As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: lending


A new survey takes a look at the critical state of today’s recent college graduates. The survey questioned a nationally-representative sample of 444 recent college graduates between the ages of 22 and 29, about their employment situation and experiences. The questions also lightly touched upon these graduates’ financial condition. I’ve included a link to the full survey at the bottom of this article.

The necessity of choosing a major in college can put quite a bit of pressure on any student, particularly those who have either a wide variety of interests and talents as well as those who may not feel themselves pulled in any particular direction. There’s always the hope or the expectation that the bachelor’s degree will define a career path for the rest of one’s life, and that career path will follow a straight line or an exponential curve.

GraduationAn economist’s opinion is that students, who often go into debt to obtain their degrees, should simply look at the expected rate of return. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard or read that students should choose majors like engineering, physics, computer science, or applied mathematics to guarantee high salaries and easy job placement. Not everyone is interested or talented in these areas, and the pure financial approach says that those who aren’t shouldn’t bother spending money for a college education. The return on investment for an education is about more than just money, but that opinion doesn’t exactly make me popular in certain communities.

The financial reality is dire according to this survey. And as much as a college education has value beyond the expected return in the form of salary, no one can ignore the money-related part of the equation. Many decades ago, a college degree was a sign of differentiation, and gave holders the ability to market themselves well and qualify for the best jobs. At the same time, culture put such an emphasis on higher education that as it became available to more people — through grants and loans, not through lowered costs — it’s become less of a distinction. Colleges are basically unchecked in their tuition increases because they know that students will keep coming and the government will continue providing opportunities.

In good economic times, that can be ignored. With a low level of unemployment among graduates, former students can receive jobs, healthy incomes, and can pay down their student loan debt. In difficult times — when Baby Boomers aren’t retiring and there aren’t opportunities for younger workers, for example — the buy-now-pay-later model of education begins to fail. And it always fails for those with degrees in fields that take longer to recover their costs, like the arts and humanities.

Mark Cuban offered an apt analogy. College education is similar to the practice of flipping real estate. In the heyday of oversized, abnormal growth in the real estate market, any fool could make
money by buying a house relying heavily on debt, selling it to a bigger fool, and using the proceeds to repeat the process. There was a promise of success, and it worked well for a while — until the real estate market meltdown, followed by the Great Recession and credit crunch. A similar experience is happening today with the investment in a college education. Cuban argues that it used to be able to “flip” a college degree for a good starting salary and a solid opening to a life-long career, but the investment no longer performs so well.

With the run-up in real estate prices, it became very easy to access credit. Banks would give loans to as many customers as possible, with the knowledge the banks could repackage and sell those loans to reduce their apparent risk. The credit crunch required banks to tighten up their lending standards to the point where credit wasn’t available anywhere. Cuban believes this is where we are heading with student loans.

Years ago, policies were designed to ensure that everyone who wanted to become a homeowner could afford to do so. Taxpayers subsidized a great expansion in homeownership, and the real estate industry thrived. Education for all has been just as much a part of the American Dream, and taxpayers are subsidizing college educations for those who can’t afford it on their own. When it’s so easy to get an education for little money down, and everyone is taking advantage of free-flowing credit, we should have expected that making a return on that investment has become more difficult.

There is more student loan debt in aggregate in the United States than credit card debt, and Mark’s conclusion is that the economy won’t improve until this student loan bubble bursts. He promotes non-traditional universities — though not diploma mills, as he later warns — as the answer, because they can provide a better deal.

While colleges and universities are building new buildings for the English, social sciences and business schools, new high end, un-accredited, branded schools are popping up that will offer better educations for far, far less and create better job opportunities. As an employer I want the best prepared and qualified employees. I could care less if the source of their education was accredited by a bunch of old men and women who think they know what is best for the world. I want people who can do the job. I want the best and brightest. Not a piece of paper.

The competition from new forms of education is starting to appear… You would think traditional university educators would take notice. Beyond allowing some of their classes to be offered online, they haven’t. They won’t. Its the ultimate Innovators Dilemma. They don’t believe they should change and they won’t. Until its too late. Just as CEOs push for that one more penny per share in EPS, University Presidents care about nothing but getting their endowments and revenues up. If it means saddling an entire generation with obscene amounts of school debt, they could care less. This is how they get their long term contracts and raises.

It’s just a matter o[f] time until we see the same meltdown in traditional college education. Like the real estate industry, prices will rise until the market revolts. Then it will be too late. Students will stop taking out the loans traditional Universities expect them to. And when they do tuition will come down. And when prices come down universities will have to cut costs beyond what they are able to. They will have so many legacy costs, from tenured professors to construction projects to research they will be saddled with legacy costs and debt in much the same way the newspaper industry was. Which will all lead to a de-levering and a de-stabilization of the university system as we know it.

