I am not sure about how to improve financial literacy. It does have to be improved because too many people think credit cards are free money and end up sinking in a mire of debt.
At least try so that we might find out what -- if anything -- works! (With a hat tip to Mr Edison, we've seen a variety of things that most assuredly DON'T work!)
And because the wheels of justice in the UK turn slow -- the founder of Surrey Pride has been sentenced to 30 years (a huge sentence) . It is a jaw dropping conviction. Ireland had been a prolific attacker of women on social media, including JKR. Apparently Surrey Pride has not learned its lesson as the safeguarding lead was intimately involved with Ireland... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/01/stephen-ireland-surrey-pride-council-warnings/ 0r https://archive.ph/4613J
Another area where we need to quit listening to “experts” (outside of a local, knowledgeable, friendly CPA, of course). We’re not supposed to talk about money for some reason, so people go to financial advisors for help who, let’s be honest, are incentivized to nudge you into investing YOUR money in an investment that makes them and/or their company money through fees and kickbacks. They also overcomplicate it to scare you into needing their services. Investing ain’t hard.
I highly recommend JL Collins book The Simple Path to Wealth. It’s an excellent and funny read.
Total stock market index funds are the way to go. Throw whatever money in it you can and then just don’t touch it until you need it. As an example, early in my career I started throwing some money in here and there to a Roth. I stopped about 7 years ago having put in a total of about $29,000. Haven’t touched it since, and it’s now worth over $100,000.
My kids both have custodial investment accounts that I will use to teach them the 4% rule when they are old enough. And then one day whatever money is left in it will be theirs to do with as they please.
And take Celia’s safe advice and STAY OUT OF DEBT! Be very wary of 0% interest for 2 years credit lines. If you miss one payment that would keep you from paying it off on time (I.e. you only pay the minimum one month), they will add all the interest that should have been accruing from the beginning onto the bill.
It's not really true anymore that financial advisors invest clients into what makes the firms and themselves the most money. There is way too much regulation to get away with that anymore. If anything, they are often more conservative than they need to be because investment companies and banks are very risk adverse.
Incentives and kickbacks to the FA and firm are generally illegal now.
Maybe kickback is the wrong word. I’m talking about when a Fidelity advisor recommends a Fidelity managed mutual fund with 2-3% fees when they should just be recommending their total market fund with a 0.01% fees, and then likely gets a bonus based on the number of clients he/she gets signed up for the higher fee funds (that the total market funds almost always outperform, even without the built in automatic 2-3% advantage).
My sister has to see a financial advisor for work and always calls me to discuss. The advice they give is less than stellar. There are exceptions to every rule, though.
No one makes 2-3% unless it's a one time upfront commission, usually coupled with low annual fees. If you're paying 2-3%/year you're either very poorly informed, or a fool.
I’m picking on Fidelity because my workplace retirement is through them so I’m most familiar with them. I went to their website and searched “Fidelity” and picked the first fund that came up. Its fees were a little over 2%. You’re right, though. Most are in the 0.5-0.7% range, which is still much higher than the 0.01% of their total market fund. I’m not talking about advisor fees. I’m talking about the fees of the funds they recommend you invest in.
It doesn’t sound like much at just 0.5%, but when talking retirement accounts and potential million dollar investments, it’s $5,000/year vs $100/year.
Some funds have higher expenses because they may cost more to manage, ie they have overseas research offices, or they may have fewer assets and the expense ratio by default is higher.
Never pick an investment only because of its expenses....net returns AND the probability of continued net returns is critical.
I tend to agree. Naturally a financial planner for a specific company is going to recommend their own products, but then you don't go to a Honda dealership to buy a car and have the salesperson sell you a Ford. They sell what they know best, and then at least in my case they give me a good sounding board for things I may want to do financially.
And, if its a point of contention about what they recommend, you can always go to a fiduciary.
That's a weak analogy and it's not true. FAs have thousands of investment products they can recommend, and the compensation/pricing structure is now so level they get paid the same amount no matter what you invest in.
Of course they do. The original point was specifically about Fidelity, though. And while they may have other options they can offer they will be spiffed and more knowledgeable about their own products.
When I lived in the 1980s, a lot more people had pensions and this wasn't a conversation...so maybe accuse me of living in the early 2000s! :)
Fidelity notoriously says they have no proprietary obligation, but most Fidelity accounts have mostly Fidelity funds in them. So speaking specifically about Fidelity was a good point to make.
That’s true, they don’t. Because investing has been way over complicated. And most people don’t even know total market funds exist. Thats why I shared JL Collins information. It’s worth reading.
If NW Mutual has you invested in more than one or two (depending on your risk aversion) mutual funds, and they are charging you more than 0.01% in fees (theirs and your investments’ combined), you are losing a lot of money. It’s been shown over and over that passive investing in a total market fund beats active management. For example:
Passive investing does better than SOME active managers, but not all. If 90% of active managers underperform a COMPARABLE benchmark (with comparable risk quotients) then 10% of active managers do better, after all fees, and if you argue there are no managers that out distance the indexes, you don't know much.
Because they can’t outperform the market consistently, and their fees would eat away at any gains anyway. Sounds like a lot of work for little to no return.
But I guess some people are really good at this. I don’t think Nancy is taking new clients, though.
The Bloomberg article this links to at the end quotes highest and second highest returns ever for specific hedge funds of 15% and 11%. As compared to the 25% of the S&P 500 over the same time frame.
Some have outperformed the market consistently and have a high probability of continued returns. It's very foolish to proclaim "they can't outperform the market consistently"....how do you know?
Furthermore, the documented returns are net of all expenses, so your claim that "fees would eat away at any gains anyway' is unfounded and totally wrong.
This is true later in life. But the best advice to a new graduate is to head off to Schwab or similar, set up auto transfer for $500 a month automatically invested in a low expense index fund and leave it alone.
A financial advisor only makes sense when one’s net worth exceeds $500k.
Well Fisher is a fiduciary so it doesn’t make sense for them to give personal attention to small accounts.
Self directed investment is pretty straightforward at the outset- one learns the value of compounding and market fluctuations. These are better learned through experience rather than education.
I know I wouldn't do as well investing on my own, as I do with my financial advisor. He happens to be excellent and he has a client base to prove it. His success is my success!
The kids both have 529s. Different purposes. The custodial accounts are their money. A gift we gave them at birth to open the account, Christmas money from family when they are too young to even know what to do with that much money, birthday money from us when they get all the presents they would ever need from family and birthday parties, etc.
The student loan scam. The lie that kids need a piece of sheepskin from an indoctrination factory to have a nice job and life. And that taking out $100,000 loan or more is worth it. I think academia should be forced to pay for this huge scam they perpetrated on gullible kids. And to some extent, parents too, who wanted white collar kids pushing paper at some NGO vs fixing plumbing. Ivy league Academia has become a punch line but their heads are so far up their arses they will never see it.
What to do about the 1.7 trillion in student loan debt? Foist it on the taxpayer? Empty the coffers of the endowments first.
Here’s the money lesson—a fool is easily parted from his money by shisters.
First of all, hold the schools accountable for unpaid student loans. That would force down the constantly increasing cost of higher education. And do NOT...EVER...give the student borrowers a break!
Well, it's government-backed student loans that drove up tuition and let universities go on spending sprees: ever more real estate, more and bigger gyms, bowling alleys, and eateries, and ever fancier dorm rooms.
If colleges had to grant scholarships, we'd have far lower tuitions, less tolerance for bad behavior on the part of students, and fewer hot-shot professors.
My graduate degree was paid for by Bausch & Lomb, IBM, Kodak, and Xerox, all of them headquartered back then in Rochester, New York and overflowing with money, much of which made it to the U of R and RIT. Full scholarships could be scooped up with a spoon.
We do not criticize Obama enough for forcing federally backed student loans into the world. When banks were responsible for student loans they would take the declared major into account.
Accounting and Finance? Here's your loan.
Pre-Med? Here's your loan.
Underwater Basket Weaving for non-binary people of color going for a doctorate? Try another bank.
When the Feds just started tossing obscene dollars at everything, as they always do, without thinking about it the universities started doing crazy things to just get on the government tap. They should be embarrassed.
Ha. I get your point and mostly agree. However I happen to be trained in traditional PNW cedar bark basket weaving. ( never tried it underwater tho!) I never learned weaving in college, but towards the end of my private training, one of the tribal Indian colleges here started teaching traditional basketweaving classes and giving credit for that, which they still do. My own basket teacher was a master weaver who made some respectable money on her work. It wasn't enough to fully support her, but certainly paid better than clerking at 7-11! So there are some exceptions to be considered. One of the colleges I went to did not have Native American studies at the time, even tho a very high percentage of the students had native ancestry, mostly Cherokee. Now that same college offers a degree in the Cherokee language. So while alot of crappy changes have happened, there is still some good stuff too.
Yes the Navajo have managed to preserve their language magnificently. I think more so than any other tribe and I believe they are still the second largest tribe, so that means enough native speakers to keep the language alive. I have heard that the Crow also did a good job of language preservation. The Cherokee are still struggling. There are many who are interested, but it is one of the harder languages and the Cherokee are scattered around the world now, so hard to find native speakers to converse with. Out of a tribe of 440,000 I think we only have about 3,000 fluent speakers left and about 25,000 who speak some.
Lol...I should have known there would be a basket weaver on this blog! I bet you are good at it, too!
Ok, here's a few I found online: Masters in Bowling Industry Management, Bachelor's in Puppet Arts, Bachelor in Comic Arts, and everyone's favorite "Bachelor's in Create Your Own Major".
Although I suppose I'll be on thin ice there...no offense to the bowling alley owners out there, but I struggle to see what a Bowling Management degree would get you that a standard MBA wouldn't.
No worries. I agree there are some very strange and seemingly useless degrees out there. I was okay as a weaver, because I worked really hard at it! But frankly I was better as a teacher, since I made so many mistakes myself and thus knew how to fix them. My own teacher, who was in her 80's when she taught me, learned to weave at 5 years old from her grandmother, so she was kinda impatient with mistakes.
Oh yes, he made a big show of all students should be able to go to college. His heart was in the right place on this one, as it is with most liberals generally, but obvious execution issues and unintended consequences were pretty easy to see even at the time.
Also add trade schools. I know someone who went through an audio engineering program, with repaid student loans, rather than college as a music major; he's now gainfully employed.
1) isn't making schools responsible giving student visits a break?
2) how does making schools responsible for unpaid loans drive down costs?
I agree making schools (or whomever is funding loans) responsible for defaults is a good idea. It will quickly sort out the issue of degrees that don't offer a positive ROI in terms of increased earning potential (i.e. probably most of them).
