Investing Curiouscatblog

Tag: commentary

  • FDIC Limit Raised to $250,000

    The FDIC limit has been raised to $250,000 which is a good thing. The increased limit is only a temporary measure (through Dec 31, 2009) but hopefully it will be extended before it expires. I don’t see anything magical about $250,000 but something like $200,000 (or more) seems reasonable to me. The coverage level was increased to $100,000 in 1980.

    What does federal deposit insurance cover?
    FDIC insurance covers funds in deposit accounts, including checking and savings accounts, money market deposit accounts and certificates of deposit (CDs). FDIC insurance does not, however, cover other financial products and services that insured banks may offer, such as stocks, bonds, mutual fund shares, life insurance policies, annuities or municipal securities.

    Joint accounts are covered for $250,000 per co-owner. The limit is per person, per institution, so all your accounts at one institution are added together. If you have $200,000 in CDs and $100,000 in savings you would have $50,000 that is not covered.

    FDIC is an excellent example of good government in action. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was created in 1933 and serves to stabilize banking by eliminating the need to get ahead of any panic about whether the bank you have funds in is in trouble (which then leads to people creating a run on the bank…)

    From an FDIC September 25 2008 news release: the current FDIC balance is $45 billion (that is after a decrease of $7.6 billion in the second quarter). The FDIC is 100% paid for by fees on banks. The FDIC can raise the fees charged banks if the insurance fund needs to get increased funds.
    (more…)

  • Top 12 Manufacturing Countries in 2007

    The updated data from the United Nations on manufacturing output by country clearly shows the USA remains by far the largest manufacturer in the world. UN Data, in billions of current US dollars:

    Country 1990 1995 2000 2005 2006 2007
    USA 1,041 1,289 1,543 1,663 1,700 1,831
    China 143 299 484 734 891 1,106
    Japan 804 1,209 1.034 954 934 926
    Germany 438 517 392 566 595 670
    Russian Federation 211 104 73 222 281 362
    Italy 240 226 206 289 299 345
    United Kingdom 207 219 228 269 303 342
    France 224 259 190 249 248 296
    Korea 65 129 134 200 220 241
    Canada 92 100 129 177 195 218
    Spain 101 103 98 164 176 208
    Brazil 120 125 96 137 170 206
    Additional countries of interest – not the next largest
    India 50 59 67 118 135 167
    Mexico 50 55 107 122 136 144
    Indonesia 29 60 46 80 102 121
    Turkey 33 38 38 75 85 101

    The USA’s share of the manufacturing output of the countries that manufactured over $200 billion in 2007 (the 12 countries on the top of the chart above) in 1990 was 28%, 1995 28%, 2000 33%, 2005 30%, 2006 28%, 2007 27%. China’s share has grown from 4% in 1990, 1995 7%, 2000 11%, 2005 13%, 2006 15%, 2007 16%.

    Total manufacturing output in the USA was up 76% in 2007 from the 1990 level. Japan, the second largest manufacturer in 1990, and third today, has increased output 15% (the lowest of the top 12, France is next lowest at 32%) while China is up an amazing 673% (Korea is next at an increase of 271%).
    (more…)

  • Stock Market Decline

    Watching your new worth decline isn’t fun. But when investing over the long term you will have some good periods and some bad periods. Diversification can help smooth out the extremes but the markets are often driven by emotion. And those emotions (greed, fear…) cause extreme price swings. I am getting ready to invest more in the market. I don’t know how much further we will go down, or if we are at the bottom now (unlikely). But there are investments I am happy to own at these prices. The main reason I don’t buy more is the limitation of my capital. And I would rather buy in slowly so if prices decline I can get more for my money.

    Not surprisingly the stocks I am looking at are those in the 12 stocks for 10 years portfolio. I am looking at buying more Templeton Dragon Fund, Toyota and Google for myself now. I am happy to be able to buy more of these stocks for the long term. It is not fun to see my net asset value decrease but that does provide some opportunities for buying stocks at lower prices. They may turn out to be bargains, or maybe they will drop much further. That only time will tell, but I am happy to add to those positions at these prices.

    On the overall market I am waiting and watching. But I am leaning now toward moving more of my long term investing into stocks – I am already over-weighted there compared to the conventional wisdom but that is my style. I am willing to take more risk with a long long term investment portfolio. As the time frame shrinks (and the assets grow) I believe in reducing the risk profile for the overall portfolio (though I still believe conventional wisdom over-emphasizes price volatility risk (compared to inflation risk, for example). This market does have real potential for creating serious long term problems, which is why I need to think more (and get more information) about the long term implications.

