In 2007 (about a year before the proles realized there was a problem with housing and debt), I got in an argument at work with a guy younger than me--he was still in college--about the prudence of home ownership.
I observed that the large town/small city we were in had more banks per capita than anywhere I'd ever lived--or seen, for that matter. I further observed that the price level of the new homes in the new subdivisions everywhere being constructed was such that I (along with the truck driver also in the conversation) couldn't imagine how all these people were paying for these homes given the general wage level of the area.
The college guy was someone I liked, but he had a bad case of farmboy fever--what happens when an otherwise intelligent person goes off to a diploma mill from a rural area. These sorts invariably have a low self esteem chip on their shoulder and get eaten alive by braindead professors and the propaganda du jour. They eat that shit up in a vain attempt to "be somebody."
I hadn't observed anything that anybody else hadn't seen every day, but it was like I'd insulted his mother or something. His response to me was like some crazy temperance crusader or "anti-racism" schoolmarm. He actually began talking down to me, explaining slowly to me how home ownership was the best investment possible "and it's been proven for a long time, actually."
I observed that it certainly wasn't that way when Sherman came through, and in any event I (and a large section of the local workforce) couldn't afford the going rates.
I've often wondered if he learned anything from that conversation and the subsequent "sub-prime" debacle.
|