Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Good Old Middle Class or Wealthy, You Decide

By: Roshawn Watson

My wife and I make $400,000 annually and I'm "barely getting by" bemoans James Duran, an owner of a human resource company Silicon Valley.
In a recent WSJ article, high income earners suggest that they are not rich and should not be subject to a 3% tax rate increase proposed in the Obama budget. They argue that although they may be in the top 2% of Americans with respect to income, they are not rich. In fact, the wife of one surgeon, Mrs. Ellen Parnell claims their family is "good old middle class" despite their $260,000 annual income.

We're Just Middle-Class

Although few claimed that they were struggling, it was clear that these high income earners felt they were in the same financial boat as most Americans. For example, Mr. Parnell works 7 days a week and drives a 10 year old Infiniti. Although the family vacations at a beach resort every year, it is owned by Mrs. Parnell extended family. Her five member family would like more space than the 2500 square-foot home, but she is hesitant to do the renovations during an economic downturn. She laments
our needs are met, but we don't have a load of cash to cover wants... the reality is Obama may call me wealthy, but I thought we were just good old middle class
Under President Obama's budget proposal, two of the highest tax brackets would see rates rise from 33% to 36%, and deductions would be reduced for households earning more than $250,000 annually. Many members of Congress are seeking to scale back some of the proposed tax increases.
Threats to Cash Flow
Several factors can impact someone's location, his or her life choices, and some expenses are generally unavoidable. As mentioned in the article, location is important because changes to the tax code don't reflect the immense disparity between living in Gary, Indiana vs. Manhattan. Life choices such as sending kids to private school, having conspicuous consumption (including car payments and McMansions) can also tremendously dwindle down someone's cash flow. Additionally, there are expenses that are just unavoidable in most cases, including health-care costs and childcare.

We're Just Sloppy With Our Finances

Although the Parnells are doing well on the income side of the equation, they are pretty crappy at controlling their cash flow. In the article, the Parnells attempt to justify their position that they are just middle class; however, this only serves to weaken their claims.
The value of their house is down $60,000. Ms. Parnell says the couple's gross income last year was about $260,000. Taxes, premiums for medical care and deductions for Social Security and their 401(k) contributions cut the gross to about $12,000 per month. The family tithes $1,300 a month at their church. Their mortgage, second mortgage and payment on land they bought is nearly $4,000 a month. Other expenses, including their family car payment, insurance and college funds, as well as basics like food, utilities and donations to charities, leave them with about $1,200 left over each month.
First, with a $260,000 salary, there is really little excuse to have a family car payment or a second mortgage. Like others, they are living on more than they make and using debt to finance a lifestyle they feel entitled to. Second, donations to charities are great for the recipients and the givers and provide tax deductions; giving reasonable contributions to charities should not be a real stretch for a family earning $260,000 per year. However, due to sloppy financial management, they may not yet be in a position to do a high level of giving. The truth is whether you make $40,000 per year or $400,000, you can still be broke. If you make more and spend accordingly, you just end up with more toys but can suffer from the same financial insolvency experienced by low income earners.
Some people could take the Parnells income over time and create tens of millions of dollars. The Parnells chose differently, which is their right, but to argue that America needs a "reality check of what being rich really means" is them missing the point. Their income makes them the financially elite, and they have an opportunity to build wealth like very few can. Consider that they make more than 5 times the median American income. Indeed, you can make millions and not be rich. Pro athletes do it all the time. Similarly, it is their choice that with over a $21,000 monthly income they only retain $1200 (plus 401K contributions). It's their lack of personal responsibility with regards to their finances that I find particularly troublesome not their opposition to the tax hike.


Notably, the article doesn't state the couple's 401K contributions, investments, or net worth, so it is impossible to really get an accurate financial snapshot. That said, I do believe the Parnells when they say that they are not rich. It is very plausible that they are not, but in their case, it is not the taxman's fault.

What are your thoughts???

Lastly, if you like this post, please subscribe (upper left-hand corner), click here to get my eBook FREE, and Propel it, Stumble it, and tag it on Delicious.

Related Posts

Creating Phenomenal Wealth Over Time

Forget Looking Rich... Be Rich!

Budgeting: Your Foundation To Wealth

5 Ways of Protecting Your Cash Flow Like The Rich




Thursday, April 23, 2009

Uncommon Money News (56)


By: Roshawn Watson

In preparing to write my posts, I often come across noteworthy and sometimes bizarre financial and business news. Below are links to some of these sites. Enjoy!

