Occupy Wall Street, contrary to press reports, did not "come from nowhere." The American grassroots movement that has spread to more than 40 cities is a natural progression of protests that began in the Arab world this spring.
But don't try to compare what is happening today on Wall Street or in D.C. to the ongoing struggle for basic human rights in the Middle East, nor to the riots in Greece over their debt crisis, or the seemingly senseless rampage of young people through the neighborhoods of London this summer. The one palpable thread that weaves its way throughout the masses in this global awakening of civil disobedience is that these protestors are convinced that their governments are no longer listening to them.
One recurring complaint that I have heard ever since Occupy Wall Street descended upon Zuccotti Park in lower Manhattan on Sept. 17 is that the protestors cannot articulate exactly what it is they are protesting against. To me, it is as clear as the sky above. It is the same reason our forefathers held the first Tea Party in Boston. Put in historic terms, these modern-day revolutionaries are protesting "taxation without representation." That no matter how bad the situation becomes for the majority of Americans, the status quo will remain the same
They argue that there is now an entrenched and extremely dangerous liason between Corporate America, Wall Street and our political system that threatens our economic and political freedom. If you have been reading my columns over the last few years, you may have picked up the same message.
I have often pointed to the excesses of Wall Street and railed against the practices of the financial sector. Occupy Wall Street and I share the same opinion of government bailouts that have done little but further enrich our nation's bankers and brokers. Instead of lending out the billions of dollars they received in taxpayer money, the banks pocketed that money, speculated with that money and paid their executives huge bonuses with that money. The country narrowly avoided a second depression because of them and yet, how many of these miscreants have paid for their crimes?
This week we were told that two years after the recession, inflation-adjusted median household income fell 6.7 percent to $49,909. During the recession itself, household income fell 3.2 percent and yet American corporations are making record profits with record amounts of cash in their coffers. Yet, they refuse to hire new workers or even raise the salaries of those they employ.
Whether we like it or not, the rich in this country have gotten richer and the rest of us have gotten poorer and it is a trend that appears to be accelerating.
The Occupy Wall Street movement calls us "the 99 percent." They claim that the top one percent of Americans owns 40 percent of the nation's wealth. They also argue that the gap between the 1 percent and the 99 percent is only going to grow wider. They are protesting (revolting may be a better word) in fear that the middle class in this country will be a thing of the past unless something is done.
The greed of Corporate America also figures prominently in their slogans and protest placards. But a corporation cannot feel greed since it is not human. It is an entity that is driven by only one principal–profit. It cannot, nor should it, be worried about things like humanity, kindness, fair play, a livable wage, etc. So, for example, when corporations are making historic record profits by demanding that their existing workers work longer hours for less money, fewer benefits and no raise or bonuses, it is simply following its stated objective, improving profits. Corporate executives will receive large bonuses to keep costs low and they know that with unemployment over 9 percent they can always replace workers who complain or protest.
There was a time in this country where the very same practices occurred. In an effort to protect themselves, workers organized and government regulated the worst of the excesses of corporation's unbridled devotion to profit. That was then but now unions are a shadow of their former selves.
As for government, if the regulator is beholden to these same corporations, then the system no longer works. Although we, the great silent middle class, continue to pay taxes, continue to dutifully vote to "throw the bums out" and replace them with new bums, our views as to what is fair is no longer represented by our leaders.
Our system no longer works when politicians, in order to get elected, finance their campaigns by taking huge sums of money from the corporate sector. How can they do what is fair and equitable for us and at the same time regulate the hand that feeds them?
How different is that from those days when American colonists were taxed but ignored by a monarch who administered to the favored few residing in England?
There is a growing frustration in this country. We work harder than ever, for less and yet we are told that everything that can be done is being done. Most of us are angry; some about the ecosystem, others about the two wars that are a decade old or our inability to get ahead or even find a job. There are plenty of us that are mad about all of the above and then some.
In my opinion, we are seeing the beginning of a revolt by the long suffering, long silent majority. We have a tradition of taking to the streets when our voices are not being heard, beginning with the American Revolution. Veterans of World War I marched for their pensions. The middle class marched during the Great Depression; farmers marched to forestall foreclosure and food prices. Workers marched for the right to unionize, and women to vote. Today brave and motivated Americans are marching again, and I say it's about time. As long as their protests remain peaceful, count me among them.
