Investing Curiouscatblog

Tag: quote

  • Low Mortgage Rates Not Available to Everyone

    The lowest 30 Year fixed mortgage rates in 37 years is great news for those looking to buy a house or to re-finance. However, that truth (the lowest rate) masks another truth, that it is available to a somewhat limited pool of borrowers. The rates for jumbo 30 year fixed mortgages and for regular 30 year fixed mortgages, for those with lower credit ratings, are not at the lowest rates they have ever reached. And getting mortgage rates that don’t require a 10-20% down payment and fully documented financial position are not as low as they have ever been. 15 year fixed rates are also low, but are not at all time lows. FHA loans still allow very low down payments, but others have moved away from this practice (which is a wise move).

    Current rates, national average, from Bankrate: 30 year fixed 5.26%, 30 year fixed jumbo 6.96% (a full 170 basis points higher rate), 15 year fixed 5.07%. Jumbo rates have been less than 40 basis points higher than conventional rates most of time (based on my memory – I am looking for a source to confirm). The site does not present the credit score but my guess is these rates are based on a credit score of 700, or higher. Last week the jumbo rates increased by 11 basis points and regular 30 year rates fell by 3 basis points.

    Related: Jumbo v. Regular Fixed Mortgage Rates: by Credit Score – historical mortgage rate chart – Nearly 10% of Mortgages Delinquent or in Foreclosure – misinterpreting data

    Changes in the Market For Jumbo Mortgages

    During the period May 4, 2007 to November 7, 2008, the spread in wholesale interest rates between a $417,000 loan eligible for purchase by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and a $418,000 loan that is not eligible, increased from 0.28% to 2.97%.
    …
    On Nov 12, 2008 I shopped for an $800,000 30-year fixed-rate mortgage on Mortgage Marvel, an on-line site that I reviewed earlier in 2008 (see A Look at Mortgage Marvel). The mortgage companies on the site quoted rates of 8.125% to 8.375%. The credit unions and banks, in contrast, quoted rates ranging from 5.875% to 7.875%. I have never before seen rate differences on the same transaction this large. They no doubt reflect wide differences in lender access to funding, which is symptomatic of a market in turmoil.

    Mortgage Q&A

    For example, I see from today’s rate sheet that a homeowner with 40 percent equity and an excellent credit score of 740 would receive a quote of 5.125 percent with no points or origination fees for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. A borrower with a credit score of 670 who has 20 percent equity would receive the same rate but would be charged two points. On a $300,000 loan, this makes the 5.25 percent rate $6,000 more expensive. If the homeowner with the lower credit score wanted to pay zero points, the rate would be well north of 6 percent.

  • Financial Planning Made Easy

    Scott Adams does a great job with Dilbert and he presents a simple, sound financial strategy in Dilbert and the Way of the Weasel, page 172, Everything you need to know about financial planning:

    • Make a will.
    • Pay off your credit cards.
    • Get term life insurance if you have a family to support.
    • Fund your 401(k) to the maximum.
    • Fund your IRA to the maximum.
    • Buy a house if you want to live in a house and you can afford it.
    • Put six months’ expenses in a money market fund. [this was wise, given the currently very low money market rates I would use “high yield” bank savings account now, FDIC insured – John]
    • Take whatever money is left over and invest 70% in a stock index fund and 30% in a bond fund through any discount broker, and never touch it until retirement.
    • If any of this confuses you or you have something special going on (retirement, college planning, tax issues) hire a fee-based financial planner, not one who charges a percentage of your portfolio.

    (more…)

  • Let the Good Times Roll (using Credit)

    Continuation of: USA Manufacturing is Healthy

    The real problem with the USA economy is that a country cannot live beyond its means forever. Those living in USA have consumed far more than they have produced for decades. That is not sustainable. The living beyond our means is mainly due to massively increased consumption, not shrinking output (in manufacturing or service). One, of many examples, of the increased consumption is average square footage of single-family homes in the USA: 1950 – 983; 1970 – 1,500; 1990 – 2,080; 2004 – 2,349.

