(sigh) Why did we bother working so hard to elect allegedly progressive Senators? I hate these b******s. They've srewed us yet again.
A few weeks ago I wrote a blog praising the Senate Bankruptcy reform act of 2008, caling it one of the few pieces of housing related legislation that had some merit.
Most importantly, it would have restored to Bankruptcy judges the power they had before 2005 to force down the amount of a debtor's mortgage. Well, the Senate republicans did one of their faux filibusters and the bill failed.
So now, our erstwhile progressive democratic senators have caucused with the Republicans and what do we get? A complete cave-in as to debtors, and huge dollops of gifties for homebuilders. In other words, "our" Senators are reaching into our tax pockets and have actually succeeded in making matters worse.
Boy oh boy is this sad, AP reports on the bill expected to pass the Senate:
A measure billed as boosting the slumping housing market showers money-losing businesses with $25 billion in tax relief in the next few years but offers just $3 billion to homeowners.
The estimates released Thursday by congressional scorekeepers lend credence to accusations that the measure helps businesses like home builders while doing little to help millions of families threatened with foreclosure.
The benefits to businesses also dwarf the $4 billion in the measure that would be provided to cities and towns to buy up and refurbish foreclosed and abandoned homes. The only direct help in the measure to homeowners threatened with foreclosure is $100 million to provide counseling to people threatened with foreclosure and help them in negotiating with their lenders.
One of the speculations I have made from time to time is that the very assumptions underlying neoclassical economic theory are so flawed in comparison with reality that the theory, while elegant, and able to generate wonderfully pretty mathematical graphs, is deeply flawed.
One such problem is that neoclassical economic theory made use of the mathematics of 19th century Newtonian physics. And just as quantum theory and the theory of relativity gave rise to startlingly different results, if one applies 20th century physics to economic theory, the entire notion of equilibrium breaks down, and one sees radically different predicted results.
There is a neo-populist movement afoot in the US right how. No one is sure exactly what to call it. Analogies with the original Populist party break down over issues of tariffs and xenophobia. The later "Progressive" movement, which is credited with creating the first round of government regulatory agencies, doesn't fit well either. It didn't have the broad-based working class foundation that is meant when one talks about populism.
These days when critics accuse liberals of engaging in "class warfare" they mean the the working classes are looking to rein in the excesses of the super wealthy. Since this group is tiny, the appeal to defending the rights of Paris Hilton doesn't work well, so they try to include the top 20% as well.
The AFL-CIO has put out an action alert:
The U.S. Senate is considering a bill (S. 2636) with a key provision that would fix bankruptcy policies to allow borrowers to restructure their mortgages in bankruptcy court.
You can protect thousands of families from losing their homes by asking your senators to support "Pay and Stay" (also known as Title IV of the Foreclosure Prevention Act, S.B. 2636)
Recent comments