It is the privatized suburbs fault. We lost the attachment to shared public goods that many could get value from and instead shifted toward purely private sources of pleasure. The last example of the old form of public good would be professional and college sports, but even that is less than it was because we watch it at home. I could go on.

Clearly the source of all your troubles!

 

Clearly a source!  LOL

sounds like you are looking at housing in some very interesting neighborhoods.

 

For the record - I have a pool.  It came with the house (I would never voluntarily put one in).  There is no neighborhood pool. But then again, there are no neighbors.

 

Growing up, I never had a pool.  Never wanted one.  No one in the neighborhood had one.  And only 1 or 2 people in the giant subdivision behind us had one.  Swimming was not a part of my childhood.  When I was a teenager, my parents joined a private swimming pool for a few years, and I went quite often at that point.

sounds like you are looking at housing in some very interesting neighborhoods.

 

For the record - I have a pool.  It came with the house (I would never voluntarily put one in).  There is no neighborhood pool. But then again, there are no neighbors.

 

Find a house in NYC is stressful.  Each couple will probably look at 50 apartments before finding one  I'm just trying to help these kids out.  They are like little brothers to me, I love those boys.  We've been through a lot in the 12/10 years I've known them.

 

The pool thing.  It's was just a "status" thing.  I felt like we should have one, since it seemed like everyone else in Shaker or Cleveland hts. had a pool.

 

I bought fabulous swim trunks for the ground breaking...and my father crushed my dream! :'(

sounds like you are looking at housing in some very interesting neighborhoods.

 

 

that was actually a reply to RockandRoller.  I opend the threat and it was on the previous page.  I replied, then realized the thread had rolled over to a new page and there were new posts.  So my post ended up a lot lower in the order than I expected.

Stay on the thread topic please.

Here are some 'interesting' quotes from the government and wall street back in the late 1920s and early 1930s. I think some of our leaders are just cutting and pasting. Lets hope the outcome is different.

 

"We will not have any more crashes in our time."

- John Maynard Keynes in 1927

 

"I cannot help but raise a dissenting voice to statements that we are living in a fool's paradise, and that prosperity in this country must necessarily diminish and recede in the near future."

- E. H. H. Simmons, President, New York Stock Exchange, January 12, 1928

 

"There will be no interruption of our permanent prosperity."

- Myron E. Forbes, President, Pierce Arrow Motor Car Co., January 12, 1928

 

"No Congress of the United States ever assembled, on surveying the state of the Union, has met with a more pleasing prospect than that which appears at the present time. In the domestic field there is tranquility and contentment...and the highest record of years of prosperity. In the foreign field there is peace, the goodwill which comes from mutual understanding."

- Calvin Coolidge December 4, 1928

 

"There may be a recession in stock prices, but not anything in the nature of a crash."

- Irving Fisher, leading U.S. economist , New York Times, Sept. 5, 1929

 

"Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau. I do not feel there will be soon if ever a 50 or 60 point break from present levels, such as (bears) have predicted. I expect to see the stock market a good deal higher within a few months."

- Irving Fisher, Ph.D. in economics, Oct. 17, 1929

 

"This crash is not going to have much effect on business."

- Arthur Reynolds, Chairman of Continental Illinois Bank of Chicago, October 24, 1929

 

"There will be no repetition of the break of yesterday... I have no fear of another comparable decline."

- Arthur W. Loasby (President of the Equitable Trust Company), quoted in NYT, Friday, October 25, 1929

 

"We feel that fundamentally Wall Street is sound, and that for people who can afford to pay for them outright, good stocks are cheap at these prices."

- Goodbody and Company market-letter quoted in The New York Times, Friday, October 25, 1929

 

"This is the time to buy stocks. This is the time to recall the words of the late J. P. Morgan... that any man who is bearish on America will go broke. Within a few days there is likely to be a bear panic rather than a bull panic. Many of the low prices as a result of this hysterical selling are not likely to be reached again in many years."

- R. W. McNeel, market analyst, as quoted in the New York Herald Tribune, October 30, 1929

 

"Buying of sound, seasoned issues now will not be regretted"

- E. A. Pearce market letter quoted in the New York Herald Tribune, October 30, 1929

 

"Some pretty intelligent people are now buying stocks... Unless we are to have a panic -- which no one seriously believes, stocks have hit bottom."