Just over half of recent college graduates have jobs. Many of those who do have jobs settled for a position for which their four-year degree was not necessary. 40 percent of recent graduates haven’t even begun paying off their student loan debt. Most recent graduates, while happy with their time in college, would have chosen a major after more consideration, taken different courses, or sought out more working or internship opportunities.

Photo: NazarethCollege
Blog Maverick, John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development

{ 13 comments }

The Next Credit Crunch

This article was written by in Economy. 1 comment.

There are signs that the economy might be in more trouble in the near future. One of the symptoms of the recession was the credit crunch. Banks and other lending institutions tightened up their previously loose standards for extending credit, and in order to prop up their own organizations financially, banks held on to the cheap money afforded to them by the government rather than extending loans to small businesses needing the cash flow to expand or operate, extending the recession.

A number of policies were designed to help small businesses when practically-free loans from the government weren’t enough to encourage banks to do anything but prop up their balance sheets. The FDIC instituted a policy where they would insure noninterest-bearing accounts without a limit. This is different than the insurance consumers receive on up to $250,000 on savings and checking accounts. The extended FDIC coverage allows businesses to keep their operating accounts — which are mostly used for paying employees with direct deposit — at smaller banks, seen as being at risk for failing moreso than large, “too-big-to-fail” banks.

Captain Credit CrunchThis FDIC benefit is scheduled to end before January 1, 2013. The expected reaction is for small businesses to take their operating funds out of community banks and return to larger banks, where size is assumed to correlate to strength. Small banks, which have recently begun extending more credit to local businesses, will no longer have the funds to continue this practice.

There is a chance that the FDIC program will continue, but that requires dependency on politicians being interested in changing the direction it gave the FDIC and being willing to continue the expense, whether from government (public) sources or from fees received from FDIC member institutions.

At the same time the potential shift from community banks to large, national banks hangs over the head of those who are concerned about the possibility of another credit crunch, big banks have already reined in their lending. In the first quarter of 2012, credit card and bank lending has dropped.

JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Citigroup cut their lending by a collective $24 billion in the first three months of the year. That was a change from last year when lending rose $34 billion at the nation’s four biggest banks in all of 2012.

Plan for the next credit crunch now

The individuals hurt the hardest during a credit crunch are people barely living paycheck to paycheck, relying on credit cards to meet their financial obligations, but by far the worst of the credit crunch is felt by small business owners who rely on bank credit, particularly during times of recession, to stay in business.

Families with the most exposure in a credit crunch can prepare by growing and nurturing an emergency fund. I’ve been promoting emergency funds during the best and worst economic times, and those who use the good times to shore up resources to survive the hard times make it through. It’s an economic policy as old as the Bible. Small business owners should take the same approach.

With a credit crunch, interest rates will continue to remain low, encouraging a money to flow as freely as possible. Those who qualify for borrowing with the stricter criteria in a credit crunch can take advantage of the opportunity to borrow money at low rates and invest in hard assets with a physical presence. Real estate and art come to mind.

Photo: mary_thompson
CNN, Fortune

{ 1 comment }

Today on the Consumerism Commentary Podcast, Jay Frosting and Flexo talk with Matt Schulz, Vice President of Content for InvestingAnswers.com.

They discuss the implications of a recent legal ruling that excludes credit card application fees from the limit on fees that credit card issuers can charge within the first year.

Consumerism Commentary Podcast
Credit Card Application Fees: S07E01 / 157

DownloadRSSiTunes

Table of contents

Consumerism Commentary Podcast[00:00] Introduction from Jay Frosting
[00:33] Interview with Flexo and Matt Schulz
[00:49] Challenging the 25% fee limit specified in the Credit CARD Act
[06:00] Will application fees be more pervasive now?
[07:14] Are these fees limited to those with bad credit?
[09:18] A very high interest rate is worse than almost any other option
[12:34] The CFPB is still hearing public comments on this decision
[13:41] Application fees aren’t refundable and don’t guarantee credit
[14:21] The CFPB is trying to get more done before a possible Executive Branch change (addressing Republican criticisms of the bureau)
[18:33] Reduction in debt is part frugality and part banks reducing credit
[20:02] End

Update:

We were mistaken during the recording regarding whether First Premiere refunds its application fee. Here’s what the terms and conditions say:

“Right to Reject: You may still reject this plan, provided you have not used the Credit Account or paid a fee after receiving a billing statement. If you do reject the plan, you are not responsible for any fees or charges, including any Processing Fee(s) paid prior to receipt of your Account Opening Disclosures. Any such Processing Fee(s) previously paid will be refunded upon rejection of the plan.”

