Remember in one of the early classes Eben torn down our perceptions of employment choice, of honesty and loyalty and other such values that can be taken advantage of by the unscrupulous? I think the situation there illustrates that. The article at the center of so much discussion in February conveyed a tone of the intelligent writer discovering a trick simple-minded middle class folks with underwater mortgages were too honest and straightforward to figure out. Interesting how the writer could not obtain interviews with more than one defaultee; I wish the article could have probed into all the same issues the article discussed in class did, regarding their attachment to their homes, their sense of shame, the worth of their "word."

I think Khater sounds rather in awe of the wealthy defaultees for being able to sever themselves so quickly from their homes. No dithering and length periods of sentimentality for them! Lenders, the big companies, sell these values and take advantage of these values to those who have so little that they will latch on to such intangible, personal rewards, while ignoring those who have enjoyed financial and academic success because they are indeed more "ruthless" in that they are concerned with status markers such as their former income, their employment history and their education, and with a history of successes (these all sound like enterpreneurs, don't they?), they feel more comfortable starting again.

It seemed apt to post this article that just came out, given that it relates to our discussions at the beginning of the class. I found one quote in the article to be particularly striking:

"Though it is hard to prove, the CoreLogic? data suggest that many of the well-to-do are purposely dumping their financially draining properties, just as they would any sour investment.

“The rich are different: they are more ruthless,” said Sam Khater, CoreLogic? ’s senior economist."

Is ruthless the right word? Or is pragmatic better? Mr. Khater seems to be implying that one is bad or cruel for acting in his own self interest. Thoughts?

-- DavidGoldin - 09 Jul 2010