- R. W. McNeal, financial analyst in October 1929

 

"The decline is in paper values, not in tangible goods and services...America is now in the eighth year of prosperity as commercially defined. The former great periods of prosperity in America averaged eleven years. On this basis we now have three more years to go before the tailspin."

- Stuart Chase (American economist and author), NY Herald Tribune, November 1, 1929

 

"Hysteria has now disappeared from Wall Street."

- The Times of London, November 2, 1929

 

"The Wall Street crash doesn't mean that there will be any general or serious business depression... For six years American business has been diverting a substantial part of its attention, its energies and its resources on the speculative game... Now that irrelevant, alien and hazardous adventure is over. Business has come home again, back to its job, providentially unscathed, sound in wind and limb, financially stronger than ever before."

- Business Week, November 2, 1929

 

"...despite its severity, we believe that the slump in stock prices will prove an intermediate movement and not the precursor of a business depression such as would entail prolonged further liquidation..."

- Harvard Economic Society (HES), November 2, 1929

 

"... a serious depression seems improbable; [we expect] recovery of business next spring, with further improvement in the fall."

- HES, November 10, 1929

 

"The end of the decline of the Stock Market will probably not be long, only a few more days at most."

- Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics at Yale University, November 14, 1929

 

"In most of the cities and towns of this country, this Wall Street panic will have no effect."

- Paul Block (President of the Block newspaper chain), editorial, November 15, 1929

 

"Financial storm definitely passed."

- Bernard Baruch, cablegram to Winston Churchill, November 15, 1929

 

"I see nothing in the present situation that is either menacing or warrants pessimism... I have every confidence that there will be a revival of activity in the spring, and that during this coming year the country will make steady progress."

- Andrew W. Mellon, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury December 31, 1929

 

"I am convinced that through these measures we have reestablished confidence."

- Herbert Hoover, December 1929

 

"[1930 will be] a splendid employment year."

- U.S. Dept. of Labor, New Year's Forecast, December 1929

 

"For the immediate future, at least, the outlook (stocks) is bright."

- Irving Fisher, Ph.D. in Economics, in early 1930

 

"...there are indications that the severest phase of the recession is over..."

- Harvard Economic Society (HES) Jan 18, 1930

 

"There is nothing in the situation to be disturbed about."

- Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon, Feb 1930

 

"The spring of 1930 marks the end of a period of grave concern...American business is steadily coming back to a normal level of prosperity."

- Julius Barnes, head of Hoover's National Business Survey Conference, Mar 16, 1930

 

"... the outlook continues favorable..."

- HES Mar 29, 1930

 

"... the outlook is favorable..."

- HES Apr 19, 1930

 

"While the crash only took place six months ago, I am convinced we have now passed through the worst -- and with continued unity of effort we shall rapidly recover. There has been no significant bank or industrial failure. That danger, too, is safely behind us."

- Herbert Hoover, President of the United States, May 1, 1930

 

"...by May or June the spring recovery forecast in our letters of last December and November should clearly be apparent..."

- HES May 17, 1930

 

"Gentleman, you have come sixty days too late. The depression is over."

- Herbert Hoover, responding to a delegation requesting a public works program to help speed the recovery, June 1930

 

"... irregular and conflicting movements of business should soon give way to a sustained recovery..."

- HES June 28, 1930

 

"... the present depression has about spent its force..."

- HES, Aug 30, 1930

 

"We are now near the end of the declining phase of the depression."

- HES Nov 15, 1930

 

"Stabilization at [present] levels is clearly possible."

- HES Oct 31, 1931

 

"All safe deposit boxes in banks or financial institutions have been sealed... and may only be opened in the presence of an agent of the I.R.S."

- President F.D. Roosevelt, 1933

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_01/seymour062001.html

Fischer is a fascinating figure. I guess after he turned out to be so wrong in the run-up to the Great Depression, he went back and tried to figure out where he went wrong and wrote a couple fascinating books that a lot of the in-the-know economists have been looking about again.

It nice to see the main stream media starting to get to the point. On average home prices historically must have some equality with income of the area and rental rates. If this continues to hold true (I think it will) we have a long way to go.

 

Home Prices: Low, But Still No Bargain

Forget low mortgage rates and the buyer's market. Real-estate prices still have a long way to fall.

 

"Homeowners are watching anxiously for any signs of housing market stabilization. So, too, are all those who believe the market may hold the key to the economy.

