Category Archives: Economics

California: Part V

What do you do when you’re short money?  Do you spend less?  Go try and earn more?  Or do you go and hold your hat on the street?

California can’t t spend less.  They won’t do what it takes to earn more.  The only option left open to them is to ask you and I for money:

California’s political leaders, who are facing the daunting challenge of closing an estimated $20.7 billion budget deficit this year, are looking to Washington for help. Just don’t call it a bailout.

Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said he plans to head to the nation’s capital “early and often” seeking federal assistance. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger already has put the federal government on notice that he wants billions he says the state is owed. And outgoing Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Baldwin Vista (Los Angeles County), said she would head east as soon as this month.

Awesome.  California continues to drive themselves deeper and deeper into debt and insolvency.  And then, when the well is dry, they come running to the Federal government for help.

Only in America.

Hard to See This Coming

In an effort to curb banks from “predatory lending” and “profit taking”, Washington lawmakers enacted legislation that our Dear Beloved Leader signed into law.  Basically the new law makes it harder for banks to raise rates it charges folks who fail to make payments.

First, I often find it hilarious when groups of people chastise banks or lenders for trying to make money for “selling money” or lending money to people.  Especially when these people fail to pay that money back.  Fail to pay it back either “on time” or “at all”.  As if these lending institutions exist for the sole purpose of handing out discretionary money.  At times likes these, I always ALWAYS trot out my favorite “put your money where your mouth is” argument.  { by the way, didja catch that pun?!?  money where your mouth is? }.  If someone you know, or even if it’s you in this situation, think that people, banks or institutions should lend money without regard to being paid back, go to prosper.com and lend your own money to people who can’t afford to pay it back.  This is the perfect opportunity.  You don’t have to be a fancy shmancy bank with billions of dollars.  Even a couple hundred bucks would be appreciated.

Okay, back to the point.  When banks are restricted in their ability to sell their product to a group of people, they will react by:

  1. Stop selling that product
  2. Charging the non-regulated customers more for the same product
  3. Like the force of water, work around the obstacle

In this case, the banks choose option #3:

(AP) It’s no mistake. This credit card’s interest rate is 79.9 percent.

Typically, the First Premier card comes with a minimum of $256 in fees in the first year for a credit line of $250. Starting in February, however, a new law will cap such fees at 25 percent of a card’s credit line.

In a recent mailing for a preapproved card, First Premier lowers fees to just that limit – $75 in the first year for a credit line of $300. But the new law doesn’t set a cap on interest rates. Hence the 79.9 APR, up from the previous 9.9 percent.

The new law restricts the fees for selling money.  So, in response, the banks just raise the rate of interest.  Awesome.

But even with these new rates, does a credit card appeal to certain people?

As harsh as First Premier’s terms seem, that could be a blow to those who rely on the card, said Odysseas Papadimitriou, CEO of CardHub.com.

“Even when the cost of credit is astronomical, for people in true emergencies, it’s much better than not having access to credit,” said Papadimitriou.

Sure.  In fact, for some people, even at these rates, the borrowed money passes the marginal value threshold.  Then again, so did the flat rates the government restricted.

Where Are All the Jobs Going?

When we look backwards, it’s easy.  We see that as we lost steel working jobs and coal mining jobs to various other countries around the world, we found other more value added jobs here.  We became technology leaders in fields such as IT and medical care.

However, looking forward is much harder.  Both in vision and on the soul.  We literally can’t see the type of industry that we will identify and advance in.  That industry that will provide the new jobs of tomorrow.  Further, we view tomorrow with trepidation wondering what role this new world order has in store for us.

It’s valid.  Life is somewhat hard.  It requires grown up planning and grown up work.  It requires sacrifice, often times significant.  But fear can not stop advancement.  And advancement initiates creative destruction.  My advice; learn smelting.  Because stone is a thing of the past:

Hat tip:  Mark Perry at Carpe Diem

HealthCare: Price vs. Cost

I wish that I could say that I said it.  But I didn’t; Mr. Munger did:

Right now, our attempts at reform are doomed by a law of accounting physics: Insurance can’t cost less than the health care it insures.

Consider: I have car insurance. But my insurance doesn’t pay for oil changes.

Instead, I go down to the Happy Lube, without an appointment, get a diagnosis of the needs of my car, and choose services based on a price list published online. Some of these services are complex, and require large expensive machines and equipment. But I don’t have to pay a separate bill, or go wait in another line, at another office or lab.

… compare it to car insurance, for two people. Imagine neither of us has to pay for our car repairs, from accidents or engine wear. We can go to the garage as often as we like, and get whatever service we want, for free. The car repair shop can charge our insurance whatever they want, because insurance pays everything. An oil change would bill out at $600; an alignment would bill our insurance $2,200, with another $800 tacked on to pay for micro-digital wheel axis imaging.

