Would We Have Avoided The Mortgage Mess With More Financial Education?

There's no question that the United States is a nation of financial illiterates, and that this contributed to the decisions of millions of Americans to run up credit-card debts, buy houses they couldn't afford, purchase college educations they can't pay for. But does it follow from our widespread illiteracy that education would help us avoid those mistakes?

That's what investment adviser Steven Goldberg argues in Kiplinger. He even finds a guy who works for the National Endowment for Financial Education who agrees. Of course, both of these guys have huge conflicts of interest. Education makes people more confident in their investment decisions and more likely to employ the services of advisers like Goldberg. The guy from the endowment, Paul Golden, is professionally dependent on faith in financial education.

Despite the conflicts, we're sure these gentlemen mean well. But this is probably wishful thinking. Educated people tend to overrate the value of education (just as intelligent people overrate intelligence). Reality, however, is less enthusiastic about education. Despite decades of civics class, the broad public remains shockingly ignorant of even the most basic political facts. There's little to suggest that widespread financial education can make a meaningful difference in overcoming financial illiteracy in all but a select few. Many people are illiterate because they are, for all practical purposes, uneducable.

What's more, it's questionable that even a financially literate people could have avoided the mistakes that led, say, to the mortgage mess. Some of the most financially literate people on earth lost billions on Wall Street betting wrong on mortgages and derivatives. If a Wharton education can't prevent these kind of colossal errors what are the odds that a semester of high school finance would?

Badly in Need of Financial Education [Kiplinger]

Comments

1

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:05PM

If we stopped bailing these losers out, that would be an educational moment for them.

2

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:08PM

A good reason why we should privatize social security, a la 401k. NOT.

3

Posted by Capt Obvious, May 21, 2008 3:10PM

not a lack of education -- we're a society addicted to debt -- from the highest rungs of the federal government to the smallest mom and pop shops -- I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today

4

Posted by Bulging Bracket, May 21, 2008 3:11PM

Finance, as with civics and so many other critically important subjects, is something that most people can remain "rationally ignorant" about. Pay a minimal amount of attention to the subject and then hire someone to take care of the details.

We all do this about so much of our lives - the benefit of living in an urban, post-industrial, capitalist society. Everyone thinks the subjects that they are interested in are critically important to survival and are an essential part of a fulfilling life. This is merely evidence of hubris, confirmation bias, and several other logical fallacies. I'm sure we all find the English major's insistence that not having read the current avant-garde novel of the month is a guarantor of philistinism and anti-intellectualism to be so much bullshit. When we do it it is just as futile, self-serving, and untrue.

People don't need more education on personal finance. A bit more mandatory math education would likely help a bit (power laws, exponential functions, statistics) but the population that we recruit our teachers from are pretty much useless at math to begin with and we're talking about people who find basic algebra too hard. Some education on economic history would also be helpful - but then again we have the teachers to deal with, who are constitutionally wedded to the idea of a marxist state. That's not a promising population to use to demonstrate that good intentions make bad policy while malevolence and self interest create wealth for everyone!

If you saw CNBC or Bloomberg today, there were politicians and lobbysists arguing that the increase in demand from China was a minimal impact on the market (ignoring the concept of marginality), that speculators were distorting the market (rather than a necessary way of finding prices), and that oil companies had "excess profits" (err WTF?). Instead of being drug off to be shot as aiding and abetting crimes against humanity (these are but steps to North Korean or Zimbabwean economic policies and hence aiding and abetting genocide) the anchors just made a few questions about "we live in a capitalist society".

5

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:20PM

we would have avoided this mess if women stayed home, had kids and didnt mess up the workplace. When men ruled in the 50s, none of this happened.

6

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:21PM

3:20:

Don't forget the gays....