I am especially appreciative to the Personal Finance Playbook, My Life ROI, One Family's Blog, and Stretchy Dollar for hosting the Money Hacks Carnival, Festival of Frugality, Carnival of Financial Independence, and the Carnival of Twenty Something Finances. I am happy that our Mark to Market NOT Mark to Myth post was included in all 4 carnivals. Thanks for spreading the word!

To my readers: I am so honored by your support. Thank you for reading, subscribing, and for voting for articles from this site on social bookmarketing sites such as stumbleupon, reddit, delicious, digg, propeller, and yahoo buzz. Together, we are telling thousands of the importance of financial literacy. I absolutely could not do it without you. You are vital this this site, and I appreciate your help so much! Thanks.

Posts Of week
New CFO of Freddie Mac commits suicide

Worse year in Fortune 500 history

How the government really spends taxpayer money (illustration)

Goldman Sachs ready to repay TARP funds (they never needed it in the first place)

Business
New CFO of Freddie Mac commits suicide

GM to layoff 1600 white collar employees to qualify for government assistance

Exxon overtakes Wal-mart to top Fortune 500

Worse year in Fortune 500 history

Goldman Sachs ready to repay TARP funds
(they never needed it in the first place)

Oracle to buy Sun Microsystems after IBM dropped bid

NBC Universal profits down 45%


Economy

United States vs. China economy


How the government really spends taxpayer money

The US economy could rebound much sooner and more strongly than expected

Most Americans say let GM and Chrysler go bankrupt

A visual guide to deflation


Entertainment Money News

Decadent celebrity homes


Marie Osmond discusses difficult financial times

Miley Cyrus new Hannah Montana movie debuts No. 1

Zac Efron movie 17 Again debuts No 1


Mel Gibson's Divorce could be most expensive in Hollywood history

President and Michelle Obama release their tax returns


DWTS champ & professional racer Helio cleared of tax evasion

Slumdog Millionaire Kid Star Put up for sale by father?
(later authorities found no evidence of this)

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Hobby Lobby Raising Minimum Wage to $10 Hourly


By: Roshawn Watson

In a refreshing gesture amongst all of the negative news, Hobby Lobby recently announced that they have increased the minimum wage to $10 per hour, effective immediately.

A spokeswoman for the company said that Hobby Lobby "had a profitable year, and (they) want(ed) to pass that on to their employees."

Image Credit: Peter Broderick

Costs and Current Sales
This move will cost an additional $10-$15 million per year and will raise some of their full-time employee salaries by as much as $600 monthly. Fortunately, their revenue last year was $1.8 billion, and their projected sales for 2009 is $2 billion. In fact, analysts believe that Hobby Lobby has even benefited from the recession, as many people choose arts and crafts projects in lieu of more expensive activities.

Background and Future Directions

Overall all, the privately-held company has over 400 stores (including Mardel and Hemispheres) and over 18,000 employees. Currently, the store has locations in 33 states.
In 2009, Hobby Lobby plans to open 25 stores and will create 1000 new jobs across the country.

CEO and founder, David Green, recently said "our employees are the backbone of our company, and we believe that giving them the opportunity to share in our success is the right thing to do. This is part of our continuing efforts to reward our employees for their hard work and integrate them into the growth of our company.”

Green is a true American success story. Green is of very humble origins and never finished formal schooling past high school. He is the son of a poor minister and started the arts and craft giant with a $600 loan in 1972. Presently, he is now one of the richest men in the world, with an estimated net worth of over $1 billion.

With the interminable focus on bad financial news that plagues most media, today it is great hear of companies (such as Walmart and Hobby Lobby) that are thriving in spite of (possibly because of) the recent economic turmoil. Moreover, the fact that Hobby Lobby is sharing the wealth with the employees that helped them create the wealth is a great model that would serve many businesses well to learn from.

Lastly, if you like this post, please subscribe, click here to get my eBook FREE, and Propel it, Stumble it, and tag it on Delicious.

Related Post

Caring Banker's $60 Million Gift

Monday, April 13, 2009

Mark to Market NOT Mark to Myth


By: Roshawn Watson

Is the new mark to market accounting change a bad thing?

Mark to Market Accounting Changes

Recently, the Federal Accounting Standards Board (FASB) decided to relax fair-value (mark to market) accounting rules. With the change, companies may use significant judgment in assessing the prices of some of their investments, including mortgage-backed securities. The measure is suppose to reduce bank write-downs and boost net income.

Previously, banks primarily relied on competitors asset sales to determine the value of similar investments they are holding. In the current economic climate, this led to the presumption that all securities sales are distressed unless evidence proved otherwise. However, certain situations cause this presumption to be very inaccurate: for example, if a firm is selling securities merely to comply with regulations or liquidating to prepare for future investment opportunities.

