There have been a hundred's of articles written over the last 12 months outlining what might happen to Mortgage Lending Industry if/when the federal government slows it's heavy participation through Fannie, Freddie and the Federal Housing Administration.
To say there would be no housing market without the government is an understatatement. thankfully, Washington has taken extraordinary steps to keep home loans available and affordable over the last 24 months. That caused a tentative housing recovery last year. Home sales reversed their four-year descent, while prices stabilized.
Now comes the hard part. Fannie, Freddie and the Federal Housing Administration are massive entities that purchase home loans, package them into investments and guarantee them against default. The price tag has been huge — $126 billion and growing.
The Obama administration has been surprisingly mute on the subject which makes me all the more neervous. Congress will hold its first today on how to restructure the mortgage system in the wake of the current financial crisis. How to manage change when the housing recovery remains too fragile and feeble for the government to step away. Even staunch free-market advocates who want to get rid of Fannie and Freddie in the long run don't see that happening anytime soon.
"The housing finance system clearly cannot continue to operate as it has in the past," said Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in testimony prepared for Tuesday's hearing held by the House Financial Services Committee. He added that any restructuring should wait until "a time of greater market stability."
My interpretation: See National Health Care. Get your cheap mortgage rates now!!!
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Housing's Continued Weakness (Existing Home Sales)
Earlier this week the Commerce Department reported a 7.2 percent decline in existing home sales. No surprise to anyone, this reflects continued evidence that high unemployment and tight lending standards are undercutting the government's attempts to prop up the market.
I would like to make a few points regarding the existing lending standards. First, we need to keep in mind that the government is currently buying roughly 93% of all residential mortgage activity in the US via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Without a robust capital markets outlet for mortgage backed securities, politics get to determine who obtains a home and who does not. Given the financial crisis of the last three years and the added negative press surrounding mortgages in general it's not surprising to see credit requirements sitting at their highest points in 15 years. While housing is not the largest employment industries in our nation, it does serve several critical needs of our country and must play a participatory role in our nations recovery. Out of reach lending standards is not going to help matters.
So back to Friday's report. Since the for forecast was so much worse than forecast and suggest the housing recovery will sputter without government support. The government has spent billions to keep mortgage rates low and give buyers tax breaks, but both programs are set to end this spring.
The National Association of Realtors said that home sales fell 7.2 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.05 million from a downwardly revised pace of 5.44 million in December. Economists expected a slight increase to a rate of 5.5 million.
Home sales have been sluggish this winter even though the deadline for a tax credit for first-time buyers was extended. It had been set to expire on Nov. 30. That caused sales to surge last fall. Then Congress extended the deadline until April 30 and expanded it to existing homeowners who move.
The housing report was another sign that consumers still aren't feeling comfortable making sizable purchases. With jobs still scarce, weak consumer spending is a key reason why economic growth is expected to be feeble this year.
Home sales are still up nearly 12 percent from the bottom, but are down 30 percent from their peak more than four years ago.
Last month, sales declined throughout the country, falling the most — nearly 11 percent — in the Northeast. Sales fell by about 7 percent in the South and Midwest and by more than 5 percent in the West.
Nationally, more than a quarter of buyers last month paid all cash, reflecting a surge of investors buying low-priced foreclosures, the Realtors group said.
Nationwide, the median sales price was $164,700, unchanged from a year earlier and down about 3 percent from December. The inventory of unsold homes on the market was down slightly. There is a 7.8 month supply at the current sales pace, up from a recent low of 6.5 months in November.
The bleak report comes after the government reported Wednesday that sales of newly built homes plunged 11 percent to a record low in January. The report, which measures signed contracts to buy homes rather than completed sales, also came as a surprise to economists.
Another question hanging over the housing market this year is whether interest rates will rise, and by how much. The Federal Reserves $1.25 trillion program to push down mortgage rates is scheduled to expire on March 31. This is a MAJOR concern for us here at Efinity. The affordability of homes right now is critical to this nation's recovery.
I would like to make a few points regarding the existing lending standards. First, we need to keep in mind that the government is currently buying roughly 93% of all residential mortgage activity in the US via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Without a robust capital markets outlet for mortgage backed securities, politics get to determine who obtains a home and who does not. Given the financial crisis of the last three years and the added negative press surrounding mortgages in general it's not surprising to see credit requirements sitting at their highest points in 15 years. While housing is not the largest employment industries in our nation, it does serve several critical needs of our country and must play a participatory role in our nations recovery. Out of reach lending standards is not going to help matters.
So back to Friday's report. Since the for forecast was so much worse than forecast and suggest the housing recovery will sputter without government support. The government has spent billions to keep mortgage rates low and give buyers tax breaks, but both programs are set to end this spring.
The National Association of Realtors said that home sales fell 7.2 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.05 million from a downwardly revised pace of 5.44 million in December. Economists expected a slight increase to a rate of 5.5 million.
Home sales have been sluggish this winter even though the deadline for a tax credit for first-time buyers was extended. It had been set to expire on Nov. 30. That caused sales to surge last fall. Then Congress extended the deadline until April 30 and expanded it to existing homeowners who move.
The housing report was another sign that consumers still aren't feeling comfortable making sizable purchases. With jobs still scarce, weak consumer spending is a key reason why economic growth is expected to be feeble this year.
Home sales are still up nearly 12 percent from the bottom, but are down 30 percent from their peak more than four years ago.
