1. Food Stamps: Where Does Your State Rank?

    Last month, I posted about the fact that roughly one in every eight Americans will participate in food stamp programs in the coming year.

    Now the Wall Street Journal presents us with an article, and accompanying chart, regarding each state’s participation in the program:

    WSJ: In U.S., Some 14% Rely on Food Stamps

    Turns out that my state, Oklahoma, shows up at #15 in the ranking of states with the highest percentage of population on food stamps. I can’t say I’m surprised that 16.5 percent of Oklahomans utilize food stamps, as the Sooner State has never been noted for any sort of widespread affluence. (We do likes us some crappy Easter baskets, though, uh huh.)




     

     

  2. Bubble Chasing

    I try to read John P. Hussman’s (of Hussman Funds) articles at least once or twice a month. His article of this past week, entitled “The Recklessness of Quantitative Easing,” gives me a chunk which I’d award Quote of the Month. Heck, Quote of the Year, maybe.

    Long-term economic prosperity is created by carefully allocating savings to productive investments that increase the output of goods and services that meet the needs of consumers, and whose production generates the income required to purchase that output. Everything else is bubble chasing.

    The entire article is absolutely worth a read — if you’d like an economic point of view that runs counter to what we’re so often force-fed by CNBC and most financial outlets.




     

     

  3. Fed and the “Phony” Economy

    I don’t pretend to understand all the workings of macroeconomics, though I’ve made efforts in recent years to educate myself on larger-scale economics issues that would’ve bored me senseless when I was younger — and far more intrigued by Beavis and Butthead than by short-term interest rates and credit spreads.

    When I read the following Reuters article the other day, I found myself agreeing with the author far more than I’ve done with most mainstream financial writing lately:

    Reuters: Fed is Banking on Phony Wealth Effect

    I suppose it would be nice to believe, as so many money gurus do, that our Federal Reserve officials and economists at large have so much knowledge and historical data these days that it’s virtually impossible for our economy (or the world’s economy, for that matter) to undergo any sort of “great depression” as was experienced in the 1930s. There are, as I’ve heard Dave Ramsey say on more than one occasion, “too many safety valves in place.”

    Ummm … yeah.

    I don’t buy that theory for a second. Rather, I tend to believe that usually, that kind of pride and arrogance (“The Titanic is unsinkable!”) goes before the fall. Nature, and other forces larger than us, have a way of eventually cracking whatever multi-reinforced structures we previously believed were failproof.

    Sometimes it’s ocean liners. Sometimes it’s Centralized Economic Recovery Planning™.

    Equilibrium, in short, will always have its day.

    From the article:

    A round of speeches from key Fed officials has given the clear view that, faced with deteriorating conditions and trapped by the lower bound of zero in its monetary policy, the Fed is preparing to once again buy up large amounts of Treasuries, perhaps even more than the government is issuing on an ongoing basis, in an attempt to drive down market interest rates and stimulate the economy.

    Will that do any good, given that people generally do not want to borrow and the banking system is impaired?

    “Balance sheet policy can still lower longer-term borrowing costs for many households and businesses, and it adds to household wealth by keeping asset prices higher than they otherwise would be,” Sack said in a speech in Newport Beach, California on Monday.

    And right there is where we step into folly: Keeping interest rates artificially low means asset prices will stay higher than they otherwise would be. And apparently, for our Fed captains, this brings additional household “wealth.” Which of course exists only to be borrowed against, and spent.

    So, there you have it: Pump up asset prices and hope that people spend some of the ephemeral gains. The idea that people will spend more if their houses and other assets rise in value is called the wealth effect, but this policy creates only pretend wealth.

    In fact, many people in the U.S. now face diminished retirements and generally straitened circumstances precisely because they mistook the rising prices of their house and Internet stocks for wealth and spent or borrowed against it. Is the U.S. actually so desperate for economic activity that this is the best it can do? Apparently so.

    Yes. I think some would call it “empire in decline,” actually. When the answer to every question is “more borrowing” and “more debt,” you really have to step back and admire all the delusion around you. This can’t end well.

    I’m pretty certain that equilibrium will have its day. I don’t imagine that it will be pretty, either.

    The only question is how long we can put it off.




     

     

  4. Food Stamp Participation: Still Rising

    Here’s a shocker: U.S. food-stamp participation (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP) is still rising.

    Per Bloomberg, roughly one in eight Americans will participate in the program during the upcoming fiscal year.

    Chart source data here and here. Ugly spreadsheet here.