If student loans were dischargeable in bankruptcy, it seems to me that kids in way over their heads would have a way out, and still have societal consequences, but without being “forgiven” of anything. It could make lenders tighten up, too. Why should you be able to “chapter 7 away” your Macy’s bill but not your student loan? I read once in an advice column that a just-graduated Md died in a car crash, and her poor Mother was still stuck as co-signer with her daughter’s $100k student loan. The columnist advised parents to take out a life insurance policy on any child they would co-sign a student loan for. Sorry, but that’s just morally screwed up …
I understand “government-backed”; maybe they shouldn’t be … (?)
I'll never understand why anyone thinks it's better to take general education classes at any private university when you can take the exact same class at local colleges for $350. College algebra is the same no matter where you take it. Why pay more?
At that age, going where your friends go, going where the parties are the best, and attending large football games in the fall tends to override common sense. It is unfortunate.
Partly, it's prestige and networking. Which are actual positive effects, though maybe not enough to make the additional costs worthwhile. I've not seen any data on this.
because most of the boomer and Gen X generation got brainwashed to think that the name of the school on your resume mattered more than what they actually taught you. So it was always a race to get the kids in there no matter the cost or future implications.
Speaking of wealth: Here's another kind of wealth -- Shakespeare --that's been depreciated.
The WSJ review of the new Folger library:
‘Shakespeare: Then and There, Here and Now’ Review: Dismantling the Master
The permanent exhibition at the Folger Shakespeare Library celebrates the playwright with its world-class collection of First Folios and other materials while leaving him oddly diminished.
By Edward Rothstein
June 30, 2025 at 5:08 pm ET
Inscribed on the grand neoclassical façade of the Folger Shakespeare Library is the famed tribute to the playwright by his contemporary, Ben Jonson: “Thou art a monument, without a tombe, / And art alive still, while thy booke doth live, / And we have wits to read, and praise to give.” Since 1932, this research library has been a monument to that monument. Its world-class collection of Shakespeare materials amassed by Henry Folger (1857-1930), chairman of Standard Oil of New York, and his wife, Emily (1858-1936), form the core of the library’s still-growing holdings, accompanied by an Elizabethan-inspired theater, exhibitions, and a publication program that includes widely used teaching editions of the plays.
Last year, the Folger reopened after an $80 million expansion that was really a transformation, adding for the first time a permanent exhibition along with new galleries for temporary shows (now featuring “How to Be a Power Player: Tudor Edition”—a playful survey of “social climbing” as a “competitive sport” in the age of Queen Elizabeth I). Peculiarly, though, it also presents us with a Shakespeare who doesn’t seem worth much attention.
This doesn’t mean there aren’t things worth attending to here. The new permanent exhibition, “Shakespeare: Then and There, Here and Now,” for example, displays the world’s largest collection of First Folios in one gallery. Dimly lighted behind a glass wall are 82 examples of this first collection of Shakespeare’s plays, printed in 1623, seven years after his death. Touch-screens guide us, exploring markings and scars left by four centuries of readers. The “Power Player” exhibition, too, is charming and suggestive.
But what of Shakespeare’s achievement? Aye, there’s the rub. These explorations of the Folios and Tudor power plays deal with secondary matters—the collection, the era’s sociology—and neither illuminates Shakespeare’s accomplishments. And while the permanent exhibition also includes a working model of a 17th-century printing press (along with an interactive simulation), it reveals nothing about the artistic or dramatic powers of the works printed. Another gallery primarily presents centuries of performance memorabilia.
One ambition of the new Folger, it seems, is to topple Shakespeare from his monumental status. Rather than mount stairs to a grand temple-like portal, visitors now descend on ADA-compliant ramps leading through small gardens to lower-level side-entrances. The entire grand Tudoresque Great Hall is now a Starbuckian (or Falstaffian?) coffee shop.
This is not just a symbolic leveling. The opening gallery of the permanent exhibition—the Folger’s main introduction to Shakespeare’s work—seems written by a middle-school teacher for a middle-school student, both burdened by grudges. “Who was Shakespeare?” reads the opening panel. “A hero? An icon? The name on a book you never wanted to open?” Why would you not want to open it? Is it off-putting because of its aura of elite achievement? Don’t worry, only faint praise is found here. Shakespeare, the panel continues, was “a writer, an actor, and a businessperson.” His reception has made him seem overly grand, or worse. And though his words “outlived him”—and two books on display show him avidly quoted as early as 1600—there is nothing too special about those words: “Sometimes they connected people, sometimes they divided people.” We are urged to “talk back to Shakespeare.”
That is what the Folger does, first implying guilt by association: “While Shakespeare was writing his plays,” reads one label, “England was colonizing this land that we are currently standing on.” Does it matter that this is scarcely shown to be relevant, since England’s colonization efforts were little more than a glint in Queen Elizabeth’s eye during the first part of the playwright’s career and even at his death in 1616 were still fairly insignificant? It is just preparation for our era’s most lurid curse: “For far too long,” we are told, “Shakespeare was seen as both the property of white culture and evidence of its supremacy.” We are shown examples of racism in the treatment of black actors (because of segregation, for example, John Gielgud could have lunch with Earle Hyman—the black star of Howard University’s 1951 “Hamlet”—only in Washington’s bus station). But no evidence is offered of Shakespeare as poster-boy for white supremacy or why any such misuse should be treated as his defining feature.
But that is the dominant theme. A centrally displayed bust shows Hyman (1926-2017) as Othello, a character he initially shunned (the label explains) as “a Black general falling for a white person’s deception.” A commissioned installation by the black artist Fred Wilson plays with symbolism: Through an Italianate black mirror, we see the reflection of an alabaster Queen Elizabeth I in George Gower’s 1579 portrait. Yet throughout, no insight is provided into Shakespeare’s racial metaphors and nothing shows how Shakespeare’s plays might transcend formulaic racial readings.
Is there any chance that the Folger’s new director since October, Farah Karim-Cooper, might give this exhibition, which she inherited, a warmer, more detailed approach, as is (partly) the case in her 2023 book, “The Great White Bard: How to Love Shakespeare While Talking About Race”? Perhaps. But in that volume Ms. Karim-Cooper is also determined that Shakespeare should never be hailed again as a “native genius”—an emblem of “English exceptionalism” and its implicit “whiteness.”
Whiteness, though, is hardly the point of Shakespeare’s genius or his reputation. So distinctive were Shakespeare’s powers that his writings, along with the contemporaneous King James Bible, shaped the English language. Almost a century and a half later Samuel Johnson, compiling his landmark dictionary, used more than 17,000 Shakespeare quotes, about 15% of all his citations. The U.S. was heir to that language along with the Enlightenment ideas it helped articulate. Emily Folger called Shakespeare “one of the wells from which we Americans draw our national thought, our faith and our hope.” That is why the Folger was built neighboring the U.S. Capitol, the Supreme Court and the Library of Congress. In its Great Hall, the coat of arms of Elizabeth is at one end, and the shield and eagle of the U.S. at the other; Shakespeare is their connection.
This seems to embarrass the new Folger, but that only means that Shakespeare was even greater than Ben Jonson affirmed in the Folger’s engraved encomium. His art is alive still, despite the fact that here there is scant praise to give, and few signs of wits to read.
Folder Library - owned by Amherst College, my Alma mater.
Amherst College, which made the front page of the NYT when copies of the Amherst Guide to Acceptable Speech were actually distributed to students and the spineless president of the college, Biddy Martin, simply said, “Oh, that wasn’t meant to go out, yet…” (or words to that effect. She’s left the presidency but maintains her seat on the Corporation at Harvard.
Our commencement speaker was the president of the Folger Library - What. A. Bore.
A missed opportunity as selective use of source material could have portrayed Shakespeare as woke. For example, I think there's a critique of colonialism in 'The Tempest.' Caliban wants his island back! An understanding of capitalist economics in 'The Merchant of Venice,' as converting Jews would increase the price of pork. And so on.
Henry Folger was an accumulator in the worst sense of the word. He bought up every copy of the First Folio he could find, being unafraid to resort to deceit in order to add to his collection.
While he was alive, he horded his treasure. He was not particularly interested in sharing love or understanding of the works - just gathering more.
Since the English Restoration, all manor of manipulation had been done to the plays - to suit an actor, a fad, or societal whims. Folger's hording of the original source inhibited the work of actors and scholars who labored, during the late 1800s - early 1900s to restore the works to their true form.
The museum Folger endowed in his will is as much (or more) a monument to his own ego and obsession as an homage to Shakespeare.
The 2015 book, "The Millionaire and the Bard," if a bit too one-sided in its idolation of Folger, also accurately describes the rise of his obsession and hints at his motivations.
I am not the least surprised by the changes you describe. The library never had a clear mission, other than to boast of its precious holdings.
I doubt nothing you say -- I know little about Folger. But I know I hate imposed racial and feminist guilt trips that interfere with my enjoyment of museums.
Gubmint is to blame as much as the schools. When Obama federalized the student loan game, the schools went on a spending bender, just look at admin positions pre and post. Pre federalization about 10:1, now it’s a little over 2:1
I think a lot of the debt is based around where they go to college. I distinctly remember my Dad and I having the conversation about my college choices. Choice A was $23k/yr and Choice B was $12k/yr (1995). I was fortunate in that I had enough savings for either choice, however my Dad reminded me that there were expenses waiting for me after college. I made the less expensive college choice and am glad I did bc it started my own investment account and helped with graduate school, my wedding, buying a house. When speaking with other parents now about my own child’s college education, we have a budget and will make choices accordingly since the cost of many colleges these days has gotten to the point of ridiculous given starting salaries for most jobs.
I started out reading Money Magazine and watching Wall Street Week on PBS and both served me well. Then as I got more learned and had more assets to protect and invest - I turned to Morningstar which also worked quite well. Today Money is gone,PBS is a progressive mess and Morningstar has become all about ESG investing. Now I use Seeking Alpha but I wouldn’t suggest it to a novice because it is a free-for-all of investing advice and often very poor advice mixed in with the good stuff. I don’t know where new investors go to learn about investing - certainly not Cramer on CNBC.
Unsolicited advice, sorry, but I'd add that Fidelity is good as well. Best trading platform online IMO, plus, big PLUS, they are privately held still. Not being beholden to Wall Street gives them more flexibility than the publicly traded investment firms. Again all just my opinion.
Excellent advice regarding Seeking Alpha, they also have excellent tools but only once you pay up. I much prefer being able to read the transcripts of companies quarterly and annual presentations versus listen to the spin. It's much more clear what's really being said when you read them, versus listen to them.
Everyone should read the book Howard Marks published about how to not let emotions influence your investment approach and/or make you react to what is usually not in your best interests because the market did something. (The name escapes me, and I don't know which bookcase it's hiding in right now - sorry.) Smart guy.