Of course, the services aren’t really free. At the end of every year, we sum the total repair costs for both people, and each of us pays half of that total.

The cost of that free car care would be enormous, because of all the unnecessary and overly expensive charges. Of course, the government could subsidize the final bill; would that help? The answer is no, for two clear reasons.

First, having the government (meaning taxpayers) subsidize the total would do nothing to reduce the runaway cost increases. Buyers won’t shop around if they don’t know or care about real costs. Subsidies mean I don’t pay if I spend, and I don’t save if I’m frugal.

Second, let’s expand the example from two people (each paying half) to 300 million people getting free care (but paying an equal share of total costs). We have met the public option, and it is us! Once we are all paying ourselves, there is no one else to hit up to help with the costs. We are simply taking each person’s money in taxes, then giving some of it back in subsidies. There is no saving, even to individuals.

Just good stuff.

Chinese Pander Bear

In a stunning display of economic brilliance, the Obama Administration announced today:

WASHINGTON (AP) – The U.S. government is imposing new duties on imports of steel pipes from China…

The U.S. International Trade Commission voted Wednesday to impose duties between 10.36 percent and 15.78 percent on the pipes

Once again, our administration is trying to stifle and regulate trade when no such need is required.  If a product or service is introduced into the market at a price the seller is willing to sell, a buyer should be able to enter into contract with that seller if he wants.  Right now, the administration is needlessly preventing such an arrangement at the price being offered.  This will have the effect of punishing the purchasing party and raising the costs of that parties goods.  Further, the demand for that product will be artificially lowered causing an imbalance in the allocation of scare resources which have alternative uses.

On the other hand, we must never forget that the business of politics is inherently, ahh, political.  And if we read a little deeper we see:

The move is in response to a complaint filed in April by U.S. Steel and six other steel manufacturers, as well as the United Steelworkers’ union.

Ahh, I see.  One of the largest group of Obama supporters would like the United States government to intervene on its behalf in order to make their product more cost competitive in the market place.  Interesting.  But surely, there must be a group whose interests are HURT by the rising cost of Chinese steel?

The U.S. International Trade Commission voted Wednesday to impose duties between 10.36 percent and 15.78 percent on the pipes, which are mostly used in the oil and gas industries.

Masterful stroke.  With one stone, Obama gets two birds; assistance for his Union thugs and a penalty to the dirty nasty oil and gas industries.

The {gravel} Road to Perdition

I don’t know what this means.  I’m not sure it means anything at all.  Then again, it may mean everything:

The high price of pavement and the sour economy have driven municipalities in states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Vermont to roll up the asphalt — a mile here, a few miles there, mostly on back roads — rather than repave.

Now look, I grew up in a county FULL of gravel roads.  I used to drive gravel roads to visit my friends and to get to work.  Heck, when I was teaching the directions I gave to family was “turn left at the gravel road”.  I am FINE with gravel.

Question is: I this a sign of fiscal responsibility or a harbinger of bad times ahead?

Government Preventing Entire Class of People From Buying a Home

The State of North Carolina claims that it is serving the people.  It claims that by relieving my money from, well, from me, they are helping other people in need.  Never mind for a second that I already help people in need through my various charity giving and other activities.  Or that the people I help are people that I think need help.  Or that, in any case, this decision on what to do with my money should be mine to make.  The State is helping an entire class of citizens, or so they claim:

Raleigh, N.C. — A program launched a year ago has helped more than 2,500 North Carolina homeowners avoid foreclosure, officials said Monday.

Birdsong will now receive mortgage assistance, including payments for property taxes and homeowner’s insurance for at least the next nine months and could benefit for as long as two years.

That’s one way of looking at it.  The other way, of course, is to look at it this way:

Raleigh, N.C. — A program launched a year ago has prevented more than 2,500 potential North Carolina homeowners from attaining affordable housing, officials said Monday.

Their goal of home ownership has been prevented because select citizens will now receive mortgage assistance, including payments for property taxes and homeowner’s insurance for at least the next nine months and could benefit for as long as two years.

But serious.  I’m sure that all the people who are in danger of losing their homes are good, hard-working people who almost certainly bought a home that was within their means and needs.  Right?  No?

She said she’s most relieved that her three children will be able to spend the holidays at home.

“Each one of them has their own room. They’re like, ‘It’s mine,'” said Birdsong, a widow. “I wouldn’t want to take that from them. They’ve had enough problems already.”

