Chart showing loan default rates for real estate, consumer and agricultural loans for 1998 to 2009 by the Curious Cat Investing Economics Blog, Creative Commons Attribution, data from the Federal Reserve.

As you can see real estate default rates exploded in 2008. In the 4th quarter of 2007 residential default rates were 3.02% by the 4th quarter of 2008 they were 6.34% and in the 1st quarter of this year they were 7.91% (471 basis points above the 4th quarter of 2007). Commercial real estate default rates were at 2.74 in the 4th quarter of 2007, 5.43% in the fourth quarter of 2008 and 6.5% in the 1st quarter of 2009 (a 366 basis point increase).

Credit card default rates were much higher for the last 10 years (the 4-5% range while real estate hovered above or below 2%). In the last 2 quarters it has increased sharply. From 4.8% in the 3rd quarter 2008 to 5.66% in the 4th and 6.5% in the 1st quarter of 2009. The default rate on other consumer loans are up but nowhere near the amounts of real estate or credit cards.

Agricultural loan default rates are actually about as low now as they have every been 1.71%. That is up a bit from the 1.06% low the default rate hit in the 1st quarter of 2009 but actually lower than it was for half of the last decade (the last 5 years it has been lower but prior to that it was higher – in fact with higher default rates than either real estate loan category).

Data from the Federal Reserve

Related: Mortgage Rates: 6 Month and 5 Year Charts – Jumbo Loan Defaults Rise at Fast Pace – Continued Large Spreads Between Corporate and Government Bond Yields – Nearly 10% of Mortgages Delinquent or in Foreclosure

Chart showing government debt as a percentage of GDP by Curious Cat Investing Economics Blog, Creative Commons Attribution, data from OECD, March 2009.

The USA federal government debt is far too large, in my opinion. We have been raising taxes on future taxpayers for several decades, to finance our current spending. Within reason deficit spending is fine. What that reasonable level is however, is not easy to know. One big problem with the past few decades is that during very prosperous economic times we spent money that we didn’t have, choosing to raise taxes on the future (instead of either not spending as much or paying for what we were spending by raising taxes to pay for current spending).

By not even paying for what we are spending when times were prosperous we put ourselves in a bad situation when we have poor economic conditions – like today. If we were responsible during good economic times (and at least paid for what we spent) we could have reduced our debt as a percentage of GDP. Even if we did not pay down debt, just by not increasing the outstanding debt while the economy grew the ratio of debt to GDP would decline. Then when times were bad, we could afford to run deficits and perhaps bring the debt level up to some reasonable level (maybe 40% of GDP – though it is hard to know what the target should be, 40% seems within the realm of reason to me, for now).

There is at least one more point to remember, the figures in the chart are based on reported debt. The USA has huge liabilities that are not accounted for. So you must remember that the actually debt is much higher than reported in the official debt calculation.

Now on to the good news. As bad as the USA has been at spending tomorrows increases in taxes today, compared to the OECD countries we are actually better than average. The OECD is made up of countries in Europe, the USA, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. The chart shows the percentage of GDP that government debt represents for various countries. The USA ended 2006 at 62% while the overall OECD total is 77%. In 1990 the USA was at 63% and the OECD was at 57%. Japan is the line way at the top with a 2006 total of 180% (that is a big problem for them). Korea is in the best shape at just a 28% total in 2006 but that is an increase from just 8% in 1990.

Related: Federal Deficit To Double This Year – Politicians Again Raising Taxes On Your Children – True Level of USA Federal Deficit – Who Will Buy All the USA’s Debt? – Top 12 Manufacturing Countries in 2007 – Oil Consumption by Country
Read more

Health spending in the United States grew 6.1 percent in 2007, to $2.2 trillion or $7,421 per person.
For comparison the total GDP per person in China is $6,100. This continues the trend of health care spending taking an every increasing portion of the economic output (the economy grew by 4.8 percent in 2007). This brings health care spending to 16.2% of GDP (which is yet another, in a string of record high percentages of GDP spent on health care). In 2003 the total health care spending was 15.3 of GDP.

With the exception of prescription drugs (which grew at 1.4% in 2007, compared to the 3.5% in 2006), spending for most other health care services grew at about the same rate or faster than in 2006. Hospital spending, which accounts for about 30 percent of total health care spending, grew 7.3 percent in 2007, compared to 6.9 percent in 2006.

