On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Charles Brown
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> CB: Yea, that bailouts retroactively make the risks fake is one of my
> pet peeves. I recall debating this with David S. here a while back. I
> believe he raised risk as the justification for charging interest on
> loans ?
> That giant hedge fund bailout raised the same issue.
>
> I believe it was Raghu and I who proposed bailing out the sub-prime
> mortgagors instead of the mortgagees. The mortgagors could then pay off
> the mortgagees or note-holders, and the later would get the money, the
> former the houses and everybody would be happy ( smile).
I am not sure that *everybody* would be happy. There are many "prudent
savers" out there who want to see all participants in the housing
bubble to feel some hurt. ("I passed on the chance to buy a house I
couldn't afford, and now my irresponsible sub-prime neighbor gets to
keep his house but I get nothing.") It seems to me that they have a
very legitimate grievance.
Maybe the best thing to do is a $1.5T "stimulus package" giving every
household in the US a $10,000.00 check.
-raghu.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