     

     

  5. CareerBuilder: 77% Living Paycheck to Paycheck

    Now this is some encouraging news … if you enjoy financial distress.

    If we’re to believe CareerBuilder’s survey of 4,500 U.S. workers — and I don’t really have a great reason not to — then roughly 77 percent of us describe ourselves as living paycheck to paycheck:

    CareerBuilder: Nearly 8 in 10 Living Paycheck to Paycheck

    From the article:

    Nearly eight-in-ten (77 percent) workers report that they live paycheck to paycheck to make ends meet. Sixty-one percent of workers said that they felt they lived paycheck to paycheck to make ends meet in 2009. Workers went on to say that sometimes they are unable to make ends meet at all, with one-in-five (22 percent) saying they have missed payments on bills in the last year.

    Ouch. Earlier this year, I mentioned that more and more $100k workers were living paycheck to paycheck, too.

    For those of you who like charts, here’s one with a bit more data from the CareerBuilder survey:

    Pretty great, ain’t it, that more people were willing to dip into savings and retirement accounts than were willing to cancel their cable TV and other subscriptions. What the hell are people thinking?

    And since I’ve already got Excel open, I might as well update this running chart while I’m at it:

    If you’re interested in comparisons, I covered last year’s CareerBuilder survey here.




     

     

  6. Home (Free) on the Range

    You want stimulus? Well, how ’bout the chance to go almost 15 months without a house payment?

    Thanks to cottony-soft (and FedGov encouraged) accounting standards, banks are loathe to foreclose on underwater properties. As a bank, realizing five- and six-digit losses is no fun. It tends to leave ouchies on your balance sheet, and more importantly, has a negative effect on management bonuses.

    Cause, meet effect:

    Defaulted borrowers were spending an average of 469 days in their home after ceasing to make payments as of July 31, so the financial attraction of strategic defaults increases.

    Four hundred days with no house payment? A fellow could save up quite a stash in his piggy bank, going that long without sending a check to the mortgage company.

    In any case, that tantalizing little snippet comes from an article at AmericanBanker.com.

    And speaking of homeowner savings, just imagine all the dutiful home care and maintenance being performed by all these “living free for now” borrowers — borrowers who know that one day the bank will be coming to throw their La-Z-Boy on the lawn and Master Lock all the doors. The question isn’t if, but when.

    Oh, I’m sure that leaky roof will get fixed. Any day now.

    Yes, indeed. Delaying foreclosures (most econ-types refer to it as “extend and pretend”) with schemes like relaxed accounting standards and FedGov-initiated can-kickings (HAMP much?) should work out just fine.




     

     

  7. DTIs of HAMP Modification Recipients

    Because I have become very much a financial hardass in my old age, I’ve been against FedGov’s HAMP program from Day One. (To show that I am an Equal Opportunity Hardass, I am virulently against taxpayer funds going to banks or other corporate entities, as well.)

    Still, I keep up with HAMP results (or lack thereof) because train wrecks this large are just hard to ignore. And also because watching FedGov throw piles of good money after bad is better entertainment than most primetime TV (which isn’t saying much).

    So here we go with the July batch of HAMP results:

    Financialstability.gov: HAMP Servicer Report — July 2010

    In particular, I’d like to call reader attention to a chart on page three:

    Aside from the inherent irony in finding numbers like this at a site called “financialstability.gov,” and ignoring the brazen injustice done by allowing any U.S. dot-gov entity to even use said domain, you have to be amazed — really amazed — at the financial condition of HAMPsters at large.

    With Numbers This Bad…

    What we see here is that for folks who’ve had their mortgages modified via HAMP, the median debt-to-income (DTI) ratios are downright scary.

    Think about this: The median back-end DTI for successful HAMP applicants, before their mortgages were modified, was almost 80 percent.

    After mod, the median back-end DTI is still almost 64 percent.

    So, at the median, having 64 percent of their pre-tax income going to debt payments is an improvement.

    And since part of HAMP qualification is supposed to focus on whether or not the borrower actually has a shot at staying in the house, presumably making payments to the bank from now until pigs fly, then you have to wonder just how bad the non-approved applicants’ DTIs are. (Almost half of the people who’ve applied to HAMP have been bounced from the program, for various reasons.)

    If having a 60+ percent back-end DTI after a modification is seen as “affordable,” then I probably don’t want to what “unaffordable” is.

    Yeah. Mortgage modifications or not, these are still defaults looking for a place to happen.

