American homeownership has long been characterized by racial, ethnic and geographic inequality. Inequality in homeownership, in turn, has contributed to racial and class segregation and inequality in other aspects of American life. Recently, however, there have been signs of dramatic change, as minorities and low-income groups have achieved all time record high rates of homeownership. To explain these developments, we compare and contrast neoclassical economic theory, which suggests that banking deregulation, increased competition, better information and improved risk assessment reduce or eliminate mortgage market discrimination, with a sociological theory of networks that argues industry restructuring can disrupt markets and social relationships and create new opportunities for exploitation. We argue that, as the old inequality in home mortgage lending has slowly diminished, a new inequality has emerged, characterized by less favorable loan terms, sometimes-problematic forms of housing, and a lack

No abstract

Numerous studies have documented racial and economic disparities in the home mortgage market. Almost all of these have been done in large urban areas, many of which have long histories of racial conflict and discrimination. Further, little attention has been paid to institutional disparities, i.e., the ways in which mortgage lenders differ among themselves in their community reinvestment performance. In this study, we profile the home mortgage lending of several institutions doing business in the medium-sized urban area of St. Joseph County, Indiana. We find tremendous differences between lenders, suggesting that bank practices and policies exert a great impact on how well low income and minority neighborhoods and individuals are served. Lender characteristics, such as the legal structure of the institution (e.g.. commercial bank, credit union, savings and loan), branch locations, and other factors are associated with these disparities. We conclude by suggesting that several heretofore ignored variables need closer examination. are virtually unanimous. Studies across the country show that blacks proportionally apply for fewer loans than whites, yet are rejected more often. Researchers consistently find that white neighborhoods receive many (three to four) times more loans per 1,000 mortgageable structures than do minority neighborhoods. Regression analyses, using various model specifications and data sets, agree that redlining and racial variables show consistent, significant and negative associations with home mortgage lending. This is true even after applying controls for obligation ratios, credit history, loan to value ratios, and property characteristics.In this study, we make three important contributions to the literature on residential mortgage patterns. Throughout this study "banks" refers generically to banks, savings and loans, savings banks, credit unions, and bank holding companies.First, almost all studies have focused on aggregate bank performance, i.e., how well do all the lending institutions in an area do at serving the community. Very little attention has been paid to institutional disparities (i.e., the ways in which banks differ among themselves in their community reinvestment performance). As Kim and Squires (1995) put it, most studies of mortgage lending have focused on the demand side (characteristics of borrowers, the properties they intend to purchase, and the surrounding neighborhoods) while paying little attention to the supply side (the characteristics of lending institutions). We examine measures and create indices that allow us to look individually at the community reinvestment performance of several institutions. This allows us to examine whether and why some lending institutions do better than others at serving low income and minority areas and individuals. Wide variations between lenders may suggest that bank practices and policies exert a strong impact on how well different groups and areas are served. We go a step further to see what lender characteristics, if any, seem to be he...

No abstract

Are Institutional and post-Keynesian economists converging on a shared approach to understanding Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)? The literature suggests growing recognition that post-Keynesians and Institutionalists share a common intellectual history, conceptual frameworks, and overlapping professional memberships. For this reason, PostKeynesian Institutionalism (PKI) has emerged as a unifying approach to heterodox economics. In this review of the Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) literature, I explore the degree to which this PKI convergence extends, or fails to extend, to the historical, theoretical, and policy issues surrounding MMT. The point of this paper is to delineate where scholars from these traditions agree, where they specifically disagree, and to explore whether or how these disagreements may be ameliorated with respect to MMT.