 

And yet the most recent data makes for more gloomy reading.

 

The closely watched Case-Shiller index, which tracks prices across twenty major cities, shows that through January the crash was getting worse, not better.

 

....

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123853857749575441.html

Great article.  I wish more people understood the relationship between wages and housing budgets.  It doesn't seem like rocket science... I suspsect the problem is denial moreso than ignorance.

I wish more people understood the relationship between wages and housing budgets

 

From my limited experience, RE people have traditionally had a different mindset.  The first questions out of their mouths when I discussed selling my house(s) were along the lines of...."What did you pay for it and what improvements did you do".  After that they factor in some sort of premium to cover appreciation, and spit out a suggested listing price.

 

The basic formula most of these people have worked from is:  Cost + improvements + general appreciation = market price. They throw in a check of local comps to see if the result makes sense. 

 

That formula simply doesn't work in a bubble or post-bubble market, yet I get the feeling most RE agents don't know any other formulas.  I don't recall hearing any discussions from them about tieing house prices to wages, rents, etc.

 

RE agents find the price for the house within the current market.  That is what their formulas are based on.  This article is looking a little deeper to find what the long term market will be.  I'm surprised this is the first article I've seen that puts this bubble in proper perspective, over a year into the crash.  I always wonder when analysts say things like "look for prices to rebound in the next quarter".  Based on what?  I think they pull these things out of a hat, instead of looking at the underlying fundamentals of an economy.  Of course housing prices can't get too out of line with incomes and rental rates in the long term!

The problem is that too many folks presumed appreciation as the natural movement of home prices against minimal historical support.

I wish more people understood the relationship between wages and housing budgets

 

From my limited experience, RE people have traditionally had a different mindset.  The first questions out of their mouths when I discussed selling my house(s) were along the lines of...."What did you pay for it and what improvements did you do".  After that they factor in some sort of premium to cover appreciation, and spit out a suggested listing price.

 

The basic formula most of these people have worked from is:  Cost + improvements + general appreciation = market price. They throw in a check of local comps to see if the result makes sense. 

 

That formula simply doesn't work in a bubble or post-bubble market, yet I get the feeling most RE agents don't know any other formulas.  I don't recall hearing any discussions from them about tieing house prices to wages, rents, etc.

 

 

That formula is total bunk.  Invalid and unjustifiable.  I'm not saying they don't use it, I'm sure they do, I'm saying it's erroneous and inflationary.  They need to stop using it right away.  X is right, the more accurate formula is the one based on actual sales, not cost plus some magical automatic inflation factor.  That's kind of insane when you think about it.  Why should there be housing inflation--or anything but a steep housing drop-- in a place where employment is crashing?

 

Though Ohio's population has continued to grow the growth rate has been declining for years, so demand is declining too... therefore there should have been little new construction coupled with declining existing home values in Ohio, proportionate with job losses, over these past 30-40 years.  But the opposite happened, to our detriment, and I think this magical pro-seller (and pro-sales) inflation forumla was part of it.  There's no way it should have been used, even in Ohio's hottest suburbs, ever.  It's that far off of reality.

 

I used to do residential appraisals.  One of the cardinal rules is that you rarely get your money back out of any improvements.  You add ten grand of bells & whistles, we might throw you $1000 in extra value.  Those things just aren't very important to most buyers in most markets.  There's a good chance they have different taste than you.  The only time you'd get close to dollar-for-dollar is when the house needed the improvement to reach average for the neighborhood.  Neighborhood is everything.

 

Point is-- inner city and Appalacian home (and other) values in Ohio should have fallen steeply, to ridiculous lows, as the income vanished from these towns.  People willing to live there, businesses willing to locate there, they all should have faced dramatically reduced costs for doing so.  I mean costs so low that investment would siphon in from the coasts until the country reached equilibrium again.  We wouldn't have the problems we have under a truly free market.  Insiders have been jacking up costs in their own favor, and declining states like Ohio are footing most of it.

HGTV was probably more guilty of brainwashing a generation of housebuyers than anyone else. And then we wonder why Scripps has closed the Cincy Post and Rocky Mountain papers in the last year. You pump the bubble up and then it crushes when it explodes.

^  Well said, 327. 

 

My experience may not be completely typical since I tend to purchase at the leading eage of urbanization, and, sprawl being what it is, the market factors are probably different from inner city and Appalacian areas.

