Skip to content

Upside Down

jobhopping

By Jessica Hagy over at Indexed.

This makes a nice lead in for a realization I’ve had about the sub-prime fiasco and the housing markets, adding to what The New Yorker had to say in Home Economics back in March.

A few years ago a lot of economists and financial experts, including Alan Greenspan were warning that sub-prime loans were going to be a problem. They were right in that the mortgage market is now a mess. But they were almost unanimously wrong in their reasoning why. Everyone then thought the nail in the coffin would be variable interest rates, that less qualified home buyers would not be able to afford an increase in interest rates, which may be true, but interest rates haven’t been a problem.

What really happened was quite unexpected both in how it happened and to whom it happened. I don’t believe sub-prime is entirely to blame for the problems we’re seeing now, rather it’s much broader than that. Simply put, people, lots of people, not just poor people, got upside down on their mortgages. This wasn’t just recent home buyers, but long-time home owners. They watched thousands of home shows on cable television, sponsored by big box home improvement centers, telling them how to increase the value of their home and they went out and got second and third mortgages to finance home remodels.

They just had to have granite countertops. Now those same shows are already telling people that those granite countertops, they just spent thousands of dollars to have installed and haven’t even finished paying off yet, are on their way out. Home Depot and HGTV have taken a page from the fashion world and worked to accelerate the interior design cycle.

Home owners falling for this marketing tactic have effectively started over as first-time home buyers. Everyone who could buy a home, bought one, and everyone who had any equity in their home tapped it out to improve their homes and make it worth more. They went from bad bets on dot coms to bad bets on their homes.

Now there’s no one left to sell their homes to. So home prices fall and since no one has any equity everyone is upside down on their mortgages, owing more to the banks than they can get for their home.

The nail in the coffin is the job market. There’s no permanency in jobs any longer. Jobs generally don’t last more than a couple of years. People job hop first and worry about selling their house later. Now they’ve got themselves in a situation were they’ve moved to another city, and their stuck with their old house because they can’t sell it for enough to pay off the mortgage and they don’t have any savings left to pay off the difference since they gave it all to Home Depot, ironically to increase the value of their home.

Econ-o-rama: Economic Complexity

chaos A Brave Army of Heretics -economicprincipals.com

For the last 125 years, however, ever since the views of Leon Walras and other theorists of general equilibrium became encoded in a famous textbook of Alfred Marshall (or, rather, partially encoded), technical economists have viewed the economy as a system in which individuals deal with one another only through the market mechanism, reacting to signals about prices and quantities as if they were determined by some central authority, best thought of as an auctioneer. Individual actors adapt as best they can to market signals which they are powerless to affect, until some sort of balance between supply and demand is achieved. Then things settle down and no individual has any reason to change his behavior, unless some external “shock” to the system occurs.

Prior to sub-prime implosion, the risk management techniques were derived from this same theoretical viewpoint on how people interact with one another in the markets. The theories were misguided and flat-out wrong. Real risk is far more complex. To complex, in fact, for the quants to get a handle on pushing pencils and punching numbers on their geeky HP calculators. So they chose instead to just ignore the risks they could not explain, or write formulas to manage. Misguided, unpracticed, collegiate theories. Same thing that happened to LTCM. They didn’t learn then and they aren’t learning now, because money managers making the same mistakes speculating in China and commodities, which is where they’ve got your pension tucked away, also safe and sound, yeah right.

Econ-o-rama: Salary comparisons

Seeing a comparison between men and women’s salaries somewhere on the Interweb this morning it occurred to me to wonder how such comparisons are made, whether or not outliers are included. Typically, in my experience, people tend to use statistics that best seem to prove their point. So if you want to show a wide salary difference between men and women leave in Bill Gates and the CEOs of the world.

But to do so would not be a fair comparison really, because the glass ceiling is a separate issue, and salaries at that level are so skewed that they don’t really mean anymore to the average man than they do to the average woman. We’re talking about differences of a magnitude of 10,000ish at the average level. Throughout the billionaires and the multimillionaires, regardless of the fact that most of them are men, and the difference may not be so great. Just an unpolished observation.

Ethanol Insanity

Hell must have froze over... the government paying us to moonshine!

Greasy spoons relieved of greased lightening

As fuel prices soar, rustlers pilfer barrels of used cooking oil to make biodiesel - IHT

A few years ago, drums of used french fry grease were only of interest to a small network of underground biofuel brewers, who would use the slimy oil to power their souped-up antique Mercedes.

Now, restaurants from Berkeley, California, to Sedgwick, Kansas are reporting thefts of old cooking oil worth thousands of dollars by rustlers who are refining it into barrels of biofuel in backyard stills.

Another unintended consequence of the alternative fuels mania and oil pushing $130 a barrel.

Econ-o-rama: There’s gold in corn and them thar hills, economics 001

goldrushl

You Can’t Afford To Go To The Movies. Thanks, Ethanol!

Ethanol, the stupid fuel that the government loves for some reason, is going to take up 40% of next year’s corn crop. Movie theaters make nearly half of their money from concessions, and a third of that money comes from popcorn sales. When concession prices go up, people buy less, “forcing” theater owners to raise their ticket prices.

I question the math here, both the 40% number and the theater’s numbers. But if it’s true, if we’re already at 40% of the corn crop going into ethanol, that’s huge, and a serious problem. It will be the biggest and most ignorant, naive, and downright insane economic experiments we’ve ever conducted. The mother of all duhs.

Gold rush fever returns to the California hills

Land claims in the western states have soared and the Gold Prospectors Association of America says its membership has grown by nearly 40 per cent in a few years to 45,000.