Last month, sales declined throughout the country, falling the most — nearly 11 percent — in the Northeast. Sales fell by about 7 percent in the South and Midwest and by more than 5 percent in the West.
Nationally, more than a quarter of buyers last month paid all cash, reflecting a surge of investors buying low-priced foreclosures, the Realtors group said.
Nationwide, the median sales price was $164,700, unchanged from a year earlier and down about 3 percent from December. The inventory of unsold homes on the market was down slightly. There is a 7.8 month supply at the current sales pace, up from a recent low of 6.5 months in November.
The bleak report comes after the government reported Wednesday that sales of newly built homes plunged 11 percent to a record low in January. The report, which measures signed contracts to buy homes rather than completed sales, also came as a surprise to economists.
Another question hanging over the housing market this year is whether interest rates will rise, and by how much. The Federal Reserves $1.25 trillion program to push down mortgage rates is scheduled to expire on March 31. This is a MAJOR concern for us here at Efinity. The affordability of homes right now is critical to this nation's recovery.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
FED LOOKING MORE LIKE JP MORGAN CHASE EVERY DAY....
The few remaining banks left on Wall Street aren't the only banks having a banner year. The Federal Reserve made record profits in 2009, as its unconventional efforts to prop up the economy created a windfall for the government.
The Fed will return about $45 billion to the U.S. Treasury for 2009, according to calculations by The Washington Post based on public documents. That reflects the highest earnings in the 96-year history of the central bank. The Fed, unlike most government agencies, funds itself from its own operations and returns its profits to the Treasury.
The numbers are good news for the federal budget and a sign that the Fed has been successful, at least so far, in protecting taxpayers as it intervenes in the economy — though there remains a risk of significant losses in the future if the Fed sells some of its investments or loses money on its stakes in bailed-out firms.
This turn of events comes as the banks that benefited from the Fed's actions are under the microscope: Major banks are expected to announce massive earnings and employee bonuses starting at the end of this week, and anger in Washington is at such a high boil that the Obama administration is likely to propose a fee on financial firms to recoup the cost of their bailout, officials confirmed Monday.
As it happens, the Fed's earnings for the year will dwarf those of the large banks, easily topping the expected profits of Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan Chase combined.
Much of the higher earnings came about because of the Fed's aggressive program of buying bonds, aiming to push interest rates down across the economy and thus stimulate growth. By the end of 2009, the Fed owned $1.8 trillion in U.S. government debt and mortgage-related securities, up from $497 billion a year earlier. The interest income on those investments was a major source of Fed profits — though that income comes with risks, as the central bank could lose money if it later sells those securities to reduce the money supply.
Emergency loans
The Fed also made money on its emergency loans to banks and other firms and on special programs to prop up lending, such as one that supports credit cards, auto loans, and other consumer and business lending. Those programs impose interest and fees on participants, with the aim of ensuring that the Fed does not lose money.
And while the central bank in its most recent financial report had recorded a $3.8 billion decline in the value of loans it made in bailing out the investment bank Bear Stearns and the insurer American International Group, the Fed also logged $4.7 billion in interest payments from those loans. Further losses — or gains — on the two bailouts are possible as time goes by. The Fed also charges fees for operating the plumbing of the financial system, such as clearing checks and electronic payments between banks.
From its revenue, the Fed deducts operating expenses, such as employee salaries, then returns almost all of the earnings that remain to the Treasury. The largest previous refund to the Treasury was $34.6 billion, in 2007.
"This shows that central banking is a great business to be in, especially in a crisis," said Vincent Reinhart, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Fed official. "You buy assets that have a nice yield, and your cost of funds is very low. The difference is profit."
The Fed plans to release its estimate of 2009 earnings Tuesday. The Post's calculation is based on combining data through September from the Fed's monthly balance sheet report with more recent data from the Treasury's daily budget statement.
Fed officials do not make policy with an eye toward maximizing profits. They are charged by law with managing the nation's money supply to keep employment high and prices stable, and earnings fluctuate depending on a wide range of factors as they pursue that goal. In the crisis, the central bank's policy has been to create money and use it to buy a wide variety of assets, which in turn pay interest.
Exotic investments
In effect, the unprecedented range of actions taken to address the crisis has made the Fed's balance sheet more like that of a private bank. A firm such as Bank of America takes money from depositors, whom it pays little or nothing in interest, and lends it out at significantly higher rates. The Fed, similarly, takes money that banks keep on deposit, at a rate of 0.25 percent, and lends it to the U.S. government by buying Treasury securities and, lately, to home buyers and other private borrowers though more exotic investments.
While that resulted in higher earnings in 2009, it exposes the Fed to more risks down the road. "They've moved up the risk-return curve, as they have more long-term assets and more things that involve credit risk," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial.
If the price of Treasury bonds or mortgage-related securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were to fall in the years ahead, and Fed leaders decided they need to drain money from the financial system by selling off some of their portfolio, the central bank would lose money. "If they do enough asset sales and rates go high enough, that could eat into future profits pretty substantially," said Michael Feroli, an economist at J.P. Morgan Chase.
Question is, I wonder if the tax payer will recieve a refund?
The Fed will return about $45 billion to the U.S. Treasury for 2009, according to calculations by The Washington Post based on public documents. That reflects the highest earnings in the 96-year history of the central bank. The Fed, unlike most government agencies, funds itself from its own operations and returns its profits to the Treasury.
