I'd love a copy, rb. My gmail account would be fine, if it's not too much trouble.
The outline of the paper seems to have the right general idea, imho. This line in particular stands out:
Quote:
|
The investors “acted as if future losses were somebody else’s problem,” the economists wrote. “They were right.”
|
This is an excellent summarization. Especially now that the largest failures are being bailed out, it seems that the most irresponsible lenders are being rewarded for their "looting", somehow lending credibility to their repeated mistakes and outright frauds. And why wouldn't they expect to be saved? They were allowed to become so bloated that their failure couldn't be allowed.
Part of me wishes I'd been born 10 years earlier so I could have really seen the implementation and first failures of deregulation. I feel that, not being generally aware of economics until maybe the late 90s, I missed out on a lot of necessary context (like the Texas real estate bust).