Google news articles regarding sub-prime loans from two years ago. You will see they were touted by the experts as great products. Don't believe the disinformation that sub-prime loans are loans to people with poor credit. A large percentage of sub-prime loans were investor loans or second home loans or 100% LTV loans and many other types that were made to people with strong credit. The bottom line is that the FED made money cheap and easy to create an up business cycle they then tightened the money supply and are creating a down cycle.
I see. Makes sense from an economic POV, but you would then wonder who would accept a subprime instrument for (presumably) speculative/short-term gain.
100% LTV? What responsible, publically-traded institution would write such a thing?
In short, such a thing is plausible, but not as intuitively-tangible as you might believe. There are many competing sharks in the water. Lending is an easy buck for those with liquidity, and a few foreigners are dipping their toes into the US lending market, regardless of our monetarism. Still, I'll keep an open mind. Great article.
Fails to cite sources, unfortunately. 10 percent doesn't really match my (admittedly) anecdotal experience, even with fuel and commodity-pricing fluctuations. I'll cede the housing stat to, perhaps, regional differences between the extremes. Growth is likely best measured in GDP. I just don't see the problem, though I'm glad you pointed my attention to monetarism, certainly. There are likely institutional types who can pocket millions on every announcement from the Fed. Obviously, the publisher is not a big fan of floating, fiat currencies.