Bill Schmick is an independent investor with Berkshire Money Management. (See "About" for more information.) None of the information presented in any of these articles is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. The reader should not assume that any strategies, or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold or held by BMM. Direct your inquiries to Bill at (toll free) or e-mail him at wschmick@fairpoint.net . Visit www.afewdollarsmore.com for more of Bill's insights.
Independent Investor: Pre-Owned Autos Selling at a Premium
By Bill Schmick On: 08:23PM / Saturday October 08, 2011
If you have been thinking of trading up to a new car, this may be the time to do it. Used auto prices are selling at 16-year highs but your window of opportunity is closing fast.
My wife, Barbara, and I have been shopping for either a used or new car. We own matching 2004 Subarus that we purchased used back in 2005-2006. We would much prefer a vehicle with even better gas mileage, but we live in the Northeast where snow and ice demand a four, or all-wheel, drive vehicle and that limits our choice of fuel-efficient transportation.
The good news for us is that although all used cars are priced higher these days, smaller, fuel-efficient models and hybrids are commanding especially good prices. As a rule of thumb, every $1 increase in the price per gallon of gas, the value of used compact cars rises 8 to 12 percent. So if the trade-in value of your car was worth $10,000 last year, it could bring $11,000 this year.
However, this shortfall in supply won't last long. Dealers estimate by late fall or winter the pipeline will begin to fill once again.
Much of this used-car price windfall is a by-product of the 2008 recession. The consumer was hit by the double blow - less income and, thanks to the financial crisis, increased difficulty in qualifying for either a lease or auto loan. As a result, today, three years later, there are a lot fewer used autos for sale. The average car on the highway today is 10.6 years old, according to Polk, the auto research firm. That's up from 9.8 years in 2007.
Another large source of used cars for dealerships has traditionally been the leased cars market. Companies sell leased cars as used when leases expire. But a lot fewer leases were written during the financial crisis, leaving a large hole in supply at the wholesale level.
"Wholesale prices are quite high," said Mike Coggins, general manager of Haddad Dealerships in Berkshire County. "We haven't passed those prices on to the consumer so our margins are smaller."
Still, Coggins isn't complaining since his used car sales are up 25 percent this year, leading all of his other divisions.
The effect of Japan's earthquake has also contributed to an overall shortage of new autos this year. The disaster in Japan disrupted the world's supply chain of auto parts as well as the export of many Japanese-made vehicles to the United States. This is a far cry from three years ago, when all three U.S. automakers were on the ropes and dealerships around the country were closing every day.
It may actually make more sense for us to look at replacing our autos with a new car this time around. I am going to do my research, something you should do as well, if you are planning to buy a car. Figure out the price differences between a used model and a brand-new vehicle before making a decision. I tend to drive my auto for many years (as opposed to trading it in every three years) so the new-car avenue may make economic sense for me. Find out a ballpark asking price for your vehicles from Kelly Blue Book on the Internet and find out what similar cars are selling for in your area.
I know that we would probably get a higher price for our vehicles by selling them to a private party. Something I suggest you try if you really want to get the best price for your car. We will probably take a 10 percent haircut on the price by trading it in to a dealer.
Yet, neither of us is willing to put the effort into listing it on the Internet and haggling with potential buyers. I would much rather devote that time to writing columns for you, my readers.
Bill Schmick is an independent investor with Berkshire Money Management. (See "About" for more information.) None of the information presented in any of these articles is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. The reader should not assume that any strategies, or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold or held by BMM. Direct your inquiries to Bill at (toll free) or e-mail him at wschmick@fairpoint.net . Visit www.afewdollarsmore.com for more of Bill's insights.
The Independent Investor: Should You Be Worried About October?
Bill Schmick On: 03:59PM / Thursday September 29, 2011
A common perception on Wall Street is that October is the worst month of the year for the market. It is true that the month has historically failed to provide stellar returns, but it is actually September that deserves the title of the worst market month of all.
The good news is that September is over. Does that mean we can look forward to better times ahead? Well not quite; we still have to deal with October, which like March, is usually a month that begins like a lion and ends like a lamb as far as selloffs are concerned.
