 AM
Lester Thurow, the MIT economist, said onetime that an advanced industrial economy could be maintained by solely catering to the needs of the upper middle class. This country was founded by the upper middle class for the upper middle class. Read the debate in the 1830s over granting universal male sufferage to see the resistance upper middle class people, John Adams, and so on, had toward the idea of allowing working class wage earners (wage slaves) to vote. It was felt that only people who earned their income from capital investments had the ability to make prudent judgments.
I think the greatest crime the upper middle class has committed against the working class has been their indifference to the education of working class people. Historically, American business has been idifferent to the education of their workers beyond what they minimally needed to know to perform their function.
The American working class has never been regarded as part of the polit. They were regarded siply as people who needed to be manipulated and controlled.
This has been our history, and we need to recognize the "reality" of our history before we can ever egin to think realistically about what we need to become a united nation
|
|
Bruce Kushnick questions whether AT&T and Verizon are trying to kill off the “plain old telephone service” that millions of Americans rely on. In a recent FCC filing cited by Kushnick, AT&T stated that landline utilities are from a bygone era, and asked to be relieved of its obligations to service them. 
The GAO showed that contractors’ estimates have nothing to do with reality, and economic hard times may eventually force the President and Congress to rein in outrageously costly warships, planes and missile systems that don’t work. But that time isn’t here yet.
It’s easy to find activism, impossible to find original intent behind the Roberts/Scalia group’s ruling on corporate political spending. Martin Lobel suggests six sharp, practical steps to deal with it.
|
As an old assignment editor I’m used to asking questions and not being embarrassed if they expose me as naïve or wrong minded, because sometimes there’s a good story lurking. So here are a few simple questions. The biggest financial institutions are said to be on the verge of issuing $145 billion in bonuses. My [...] 
A friend and contributor to Nieman Watchdog, Martin Lobel, sent this emaiI with the suggestion that people pass it along. Looks worth passing along to me. Here’s Marty:
“I don’t know whether you’re as upset with the Supreme Court’s legislating in Citizens United v. FEC as I am, but there is a simple solution that is [...]
Item: The New York Times reported Friday afternoon that “two more Democratic senators” said they would vote against a second term for Fed Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke. From there, the Times said this made it unclear “whether there were the 60 votes necessary to confirm Mr. Bernanke.”
Excuse me? Sixty votes are not necessary to [...]
Blog main page >>
|
| Leading journalism sites, blogs... |
|
|
|
TWITTER
Follow Nieman Watchdog on Twitter.
(Nieman Watchdog)
Torture probe abandoned
For lack of interest, the Senate will not move ahead on the idea to appoint a commission to investigate detention, rendition and interrogation policies by the U.S. during the George W. Bush administration.
(Secrecy News)
Find John Brennan's op ed
Harry Shearer, working from a fantasy assignment desk, wants reporters to find a 2005 anti-Iraq war op ed that never was published.
(Huffington Post)
Those Mohammed cartoons
On Jan 2 a man with an axe tried to attack the Danish artist whose 12 depictions of the prophet Mohammed created a furor in 2005. After the failed attack, a Norwegian newspaper reprinted six of the drawings.
(Editors Weblog)
Afghanistan surge to rely heavily on private contractors
Private contractors are expected to make up at least half of the total military workforce in Afghanistan, according to Defense Department officials cited in a recent study from the Congressional Research Service. The number of contractors will likely increase by between 16,000 and 56,000 for a total of 120,000-160,000.
(TPM Muckraker)
Recession scars will be lasting
The aftershocks from deep recessions reverberate for years, even decades.
(USA Today)
The curious spending of a GOP pro-choice PAC
The money doesn't seem to actually go to supporting choice.
(Center for Public Integrity)
More Spotlights >>
|
 |