    In case it isn’t totally obvious to you. You don’t fix this problem by encouraging more spending and borrowing: either by the government or by consumers. The long term problem for the USA economy is that people have consuming more than they have been producing. Personally, as this continues you reach a point where getting another credit card does not work. The same holds true for the collective health of a country. A country cannot solve the problem of having bills come due from decades of living beyond its means by charging more so that they can continue to live beyond their means.

    Where the USA is in the continuum, is hard for me to judge. For the sack of illustration, lets say a consumer can get to 10 cards before they finally fail. If the consumer reaches the limit on 2 credit cards they have the choice to continue to the party by getting another credit card. Or they have the choice of addressing the situation they have gotten themselves into. If they decide to become responsible they have a challenge but one they can endure with some hardships.

    If they press on to 5 credit cards and then max them out they come to the same decision. Dig themselves deeper in debt to avoid the problem today or live up their past behavior and become responsible. The work they have ahead of themselves is much more challenging than if they had started working on the problem when they only had 2 cards.

    If they press on to 9 cards and now have the decision again. The effort to find a solution may be almost impossible. Borrow more to pay for past mistakes while maintaining some expenditures may be possible (but they will have to live on less than they earn). By the time you are this far down the failed path you have so much going to pay for your past bills you can’t spend even close to what you currently earn on current expenses. Letting yourself get to this point is very bad. And most likely as a person you will go bankrupt.
    (more…)

  • USA Manufacturing Output Continues to Increase (over the long term)

    When looking at the long term data, USA manufacturing output continues to increase. For decades people have been repeating the claim that the manufacturing base is eroding. It has not been true. I realize the economy is on weak ground today, I am not talking about that, I am looking at the long term trends.

    The USA manufactures more than anyone else – by far. The percentage of total global manufacturing is the same today it was two decades ago (and further back as well). For decades people have been saying the USA has lost the manufacturing base – it just is not true. No matter how many times they say it does not make it true. It is true since 2000 the USA increase in manufacturing output (note not a decrease) has not kept pace with global grown in manufacturing output (global output in that period is up 47% and the USA is up 19% – Japan is down 10% for that period).

    I would guess 20 years from today the USA will have a lower percentage of worldwide manufacturing. But I don’t see any reason believe the USA will see a decline in total manufacturing output. I just think the rest of the world is likely to grow manufacturing output more rapidly.

    Looking at a year or even 2 or 3 years of manufacturing output data leaves a great deal of room to see trends where really just random variation exists. Even for longer periods trends are hard to project into the future.

    Conventional wisdom is correct about China growing manufacturing output tremendously. China has grown from 4% of the output of the largest manufacturing companies in 1990 to manufacturing 16% of the total output in China today. That 12% had to come from other’s shares. And given all you hear from the general press, financial press, politicians, commentators… you would think the USA must have much less than China today, so may 10% and maybe they had 20% in 1990. When actually in 1990 the USA had 28% and in 2007 they had 27%.

    Manufacturing jobs are not moving oversees. Manufacturing jobs are decreasing everywhere.
    (more…)

  • Easiest Countries for Doing Business 2008

    Singapore is again ranked first for Ease of Doing Business by the World Bank. For some reason they call the report issued in any given year as the report for the next year (which makes no sense to me). The data shown below is for the year they released the report.

    Country 2008 2007 2006 2005
    Singapore 1 1 1 2
    New Zealand 2 2 2 1
    United States 3 3 3 3
    Hong Kong 4 4 5 6
    Denmark 5 5 7 7
    United Kingdom 6 6 6 5
    Ireland 7 8 10 10
    Canada 8 7 4 4
    other countries of interest
    Japan 12 12 11 12
    Germany 25 20 21 21
    France 31 31 35 47
    Korea 23 30 23 23
    Mexico 56 44 43 62
    China 83 83 93 108
    India 122 120 134 138
    Brazil 125 122 121 122

    The rankings include ranking of various aspects of running a business. Some rankings for 2008: starting a business (New Zealand 1st, Singapore 10th, USA 6th, Japan 64th), Dealing with Construction Permits (St. Vincent and the Grenadines 1st, Singapore and New Zealand 2nd, USA 26th, China 176th), Employing Workers (Singapore and the USA 1st, Germany 142, Korea 152), protecting investors (New Zealand 1st, Singapore 2nd, Hong Kong 3rd, Malaysia 4th, USA 5th), enforcing contracts (Singapore 1, Hong Kong 2, USA 6, China 18), getting credit (Malaysia 1; UK and Hong Kong 2; Singapore, New Zealand and USA 5th), paying taxes (Maldives 1, Hong Kong 3, USA 46, Japan 112, China 132).