I did a lot of research and thinking, and eventually went with Vanguard for my personal accounts. I have Fidelity for my 401k(s) that were set up by the company.
What I like about Fidelity is how helpful they are from a customer service perspective. I get a little less excited about the fees they charge, but that's by product so as long as you know what you are buying then you should be fine.
It's a good example of do your research and go with what fits your situation the best!
There are many good books on investing. I would develop a foundation with those rather than internet sources. For investors who want to avoid conflicts of interest, there are really three choices: Schwab, Fidelity and Vanguard.
My partner day trades. He gives me tips. Tells me to check my stock account daily. But I honestly don't completely understand how it works, or even more to the point -- how to make it work to my advantage.
When he explains it to me, it goes in one ear and out the other. It's as if I can't grasp it literally and figuratively.
I need to read something that explains how to manage and profit from the stock market. But the prospect fills me with dread.
You are not alone! Investing takes patience and knowledge. When it come to finance all I know is"Don't spend what you don't have", and "Don't touch that chunk you have in CD". At 74 years of age, I am not rich, and my savings may not last, but I DO know that if I don't spend, and don't try being cute with investments, then my money will still be there when I need it.
The best book ever written about stock market investing (IMHO) is “A Random Walk Down Wall Street” by Burton Malkiel. He proves that throwing darts at the NYSE listings will net you as much as listening to an “advisor”; probably more because you only have to pay for the darts. I’ve followed his advice by staying in diversified mutual funds and I am very happy with the results.
For anyone not comfortable with investing, go to ChatGPT and ask it how to diversify your investing. It will give you percentages by type of investment, right down to picking funds for you.
Again IMHO, day trading is playing with fire. It can be fun if you are using “fun” money but after all it’s just gambling.
Yes. And dollar cost averaging. Put the same $ amount in at regular intervals so that you’re buying fewer shares when their price is high, more when the price is low. It’s tempting to try to “buy on the dips” and “sell on the peaks” but that’s a fool’s game.
I'd add that many people consider John Bogle's books a good place to start. He was 100% through and through a mutual fund investor, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Common Sense would be an excellent place to start, and it's written for the common folks, not the investment community. Gets a little deeper and technical towards the end, but the title really is spot on.
Day trading is for crazy people or someone who really really knows what they’re doing. For most average Americans, I would say stay the hell away from day trading and absolutely do not check your stock portfolio every day. You’ll make yourself crazy.
I’m with you. While I have the interest in growing my money and not losing any, I have zero interest in the how. I pay an advisor to manage my accounts which are doing very well and growing. It’s hard in this economy to lose money so we are all fortunate in this regard.
Probably it pays to have had Depression-era parents who never bit off more than they could chew.
Maybe it's easy for me to say because I don't have kids; but I also don't have cable TV or pricey gadgets, and I do my own gardening and home-repair chores except when I can't, and I wear my clothes forever; but spouse and I pay our monthly credit card bill on time and in full.
We paid off our house in three years at a time when stocks were falling and it seemed sensible to use the cash to get rid of that interest payment.
My most successful investment was to purchase a 2-bed, one bath condo in SoCal for $125K in 1998. It sold two years ago for $775K when I retired. We purchased a home in Georgia for cash and paid off our car loan. We are living on our combined Social Security of around $3,200 a month, augmented by my part-time job. We need nothing and are living comfortably for now. But the future? Who knows...
He's done a lot for school. I'm still seeing leftist curriculum regarding climate and social justice policy, but it's getting better. If he could just finally and completely remove phones from school and remove the stupid testing requirements, we would be all set.
We always valued the advice of owning your home and I helped our daughters with a down payment as soon as they started working. They learned about different mortgages, refinancing to a lower rate and never missing a payment.
I was introduced to financial literacy through Crown Ministries. A friend needed a co-teacher for this night class, based on scriptural principles. I ended up doing 1 on 1 counseling for people who wanted to get out of debt. The hardest part for me, as an independent contractor, was making a budget, since my monthly income varied widely. It served me well though. My favorite encounter was with a young teacher and tennis coach not really sure how much money she made. She paid off her car, paid off other debt with the no longer car payments and was confident enough to use her credit card for Christmas trips home to visit family. My worst case was a husband and wife, both highly paid professionals, whose phones were turned off regularly for non payment. They had 3 car payments between the two and were ridiculously wasteful with unchecked daily expenditures. One refused to change any behaviors. The other was in tears. The most important lesson I learned was this; For I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am in. I know how to get along with humble means and I also know how to live in prosperity.
I love that you taught this course! Established churches offer classes like this or Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University courses all the time. Many times free, sometimes for a nominal cost. (Probably best to stay away from the trendy "mega churches" that preach a prosperity gospel, as these are the one's that end up on the nightly news.)
A good community bank will also offer everything from budgeting classes to get out of debt planning to mortgages and all the way to investing.
If people would just dust off their critical thinking hats, put them on, and go to these options they'd be in much better shape.
My small Bible study church turned into a Mega church. It stopped us from offering our cost of materials course and instead offered a ponzi scheme masquerading as financial advice. Like, Hello. If your goal is to be a pastor, minister, writer, thinker, whatever, heavy debt is not going to get you there. I left when I discovered the amount of tithes being forwarded to Washington D.C. lobbyists. Turned me away from Religion, but I have made my peace with God.
This is one reason why premarital counseling is so important. When I married my first husband, I had no idea how far in debt he was. He failed to disclose any of this before we got married. But of course I didn’t ask either. As we all know, financial problems are a main driver of divorce.
I was told about 40 years ago that most all marital problems could be solved with an unlimited checkbook. Not if the one wielding the checkbook is a sadomasochist. What we didn't know before we got married...
We finally got out from under our credit card debt a few years ago by using principles (such as budgeting) taught in our church's class on the subject. Reminds me that we need to draw up a budget again. With the kids out on their own and my father-in-law now deceased, we've been skating along, probably spending more than we should day-to-day, just because we can.
Living within your means is a very underrated concept that should be stressed early. Credit lines and the consumer mindset make life so much harder for some people than it needs to be. My wife is constantly telling me about people who are likely making less than us but who have more or nicer "stuff" than us and asking, "How can they afford that?" to which I always reply, "They can't".
I also remember reading somewhere years ago that some study showed that happiness levels started to plateau and even decrease above an annual household income of around $75,000. That number is probably a little higher now.
I think it's on topic here, but I'd like to point out that here in Fairfax County VA kids in high school have to take a financial literacy course to graduate. Thats a step in the right direction IMO. I bitch and moan about the crazy cost of living here and the taxes, but every once in a while they get it right. Thanks all.
Kids, and everyone else, should be taught the beauty of compound interest. Example: Assume that every month, starting at age 18, you had invested $100 into an S&P 500 Index fund. At age 55 today, you’d have $536,467. Why that impressive figure? Because the S&P has historically grown by about 10 percent, and we’re adding reinvested dividends. We got to that figure simply by having the discipline to set aside $100 each month. (You can find such calculations online).
But how to teach this? A personal finance class in high school, which could cover a myriad of topics by using spreadsheets and mock tax returns and bank accounts.
One hurdle to overcome is that such topics are a feature of (gasp!) capitalism, the economic system that’s perpetually under attack - but has proven to be superior to all other options.
Great point, and not just because it was what I was going to post. I think a big obstacle is the widespread math phobia I see in my students. Compound interest involves an exponent which automatically shuts some people down, unfortunately. Even though my classes are about population estimation and things like that, I try to make the link to other practical things, so tell them the equation we use to project a population into the future is the same one for calculating compound interest on a loan or investment.
I think it’s about the basics of money management. I took business classes in high school, bookkeeping etc. It’s about keeping track of your money. I’ve been single all my life so it was my responsibility to stay solvent. I never bought anything on credit that I didn’t already have the money to pay for it. The exceptions were mortgages and auto loans. I don’t know if they still do this but I opted for bi monthly payments on my mortgage. Paid it off sooner and saved a bunch of money. I brown bagged my lunch every day. I managed without those new shiny things. It paid off. These times are so consumer driven that I don’t fault those who fall victim to it. But tax payers shouldn’t be forced to cover those expenses.
If you worked in Silicon Valley you'd realize that you have to cover most of your meals (local companies tend to be in loco parentis); my costs went up!
My dad gave me a copy of the spreadsheet he used to track cash flow and I use it every month to track income and expenses. It’s great to see where all the money goes and to physically see any debt. I think that’s one problem with the cashless society, we never physically see our money disappearing anymore so it hurts less somehow.
I taught an informal financial literacy class for young adults and was somewhat surprised at their lack of basic knowledge. The biggest things I talked about were: credit card debt is hell, explaining what a mortgage is and how it works; how to invest in their company’s 401K plan (especially the younger you are the higher the percentage of equities you should have in your 401K), and buying vs leasing a car. Those things (and basic math skills!) should be taught in high school.
For today’s kids, more modern things probably need to be taught. Fraud awareness, Crypto, online savings accounts that actually pay interest vs brick and mortar banks that don’t, using software to track your finances and budgets (I use Quicken but there are a lot of others now), explaining Zelle, Venmo, Paypal, etc.
When I moved to Birmingham, I over-doubled my income. I wanted a mortgage of a certain size. The person at the bank kept telling me that I could afford a MUCH larger loan. I knew what my guaranteed minimum salary would be and based my house on that. She just couldn’t understand my thinking. I couldn’t understand hers.
I use two credit cards—one at CostCo and the other for American Airlines. Everything else is a debit card. I’m essentially paying cash for just about everything. The only debts I’ve ever carried were mortgages and car payments, which are sorta short-term mortgages themselves. I’ve always been terrified of running up debt. I just didn’t buy things I couldn’t afford.
Which, it seems, makes me different from most Americans. In 2008, I filled my 4Runner’s gas tank at CostCo. It was 80 bucks. Ouch! Looked to me that many people will have a hard time with it. And that they’d have to choose between paying off debts and be able to get around town. Seemed sensible to me that Visa and Mastercard would be having a problem, but a friend who knows about money assured me that that wasn’t at all the case.. They were solid, successful companies. If I wanted to short sell anything, I should do that with bank stocks since banks, not credit card companies are the entities that hold the debt. Bank stocks?? Banks don’t fail! [imagine forehead slap]
But that's exactly what ~did~ happen, as so well described in Michael Lewis’ excellent book, The Big Short. And also in the movie of the same name. Some people were just braver than I was investing-wise. Coulda, shoulda….
What about “financial literacy”? Most stuff is common sense, which gets consistently ignored. Andrew Carnegie got it right (for the most part) when he said, “put all your eggs in one basket. And watch that basket!” He meant, of course, Carnegie Steel, not current market investing. But the principle is correct: if you don’t understand it, don’t let someone pressure you into buying it. He’s probably no more savvy than you are, but he might be more persuasive.
