Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (44929)	8/18/2010 8:38:15 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: [(And I posted exact quotes from her saying just that. <GGG>)] "You did no such thing." Yes, I DID! Here they are, (in her OWN WORDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!): "It's not that I think that it is necessarily untrue that the wealthy are more likely to default on mortgages that they could pay. Indeed, I think it is probably almost definitionally true, at least the way I think of strategic default." She ACCEPTS the CoreLogic data (which shows higher incidence of default among the wealthy then among the general population) when she writes: "The CoreLogic data tell you how many people are in default." (She does not attempt to deny or rebut the CoreLogic data at all.) She merely argues that the data --- (ALTHOUGH CLEARLY SHOWING A STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT HIGHER DEFAULT RATE AMONG THE WEALTHY) --- does not contain the types of facts that would be necessary to establish whether these defaults were "strategic", i.e. voluntary, or not. Nevertheless she accepts that the data shows a much higher default rate among the wealthy. In fact, she even states that (although no way to prove it yet) she herself SUSPECTS that the wealthy DO STRATEGICALLY DEFAULT at a higher rate: "And I still think it's more likely than not that the wealthy are leading whatever trend their may be in strategic defaults." Link to her remarks: theatlantic.com Link where I first explained her remarks to you: Message 26730737