The Mayan-predicted End of the World has come and gone. The earth is still rotating on its axis (big surprise there). And now, with just a few days left in the year, our nation’s attention is pulled back to fiscal issues still in need of resolution, all of some importance.

Hopefully, within a week of this blog posting, our elected representatives will do the seemingly unthinkable: work together to solve the Fiscal Cliff and national debt ceiling issues. We’re hoping the fix for these issues is substantial and long-term in nature; a temporary patch would effectively “kick the can down the road” for someone else to solve.

As important as the Fiscal Cliff and debt ceiling issues are, however, they are near term issues of procedure and policy. Soon it will be time to shift the national focus to the broader discussion of defining the desired scope of government: namely social programs such as Medicare and Social Security.

James Surowiecki of The New Yorker offers an interesting historical perspective on Medicare and Social Security in his recent article In Funds We Trust? And to see where this national debate might lead in the coming months and years, Frank Bass of Bloomberg News wrote a short piece on this topic titled: Most Elderly Favor Keeping Social Programs Over Debt Trim. The article is interesting because it highlights the generational shift in thinking on entitlement programs.

A lasting imprint of the 2008 financial crisis is the enormous popularity of bonds, largely at the expense of stocks. Despite measly yields, the appetite for bonds has not wavered – investors poured $300 billion into bond funds in 2012 alone.

With that backdrop, we’ve noticed more talk of a looming bursting of the “bond bubble.” We encourage clients to be mindful of bond market risks, but remind them, too, that sitting on cash in fear of an all-out bursting is counter-productive.

Roger Young, a fixed-income analyst at Fidelity Investments, has a similar view. Young makes a well-reasoned case for investors to maintain a strategic allocation to fixed-income in Bond bubble ready to burst? Not so fast.

For the bond market to burst, Young suggest that four events would need to take place:

  • The economy would have to improve drastically
  • The fed would have to stop its quantitative easing
  • Demand for government debt would have to decline
  • The U.S. would need to take a step down from its “safe haven” status

Young makes the case that the likelihood of any of these events happening in lock step is remote. He further argues that even if they did, interest rates would not rise so quickly to create a devastating “bursting” effect.

Bond bubble or not, Young’s article is an excellent primer on the workings of the bond market.

Negotiations over the fiscal cliff, the austerity crisis, the same-old-same-old-whatever-you-want-to-call-it, keep dragging on in Washington D.C.

Perhaps you’ve read some politicians’ lists of demands. They all seem to have a version of; “This is what we want, and if we don’t get it, we are willing to see taxes skyrocket and spending slashed. Just try us! Oh, and I’m only doing this because I love my country so much.”

Sigh.

Now, we mere citizens are not privy to the negotiation play-by-plays. Still, this all seems so repetitively sclerotic.

There are some ideas that could appeal to both sides and break the logjam. Derek Thompson at the Atlantic website has one. It’s an idea that has been kicked around for a while and might start showing up in some news reports.

If you haven’t had your fill of such stories, check it out.

It’s not breaking news that the average American family was financially slammed in the last recession. But this statistic may give you pause: adjusted for inflation, median household net worth in the US fell by 47% between 2007-2010, reaching its lowest level in more than forty years.

This and more revealing data were published by Edward Wolf, a New York University economist, and summarized nicely in the Atlantic’s The Recession’s Toll: How Middle Class Wealth Collapsed to a 40-Year Low.

Wolf argues the middle class suffered disproportionately, largely because their net worth was tied to their homes, which were punished more than any other asset during the financial crisis. According to Wolf, the middle 60% of Americans had 66.6% of their net worth tied up in their home at the end of 2010, compared to 9.4% for the top 1% of households.

On a positive note, Americans have begun to recover from the forty year low sited earlier. Since 2010, a modest rebound in housing and a sustained rally in both stocks and bonds have begun to heal the damaged balance sheet of America’s shrinking middle class.

Information Menu

Subscribe to Blog

Receive our blog by email.

Subscribe

Blog Archive

Let's get acquainted!

We offer a complimentary
"Get Acquainted" meeting to describe our services, and
to see if we're a good fit for you.

Contact Us