So, a single mother with one revenue stream over reaches, buys a FOUR BEDROOM HOME surprisingly finds herself in a financial pinch.  And because of that, the government takes my money, thereby preventing me from giving to who I think is deserving, props up this family and keeps what would otherwise become a more affordable home from falling into the hands of more responsible home owners?  Unbelievable.

For the record, I grew up in a house that had TWO bedrooms.  Sure, after a bit we added a bedroom, but that was when my family grew from 3 to 6.  That’s 2 rooms for 4 kids.  If only I could have had my own room.

Merry Christmas.

The Most for the Least

If you aren’t careful, you will be told that American’s have it pretty bad; especially right now.

Unemployment is up, health care is up.  All of it, is up.  Except wages, and they are down.  It’s all bad news.

Except, well, maybe it’s not from Mark Perry:

when you factor in the fact that the typical new home built today (average of 2,519 square feet) are more than 50% larger than the typical new home in 1973 (1,660 square feet, see bottom chart above, data here), Americans have never had it better when it comes to housing costs.

Just another example that we are living in the best to live.  Ever.

Average Monthly Mortgage

Compared to:

Average New Home Size

When Down is Up

Let’s say that you are running a lemonade stand.  You buy your cups, your ice, sugar and lemons.  All in, it costs you $0.10 to make a cup of lemonade.  Include your time and risk plus the profit you need and you sell it for $0.20 a cup.  Anything less and the risk of running the stand forces you to pack up shop and go back to work at the local grocery store.

Now, let’s say that the friendly neighborhood HOA comes over and says that some of your customers are kids who are thirsty because they are mowing lawns for the old ladies on the block.  They can’t afford the 20 cents you are asking but it’s just not fair that these kids don’t get to drink lemonade when they are so so thirsty and so so deserving.  You shake your head and kick your toes….you know what’s coming.

If you wanna keep selling lemonade on this street you have to sell lemonade to the kids for a nickel; a stinkin’ nickel!

What happens to your lemonade business model?  Well, you either:

  • Quit
  • Raise the price such that you compensate for the reduced price to kids
  • Move to another street so that none of your customers, including the poor deserving yet thirsty kids have ANY lemonade.

Right?

So how is that different than this?

WASHINGTON – A bipartisan group of lawmakers hopes to finally win a long struggle to ease curbs against importing low-cost prescription drugs…

Same thing, right?

Drug companies have a market that they sell into.  The prices currently are set such that they make the profits they need to exist.  In fact, those prices might ALREADY be higher than they would because foreign nations are already forcing prices below market levels.

Well, guess what will happen when/if this becomes law?  Our fearless reporter gets to it.  In the SIXTH paragraph:

…the billions of dollars drug companies would lose if Americans began buying large amounts of lower-priced pharmaceuticals from other nations — has prevented the proposal from being implemented for about a decade.

Good for our young reporter!  Finally he gets what might happen.  See, if the drug companies lose billions of dollars they are going to have to …. Ahh, what?  What did you say?  Our fearless reporter is continuing in ANOTHER direction?

“Does the pharmaceutical industry have a lot of clout? The answer is they sure do,” Dorgan said Wednesday. He said when it comes to a vote, he hoped “the interest of the American consumers will have as much clout in this chamber.”

Heh.  I should have known.  But lucky for us we can spot the key phrase:

the interest of the American consumers

And that means that this bill is a bunch of:

You Know What This IS

Finally

This I can understand.  I may not agree as to the degree, but I can understand it.

Thomas L. Friedman has an op-ed article in the NY Times.

When I see a problem that has even a 1 percent probability of occurring and is “irreversible” and potentially “catastrophic,” I buy insurance. That is what taking climate change seriously is all about.

But if we don’t prepare, and climate change turns out to be real, life on this planet could become a living hell. And that’s why I’m for doing the Cheney-thing on climate — preparing for 1 percent.

This I can understand.  This I can accept.

See, there is a chance that I am going to get into a car accident and perhaps die.  Maybe just become paralyzed.  I get that.  And to that extent, I do –I really DO–  buy insurance against that.  To protect against my car and my health.  Heck, I even protect against my income; even my death.  ALL of this is understandable to every one of us.

Well, NOT every one of us.  I mean, there are still people out there who refuse to buy even the most basic health insurance and then, when they DO become sick, expect me to go to work for them in order that I pay their bills.

But I digress. Each of us can understand the concept of insurance.  And we innately have a sense of the chances of bad things happening to us and then of how much we are willing to sacrifice in order to protect against that.

With that said, I am not aware of a SINGLE person who wouldn’t acknowledge that the world is warming right now.  And that, further, it could be caused by or contributed to by humans.  Key word could.  The question now is, how much are you willing to pay for that insurance policy.

Me?  Well, let’s just say that I continue to get in my car, with my kids, at LEAST twice a day.