The numbers are good news for the federal budget and a sign that the Fed has been successful, at least so far, in protecting taxpayers as it intervenes in the economy — though there remains a risk of significant losses in the future if the Fed sells some of its investments or loses money on its stakes in bailed-out firms.
This turn of events comes as the banks that benefited from the Fed's actions are under the microscope: Major banks are expected to announce massive earnings and employee bonuses starting at the end of this week, and anger in Washington is at such a high boil that the Obama administration is likely to propose a fee on financial firms to recoup the cost of their bailout, officials confirmed Monday.
As it happens, the Fed's earnings for the year will dwarf those of the large banks, easily topping the expected profits of Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan Chase combined.
Much of the higher earnings came about because of the Fed's aggressive program of buying bonds, aiming to push interest rates down across the economy and thus stimulate growth. By the end of 2009, the Fed owned $1.8 trillion in U.S. government debt and mortgage-related securities, up from $497 billion a year earlier. The interest income on those investments was a major source of Fed profits — though that income comes with risks, as the central bank could lose money if it later sells those securities to reduce the money supply.
Emergency loans
The Fed also made money on its emergency loans to banks and other firms and on special programs to prop up lending, such as one that supports credit cards, auto loans, and other consumer and business lending. Those programs impose interest and fees on participants, with the aim of ensuring that the Fed does not lose money.
And while the central bank in its most recent financial report had recorded a $3.8 billion decline in the value of loans it made in bailing out the investment bank Bear Stearns and the insurer American International Group, the Fed also logged $4.7 billion in interest payments from those loans. Further losses — or gains — on the two bailouts are possible as time goes by. The Fed also charges fees for operating the plumbing of the financial system, such as clearing checks and electronic payments between banks.
From its revenue, the Fed deducts operating expenses, such as employee salaries, then returns almost all of the earnings that remain to the Treasury. The largest previous refund to the Treasury was $34.6 billion, in 2007.
"This shows that central banking is a great business to be in, especially in a crisis," said Vincent Reinhart, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Fed official. "You buy assets that have a nice yield, and your cost of funds is very low. The difference is profit."
The Fed plans to release its estimate of 2009 earnings Tuesday. The Post's calculation is based on combining data through September from the Fed's monthly balance sheet report with more recent data from the Treasury's daily budget statement.
Fed officials do not make policy with an eye toward maximizing profits. They are charged by law with managing the nation's money supply to keep employment high and prices stable, and earnings fluctuate depending on a wide range of factors as they pursue that goal. In the crisis, the central bank's policy has been to create money and use it to buy a wide variety of assets, which in turn pay interest.
Exotic investments
In effect, the unprecedented range of actions taken to address the crisis has made the Fed's balance sheet more like that of a private bank. A firm such as Bank of America takes money from depositors, whom it pays little or nothing in interest, and lends it out at significantly higher rates. The Fed, similarly, takes money that banks keep on deposit, at a rate of 0.25 percent, and lends it to the U.S. government by buying Treasury securities and, lately, to home buyers and other private borrowers though more exotic investments.
While that resulted in higher earnings in 2009, it exposes the Fed to more risks down the road. "They've moved up the risk-return curve, as they have more long-term assets and more things that involve credit risk," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Mesirow Financial.
If the price of Treasury bonds or mortgage-related securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were to fall in the years ahead, and Fed leaders decided they need to drain money from the financial system by selling off some of their portfolio, the central bank would lose money. "If they do enough asset sales and rates go high enough, that could eat into future profits pretty substantially," said Michael Feroli, an economist at J.P. Morgan Chase.
Question is, I wonder if the tax payer will recieve a refund?
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
WHY AMERICAN CONSUMERS CAN'T ADD
Came accross the following article this morning from CNBC. The first question which came to mind was, are we really at a 10% unemployment or much worse. Who's adding the numbers...
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2009/12/when-i-published-gotcha-capitalism-two-years-ago-i-was-in-for-a-big-surprise-as-i-talked-about-systemic-hidden-fee-fraud-al.html
When I published "Gotcha Capitalism" two years ago, I was in for a big surprise. As I talked about systemic hidden fee fraud all around the country, many, many friends (and even co-workers) found me and asked in hushed tones, “What’s a mutual fund?” “What’s comprehensive and collision?” “What’s a mortgage point?”
It was obvious from these conversations that millions of Americans are severely lacking in financial basics, and this shortcoming played a major role in the housing bubble and the resulting economic collapse. I wanted to know why.
I'm the hidden fee guy, the “Gotcha” guy. People like me usually rant about dreadful banks are and how unfair big companies are, about how corporate greed caused our economic collapse and about how rampant unfairness built the house of cards that just collapsed all around us and sent the world into a global recession.
But it's impossible to ignore the fact that individual consumers made a lot of really bad choices in the past decade. They bought homes with $2,000 mortgages when they only earned $3,000 a month. They borrowed money at 30 percent interest to buy granite countertops. Aren’t they to blame for their own demise? To be an honest journalist, I had to ask: Why are American consumers so gullible, so seemingly out of control? Is there something wrong with us?
Yes, several things. But most important is this: Americans are terrible at math.
I know you know that. But my research shows we are far worse at math than you think.
Exhibit A: Think about the last time you had lunch with four or more friends. What happened when the bill came? Everyone pulled out calculators, there was a lot of murmuring and head scratching and still some of your friends just ended up throwing down a $20 bill and hoping for the best. Now, imagine that crowd in a car dealership or with a mortgage broker. They wouldn’t stand a chance.