Joe, one thing I would recommend. Don’t use debit cards to pay for things because they’re much more susceptible to fraud. I use a credit card to pay for everything and then pay the credit card off in full at the end of each month.
Since your debit card is tied directly to your checking account, if someone makes a fraudulent purchase, you’ve literally lost the cash.
It takes way more effort to get the bank to give you your money back when fraud occurs connected to a debit card rather than just a plain old credit card.
We've never had that problem ourselves, but there was a rash of debit card fraud here a few years ago--either skimming or a store clerk committing fraud.
The ideal is to use credit cards for all purchases, then pay them off every month. Then you get the benefits without the interest. I'm still trying to move us toward that, but we need to have some better plans in place before we go whole hog.
It only takes once, and all your money in your checking account is gone and you may even be on the hook for overdrafts. We use a credit card for everything. You can set alerts for spending limits to notify you if you might be getting a bit heavy handed on the easy money spending. Plus the apps make it really easy to keep an eye on how much you've spent and where, and you can set up autopay (from the same account you would be paying from with debit) to ensure you never miss a bill and are then left with interest to pay. Credit cards are definitely the way to go. We have a Costco card, an Amazon card, a Discover that we rarely use anymore, and we mostly use a Fidelity card that gives us 2% cash back on every purchase anywhere. If you spend 1,500 a month on gas, groceries, whatever else that can be purchased with a credit card, that would be $360/year in free money.
There may be better cards out there, but we got annoyed with trying to keep up with what we got cash back on this month and just went with the highest straight cash back on any purchase offer I could find.
I agree. I’ve had more fraud issues with CC than my debit card, especially now that there are chip readers. I don’t like the gas or store machines where you have to insert your card bc of skimmers but the upside to using BofA for a bank is that they are really good with fraud protection.
Some even offer zero interest on large purchases. Recently at Home Depot bought new kitchen appliances, almost $4k. 24 months zero interest if paid within that term…yes I will use your money to spread it out.
I asked if there was a cash discount if paid on day of purchase - nope
Just be careful with these. We use offers like this all the time, but I've read that if you don't pay the set amount that would get you paid off in the 24 months and, for example, decide to only pay the minimum one month, they will retroactively add all the interest you've been accruing in the background to your account.
Yes, credit cards have built in safeguards that protect the user, such as $50 maximum liability for fraud (though I’ve never had a credit card company charge that). I only have credit cards that pay me to use them, with between 2 and 5 % cash back, depending on the “category” I’m purchasing. I have never used my debit card.
We have always made a point of buying the least expensive house that would meet our space needs. The banks are always pushing you to buy the most expensive house THEY think you can afford. But we've always felt that we wanted to make sure we could keep a roof over our heads, even if we had a hit to our income. And I always made a point of paying extra toward the principle every month, even if it was only $5.
For starters, it would be great if kids — and adults — understood that wealth fundamentally is: a measure of a person’s intelligence and labor. Money is a vehicle to facilitate the trading of the fruits of both. A consumer pays according to the value he/she places on the product. You capitalize on your labor and smarts and make a better product, then you should demand and receive top dollar. You slack off, prepare to get zilch for your non-effort. Likewise, you should consider and value any wealth you hold as a manifestation of your sweat and smarts.
Would we be more literate if we first understood that what we exchange in a transaction is a piece of ourselves?
My husband and I have two kids. We both tend to skin-flintishness. We raised both by the same rules. Daughter has been able to buy a little house and car on a charter school teacher’s salary. Son spends fifty even though he has five in his pocket and zero in the bank. She learned her lessons and weighs whether she really needs that shiny bauble whenever it’s dangled in front of her. He can’t pass a Jamba Juice stand or Toyota dealership without being triggered.
So many people will think long and hard about a $500 purchase, for example, but they literally think nothing of the $5, $10 and $20 purchases that they make every single day at Starbucks or Dunkin or buying lunch out.
Watching those unnecessary small daily purchases is one of the things I learned from the Dave Ramsey program.
Well being lifetime poor used to automatically mean you didn't spend even 5 dollars without serious consideration. Nowadays I watch the 'poor' around me spend hundreds, even thousands on fireworks every year and buy other unecessary stuff all the time. One thing I have learned over a lifetime of very little money is that I may not have financial literacy and I might have made some unwise decisions re career and education when young, but I am also pretty much immune to the carrot of shiny new things I 'must' buy.
Agree! I was stunned when I found out how much tattoos cost. I never imagined that a lot of people would be spending that much money on a tattoo sleeve.
Oh my gosh! The number of people covered in tattoos, that I know cost a fortune, that clearly look like they don’t have two nickels to rub together. WTF?!?
I’m astonished as well. They wear their wealth on their skin and over time it fades or stretches or sags. And most all of them are black ink and just look dirty. I think it’s an addiction for some reason but a stupid one. Plus can ink injected into your skin, which is an organ, be that good for you?
Ever read Your Money or Your Life. It's essentially that exact concept. You are trading your time (your life) for money, so when you look at a purchase, it should really be "how many hours of my life am I willing to trade for this (fill in the blank)". Someone making $20/hr after taxes who drinks a $5 coffee every day is giving up almost 4 days of their life every year just for coffee.
The question of what to do about financial literacy.
I think it starts at home, with parents. My dad did a very nice job teaching us everything we needed to know. It worked better on my brother and sister than it did on me, but by the time I was 35 I started to realize that dad was right all along.
Schools, churches, and other community organizations also need to understand that many community banks and credit unions LOVE to provide free financial literacy classes. I know, I've taught many of those myself and designed courses for others to deliver.
YouTube is a very good resource, as long as you make sure you critically think through what you are being told. I've learned a ton through Geoff Schmidt, Devin Carroll, The Money Guys, Dave Ramsey, and Erin Talks Money. If you want to learn how to spot bad financial advice, many of these channels will do "Tik Toc Financial Advice" reaction videos...and the react videos are typically pretty funny. Learning what not to do through a humorous lens is good.
When I have grandkids, hopefully I do one day, I'm going to be talking about how financial education starts at home, extends to the church, how to select a reputable community bank or credit union, then add in a dose of humor on YouTube or Tik Tok react videos from reputable sources. When they get a little older, give a couple of well curated books and offer to pay for a Financial Peace University course for them.
Then, if they screw it up, I will be able to say I did my best!
In theory, it sounds good to say financial literacy starts with parents, but the reality is most parents don’t have a clue.
My parents were terrible with money. My mother never saw a credit card she didn’t like or need and my dad had a very expensive gun hobby that really somebody on a blue-collar salary couldn’t afford.
Parents don’t need to be geniuses to pass along basic financial wisdom. Only finance cars and houses. Pay your credit cards monthly. Put aside a fixed amount each paycheck in an index fund, increase with every pay raise. Reinvest dividends.
These basic rules will take care of 80% of potential problems.
Yes, but what I’m saying is many parents don’t do the things you said. I worked with one woman who had $40,000 in credit card debt and seemed to think nothing of it.
I guess. Here we’re talking about parents who walk away from mortgages, expect to be made whole after poor investment decisions and demand their student debt is written off. Without going down the moral hazard rabbit hole a failure to honor one’s word is a growing problem and a glaring red flag for the future.
I agree with you that many parents are as, or more, clueless than their kids when it comes to finances. I was lucky; my dad was an accountant and while he was too risk averse he was great with money.
I'm just the guy who thinks that money matters, just like changing a tire, knowing what to put into a good toolbox, how to do your own laundry, and how to cook a few basic things, are things that parents should be learning themselves so they can teach their children.
I guess my thought on what to fix is more aspirational, but I think if more parents would even have the guts to say "let's learn this together" we'd be in a better place.
My parents were careful with money, but they never talked frankly with me about it. And they had both grown up in the Depression, so they wouldn't have dreamed of investing in the stock market.
I am not sure about how to improve financial literacy. It does have to be improved because too many people think credit cards are free money and end up sinking in a mire of debt.
This is true in the UK as well as in the US.
Here:
It has emerged that Tim Davie, the head of the BBC was at Glastonbury and knew about the chanting. He allowed chanting to remain on iplayer for 5 hours. He should be sacked along with a slew of other people. The police are investigating Foster-Robinson who has had his US visa revoked and has been dropped by his agency. I do hope he is charged. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/06/30/ofcom-investigates-bbc-over-glastonbury-hate-chant/ or https://archive.ph/fPdEa
Lord Walney has written about the shadow Islamist army which are within British institutions and how the change to the law is not going to prove a deterrent. One needs to remember that they target ordinary Muslims first, seeking to radicalise them. https://www.thetimes.com/article/8ef8d7ce-826b-4eb1-a00a-50f46fd50b2b?shareToken=7d948680e68f8ca3ec9400a78a35f847
The Scottish government have been warned about their refusal implement the FWS ruling. Yesterday Starmer said that he welcomed the ruling and that the public bodies needed to obey the ruling asap. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25278511.ehrc-warns-snp-ministers-sex-definition-ruling/ or https://archive.ph/EFssF
Restore Britain.
At least try so that we might find out what -- if anything -- works! (With a hat tip to Mr Edison, we've seen a variety of things that most assuredly DON'T work!)
And because the wheels of justice in the UK turn slow -- the founder of Surrey Pride has been sentenced to 30 years (a huge sentence) . It is a jaw dropping conviction. Ireland had been a prolific attacker of women on social media, including JKR. Apparently Surrey Pride has not learned its lesson as the safeguarding lead was intimately involved with Ireland... https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/01/stephen-ireland-surrey-pride-council-warnings/ 0r https://archive.ph/4613J
The whole Glasto thing is continuing to make waves. Eavis's husband is great friends with the record label who promote Kneecap. https://x.com/TracyAnnO/status/1940054273116840220
And this is huge. Trump has come through. UPenn has caved. I suspect they knew they were going to lose the lawsuit big time.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/upenn-agrees-follow-trumps-mandate-protecting-womens-sports-education-department-says
Another area where we need to quit listening to “experts” (outside of a local, knowledgeable, friendly CPA, of course). We’re not supposed to talk about money for some reason, so people go to financial advisors for help who, let’s be honest, are incentivized to nudge you into investing YOUR money in an investment that makes them and/or their company money through fees and kickbacks. They also overcomplicate it to scare you into needing their services. Investing ain’t hard.
I highly recommend JL Collins book The Simple Path to Wealth. It’s an excellent and funny read.
https://jlcollinsnh.com/books/
Or save money by getting the same information from his blog.
https://jlcollinsnh.com/stock-series/
Total stock market index funds are the way to go. Throw whatever money in it you can and then just don’t touch it until you need it. As an example, early in my career I started throwing some money in here and there to a Roth. I stopped about 7 years ago having put in a total of about $29,000. Haven’t touched it since, and it’s now worth over $100,000.
