Suchergebnisse

n/a

AbstractThere is a small but growing literature on the financialization of housing that demonstrates how housing is a central aspect of financialization. Despite the varied analyses of the financialization of housing and the importance of housing to financialization, the relations between housing and financialization remain under‐researched and under‐theorized. The financialization of housing is not really a specific form of financialization, transcending as it does a number of different forms of financialization. Housing systems, in particular, vary widely across the globe, which implies that housing financialization will be inherently variegated, path‐dependent and uneven. In this introduction to the symposium, I will discuss how the articles to follow contribute to the literature on the financialization of housing. Housing has entered a post‐Fordist, neoliberal and financialized regime. Increasingly, both mortgaged homeownership and subsidized rental housing are there to keep financial markets going, rather than being facilitated by those markets. There is little evidence that the global financial crisis has resulted in any de‐financialization of housing. There are common trajectories within uneven and variegated financialization, rather than radically different and completely unrelated forms of housing financialization.

AbstractSocial scientists have started to discuss the causes and consequences of the financial and economic crisis of 2007–09, and have also started debating the role of neoliberalism in and after the crisis. More generally, the crisis is often seen as a crisis of neoliberalism — and indeed it is. Neil Smith has observed that neoliberalism 'has run out of ideas politically' but remains dominant. The essays that make up this debate discuss what happened to neoliberalism during and after the global financial — or neoliberal — crisis, and how the heralded death and recovery of neoliberalism affects cities around the globe.

AbstractIn this essay I argue that the ideology of neoliberalism may have failed, but that neoliberal practice is alive and kicking. Most of the 'solutions' to the crisis are in the spirit of neoliberalism, rather than enraptured by neoliberal spirit. Yet, this neoliberal solution is not a solution; it is part of the problem in the sense that it is leading to more problems — not just today but also in decades to come. This so‐called solution is often presented as Keynesian, but it is only partly so. A better way to classify this solution is as an attempt to save the existing, neoliberal, system. The big crisis of our time did not become a crisis of the hegemony of neoliberalism, because actually existing neoliberalism is flexible enough to influence policy in other ways than through the mantra of free markets: it thrives on presenting existing socioeconomic conditions as failing and neoliberalism as the best solution. Considering the many blows neoliberal ideology has received during this crisis, it should already be dead, but like a creeping cancer neoliberal practice is able to resurface and show up in both new and unexpected, and old and predictable, ways.