 

You do make some very interesting points in your post.  While Ohio's population has been pretty stable for some time (growing very slowly), is there nonetheless, a shift going on geographically within the state ?  Is there a population shift out of smaller communities and into larger metro areas?  Is there a shift from the northern 1/3 of the state southward? If so on any of these, is there a mismatch geographically between where housing was built and where we need it now?  Probably yes, to some degree.  There is certainly a shift in the TYPE of housing people want.  Both of these partially explain how we can build so many new homes in a state with a stagnant population and still have house prices hold up.

 

But as I said, it probably only partially explains the sustainability of Ohio house prices.  Absent the housing bubble, would Ohio house prices have stagnated (in nominal terms) over the past 10 years?  I don't completely know, but I suspect that absent a national housing bubble that home prices in Ohio would not have risen as far as they did, and would perhaps have even fallen as you suggested.  And house prices in certain geographical areas would have possibly completely collapse, as you suggested.

 

327's post above was a very good one.

 

 

I can't take it anymore.

 

APPALACHIA (with an H)

 

LOLA (not Lola's)

 

LOLITA (not Lolita's)

RE agents find the price for the house within the current market.  That is what their formulas are based on.  This article is looking a little deeper to find what the long term market will be.  I'm surprised this is the first article I've seen that puts this bubble in proper perspective, over a year into the crash.  I always wonder when analysts say things like "look for prices to rebound in the next quarter".  Based on what?  I think they pull these things out of a hat their @sses, instead of looking at the underlying fundamentals of an economy.  Of course housing prices can't get too out of line with incomes and rental rates in the long term!

 

I made a correction.

^  You do make some very interesting points in your post.  While Ohio's population has been pretty stable for some time (growing very slowly), is there nonetheless, a shift going on geographically within the state ?   Is there a population shift out of smaller communities and into larger metro areas? 

 

 

There has been a shift in some areas of Ohio and other places with people moving out of the small towns and to the larger metros. But, we also have had a huge amount of people just moving from one part of a metro to another, with little or no real population growth. This has created sprawl, a fake sense of growth and a poor use of resources.

There has been a shift in some areas of Ohio and other places with people moving out of the small towns and to the larger metros.

 

 

I was thinking of places like Sandusky, Lima, Mansfield, etc. (even  Middletown).  Smaller cities that have yet to become exurbes, or have not fully been integrated into a metro area.  These cities are a constant supply of people for the larger metros.

 

The point is, we will always need to build some new houses to accommodate a shifting population.  But I can't say what % of new housing this comprises.  I'm not so sure we always remove an equal amount of housing from the depleted areas, and that should have some effect of keeping house prices down state-wide.

 

Its not just raw population.  It is also new households.  Households, or the rate of new household formation would be the driver for housing demand.  It's possible to have a stagnant or even declining population and still see some increase in new households.

And yeah I agree, 327 made a great point, as did that WSJ article on housing costs vis a vis income. 

 

 

An interesting comment from a consultant...

 

I was talking to an IT consultant yesterday about the state of the economy. (He primarily works with clients from Ohio.)  He was saying that a number of projects were on hold for the last 6 months, but companies are starting to move forward on them now.

 

But what I found more noteworthy was this... He said that a lot of companies had been operating so lean before the recession that they had little room to cut and still keep the doors open.  They may be slow to replace someone who leaves, but they are not in a position to let people go.

 

Sounds like a lot of the automation that taken place over the past 20 years has allowed companies to hold the line on employment.  There is little fat in organizations these days. That serves as a damper on letting people go when times are lean.

 

Makes me wonder, though... In years past companies would reduce employment in a downturn, but the company would typically stay open.  Maybe this time around we will see a lot fewer actual layoffs, but a lot more companies going out of business?  Sounds like we may be entering a period where its "all or nothing" ... nearly everyone keeps their jobs at the company, or everyone looses their job?

 

(I know, the gov't statistics don't break down job reductions vs company closings, but I'm wondering if the makeup of out-of-work people will be different this time (staff reductions vs company closures -wise.)

The other possibility is that a lot of people will just have their salaries cut - the famous unpayed vacation. It isn't just automation, but also the downsizing of the 90s and the fact that in Ohio we only had about 2 or 3 years of decent growth after the recession at the beginning of the decade (and parts of the state - Toledo - basically had no growth or were shrinking). American businesses were probably leaner going into this recession than any time in history. Easy layoffs were probably in divisions that had been eyed for elimination because they weren't holding their own - anything to do with real estate or construction.