With the new change, bank management will have the autonomy to disregard transactions that are not orderly (i.e. the bank selling their securities is near bankruptcy).

Does this New Discretion Create Another Problem?

One problem is that many analysts believe toxic asset prices are still not low enough. In a recent statement, Texas banker Andy Beal remarked...
Half the country's banks--4,000 in all--would be bust if they marked their loans to what the loans would fetch in an auction. Banks are fooling themselves by refusing to mark busted assets down. Banks are on a prayer mission that somehow prices will come back and they won't have to face reality.
Beal is uniquely qualified for his assessment. Over the last 15 months, Beal has purchased nearly $2 billion in residential loans, $800 million in distressed assets from failed banks at huge discounts, tripled his bank's assets, and nearly doubled his banking staff. He receives virtually no help from the government either. Even with an abundance of financial institutions looking to unload securities, he still only buys about 3% of what lands on his desk because the prices are still too high for many investments to make fiscal sense.

Who Will Assess the Accuracy of Their Judgments?

With the new mark to market regulation change, banks can now pretend that their assets are worth more than what they really are, and accordingly, they can inflate their earnings. This is equivalent to us wishing these financial problems will just go away as mentioned earlier.
By bank management using significant judgment in gauging the value of their loans, who will ascertain whether their assessments reflect the true value of the assets instead of their desired value?
Hopefully, auditors will keep management accountable for accurate records, but I have my doubts.

The new discretion allows banks to use more than market price to determine the value of their assets. One of the reasons the true value of these assets is below the face value is because of the likelihood of default. Thus, buyers just aren't willing to pay what the assets are "worth" on paper because the likelihood of them getting the face value is low.

Interestingly, banking advocates have touted cash flow projections as a reasonable substitute for true market-based pricing. However, the fallacy with using cash flow projections is that it assumes that cash flow will remain constant in the future. For example, there are obviously mortgages and loans that are current today that will not be current in 8 months. Thus, they are not really worth their face value because the lender will not be able to reclaim the total amount owed.
If the problem was merely insolvency, then the bailouts would have done the trick. The real problem is an inflated price for bad assets.

Let's Not Repeat Our Mistakes

Lenders argued that previous stringent accounting standards didn't work in down markets. However, they are really saying that our fiscal health is really better than the numbers show.

Let us not forget that this is how we got into this financial mess in the first place.

Remember, Bears Stearns went bankrupt because they were marking their assets to myth. It was only when they were forced to sell some of these crappy assets that they were forced to reconcile the fact that their book values and actual values were disparate. This is my concern with the new regulation.

Allowing banks to selectively "adjust" the value of their assets can be deleterious if their judgment is bad. In the short-term, their write-downs decrease and their profits rise. However, hiding the problem will ultimately lead to insolvency, keep these poorly-run financial institutions in business longer, and allows them to keep on attracting new deposits until their eventual bankruptcy. Overall, there is more harm done than good because this destroys consumer confidence: the very thing that everyone is trying to build.

I once went into business selling some really good products at very hefty prices. Although I loved the products, it was initially hard to fix my mouth to ask for that much money. In the process, I learned something very interesting about value. The truth about the commercial value of an item is that it is only really a measure of what someone else is willing to pay for it.

If no one is willing to pay the face value of toxic assets, then why should banks be able to say they are worth more than market value?

Lastly, if you like this post, please subscribe, click here to get my eBook FREE, and Propel it, Stumble it, and tag it on Delicious.

Related Posts

Is There Room For Economic Optimism


The Thrift Paradox - Is Frugality Hurting The Economy

The Starbucks Method For Restructing Your Finances


Lame Defense for $18.4 Billion in Wall Street Bonuses

Friday, April 10, 2009

Uncommon Money News (Vol 55)

By: Roshawn Watson


In preparing to write my posts, I often come across noteworthy and sometimes bizarre financial and business news. Below are links to some of these sites. Enjoy!

To my readers: I am so honored by your support. Thank you for reading, subscribing, and for voting for articles from this site on social bookmarketing sites such as stumbleupon, reddit, delicious, digg, propeller, and yahoo buzz. Together, we are telling thousands of the importance of financial literacy. I absolutely could not do it without you. You are vital this this site, and I appreciate your help so much! Thanks.

Posts of the Week


A visual guide of how the average taxpayer's dollars are spent

Want to may real money, learn from this banker (I absolutely love this article)

Millions of people are out of work. Millions are losing their homes. And you expect sympathy because you can't swing the million-dollar home you think you deserve?

