You can keep whatever advice your mother told you. I'm sure that's engraved on your heart rather than taking up storage space in a paper or electronic file.
Otherwise, you're probably better off pitching every single piece you saved that tells you to invest in real estate (!), play brinksmanship with your credit cards and then do an easy bankruptcy, or get all the equity of out your house to finance new self-indulgence. I just spent an hour culling my financial article clippings and was discouraged by how time-sensitive all the well-meant advice was. The financial situation of this country has changed dramatically in the last ten years. The real estate bubble and its burst caused dramatic spending and equally dramatic regrets. Practically nothing about finance that was written before Lehman Brothers went down in 2008 is worth keeping, because at that moment, all the tried-and-true theories went out the window.
Nothing dates and becomes irrelevant quicker than specific financial advice. Laws have changed affecting credit and bankruptcy in particular, so consulting old advice that cites prior legal rights could be a crucial mistake. Holding on to dated expectations is just as foolish. Think of all those old retirement calculators that imagine you can average 10% interest on your investments. Try getting 5% today.
It's a sad world at the moment. Keeping around old personal finance advice that was keyed to a time of much fuller employment and wild credit card spending on consumables isn't going to increase happiness or give anyone pointers on how to live today and in the future. We return instead to the tried and true, the more general advice: Live below your means. Save as if trouble is around the bend. It might be.
Tossing all that now-useless advice in the recycle bin felt good.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Worrying about Saving for Retirement
Do you worry a lot about saving for your retirement? Neither do I. Are we idiots?
No. Some of us will die before we can retire. Some of us will die only a few years later. People born during the baby boom---the group about to reach retirement age now and in the next few years---can be expected to live another for 20 years or so. Except if they are already dead, that is. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, those currently alive have a better life expectancy than those born in the year they were born. What this means is that even though life expectancy for baby boomers was circa 70 years when we were born, it now is circa 80 years simply because we (individually) aren't dead yet.
This presents an interesting puzzle. People are always dying. Although we have a better chance of living to be 80 than we did at birth, again, some of us won't make it. So how do we plan for retirement? Most personal finance counselors would advise us to plan as if we are going to live to be 90 or even 100. Some of us will, and we don't want to run out of money and have to live on cat food in some miserable rented room in a rat-infested inner city slum. Just painting a horrifying future to contemplate. No worries. It won’t happen to you.
Anyway, if you retire at 65, the magic number that no longer holds any magic, you’ll still have to wait a year or two to collect your full Social Security, so why do it? If you retire even later, at age 70, you can collect a higher Social Security benefit because you waited, and you’ll have had more years in which to put away more savings. Sounds great, yes? It is, unless you’re one of the unlucky baby boomers who dies about when expected when we were born, or even earlier. In which case you just wasted your last years working when you could have spent them living it up in retirement. Dang.
Truth is, the joker in the deck is not really whether you die when expected circa your 1946–1964 birth, but whether you get seriously ill. It is possible to spend down quite a decent fortune on medical care unless you spend it first on very good medical insurance. And, supposedly, unless you make the effort beforehand to invest in preventative health care and self care, such as eating right (however that is defined this week), getting regular exercise that doesn’t tear up your body, and so on. Still, whether you get cancer or have a heart attack or are run over by a truck remains rather random.
Meanwhile, what should you do about saving for retirement? And about working until retirement? Look at your own personal circumstances, not those of the mass of Americans. Some of us will receive substantial pensions. Some of us have very nice savings, inheritances, paid-off houses, and more. Some of us have hardworking or wealthy spouses, or grown children who've made it big and can turn around and help their parents. Our circumstances vary. Why shouldn't our preparations for retirement vary, too?
Mainstream media advice-givers keep painting a picture of gloom and doom, saying our money will inevitably run out. These experts tell us not even a million dollars in savings is going to be enough. A million dollars. It still sounds like a lot of money to most of us, because it is. Advice-givers usually offer whatever the current wisdom is about investing. Sometimes it’s not good advice because the deal is not in our favor. Sometimes, the tide of affairs works against us. Hasn't anyone yet figured out that if millions of people flock to a sweet deal, the sheer weight of their participation causes it to tank? Regardless, nobody can foretell the future. Seemingly solid investments can and do go sour. Companies that are deemed rock solid go bankrupt.
Should we be terrified of our future unless we are immensely wealthy? Are we all going to die broke? I don’t think so. The scary part about retirement is not running out of money, because we all will have some income. Even people who do not qualify for Social Security (and that would be who?) are likely to qualify for other government assistance. What is scary about retirement is the finite quality of our income. Those of us who have never successfully lived within a budget finally have to learn a new approach to spending. That’s a lesson the baby boom generation has been spectacularly bad at learning so far.