(and parts of the state - Toledo - basically had no growth or were shrinking).

 

..this was the case with Dayton for employment.  The metro area didnt really recover from the "9-11 Recession".

 

@@@

 

 

(and parts of the state - Toledo - basically had no growth or were shrinking).

 

..this was the case with Dayton for employment. The metro area didnt really recover from the "9-11 Recession".

 

@@@

 

On a lighter note. Recession may End in June

 

May 6 (Bloomberg) -- A peak in the number of jobless claims signals the worst U.S. recession in half a century may end in June, according to Thomas Lam, an economist at United Overseas Bank Ltd. in Singapore.

 

As the CHART OF THE DAY illustrates, the previous three recessions all ended within weeks after the number of applications for unemployment benefits started to wane. In his calculations, Lam smoothes the weekly claims figures using a proprietary weighted-average formula that more closely correlates with economic turning points.

 

The graph shows the smoothed figures reached a high of 664,000 in the week ended April 4 (blue circle), indicating the economic slump will probably end by next month (dashed blue vertical line), he said. With 95 percent confidence, the model signals the recession will be over at the latest by the end of September, he said.

 

...

It is important to remember that growth simply means that we are no longer shrinking. It is like you've walked down the stairs into the basement and then at some point you decide to go back, well you start going up from however far down you are, not starting from the top stairs where you were before you started going down.

To play with that analygy a little more...

 

I fear the economy has gone down those stairs into the basement and now wants to take a nap.  Will it be a cat-nap or a Rip Van Winkle nap?

 

And as its been pointed out before, unemployment is a trailing indicator.  Maybe the economy will reach the basement in the next couple of months.  No idea when it will climb back to the main floor of the building.

I agree with cincydad.  This is far from over, the personal finance & credit card shoe and personal/individual bankruptcy shoe has yet to drop or be felt.

April's Job Numbers....net 539k jobs lost, Unemployment Rate up to 8.9%

 

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=OBR&date=20090508&id=9884285

 

(bold and red comments are my emphisis)

 

U.S. employers cut 539,000 jobs last month, the fewest since October, according to government data on Friday that signaled the economy's steep decline may be easing.

 

The unemployment rate, however, soared to 8.9 percent, the highest since September 1983, from 8.5 percent in March and job losses in March and February were a combined 66,000 steeper than previously estimated, the Labor Department said.

 

A big 72,000 jump in government payrolls tempered the overall job-loss figure. Private sector employment fell by 611,000 in April after a 693,000 job decline in March.

 

...

^

 

The employment numbers show a big increase in government payrolls (+72,000).  This contradicts Rage's "information network" that shows local and state governments cutting jobs. I suspect Rage has a better finger on the pulse than the government numbers do.

 

Either the Federal Gov't is doing a LOT of hiring (gearing up for the census?) or the numbers for local government are way behind.  (I think the data for April was probably gathered 3 weeks ago, not on April 30th).

 

Without the government numbers, the job losses would have been 626k  (539 + 72 direct go't + 15k indirect gov't[education & health])

 

Census is supposedly the big bulge in gov't employment. As we move into the summer and beyond that big stimulus package will start to move through the veins of the economy - for good or ill.

The BLS press release is here

 

More in-depth than the news article.

Census is supposedly the big bulge in gov't employment. As we move into the summer and beyond that big stimulus package will start to move through the veins of the economy - for good or ill.

 

If census short term hiring is what the country is 'hanging' its hat on, then we are in trouble. Many of these jobs are just part time and almost all of them are temporary. Maybe we will start doing a yearly, full population count to keep people permanently employed?

Well they will have these jobs for at least the next year and a half so that isn't the shortest term of employment. Some of these folks will likely be able to transition into other gov't work or back into the private sector. This is actually the best kind of gov't stimulus/make work activity. No long investment that drives up costs eventually with retirement and the like and it accomplishes a valuable goal.

Well they will have these jobs for at least the next year and a half so that isn't the shortest term of employment. Some of these folks will likely be able to transition into other gov't work or back into the private sector. This is actually the best kind of gov't stimulus/make work activity. No long investment that drives up costs eventually with retirement and the like and it accomplishes a valuable goal.

 

I have to agree. It better to put people on Main Street to work with stimulus money, than use it on some of the other 'bailout' programs.

