Oh, Mickey. See what happens when you wander out of your bubble?
Why was Pennsylvania relatively unscathed by foreclosures in 2008 while neighboring Ohio was hammered? A friend at a conference I recently attended pointed out the contrast. I don't know the answer, but it might be instructive.
What do you think Mickey was expecting here? Unions? The MSM? A bling-bling culture of dependency that had yet to be killed by Obama?
... Update: Thanks to Tom Maguire, who forwards a newspaper article and a summary of three Fed studies on the topic. Regulatory differences are suspected. ...
"Regulatory differences are suspected." Hmm ... bloodless phrasing there. I wonder if those differences are instructive?
Clicking through Mickey's links, one sees that Pennsylvania's success is due to:
(1) Pennsylvania more effectively regulating its mortgage brokers, while Ohio basically allowed lenders to go wild.
(2) An effort by a Pittsburgh community development group working for "economic justice" (Money Liberals!) to work within the Community Reinvestment Act (Naive Liberal Do-Gooders!) to make bank loans to minorities more scrupulous (Red Alert! All Hands to Kausfiles Battle Stations!).
So, while Mickey runs around blaming immigrants and liberals for the housing mess, it turns out that -- naturally, perfectly -- the way to avoid the crisis was a strong regulatory state and the local equivalent of the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
This person at this conference giving you ideas, Mickey? They are no friend to you.