Woman finds cashiers check for $357,959 and returns it

5 ways companies breed incompetence

Humorous Money News

Incredible business man with earning power of 10 times greater than ordinary men

Business News

Wells Fargo expect first quarter earnings to net $3 billion
(record-breaking profits)

Pulte Homes to buy Centex Homes for $1.3 billion

5 ways companies breed incompetence
(POW)

Berkshire Hathaway loses top credit rating

Want to may real money, learn from this banker (POW)

Economy


A visual guide to deflation

A visual guide of how the average taxpayer's dollars are spent (POW)

Could the real unemployment rate be 15.5%

Real Estate

Millions of people are out of work. Millions are losing their homes. And you expect sympathy because you can't swing the million-dollar home you think you deserve?
(POW)

Entertainment Money News
Fast and Furious takes No. 1 at the box-office this weekend with the biggest opening of the year

Diane Keaton selling 7000 sqft colonial style mansion for $11.9 million


FBI targets bogus $1 million Oprah Winfrey giveaway

Star's money demands shake up Law & Order SVU

Wanna stay in Paris Hilton's summer pad? It'll cost you

Offbeat Money News

Woman finds cashiers check for $357,959 and returns it
(POW)


Sunday, April 05, 2009

Celebrity Apprentice 2: Episode 6 Recap

By: Roshawn Watson


In what proved to be one of the most difficult creative tasks of the season, both teams ultimately failed to deliver the goods. One team created a product that's funny and buzz-worthy but missed the target demographic. The other team delivered a product so perverted and confusing that they never even stood a chance at winning. To compound matters, this episode's double-firing had absolutely nothing to do with the task. Perhaps, this is just another dysfunctional day in Trump's world.

The Task
This week's task was to create a 60 sec. viral video to help promote All® Small and Mighty detergent. Since KOTU was decimated due to 4 losses, Trump decided to restructure the teams (as I predicted previously). Melissa Rivers, Brandie Broderick, Annie Duke, Tionne Watkins, and Jesse Jame made up Athena. KOTU consisted of Clint Black, Joan Rivers, Natalie Gulbis, Khloe Kardasian, and Herschel Walker. Because both Clint Black and Melissa Rivers had experience producing videos and TV shows, they were chosen to lead KOTU and Athena, respectively.

Athena chose to shoot a video with Jesse James and little people to feature the All® Small & Mighty detergent. Jesse "plays" a car mechanic wearing visibly dirty clothes. He states the new detergent will help him clean up. Then, three little people dressed up as little All® detergent bottles scrub him down. A few seconds later, Jesse's clothes are completely clean. The video definitely pokes fun at itself because at the end, you can see the little people throwing down their detergent hats and saying a few choice words. This video overall was entertaining. Athena worked pretty harmoniously on this task, and Melissa created and executed the production like a pro.

KOTU chose to shoot a video with sexual innuendo. Clint Black plays a husband who calls his wife about perhaps doing the "dirty laundry." She begs off stating she has too much other work to do. Laundry is their key word for sex. In the bedroom scene later that night, the wife says "I am ready to do the dirty laundry now" and exposes her lingerie. Clint then states, "Honey, it was a small load, so I did it myself." The not so subtle sexual references weren't really a great fit for the conservative All® brand, and the video was pretty corny at best. More importantly, Clint completely disregarded the opinions of his team. He alienated himself by pretty much doing the entire task without the team's input or assistance, much to their dismay. Joan Rivers was especially upset about being marginalized because being funny is her job.

Help support Joan and Melissa charities by forwarding their videos to your friends

The Task Results and Boardroom
Famed blogger Perez Hilton said that the KOTU video was crap and that he wouldn't have finished it if he didn't have to, but he thought the Athena video was "excellent." Unfortunately for both teams, the All® executives didn't like either production for All® small & mighty detergent because they felt both videos failed to connect adequately to their target demographic: women with children over 25. Since they were ultimately the clients, Trump decided to do a double firing this week because neither team really won.

Clint wisely chose Khloe Kardashian and Natalie Gulbis to go back into the boardroom with him while Melissa chose Tionne Watkins and Brande Broderick. It was clear that Brande Broderick was uncomfortable being selected for the boardroom, but Tionne volunteered to go to the boardroom to support Melissa. Honestly, both Clint and Melissa thought they would be fired as the project managers. Interestingly, they both survived this week.