    Related: Investment Risks – books on investing – Does a Declining Stock Market Worry You? – Uncertain Economic Times

  • Ignorance of Capitalism

    Chatting with Obama by Bill O’Reilly

    You can decide if that’s change we should believe in, but keep in mind that the unintended consequences of government interference in the marketplace are impossible to predict. Free markets have a way of chafing under government imposition.

    I really wish people understood capitalism. Capitalism requires regulation. It was known to all the economist in Adam Smith’s time that the government must regulate or powerful forces that would not allow the free market to function as it should – which destroys the potential of capitalism. This is not some minor point, it is absolutely essential to the theory of how capitalism provides value to society.

    The ignorance that equates allowing manipulation of the market by powerful forces undermining capitalism (which is supported by those that claim to support capitalism – “regulation distorting free markets”) with disrupting the free market annoys me. I know I should accept that ignorance is just rampant but sometimes I can’t get over it. I truly support capitalism and seeing it abused by so many ignorant pundits and politicians is distressing.

    And when those with influence constantly reinforce ideas based on ignorance then many, that can’t think for themselves, accept idiotic ideas like “free markets” should allow oligopolies to consolidate reducing the benefits of capitalism, that polluters should be allowed to push negative externalities onto the public, that allowing trust fund babies to receive massive inheritances is good (capitalism is meant to reward those that contribute, not reward those who were related to someone useful) and that the inheritance tax is bad (it is the BEST tax that exists, arguably along with taxes on negative externalities) and on and on.

    The idiotic idea that government regulation of markets is interference is equivalent to saying police interfere with freedom by enforcing laws against violent crime. Yes the watchmen must be watched. You can have bad policing and bad regulation; but the idea that policing the free market, in itself is wrong, is so ignorant we have to stop accepting such claims as if they were anything but ravings of radicals or ignorant people (or people that are both).

    By the way I am using ignorant with the sense of “lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified.” Sometimes the word is used to claim the other person’s opinion is wrong, which is not an accurate way to use the word. It is my opinion that those espousing crazy ideas like, free markets are those without regulation, don’t understand capitalism is based upon the idea of perfect competition. If they do, but have decided that fundamental aspect (along with negative externalities, rewards based on who your parents are instead of what you produce…) of capitalism is wrong, but they have a new theory that somehow updates capitalism I am waiting to hear about it. I am basing my guess of their ignorance on their statement seeming to be completely disconnected with capitalist theory.
    (more…)

  • Kiva Fellows Blog: Nepalese Entrepreneur Success

    photo of Rita Bashnet

    Kiva has added a fellows blog – which is a great idea. The fellows are funded by Kiva (fellows are unpaid) to go to spend time in the countries Kiva facilitates loans for working with the local partners. This post is about Rita Bashnet (in photo) an entrepreneur from Nepal:

    Field visits are by far the best part about being a Kiva Fellow. You’re given the opportunity to hop on a motorbike, hike up a village trail, and actually see the impact of a Kiva loan firsthand.
    …
    Five years ago, Ms. Rita took her first loan of NRs. 10,000 (USD $150) and purchased some extra seed and fertilizer in the hopes of expanding her small vegetable patch. With the profits from this initial investment and a second loan from Patan Business and Professional Women (they offer a graduated loan program), she then purchased her first dairy cow.
    …
    After hearing about a program that subsidized the installation of methane gas storage tanks, Ms. Rita took another loan and applied for the program. With this new system, she is now able to capture the valuable gas released from her cow’s waste in a simple controlled-release storage tank. Today she no longer purchases gas from the city and can even sell some during times of shortage.
    …
    Ms. Rita exemplifies the potential of microfinance. A combination of access to capital and strategic investment has allowed her and her family to drastically improve their economic situation in a short five years.

    Great story, and exactly my hope for using capitalism to improve the standard of living for people around the globe. I notice today, for the first time, some of those seeking loans are about to have their listings expire unfunded. Kiva gives listings 30 days to be funded. I have no problem if some loans are not funded (I want to help entrepreneurs by providing funding to build a business – some loans are for things like adding a room onto their house, which is fine but not what I want to support with interest free loans from me). But, this is a big change from when I couldn’t find anyone to loan to (they had so many people looking to lend that they didn’t have enough loans to fund). If you haven’t loaned money through Kiva (or you haven’t added to your loan portfolio recently), please consider it now. If you do, send me your Kiva lender link and I will add it to Curious Cat Kivans. My biggest wish for this blog is to get more readers listed on that page.

