Ignorance is no excuse

This is strip, not prime, but close enough

What does prime rate mean?

In between poking fun at people, occasionally we deconstruct complexity and explain what’s what. Prime rate is a term you hear frequently but might not know the meaning of – like “Dow”, “consumer confidence”, and other commonplace but commonly misunderstood terms.

(If you can’t get enough of Control Your Cash, read our guest posts on LenPenzo.com. Len Penzo is an engineer based out of Los Angeles – a financial amateur. But his common-sense approach and avoidance of stupidity make his blog one of the most insightful you’ll find.)

Prime rate is the interest rate banks charge their most creditworthy customers. Last January the U.S. prime rate fell from 3.61% to a 55-year nadir of 3¼%, where it’s been ever since. In 2007 the rate was 8¼%, and it reached its all-time zenith of 20½% in 1981.

Does that mean that if you’ve always paid all your bills on time and in full, Chase will loan you money at 3¼% to buy a house? No. But if you were Costco (America’s 24th largest corporation), and wanted to build a new location at a cost of $4 million, you’d pay $130,000 in annual interest charges. For individual investors, who don’t have millions in cash on hand, your bank sets its rates higher. Which is why mortgage rates average 5.09%* today.

Prime rate generally derives from the federal funds rate, which banks lend to each other in the short-term (i.e. overnight) at and which we touched on here. Under normal circumstances – 1981 was about as abnormal as it got – add about 3 percentage points to the federal funds rate, and that’s your prime rate.

Where does our 3¼% rate stack up internationally? Here:

So, two questions:

a) Why is the prime rate so historically low right now?
b) (As always,) how can I use this to my advantage?

It’s low because the Federal Reserve, the quasi-governmental leviathan that has an unduly large hand in our economy and answers to no one, wants to make it as easy as possible for people to borrow money. The federal funds rate (which is really a range of rates, rather than one rate) sits at close to 0. Banks obviously have to make money on loans or they wouldn’t stay in business, which explains the spread of 3% – which has been fairly uniform throughout American history.

But wasn’t it those low rates that got us in trouble in the first place?

Yes. People bought houses larger than they needed, cars fancier than they could normally afford, ATVs they were going to ride maybe once a year. And financed them all. It seems almost too obvious to mention, but borrowing money makes sense if you can pay it back. More to the point, it makes sense if you can buy assets with it. A piece of vacant industrial land that appreciates by 2% annually, ceteris paribus, isn’t a worthwhile investment if you’re paying 5.09% for the privilege of borrowing the money to pay for it.

So why is the Fed encouraging people to engage in more of the same destructive behavior?

The Fed would argue that this is the least bad option. Getting money circulating in the economy means borrowers are hiring people to complete their projects, and those newly hired employees will spend money on goods and services. If the prime rate were at 1981 levels, or even at 2007 levels, people would be more cautious to invest. They’d sit on their money, and the economy would stagnate.

So how can I use this to my advantage?

Don’t defer for a tomorrow that might never come. Understand that no economy is an island, and that time is not static. Interest rates can’t get much lower than they are now. The federal funds rate isn’t going to go negative. Banks aren’t going to accept a spread much lower than 3%. The eventual pressure on interest rates should be to rise. It’s no guarantee, but 6 or 12 months from now it ought to cost more to borrow money to finance an investment than it does today.

So if you’re thinking of making your way into the investment class, and joining the ranks of people who derive their income through passive means rather than earning a salary, now would be as good a time as any to take the leap. Don’t wait for a perfect set of circumstances, because a) such a thing never arises and b) it’d be tough to identify if it did.

———————-

*There are several kinds of mortgage rates, the vast majority of which you don’t need to concern yourself with. If you see the unadorned phrase “mortgage rate”, whether at Control Your Cash or elsewhere, assume that it refers to the most generic mortgage of all – the 30-year, fixed-rate kind. And if you’re thinking of buying an adjustable-rate mortgage, think again. Or did you not hear about the foreclosure crisis?

Almost certainly not how Carl Icahn got started

Not pictured: Kids #2, 3, 4, 6, and 9, and Baby Daddies #1, 2, 3, 4, and possibly 5 and 6

Can you handle another story that features a bad example? We had a feeling you might.

There are thousands of women like this, which is a problem unto itself, but introducing her leads to a larger point.

The well-fed 35-year old woman in the middle of the picture is Tessa Savicki (anagrams include “Avast, Sickies” and “Cake Ass Vista”), a Massachusetts welfare queen. Her oldest kid is, ahem, 21. She has another adult kid. She’s “planning on getting her GED next month”, not unlike the stripper who’s working on her Ph.D. or the fat girl who’s definitely going to start going to the gym. A chronic plaintiff, Miss Savicki (That’s “Miss”, guys! She’s available!) once sued a major drugstore chain for selling her an expired spermicide. (She might have a case. That spermicide looks like it went bad sometime around Reconstruction.) The remainder of what you need to know about Miss Savicki is captured in the caption, with one exception.

