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

Search: united


The best place to learn solid financial behavior is at home. Although a kid’s environment at school and among peers is important in his or her development, the biggest influence on a growing child’s set of values is the behavior of the parents. Parents are role models, so in a perfect world, they are best suited to solve young adults’ lack of preparedness for handing the world from a financial perspective.

Parents, on the other hand, are often ill-equipped for this responsibility, so public school teachers are left to pick up the slack for parents who can’t or won’t be the role models necessary. The lessons aren’t difficult, but financial behavior is so embedded in life at home, poor models there can easily undo any lessons taught in a school environment. Although New Jersey updates its public school curriculum standards a few years ago to require 2.5 credits in financial, economic, business, and entrepreneurial literacy, the typical class is not going to be effective for establishing solid financial behavior.

Eighth gradePrograms that teach financial literacy need to get creative. If there’s ever a chance for the banking industry to get involved with its future customers at an early age, this is it. Capital One sees the benefit in teaching young children how to use its products and is sponsoring the “Finance Park” program, coordinated by the non-profit organization Junior Achievement.

Finance Park is a mobile program for middle school students. After a few preparatory lessons in the classroom, the students visit one of these mobile stations and a Capital One bank branch. Students are assigned a family situation (single, married, with or without children, etc.) and a job, and are faced with simulations requiring financial decisions that have consequences. Due to a lack of preparedness in real life, most people learn how to manage their money “on the job.” But even in real life, the consequences of poor financial decision-making can be somewhat removed from the decisions themselves. The distance between cause (overspending, for example) and effect (not being able to afford a house due to high debt levels, for example) are so separated that learning on the job isn’t always effective as quickly as it would need to be.

Simulations can bring the cause and effect relationship into focus.

Capital One’s presence is significant in this program. The official name of the initiative is the “Capital One Junior Achievement Finance Park” with the necessary trademark symbols. Corporate involvement doesn’t stop with Capital One. There are more co-branded programs which one might expect to see corporations training young consumers to be life-long customers, in New Jersey alone:

Elementary school grades

  • Our Nation® Sponsored by United Technologies
  • JA More than Money™ (After-school Program) Sponsored by HSBC

Middle school grades

  • JA Global Marketplace™ Sponsored by MasterCard Worldwide
  • JA Economics for Success™ Sponsored by the Allstate Foundation
  • JA America Works Sponsored by Pitney Bowes & The Literacy and Education Fund

High school grades

  • JA TITAN (Internet based) Sponsored by Oracle
  • JA Economics™ Sponsored by the MetLife Foundation
  • JA Exploring Economics™ Sponsored by the MetLife Foundation
  • JA Banks in Action™ Sponsored by the Citi Foundation
  • JA Business Ethics™ Sponsored by Deloitte
  • JA Careers with a Purpose™ Sponsored by HCA & John Templeton Foundation

Junior Achievement programs in other states have different partnerships.

Shareholders are often impressed with corporate involvement in positive social initiatives and happy when companies are beneficiaries of tax incentives for charitable spending. I am concerned about the effect of branding in education lessons for eighth-graders. Corporations should not be involved with the education of children, but these corporations have money to devote to programs like Finance Park. If it weren’t for corporate sponsorship, programs like these would likely not exist.

Corporations have been involved with public education since the 1920s, but the trend has increased in recent years. As the United States falls behind other countries in education, citizens look to blame this country’s public school system. We look to corporations that create charter schools as an alternative, with the idea that schools with a better funding source, corporate profits rather than taxpayer money, will help solve the educational crisis. Results show that charter schools have mixed results when compared with public schools.

The lessons in personal finance are important, so it’s a good thing that kids are getting the exposure to real-life simulations. Can it be done without corporate involvement and indelible branding at an impressionable age?

Photo: daveparker
Junior Achievement Finance Park, Stanford CREDO study

{ 10 comments }

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 }

We live in an era of cheap, disposable goods. My closet full of clothing, much of it rarely worn, even though I sort through my wardrobe about once a year to eliminate items I no longer need, is a good indicator of this situation. For a good period when I was a kid, I wore hand-me-down clothes — as the eldest child, I received clothing from a family friend — and when an item became damaged, my mother fixed it with her sewing machine.