So what makes investors so fearful of October? It might be because October has ushered in some auspicious dates of calamity beginning with a 12.8 percent plunge in the Dow on Oct. 29, 1929. In today's markets, a 12 percent plunge doesn't feel like a big deal but back then it was substantial and it didn't stop there. The market went on to lose 90 percent of its value and usher in the Great Depression.
Then there was the stock market crash of Oct. 19, 1987. That was my first of many encounters with stock market meltdowns throughout the world. Fortunately, it was a short, sharp decline and the U.S. markets recovered quickly.
And how could we forget October 2008? It was the worst month for the S&P 500 Index, NASDAQ and the Dow in 21 years. Global equities lost $9.5 trillion that month and it was the most volatile 30 days in the S&P 500's 80-year history. We registered the most down days in a single month since 1973.
Actually, despite these gruesome statistics, October historically turns out to be the seventh-best month to own stocks, tied with April, putting it in the middle of the pack.
September, on the other hand, is the bad boy of the calendar year. It holds the record for most miserable month as far back as 1929. If we look even further back in history we discover the root cause of September's stock market underperformance.
Back in the day, much of 19th-century American commerce consisted of East Coast purchases of newly harvested crops from the South and Midwest regions for sale to the rest of the country. September was harvest month so bankers and other investors would borrow large sums of money from Wall Street, temporarily pushing up interest rates while redirecting money flows away from stocks and into the bond market. This would also coincidentally push down prices in the stock market that month.
Although money flows have long since been regulated by the Federal Reserve for events like the planting season, the tradition of down Septembers persist. Since 1959, the S&P 500 Index has declined an average of 0.9 percent in September. In the first two years of a presidential term, the performance is a bit worse. Overall, investors have suffered the most double-digit losses in that month as well.
In today's world, other concerns might explain September's continued poor performances. There is the "back to work" phenomenon, which occurs just after the Labor Day holiday. Many investors typically take the summer off and when they come back are disappointed to find that their portfolios gained little during the summer months. They lose patience and sell.
One reason for that disappointment may be that a company's earnings for the year have not met the expectations of the market. The normal end of June, early July, quarterly earnings announcements oftentime disappoint. What may have seemed a reasonable expectation by company management at the end of the prior year may not be a reasonable estimate by mid-year for a variety of reasons. The company's stock price may decline or simply mark time temporarily. Many investors won't want to hang around for yet another earnings disappointment at the end of September, so they sell ahead of earnings season.
This year, September has certainly lived up to its reputation with the averages declining almost 5 percent overall while volatility has skyrocketed. The bottom line is that if September is usually the month when crashes occur, then October is the month that ends them. Since September is over, the good news is that we have weathered the worst and if history is any guide, the future should be a bit better.
Bill Schmick is an independent investor with Berkshire Money Management. (See "About" for more information.) None of the information presented in any of these articles is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. The reader should not assume that any strategies, or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold or held by BMM. Direct your inquiries to Bill at (toll free) or e-mail him at wschmick@fairpoint.net . Visit www.afewdollarsmore.com for more of Bill's insights.
The Independent Investor: What the Markets Missed
By: Bill Schmick On: 10:49PM / Thursday September 22, 2011
As disappointed global stock markets plummet in response to the Federal Reserve's latest stimulus initiative, few investors are paying attention to what may be the Fed's real intention behind this new plan: mortgage refinancing.
For the longest time, I have been convinced that the housing market holds the key to economic growth (or lack of it) in the U.S. As such, I have been hoping against hope that one or more of a long line of presidential candidates would actually have the courage and intellect to recognize and address our main problem.
Instead, I hear how "we need to get America back to work" or "we need to roll back all these regulations that are preventing businesses from investing." While all of those jingoistic slogans sound good, none of them address the main issue: how to deal with the trillions of dollars in underwater mortgages and the people who hold them.
The Fed, through QE II, attempted to push interest rates low enough so that borrowers could stave off foreclosure by refinancing their mortgages. The problem is that lenders insist that the market value of homes to be refinanced must be no lower than 25 percent of the mortgage they carry. That's a real "Catch-22" for most borrowers, thanks to the decline in housing values over the last three years.