We could try that now. Live within our means, or a little under, and save the difference. Build up a cushion for the future. Who knows? We might save up that million dollars yet. Some of us will sleep better, too.
No. Some of us will die before we can retire. Some of us will die only a few years later. People born during the baby boom---the group about to reach retirement age now and in the next few years---can be expected to live another for 20 years or so. Except if they are already dead, that is. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, those currently alive have a better life expectancy than those born in the year they were born. What this means is that even though life expectancy for baby boomers was circa 70 years when we were born, it now is circa 80 years simply because we (individually) aren't dead yet.
This presents an interesting puzzle. People are always dying. Although we have a better chance of living to be 80 than we did at birth, again, some of us won't make it. So how do we plan for retirement? Most personal finance counselors would advise us to plan as if we are going to live to be 90 or even 100. Some of us will, and we don't want to run out of money and have to live on cat food in some miserable rented room in a rat-infested inner city slum. Just painting a horrifying future to contemplate. No worries. It won’t happen to you.
Anyway, if you retire at 65, the magic number that no longer holds any magic, you’ll still have to wait a year or two to collect your full Social Security, so why do it? If you retire even later, at age 70, you can collect a higher Social Security benefit because you waited, and you’ll have had more years in which to put away more savings. Sounds great, yes? It is, unless you’re one of the unlucky baby boomers who dies about when expected when we were born, or even earlier. In which case you just wasted your last years working when you could have spent them living it up in retirement. Dang.
Truth is, the joker in the deck is not really whether you die when expected circa your 1946–1964 birth, but whether you get seriously ill. It is possible to spend down quite a decent fortune on medical care unless you spend it first on very good medical insurance. And, supposedly, unless you make the effort beforehand to invest in preventative health care and self care, such as eating right (however that is defined this week), getting regular exercise that doesn’t tear up your body, and so on. Still, whether you get cancer or have a heart attack or are run over by a truck remains rather random.
Meanwhile, what should you do about saving for retirement? And about working until retirement? Look at your own personal circumstances, not those of the mass of Americans. Some of us will receive substantial pensions. Some of us have very nice savings, inheritances, paid-off houses, and more. Some of us have hardworking or wealthy spouses, or grown children who've made it big and can turn around and help their parents. Our circumstances vary. Why shouldn't our preparations for retirement vary, too?
Mainstream media advice-givers keep painting a picture of gloom and doom, saying our money will inevitably run out. These experts tell us not even a million dollars in savings is going to be enough. A million dollars. It still sounds like a lot of money to most of us, because it is. Advice-givers usually offer whatever the current wisdom is about investing. Sometimes it’s not good advice because the deal is not in our favor. Sometimes, the tide of affairs works against us. Hasn't anyone yet figured out that if millions of people flock to a sweet deal, the sheer weight of their participation causes it to tank? Regardless, nobody can foretell the future. Seemingly solid investments can and do go sour. Companies that are deemed rock solid go bankrupt.
Should we be terrified of our future unless we are immensely wealthy? Are we all going to die broke? I don’t think so. The scary part about retirement is not running out of money, because we all will have some income. Even people who do not qualify for Social Security (and that would be who?) are likely to qualify for other government assistance. What is scary about retirement is the finite quality of our income. Those of us who have never successfully lived within a budget finally have to learn a new approach to spending. That’s a lesson the baby boom generation has been spectacularly bad at learning so far.
We could try that now. Live within our means, or a little under, and save the difference. Build up a cushion for the future. Who knows? We might save up that million dollars yet. Some of us will sleep better, too.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
A Signing Bonus Instead of Unemployment Checks?
Todd G. Buchholz, a former White House economist, had a huge spread in the Washington Post’s Outlook section recently about his idea of paying people who have been unemployed for 26 weeks to take jobs instead of continuing to draw unemployment benefits. “Will Work for Signing Bonus” contains a number of interesting ideas, and his math appears to compute, but alas, I don’t think Buchholz realizes just how nasty the job market is today. After being unemployed for half a year most people are considered dead meat to potential employers. No offers are being made. Many of the long-term unemployed aren’t even getting interviews, because people who already have jobs are openly preferred. Next come people who have left jobs within the past month or so. People who have been out of work long-term reside at the bottom of the employment heap.