Turns out, there's an entire field of study -- albeit a small one -- devoted to this subject. It's called “innumeracy” -- or mathematical illiteracy. It’s a hidden epidemic in our society. And the consequences are dire.
Just as there is a hidden epidemic of people who are functionally illiterate in our country, there is big problem (bigger, by my reckoning) with people who can’t do basic math. There’s no way to function in our society without understanding money, percentages, interest calculation and so on. Yet in a recent government study, less than one in seven American adults ranked “proficient” at math.
Here are a few examples of innumeracy in action:
According to the Department of Education’s National Assessment of Adult Literacy, U.S. adults are terrible at solving real-world math problems, like calculating tips or comparing prices in grocery stores. Some dismal results:
*Only 42 percent were able to pick out two items on a menu, add them, and calculate a tip.
*Only 1 in 5 could reliably calculate mortgage interest.
*1 in 5 could not calculate weekly salary when told an hourly pay rate.
*Only 13 percent were deemed “proficient.” Worse yet, only 1 in 10 women, 1 in 25 Hispanics and 1 in 50 African Americans made the grade.
*Americans are terrified of numbers when it counts most: 20 million Americans pay someone to file their 1040EZ, a one-page tax form with around 10 blanks to fill out.
Also, these numbers show up in U.S. student math scores, which are abysmal:
*The U.S. ranks 25th among 30 industrialized nations in math scores, down near Serbia and Uruguay. U.S. students thought they had the highest grades of any nation in the study, however.
*Half of 17 year olds couldn't do enough math to work in an auto plant, according to President's National Mathematics Advisory Panel.
*Study after study shows U.S. achievement falls off the cliff during middle school, when subjects like fractions and percentages are introduced -- exactly the skills you need as a consumer or, for that matter, to move on to algebra, calculus and advanced sciences.
But here’s another essential point. How can Johnny learn to add if Johnny’s teachers can’t?
*In 18 U.S. states, not even one elementary math class is required for certification.
*Some teaching colleges allow admittance as long as students have math skills equal to their future students -- that is, as long as they could pass a 5th grade math test.
*It's possible in some states to pass the teacher certification exam (Praxis) without answering a single math question correctly.
*In Massachusetts, there's a special program to reacquaint teachers with math. The man who runs the program says half of teachers can't answer basic questions involving fractions and has concluded that many elementary teachers are "phobic" about math.
*Teachers seem to be math-averse from the start. College bound seniors headed for elementary education have math SAT scores significantly lower than the national average (483 vs. 515).
There are many, many other reasons why U.S. consumers tripped and fell down a mine shaft during the past two years. In my new book, "Stop Getting Ripped Off," I lay out a series of other explanations: Greed, laziness, lack of government regulation and magical thinking. And I offer up my own handy guide to solving today’s consumer puzzles, from buying a home to saving for retirement. But innumeracy is the biggest culprit.
Two years ago, I would have had to lay out a doomsday scenario to draw attention to this ticking time bomb. Well, the bomb’s gone off. People who were bad at math could hardly have been expected to see through the consequences of an adjustable-rate mortgage, or to make a sound bet on their future earnings potential. These consumers didn’t stand a chance against mortgage brokers, real estate agent and an overheated market. They can’t fight with financial planners over fees that are swallowing one-third of their retirement savings. Heck, they can’t even stop taking out 250 percent APR payday loans, 1,000 percent overdraft protection loans or paying tax preparation firms $100 for three minutes work to fill out simple tax forms. Now, millions of individuals are losing their homes and are on pace to become destitute in old age.
If I only shine a light on only one topic with this book, I hope it will be the hidden epidemic of innumeracy in America. Because if we can’t add, if we continue suffer from an extreme lack of mathematical self-confidence, any recovery we begin is surely doomed.
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2009/12/when-i-published-gotcha-capitalism-two-years-ago-i-was-in-for-a-big-surprise-as-i-talked-about-systemic-hidden-fee-fraud-al.html
When I published "Gotcha Capitalism" two years ago, I was in for a big surprise. As I talked about systemic hidden fee fraud all around the country, many, many friends (and even co-workers) found me and asked in hushed tones, “What’s a mutual fund?” “What’s comprehensive and collision?” “What’s a mortgage point?”
It was obvious from these conversations that millions of Americans are severely lacking in financial basics, and this shortcoming played a major role in the housing bubble and the resulting economic collapse. I wanted to know why.
I'm the hidden fee guy, the “Gotcha” guy. People like me usually rant about dreadful banks are and how unfair big companies are, about how corporate greed caused our economic collapse and about how rampant unfairness built the house of cards that just collapsed all around us and sent the world into a global recession.
But it's impossible to ignore the fact that individual consumers made a lot of really bad choices in the past decade. They bought homes with $2,000 mortgages when they only earned $3,000 a month. They borrowed money at 30 percent interest to buy granite countertops. Aren’t they to blame for their own demise? To be an honest journalist, I had to ask: Why are American consumers so gullible, so seemingly out of control? Is there something wrong with us?
Yes, several things. But most important is this: Americans are terrible at math.
I know you know that. But my research shows we are far worse at math than you think.
Exhibit A: Think about the last time you had lunch with four or more friends. What happened when the bill came? Everyone pulled out calculators, there was a lot of murmuring and head scratching and still some of your friends just ended up throwing down a $20 bill and hoping for the best. Now, imagine that crowd in a car dealership or with a mortgage broker. They wouldn’t stand a chance.