Their houses are now worth a lot less than that. So mortgageholders are in a bind. They can't sell their property because they won't get back enough to pay off the loan. They can't refinance because the house is worth less than the mortgage and they can't afford the monthly mortgage payments. As the situation drags on, more and more Americans slip into bankruptcy or walk away from their home/mortgage leaving and already weakened financial system to pick up the pieces.
Right now this is just my guess of what the Obama administration may be planning. Over the past week a number of governmental trial balloons have been floated in the media concerning refinancing of up to $1 trillion of mortgage loans on easier terms. It won't be a giveaway, if it occurs, in the sense that to qualify for re-financing, you must be current on your mortgage payments and the loans must have been guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or the FHA. How would it work?
Homeowners who qualify would get a new 30-year loan at say 4 percent and payoff 100 percent of the old mortgage (presumably carrying a much higher rate of interest). This is called prepaying your loan in the mortgage business. Your bank receives the proceeds and pays off the old loan to Fannie and Freddie. These two government mortgage entities would receive these billions in prepaid mortgages and dispense them to the ultimate mortgage holders in the mortgage-backed securities market.
Now, guess who holds the lion's share of mortgage backed securities in this country? You guessed it, the Fed.
That still leaves Fannie and Freddie with a problem. They need to refinance all these new 30-year, 4 percent mortgages. They are also assuming a lot of risk since lending now, when interest rates are at historical lows, is a dicey business. Who will buy them and how can they protect these new mortgage loans from future losses when interest rates begin to rise? The answer was revealed in Wednesday's Fed announcement.
The Federal Reserve announced that it intends to drive long-term interest rates lower by purchasing long term U.S. Treasury bonds. The Fed said it will also juggle its $2.65 trillion securities holdings by using its enormous cash flow to buy more mortgage debt. In other words, since it will be on the receiving end of all these billions in prepaid mortgage money, it will just turn around and use that cash to buy up billions in these new refinanced mortgages. At the same time, by driving long rates lower through their purchase of long dated Treasury bonds, they effectively remove the risk of rates rising anytime in the near future. The Fed becomes both buyer and seller of this entire refinancing operation.
The beauty of this move, in my opinion, is that the White House will be able to launch a new refinancing program/stimulus plan without going through Congress for approval. Nor will it add to the deficit, since all of these transactions will be run through the Federal Reserve. The Republicans may have gotten wind of this, thus the letter to the Federal Reserve Board just prior to their meeting, warning the Fed members not to do anything further to stimulate the economy.
Well, boys, the Fed just blew you off and you can't do a thing about it.
Is this all a hair-brained scheme of mine born of too much work and too little vacation? Time will tell. But if I'm right, I would expect an announcement fairly soon. I have to hand it to the Obama administration if it is true and they can pull this off. The scope of refinancing they are planning will put $2,000 or more a year into borrower's pockets, which will amount to a huge stimulus program that bypasses Congress and goes straight to the people. I hope I'm right.
Bill Schmick is an independent investor with Berkshire Money Management. (See "About" for more information.) None of the information presented in any of these articles is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. The reader should not assume that any strategies, or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold or held by BMM. Direct your inquiries to Bill at (toll free) or e-mail him at wschmick@fairpoint.net . Visit www.afewdollarsmore.com for more of Bill's insights.
"U.S. stocks opened higher Thursday as the Federal Reserve and four of the world's other major central banks agreed to make U.S. dollars more readily available in Europe's struggling financial system."
" ... Early Thursday, investors welcomed the news that the Fed — along with the central banks of England, Switzerland, Japan and the euro zone — is coordinating a program to boost dollar liquidity in the region."
CNNMoney, September 15, 2011, 9:47 a.m.
The markets are climbing in celebration that the central banks of the world are combining and coordinating their immense financial power to bolster Europe's struggling banks. The message the ECB is trying to telegraph to investors is that Europe is not going to allow a Lehman Brothers-type disaster occur within their community. Why then am I so worried?
After all, over the past week, our markets have soared as European leaders have assured the financial markets that Greece will not default, that the country will not be kicked out of the EU, and that Greece will be able to pay their bills on time. If the chancellor of Germany says its true than it must be so, right? Certainly no one can argue with the market's verdict. Investors scrambled to buy European banks with some French and German banks climbing anywhere from 10 percent to 22 percent within minutes of the news.