Spending growth for both nursing home and home health services accelerated in 2007 (4.8% v. 4.0%). Spending growth for freestanding home health care services increased to 11.3 percent. Total health care spending by public programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, grew 6.4% in 2007 v. 8.2% in 2006. In comparison, health care spending by private sources grew 5.8% compared to 5.4%.

Private health insurance premiums grew 6.0 percent in 2007, the same rate as in 2006. Out-of-pocket spending grew 5.3 percent in 2007, an acceleration from 3.3 percent growth in 2006. Out-of-pocket spending accounted for 12.0 percent of national health spending in 2007. This share has been steadily declining both recently and over the long-run; in 1998, it accounted for 14.7 percent of health spending and, in 1968, out-of-pocket spending accounted for 34.8 percent of all health spending.

The costs for health services and supplies for 2007 were distributed among businesses (25%), households (31%), other private sponsors (4%), and governments (40%).

Decades ago Dr. Deming included excessive health care costs as one of the seven deadly diseases of western management. We have only seen the problem get worse. Finally it seems that a significant number of people are in agreement that the system is broken. Still, admitting the system is broken is not the same as agreeing on how to fix it. The way forward to workable solutions still seems very difficult.

Full press release from the United States Department of Health and Human Services.

Related: International Health Care System Performance – Personal Finance Basics: Health Insurance – Many Experts Say Health-Care System Inefficient, Wasteful – How to Improve the Health Care System

Since August of 2008 conforming mortgage rates are have declined a huge amount. Jumbo rates have fallen a large amount also, but much less (for example for a credit score of 700-759 the jumbo rates declined 73 basis points while the conventional rate declined 172 basis points.

For scores above 620, the APRs above assume a mortgage with 1 point and 80% Loan-to-Value Ratio. For scores below 620, these APRs assume a mortgage with 0 points and 60 to 80% Loan-to-Value Ratio. You can see, with these conditions the rate difference between a credit score of 660 and 800 is not large (remember this is with 20% down-payment) and has not changed much (the difference between the rates if fairly consistent).

Related: Low Mortgage Rates Not Available to Everyone – 30 Year Fixed Rate Mortgage Rate Data – Real Free Credit Report (in USA) – Jumbo Mortgage Shoppers Get Little Relief From Rates – posts on mortgages
Read more

Scott Adams does a great job with Dilbert and he presents a simple, sound financial strategy in Dilbert and the Way of the Weasel, page 172, Everything you need to know about financial planning:

• Make a will.
• Pay off your credit cards.
• Get term life insurance if you have a family to support.
• Fund your 401(k) to the maximum.
• Fund your IRA to the maximum.
• Buy a house if you want to live in a house and you can afford it.
• Put six months’ expenses in a money market fund. [this was wise, given the currently very low money market rates I would use "high yield" bank savings account now, FDIC insured - John]
• Take whatever money is left over and invest 70% in a stock index fund and 30% in a bond fund through any discount broker, and never touch it until retirement.
• If any of this confuses you or you have something special going on (retirement, college planning, tax issues) hire a fee-based financial planner, not one who charges a percentage of your portfolio.

Read more

When looking at the long term data, USA manufacturing output continues to increase. For decades people have been repeating the claim that the manufacturing base is eroding. It has not been true. I realize the economy is on weak ground today, I am not talking about that, I am looking at the long term trends.

The USA manufactures more than anyone else – by far. The percentage of total global manufacturing is the same today it was two decades ago (and further back as well). For decades people have been saying the USA has lost the manufacturing base – it just is not true. No matter how many times they say it does not make it true. It is true since 2000 the USA increase in manufacturing output (note not a decrease) has not kept pace with global grown in manufacturing output (global output in that period is up 47% and the USA is up 19% – Japan is down 10% for that period).

I would guess 20 years from today the USA will have a lower percentage of worldwide manufacturing. But I don’t see any reason believe the USA will see a decline in total manufacturing output. I just think the rest of the world is likely to grow manufacturing output more rapidly.

Looking at a year or even 2 or 3 years of manufacturing output data leaves a great deal of room to see trends where really just random variation exists. Even for longer periods trends are hard to project into the future.