    These rankings are not the final word on exactly where each country truly ranks but they do provide a valuable source of information. With this type of data there is plenty of room for judgment and issues with the data. Several of my posts, from my other blogs, that I recommend on this topic: The Future is Engineering, Science and Engineering in Global Economics (more…)

  • Why America Needs an Economic Strategy

    In a recent article in Business Week Michael E. Porter makes some excellent points – Why America Needs an Economic Strategy:

    First, the U.S. has an unparalleled environment for entrepreneurship and starting new companies.

    Second, U.S. entrepreneurship has been fed by a science, technology, and innovation machine that remains by far the best in the world. While other countries increase their spending on research and development, the U.S. remains uniquely good at coaxing innovation out of its research and translating those innovations into commercial products.
    …
    Third, the U.S. has the world’s best institutions for higher learning, and they are getting stronger. They equip students with highly advanced skills and act as magnets for global talent, while playing a critical role in innovation and spinning off new businesses.

    Fourth, America has been the country with the strongest commitment to competition and free markets.
    …
    An inadequate rate of reinvestment in science and technology is hampering America’s feeder system for entrepreneurship. Research and development as a share of GDP has actually declined, while it has risen in many other countries.
    …
    A creeping relaxation of antitrust enforcement has allowed mergers to dominate markets. Ironically, these mergers are often justified by “free market” rhetoric. The U.S. is seeing more intervention in competition, with protectionism and favoritism on the rise. Few Americans know that the U.S. ranks only 20th among countries in openness to capital flows, 21st on low trade barriers, and 35th on absence of distortions from taxes and subsidies

    I have discussed similar idea in this blog and the Curious Cat Science and Engineering Blog: The Future is Engineering – Engineering the Future Economy – Science Gap – Not Understanding Capitalism

  • Canadian Banks Avoid Failures Common Elsewhere

    Canada’s banking system kept high and dry by strict regulation: Flaherty

    High banking standards have kept Canada’s financial institutions afloat and out of the kind of trouble that has sunk many of their international peers, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said Wednesday.
    …
    Some of the fundamentals credited with keeping Canada’s banks in the safe zone were put in place nearly a decade ago by the Liberal government of Jean Chretien, including a refusal to approve any Canadian bank mergers.
    …
    The finance minister said Canada is in a strong position to deal with the global crisis, with a strong banking system, a stable housing market and a federal budget surplus. “Other countries have been increasing their deposit standards, but they’re still for the most part below the high Canadian standard,” he said.

    Related: Monopolies and Oligopolies do not a Free Market Make – Too Big to Fail – What Should You Do With Your Government “Stimulus” Check? – The Budget Deficit, the Current Account Deficit and the Saving Deficit – 2nd Largest Bank Failure in USA History

  • Warren Buffett Webcast on the Credit Crisis


    Warren Buffett     quotes from the interview:

    • “In my lifetime I don’t think I have ever seen people as fearful economically as they are now”
    • “The major institutions in the world are all wanting to de-leverage”
    • “I don’t like what is going on with executive compensation“
    • “unemployment is going to go up under any circumstances, the 6.1 [% unemployment rate] is going to go higher, but whether it quits at 7% or whether it quites at 10, 11 or 12, depends on, among other things the wisdom of congress, and then the wisdom of caring out the plan congress authorizes”
    • “I just wonder if it [the $700 billion bailout] is enough”
    • “AIG would be doing fine today if they never heard of derivatives… I said they were possibly financial weapons of mass destruction and they have been, I mean they destroyed AIG, they certainly contributed to the destruction of Bear Stearns and Lehman”
    • The biggest single cause was that we had an incredible residential real estate bubble.
    • [on consuming more than we are producing] I don’t think it is the most pressing problem at all. We are trading away a little bit of our country all the time for the excess consumption that we have, over what we produce. That is not good. I think it is terrible over time.

