金融化次级贷款背后对弱势群体的影响--Assignment代写范文

Assignment代写范文:“金融化次级贷款背后对弱势群体的影响”，这篇论文主要描述的是在次级贷款日益金融化的今天，我们也渐渐看清次级贷款背后对我们生活所带来的影响，有越来越多的弱势群体开始使用次级贷款，特别是妇女群体，他们更多的倾向于住房财富的调整，因此妇女们的这种思想更好的带动和刺激了次级贷款的繁荣。

Subprime lending has become the penultimate case study for critics of the recent period of financialization, or neo-liberalism more broadly, because it exposes the most profligate tendencies of predatory lending and the pernicious social costs visited on society’s most vulnerable groups. This article builds on the social stratification and wealth accumulation literature. We assess how mounting debt levels and crippling costs of servicing these debts compared to relatively flat income growth for female-headed households have resulted in wealth (dis)accumulation. We use the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) to analyze how single female-headed households, and in particular how African American single mothers were affected by the subprime boom in different, arguably more pernicious, ways. There is already considerable evidence showing that subprime lending was disproportionally sold to women, particularly minority women. Focusing on single mothers reveals important gender and racial dimensions of the lending techniques, but it also shows how marginalized families increasingly relied on housing wealth (equity) to adjust to shrinking purchasing power. Thus, contrary to the lofty expectations of the ownership society, the high mortgage debts of many low-income women suggest they own a lesser share of their homes – (dis)accumulation of wealth – than at any previous time. Key Words Social stratification, financial inclusion, subprime sector, family indebtedness predatory bank lending, wealth (dis)accumulation. 

Introduction介绍

Critical approaches to the study of finance have long emphasized the relationship between financial integration and deepening social inequality. Whether it be third-world sovereign debt, corporate financing or household borrowing, the conditions of access to credit create barriers between those that are included and excluded from mainstream financing. It is at these junctures between inclusion and exclusion in which finance wields its political and socio-economic power (Mooslechner et al., 2006).

The transition to subprime lending, particularly post-2001, re-shaped the boundaries of financial access as macro-conditions of cheap credit and excess liquidity created a lucrative opportunity for banks to lend to previously excluded groups. Due to the wide-spread practice of ‘redlining’ and discrimination, low-income groups were systematically excluded from gaining access to mortgage loans prior to the 1990s (Dymski 2009). By adapting the rhetoric of ‘democratizing finance’, subprime lenders used credit-scoring techniques to justify lending to low-income groups under the auspice of greater financial inclusion. There is already considerable evidence that shows subprime lending was concentrated in low-income communities, especially racial minority-communities (Calem, Gillen et al. 2004; Dymski 2009)1 and was disproportionately sold to women, particularly minority women (Fishbein and Woodall 2006). By counting the number of high-cost subprime loans sold in low-income communities—or by comparing women and minority groupsslated into job loss, declining wage growth, dwindling state income support, rising health care costs, and mounting living costs for many low-income households, especially single-mothers (Hartmann 2008; Bakker 2003).

Studies have shown that if differences in wealth are explored by marital status, gender, and parenting, single mothers suffer the most severe economic penalties in household wealth accumulation (Yamokoski and Keister (2007). The role of motherhood has been cited as the primary factor in affecting poverty rates for single mothers. Nancy Folbre (1987) has called this the ‘pauperization of motherhood’, suggesting that the reduction in welfare services and the stagnation in wages has penalized mothers. As a result parenthood has left single-mothers poorer than fathers. In addition, gender norms and racial stereotypes which are embedded in political, legal, economic and financial domains perpetuate the stratified gender and racial systems. As such, gender (and racial) ideologies are used to justify the existing gender/racial imbalance in power and resources (Seguino 2007).

This paper builds and expands on the social stratification and wealth (asset) accumulation literature (Yamokoski and Keister 2006; Schmidt and Seval 2006; Deere and Doss 2006; Folbre 1987; Seguino 2007), but here we assess these trends in terms of single female-headed households and their increasing mortgage indebtedness relative to wages. We analyze the different relative financial insecurity of women in partnership with financial dependent children, single-mothers, and minority single-mothers by evaluating their income levels relative to outstanding debts. We use the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) to demonstrate how these trends are reflected in mounting debt levels and crippling costs of servicing these debts compared to relatively flat income growth levels for female-headed households, specifically single mothers, and African American single mothers. In doing so, we elucidate how different women were affected by the subprime boom in different, arguably more pernicious, ways. This research builds on the existing evidence showing that subprime lending was disproportionally sold to women, particularly minority women while at the same time creating huge profit opportunities for banks and wealth holders. Most perniciously for wealth (dis)accumulation was the fact, that the previously unbanked and underbanked households extracted housing wealth to adjust to shrinking purchasing power (Dymski 2009). While we do not measure wealth accumulation per se, we use mortgage debt as a proxy for arguing that low-income women own a lesser share of their homes – (dis)accumulation of wealth – relative to their income. As long as house prices increased, equity withdrawal made it possible for many single female headed households to finance current consumption. The opposite is now true – the sharp drop in house prices and the riskier subprime loans have led to a higher proportion of foreclosures among subprime borrowers.

The Myth of Inclusion and the Politics of Subprime Lending

Gendering Financialization

The Family Dynamics of Indebtedness

Conclusion 总结

Contrary to the expectations of the ownership society, the subprime strategy turned out to be a major source in wealth (dis)accumulation for many single female-headed households, in particular for African-American households. There are both demand and supply-side factors that explain the emergence of subprime loans to previously excluded groups. At one level, the transformation of banking in the 1980s from earnings based on interest margins to net earnings based on fees for financial services made it lucrative for banks to extend loans to racial minorities and single-female headed households at conditions far more exploitative than mortgage loans to middle-class recipients. Yet, it is not enough to simply assume that transformations in financial markets translate into widespread social change. In the case of subprime lending, the longstanding political consensus on the centrality of homeownership to American society legitimized the rhetoric of fostering an ‘asset-owning democracy’.

The underbelly of the homeownership society is the inability of the housing system to provide adequate and affordable dwellings for large numbers of Americans. Government policy massively promoted home buying by low-income households despite that many families could not afford them. Admittedly, rising indebtedness is a problem faced by many families. We argue that the causes of indebtedness are similar for the majority of middle- and low-income families: the longer term trends of slow wage growth and the politics of abandonment combined with the more recent processes of financialization. But, since the majority of single-mothers, and especially racial minorities, do not belong to the ownership society, they are affected by these processes differently and more severely. Firstly, women of all races as ‘workers’ are subject to the persistent gender wage-gap and make up the majority of the part-time and flexible workforce.

Secondly, neo-liberalism has fundamentally changed the dynamics of social reproduction which affects single-women and minorities most acutely. Single-mothers are solely responsible for meeting the economic and social needs of their families, which creates specific forms of inequality. At the same time, women also seem to bear the brunt of budget consolidation and financial retrenchment following severe financial crisis. As the present subprime crisis in the United States has shown, financial governance plays a crucial role in how risk sharing is organized in society. Low-income women were integrated into the asset-regime, but at the cost of mounting debts levels and crippling costs to service these debts. As such, homeownership has brought greater financial insecurity as higher debts mean low-income women own a lesser share of their homes - (dis)accumulation of wealth - than at any  previous times. 1 In fact, Dymski makes the argument that the US subprime crisis was the result of the transformation of racial exclusion in US mortgage markets.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创留学生作业代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务包括留学生作业代写服务，以及统计作业代写、essay代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的peaking代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多assignment代写范文 提供美国作业代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041哟。-xz