The crux of the problem is most people are not sufficiently humbled immediately after losing their jobs. They don’t grab at the first thing that offers, and in this economy, likely they ought to. If the new job is a poor fit, the person can continue the job hunt from a position of strength—that of being employed. Unfortunately, most people who lose their jobs are in a state of shock when it happens, and they need time to recover. Time is what they don’t have in our fast-changing society. We have so many safety nets, not only unemployment benefits but also credit cards and spouses with jobs, that many recently laid-off workers aren’t quite desperate enough right after the event. They should be. This is a buyer’s market and employers have their pick. A resume is viewed as fresh for a month or so, but after two to three months, the resume is definitely sour. People who lose their jobs should settle for whatever is offered within the first two months, because there may not be any more offers for a long, long time. If ever. I know it sounds awful, but it’s the practical thing to do unless unemployment benefits happen to pay more than the new job would.
Buchholz wants to pay people bonuses to take a job, but impose an enormous penalty if the person quits or changes jobs in under a year. This presumably is to encourage people not to game the system, as has been done with the first-time homebuyers' credit and various other tax advantages. I think it would be more fair to require the worker to pay back the bonus with interest, raising that interest over time if payback is dilatory. Regardless of the details, Buchholz’s idea of giving unemployed people a financial incentive to take jobs instead of extended unemployment benefits is interesting. If it worked, it would save the government money and add to government coffers as the employed person began paying income taxes again.
Should we all rush out and take whatever jobs we are offered? Yes. If the worst your resume shows is a little job-hopping rather than a lengthy period of unemployment, you have a competitive advantage over other job seekers. And meanwhile, you have a job.
With one caveat. This strategy does not apply to low-level retail employment. The field is not stable enough, and your prospects are not good enough, to give up anything to enter it. In many cases, even working full-time at a big box store will not be enough to pay the rent if you previously held a moderately good office job. Also, I've done plenty of tax returns for people who only lasted for half a day at McDonald's or Home Depot. Firing people from these jobs is dead easy and happens all the time. Many out-of-work people are nagged to go work at these places, but accepting such underemployment is a strategy of last resort, to be taken only after all other avenues have been explored, including using up all unemployment benefits, getting a roommate, and selling possessions.
The crux of the problem is most people are not sufficiently humbled immediately after losing their jobs. They don’t grab at the first thing that offers, and in this economy, likely they ought to. If the new job is a poor fit, the person can continue the job hunt from a position of strength—that of being employed. Unfortunately, most people who lose their jobs are in a state of shock when it happens, and they need time to recover. Time is what they don’t have in our fast-changing society. We have so many safety nets, not only unemployment benefits but also credit cards and spouses with jobs, that many recently laid-off workers aren’t quite desperate enough right after the event. They should be. This is a buyer’s market and employers have their pick. A resume is viewed as fresh for a month or so, but after two to three months, the resume is definitely sour. People who lose their jobs should settle for whatever is offered within the first two months, because there may not be any more offers for a long, long time. If ever. I know it sounds awful, but it’s the practical thing to do unless unemployment benefits happen to pay more than the new job would.
Buchholz wants to pay people bonuses to take a job, but impose an enormous penalty if the person quits or changes jobs in under a year. This presumably is to encourage people not to game the system, as has been done with the first-time homebuyers' credit and various other tax advantages. I think it would be more fair to require the worker to pay back the bonus with interest, raising that interest over time if payback is dilatory. Regardless of the details, Buchholz’s idea of giving unemployed people a financial incentive to take jobs instead of extended unemployment benefits is interesting. If it worked, it would save the government money and add to government coffers as the employed person began paying income taxes again.
Should we all rush out and take whatever jobs we are offered? Yes. If the worst your resume shows is a little job-hopping rather than a lengthy period of unemployment, you have a competitive advantage over other job seekers. And meanwhile, you have a job.
With one caveat. This strategy does not apply to low-level retail employment. The field is not stable enough, and your prospects are not good enough, to give up anything to enter it. In many cases, even working full-time at a big box store will not be enough to pay the rent if you previously held a moderately good office job. Also, I've done plenty of tax returns for people who only lasted for half a day at McDonald's or Home Depot. Firing people from these jobs is dead easy and happens all the time. Many out-of-work people are nagged to go work at these places, but accepting such underemployment is a strategy of last resort, to be taken only after all other avenues have been explored, including using up all unemployment benefits, getting a roommate, and selling possessions.
Monday, June 13, 2011
How to Get Out of Debt
1. Stop buying on credit.
2. Contact your creditors and push to get your interest rates lowered.
3. Balance transfer your high-interest debt to lower-interest accounts.
4. Pay off your highest-interest debt first.
This simple advice presumes you have income. Maybe not enough income, but there's a paycheck coming in steadily, and that gives you some choices.