    Related: Warren Buffett related posts – Credit Crisis Continues – Credit Crisis (August 2007)

  • Save Some of Each Raise

    Failing to save is a huge problem in the USA. Spending money you don’t have (taking on personal debt) and not even having emergency savings and retirement savings lead to failed financial futures. Even though those in the USA today are among the richest people ever to live many still seem to have trouble saving. Here is a simple tip to improve that result for yourself.

    Anytime you get a raise split the raise between savings, paying off debt (if you have any non-mortgage debt), and increasing the amount you have to spend. I think too many people think financial success is much more complicated than it is. Doing simple things like this (and some of the other things, mentioned in this blog) will help most people do much better than they have been doing.

    There are lots of ways to spend money. And many people find ways to spend all or more than all (credit card debt, personal loans…) they have which are sure ways to a failed financial future. So anytime you get a raise (a promotion, new job…) take a portion of that extra money and put it toward your financial future. The proportion can very but I would aim for at least 50% if you have any non-mortgage debt, don’t have a 6 month emergency fund, or are behind in saving for retirement, a house…

    Exactly how you calculate if you are behind, I will address in a future post (or you can look around for more information). By taking this fairly simple action you will be setting yourself up for a successful financial future instead of finding yourself falling behind, as so many do. And then when things go badly, as they most likely will sometime during your life, you will have built up a financial position to draw on. Instead of, as so many do now, find that you were living beyond your means when things were going well – which it doesn’t take a genius to see will lead to serious problems when things take a turn for the worse.

    So lets say you take a new job and get a raise of $4,000 a year. Instead of spending $4,000 more just put $2,000 away (pay off debt, add to your retirement savings, add to savings for a house, add to your emergency fund…). Then you get a promotion of another $3,000, increase your spending by $1,500 and save the rest. It is such a simple idea and just doing this you can find yourself in the top few percent of those making smart financial decisions. And if you get to the point that you are ahead in all your financial areas then you can take more of each raise you get (but most of the time you will have learned how valuable the extra saving are and figured out the extra toys really are not worth it). But if you want to, once you have created a successful financial life, you can choose to buy more toys.

    Related: Retirement Savings Survey Results – Earn more, spend more, want more

  • How Not to Convert Equity

    CNNMoney is not exactly intellectual discussion of economic and investing issues but normally it offers fairly good material for the large number of people. Especially those who really don’t want to read Warren Buffett or Brad Setser. Still the following quote in their article, Cashing in on hot real estate is just wrong:

    They also have one extremely valuable asset: a house in the now trendy Silverlake neighborhood of Los Angeles that’s worth $1 million, nearly four times what they paid in 1995. The equity, Handel says, is “lovely,” but it’s not doing them much good right now.
    …
    San Diego-based certified financial planners Christopher Van Slyke and Terry Green recommend an unconventional plan: taking out a new $500,000 ARM.

    Handel and Laport can pay off their existing mortgage before the rate rises and retire their other debts. They can put the remaining $200,000 into stock and bond funds.

    To be sure, borrowing against a house to put the proceeds into the market rarely makes sense. But in Handel and Laport’s case it does because so much of their net worth is tied up in their home, and the super-hot L.A. real estate market looks primed for a fall…

    They can convert equity that might melt away.

    They can what? In no way does increasing their leverage convert equity that might melt away. Any amount of “melting away” will still happen after this increase in leverage – no conversion has happened. They still have a full ownership interest in the real estate. If the value of their house fell $300,000 before or after this supposed “conversion” they would “lose” (on paper) the same amount: $300,000. The investment risk for the house has not changed (for the whole portfolio you could argue it has but that gets complicated and subject to debate).
    (more…)