The housing perhaps-not-entirely-a-crisis resembles, in one particular, the curious consensus about the global warming "crisis," concerning which, the assumption is: Although Earth's temperature has risen and fallen through many millennia, the temperature was exactly right when, in the 1960s, Al Gore became interested in the subject. Are we to assume that last year, when housing prices were, say, 10 percent higher than they are now, they were exactly right? If so, why is that so? Because the market had set those prices, therefore they were where they belonged? But if the market was the proper arbiter of value then, why is it not the proper arbiter now?
I'm not too worried about the housing "crisis." House prices are falling. So what? Isn't that good for some and bad for others? Houses in my neighborhood are losing value. Tough luck for me--that's the way markets work sometimes. Markets determine the "right" price.
But what is the "right" global temperature? The current answer seems to be something at or lower than the current temperature. But why? Are we convinced that the current situation is better or worse than any other? Are we sure that higher temperatures will result in worse conditions than current temperatures?
Recent Comments