7

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:23PM

@3:31 Pay a minimal amount of attention then hire someone to take care of the details? That's what's done now, and the result is people are pushed by greedy sales people into investments and insurance programs that are totally unsuited to their needs, but carry big fees. And not just dumb people. I'm thinking of a very smart (in the liberal arts sense) relative, with a good job (not in finance) that has been hosed. Not sure what the solution is, but the issue of personal financial management in a complex age needs more than minimal attention.

8

Posted by Bulging Bracket, May 21, 2008 3:25PM

Contra to 3:08, the more risk the more people pay attention. When your entire future rests on your successful management of your investments, you pay more attention and you take fewer risks. This is human nature and applies to driving (seatbelts, roadsigns, curbs, painted lines, highway dividers, etc all increase the risk tolerance of road users), health (safer sex practices vis a vis treatment options for STDs, dietary choices vs blood pressure meds, total risk taking vs avg life expectance), and finance. The more risk in the system, the more cautiously people behave - Moral Hazard is very real and demonstrable, despite the protestations of leftists everywhere.

9

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:28PM

Who was more financially illiterate, the no-doc,no-down borrower gambling on house prices with more money than he could ever earn or the guy lending him the money (or buying the loan afterward)?

10

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:28PM

@3:20, 3:21 I know you're kidding, but watch Mad Men (about an advertising agency in 1960). A fascinating look at the good old days, which makes it clear that they weren't really so good.

11

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:35PM

We're a society that cannot say no to instant gratification in many forms: money (easy credit), food, etc. Have a problem? Pop a pill. Stressed? Shop or eat. Need cash? Ring up the debt. Our nation is in a consumption coma.

12

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:45PM

Look at the average credit card statement.

It calls out the interest rate both yearly and monthly, and shows you the exact amount of your monthly finance charge.

After one look at that, if you still use credit cards for anything other than emergencies or expenses you can pay in full during the grace period, no amount of financial education on Earth will make you any better off.

13

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:46PM

Due. Liberals think getting ANY govt issued ID (where you literally have to just show up) is too much burden for people. And you want to make major financial decisions like buying a house contingent on basic knowledge of finance? What kinda crazy person are you?

14

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:50PM

Look at the average credit card statement.

It calls out the interest rate both yearly and monthly, and shows you the exact amount of your monthly finance charge.

After one look at that, if you still use credit cards for anything other than emergencies or expenses you can pay in full during the grace period, no amount of financial education on Earth will make you any better off.

15

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:54PM

More financial literacy would probably help, but I think the real problem is the Lake Wobegon Effect. Good luck getting someone to teach people that they're not as smart as they think they are. That is without selling them some toxic ABS piece of crap in the process.

16

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 3:55PM

@3:50 True but.... Do you really think anyone uses their credit cards thinking that they're actually going to be carrying a balance at those interest rates? No, they spend telling themselves in a half assed way that they'll pay at the end of the month. Then don't. Then buy more, promising themselves the same thing. Pretty soon they're in a hole. Its like any other addictive bahavior. (Just one puff...Just....).

17

Posted by FirstYearBKR, May 21, 2008 4:08PM

It's not about women in the workplace, lack of education, or any complex 'what if' reasoning...the people who thought it would be a good idea to give legit deadbeats massive mortgages/loans should have seen this coming. We have companies monitoring credit history reports for a reason. In high school I thought that this was the dumbest investment idea when I first heard about it. Yeah, the risk/return ratio was enticing and your bets would surely pay off since SOME of those deadbeats would attempt to make payments on their debt. I find it hard to believe that NOBODY anticipated a situation where enough loans would default to make the entire system crash and burn. This seems more likely than the current ARS market. Although the 'auction rate' process possessed risks loosely associated with investor/market psychology, the catalysts for a sub-prime meltdown were a little more than a possibility.

We all have at least one friend who constantly says he'll 'get you back' for dinner/cabs/etc. Does he ever get you back? No. If he asks you to spot him again, would you? Probably not.

