Financiers and sub-prime borrowers are twin symptoms of the same precarious economy

Evidence

Ho (2009, 4–13) makes the compelling argument that Wall Street investment bankers are both the subjects and the authors of a hyper-precarious form of “liquid” neoliberal social and economic relationality. Financiers are both exemplars and enforcers of precarious life and work in the global economy. In the context of the sub-prime sector and industry, we might make a similar argument: sub-prime borrowers represent both a paradigm of the precarious economy and the precariousness of the economy itself. — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 207

Categorization

• XREF: Links to Ho’s ethnography of Wall Street — a foundational text for the financialization-of-culture argument deWaard builds on. — connects to: Predatory sub-prime lending preyed on America’s poor and racialized communities — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 154; Blaming borrowers’ financial ignorance obscures the structural logic of sub-prime lending — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 528; Blaming individual borrowers hides a systemic precariousness produced by finance — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 208 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Blaming individual borrowers hides a systemic precariousness produced by finance #corroborates (0.90) — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 208
• Blaming borrowers’ financial ignorance obscures the structural logic of sub-prime lending #corroborates (0.85) — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 528
• Everyday financialized actors co-produce precarity alongside macro institutions #expands (0.80) — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 214