    Get Ya Some

    I’d step up to the trough and request a modification for myself — hey, who doesn’t want a “more affordable” mortgage PLUS the opportunity to stick somebody else with the bill? — but somehow I doubt that my front- and back-end DTIs of roughly ten percent would allow me to qualify for any sweet HAMP action. (Since I have no non-mortgage debt, both of my DTIs are equal.)

    Darn the bad luck, anyway. Savers and responsible folk? Shut out from reaping taxpayer largesse once again.

    Instead, we just get to pay for it.




     

     

  8. The Bankless Among Us

    Well, here I am dithering on about my recent experiences with rewards checking accounts, and off goes USA Today to do a story on those folks who live bank-free lives, primarily due to necessity:

    USA Today: Many Shun Bank Accounts, But Pay More…

    Well, yes, those close to the poverty line have long been “left hanging” by standard Main Street banking institutions. Short of overdraft fees, where’s the profit in the bricks-and-mortar managing of checking accounts that’ll be lucky to see a $1k balance at any point during the month? (According to one 2004 study, 83 percent of “unbanked” families make less than $25k per year.)

    And savings accounts for these folks? Fuhgettaboudit.

    From the article:

    Nearly 8% of U.S. households, or about 17 million people, don’t have bank accounts, according to a 2009 study by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. An additional 18% — 43 million people — are “underbanked,” which means they have bank accounts but occasionally use check-cashing companies, pawn shops, liquor stores or other alternatives to cash checks, pay bills and borrow money… .

    In an effort to bring more consumers into the financial mainstream, the board of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. is scheduled to vote today on a program to encourage banks to offer no-frills, low-cost checking and savings accounts. The FDIC’s model checking account would allow customers to open an account for as little as $10. While banks may decide to charge a low monthly maintenance fee, the accounts won’t have the kind of surprise fees — such as overdraft protection fees — that have led consumers to abandon banks, says FDIC Chair Sheila Bair.

    Hmmm. I really feel like this sort of banking program has been tried before, another pilot program of some kind, and with not-so-good results. Meaning that participation rates were low, and dropout rates high. But perhaps I’m imagining that.

    “While the majority of banks have offered free and low-cost checking accounts for many years, all banks will need to reconsider the feasibility of continuing to offer free accounts, given current economic and regulatory pressures,” Carol Kaplan, a spokeswoman for the American Bankers Association, said in a statement.

    A 2009 analysis by Novantas, a consulting firm, estimated that even in a “good” year, about half of checking accounts are unprofitable, and that regulatory and economic changes could raise that figure to 75%.

    Gotta love the American Bankers Association. Setting the rest of us up already for new fees and/or fee increases!




     

     

  9. Worst-Paying College Degrees

    Now here’s an interesting article from Yahoo. Apparently someone has taken the time to compile a list of the worst-paying college degrees out there:

    Yahoo: 20 Worst-Paying Degrees of 2010

    I get a kick out of lists like this — especially ones that reinforce my own views on the relative value (or lack thereof) of higher education. Which is that “higher education,” in and of itself, is very rarely the Ticket to Financial Success which society makes it out to be. (Check out this article in the Harvard Business Review; the difference between “knowledge” and “skills” is immense. The higher-ed conglomerate may disperse knowledge, but usually, what employers want are skills.)

    And oh yeah — if you take on lots of debt to get that higher ed, you can easily end up worse off — far worse off — than if you had no degree at all.

    Because I’m lazy, I won’t reprint the whole list here. However, the top five worst-paying degrees…

    College Degree Starting Pay Mid-Career Pay
    1. Child and Family Studies $29,500 $38,400
    2. Elementary Education $31,600 $44,400
    3. Social Work $31,800 $44,900
    4. Athletic Training $32,800 $45,700
    5. Culinary Arts $35,900 $50,600

    … are pretty much what I’d expect. (Wait — where is Underwater Basket Weaving?)

    I do, though, have to take issue with how the author finishes out her missive:

    If you’d rather end up with one of the best-paying college degrees, you’ll have to major in something that requires a lot of math classes.

    I’m not so sure about that. I mean, politicians seem to do pretty well financially. And it’s obvious that math was never a core requisite at any point in their lives.




     

     

  10. One Family’s Housing Woe

    A couple of weeks ago, in Ready to Own a Home?, I talked about some mistakes made by too-anxious homebuyers. Well, what do you know? The LA Times presents a fine example of just what I was talking about:

    LA Times: Undone By Their Dreams

    It’s one family’s tale of housing woe, to be sure.