My kids both have custodial investment accounts that I will use to teach them the 4% rule when they are old enough. And then one day whatever money is left in it will be theirs to do with as they please.
And take Celia’s safe advice and STAY OUT OF DEBT! Be very wary of 0% interest for 2 years credit lines. If you miss one payment that would keep you from paying it off on time (I.e. you only pay the minimum one month), they will add all the interest that should have been accruing from the beginning onto the bill.
It's not really true anymore that financial advisors invest clients into what makes the firms and themselves the most money. There is way too much regulation to get away with that anymore. If anything, they are often more conservative than they need to be because investment companies and banks are very risk adverse.
Incentives and kickbacks to the FA and firm are generally illegal now.
Maybe kickback is the wrong word. I’m talking about when a Fidelity advisor recommends a Fidelity managed mutual fund with 2-3% fees when they should just be recommending their total market fund with a 0.01% fees, and then likely gets a bonus based on the number of clients he/she gets signed up for the higher fee funds (that the total market funds almost always outperform, even without the built in automatic 2-3% advantage).
My sister has to see a financial advisor for work and always calls me to discuss. The advice they give is less than stellar. There are exceptions to every rule, though.
No one makes 2-3% unless it's a one time upfront commission, usually coupled with low annual fees. If you're paying 2-3%/year you're either very poorly informed, or a fool.
I’m picking on Fidelity because my workplace retirement is through them so I’m most familiar with them. I went to their website and searched “Fidelity” and picked the first fund that came up. Its fees were a little over 2%. You’re right, though. Most are in the 0.5-0.7% range, which is still much higher than the 0.01% of their total market fund. I’m not talking about advisor fees. I’m talking about the fees of the funds they recommend you invest in.
It doesn’t sound like much at just 0.5%, but when talking retirement accounts and potential million dollar investments, it’s $5,000/year vs $100/year.
Some funds have higher expenses because they may cost more to manage, ie they have overseas research offices, or they may have fewer assets and the expense ratio by default is higher.
Never pick an investment only because of its expenses....net returns AND the probability of continued net returns is critical.
I tend to agree. Naturally a financial planner for a specific company is going to recommend their own products, but then you don't go to a Honda dealership to buy a car and have the salesperson sell you a Ford. They sell what they know best, and then at least in my case they give me a good sounding board for things I may want to do financially.
And, if its a point of contention about what they recommend, you can always go to a fiduciary.
That's a weak analogy and it's not true. FAs have thousands of investment products they can recommend, and the compensation/pricing structure is now so level they get paid the same amount no matter what you invest in.
You're living back in the 1980's my friend.
The proprietary obligation is a dying model.
Of course they do. The original point was specifically about Fidelity, though. And while they may have other options they can offer they will be spiffed and more knowledgeable about their own products.
When I lived in the 1980s, a lot more people had pensions and this wasn't a conversation...so maybe accuse me of living in the early 2000s! :)
Fidelity notoriously says they have no proprietary obligation, but most Fidelity accounts have mostly Fidelity funds in them. So speaking specifically about Fidelity was a good point to make.
Alan, I disagree. Most people don’t do well with investing on their own. The key is a good and reputable financial advisor.
Personally, I’m with NW Mutual who handles all of my insurance needs and my financial items.
Yes, they make money off my investments but it’s no different than paying for many types of services.
That’s true, they don’t. Because investing has been way over complicated. And most people don’t even know total market funds exist. Thats why I shared JL Collins information. It’s worth reading.
If NW Mutual has you invested in more than one or two (depending on your risk aversion) mutual funds, and they are charging you more than 0.01% in fees (theirs and your investments’ combined), you are losing a lot of money. It’s been shown over and over that passive investing in a total market fund beats active management. For example:
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/030916/buffetts-bet-hedge-funds-year-eight-brka-brkb.asp
Passive investing does better than SOME active managers, but not all. If 90% of active managers underperform a COMPARABLE benchmark (with comparable risk quotients) then 10% of active managers do better, after all fees, and if you argue there are no managers that out distance the indexes, you don't know much.
Why not find one of those 10%"
Because they can’t outperform the market consistently, and their fees would eat away at any gains anyway. Sounds like a lot of work for little to no return.
But I guess some people are really good at this. I don’t think Nancy is taking new clients, though.
https://nypost.com/2025/06/21/us-news/pelosi-added-millions-to-net-worth-last-year-report/
The Bloomberg article this links to at the end quotes highest and second highest returns ever for specific hedge funds of 15% and 11%. As compared to the 25% of the S&P 500 over the same time frame.
Some have outperformed the market consistently and have a high probability of continued returns. It's very foolish to proclaim "they can't outperform the market consistently"....how do you know?
Furthermore, the documented returns are net of all expenses, so your claim that "fees would eat away at any gains anyway' is unfounded and totally wrong.
This is true later in life. But the best advice to a new graduate is to head off to Schwab or similar, set up auto transfer for $500 a month automatically invested in a low expense index fund and leave it alone.
A financial advisor only makes sense when one’s net worth exceeds $500k.
The TV ads for Fisher Investments have increased the minimum they mention to seek their advice from $500K to $1M.
Well Fisher is a fiduciary so it doesn’t make sense for them to give personal attention to small accounts.
Self directed investment is pretty straightforward at the outset- one learns the value of compounding and market fluctuations. These are better learned through experience rather than education.
I know I wouldn't do as well investing on my own, as I do with my financial advisor. He happens to be excellent and he has a client base to prove it. His success is my success!
Look into 529 accounts for your kids instead of custodial accounts. Every state offers them. I recommend Utah’s or Iowa’s.
The kids both have 529s. Different purposes. The custodial accounts are their money. A gift we gave them at birth to open the account, Christmas money from family when they are too young to even know what to do with that much money, birthday money from us when they get all the presents they would ever need from family and birthday parties, etc.
Excellent!
The student loan scam. The lie that kids need a piece of sheepskin from an indoctrination factory to have a nice job and life. And that taking out $100,000 loan or more is worth it. I think academia should be forced to pay for this huge scam they perpetrated on gullible kids. And to some extent, parents too, who wanted white collar kids pushing paper at some NGO vs fixing plumbing. Ivy league Academia has become a punch line but their heads are so far up their arses they will never see it.
What to do about the 1.7 trillion in student loan debt? Foist it on the taxpayer? Empty the coffers of the endowments first.
Here’s the money lesson—a fool is easily parted from his money by shisters.
First of all, hold the schools accountable for unpaid student loans. That would force down the constantly increasing cost of higher education. And do NOT...EVER...give the student borrowers a break!
Well, it's government-backed student loans that drove up tuition and let universities go on spending sprees: ever more real estate, more and bigger gyms, bowling alleys, and eateries, and ever fancier dorm rooms.
If colleges had to grant scholarships, we'd have far lower tuitions, less tolerance for bad behavior on the part of students, and fewer hot-shot professors.
My graduate degree was paid for by Bausch & Lomb, IBM, Kodak, and Xerox, all of them headquartered back then in Rochester, New York and overflowing with money, much of which made it to the U of R and RIT. Full scholarships could be scooped up with a spoon.
We do not criticize Obama enough for forcing federally backed student loans into the world. When banks were responsible for student loans they would take the declared major into account.
Accounting and Finance? Here's your loan.
Pre-Med? Here's your loan.
Underwater Basket Weaving for non-binary people of color going for a doctorate? Try another bank.
When the Feds just started tossing obscene dollars at everything, as they always do, without thinking about it the universities started doing crazy things to just get on the government tap. They should be embarrassed.
Ha. I get your point and mostly agree. However I happen to be trained in traditional PNW cedar bark basket weaving. ( never tried it underwater tho!) I never learned weaving in college, but towards the end of my private training, one of the tribal Indian colleges here started teaching traditional basketweaving classes and giving credit for that, which they still do. My own basket teacher was a master weaver who made some respectable money on her work. It wasn't enough to fully support her, but certainly paid better than clerking at 7-11! So there are some exceptions to be considered. One of the colleges I went to did not have Native American studies at the time, even tho a very high percentage of the students had native ancestry, mostly Cherokee. Now that same college offers a degree in the Cherokee language. So while alot of crappy changes have happened, there is still some good stuff too.
I’m fascinated by Cherokee and other native languages. It was heartening to hear Diné bizaad spoken so widely when I was in Navajoland in May.
Yes the Navajo have managed to preserve their language magnificently. I think more so than any other tribe and I believe they are still the second largest tribe, so that means enough native speakers to keep the language alive. I have heard that the Crow also did a good job of language preservation. The Cherokee are still struggling. There are many who are interested, but it is one of the harder languages and the Cherokee are scattered around the world now, so hard to find native speakers to converse with. Out of a tribe of 440,000 I think we only have about 3,000 fluent speakers left and about 25,000 who speak some.
Lol...I should have known there would be a basket weaver on this blog! I bet you are good at it, too!
Ok, here's a few I found online: Masters in Bowling Industry Management, Bachelor's in Puppet Arts, Bachelor in Comic Arts, and everyone's favorite "Bachelor's in Create Your Own Major".
Although I suppose I'll be on thin ice there...no offense to the bowling alley owners out there, but I struggle to see what a Bowling Management degree would get you that a standard MBA wouldn't.
Thanks for setting me straight Rainbow!
No worries. I agree there are some very strange and seemingly useless degrees out there. I was okay as a weaver, because I worked really hard at it! But frankly I was better as a teacher, since I made so many mistakes myself and thus knew how to fix them. My own teacher, who was in her 80's when she taught me, learned to weave at 5 years old from her grandmother, so she was kinda impatient with mistakes.
I did not know this disaster was of Obama's making (I wasn't in the US then). Interesting.
Oh yes, he made a big show of all students should be able to go to college. His heart was in the right place on this one, as it is with most liberals generally, but obvious execution issues and unintended consequences were pretty easy to see even at the time.
Ah yes, no impulse control, that crowd.
Also add trade schools. I know someone who went through an audio engineering program, with repaid student loans, rather than college as a music major; he's now gainfully employed.
1) isn't making schools responsible giving student visits a break?
2) how does making schools responsible for unpaid loans drive down costs?
I agree making schools (or whomever is funding loans) responsible for defaults is a good idea. It will quickly sort out the issue of degrees that don't offer a positive ROI in terms of increased earning potential (i.e. probably most of them).