    Related: Using Capitalism to Make a Better World – Funding Entrepreneurs in Nicaragua, Ghana, Viet Nam, Togo and Tanzania – 2006 Nobel Peace Prize to Economist – Frontline Explores Kiva in Uganda – Trickle Up

  • Naked Short Selling

    Short selling is when you sell something before you buy it (you try to sell high and then buy low later, instead of buying low and then selling high later). In order to sell short, you are required to borrow the shares that you then sell. So if I own 1,000 shares of Google (I wish), I could lend them to someone to sell. Nothing happens to my position, it is just that those shares are now allocated to that short sale. If I sell them then the short seller has to go borrow them elsewhere or buy the stock to close their position. In general the borrowing is either from brokers that hold shares for individuals or from large institution (mutual funds, insurance companies…).

    However from everything that I read it appears the SEC hasn’t bothered to actually enforce this law much. There was a bunch of excitement recently when the SEC announced it would bother to enforce the law to protect a few large banks, many of whom are said to practice naked short selling but didn’t like it when that was done to their stock. As you can see, this does make the SEC look pretty bad, when they chose to enforce a law, not in all circumstances, but only to protect a few of those who actually take advantage of the SEC’s failure to enforce the law to make money.

    CEOs Launch Web Site To Protect Short Sellers

    In 2005, the SEC required the publishing of the daily threshold lists, which include companies that have a high degree of FTDs [failure to deliver – stocks sold short with the promise they would borrow the shares but they then don’t]. Brokers are mandated 13 days to resolve any FTDs after landing on the lists. Despite this, some companies have been there for hundreds of days, with millions of failed shares.

    Some people find the whole concept of short selling bad since it is based on making money on stock price declines. I don’t feel that way and believe it can help the market. But it requires regulators that actually do their jobs and enforce laws. A favorite tacit of those who seek to keep open special ways for themselves to benefit from abusing the system is to try and make things seem complex. The recent SEC order saying they would enforce the intent of the law to protect a few powerful banks from the behavior many (or most) practice themselves for years shows that it isn’t that complicated.

    Adding the decision not to enforce the requirement to borrow shares to their recent decision to eliminate the requirement that short sales take place on down ticks in price (a measure put in after the 1929 stock market crash to not have short sellers accelerate market declines and insight panic seems like a really bad combination).

    Related: Shorting Using Inverse Funds – Monopolies and Oligopolies do not a Free Market Make – Fed Continues Wall Street Welfare – SEC data on “failures to deliver”

  • Medieval Peasants had More Vacation Time

    There are ways to get more vacation time

    De Graff, national coordinator of Take Back Your Time Day, based his figures on the number of religious holidays peasants took off to eat, drink and spend time with their families, and found it was about two weeks extra.
    …
    According to Robinson, mentioning to your boss that you are willing to go on vacation without any pay can often be a very effective way to get some time off.
    …
    Take what you get: It may seem obvious, but many people don’t check how much time they are entitled to take off. Many others are reluctant to take the average nine days of paid vacation to which they are entitled, often because they are afraid it will show weakness or lack of loyalty.

    Joe Robinson said there may be “ongoing subtle discouragement” in the work force, but employees should remember that they are entitled to their vacation and should not be afraid to take it. In 2005, U.S. workers collectively turned down a staggering 1.6 million years of vacation time that was offered to them.

    I find these discussions of how little time off we have interesting. Similar studies look further back, at hunter gathers and find similar patterns. Still they are a bit misleading. What about total hours worked during the year (for peasants). What about the conditions of work and life. What about life expectancy… Still I agree with the thought that more vacation is more important than more work to fund more spending. I would rather reduce my spending and have more free time. I have taken unpaid vacation myself, and have worked part time, at times, to buy myself more freedom to spend my time as I wished.

    Related: Vacation: Systems Thinking – Workplace Experiments

  • Copywrong

    In response to: Fair Use Rights by David Bradley

    Copyright is a taking of a public benefit for a private entity. This was put into law in order to increase the total public benefit. The idea was that taking from the public to provide the creator a limited-term, exclusive, government-granted, right to their work would encourage individuals to invest their time in creating works that would benefit society.

    So the debate is properly about how great the taking from the public should be. It seem to me the current situation is completely corrupt. Many of the actions are taking public benefit to provide to the private entity where no possible public benefit exists. Extending copyright periods of long ago created works, where obviously the public is harmed purely for private benefit. No possible argument can be made that their is a payoff to the public for this taking.