It also says this:

“Refund Disclosure: We will refund your Processing Fee and initial fees (those fees that are billed at the time of account opening) if (1) you have not used your Card for a Purchase or Cash Advance; and (2) you have not paid a fee after receiving a billing statement. We will refund any partial payment of the Processing Fee if you do not open your Credit Account within 85 days of approval. We will refund any Credit Limit Increase Fee charged to your Credit Account if you notify us, within 30 days of the date of the Periodic Statement on which it appears, that you do not wish to have the credit limit increase. This will result in a reversal of the credit limit increase. Except as described in this paragraph, these fees are non-refundable.”

Here are the link for the terms and conditions.

We always welcome feedback from listeners. If you have any comments for this episode or for any other, or if you have suggestions for future episodes, please leave us comments here or email us at podcast at this domain name.

Theme music by Mindcube.

{ 1 comment }

After the recession, the Federal Reserve developed a stress test for banks and financial firms too big too fail. The stress test looks at the financial condition of these corporations and simulates a new recession. Under the simulation, based on a worst-case scenario, not an actual economic forecast, banks pass the test if the companies have sufficient capital to continue lending; if not, they fail.

Here’s the doomsday recession scenario or assumptions applied to the banks’ financial condition:

  • An unemployment rate of 13 percent.
  • A 50 percent drop in the stock market.
  • A 21 percent drop in the real estate market.

Citi Checking Account Piggy BankThis scenario, which isn’t a prediction for the future, is non far-fetched. The recession in 2008 produced similar or worse results in the stock market and housing prices.

Overall, the banks fared better with this year’s test than with last year’s same analysis. The improvement is due to increased capital at the corporations. The companies lowered dividends to keep more money on hand for emergencies.

While fifteen of the nineteen banks were found to have sufficient capital to withstand the recession without assistance, four bank holding companies or financial institutions in the test failed to meet the capital requirements: Ally Financial, Citigroup, SunTrust, and MetLife.

Officials from the banks quickly responded to the Federal Reserve’s results.

Citigroup said it remains among the best capitalized large banks in the world. However, it said it would not be able to raise its dividend as it hoped, and would submit a revised capital plan to the Fed. Ally said it supported the idea of stress tests, but it disagreed with a number of the assumptions the Fed made, including overstating the bank’s potential mortgage losses. SunTrust could not be reached for comment. Metlife said it was unfair to apply the same tests to insurers as it did to banks.

These companies’ failures isn’t too concerning for customers. Customers shouldn’t be worried that their savings accounts aren’t safe or their insurance policies are in danger. No one has ever lost money in an FDIC-insured bank account. If these corporations don’t improve their financial situation by raising more capital or paying less to shareholders, a recession might result in more government intervention in the companies’ continued operation. The lack of sufficient capital in these financial institutions might lead to another bail-out scenario.

While not concerning from a personal perspective, there is reason to be somewhat concerned with the Federal Reserve’s findings. Financial institutions haven’t adequately planned for systemic risk. When banks fail or need a government bail-out, capital infusion, or partial nationalization, all taxpayers are affected. Shareholders need to be concerned. Will the recent bail-outs still fresh in people’s minds, the public and policymakers have likely lost its appetite for using taxpayer money for assisting banks that are “too big to fail,” and might rather see a firm like Citi go bankrupt rather than submit to a government takeover.

Federal Reserve
Fortune

{ 7 comments }

Should the Government Ban Banks’ Payday Loans?

by Flexo
Check

When we think of predatory lending practices, the first thought that often comes to mind is the payday loan industry, catering to people barely, if at all, living paycheck to paycheck. Payday loans service communities with an aversion or without a need for or trust of the mainstream financial industry. Offering short-term loans designed to ... Continue reading this article…

14 comments Read the full article →

More Fees for Bank of America Customers

by Flexo
Bank of America

Just when you thought it was safe, Bank of America and other large, national banks, are still finding ways to charge customers new fees. Only a few months ago, word of a new $5 monthly fee for debit card users sent Bank of America customers into a frenzy, threatening to move money away from the ... Continue reading this article…

9 comments Read the full article →

Will You Buy the iPad 3?

by Flexo
iPad

All signs are pointing to Apple releasing the latest iteration of its popular tablet this coming week. I gave in last year and purchased the original iPad, and I made this decision just days before the iPad 2 was announced. Now, tech geeks are expecting the iPad 3 to hit to streets this week. The ... Continue reading this article…

16 comments Read the full article →

JetBlue Card From American Express Review

by Joe Taylor Jr.

The JetBlue Card from American Express is offering 10,000 points after your first purchase. Each purchase on the card earns one TrueBlue point per dollar, and some purchases can earn up to eight points per dollar. Is the $40 annual fee worth these and the card’s other benefits? JetBlue operates major hubs in New York, ... Continue reading this article…

0 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 1412345···Last »