I hope this is on-topic enough to post here, I thought it was a good article and it touched on some things we've talked about before re: credit cards.

 

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1897362,00.html?cnn=yes

 

The problem with the credit-card industry isn't just the credit-card companies — it's you, too. This week the Senate takes up a bill that would seriously clamp down on some of the industry's most unsavory practices, a piece of legislation that President Obama has said he wants on his desk by the end of the month...(more at the link)

I just think that we need to get away from being such consumer-driven people. We are far too worried about status here, and some people want to fit in with that at all costs, I think.

 

I, for one, am thankful for economic shakeups like the one we're experiencing right now. It makes things very difficult (I've been unemployed for about a month now), but people are FORCED to re-evaluate their spending habits and make adjustments. If they don't, they go under. If anything, people need to maybe take some financial counseling courses. And, of course, the economy will have to adjust to those new spending habits. But rather that happen then people drive themselves deeper and deeper into debt and have the economy "expand".

I just think that we need to get away from being such consumer-driven people. We are far too worried about status here, and some people want to fit in with that at all costs, I think.

No...that will never happen, or at least I'm trying to prevent that form happening , in this date/age.  Too many 20 somethings have grown up in the "connected" instant world.  The world is too digitally connected and people "see" things and want it "now".  The internet has changed the way we live.  In the 80's you had to read about the "it" think in a magazine then order it or wait for your local department store to order it.  In the 90's, if you saw it on cable, you could call the show and find out who was wearing what and then order it over the phone. Now, as soon a that "it" item hits the www. you can get it.

 

I, for one, am thankful for economic shakeups like the one we're experiencing right now. It makes things very difficult (I've been unemployed for about a month now), but people are FORCED to re-evaluate their spending habits and make adjustments. If they don't, they go under. If anything, people need to maybe take some financial counseling courses.

 

It's forced many to examine their spending habits.  I was shopping for a new wallet and my shopper said, "oh thank good you called, nobody is shopping anymore, it's bad, really bad.  Some of us are going to lose our jobs."  Even the filthy rich are looking at price tags.  And those who aren't are living on credit.

 

There are so many people using credit as a lifeline because they don't' know how to create or maintain a budget. 

 

How many of you people, especially you whippersnappers & 30 somethings: 

[*]Have a budget?

[*]Pay bills on the day it's received?

[*]Reconcile your checking (and savings) account every month at the same time of the month?

 

And, of course, the economy will have to adjust to those new spending habits. But rather that happen then people drive themselves deeper and deeper into debt and have the economy "expand".

 

More sales, more perception that your getting more for your money and more local spending will happen.  Retailers will order less merchandise or offer bigger discounts via one of it's distribution methods. 

 

This environment is a plus for entrepreneurs.  You gotta find a niche that hasn't been explored/exploited and work it!

 

How many of you people, especially you whippersnappers & 30 somethings:

[*]Have a budget?

[*]Pay bills on the day it's received?

[*]Reconcile your checking (and savings) account every month at the same time of the month?

 

It's amazing to me how many people still don't even use the free online bill paying that their bank offers.  When I used to have to sit down and write out checks for everything, it would seriously take me like an hour to write everything out and do balancing and everything else, every 2 weeks, it was a huge time suck, PITA and cost a lot in postage.  I don't know why ANYONE does it this way anymore.  With the online bill paying, I now set up my bills to pay on the date I choose within 24-48 hours of receiving them. Most people do not even know they can do this (set it up to pay ahead, not pay it out the day you get it).  A girl I work with ran out of checks and ended up paying $5 each for bank checks and running all over town paying utilities and rent to avoid late charges.  This is just insanity to me.  I haven't run out of checks in YEARS and almost never buy stamps anymore. 

 

How many of you people, especially you whippersnappers & 30 somethings:

[*]Have a budget?

[*]Pay bills on the day it's received?

[*]Reconcile your checking (and savings) account every month at the same time of the month?

 

1. We have a loose budget.  We put nearly everything on the card, and pay it off each month, amd aim to keep the balance around $1500-$2000.  This has been higher recently seen as we were remodeling the bathroom and Home Depot was loving us. 

 

2. On or a day or two later.  Having the banks Bill Pay feature is really nice, can keep track of everything w/o writing a check and waiting for it to clear.  Plus Points!

