Investing Curiouscatblog

Tag: risks

  • Too-Big-to-Fail Bank Created Great Recession Cost Average USA Households $50,000 to $120,000

    A report by the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank, Assessing the Costs and Consequences of the 2007–09 Financial Crisis and Its Aftermath, puts the costs to the average household of the great recession at $50,000 to $120,000.

    A confluence of factors produced the December 2007–June 2009 Great Recession—bad bank loans, improper credit ratings, lax regulatory policies and misguided government incentives that encouraged reckless borrowing and lending.

    The worst downturn in the United States since the 1930s was distinctive. Easy credit standards and abundant financing fueled a boom-period expansion that was followed by an epic bust with enormous negative economic spillover.
    …
    Our bottom-line estimate of the cost of the crisis, assuming output eventually returns to its pre-crisis trend path, is an output loss of $6 trillion to $14 trillion. This amounts to $50,000 to $120,000 for every U.S. household, or the equivalent of 40 to 90 percent of one year’s economic output.

    They say “misguided government incentives” much of which are due to payments to politicians by too-big-to-fail institution to get exactly the government incentives they wanted. There is a small bit of the entire problem that is likely due to the desire to have homeownership levels above that which was realistic (beyond that driven by too-big-to-fail lobbyists).

    “Were safer” says a recent economist. Which I guess is true in that it isn’t quite as risky as when the too-big-to-fail-banks nearly brought down the entire globally economy and required mass government bailouts that were of a different quality than all other bailouts of failed organizations in the past (not just a different quantity). The changes have been minor. The CEOs and executives that took tens and hundreds of millions out of bank treasures into their own pockets then testified they didn’t understand the organization they paid themselves tens and hundreds of a millions to “run.”

    We left those organizations intact. We bailed out their executives. We allowed them to pay our politicians in order to get the politicians to allow the continued too-big-to-fail ponzie scheme to continue. The too-big-to-fail executives take the handouts from those they pay to give them the handouts and we vote in those that continue to let the too-big-to-fail executives to take millions from their companies treasuries and continue spin financial schemes that will either work out in which case they will take tens and hundreds of millions into their person bank accounts. Or they won’t in which case they will take tens of millions into their personal bank accounts while the citizens again bail out those that pay our representatives to allow this ludicrous system to continue.

    (more…)

  • What the Bailout and Stimulus Are and Are Not

    The huge banking bailouts and stimulus bill are meant to counter-balance the huge problems the economy is suffering through. The damage caused to the economy, is largely from unwise risks that were allowed by regulators and politicians that have not panned out and are now greatly damaging the economy. It is always easy for politicians to pay out money in an attempt to buy our way out of problems. That is what the stimulus and bailout bills are doing. They are yet again heaping huge debts on our children and grandchildren.

    The bailout and stimulus packages are not about preventing foolish risks to the economy by huge banks that would make the economy safer in the future. Those types of bills are very hard to pass as the politicians get great sums of money to allow people to risk the economy for their own benefit. The concept of the stimulus is not to fix the cause of the problem but do cope with the problem we are left with due to people that paid themselves huge amounts of money. Now the taxpayers get to fund the huge payouts wall street has given themselves.

    This is because they never actually provided the value they claimed. They merely created false returns to claim they provided a benefit to justify obscene pay (many of them truly didn’t understand this is what they were doing so beyond failing they were so incompetent [while accepting well over a million dollars a year] they didn’t even understand that the financial games they were playing were failing. It is hard to know what is worse, being so incompetent while claiming you deserve millions or knowing you are just paying yourself money based on false claims of value.

    Either way, the banks are left bankrupt – having worthless securities created by those paying themselves huge amounts of money. If the huge banks fail the financial system collapse creates huge problems – businesses that have operated for decades by borrowing some funds (responsibly) go bankrupt because no funds are available to lend them, etc..

    The stimulus is not about fixing the problems of the past it is about countering the huge decline from the bubble economy. That bubble economy was funded largely by claiming value where none existed thereby allowing people to spend huge amounts of money based on those faulty claims. How people are shocked that playing financial games doesn’t actually make hundreds of billions of dollars appear out of thin air is beyond me.
    (more…)

  • MicroFinance Currency Risk

    I have been curious how Kiva deals with currency risk. Kiva is a great resource for providing micro-lending and the opportunity to engage in choosing who you will lend to. But my transactions are all in US$ and the loans in the field are in the local currency. This creates an issue of what happens when currency values fluctuate. I asked a question on the Kiva LinkedIn group (an excerpt is shown here):

    A lender takes out a loan of $100 with 10 months to repay. If the loan is in the local currency, what if the value of that currency during the 10 months declines by 20%? Then the bank has received all their money back but they owe Kiva $100 but they only have $80 worth of the local currency (again ignore that the payments are made monthly – since it doesn’t effect the issue at hand – currency rates). Hows does Kiva deal with this currency risk? Do the local partner banks take the risk…?

    I was directed to a great slideshow showing Kiva’s lending policies. It turns out Kiva does have the local banks take the currency risk. So they have to pay back $100, if the local currency value is now $80, they would have a loss, of course the local currency value could also have risen, then the local bank has a gain.

    They have a chart showing the cost of capital to local Kiva lenders at 0-1% plus currency exchange risk (which they say some banks choose to hedge and others just take the risk), which is about the lowest cost of capital around. Kiva charges no interest on the loans to the local banks. The costs come from the requirements (the cost of adding a profile – the time of staff of the bank to add the information…) of using the Kiva website.

    Updates
    1) Kiva updated their policy to put any currency loss greater than 20% on the lenders (up to 20% losses are taken by the bank, above 20% are taken by those lending through Kiva). But the banks can chose to take the currency risk, which they could do to encourage lenders to select their loans to fund.
    2) They updated it again to make it a decision by the bank, which means often the lenders bear the risk (it is stated on each loan how the risk is assigned)

    Curious Cat Kiva connections: Curious Cats Kiva lending team – Curious Cat Kivans – Funding Entrepreneurs in Nicaragua, Ghana, Viet Nam, Togo and Tanzania – Kiva Fellows Blog: Nepalese Entrepreneur Success – Kiva related blog posts

  • Personal Finance Basics: Health Insurance

    Much of personal finance is not amazingly complex once you take some time to lay out the basics. We have covered some important topics previously: tips on using credit cards, retirement saving, creating an emergency fund… One of the most critical factors is to insure yourself against possible catastrophic events.

    Some personal finance mistakes can set you behind, say falling to save for retirement when you are 28 or cashing in your 401(k) when you switch jobs at 27. Those mistakes however are most often manageable. You just need to save more later. For health insurance the critical need is to protect yourself from huge costs.

    Bankruptcies are a huge problem due to health costs. If you have done everything else right and have saved up say $150,000 in mutual funds (in addition to retirement savings and a house) at age 40 but have no health insurance there is little I can think of more likely to result in your losing that saving than a health crisis when you are without coverage (disability insurance is another critical personal finance need that I will discuss in another post and the another such risk – as is an uninsured home). The costs of health care are just too large for any but the richest to survive a major cost without either ruining an entire lifetime of smart financial moves or coming close.

    There are certain things that cannot be compromised in your personal financial situation. Health coverage for significant costs is one of those. If you can afford a $5,000 (or higher) deductible that is fine. The critical need for health insurance is not the first $2,000 or $20,000 but the 2nd, 3rd, 4th… $100,000 bill. A bill for $2,000 you can’t afford is a challenge but a bill for $100,000 you can’t afford can ruin decades of smart and diligent financial moves.
    (more…)