Keep the Peace. Melissa led Athena like a pro, and her team sung her praises all the way to the boardroom. She was very collaborative, organized, and extremely insightful into her team's strengths and weaknesses. For example, because she knew Annie Duke is a pretty intense person, Melissa assigned Annie to find the costumes. By sending Annie away and still giving her an important task, Melissa was free to lead without the hostility that Annie sometimes brings to the tasks. Additionally, because of Annie's meticulous nature, Melissa also assigned her the task of product placement. Melissa almost effortlessly managed one of the strongest personalities left on the show. By keeping the peace, the task was not derailed due to the frequent bickering on past episode.

Know when to dissent. Clint said there were two things that were grounds for immediate termination for an employee: dishonesty and insubordination. He considered Joan Rivers antics insubordination. However, she genuinely thought that he didn't have a clue about what he was doing. Since the rest of the team shared her opinion, she voiced her concerns throughout the project. This is one of the reasons Clint didn't dare bring her into the boardroom. Joan, an internationally famed comedienne, told Clint that the video wasn't funny, and the that the concept stunk for this product. He refused to heed her warning. If he had taken her into the boardroom instead of Khloe, he definitely would have been fired.

Unfortunately, this week's lame firings had nothing to do with the tasks. Trump decided to teach lessons with the firings this week.
I haven't been this ticked about the show since Trump picked that slimeball Piers Morgan in favor of the beloved Trace Atkins in celebrity apprentice season one.
First, Trump fired Tionne because she "volunteered" to go back to the boardroom out of support for Melissa. Apparently, this is inexcusable because you should never "volunteer for a beheading." Whatever! That was obviously not what she was volunteering for regardless of how someone tries to spin it. Next, Trump fired Khloe Kardashian because she got a DUI (before apprearing on the show), stating that he just found out and she would not have been selected for the show if he had known. Although I definitely don't condole drinking and driving, I wish Trump would have just used objective measures to decide who stays and who goes. It just not as fun when the firing seem purely arbitrary.

Want to go to the Celebrity Apprentice Finale for Free?

Because this week's task had no winner, Watson Inc has agreed to support Joan and Melissa charities by linking to their videos. Each time you watch a video, All ® will donate 50 cents to either Joan’s Guide Dogs for the Blind or Melissa’s The Lili Claire Foundation. Lastly, by entering the sweepstakes, you will have a chance to win 2 tickets and an expense paid trip to the Celebrity Apprentice Finale! 50 runner ups will receive a 1 year supply of All® small & mighty®. More importantly, you will also help either Joan or Melissa's charity by watching a video and forwarding their videos to your friends. This is your chance to support the charity and it won't cost you a dime and only takes a few seconds, so let's get the word out.

Friday, April 03, 2009

Uncommon Money News (Vol 54)

By: Roshawn Watson


In preparing to write my posts, I often come across noteworthy and sometimes bizarre financial and business news. Below are links to some of these sites. Enjoy!

To my readers: I am so honored by your support. Thank you for reading, subscribing, and for voting for articles from this site on social bookmarketing sites such as stumbleupon, reddit, delicious, digg, propeller, and yahoo buzz. Together, we are telling thousands of the importance of financial literacy. I absolutely could not do it without you. You are vital this this site, and I appreciate your help so much! Thanks.

Posts of the Week

A Visual Guide to Inflation


Could the end of excess be good for America?
(I talked about this before and plan to address again)

A visual guide to the fall of GM

Mortgage rates at 52-year low



Detroit sold for scraps

Humorous Money News

Prostitute pricing (photoshopped pic?)

Detroit sold for scraps (POW)

Business News

Chicago Sun-times files for bankruptcy
(I hoped this day wouldn't come)

GM CEO ousted as part of bailout agreement

A visual guide to the fall of GM

Rupert Murdoch wealth halved but still tops Australia's top richest executives lists

Amazon CEO to work at its Kentucky distribution center for a week


Obama thinks bankruptcy likely for GM, Chrysler


Economy/Real Estate

Dow Extends 4-week Rally

A Visual Guide to Inflation (POW)

Could the end of excess be good for America? (POW)

Mortgage rates at 52-year low
(POW)

Banks starting to quietly walk away from foreclosures


Mark to market account rules change
Entertainment Money News

Monster's vs. Aliens kills it at the box-office

Spelling home goes on sale with a $150 million price tag


Offbeat Money News
Dominos gives out 11,000 free pizza's by mistake

Wednesday, April 01, 2009

How Much Does DWTS Pay Celebrities

By: Roshawn Watson

Have you always wondered why some celebrities are always clamoring to get on shows such as DWTS? I always assumed it was to resuscitate their careers and broaden their fan base, but apparently there may be another motivation as well...money. E News recently disclosed some salary details, so check out the video below.



video


Image credit: Jess Miklish


 Related Posts