 

3. Well seen as we never write checks and if we do they are few and far between, we can easily eyeball the statement and see where a discrepency may be.  Plus as it is online checking the status every few days is pretty common.

It is great and wonderful if folks start spending within their means and actually save, but that will mean higher unemployment, lower pay, and a generally slower growing economy for many years. The transition will be heart-wrenching for many people and folks will likely start protesting that the pain is too much and somebody should do 'something' about it or 'somebody' is to blame for why they can't get a job or send their kids to college or retire. It may bring political actors to the fore that are not good, maybe even evil.

The answer to the government employment growth numbers.

 

It's A Good Time To Work For Uncle Sam

 

"President Obama's call last year for "shared sacrifice" doesn't extend to federal employees, at least based on the details of his administration's 2010 budget released this week.

 

At a time when the official unemployment rate is nearing double digits, and 6.35 million people are receiving unemployment benefits, the U.S. government is on a hiring binge.

 

Executive branch employment — 1.98 million in 2009, excluding the Postal Service and the Defense Department — is set to increase by 15.6 percent for the 2010 fiscal year. Most of that is thanks to the Census Bureau hiring 102,000 temporary workers, but not counting them still yields a net increase of 2 percent in one year."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/12/business/econwatch/entry5007862.shtml

 

 

 

How many of you people, especially you whippersnappers & 30 somethings: 

[*]Have a budget?

[*]Pay bills on the day it's received?

[*]Reconcile your checking (and savings) account every month at the same time of the month?

 

 

It's amazing to me how many people still don't even use the free online bill paying that their bank offers.  When I used to have to sit down and write out checks for everything, it would seriously take me like an hour to write everything out and do balancing and everything else, every 2 weeks, it was a huge time suck, PITA and cost a lot in postage.  I don't know why ANYONE does it this way anymore.  With the online bill paying, I now set up my bills to pay on the date I choose within 24-48 hours of receiving them. Most people do not even know they can do this (set it up to pay ahead, not pay it out the day you get it).  A girl I work with ran out of checks and ended up paying $5 each for bank checks and running all over town paying utilities and rent to avoid late charges.  This is just insanity to me.  I haven't run out of checks in YEARS and almost never buy stamps anymore. 

I tried to get my parent to pay bills online, my mother refuses.  She still writes checks.  My nephew is "working" with her to ease her fears.

 

So if your in a store and there is a tall lady, with an accent, long hair, wearing big sunglasses & carrying a big purse, at the check out counter and she is taking forever  -  that madre MTS. 

 

If she hears "sighs" and/or "comments" and turns around, lifts her left eyebrow and give you one of these....

 

 

...It's definitely my mom.

 

 

 

Lest anyone thinks everybody is not being affected adversely by the current economy, read this (the rich are people too, damnit! :cry: :cry:):

 

full article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/nyregion/02metjournal.html

 

UPPER EAST SIDE JOURNAL

Where Money Was Flaunted, Now It’s Budgeted

By CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY

Published: May 1, 2009

 

New York City’s neighborhoods are a patchwork of tribes, each with its own standards about manners and the flaunting of wealth. Chatting openly about an inheritance in a Williamsburg cafe or bantering loudly with buddies in a Park Slope pizzeria about “making seven figures” would be immediate grounds for social exile. But the Upper East Side is a different story.

 

This is a neighborhood where, until recently, it was commonplace for bankers to boast into their cellphones about their bonuses. Spike-heeled ladies clacked along avenues and noisily swung designer shopping bags. Developers could sell speculative shells of unfinished five-bedroom condos. Its residents boldly prided themselves that they were surrounded by the trappings of wealth: AmEx black cards, dexterous plastic surgeons and preened pooches.

 

But the Upper East Side has been served a dose of humility in recent months as its residents have watched their wealth slip away. Their chatter about bonuses has been replaced with gripes about severance agreements. Their investments have been wiped out by collapsed hedge funds and Ponzi schemes, often run by their neighbors.

Lest anyone thinks everybody is not being affected adversely by the current economy, read this (the rich are people too, damnit! :'( :'( ):

 

full article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/nyregion/02metjournal.html

 

UPPER EAST SIDE JOURNAL

Where Money Was Flaunted, Now It’s Budgeted

By CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY

Published: May 1, 2009

 

New York City’s neighborhoods are a patchwork of tribes, each with its own standards about manners and the flaunting of wealth. Chatting openly about an inheritance in a Williamsburg cafe or bantering loudly with buddies in a Park Slope pizzeria about “making seven figures” would be immediate grounds for social exile. But the Upper East Side is a different story.