Prices for clothes have certainly increased over the last few decades, but clothing is not expected to last. When a piece of clothing becomes damaged, it’s easier and cheap enough to replace.

Broken ToasterBroken kitchen appliances, lamps, and other household devices past their warranty periods can’t be fixed with a sewing machine. Many would need specialized care by a professional, and with today’s disposable consumer culture, many people just opt for replacement rather than finding a repair shop and paying nearly as much money as they would to buy a new item.

Additionally, retailers and manufacturers have embraced the concept of planned obsolescence. To keep manufacturing costs low and to maximize profits, there is little concern for making products that last as long as their owners. This is a primary feature of high technology — a house phone sold fifty years ago may still function properly today, but a cell phone purchased five years ago not only doesn’t keep up with the latest technology, but it likely doesn’t work at all. Furniture built in the eighteenth century was made to last in a family for generations; IKEA furniture might last a few years under regular stress of use.

In Amsterdam, there is a small movement in opposition to this disposable consumer culture. The community has come together to repair its members’ broken items. Volunteers bring their tools and sewing machines to an open building several times a month and offer to fix any broken item brought to the gathering. This Repair Café helps reduce waste by encouraging reuse of broken items, and makes fixing an affordable alternative to replacement.

The government in the Netherlands, private groups, and individual donors have helped the Repair Café Foundation raise $525,000 over the past few years, and these funds have helped the organization create these gatherings at various locations across the country. These Repair Cafés provide a chance for consumers to make better use of their goods and for volunteers, particularly those with repair skills that might no longer be in demand, use those skills for a good cause.

Would Repair Cafés; be welcome in the United States? It’s not exactly a profitable business venture, and as such, is unlikely to draw much attention. The model, however, could easily be recreated, perhaps in low socioeconomic neighborhoods, to provide a money-saving alternative for spending money to replace slightly damaged items. Strong marketing encouraging consumers to exist in a cycle of buying and replacing comes at a price to retailers and manufacturers. If these expenses were redirected towards making better, durable products without planned obsolescence, consumers might lose the desire to constantly have new items, and would be able to hold onto the same products for a longer period of time. There would be less waste. Companies and their shareholders would find they have more loyal, life-long customers. Customers would shop with a focus on the differentiation in quality rather than with their tunnel-vision focused solely on price. Companies that build their products to last would succeed while those focused on the short-term would fail.

Could Repair Cafés be an answer to the consumer culture of disposable products? Would the availability of free repairs in the United States change the way consumers buy goods, and thus force companies to build products that are made to last rather than go obsolete? Is the trend towards disposability reversible at all?

Photo: phozographer
New York Times

{ 10 comments }

In April, LIMRA, a think-tank for the financial industry, completed a survey intended to focus on the savings and investment preferences of those living and working in the United States. After receiving responses from 2,697 Americans, a representative sample of the country, LIMRA was able to determine that 49 percent of the country is not saving for retirement. Additionally, more than half of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34, at 56 percent, are not saving for retirement.

Saving for retirement — and receiving the associated tax benefits through typical investment types like 401(k) plans and IRAs — requires a public trust in the financial industry. On one side, financial planners, investment salespeople and brokers, columnists, and bloggers are encouraging the use of financial products that, through both apparent and hidden fees, enriches the industry, while on the other side, investment firms are the beneficiaries of massive taxpayer bailouts and frequently in the news for using taxpayer money for paying their executives bonuses that defy the laws of gravity.

Wall StreetIt may be true that the reason many Americans do not save for retirement is ignorance. There are typical excuses for not saving for retirement, such as the lack of good, seemingly trustworthy information about the options that are available, the lack of knowledge about the benefits of investing in 401(k) plans and IRAs, or the belief that during tight personal economic times, not a cent is available to save for the future. After the recession, however, many people just see the financial industry as unworthy of trust. Organizations like LIMRA, working for the industry and promoting financial products, are unlikely to bring this attitude to the public attention.

The industry is more interested in shaming people unwilling to get on the boats rather than analyzing the leadership capabilities and trustworthiness of the boats’ captains.

