I recall making a post about how using negative amortization loans was foolish because your goal should be to pay off your mortgage, not increase the size of it. And based on household debt to GDP, it seemed nobody was paying off their debts, even as they approached retirement.
Then one poster berated me as to how dare I demand his generation pay down their debts. They were just as entitled to bleed the equity out of their houses if they so desired. I hope he enjoys his nice long lonely stay in a nursing home.
Regardless I don't normally curse, but I'm pissed as hell. And not so much because of the lack of fiscal planning resulting in 1 in 10 boomers borrowing for everyday expenses, but more so because 4 in 10 baby boomers just give their children money apparently instead of letting them fend for themselves.
People are going to have to learn, one way or another, if you keep giving people money, be you the government or a parent, the recipients of the money are going to come to expect it. And not only will you kill any work ethic they may have, but you'll impoverish yourself along the way. Furthermore, you can't live off of borrowing money all the time. You need to work to pay for your consumption (though I'm scared to see what the figures would be for Gen X). The fact household debt as a % of GDP is practically 100% only confirms just how much debt spending as a viable option of supporting one's lifestyle has acceptably permeated this country's think. This is just more proof we're going to learn this lesson the hard way.
Don't take the report so seriously. It was a phone survey, which means it's getting people at home (instead of people out working) who either haven't replaced their land lines with cell phones or who don't have caller ID. Either way, their sample is skewed towards people who are on the lower end of the economic spectrum.
ReplyDeletePlus, they only sampled 1000 people, so their margin of error is crap, too. All of it just screams, "We don't know squat about conducting surveys". Either that, or they want to make their voting bloc look like they need more help than they really do, which I wouldn't put past the AARP. Bunch of greedy old bastards.
Then there's this idiot:
"James Dyas, 75, of Sherman, Conn., said he and his wife go to their favorite Mexican restaurant about half as frequently as they used to. "About all the money we have goes to buying gasoline," he said."
That's a jackass who doesn't know how to make a budget. About all of their money goes to gas? Where do they live, in a freaking monster truck? Either that or James here is an idiot who doesn't know what his budget looks like in the first place. I wonder which is more likely?
I gave my kid $50 total for college - that was it. He worked fulltime, graduated in four years without debt and finished with about a 3.8. He learned to be independent real quick. Last I checked he's doing pretty well. (Not sure why the cursing is necessary)
ReplyDeleteCursing is absolutely necessary. being nice and "polite" doesn't get it through the thick skulls of society today. Specially the youth who have been brought up on "time outs" and not serious ass whoopings. A swift, vulgarities-infested kick in the ass is what this country needs.
ReplyDeleteAnd clones of Selma Hayek. Lot's o' clones.
This habit of giving money away for nothing in exchange will not go away soon. Society has become too affluent. There won't be a Great Depression anymore. Instead, Gen X, Y, Z, and so on, they will get used to live off the money of other people, which will drag down productivity growth a bit, but not enough to make them think about it.
ReplyDeleteI suggest that it should be mandated that every citizen, male AND female, after they become 18 years old, should stay a couple months in an economic boot camp.
I propose the Milton Friedman GDP assurance program. A 3 month course taught by Ben Stein or Walter Williams. All text books will be provided for by The Economist Magazine and the final month will involve a dish washing internship. After that people will work to have a job they enjoy and begin their lifelong contribution to the GDP and their own personal character.
ReplyDeleteYou can 'give away' all the 'free money' you like.
ReplyDeletePutting more cash or credit into circulation will not increase the amount of goods and services available.
There has never been, nor will there ever be a nation that will live indefinitely off of debt.
The US will not be any different. For all the fools who think that it is their right to keep borrowing and spending - be my guest. I hope you get nice and deep in debt.
Don't stop on my account.
Second, there is no such thing as an 'equity cash-out'. That is a fictitious name invented by the mortgage industry. The only way to cash out equity in something is to SELL IT TO SOMEONE ELSE.
When you borrow against it, you are the seller AND THE BUYER, so you are essentially REPURCHASING your own house at a higher price.
The housing bubble relied on the greater-fool concept. Humorously, many people functioned as their own greater fools, refinancing (in reality repurchasing) their own house at higher and higher prices.