Something about the news, however, doesn't seem quite right to me. How can I square this bailout initiative with comments by France's Finance Minster Francois Baroin who on the same day insisted French banks are solid and do not need to be recapitalized, despite being heavily exposed to Greece's debts. Baroin said on French radio that the banks aren't having difficulties accessing liquidity. Yet, the Wall Street Journal and credit agency Moody’s downgrade of French banks on Wednesday, contradicts these statements.
There was something else about Thursday's ECB statement that struck a disconcerting note within my memory. I went back to the financial crisis of 2008 and found what I was looking for. But before reading further, I ask readers to go back to the top of the page and read the quote from CNNMoney again. Now read the quote below. Notice the dates.
"The Federal Reserve announced Monday it will offer an unlimited amount of dollars to three other central banks in an unprecedented move to provide liquidity to the global banking system.
" .... After they borrow dollars from the Fed, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank and the Swiss National Bank will provide private financial institutions with one-week, 28-day and 84-day U.S. dollar loans in the latest attempt to unfreeze credit."
CNNMoney, Oct. 13, 2008, 9:09 a.m.
Sounds quite similar to this week's news, doesn't it? My problem is that while both Europe's leaders and our own U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner are telling us "don't worry, be happy" it appears the opposite is occurring behind the scenes. Central banks are tripping over themselves to avoid ... what? I recall in our own country during 2008, the powers to be were saying the same thing about our financial system, just before Bear Sterns, Lehman Brothers and AIG imploded.
So what happened to the stock markets during the October 2008 announcement? The S&P 500 Index climbed from 899 on Oct. 10, 2008, to 1,003 on Monday Oct 13, 2008, an almost 11 percent gain. Two weeks later the index stood at 848 for a 15 percent loss. Now, granted, this is not 2008-2009, although the financial problems within Europe could tip over into a full-blown crisis if allowed to continue.
As for the U.S., 2011 has its own peculiar set of challenges. The economic data continues to weaken and the past data is being steadily revised downward. Employment seems to have skidded to a halt and we may actually begin to see the jobless rate rise in the months ahead. As a result, companies are beginning to guide revenue and earnings expectations lower as well.
Of course the markets are ignoring all that bad news because investors are convinced that the Federal Reserve will announce some fabulous plan to turn all of this around on Aug. 20. But, in the meantime this investor will continue to stay defensive and watch Europe closely.
Bill Schmick is an independent investor with Berkshire Money Management. (See "About" for more information.) None of the information presented in any of these articles is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. The reader should not assume that any strategies, or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold or held by BMM. Direct your inquiries to Bill at (toll free) or e-mail him at wschmick@fairpoint.net . Visit www.afewdollarsmore.com for more of Bill's insights.
Bill Schmick is registered as an investment advisor representative and portfolio manager with Berkshire Money Management (BMM), managing over $200 million for investors in the Berkshires. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of BMM. None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Anyone seeking individualized investment advice should contact a qualified investment adviser. None of the information presented in this article is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. The reader should not assume that any strategies, or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold or held by BMM. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com Visit www.afewdollarsmore.com for more of Bill’s insights.
Occupy Wall Street, contrary to press reports, did not "come from nowhere." The American grassroots movement that has spread to more than 40 cities is a natural progression of protests that began in the Arab world this spring.
So what makes investors so fearful of October? It might be because October has ushered in some auspicious dates of calamity beginning with a 12.8 percent plunge in the Dow on Oct. 29, 1929. In today's markets, a 12 percent plunge doesn't feel like a big deal but back then it was substantial and it didn't stop there. The market went on to lose 90 percent of its value and usher in the Great Depression.
As disappointed global stock markets plummet in response to the Federal Reserve's latest stimulus initiative, few investors are paying attention to what may be the Fed's real intention behind this new plan: mortgage refinancing.
Something about the news, however, doesn't seem quite right to me. How can I square this bailout initiative with comments by France's Finance Minster Francois Baroin who on the same day insisted French banks are solid and do not need to be recapitalized, despite being heavily exposed to Greece's debts. Baroin said on French radio that the banks aren't having difficulties accessing liquidity. Yet, the Wall Street Journal and credit agency Moody’s downgrade of French banks on Wednesday, contradicts these statements.
