3 ms·
> Should the government subsidize... I don't see why a poorly run bank which has made bad investments in toxic assets should be bailed out with taxpayer's mone
by yapcguy 13y ago
> Should the government subsidize...
I don't see why a poorly run bank which has made bad investments in toxic assets should be bailed out with taxpayer's money when it should be allowed to fail, with good banks picking up clients and assets and growth in market share...
My point is there are few markets which are truly allowed to operate freely. If housing markets were not regulated, the uber rich would buy up every piece of real estate and then we'd all be stuffed.
> we bid up the houses to obscene prices due to lack of supply.
People can only bid what they can afford, and what they can afford is driven by loose lending and cheap credit. Tighten bank lending and housing prices will start falling.
- epicureanideal 13y agoI agree with you about the toxic assets and about cheap credit, but I don't see how those interventions would encourage us to add even more interventions.
- epicureanideal 13y agoI also wanted to say, this is really not a conflict between the rich and the poor. What ends up happening is the truly rich can afford to live in SF easily with or without subsidies. The lower and lower-middle class end up with "affordable" (subsidized) housing. The upper-middle and upper-but-not rich get stuck in the middle with no assistance and maybe being able to afford to live in the area if they save in every other area and work themselves to poor health.