Policies regarding housing "bail outs" are always controversial among economists (well, any policy is controversial among economists!). Coming at the policies from the national level often only gives the big picture such as how the policy will affect the national budget/debt levels or aggregated income levels. Sometimes we forget to look at the view in our own neighborhood. How exactly does this policy affect us or our neighbors?

This week in the Orlando Sentinel a neighborhood level view of the most recent housing interest rate change plan  was discussed. The article presents how this project would help specific families, particularly families who are trying to stay current on their mortgage payments. Check out the article here.

Helping families that are locked in at a higher interest rate, yet are trying to stay current on their obligations may not make a huge big picture impact, but it might be just what our neighborhoods need.

What do you think? Leave us a comment below.

Dave Ramsey's Letter to Occupy Wall Street crowd

Here at Bennett Research Services we are huge fans of Dave Ramsey. We highly recommend his books and courses! This week he took on the Occupy Wall Street group, questioned some of their demands, and made useful suggestions to those people that actually want to change something. The article is a must read. You can find it here: Dear Occupy Wall Street.

I have copied my favorite section below:

“Wealth Redistribution Is the Answer!”
I’ve heard a lot about wealth redistribution over the past few years, and I’m sure you’ve heard it too. Call it whatever you want, but this is how it usually sounds to most Americans: “We are the 99% of Americans who don’t have as much as the 1%, so we’re mad and think the government should take their wealth and property away so that I can have a piece of it. Wealth inequality is a moral breakdown! We should all spread the money around so everyone gets a fair share!”

I have my toughest critique for those who believe this: You are a thief. When someone takes my money and gives me no say in the matter, that’s called theft—whether they’re using a gun or the government. At the core of this demand is envy. And that’s not the same as jealousy. Jealousy just says, “I want what you have.” Envy is a different beast. Envy says, “I don’t think I can ever have what you have, so you shouldn’t have it either.” Decades of horrible economic teaching and the politics of envy have kept this monster alive and growing and moving forward.

This way of thinking makes you assume that all rich people are evil and have scammed their way into wealth. That may be true in the tale of Robin Hood, but I choose to live in the real world. Sure, there are some scoundrels, but the vast majority of successful men and women got that way by working hard and serving people—lots of people. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates changed the world in ways we’re just now starting to realize. Their positive impact on the world has helped all of us live better lives, and they made fortunes for themselves by doing so. Why is it that you’re holy if you help one person but evil if you help a million? That’s just stupid.

A good friend of mine is a country music legend. He’s made a bazillion dollars over his career, and he just bought a $400,000 car. He’s worked like a crazy person his whole life, spending decades in tour buses, writing songs in the middle of the night, and entertaining enormous crowds of cheering fans. He paid a price to get there, and I’m happy for his success. Would it be right for me to walk into his house and demand my “fair share” of his wealth? Heck no! I’m a terrible singer! I didn’t do one thing to contribute to his success, so why would I be entitled to a share of his wealth? He’s given me years of entertainment through his music. That’s my fair share of his hard work.

My problems aren’t his fault. And my problems aren’t McDonald’s fault or Home Depot’s fault or Walmart’s fault, either. My problems are my fault! And the more people these companies serve, the more money they make—and that’s none of my business! If you don’t like McDonald’s, then here’s an idea: Don’t eat there. But don’t walk into the restaurant and demand a portion of their proceeds for the day.

When you scream, “I’m in the 99%!” you just look like a whiner. Those of us willing to pay the price to win look at you and shrug. Heck, when it comes to the music business, I’m in the 99% myself! But that doesn’t mean I have to tear Toby Keith, Brad Paisley or even Kanye down. Oh, and a special note just for Kanye: Capitalism has been pretty good to you. I celebrate your success, but you look a little hypocritical protesting capitalism while wearing a $50,000 watch.

Statistical Abstract

The Census Bureau released the 2012 Statistical Abstract this month. It is considered to be the "authoritative and comprehensive summary of statistics on the social, political, and economic organization of the United States". The New York Times recently found some interesting data in the Abstract, although the article points out there is no context for the data.

Twice as many Americans play computer games as do crossword puzzles. More go bird watching than attend classical music concerts. Iowa has six times as many hogs as people. A record 26.6 million households do not use land lines but rely only on cellphones.

And if you were wondering about the health of Americans you can find that too...

Whether Americans are healthier is hard to tell. Farmers produced fewer potatoes and less spinach but more watermelons. People drank more tea and less coffee and ate more yogurt and less high-fructose corn syrup. Half the population said they had not dined out during the previous year. Smokers among 18- to 24-year-old men rose to 28 percent from 23.6 percent between 2008 and 2009 alone. The abortion rate per 1,000 women declined since 2000, while the rates of suicide and bankruptcies rose.

While there are lots of data in the 1400 page print edition and it is used by academics and journalist all over the country, the Abstract is on the budget chopping block for the next fiscal year. As more and more federal data series are published on the Internet, the government sees less need for a consolidated source.