If student loans were dischargeable in bankruptcy, it seems to me that kids in way over their heads would have a way out, and still have societal consequences, but without being “forgiven” of anything. It could make lenders tighten up, too. Why should you be able to “chapter 7 away” your Macy’s bill but not your student loan? I read once in an advice column that a just-graduated Md died in a car crash, and her poor Mother was still stuck as co-signer with her daughter’s $100k student loan. The columnist advised parents to take out a life insurance policy on any child they would co-sign a student loan for. Sorry, but that’s just morally screwed up …
I understand “government-backed”; maybe they shouldn’t be … (?)
I'll never understand why anyone thinks it's better to take general education classes at any private university when you can take the exact same class at local colleges for $350. College algebra is the same no matter where you take it. Why pay more?
In part, high school counselors and other system toadies infer that community colleges are for losers.
I pushed trade schools and community colleges all the time, but it was an uphill struggle against the ‘accepted wisdom.’
At that age, going where your friends go, going where the parties are the best, and attending large football games in the fall tends to override common sense. It is unfortunate.
That, too
Partly, it's prestige and networking. Which are actual positive effects, though maybe not enough to make the additional costs worthwhile. I've not seen any data on this.
because most of the boomer and Gen X generation got brainwashed to think that the name of the school on your resume mattered more than what they actually taught you. So it was always a race to get the kids in there no matter the cost or future implications.
Speaking of wealth: Here's another kind of wealth -- Shakespeare --that's been depreciated.
The WSJ review of the new Folger library:
‘Shakespeare: Then and There, Here and Now’ Review: Dismantling the Master
The permanent exhibition at the Folger Shakespeare Library celebrates the playwright with its world-class collection of First Folios and other materials while leaving him oddly diminished.
By Edward Rothstein
June 30, 2025 at 5:08 pm ET
Inscribed on the grand neoclassical façade of the Folger Shakespeare Library is the famed tribute to the playwright by his contemporary, Ben Jonson: “Thou art a monument, without a tombe, / And art alive still, while thy booke doth live, / And we have wits to read, and praise to give.” Since 1932, this research library has been a monument to that monument. Its world-class collection of Shakespeare materials amassed by Henry Folger (1857-1930), chairman of Standard Oil of New York, and his wife, Emily (1858-1936), form the core of the library’s still-growing holdings, accompanied by an Elizabethan-inspired theater, exhibitions, and a publication program that includes widely used teaching editions of the plays.
Last year, the Folger reopened after an $80 million expansion that was really a transformation, adding for the first time a permanent exhibition along with new galleries for temporary shows (now featuring “How to Be a Power Player: Tudor Edition”—a playful survey of “social climbing” as a “competitive sport” in the age of Queen Elizabeth I). Peculiarly, though, it also presents us with a Shakespeare who doesn’t seem worth much attention.
This doesn’t mean there aren’t things worth attending to here. The new permanent exhibition, “Shakespeare: Then and There, Here and Now,” for example, displays the world’s largest collection of First Folios in one gallery. Dimly lighted behind a glass wall are 82 examples of this first collection of Shakespeare’s plays, printed in 1623, seven years after his death. Touch-screens guide us, exploring markings and scars left by four centuries of readers. The “Power Player” exhibition, too, is charming and suggestive.
But what of Shakespeare’s achievement? Aye, there’s the rub. These explorations of the Folios and Tudor power plays deal with secondary matters—the collection, the era’s sociology—and neither illuminates Shakespeare’s accomplishments. And while the permanent exhibition also includes a working model of a 17th-century printing press (along with an interactive simulation), it reveals nothing about the artistic or dramatic powers of the works printed. Another gallery primarily presents centuries of performance memorabilia.
One ambition of the new Folger, it seems, is to topple Shakespeare from his monumental status. Rather than mount stairs to a grand temple-like portal, visitors now descend on ADA-compliant ramps leading through small gardens to lower-level side-entrances. The entire grand Tudoresque Great Hall is now a Starbuckian (or Falstaffian?) coffee shop.
This is not just a symbolic leveling. The opening gallery of the permanent exhibition—the Folger’s main introduction to Shakespeare’s work—seems written by a middle-school teacher for a middle-school student, both burdened by grudges. “Who was Shakespeare?” reads the opening panel. “A hero? An icon? The name on a book you never wanted to open?” Why would you not want to open it? Is it off-putting because of its aura of elite achievement? Don’t worry, only faint praise is found here. Shakespeare, the panel continues, was “a writer, an actor, and a businessperson.” His reception has made him seem overly grand, or worse. And though his words “outlived him”—and two books on display show him avidly quoted as early as 1600—there is nothing too special about those words: “Sometimes they connected people, sometimes they divided people.” We are urged to “talk back to Shakespeare.”
That is what the Folger does, first implying guilt by association: “While Shakespeare was writing his plays,” reads one label, “England was colonizing this land that we are currently standing on.” Does it matter that this is scarcely shown to be relevant, since England’s colonization efforts were little more than a glint in Queen Elizabeth’s eye during the first part of the playwright’s career and even at his death in 1616 were still fairly insignificant? It is just preparation for our era’s most lurid curse: “For far too long,” we are told, “Shakespeare was seen as both the property of white culture and evidence of its supremacy.” We are shown examples of racism in the treatment of black actors (because of segregation, for example, John Gielgud could have lunch with Earle Hyman—the black star of Howard University’s 1951 “Hamlet”—only in Washington’s bus station). But no evidence is offered of Shakespeare as poster-boy for white supremacy or why any such misuse should be treated as his defining feature.
But that is the dominant theme. A centrally displayed bust shows Hyman (1926-2017) as Othello, a character he initially shunned (the label explains) as “a Black general falling for a white person’s deception.” A commissioned installation by the black artist Fred Wilson plays with symbolism: Through an Italianate black mirror, we see the reflection of an alabaster Queen Elizabeth I in George Gower’s 1579 portrait. Yet throughout, no insight is provided into Shakespeare’s racial metaphors and nothing shows how Shakespeare’s plays might transcend formulaic racial readings.
Is there any chance that the Folger’s new director since October, Farah Karim-Cooper, might give this exhibition, which she inherited, a warmer, more detailed approach, as is (partly) the case in her 2023 book, “The Great White Bard: How to Love Shakespeare While Talking About Race”? Perhaps. But in that volume Ms. Karim-Cooper is also determined that Shakespeare should never be hailed again as a “native genius”—an emblem of “English exceptionalism” and its implicit “whiteness.”
Whiteness, though, is hardly the point of Shakespeare’s genius or his reputation. So distinctive were Shakespeare’s powers that his writings, along with the contemporaneous King James Bible, shaped the English language. Almost a century and a half later Samuel Johnson, compiling his landmark dictionary, used more than 17,000 Shakespeare quotes, about 15% of all his citations. The U.S. was heir to that language along with the Enlightenment ideas it helped articulate. Emily Folger called Shakespeare “one of the wells from which we Americans draw our national thought, our faith and our hope.” That is why the Folger was built neighboring the U.S. Capitol, the Supreme Court and the Library of Congress. In its Great Hall, the coat of arms of Elizabeth is at one end, and the shield and eagle of the U.S. at the other; Shakespeare is their connection.
This seems to embarrass the new Folger, but that only means that Shakespeare was even greater than Ben Jonson affirmed in the Folger’s engraved encomium. His art is alive still, despite the fact that here there is scant praise to give, and few signs of wits to read.
Folder Library - owned by Amherst College, my Alma mater.
Amherst College, which made the front page of the NYT when copies of the Amherst Guide to Acceptable Speech were actually distributed to students and the spineless president of the college, Biddy Martin, simply said, “Oh, that wasn’t meant to go out, yet…” (or words to that effect. She’s left the presidency but maintains her seat on the Corporation at Harvard.
Our commencement speaker was the president of the Folger Library - What. A. Bore.
Verra Interesting.
Farah Karim-Cooper: is there a woker name anywhere?
Karim-Cooper seems to use she/her pronouns so not maximum woke.
Dang it!
A missed opportunity as selective use of source material could have portrayed Shakespeare as woke. For example, I think there's a critique of colonialism in 'The Tempest.' Caliban wants his island back! An understanding of capitalist economics in 'The Merchant of Venice,' as converting Jews would increase the price of pork. And so on.
Regine, they're not smart enough. What they do is repeat formulas.
Henry Folger was an accumulator in the worst sense of the word. He bought up every copy of the First Folio he could find, being unafraid to resort to deceit in order to add to his collection.
While he was alive, he horded his treasure. He was not particularly interested in sharing love or understanding of the works - just gathering more.
Since the English Restoration, all manor of manipulation had been done to the plays - to suit an actor, a fad, or societal whims. Folger's hording of the original source inhibited the work of actors and scholars who labored, during the late 1800s - early 1900s to restore the works to their true form.
The museum Folger endowed in his will is as much (or more) a monument to his own ego and obsession as an homage to Shakespeare.
The 2015 book, "The Millionaire and the Bard," if a bit too one-sided in its idolation of Folger, also accurately describes the rise of his obsession and hints at his motivations.
I am not the least surprised by the changes you describe. The library never had a clear mission, other than to boast of its precious holdings.
I doubt nothing you say -- I know little about Folger. But I know I hate imposed racial and feminist guilt trips that interfere with my enjoyment of museums.
Good to have your sharp wit back in play.
I agree on student debt.
Let the schools pick up the tab.
Gubmint is to blame as much as the schools. When Obama federalized the student loan game, the schools went on a spending bender, just look at admin positions pre and post. Pre federalization about 10:1, now it’s a little over 2:1
I agree.
I think your ratios are off, please check #’s.
I think a lot of the debt is based around where they go to college. I distinctly remember my Dad and I having the conversation about my college choices. Choice A was $23k/yr and Choice B was $12k/yr (1995). I was fortunate in that I had enough savings for either choice, however my Dad reminded me that there were expenses waiting for me after college. I made the less expensive college choice and am glad I did bc it started my own investment account and helped with graduate school, my wedding, buying a house. When speaking with other parents now about my own child’s college education, we have a budget and will make choices accordingly since the cost of many colleges these days has gotten to the point of ridiculous given starting salaries for most jobs.
I started out reading Money Magazine and watching Wall Street Week on PBS and both served me well. Then as I got more learned and had more assets to protect and invest - I turned to Morningstar which also worked quite well. Today Money is gone,PBS is a progressive mess and Morningstar has become all about ESG investing. Now I use Seeking Alpha but I wouldn’t suggest it to a novice because it is a free-for-all of investing advice and often very poor advice mixed in with the good stuff. I don’t know where new investors go to learn about investing - certainly not Cramer on CNBC.
Just like everything else nowadays, the internet. I learned from JL Collins, Mr. Money Mustache, Mad Fientist, etc. It has served me well.
Unsolicited advice, sorry, but I'd add that Fidelity is good as well. Best trading platform online IMO, plus, big PLUS, they are privately held still. Not being beholden to Wall Street gives them more flexibility than the publicly traded investment firms. Again all just my opinion.