“There’s a lot of excitement right now,” said Walt Eason of the association. “It used to be that you might find $2,000 or $3,000 of gold after a week’s work. Now it’s possible that that figure could be $15,000 to $20,000.”

Found on: Boing Boing

Cindy Adams Fails Economics 101

Not only is it confusing, she also includes contains a glaring error. Adams writes, “Reach into your bag and pull out dollar bills — printed by the Feds, backed by gold — and salespeople shrink in horror.”

That’s more like economics 001 remedial!

Joe Zee’s $51 of Fun

In today’s New York Post, just a few pages from columnist Cindy Adams’s disturbing claim that U.S. currency is “backed by gold,” Elle creative director Joe Zee reveals how he would maximize fun in Gotham on a budget of $50.

The list adds to $51. Math 001.

Own your risk

bulldozer

Whenever people ask me about investing in China, which they do a lot, I ask them would they be so willing to invest in a bunch of U.S. companies they know absolutely nothing about? Then why are they so willing to invest in companies they really know nothing, in most cases majority owned by the communist government. I ask, do you really think you’ll be owning a piece of something? I ask them what it is they they would be buying? What claim they would have on their shares? Of course they can never say.

I say why not invest in U.S. companies benefiting the infrastructure build out in other countries? It’s good for the U.S., good for jobs, good for the economy, and good for the investor. Investing in China is good for China and a shit ton of risk for the investor. Caterpillar, for example, has more than doubled in the past four years. Anyone who thinks that’s not a respectable return has no business being in the stock market.

The catalyst for this post was Freakonomics article Forget Ferraris, Lock Up Your Bulldozer.

Another kind of economic elasticity

Wikipedia defines economic elasticity as follows:

In economics, elasticity is the ratio of the proportionate change in one variable with respect to proportional change in another variable, such as the responsiveness of the price of a commodity to changes in market demand or visa-versa. In terms of elasticity, a market or good can be described as elastic or inelastic as a means of describing its responsiveness to the proportionate change in another quantity.

But economies also have physical elasticity properties. I was reminded of this reading Why Doesn’t Spaghetti Break in Half? Economies can bend and spring back, and when they break, it’s not a simple, single fracture.

Commentary: But where’d the hops go?

hops Ever since liquor stores started sticking notes on their coolers letting us know that the price of my beloved beer would have to go up due to the rising price hops, I’ve assumed it something to do with either the cost of fuel or the displacement of hops crops by corn being turned into ethanol.

I’d occasionally see articles about, which spoke vaguely about some sort of shortage of the crop so necessary to the beer making process. There was something about a blight in Washington and something about weather in Europe, but again very vague, and somewhat suspect with so little supporting data, none to be exact.

Curiosity got the better of me and I began a preliminary investigation into this missing hops matter. Across the board began to become clearer and clearer that pretty much no one writing about hops had any clue whatsoever what they were talking about, assumed their reader would be likewise uneducated, lazily following off of the existing scribbles, and journalistically getting the obligatory quotes by calling up a local brew pub to ask them about what they had done to hedge hops prices. Naturally, such a subject warrants a field trip to the local brew pub to see just what a hops is, since no one really seems to know, and the influence of the hopsmeisters secret stash showed through in the writing. They all have a secret stash in the back don’t they, ahat special, super-potent, uber-beer that the public never gets to saviour?

hops2 It seems that about the only thing that is really known with any certainty is that brewers are paying eight to 20 times more for the ingredient. Almost universally, it is suggested that the small brewer is taking a beating on hops because they failed to protect themselves by hedging this mysterious hop crop. But, as it turns out, there’s no exchange trading for hops futures, at least not that I could readily uncover. They traded in New York in the 1800s and in London up until the 1920s in specialty exchanges, but not since. So if you want a contract for hops, you’d have to do so I presume with a major distributor, and I presume they would only be interested in contracting with large volume customers.

I wanted to know where can I hedge some hops. And that’s where I began to descend into Dante’s depths of devilish missing data. At first glance, I couldn’t see where there was significantly, any shortage in the size of the U.S. hop crop, though stores looked to be down somewhat. Looking at corn as a culprit, it did appear that more corn was being grown in Washington State, the leading hops producer, but that seemed to be offset more by wheat. With hops prices being what they are, growers are beginning to, quite sadly I might add, rip out apple orchards. Hops grows more like grapes and apples, than wheat or corn, and overall it’s a small crop compared to other grains, so corn, as golden as it may be, does not appear to be displacing hops.

So why then have hops become so expensive? Is it demand from the big box brew pubs? Is it because Samuel Adams uses more hops than any other beer maker? Have hedge funds managed to find a way to get in on the game? Thus far all signs are pointing to exports as the culprit. With the once all mighty dollar being what it is today, foreign beer makers would have wanted to import US hops, at least up until the price got to where it was cheaper and easier to buy locally. But it’s all still quite nefarious.

The case of the missing hops, to be continued…

Early computer used to predict economy

The computer model that once explained the British economy

phillipsmachine

A sensation when it was unveiled at the London School of Economics in 1949, the Phillips machine used hydraulics to model the workings of the British economy but now looks, at first glance, like the brainchild of a nutty professor.

Speaking of early computers I just happened on what must be the origin of the term “black box”. These stock tickers were literally black boxes.

Black Box Stock Tickers

blackbox1

The Black Box Ticker hit Wall Street around December of 1930.  The Teletype Corporation began developing the technology around 1927, and after the crash of October 1929, stock brokers needed a faster, more reliable machine. By 1934, The New York Quotation Company had switched almost exclusively to the black box ticker.