Housing: Bookerista Perspectives

Thomas Sowell: "Solving Whose Problem?"

The conservative economist opines: "Many of the things the government does that may seem stupid are not stupid at all, from the standpoint of the elected officials or bureaucrats who do these things. The current economic downturn that has cost millions of people their jobs began with successive administrations of both parties pushing banks and other lenders to make mortgage loans to people whose incomes, credit history and inability or unwillingness to make a substantial down payment on a house made them bad risks. Was that stupid? Not at all. The money that was being put at risk was not the politicians' money, and in most cases was not even the government's money. Moreover, the jobs that are being lost by the millions are not the politicians' jobs-- and jobs in the government's bureaucracies are increasing. No one pushed these reckless mortgage lending policies more than Congressman Barney Frank, who brushed aside warnings about risk, and said in 2003 that he wanted to 'roll the dice' even more in the housing markets. But it would very rash to bet against Congressman Frank's getting re-elected in 2010."

More commentary from Mr. Sowell: "Does the Federal Housing Administration have unlimited money to bail out bad loans? Actually there have been so many defaults that the FHA's own reserves have dropped below where they are supposed to be. But not to worry. There will always be taxpayers, not to mention future generations to pay off the national debt. Very few people are likely to connect the dots back to those members of Congress who voted for bigger mortgage guarantees and bailouts by the FHA. So the Congressmen's and the bureaucrats' jobs are safe, even if millions of other people's jobs are not."

La Shawn Barber: "Westchester Ousts County Executive"

The conservative blogger writes: "Voters in Westchester County, New York, kicked Democrat Andy Spano out of the county executive’s office and replaced him with Republican Rob Astorino. Before the November election, Spano pushed through a so-called desegregation agreement his constituents didn’t want, because he said delaying the order would make his county 'a symbol of racism.' You may recall that Westchester County is under order to create low-income housing in majority white communities and actively seek out minorities to move into the housing. Writing in the City Journal, Walter Olson notes that the government coercion 'cuts deeply into the county’s tradition of suburban home rule on development issues,' and comments on HUD deputy secretary Ron Sims’s radial vision of racial Utopia. Like other social engineering types, Sims implies that one’s preference to live in an affluent, low-crime area — and complaints about being forced to subsidize housing for people who can’t afford to live in the area — are wrong."

More commentary from Ms. Barber about the housing controversy: "Olson cites Howard Husock’s article, which we also cited in a September post. Husock made the case that if blacks who could afford to live in wealthier areas of Westchester County are intentionally kept out, the settlement would make sense. But that’s not what’s happening. Blacks are 'only slightly underrepresented' even in 'super-wealthy' areas of the county. To satisfy an arbitrary diversity goal, taxpayers in Westchester County are forced to subsidize lifestyle upgrades. To what end? Husock said moving low-income children to 'better' neighborhoods doesn’t close the academic achievement gap, improve health, or any other magical thing, and the better policy is using tax money to upgrade areas in which the poor already live. Westchester County voters spoke at the polls. Sixty-three percent chose Barack Obama to serve as president, but 58 percent selected a Republican to serve their county. It’s not about racism; it’s about electing someone who’ll push for local taxpayers rights over 'diversity' goals and playing the race card."