Excellent advice regarding Seeking Alpha, they also have excellent tools but only once you pay up. I much prefer being able to read the transcripts of companies quarterly and annual presentations versus listen to the spin. It's much more clear what's really being said when you read them, versus listen to them.
Everyone should read the book Howard Marks published about how to not let emotions influence your investment approach and/or make you react to what is usually not in your best interests because the market did something. (The name escapes me, and I don't know which bookcase it's hiding in right now - sorry.) Smart guy.
I did a lot of research and thinking, and eventually went with Vanguard for my personal accounts. I have Fidelity for my 401k(s) that were set up by the company.
What I like about Fidelity is how helpful they are from a customer service perspective. I get a little less excited about the fees they charge, but that's by product so as long as you know what you are buying then you should be fine.
It's a good example of do your research and go with what fits your situation the best!
Seeking Alpha is good, I agree.
There are many good books on investing. I would develop a foundation with those rather than internet sources. For investors who want to avoid conflicts of interest, there are really three choices: Schwab, Fidelity and Vanguard.
Reverse Cramer on X always cracks me up since it always does better than Cramer.
I'm somewhat financially illiterate.
My partner day trades. He gives me tips. Tells me to check my stock account daily. But I honestly don't completely understand how it works, or even more to the point -- how to make it work to my advantage.
When he explains it to me, it goes in one ear and out the other. It's as if I can't grasp it literally and figuratively.
I need to read something that explains how to manage and profit from the stock market. But the prospect fills me with dread.
You are not alone! Investing takes patience and knowledge. When it come to finance all I know is"Don't spend what you don't have", and "Don't touch that chunk you have in CD". At 74 years of age, I am not rich, and my savings may not last, but I DO know that if I don't spend, and don't try being cute with investments, then my money will still be there when I need it.
The best book ever written about stock market investing (IMHO) is “A Random Walk Down Wall Street” by Burton Malkiel. He proves that throwing darts at the NYSE listings will net you as much as listening to an “advisor”; probably more because you only have to pay for the darts. I’ve followed his advice by staying in diversified mutual funds and I am very happy with the results.
For anyone not comfortable with investing, go to ChatGPT and ask it how to diversify your investing. It will give you percentages by type of investment, right down to picking funds for you.
Again IMHO, day trading is playing with fire. It can be fun if you are using “fun” money but after all it’s just gambling.
I think you hit the real "trick" right on the head. Over time, no financial planner can beat the S&P 500 or a total stock market fund.
That and the advice that it is NOT "timing the market" it's "time in the market" that provides the growth.
Boring tends to win out over time.
Yes. And dollar cost averaging. Put the same $ amount in at regular intervals so that you’re buying fewer shares when their price is high, more when the price is low. It’s tempting to try to “buy on the dips” and “sell on the peaks” but that’s a fool’s game.
I'd add that many people consider John Bogle's books a good place to start. He was 100% through and through a mutual fund investor, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Common Sense would be an excellent place to start, and it's written for the common folks, not the investment community. Gets a little deeper and technical towards the end, but the title really is spot on.
Day trading is for crazy people or someone who really really knows what they’re doing. For most average Americans, I would say stay the hell away from day trading and absolutely do not check your stock portfolio every day. You’ll make yourself crazy.
⬆️ X 💯
Most day traders are really just gamblers and end up losing their ass. Not a good option.
We had a friend who traded his day job of computer something which made him a ton for day trading and lost his shirt.
I’m with you. While I have the interest in growing my money and not losing any, I have zero interest in the how. I pay an advisor to manage my accounts which are doing very well and growing. It’s hard in this economy to lose money so we are all fortunate in this regard.
Probably it pays to have had Depression-era parents who never bit off more than they could chew.
Maybe it's easy for me to say because I don't have kids; but I also don't have cable TV or pricey gadgets, and I do my own gardening and home-repair chores except when I can't, and I wear my clothes forever; but spouse and I pay our monthly credit card bill on time and in full.
We paid off our house in three years at a time when stocks were falling and it seemed sensible to use the cash to get rid of that interest payment.
I know: We've been luckier than most.
My most successful investment was to purchase a 2-bed, one bath condo in SoCal for $125K in 1998. It sold two years ago for $775K when I retired. We purchased a home in Georgia for cash and paid off our car loan. We are living on our combined Social Security of around $3,200 a month, augmented by my part-time job. We need nothing and are living comfortably for now. But the future? Who knows...
Financial literacy is now a required class in Florida high schools, along with Civics in 7th grade, high school, and college thanks to DeSantis.
Perfect.
Start is high school, I agree.
Excellent policy decision.
He's done a lot for school. I'm still seeing leftist curriculum regarding climate and social justice policy, but it's getting better. If he could just finally and completely remove phones from school and remove the stupid testing requirements, we would be all set.
We always valued the advice of owning your home and I helped our daughters with a down payment as soon as they started working. They learned about different mortgages, refinancing to a lower rate and never missing a payment.
I was introduced to financial literacy through Crown Ministries. A friend needed a co-teacher for this night class, based on scriptural principles. I ended up doing 1 on 1 counseling for people who wanted to get out of debt. The hardest part for me, as an independent contractor, was making a budget, since my monthly income varied widely. It served me well though. My favorite encounter was with a young teacher and tennis coach not really sure how much money she made. She paid off her car, paid off other debt with the no longer car payments and was confident enough to use her credit card for Christmas trips home to visit family. My worst case was a husband and wife, both highly paid professionals, whose phones were turned off regularly for non payment. They had 3 car payments between the two and were ridiculously wasteful with unchecked daily expenditures. One refused to change any behaviors. The other was in tears. The most important lesson I learned was this; For I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am in. I know how to get along with humble means and I also know how to live in prosperity.
I love that you taught this course! Established churches offer classes like this or Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University courses all the time. Many times free, sometimes for a nominal cost. (Probably best to stay away from the trendy "mega churches" that preach a prosperity gospel, as these are the one's that end up on the nightly news.)
A good community bank will also offer everything from budgeting classes to get out of debt planning to mortgages and all the way to investing.
If people would just dust off their critical thinking hats, put them on, and go to these options they'd be in much better shape.
My small Bible study church turned into a Mega church. It stopped us from offering our cost of materials course and instead offered a ponzi scheme masquerading as financial advice. Like, Hello. If your goal is to be a pastor, minister, writer, thinker, whatever, heavy debt is not going to get you there. I left when I discovered the amount of tithes being forwarded to Washington D.C. lobbyists. Turned me away from Religion, but I have made my peace with God.
This is one reason why premarital counseling is so important. When I married my first husband, I had no idea how far in debt he was. He failed to disclose any of this before we got married. But of course I didn’t ask either. As we all know, financial problems are a main driver of divorce.
I was told about 40 years ago that most all marital problems could be solved with an unlimited checkbook. Not if the one wielding the checkbook is a sadomasochist. What we didn't know before we got married...
We finally got out from under our credit card debt a few years ago by using principles (such as budgeting) taught in our church's class on the subject. Reminds me that we need to draw up a budget again. With the kids out on their own and my father-in-law now deceased, we've been skating along, probably spending more than we should day-to-day, just because we can.
That's a good reminder. I'm coming to a BIG CHANGE and need to re set new goals.
Living within your means is a very underrated concept that should be stressed early. Credit lines and the consumer mindset make life so much harder for some people than it needs to be. My wife is constantly telling me about people who are likely making less than us but who have more or nicer "stuff" than us and asking, "How can they afford that?" to which I always reply, "They can't".
I also remember reading somewhere years ago that some study showed that happiness levels started to plateau and even decrease above an annual household income of around $75,000. That number is probably a little higher now.
I think it's on topic here, but I'd like to point out that here in Fairfax County VA kids in high school have to take a financial literacy course to graduate. Thats a step in the right direction IMO. I bitch and moan about the crazy cost of living here and the taxes, but every once in a while they get it right. Thanks all.
Perfect.
Good for Fairfax County.
Must be a Virginia thing. Here in Southwest Virginia, our county schools also require an Economics and personal finance class for graduation.
Kids, and everyone else, should be taught the beauty of compound interest. Example: Assume that every month, starting at age 18, you had invested $100 into an S&P 500 Index fund. At age 55 today, you’d have $536,467. Why that impressive figure? Because the S&P has historically grown by about 10 percent, and we’re adding reinvested dividends. We got to that figure simply by having the discipline to set aside $100 each month. (You can find such calculations online).
But how to teach this? A personal finance class in high school, which could cover a myriad of topics by using spreadsheets and mock tax returns and bank accounts.
One hurdle to overcome is that such topics are a feature of (gasp!) capitalism, the economic system that’s perpetually under attack - but has proven to be superior to all other options.
Great point, and not just because it was what I was going to post. I think a big obstacle is the widespread math phobia I see in my students. Compound interest involves an exponent which automatically shuts some people down, unfortunately. Even though my classes are about population estimation and things like that, I try to make the link to other practical things, so tell them the equation we use to project a population into the future is the same one for calculating compound interest on a loan or investment.
🎯
Good comments, Mark.
I think it’s about the basics of money management. I took business classes in high school, bookkeeping etc. It’s about keeping track of your money. I’ve been single all my life so it was my responsibility to stay solvent. I never bought anything on credit that I didn’t already have the money to pay for it. The exceptions were mortgages and auto loans. I don’t know if they still do this but I opted for bi monthly payments on my mortgage. Paid it off sooner and saved a bunch of money. I brown bagged my lunch every day. I managed without those new shiny things. It paid off. These times are so consumer driven that I don’t fault those who fall victim to it. But tax payers shouldn’t be forced to cover those expenses.
Bi monthly payments on your mortgage, excellent.
Yep. I love to eat out, or even grab a coffee, but that's a major expense driver. I have curtailed a lot
COVID and remote work (now part time in office) have helped cut the daily expenses as lot.
If you worked in Silicon Valley you'd realize that you have to cover most of your meals (local companies tend to be in loco parentis); my costs went up!
Ha! A lifestyle of which I've heard rumors, alas, yet to experience!
Accurate rumors should include the 12-hour workday. Or, if at a start-up, 'if you don't come in on Saturday don't bother to come in on Sunday.'
😂
My dad gave me a copy of the spreadsheet he used to track cash flow and I use it every month to track income and expenses. It’s great to see where all the money goes and to physically see any debt. I think that’s one problem with the cashless society, we never physically see our money disappearing anymore so it hurts less somehow.
I taught an informal financial literacy class for young adults and was somewhat surprised at their lack of basic knowledge. The biggest things I talked about were: credit card debt is hell, explaining what a mortgage is and how it works; how to invest in their company’s 401K plan (especially the younger you are the higher the percentage of equities you should have in your 401K), and buying vs leasing a car. Those things (and basic math skills!) should be taught in high school.