    If you wanted to take such an action and made it only for new work then their could be an argument that now a creator knows they have 100 years of government provided rights and therefore investing more time and effort in their work creates new and better work. I don’t believe this argument but at least it is possible. The current actions though are mainly about large companies using government to take from the public to provide themselves private benefit with no corresponding public benefit.

    Lawrence Lessig is the person who has the best insight in this area, in my opinion: The Value of the Public Domain.

    Dr. Deming published his seven deadly diseases of western management a couple decades ago. I would add 2 new diseases: Excessive executive compensation and a broken intellectual property system.

    Fair use is the right to reference (and quote limited portions of) works that have been granted government copyright protection. This is integral to the whole idea of creating the greatest public benefit (even while providing some government imposed limits on public rights to the creator). The large companies now are using lawyers to greatly increase the harm to society by expanding the taking of public benefit. They threaten and scare many into paying fees (or completely avoiding works that have been granted limited government granted copyright rights) where none are are rightly due (see Lawrence Lessig for examples). This causes great harm to society for the private benefit of a few. This is an obvious failure of government. Those countries that are successful at adopting more sensible systems are going to have a great advantage over those countries that chose to continue to increasingly bad practices of harming society to benefit a few private interests.

    Related: What is Wrong with Copyright Taking Public Good for Private Special Interests – Innovation and Creative Commons – Diplomacy and Science Research – More Government Waste – Crazy Watchmen – General Air Travel Taxes Subsidizing Private Plane Airports – China and the Sugar Industry Tax Consumers

  • Student Credit Cards

    I posted before on how universities seek profits instead of helping students develop good financial literacy and habits. Here are some tips on how you should use your credit card. College Credit-Card Hustle

    Universities and their alumni associations have discovered an unlikely and disturbing source of revenue: Increasingly, they are selling students’ personal information to big credit-card companies eager for young customers.

    Using state public disclosure laws, Business Week has obtained more than two dozen confidential contracts between major schools and card-issuing banks keen to sign up undergraduates with mounting expenses for tuition, books, and travel. In some instances, universities and alumni groups receive larger payments from the banks if students use their school-branded cards more frequently.

    The growing financial alliance between schools and banks raises questions about whether universities are encouraging students to incur additional high-interest debt at a time when many young people graduate from college owing tens of thousands of dollars.
    …
    Universities rarely negotiate favorable terms for their students, according to people familiar with the practice. On the contrary, some schools and booster groups entice undergraduates to sign up for cards with low initial interest rates that are soon replaced by steep double-digit rates.

    Schools (and if some try to play legal games about alumni associations being separate, I don’t accept that) should fully disclose exactly what they are doing. I know they can make all sorts of excuses about why being open and honest is not right for them. Well, I think it is easy to predict they will be selling out their students and hiding that fact (if they must be open about what they are doing they will avoid some of the most egregious behavior because they know there will be consequences if they obviously sell out students). And, now Business Week has evidence that many are.

    If a school is not open and honest about the deals they are making just assume they are selling out the students for their own gain. I can’t really see why we would want to support such behavior and I would encourage us not to.
    (more…)

  • Failing Infrastructure in the USA

    The cracks are showing

    For the past few years it has been hard to ignore America’s crumbling infrastructure
    …
    Even worse is the influence of the pork-barrel. Only around 20 states use cost-benefit analyses to evaluate transport projects; of these, just six do so regularly. Alaska’s “bridge to nowhere” is an infamous result of this sort of planning. But it is not exceptional. Two months after the bridge collapsed in Minneapolis, the Senate approved a transport and housing bill that included money for a stadium in Montana and a museum in Las Vegas.
    …
    Such plans stand in stark contrast to the federal government’s strategy today. America invests a mere 2.4% of GDP in infrastructure, compared with 5% in Europe and 9% in China, and the distribution of that money is misguided.

    I think they underestimate our ability to ignore. For example we have over $500,000 in federal government debt per household and continue to raise taxes on future generations without any guilt. I think our capacity to ignore is pretty large and certainly large enough to ignore the decision to spend money on things other than infrastructure repair.

    I think those that don’t somehow manage to remain ignorant all know that China has taken the lead in investing in infrastructure and that the USA has chosen to elect politicians that are gutting infrastructure investments (and still spending far beyond the resources they have available). I can’t imagine many who understand economics have any trouble seeing which country is investing in the future and which country is selling out its future. It is not the choice I wish was being made in the USA but it is obviously the choice we are making.

    Related: USA Infrastructure Needs Improvement – Politicians Again Raising Taxes On Your Children – Manufacturing Takes off in India – True Level of USA Federal Debt