When this human gumball dispenser jettisoned her most recent kid, the attending physicians, God bless them, finally tied her tubes before she could create a designated hitter for the Savicki family softball team. She’s suing the hospital, and her attorney says the hatred his client is spawning engendering “blows your mind, because you see how ingrained the bigotry is against poor people.”

Wait right there, attorney Max Borten [(781) 890-9095, inquiry@GBMedLaw.com]. But thank you for leading to this week’s topic: the difference between poor and deadbeat.

The Control Your Cash authors have been poor. They’ve been rich. (Sophie Tucker: “Rich is better.”) But every step of the way, they’ve been unaware of any bigotry against poor people in the United States, at least unaware of any practiced by adults. The kid who wears tattered clothes to school might get laughed at by his peers, but the adult who openly pokes fun at someone for not having sufficient material luxuries in his life is either rare or nonexistent.

There’s no shame, none whatsoever, in being poor. Most of us have been there, making very little money and living in the rustic apartment immediately out of college or high school, furnishings courtesy of the Home Depot particleboard collection. Poverty, or at least extreme modesty, is usually a necessary step before you can earn your place among the middle class.

Being deadbeat is something else. Denuded of its buzzwords (“great society”, “hand, not a handout”, “living with dignity”, “economic security”), it’s theft. Taking money from industrious taxpayers, even if it’s for food, clothing and shelter, is stealing if the recipient offers nothing in return. Receiving the money through the conduit of a government agency doesn’t make the recipient any less culpable.

  • Artie Lange completing a triathlon.
  • A Libertarian candidate becoming President.
  • Nauru taking home Olympic gold in speed skating.

These are things that will occur millennia before a welfare queen (or king, or princess) Controls His or Her Cash.

Few of us start life with the advantages of a Jennifer Gates or a George W. Bush, but that’s not the point. If you’re born healthy enough to have your faculties, your senses, to be able to speak (and sue drugstore chains), and to make it to the age of 35 and counting, then you can theoretically someday make your way to comfort if not affluence. Here’s how not to do so, with a virtually guaranteed rate of success:

  • Jump from relationship to relationship
  • Spread your legs, repeat ad nauseam (or for you guys reading, plant that seed in any warm place it’ll land)
  • Drop out of school, again more than tangentially related to the previous two points

If you do the above, you’ll have less chance to get a job. You’ll all but eliminate your chance at getting a job with vertical room to progress. But thanks to the largesse of an increasingly squeezed public, you’ll get enough money to live and keep cranking out babies. Unless a surgeon with some foresight decides to throw the rest of us a bone.

We preach discipline at Control Your Cash, which should be neither hard nor painful for you. Spend less, save more, keep your mind open, learn how investments work before committing to them. Know what an investment is, and don’t confuse it with an expense. In short, show up here every week and get yourself informed.

But you’ve got to at least want to. It’s clear that lots of people can’t be bothered to.

Last month we awarded the golden Control Your Cash Man of the Year chalice to a guy with no debt, growing investments, and a reasonably well-spending lifestyle who would sooner rob a bank than suck at the taxpayer teat. In Control Your Cash Bizarro World, we’d have a prize for Tessa Savicki. Maybe a platinum-coated IUD.

**This post is featured as one of the best Personal Finance Rants of 2010**

Think your lek can kick my colón? Get riyal.

Strong dollar, weak dollar, what does it mean?

I haven't seen this many Indochinese dong since Sunee Plaza. Hi-oh!

It means the price of the dollar, as quoted in foreign currencies. (It doesn’t make a lot of sense to quote the dollar in terms of domestic currency. It’s always going to be worth $1.) There are 182 national currencies in circulation across the planet, but for this post we don’t need to concern ourselves with sparsely traded ones like the Botswanan pula or the Kyrgyz som (no offense to our readers in Gaborone or Bishkek. Control Your Cash is huge in Bishkek.)

Most of the world’s large cross-currency financial transactions are undertaken in just a handful of currencies: among them the euro, the pound sterling, the Japanese yen, the Canadian dollar, the Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar… and the U.S. dollar. In the world financial markets, the U.S. dollar’s value is expressed relative to the prices of these other currencies. And around the world, that can be vital. One Control Your Cash author had the perspective of growing up in Canada, where the value of the Canadian dollar (quoted in U.S. cents) is at least as prominent a financial indicator as the Dow is in the U.S. Given that the U.S. dollar has historically been the most widely held stable (and most stable widely held) currency in the world, it makes sense that it’d be the one that other countries would choose to quote their currency in terms of. In many parts of the world not referred to above, three particular (foreign) currencies carry equal importance when measuring their relative strengths. In South Africa, for instance, the U.S. dollar, pound, and euro are quoted in terms of each other, making for 3 daily rate quotes (6 if you count each quoted in terms of South Africa’s own rand.)

