The only reason I can afford some pretzels, beer, and if I'm feeling really frisky, some chicken wings, is because I'm not sending any goddamn money to the vultures holding my debt. So, putting this thought in the category of "provocative" is perhaps a bridge too far:
Here’s a provocative thought: what if ‘extend and pretend’ within our nation’s troubled mortgage markets is actually providing a lift to consumer spending? It’s not as far-fetched as the idea might initially sound, and it might help explain some interesting data we’ve seen as of late — and it also might explain why the statistical recovery we’re seeing now doesn’t really feel like a recovery to most Americans.
Or as I might say, "no shit Sherlock!" This is exactly what's going on. Fuck, the only reason I'm not out there starving in the street right now, is because I can't be thrown out of my house under my state's law for another 7 months. As Yoda might say, "Some big fucking mystery, it is not."
But this is what it all comes down to, isn't it? The rich get bailed out by the government securing all of the securitized debt "assets," so when I go broke, whoever holds my mortgage, credit card debt, and/or student loans doesn't share in my misery. Meaning they have no incentive to negotiate down the amount that I owe them - why the fuck would they? They get their money no matter what. At the first sign of trouble the government steps in to secure the payment stream, and nobody says boo about that monumental plundering of the public treasury to protect the rich. Read more about The Poor Man’s Stimulus And The Rich Man’s Plunder