Turns out, there's an entire field of study -- albeit a small one -- devoted to this subject. It's called “innumeracy” -- or mathematical illiteracy. It’s a hidden epidemic in our society. And the consequences are dire.
Just as there is a hidden epidemic of people who are functionally illiterate in our country, there is big problem (bigger, by my reckoning) with people who can’t do basic math. There’s no way to function in our society without understanding money, percentages, interest calculation and so on. Yet in a recent government study, less than one in seven American adults ranked “proficient” at math.
Here are a few examples of innumeracy in action:
According to the Department of Education’s National Assessment of Adult Literacy, U.S. adults are terrible at solving real-world math problems, like calculating tips or comparing prices in grocery stores. Some dismal results:
*Only 42 percent were able to pick out two items on a menu, add them, and calculate a tip.
*Only 1 in 5 could reliably calculate mortgage interest.
*1 in 5 could not calculate weekly salary when told an hourly pay rate.
*Only 13 percent were deemed “proficient.” Worse yet, only 1 in 10 women, 1 in 25 Hispanics and 1 in 50 African Americans made the grade.
*Americans are terrified of numbers when it counts most: 20 million Americans pay someone to file their 1040EZ, a one-page tax form with around 10 blanks to fill out.
Also, these numbers show up in U.S. student math scores, which are abysmal:
*The U.S. ranks 25th among 30 industrialized nations in math scores, down near Serbia and Uruguay. U.S. students thought they had the highest grades of any nation in the study, however.
*Half of 17 year olds couldn't do enough math to work in an auto plant, according to President's National Mathematics Advisory Panel.
*Study after study shows U.S. achievement falls off the cliff during middle school, when subjects like fractions and percentages are introduced -- exactly the skills you need as a consumer or, for that matter, to move on to algebra, calculus and advanced sciences.
But here’s another essential point. How can Johnny learn to add if Johnny’s teachers can’t?
*In 18 U.S. states, not even one elementary math class is required for certification.
*Some teaching colleges allow admittance as long as students have math skills equal to their future students -- that is, as long as they could pass a 5th grade math test.
*It's possible in some states to pass the teacher certification exam (Praxis) without answering a single math question correctly.
*In Massachusetts, there's a special program to reacquaint teachers with math. The man who runs the program says half of teachers can't answer basic questions involving fractions and has concluded that many elementary teachers are "phobic" about math.
*Teachers seem to be math-averse from the start. College bound seniors headed for elementary education have math SAT scores significantly lower than the national average (483 vs. 515).
There are many, many other reasons why U.S. consumers tripped and fell down a mine shaft during the past two years. In my new book, "Stop Getting Ripped Off," I lay out a series of other explanations: Greed, laziness, lack of government regulation and magical thinking. And I offer up my own handy guide to solving today’s consumer puzzles, from buying a home to saving for retirement. But innumeracy is the biggest culprit.
Two years ago, I would have had to lay out a doomsday scenario to draw attention to this ticking time bomb. Well, the bomb’s gone off. People who were bad at math could hardly have been expected to see through the consequences of an adjustable-rate mortgage, or to make a sound bet on their future earnings potential. These consumers didn’t stand a chance against mortgage brokers, real estate agent and an overheated market. They can’t fight with financial planners over fees that are swallowing one-third of their retirement savings. Heck, they can’t even stop taking out 250 percent APR payday loans, 1,000 percent overdraft protection loans or paying tax preparation firms $100 for three minutes work to fill out simple tax forms. Now, millions of individuals are losing their homes and are on pace to become destitute in old age.
If I only shine a light on only one topic with this book, I hope it will be the hidden epidemic of innumeracy in America. Because if we can’t add, if we continue suffer from an extreme lack of mathematical self-confidence, any recovery we begin is surely doomed.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Foreign Markets a Boon for US Fixed Assets
This evening, Greece's credit rating was lowered by Fitch which has sparked a fairly noticeable change in after hours trading (out of equities). This comes almost one year after S&P lowered the sovereign nation's rating to an A-. As a fledgling recovery takes hold across most of the US and Europe, the deterioration of some government balance sheets represents a continuing risk which may help fuel fixed income trades over the coming days. This is somewhat noteworthy because the Fed has pretty much spent their allotment of $300 billion for the direct purchase of government debt instruments and most recent non farm payroll data showed the economy came with 11,000 jobs of moving into positive job creation mode. These two conditions have many fretting that Uncle Sam will have to offer higher yields on the stacks of 10-year notes and 30-year bonds to attract the capital he is after. We may see foreign funds continue to seek a flight to quality "interestingly enough" just in time.
Release Date & Time
Economic Indicator
Consensus Estimate
My Analysis
Mon. Dec. 7, 12:45 p.m. ET
Nothing of importance
Tues. Dec. 8, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$40 billion of 3-year notes
The participation levels from domestic and foreign investors was on target.
Wed. Dec. 9, 10:00 a.m. ET
Oct. Wholesale Inventories
-0.5% vs. last -0.9%
This old stale data will likely have little, if any direct impact on the trend trajectory of mortgage interest rates today.
Wed. Dec. 9, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$21 billion of 10-year notes
Based on this evening's activities thanks to Fitch', this offering may find more aggressive than the technical indicators were initially flashing as an increased number of signs that an interest rate bottom may be near. If I am right, we may see a fairly strong rally in fixed equities supporting lower interest rates.