We do this – quoting euros in dollars, or dollars in pounds, or pounds in euros – because there’s no pure, objective measure of wealth: no commodity whose value always stays the same with respect to everything else. There can’t be, as the economy is dynamic and accelerating. Millennia ago, it might have made sense to count, say, a suckling pig as a unit of currency. My hog is worth 4 of your sucklings. My horse is worth 20. My cow, maybe 8. Oh, wait, it’s a bull? Fine, you can have it for 3. When consumer electronics and decorative tiles and golf clubs don’t yet exist and therefore can’t be quoted in terms of suckling pigs, no problem. But the moment an economy advances even a little, you need something uniform and readily transferable to conduct business in. Even cigarettes work better than piglets, but that implies that your economy has already advanced to the point where cigarettes can be manufactured. Gold works to some extent, as we discussed here, but there are myriad reasons – mostly nationalism and conspicuity – why each nation insists on printing its own money.

If everything has a value – and if anything should, money should – it stands to reason that currencies can be traded for each other. And what makes a currency worth buying? Well, considering money isn’t edible, what makes it valuable is its potential for growth. It’s an investment, like anything else people trade in the financial markets.

If I buy ExxonMobil stock, I’m betting that the stock will increase in value – or in other words, that each dollar I’m buying the stock with will one day be worth less stock.

Yes! Breakthrough.

But currencies are different. If I buy pounds, doesn’t that mean I’m betting that my dollars will one day be worth fewer pounds?

Yes.

Does that make me a traitor to my country?

No, it makes you an investor. Indeed, currency transactions differ from most transactions in that when you deal in currency, you’re exchanging two abstract quantities whose only practical purpose – whose primary purpose – is ultimately to buy other things with. But if the currency you do business in (and if you’re American, that’s largely going to be U.S. dollars) is in danger of losing value relative to other currencies, there’s no point in waiting for it to happen while watching your dollars get weaker.

A “weak” dollar only means weak relative to other currencies. A currency can also lose value relative to itself over time (and almost always will), but that’s a different phenomenon – inflation, which can occur without respect to what’s happening in the rest of the world.

There are plenty of reasons why currencies fluctuate in value, a big one being interest rates. Let’s use the U.S. dollar and the pound as examples. The United Kingdom’s central bank*, the Bank of England, recently set its bank rate (the rate at which commercial and investment banks can borrow money from it) at ½%.  Every few months the Federal Reserve sets the American equivalent, the federal funds rate. Instead of a number, it’s a range, which is currently 0–¼%. (The more a bank borrows, the lower the rate it pays.) The effective federal funds rate, which is a weighted average of the money borrowed by banks, is .11%.

The U.K. rate is unequivocally higher, and not by a little. Which means that ever since those rates were set, the pound has promised higher returns than the dollar. Which makes the pound more desirable than the dollar, which is why the pound is worth more dollars now than it was a few months ago.

(The Bank of Japan’s rate is .1%. The European Central Bank’s is ¼%**, as is the Bank of Canada’s.) We’re not recommending currency investing, nor discouraging it. We’re just trying to explain how it works, which is better than you understanding it retroactively.

In the last 10 months, the pound has gained 20% on the dollar. Does that mean the entire American economy is weak relative to the Brits’? No. If your U.S.-based business buys a lot of British materials (labor, capital, whatever), it’s gotten more expensive to operate, because your business is taking in money in dollars and paying it out in pounds. If your U.S.-based business exports a lot to the U.K., then life is magical. You might not have noticed a thing regarding the price of what your company sells, or what it costs to make it, but from the perspective of a British consumer, your products got cheaper (in pounds.) Which is a big advantage over any British competitors of yours.

There are other criteria that determine currencies’ relative strengths, of course. A country with a lot of debt relative to its size (e.g. Venezuela) might have a crazy person in charge (which it does.) That crazy person (Hugo Chavez) can keep printing currency to settle the country’s debts, making the currency worthless and vaporizing the wealth of all the Venezuelans who earn and save money in that currency. But a country with a vibrant economy, little debt, and lots of imports relative to its size (e.g. Singapore) will usually have a stable currency. Singapore has to buy goods from other countries in order to survive, which means Singapore has a vested interest in keeping its currency worth something. It doesn’t have a lot of financial obligations, so there’s no incentive to weaken its currency by inflation.

Where do we fit on this scale? The United States has a tremendously vibrant economy, at least relative to the rest of the world, regardless of what’s been happening the last 18 months. The U.S. also has a lot of debt. However, we import a lot in absolute terms (although in relative terms, it’s nothing compared to Singapore. Plus we export a lot, too.) And while our chief executive isn’t crazy, it’s not a stretch to call him an opportunist who’d think nothing of ordering the Federal Reserve to help accomplish certain political goals that might not be economically sound.

Where to find currency rates? Yahoo! Finance is our favorite all-purpose financial site: it’s clean, comprehensive and easy to navigate. Scroll down to “Currency Investing” on the left column and have at it.

*You do a blog post, and then you realize halfway through that you might introduce an unfamiliar term. A country’s central bank – most every country of decent size has one – isn’t a bank in the sense that it has branches you walk into and make deposits in. A central bank exists to lend a country’s government its currency. The central bank actually creates the money the government borrows, which is why the dollar bills in your pocket carry the phrase “Federal Reserve Note”.

**You can choose between decimals and vulgar fractions on your own blog. We’re using both.

**This post is featured at Compounding Life**