I’m saving for retirement with 401(k) plans and IRAs. When possible, I choose plans that have low fees, but the choice is not always up to me. Employees may be able to choose from a selection of investments inside their 401(k) plan, employees can’t choose their company’s 401(k) administrator and broker without a coordinated effort among a large portion of employees. That would be nearly impossible in a large company. Unions are intended to solve some of these issues, but it can often reach the point where being a member of a large union is much like working for a large employer. The power of any individual is limited.

The 401(k) is ingenious for the financial industry, particularly now that it’s automatic. In a perfect world, every single employee is enrolled in a 401(k) plan on their first day on their first job. The investments may not perform well over time, but that’s not particularly relevant for the financial industry. As long as every American is investing a portion of their paycheck every week, two weeks, month, or other period, 401(k) administrators and brokers will continue to thrive. The employee probably benefits when retirement approaches, but that is by no means guaranteed. All you need to do is look at the portion of Americans who planned to retire in recent years but saw their nest eggs trampled on during the recession.

Investors bear the responsibility for changing their risk profile as they near their planned retirement, but there is a mixed message. The financial industry says you need to stay invested in stocks (highly volatile, highly risky) as you approach retirement because most people need their funds to last several decades throughout retirement while at the same time warning people to risk only what they can afford to lose. When people receive conflicting information, making decisions becomes more difficult. And when the conflicting information is coming from the same source — that is, the financial industry — the default reaction is the lack of trust.

Does the financial industry wants to do American citizens a favor by providing options for saving for retirement? No. The financial industry wants its companies to not only stay in business but to profit as much as possible. And to that end, it sells products — investment opportunities — designed to enrich the companies and their shareholders. There’s nothing wrong with this, because consumers will only buy products they need or desire enough. Companies will sell towards that need. And when only half of Americans have discovered retirement savings vehicles like 401(k) plans and IRAs, the industry will resign itself to doing a better job in explaining to the country why their products are needs, not wants.

Saving for retirement is important. For most people, stocks are the only investment type that can grow wealth quickly enough to provide the dream retirement so impressed upon Americans through media. It’s risky, as recent would-be retirees have seen. Thanks to the cognitive dissonance resulting in the understanding that the promotion of retirement is a result of the financial industry trying to increase profits on a large scale rather than corporate concern for the well-being of a nation and the knowledge that Americans must do something drastic to save money in order to fulfill the dream of quitting work, some Americans choose to invest while others would sooner give away their firstborn rather than drink the financial industry’s Kool-Aid.

LIMRA may be right — that most people who do not invest for retirement with 401(k) plans and IRAs have not done so because the industry’s message hasn’t successfully penetrated their consciousness. That may be due in part to a lack of education, but for others, it’s a lack of faith and trust in the industry.

Photo: zoonabar
LIMRA

{ 18 comments }

Tavis Smiley: Poverty Is a Threat to Democracy

by Flexo
Tavis Smiley

Tavis Smiley and Dr. Cornel West have been working hard to bring the issue of poverty into the consciousness of the citizens and political discourse of the United States. As a team, Smiley and West have been touring city to city, speaking to audiences concerned about the increasing wealth gap in this country. Their book, ... Continue reading this article…

17 comments Read the full article →

Thanks to the Consumerism Commentary Community

by Flexo

In just a short period of time, Consumerism Commentary will be entering its tenth year of existence. The site’s ninth anniversary is approaching, and I’ve been involved with the website longer than I’ve been involved with any other commitment in my life. Jobs and relationships have come and gone, but Consumerism Commentary remains. I started ... Continue reading this article…

13 comments Read the full article →

Government-Reported Inflation

by Flexo
Helium balloon inflation

Over the twelve months ending with March 2012, the increase in the consumer price index (CPI-U) as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, often referred to as the inflation rate, is 2.7 percent (2.3 percent if you exclude food and energy). While these numbers are below the historically-cited norm for inflation, 3 percent, the ... Continue reading this article…

8 comments Read the full article →

The Rich and the Rest of Us

by Flexo
Cornel West and Tavis Smiley

Dr. Cornel West is a Princeton University professor and author. Tavis Smiley is a television and radio talk show host and author as well. The two have known each other for a long time, and last year they toured the country to hear from citizens and talk about the issue of poverty in America. After ... Continue reading this article…

16 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 4512345···Last »