 

This is a neighborhood where, until recently, it was commonplace for bankers to boast into their cellphones about their bonuses. Spike-heeled ladies clacked along avenues and noisily swung designer shopping bags. Developers could sell speculative shells of unfinished five-bedroom condos. Its residents boldly prided themselves that they were surrounded by the trappings of wealth: AmEx black cards, dexterous plastic surgeons and preened pooches.

 

But the Upper East Side has been served a dose of humility in recent months as its residents have watched their wealth slip away. Their chatter about bonuses has been replaced with gripes about severance agreements. Their investments have been wiped out by collapsed hedge funds and Ponzi schemes, often run by their neighbors.

 

Cluctch my Chopard jewels!  Oh my!

 

I'll admit, when you shop Madison, it's not as bad as it once was.  Too me that's a good thing.  Less people shopping, so there isn't as much compthe way and more people to service you.

and I thought they only made watches! Shows you how little I know.

and I thought they only made watches! Shows you how little I know.

 

Don't travel above 14 Street very often do you?  You people and your casual corner wardrobes!

 

Lest anyone thinks everybody is not being affected adversely by the current economy, read this (the rich are people too, damnit! :'( :'( ):

 

full article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/nyregion/02metjournal.html

 

UPPER EAST SIDE JOURNAL

Where Money Was Flaunted, Now It’s Budgeted

By CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY

Published: May 1, 2009

 

New York City’s neighborhoods are a patchwork of tribes, each with its own standards about manners and the flaunting of wealth. Chatting openly about an inheritance in a Williamsburg cafe or bantering loudly with buddies in a Park Slope pizzeria about “making seven figures” would be immediate grounds for social exile. But the Upper East Side is a different story.

 

This is a neighborhood where, until recently, it was commonplace for bankers to boast into their cellphones about their bonuses. Spike-heeled ladies clacked along avenues and noisily swung designer shopping bags. Developers could sell speculative shells of unfinished five-bedroom condos. Its residents boldly prided themselves that they were surrounded by the trappings of wealth: AmEx black cards, dexterous plastic surgeons and preened pooches.

 

But the Upper East Side has been served a dose of humility in recent months as its residents have watched their wealth slip away. Their chatter about bonuses has been replaced with gripes about severance agreements. Their investments have been wiped out by collapsed hedge funds and Ponzi schemes, often run by their neighbors.

 

Cluctch my Chopard jewels!  Oh my!

 

I'll admit, when you shop Madison, it's not as bad as it once was.  Too me that's a good thing.  Less people shopping, so there isn't as much compthe way and more people to service you.

 

how nice everything is working out for you, but I'm surprised you even had to compete for service. So you've been kicked up to the "B" list?

 

A quick look at how the 3-Cs entered the recession by using BLS private sector employment numbers.  This is different than the unemployment rate, but maybe more interesting as it purports to count jobs in metropolitan economies. 

 

Whats’ looked at is monthly employment.

 

 

Since Columbus is fairly low compared to the Cleveland and Columbus, breaking out the two big metros….(and showing the quarters, so you can focus in on trends a bit)

 

 

…and Columbus. 

 

 

The weak 2008 and big crash at the end of the year is noticeable.  We would have really noticed this in the first and for sure the second quarter of 2008, by the unemployment numbers

 

The Past Decade

 

Now lets look at mid-term trends, starting with the last two good years of the 1990s boom.  This is an average of the monthly employment numbers. So its not the spike or the low for any given year,  just the average.  The 3Cs

 

 

And looking at the big two Cs.  What’s notable is how brutal the “9-11 Recession” was  for Cleveland.  In fact the Cleveland metro never recovered, staying at an employment plateau and weakening earlier than Cincy and Columbus.  In this Cleveland had a similar pattern as the Dayton MSA

 

 

Urban Ohio came online in 2004, I think, so we never talked about what was going on in that early 2000s period. 

 

And here’s Columbus.  Sort of similar to Cincinnati.  This is just private sector, but running the numbers for the total employment there isn’t much change in the trends here.

 

 

The BLS has numbers going back into the early 1990s for employment and you don’t want to see those as it was just a steady increase for all these cities, year after year. 

 

Those were good times for urban Ohio.