For today’s kids, more modern things probably need to be taught. Fraud awareness, Crypto, online savings accounts that actually pay interest vs brick and mortar banks that don’t, using software to track your finances and budgets (I use Quicken but there are a lot of others now), explaining Zelle, Venmo, Paypal, etc.
Good for you! Thank you for doing this to help younger adults!
When I moved to Birmingham, I over-doubled my income. I wanted a mortgage of a certain size. The person at the bank kept telling me that I could afford a MUCH larger loan. I knew what my guaranteed minimum salary would be and based my house on that. She just couldn’t understand my thinking. I couldn’t understand hers.
I use two credit cards—one at CostCo and the other for American Airlines. Everything else is a debit card. I’m essentially paying cash for just about everything. The only debts I’ve ever carried were mortgages and car payments, which are sorta short-term mortgages themselves. I’ve always been terrified of running up debt. I just didn’t buy things I couldn’t afford.
Which, it seems, makes me different from most Americans. In 2008, I filled my 4Runner’s gas tank at CostCo. It was 80 bucks. Ouch! Looked to me that many people will have a hard time with it. And that they’d have to choose between paying off debts and be able to get around town. Seemed sensible to me that Visa and Mastercard would be having a problem, but a friend who knows about money assured me that that wasn’t at all the case.. They were solid, successful companies. If I wanted to short sell anything, I should do that with bank stocks since banks, not credit card companies are the entities that hold the debt. Bank stocks?? Banks don’t fail! [imagine forehead slap]
But that's exactly what ~did~ happen, as so well described in Michael Lewis’ excellent book, The Big Short. And also in the movie of the same name. Some people were just braver than I was investing-wise. Coulda, shoulda….
What about “financial literacy”? Most stuff is common sense, which gets consistently ignored. Andrew Carnegie got it right (for the most part) when he said, “put all your eggs in one basket. And watch that basket!” He meant, of course, Carnegie Steel, not current market investing. But the principle is correct: if you don’t understand it, don’t let someone pressure you into buying it. He’s probably no more savvy than you are, but he might be more persuasive.
Joe, one thing I would recommend. Don’t use debit cards to pay for things because they’re much more susceptible to fraud. I use a credit card to pay for everything and then pay the credit card off in full at the end of each month.
I agree, I don’t like debit cards either.
I haven’t had a problem with them to date. How does debit card fraud happen? I’m unfamiliar with that.
But thanks for the tip.
Since your debit card is tied directly to your checking account, if someone makes a fraudulent purchase, you’ve literally lost the cash.
It takes way more effort to get the bank to give you your money back when fraud occurs connected to a debit card rather than just a plain old credit card.
We've never had that problem ourselves, but there was a rash of debit card fraud here a few years ago--either skimming or a store clerk committing fraud.
The ideal is to use credit cards for all purchases, then pay them off every month. Then you get the benefits without the interest. I'm still trying to move us toward that, but we need to have some better plans in place before we go whole hog.
It only takes once, and all your money in your checking account is gone and you may even be on the hook for overdrafts. We use a credit card for everything. You can set alerts for spending limits to notify you if you might be getting a bit heavy handed on the easy money spending. Plus the apps make it really easy to keep an eye on how much you've spent and where, and you can set up autopay (from the same account you would be paying from with debit) to ensure you never miss a bill and are then left with interest to pay. Credit cards are definitely the way to go. We have a Costco card, an Amazon card, a Discover that we rarely use anymore, and we mostly use a Fidelity card that gives us 2% cash back on every purchase anywhere. If you spend 1,500 a month on gas, groceries, whatever else that can be purchased with a credit card, that would be $360/year in free money.
https://www.fidelity.com/spend-save/visa-signature-card
There may be better cards out there, but we got annoyed with trying to keep up with what we got cash back on this month and just went with the highest straight cash back on any purchase offer I could find.
I agree. I’ve had more fraud issues with CC than my debit card, especially now that there are chip readers. I don’t like the gas or store machines where you have to insert your card bc of skimmers but the upside to using BofA for a bank is that they are really good with fraud protection.
Same here, that's what I do. I don't like any company having access to my bank accounts. Plus, most CC give you 1-3% back on your purchases.
💯
Some even offer zero interest on large purchases. Recently at Home Depot bought new kitchen appliances, almost $4k. 24 months zero interest if paid within that term…yes I will use your money to spread it out.
I asked if there was a cash discount if paid on day of purchase - nope
You can buy a 4K T-Bill with their money, too.
Just be careful with these. We use offers like this all the time, but I've read that if you don't pay the set amount that would get you paid off in the 24 months and, for example, decide to only pay the minimum one month, they will retroactively add all the interest you've been accruing in the background to your account.
I use only low-limit credit cards for online purchases. I see that as an extra layer of protection against theft.
Celia, you should get a credit card that gives cash back. And pay it off monthly.
Ours do. And we do. But we need to train ourselves to limit our spending in such a way that we can safely use the credit cards instead of debit cards.
Yes, credit cards have built in safeguards that protect the user, such as $50 maximum liability for fraud (though I’ve never had a credit card company charge that). I only have credit cards that pay me to use them, with between 2 and 5 % cash back, depending on the “category” I’m purchasing. I have never used my debit card.
We have always made a point of buying the least expensive house that would meet our space needs. The banks are always pushing you to buy the most expensive house THEY think you can afford. But we've always felt that we wanted to make sure we could keep a roof over our heads, even if we had a hit to our income. And I always made a point of paying extra toward the principle every month, even if it was only $5.
Joe, we were just in Birmingham. We found a great new foodie restaurant downtown called Bayonet.
The Big Short is brilliant, terrifying and hard cold truth.
For starters, it would be great if kids — and adults — understood that wealth fundamentally is: a measure of a person’s intelligence and labor. Money is a vehicle to facilitate the trading of the fruits of both. A consumer pays according to the value he/she places on the product. You capitalize on your labor and smarts and make a better product, then you should demand and receive top dollar. You slack off, prepare to get zilch for your non-effort. Likewise, you should consider and value any wealth you hold as a manifestation of your sweat and smarts.
Would we be more literate if we first understood that what we exchange in a transaction is a piece of ourselves?
My husband and I have two kids. We both tend to skin-flintishness. We raised both by the same rules. Daughter has been able to buy a little house and car on a charter school teacher’s salary. Son spends fifty even though he has five in his pocket and zero in the bank. She learned her lessons and weighs whether she really needs that shiny bauble whenever it’s dangled in front of her. He can’t pass a Jamba Juice stand or Toyota dealership without being triggered.
Faith, 💯!
So many people will think long and hard about a $500 purchase, for example, but they literally think nothing of the $5, $10 and $20 purchases that they make every single day at Starbucks or Dunkin or buying lunch out.
Watching those unnecessary small daily purchases is one of the things I learned from the Dave Ramsey program.
Well being lifetime poor used to automatically mean you didn't spend even 5 dollars without serious consideration. Nowadays I watch the 'poor' around me spend hundreds, even thousands on fireworks every year and buy other unecessary stuff all the time. One thing I have learned over a lifetime of very little money is that I may not have financial literacy and I might have made some unwise decisions re career and education when young, but I am also pretty much immune to the carrot of shiny new things I 'must' buy.
So true. People waste so much money on those “shiny” things.
Agree! I was stunned when I found out how much tattoos cost. I never imagined that a lot of people would be spending that much money on a tattoo sleeve.
Oh my gosh! The number of people covered in tattoos, that I know cost a fortune, that clearly look like they don’t have two nickels to rub together. WTF?!?
I’m astonished as well. They wear their wealth on their skin and over time it fades or stretches or sags. And most all of them are black ink and just look dirty. I think it’s an addiction for some reason but a stupid one. Plus can ink injected into your skin, which is an organ, be that good for you?
Ever read Your Money or Your Life. It's essentially that exact concept. You are trading your time (your life) for money, so when you look at a purchase, it should really be "how many hours of my life am I willing to trade for this (fill in the blank)". Someone making $20/hr after taxes who drinks a $5 coffee every day is giving up almost 4 days of their life every year just for coffee.
The question of what to do about financial literacy.
I think it starts at home, with parents. My dad did a very nice job teaching us everything we needed to know. It worked better on my brother and sister than it did on me, but by the time I was 35 I started to realize that dad was right all along.
Schools, churches, and other community organizations also need to understand that many community banks and credit unions LOVE to provide free financial literacy classes. I know, I've taught many of those myself and designed courses for others to deliver.
YouTube is a very good resource, as long as you make sure you critically think through what you are being told. I've learned a ton through Geoff Schmidt, Devin Carroll, The Money Guys, Dave Ramsey, and Erin Talks Money. If you want to learn how to spot bad financial advice, many of these channels will do "Tik Toc Financial Advice" reaction videos...and the react videos are typically pretty funny. Learning what not to do through a humorous lens is good.
When I have grandkids, hopefully I do one day, I'm going to be talking about how financial education starts at home, extends to the church, how to select a reputable community bank or credit union, then add in a dose of humor on YouTube or Tik Tok react videos from reputable sources. When they get a little older, give a couple of well curated books and offer to pay for a Financial Peace University course for them.
Then, if they screw it up, I will be able to say I did my best!
In theory, it sounds good to say financial literacy starts with parents, but the reality is most parents don’t have a clue.
My parents were terrible with money. My mother never saw a credit card she didn’t like or need and my dad had a very expensive gun hobby that really somebody on a blue-collar salary couldn’t afford.
Parents don’t need to be geniuses to pass along basic financial wisdom. Only finance cars and houses. Pay your credit cards monthly. Put aside a fixed amount each paycheck in an index fund, increase with every pay raise. Reinvest dividends.
These basic rules will take care of 80% of potential problems.
Yes, but what I’m saying is many parents don’t do the things you said. I worked with one woman who had $40,000 in credit card debt and seemed to think nothing of it.
I guess. Here we’re talking about parents who walk away from mortgages, expect to be made whole after poor investment decisions and demand their student debt is written off. Without going down the moral hazard rabbit hole a failure to honor one’s word is a growing problem and a glaring red flag for the future.
I agree with you that many parents are as, or more, clueless than their kids when it comes to finances. I was lucky; my dad was an accountant and while he was too risk averse he was great with money.
I'm just the guy who thinks that money matters, just like changing a tire, knowing what to put into a good toolbox, how to do your own laundry, and how to cook a few basic things, are things that parents should be learning themselves so they can teach their children.
I guess my thought on what to fix is more aspirational, but I think if more parents would even have the guts to say "let's learn this together" we'd be in a better place.
My parents were careful with money, but they never talked frankly with me about it. And they had both grown up in the Depression, so they wouldn't have dreamed of investing in the stock market.