Isn't that the point of this bit?
The twist is that nobody knows who actually holds these assets, as they have been sold, repackaged, re sold, transferred and spread around all over the financial universe. It will take a bit of time to unwind the whole thing. Early losses and difficulties will be kept silent and absorbed by institutions that have built up comfortable cushions in the boom years, but eventually some of it will come out - in probably unexpected places.
I'm asking more about 1) qualitative features that may be common to the other countries with bubbles, and signs to watch for; 2) whether one bubble popping won't prompt smart players in other bubbles to bail out, seeding the collapse of their own bubble; 3) whether lenders in other bubbles won't become wary and more conservative, causing credit to dry up and precipitating the end of the bubble.
By the way, I'm seeing all these ads in London trying to convince people to put their savings into "Property ISAs". I don't remember similar ads last year. Is that the next (last?) layer of the Ponzi scheme?
As for your other question, a risky mortgage is still an asset and it won't simply evaporate - it will go to some creditor or other of the lender that went belly up. "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
Neighbors toot a lot coke, eh?
Rents dont seem to cover the cost of ownership in places like California where there has been steady population growth pressure. And I suspect rents way over compensate in places like Detroit where you have trouble finding a buyer. In growth markets there always seems to be pressure to get in before it goes up leading to rents being below costs.