Conventional wisdom is correct about China growing manufacturing output tremendously. China has grown from 4% of the output of the largest manufacturing companies in 1990 to manufacturing 16% of the total output in China today. That 12% had to come from other’s shares. And given all you hear from the general press, financial press, politicians, commentators… you would think the USA must have much less than China today, so may 10% and maybe they had 20% in 1990. When actually in 1990 the USA had 28% and in 2007 they had 27%.

Manufacturing jobs are not moving oversees. Manufacturing jobs are decreasing everywhere.
Read more

• “AIG would be doing fine today if they never heard of derivatives… I said they were possibly financial weapons of mass destruction and they have been, I mean they destroyed AIG, they certainly contributed to the destruction of Bear Stearns and Lehman”
• The biggest single cause was that we had an incredible residential real estate bubble.
• [on consuming more than we are producing] I don’t think it is the most pressing problem at all. We are trading away a little bit of our country all the time for the excess consumption that we have, over what we produce. That is not good. I think it is terrible over time.

Related: Warren Buffett related posts – Credit Crisis Continues – Credit Crisis (August 2007)

The updated data from the United Nations on manufacturing output by country clearly shows the USA remains by far the largest manufacturer in the world. UN Data, in billions of current US dollars:

The USA’s share of the manufacturing output of the countries that manufactured over $200 billion in 2007 (the 12 countries on the top of the chart above) in 1990 was 28%, 1995 28%, 2000 33%, 2005 30%, 2006 28%, 2007 27%. China’s share has grown from 4% in 1990, 1995 7%, 2000 11%, 2005 13%, 2006 15%, 2007 16%.

Total manufacturing output in the USA was up 76% in 2007 from the 1990 level. Japan, the second largest manufacturer in 1990, and third today, has increased output 15% (the lowest of the top 12, France is next lowest at 32%) while China is up an amazing 673% (Korea is next at an increase of 271%).
Read more

Failing to save is a huge problem in the USA. Spending money you don’t have (taking on personal debt) and not even having emergency savings and retirement savings lead to failed financial futures. Even though those in the USA today are among the richest people ever to live many still seem to have trouble saving. Here is a simple tip to improve that result for yourself.

Anytime you get a raise split the raise between savings, paying off debt (if you have any non-mortgage debt), and increasing the amount you have to spend. I think too many people think financial success is much more complicated than it is. Doing simple things like this (and some of the other things, mentioned in this blog) will help most people do much better than they have been doing.

There are lots of ways to spend money. And many people find ways to spend all or more than all (credit card debt, personal loans…) they have which are sure ways to a failed financial future. So anytime you get a raise (a promotion, new job…) take a portion of that extra money and put it toward your financial future. The proportion can very but I would aim for at least 50% if you have any non-mortgage debt, don’t have a 6 month emergency fund, or are behind in saving for retirement, a house…

Exactly how you calculate if you are behind, I will address in a future post (or you can look around for more information). By taking this fairly simple action you will be setting yourself up for a successful financial future instead of finding yourself falling behind, as so many do. And then when things go badly, as they most likely will sometime during your life, you will have built up a financial position to draw on. Instead of, as so many do now, find that you were living beyond your means when things were going well – which it doesn’t take a genius to see will lead to serious problems when things take a turn for the worse.

So lets say you take a new job and get a raise of $4,000 a year. Instead of spending $4,000 more just put $2,000 away (pay off debt, add to your retirement savings, add to savings for a house, add to your emergency fund…). Then you get a promotion of another $3,000, increase your spending by $1,500 and save the rest. It is such a simple idea and just doing this you can find yourself in the top few percent of those making smart financial decisions. And if you get to the point that you are ahead in all your financial areas then you can take more of each raise you get (but most of the time you will have learned how valuable the extra saving are and figured out the extra toys really are not worth it). But if you want to, once you have created a successful financial life, you can choose to buy more toys.

Related: Retirement Savings Survey Results – Earn more, spend more, want more

There are external risks to your financial health. Many people ruin their financial health even before any external risk can, but lets say you are being responsible then what risks should you seek to protect yourself from?

Another protection is to be financially literate. You can risk your financial health by being fooled in spending money you should save, borrowing too much for your house, failing to buy the right insurance, using too much leverage, investing too much in high risk investments…

Related: credit card tips – personal finance tips – personal loan information