Thurs, Dec. 10,
Most mortgage-backed securities “roll” to January delivery.
Thurs. Dec. 10, 8:30 a.m. ET
Initial jobless claims for the week ended 12/5
Up 3,000
There are few who doubt the labor sector’s recuperation will be excruciatingly slow. The anticipated uptick in last week’s jobless claims will probably be largely shrugged off by mortgage investors resulting in little, if any change to the current level of mortgage
interest rates.
Thurs. Dec. 10, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$13 billion of 30-year bonds
This is a key indicator. Investors will be watching very closely to see how this offering fares now that the Fed won't be a direct buyer of this debt obligation.
Fri. Dec. 11, 8:30 a.m. ET
Nov. Retail Sales
Ex. auto
+0.6% vs. last +1.4%
+0.4% vs. last +0.2%
Consumer spending is a major driving force behind economic growth and it will be virtually impossible for the recovery to gain traction without it. Report numbers that match or fall below the consensus estimate will tend to support steady to perhaps fractionally lower mortgage rates. The risk is that Nov. Retail Sales prove stronger than expected.
Fri. Dec. 11, 10:00 a.m. ET Oct.
Business Inventories
-0.3% vs. last -0.4%
Nothing worth noting here.
Release Date & Time
Economic Indicator
Consensus Estimate
My Analysis
Mon. Dec. 7, 12:45 p.m. ET
Nothing of importance
Tues. Dec. 8, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$40 billion of 3-year notes
The participation levels from domestic and foreign investors was on target.
Wed. Dec. 9, 10:00 a.m. ET
Oct. Wholesale Inventories
-0.5% vs. last -0.9%
This old stale data will likely have little, if any direct impact on the trend trajectory of mortgage interest rates today.
Wed. Dec. 9, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$21 billion of 10-year notes
Based on this evening's activities thanks to Fitch', this offering may find more aggressive than the technical indicators were initially flashing as an increased number of signs that an interest rate bottom may be near. If I am right, we may see a fairly strong rally in fixed equities supporting lower interest rates.
Thurs, Dec. 10,
Most mortgage-backed securities “roll” to January delivery.
Thurs. Dec. 10, 8:30 a.m. ET
Initial jobless claims for the week ended 12/5
Up 3,000
There are few who doubt the labor sector’s recuperation will be excruciatingly slow. The anticipated uptick in last week’s jobless claims will probably be largely shrugged off by mortgage investors resulting in little, if any change to the current level of mortgage
interest rates.
Thurs. Dec. 10, 1:00 p.m. ET
Treasury auctions
$13 billion of 30-year bonds
This is a key indicator. Investors will be watching very closely to see how this offering fares now that the Fed won't be a direct buyer of this debt obligation.
Fri. Dec. 11, 8:30 a.m. ET
Nov. Retail Sales
Ex. auto
+0.6% vs. last +1.4%
+0.4% vs. last +0.2%
Consumer spending is a major driving force behind economic growth and it will be virtually impossible for the recovery to gain traction without it. Report numbers that match or fall below the consensus estimate will tend to support steady to perhaps fractionally lower mortgage rates. The risk is that Nov. Retail Sales prove stronger than expected.
Fri. Dec. 11, 10:00 a.m. ET Oct.
Business Inventories
-0.3% vs. last -0.4%
Nothing worth noting here.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
What Happened to November?
Better yet, what happened to October? The last 60 days have been a flash and have left the Efinity Report void of updates. Perhaps my New years resolution will include a more time spent on submitting these valuable nuggests. That said, thank you to many of you for the emails inquiring on the Efinity Report.
Release Date & Time
Economic Indicator
Consensus
Estimate
My Analysis
Mon. Nov. 30
Nothing of any significance.
Tues. Dec. 1, 10:00 a.m. ET
Nov. Institute of Supply Mgmt.
55.0 vs. last 55.7
Because auto manufacturing is contributing less to growth this measure of factory activity is expected to post a modest decline. Most mortgage investors will likely show little reaction to this data. This report to exert little, if any influence on the direction of the markets today. I would suggest to see how the Dubai World problem plays itself out. Given the lengthy and continued run up in fixed income pricing, it would not surprise me to see a fairly strong pull pack in late afternoon trading.
Wed. Dec. 2, 2:00 p.m. ET
Fed Beige Book released
This report, named for the color of its cover, is a compilation of economic reports from all 12 Federal Reserve districts. The brighter tones of recovery in most districts will likely be offset by still grim news in terms of employment. The chance any of the data in this report will surprise investors is small. Look for this data to be essentially “toothless” with respect to its impact on the trend trajectory of mortgage interest rates.
Thurs. Dec. 3, 8:30 a.m. ET
Revised Q3 Productivity & Unit Labor Costs
+8.6% vs. last +9.5%
-4.2% vs. last -5.2%
If the consensus estimate proves correct, this report may be a little unsettling for mortgage investors. A downward adjustment in productivity gains and an upward revision in labor cost is not typically the “stuff” that lower mortgage interest rates are made
of.
Thurs. Dec. 3, 8:30 a.m. ET
Initial jobless claims for the
week ended 11/28
Up 14,000
According to data provided by the Dismal Scientist initial jobless claims have shown a tendency to rise in the week including the Thanksgiving holiday in 7 of the past 10 years.