    In 2006, Dawn and Michael Meenan found what they were looking for in Hesperia, in a community called Mission Crest. But they had declared bankruptcy four years earlier and were uncertain they could buy a house here. Then the phone rang.

    “Your loan has been approved.”

    Ah yes, the joys of housing bubbles … when folks four years removed from a BK can go out and borrow hundreds of thousands for a home in the desert.

    Dawn and Michael Meenan first explored Hesperia on Thanksgiving weekend in 2005. …They followed the signs and billboards to the subdivision, set off from the desert by a cinder-block wall. Six builders were showing model homes. A large red balloon soaring above one tract tugged at its anchor.

    …Amid the imposing two-story designs, they settled on a modest single-story home — yet with 2,400 square feet, it was large enough for their growing family. The sales representatives told them that one would be available on Newport Street by midsummer, and if they put down a $3,000 deposit they could lock in the price at $365,000.

    Lesson One in Homebuyer Edumacation: When people use the word “modest” to describe a $365,000 home, with 2,400 square feet, much buyer heartache lurks down the road.

    They could barely scrape together the deposit, and they didn’t have a down payment for the mortgage. The sales representatives didn’t seem worried. Let’s see what we can do, they said, giving the Meenan children crayons to color with and taking notes on the couple’s credit history.

    Countrywide Financial Corp. turned them down. Freedom Plus Mortgage said yes. After signing the loan documents, the Meenans worried they would be overextended, but they told themselves that this was what first-time homebuyers do, especially when they’re in their 30s and their family is young.

    Now where have I heard that before?

    Given their bankruptcy, the Meenans qualified only for a subprime mortgage. Their first loan was fixed at 7.375% for three years and was then adjustable; their second was fixed at 11.625% for 30 years. The payments came to more than $2,500 a month.

    Both loans were two percentage points above market rates, and in 2036 they would have to make balloon payments totaling nearly $300,000. Then there were the property and the community taxes — nearly $3,000 twice a year.

    You just know this is going to end well, right?

    But they managed. When Dawn’s maternity leave was over, she went back to work as a bookkeeper for an Irwindale-based online company that sells vitamin supplements. Michael worked in the firm’s warehouse. Together they made nearly $95,000 a year.

    Wow. That’s a very, very nice salary — for any family NOT sucked into a piggybacked $365k deathtrap mortgage. For a family who DID take on the loan, though … ’tis a different story.

    And did I mention the home’s location required the Meenans to undertake a 1-hour commute every day?

    If it was a sacrifice, they told themselves, it was worthwhile. They were building equity. They were improving their credit scores. In time, their income would rise, and they could refinance. That was what the sales representatives had told them.

    In March 2007, Michael was laid off and had to take odd jobs. Three months later, Dawn’s employer gave her a chance to start her own bookkeeping business. She could work at home, and as she brought in clients, the family income climbed back to near six figures. She and Michael felt secure enough to landscape the backyard, put in a patio and plant a vegetable garden.

    Whew. For a minute there, I thought this whole setup might not work out as planned!

    The idyll proved brief. As the recession deepened, Dawn lost clients, and their income started to fall. In December 2008, they did not pay their property tax. They didn’t have the money. Besides, they rationalized, homes in the area had dropped almost $200,000 in value, and they’d be getting a reassessment and their taxes should go down.

    Then one day, as Dawn organized the bills, she saw how fast they were falling behind. She was paying the mortgage later each month, and in July the interest rate on the first loan would reset upward. It could cost them anywhere from $100 to $1,000 more each month.

    All completely unexpected, of course.

    Of course.

    They spoke to the bank but were told that they didn’t qualify for a loan modification, and in May they just couldn’t pay the mortgage anymore. Sad and angry, they stopped paying on the first loan — then, two months later, on the second.

    They contacted a real estate agent to list the house. They waited until after Michael’s birthday in August to put up the For Sale sign. They didn’t want to have to explain the situation to their family just yet.

    In October, the house was sold for $125,000. As the family waited in the car, Michael went inside for one last look. The sunlight streaming through the windows looked different without the curtains, but it still brought back a flood of memories. When he saw the stain on the carpet from one of the children’s spilled drinks, he cried.

    There might have been a time when I’d feel sympathy for these folks, but not any longer. I’ve long since tired of it. No matter what anyone tells you, bad choices have bad consequences. (Unless you’re a TBTF bank. If that’s the case, and you made this loan, good on you. Thanks for taking such a prudent risk. As always, we taxpayers got your back.)