The solution is more basic than a push for financial education; it's about simple logic and willpower. People should quit thinking, 'I'm worth more than this' and begin to live WITHIN their means (i.e. if you can't pay your credit card bills in full, struggle during tax season, and have negative equity on your '89 Tercel maybe you should think twice about that 30 year mortgage). Why do Americans need to 'hire people to take care of the details' when it all boils down to diciplined spending/saving habits? People can't be that oblivious, can they?

Don't get me wrong: I'm not making enough money to live off of interest and as far as most people are concerned I'm a recent grad starting at the bottom of the ladder. Still, without the use of rocket science, I manage to cover all expenses, pay rent in Manhattan, and save a minimum percentage of my salary each month. All it takes is 4th grade-level math skills and the ability to not splurge on $500 loafers when you know that the purchase will make you unable to pay off your credit card at month-end.

If you're unhappy with your financial situation in life go out and further your career instead of superficially enhancing your lifestyle with stuff you really can't afford.

18

Posted by Anal_yst, May 21, 2008 4:26PM

@ Firstyrbnkr

1. Someone did see this disaster coming. His name is John Paulson.

2. Yes more people should have seen it coming, and, instead of riding the gravy train until they beat it into the ground (i.e. maximizing ST profits at the expense of LT sustainabile profits), the largese brought the system to a schreeching halt. Unfortunately the Gov't is absolutely intent on making sure nary a soul learns their lesson from this debacle (hey 6 months later we're already smoooooth sailin, right?).

3. 95% of people, when presented with simple means and a weak sales pitch will time and time again yield to temptation. The credit card (etc) companies are all-too-happy to oblige people to run up $25k balances where they'll be locked into paying IO finance charges into perpetuity. However, soon we'll start to see credit card, auto, and other consumer debt start to hit the sh!tter as well, unfortunately the equity markets seem to be largely ignoring this inevitability (I'm sure Jim Chanos is chomping at the bit).

4. Best financial education you can get is from your parents (assuming you had any sort of family life while you were brought up, of course). Parents who beat it into their children's heads to be fiscally responsible, or even better, give them enough rope to hang themselves early on so as to learn from experience, will do vasly more to help you than any large-scale financial education program will.

19

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 4:27PM

I always have wondered why J. Aron/Goldman Sachs traders never came to me and taught me how to trade commodities or equities. They act like they benefit financially from their trading knowledge that I don't have.

Let's make it a law that J. Aron has to train everyone how to trade.

20

Posted by onetwo , May 21, 2008 4:28PM

Great points all around, BB!

Can you do me a favor and lob me an email email is on my profile or site?

21

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 4:29PM

@3:55: That's exactly my point. The problem isn't "financial education," or the lack thereof. The problem is that the motivation to spend is stronger than the knowledge that spending isn't a good idea. I have no *objection* to financial education. It's just that thinking that increasing it would reduce overspending behavior is like saying that putting more graphic warnings on cigarette packages would reduce smoking. Everybody already KNOWS cigarettes will kill you - in fact, most people think that smoking is a lot more dangerous than it actually is. Additional warnings are useless. (Although ironically increasing the cost of cigarettes through taxation has a small but consistent reducing effect.)

22

Posted by onetwo , May 21, 2008 4:39PM

Great points all around, BB!

Can you do me a favor and lob me an email email is on my profile or site?

23

Posted by FirstYearBKR, May 21, 2008 4:53PM

@ Anal_yst

Agreed 100% on everything you said:

I'm aware John Paulson predicted it's baffling that more didn't notice and/or voice their apprehensions. Greed aside, it's blatantly obvious that sub-prime 'fad' investments wouldn't last and it isn't as if the warning signs hit the market like a freight train. It was more like a rollercoaster as it reaches the top of a climb; people had some time where the plunge was clearly visible.

It definitely comes down to parenting and how you were raised. However, you don't need to be born with a silver spoon in your mouth to learn these things. Good parenting includes preparing your children for the real world.

