巩固还是紧缩:美国和德国抵押贷款债务补贴的政治经济学

IF 2 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Alexander Reisenbichler
{"title":"巩固还是紧缩:美国和德国抵押贷款债务补贴的政治经济学","authors":"Alexander Reisenbichler","doi":"10.5129/001041522x16314500561319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Why do mortgage subsidies vary across countries? Until the 2000s, the U.S. and Germany provided large-scale subsidies for homeownership. Yet, their paths diverged when they faced deep economic crises at that time. While the U.S. doubled down on government support by quasi-nationalizing its mortgage market, Germany retrenched homeowner subsidies. This article argues that growth regimes shape coalitional logics that explain these contrasting outcomes. In the U.S. demand-led regime, where housing is key to growth, a bipartisan coalition entrenched mortgage subsidies to stimulate household credit and consumption. Germany’s export-led regime, where housing is less central to growth, produced a broad-based coalition that retrenched homeowner subsidies to boost competitiveness. Detailed case studies contrast the quasi-nationalization of U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) with the retrenchment of the German “homeowner subsidy” (Eigenheimzulage).","PeriodicalId":47960,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Politics","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Entrenchment or Retrenchment: The Political Economy of Mortgage Debt Subsidies in the United States and Germany\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Reisenbichler\",\"doi\":\"10.5129/001041522x16314500561319\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Why do mortgage subsidies vary across countries? Until the 2000s, the U.S. and Germany provided large-scale subsidies for homeownership. Yet, their paths diverged when they faced deep economic crises at that time. While the U.S. doubled down on government support by quasi-nationalizing its mortgage market, Germany retrenched homeowner subsidies. This article argues that growth regimes shape coalitional logics that explain these contrasting outcomes. In the U.S. demand-led regime, where housing is key to growth, a bipartisan coalition entrenched mortgage subsidies to stimulate household credit and consumption. Germany’s export-led regime, where housing is less central to growth, produced a broad-based coalition that retrenched homeowner subsidies to boost competitiveness. Detailed case studies contrast the quasi-nationalization of U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) with the retrenchment of the German “homeowner subsidy” (Eigenheimzulage).\",\"PeriodicalId\":47960,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comparative Politics\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comparative Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5129/001041522x16314500561319\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5129/001041522x16314500561319","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为什么各国的抵押贷款补贴各不相同?直到21世纪初,美国和德国还为买房者提供了大规模补贴。然而,当他们当时面临严重的经济危机时,他们的道路出现了分歧。在美国通过准国有化抵押贷款市场加大政府支持力度的同时,德国削减了对房主的补贴。本文认为,增长体制形成了解释这些截然不同的结果的联盟逻辑。在以需求为主导的美国,住房是经济增长的关键,两党联盟确立了抵押贷款补贴,以刺激家庭信贷和消费。在德国的出口导向型体制下,住房不是经济增长的核心,因此产生了一个基础广泛的联盟,该联盟削减了对房主的补贴,以提高竞争力。详细的案例研究对比了美国政府资助企业(GSEs)的准国有化与德国“房主补贴”(Eigenheimzulage)的缩减。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Entrenchment or Retrenchment: The Political Economy of Mortgage Debt Subsidies in the United States and Germany
Why do mortgage subsidies vary across countries? Until the 2000s, the U.S. and Germany provided large-scale subsidies for homeownership. Yet, their paths diverged when they faced deep economic crises at that time. While the U.S. doubled down on government support by quasi-nationalizing its mortgage market, Germany retrenched homeowner subsidies. This article argues that growth regimes shape coalitional logics that explain these contrasting outcomes. In the U.S. demand-led regime, where housing is key to growth, a bipartisan coalition entrenched mortgage subsidies to stimulate household credit and consumption. Germany’s export-led regime, where housing is less central to growth, produced a broad-based coalition that retrenched homeowner subsidies to boost competitiveness. Detailed case studies contrast the quasi-nationalization of U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) with the retrenchment of the German “homeowner subsidy” (Eigenheimzulage).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Comparative Politics
Comparative Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Comparative Politics, an international journal presenting scholarly articles devoted to the comparative analysis of political institutions and processes,communicates new ideas and research findings to social scientists, scholars, students, and public and NGO officials. The journal is indispensable to experts in universities, research organizations, foundations, embassies, and policymaking agencies throughout the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信