There is little reason to expect this phenomenon will not prevail once again this time around. Look for this data to draw little more than a passing glance from mortgage investors.
Thurs. Dec. 3, 10:00 a.m. ET
Nov. Institute of Supply Mgmt.
Service Sector Index
51.5 vs. last 50.6
The fractional improvement in the month-over-month value for this measure of activity in the largest segment of the economy is broadly anticipated. A reading that matches or lands close to the consensus estimate will likely result in little change to mortgage interest rates. Only in the most unlikely event that the ISM Service Sector Index falls below a reading of 50.0 would mortgage interest rates be expected to move noticeably lower as a direct result of this report.
Thurs. Dec. 3, 10:00 a.m. ET
Senate Banking Committee holds confirmation hearing on the nomination of Fed Chairman
Bernanke to a second term as chief of the U.S. central bank. Look for Committee members to attempt to lay complete blame for the swoon in the economy at the feet of Mr. Bernanke (a
hack job on a bureaucratic scapegoat is always a far better political option as opposed to accepting responsibility directly – especially with mid-term elections so close at hand). The exchanges here have the potential to be heated – but nothing in the way of market moving rhetoric is likely.
Fri. Dec. 4, 8:30 a.m. ET Nov.
Nonfarm payrolls
Jobless rate -130,000
10.2% vs. last 10.2%
Businesses accross most channels are still shedding workers. The headline nonfarm payroll number may have improved but the first-quarter average monthly loss still reflects loss of 691,000 jobs. It will likely take a headline job loss of 150,000 or more and/or a jobless rate of 10.3% or more to create enough stir in the markets and interest rates lower.
Release Date & Time
Economic Indicator
Consensus
Estimate
My Analysis
Mon. Nov. 30
Nothing of any significance.
Tues. Dec. 1, 10:00 a.m. ET
Nov. Institute of Supply Mgmt.
55.0 vs. last 55.7
Because auto manufacturing is contributing less to growth this measure of factory activity is expected to post a modest decline. Most mortgage investors will likely show little reaction to this data. This report to exert little, if any influence on the direction of the markets today. I would suggest to see how the Dubai World problem plays itself out. Given the lengthy and continued run up in fixed income pricing, it would not surprise me to see a fairly strong pull pack in late afternoon trading.
Wed. Dec. 2, 2:00 p.m. ET
Fed Beige Book released
This report, named for the color of its cover, is a compilation of economic reports from all 12 Federal Reserve districts. The brighter tones of recovery in most districts will likely be offset by still grim news in terms of employment. The chance any of the data in this report will surprise investors is small. Look for this data to be essentially “toothless” with respect to its impact on the trend trajectory of mortgage interest rates.
Thurs. Dec. 3, 8:30 a.m. ET
Revised Q3 Productivity & Unit Labor Costs
+8.6% vs. last +9.5%
-4.2% vs. last -5.2%
If the consensus estimate proves correct, this report may be a little unsettling for mortgage investors. A downward adjustment in productivity gains and an upward revision in labor cost is not typically the “stuff” that lower mortgage interest rates are made
of.
Thurs. Dec. 3, 8:30 a.m. ET
Initial jobless claims for the
week ended 11/28
Up 14,000
According to data provided by the Dismal Scientist initial jobless claims have shown a tendency to rise in the week including the Thanksgiving holiday in 7 of the past 10 years.
There is little reason to expect this phenomenon will not prevail once again this time around. Look for this data to draw little more than a passing glance from mortgage investors.
Thurs. Dec. 3, 10:00 a.m. ET
Nov. Institute of Supply Mgmt.
Service Sector Index
51.5 vs. last 50.6
The fractional improvement in the month-over-month value for this measure of activity in the largest segment of the economy is broadly anticipated. A reading that matches or lands close to the consensus estimate will likely result in little change to mortgage interest rates. Only in the most unlikely event that the ISM Service Sector Index falls below a reading of 50.0 would mortgage interest rates be expected to move noticeably lower as a direct result of this report.
Thurs. Dec. 3, 10:00 a.m. ET
Senate Banking Committee holds confirmation hearing on the nomination of Fed Chairman
Bernanke to a second term as chief of the U.S. central bank. Look for Committee members to attempt to lay complete blame for the swoon in the economy at the feet of Mr. Bernanke (a
hack job on a bureaucratic scapegoat is always a far better political option as opposed to accepting responsibility directly – especially with mid-term elections so close at hand). The exchanges here have the potential to be heated – but nothing in the way of market moving rhetoric is likely.
Fri. Dec. 4, 8:30 a.m. ET Nov.
Nonfarm payrolls
Jobless rate -130,000
10.2% vs. last 10.2%
Businesses accross most channels are still shedding workers. The headline nonfarm payroll number may have improved but the first-quarter average monthly loss still reflects loss of 691,000 jobs. It will likely take a headline job loss of 150,000 or more and/or a jobless rate of 10.3% or more to create enough stir in the markets and interest rates lower.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Where do you Fit?
Forbes takes a look at common threads in the lives of America’s wealthiest
By Duncan Greenberg
Forbes
updated 6:35 a.m. CT, Thurs., Oct . 1, 2009
Want to become a tech titan or hedge fund tycoon? Up your chances by dropping out of college or going to Harvard and working at Goldman Sachs.
Are billionaires born or made? What are the common attributes among the uber-wealthy? Are there any true secrets of the self-made?
