That isn't what a Ponzi Scheme is at all. An investment bubble certainly in many areas but merely earlier holders benefitting from new traffic does not a Ponzi Scheme make. A Ponzi Scheme is a fraud first off. Estimates may be wrong for value but they are getting what they (over)pay for.
If tommorow the housing market had a massive collapse in value people would still get the house promised and would need to keep paying to avoid repossession - if they could pay say $2.5k to get a comparable house and move they could voluntarily default and their liability would be limited. Given such extremes and shaky risk curves many if not most banks would ageee to a middle ground if they thought the crash would endure. One can argue ethics of all parties but there is no inherent fraud here.
Continuing to sell shares beyond 100% of a gold mine and using sales proceeds to make prior customers think they are getting returns is a Ponzi Scheme. If people stop buying it collapses and when the dust settles a 20% share is only a share of 1% rationalized to true percentage. That is fraud.
If tommorow the housing market had a massive collapse in value people would still get the house promised and would need to keep paying to avoid repossession - if they could pay say $2.5k to get a comparable house and move they could voluntarily default and their liability would be limited. Given such extremes and shaky risk curves many if not most banks would ageee to a middle ground if they thought the crash would endure. One can argue ethics of all parties but there is no inherent fraud here.
Continuing to sell shares beyond 100% of a gold mine and using sales proceeds to make prior customers think they are getting returns is a Ponzi Scheme. If people stop buying it collapses and when the dust settles a 20% share is only a share of 1% rationalized to true percentage. That is fraud.