If it really is true that 95% of people will bend over backwards when presented with a sales-pitch and strategic diction, history will repeat itself more than once in the future. I personally don't understand those who rationalize their fiscal over-extending with 'I'll just pay it off little by little.' With all the public examples and credit consolidation advertisements it seems silly to think that people aren't aware of the snowballing effect associated with accumulating credit card debt. If they choose to ignore the warning signs they deserve every consequence.

24

Posted by FirstYearBKR, May 21, 2008 5:01PM

@ 4:29 - 'The problem is that the motivation to spend is stronger than the knowledge that spending isn't a good idea'

Humans are supposedly more evolved than monkeys and other animals because they have the ability to use logic and reasoning rather than act soley on instinct. If you can't fight the urge to spend, congratulations: You've just taken a few steps backwards on the evolutionary timeline.

25

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 5:02PM

Very relavent to this thread. This reaffirms my belief that most politicians are idiots:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2008/05/report-californ.html

26

Posted by guest, May 21, 2008 7:11PM

Bulging Bracket,

You sound like a pretty smart guy, but "a bit more math education in power laws, exponential functions & statistics" would help the financial illiterates?

Perhaps you may not be aware of how bad the problem is. Just the thought of adding three numbers under pressure will scare the hell out of most people.

Skill in very basic arithmetic, in making change, and in balancing a checkbook would go a long way in improving financial literacy.

27

Posted by guest, May 22, 2008 9:20AM

Agree with the need for financial education. Most of us will (myself included until recently) would sign anything that promised us money. It wouldn't be a bad idea to teach students about loans, investing and taxes in high school. Even if it only sinks in for a handful.

For example, I finished undergrad not too long ago, and most of my friends don't have ANY idea how their college loans were structured. They barely even know how much they pay a month let alone the remaining balance, why/why or why not to consolidate, etc.

28

Posted by guest, May 22, 2008 9:29AM

Who has time for math? More deals get done at strip clubs and massage parlors than at some silly computer.

29

Posted by FirstYearBKR, May 22, 2008 9:43AM

@9:20am - If your friends haven't figured out how their college loans are structured by the time they graduate I'd consider finding some new people to surround yourself with.

@9:29am - This isn't about the deals that were negotiated, it's about the deadbeats who can't seem to borrow spend and save within their means.

If you're a finance guy you should be very good at multi-tasking. If you can't do basic math in your head while motorboating or getting a lap dance you may want to consider a new line of work.

30

Posted by guest, May 22, 2008 10:09AM

@9.43--you tell us! you da man, one year outta school...go man go!!!

31

Posted by FirstYearBKR, May 22, 2008 10:16AM

@10:09am - damn straight. Look at what 2007 grads walked into? When you start your first job a week after BSC's hedge funds imploded and the layoff waves just began you really get a level perspective on the industry. In the entry-level spots you're easily disposable so it's just a question of how much ass you're willing to kick to stay in the game.

32

Posted by guest, Jun 13, 2008 6:28PM

I once heard someone say "The only reason every American family doesn't own an elephant: because they haven't been offered one no money down w/ payments of a dollar a day..." I think there is some truth there. If you give people enough rope, some of them will inevitably hang themselves. You either have to be prepared for when they're swinging in the breeze or shut up and deal with government regulation.... Personally, I would prefer to watch them swing. Maybe people will pay more attention to what they're doing?

33

Posted by guest, Jun 19, 2008 5:35PM

The little guy was not the fool in the credit crisis. The little guy got control of a sizable, appreciating asset (a house) with no money down based on a schedule of payments he had no intention (or ability) to pay. If the house went up, he would flip it and take a HUGE profit (infinite in percentage terms).

When the house did not go up, he bailed and left the bank hanging. Or better, begged for a bailout and GOT IT. Of course his credit is messed up, but it was already messed up or he wouldn't be getting a sub-prime mortgage.

The little guy bought a Free Option. The little guy did well for himself. Many little guys even got paid before the end came.

The little guy doesn't need more education, he's the smart one.

Post Your Comment