We get these questions a lot, and decided it was time to go beyond the broad answers of smarts, ambition and luck by sorting through our database of wealthy individuals in search of bona fide trends. We analyzed everything from entrepreneurs' parents' professions to where they went to school, their track records in the early stages of their careers and other experiences that may have set them on the path to extreme wealth.
Our admittedly unscientific study of the self-made members of the Forbes 400 yielded some interesting results.
First, a significant percentage of them had parents with a high aptitude for math. The ability to crunch numbers is crucial to becoming a billionaire, and mathematical prowess is hereditary. Some of the most common professions among the parents of Forbes 400 members (for whom we could find the information) were engineer, accountant and small-business owner.
Consistent with the rest of the population, more American billionaires and near-billionaires were born in the fall than in any other season. However, relatively few of them were born in December, historically the month with the eighth-highest birth rate.
Of the 274 self-made tycoons on the Forbes 400, 14 percent either never started or never completed college. The number of precocious college dropouts is highest among those who forged careers as technology entrepreneurs: Bill Gates of Microsoft, Steve Jobs of Apple, Michael Dell of Dell, Larry Ellison of Oracle and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook.
Forbes 400 members who derive their fortunes from finance make up one of the most highly educated sub-groups: half of them have graduate degrees. Roughly 70 percent of those with M.B.A.s obtained their master's degrees from one of three Ivy League schools: Harvard, Columbia or the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business.
Goldman Sachs has attracted a large share of hungry minds that went on to garner 10-figure fortunes. At least 11 current and recent billionaire financiers worked at Goldman or one of it subsidiaries early in their careers, including Edward Lampert, David Tepper, Daniel Och and Leon Cooperman.
Several Forbes 400 members suffered bitter professional setbacks early in their careers that heightened their fear of failure. Pharmaceutical tycoon R.J. Kirk's first venture was a flop — an experience he regrets but appreciates. "Failure early on is a necessary condition for success, though not a sufficient one," he told Forbes in 2007.
According to a statement read by Phil Falcone during a congressional hearing in November 2008, his botched buyout of a company in Newark, N.J., in the early 1990s taught him "several valuable lessons that have had a profound impact upon my success as a hedge fund manager."
Several current and former billionaires rounded out their Yale careers as members of Skull and Bones, the secret society portrayed with enigmatic relish by Hollywood in movies like The Skulls and W. Among those who were inducted: investor Edward Lampert, Blackstone co-founder Stephen Schwarzman, and FedEx founder Frederick Smith.
© 2009 Forbes.com
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33110048/ns/business-forbescom/
By Duncan Greenberg
Forbes
updated 6:35 a.m. CT, Thurs., Oct . 1, 2009
Want to become a tech titan or hedge fund tycoon? Up your chances by dropping out of college or going to Harvard and working at Goldman Sachs.
Are billionaires born or made? What are the common attributes among the uber-wealthy? Are there any true secrets of the self-made?
We get these questions a lot, and decided it was time to go beyond the broad answers of smarts, ambition and luck by sorting through our database of wealthy individuals in search of bona fide trends. We analyzed everything from entrepreneurs' parents' professions to where they went to school, their track records in the early stages of their careers and other experiences that may have set them on the path to extreme wealth.
Our admittedly unscientific study of the self-made members of the Forbes 400 yielded some interesting results.
First, a significant percentage of them had parents with a high aptitude for math. The ability to crunch numbers is crucial to becoming a billionaire, and mathematical prowess is hereditary. Some of the most common professions among the parents of Forbes 400 members (for whom we could find the information) were engineer, accountant and small-business owner.
Consistent with the rest of the population, more American billionaires and near-billionaires were born in the fall than in any other season. However, relatively few of them were born in December, historically the month with the eighth-highest birth rate.
Of the 274 self-made tycoons on the Forbes 400, 14 percent either never started or never completed college. The number of precocious college dropouts is highest among those who forged careers as technology entrepreneurs: Bill Gates of Microsoft, Steve Jobs of Apple, Michael Dell of Dell, Larry Ellison of Oracle and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook.
Forbes 400 members who derive their fortunes from finance make up one of the most highly educated sub-groups: half of them have graduate degrees. Roughly 70 percent of those with M.B.A.s obtained their master's degrees from one of three Ivy League schools: Harvard, Columbia or the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business.
Goldman Sachs has attracted a large share of hungry minds that went on to garner 10-figure fortunes. At least 11 current and recent billionaire financiers worked at Goldman or one of it subsidiaries early in their careers, including Edward Lampert, David Tepper, Daniel Och and Leon Cooperman.
Several Forbes 400 members suffered bitter professional setbacks early in their careers that heightened their fear of failure. Pharmaceutical tycoon R.J. Kirk's first venture was a flop — an experience he regrets but appreciates. "Failure early on is a necessary condition for success, though not a sufficient one," he told Forbes in 2007.
According to a statement read by Phil Falcone during a congressional hearing in November 2008, his botched buyout of a company in Newark, N.J., in the early 1990s taught him "several valuable lessons that have had a profound impact upon my success as a hedge fund manager."
Several current and former billionaires rounded out their Yale careers as members of Skull and Bones, the secret society portrayed with enigmatic relish by Hollywood in movies like The Skulls and W. Among those who were inducted: investor Edward Lampert, Blackstone co-founder Stephen Schwarzman, and FedEx founder Frederick Smith.
© 2009 Forbes.com
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33110048/ns/business-forbescom/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