Another set of tips to try:
1. Change up your eating habits. Do not buy food at the same places, or the same food. Instead, try to work from a budgeted food amount outward. If you have $100 for food this week, what can that buy you, and how long can that last, and how often must you shop, and is food preparation involved?
2. Sell any vehicle on which you are making payments, and buy a used vehicle outright. It has to be in good condition. You have to be reasonably certain it won't beggar you with repair costs. But a paid-for car is usually cheaper to own and run than a new car.
3. Hold a yard sale (or post on Craigslist, which is free) and sell anything you no longer need or want. It may surprise you how little people are willing to pay for your used goods. They may not buy them at all. A good reminder not to spend so much money on buying all that new stuff in the first place.
4. Empty your clothes closets into your suitcases. What you own doesn't fit? Reduce it until it does, and never buy a piece of clothing again without getting rid of a piece. Be mindful of this when you shop for clothing, because it is easy to think you need multiples when the truth is you don't. If your suitcases are full, you have enough clothes.
Add your own tips for getting out of debt if you've got 'em.
2. Contact your creditors and push to get your interest rates lowered.
3. Balance transfer your high-interest debt to lower-interest accounts.
4. Pay off your highest-interest debt first.
This simple advice presumes you have income. Maybe not enough income, but there's a paycheck coming in steadily, and that gives you some choices.
Another set of tips to try:
1. Change up your eating habits. Do not buy food at the same places, or the same food. Instead, try to work from a budgeted food amount outward. If you have $100 for food this week, what can that buy you, and how long can that last, and how often must you shop, and is food preparation involved?
2. Sell any vehicle on which you are making payments, and buy a used vehicle outright. It has to be in good condition. You have to be reasonably certain it won't beggar you with repair costs. But a paid-for car is usually cheaper to own and run than a new car.
3. Hold a yard sale (or post on Craigslist, which is free) and sell anything you no longer need or want. It may surprise you how little people are willing to pay for your used goods. They may not buy them at all. A good reminder not to spend so much money on buying all that new stuff in the first place.
4. Empty your clothes closets into your suitcases. What you own doesn't fit? Reduce it until it does, and never buy a piece of clothing again without getting rid of a piece. Be mindful of this when you shop for clothing, because it is easy to think you need multiples when the truth is you don't. If your suitcases are full, you have enough clothes.
Add your own tips for getting out of debt if you've got 'em.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
No New Credit Cards Without Gifts
How glad I am not to be caught in the toils of the credit card companies. Another offer came in the mail today, full of talk of penalty fees and other disclosures of punitive rules if I do not pay my balance in full and on time. Frankly, I can’t see any reason to apply for this credit card. It didn’t even seem that the credit card company was making any effort to sell me on their card, other than the usual balance transfer offers. I have made use of balance transfers in the past to my advantage, but recently I decided that keeping some money liquid made more sense than borrowing it from these companies. Especially since at the middle-class level of investments where I sit, the earnings on my savings currently are pitiful.
Yes, pitiful. Less than 1%. Sometimes less than .1% Far less than the 3% or 4% a credit card would charge for a cash advance. Obviously in this economic climate it is cheaper to use my own money to finance what I want to buy. What is the point of saving when one’s money cannot earn money? Ah, I know. To have cash when I need it. Presto. The reason to keep rainy day savings in liquid form, not locked away in CDs or stocks.
This isn’t always the best strategy. If and when the Big Inflation that everyone predicts actually happens, it may make more sense to get some quick profits from CDs or other guaranteed investments. Maybe banks will hand out toasters for opening CDs, the way they did in the inflationary 1970s. Not that I need another toaster, but we all like free gifts, don’t we?
That’s my primary objection to the recent credit card offers I have received. Not only are they full of threats, but also they contain no free gifts. Oh, I can earn 1% cash back on my spending, but then I’d have to spend, wouldn’t I? Nah, not interested. Many years ago, I banked at the Bowery Savings Bank in New York. Almost every time I visited a branch, they were handing out a little gift. I still have the bright red yardstick they gave me one day. Who buys yardsticks, anyway? They’re always freebies from someone. Well, I loved the Bowery Savings Bank because they gave me those little gifts. Still do, although they have long since been swallowed up by another bank.
So, no, I don’t want your credit card. I don’t want to make myself the victim of yet another bloodthirsty credit card company whose only intention is to trip me up and charge me fee after fee. And yes, I want gifts. Real gifts.
Yes, pitiful. Less than 1%. Sometimes less than .1% Far less than the 3% or 4% a credit card would charge for a cash advance. Obviously in this economic climate it is cheaper to use my own money to finance what I want to buy. What is the point of saving when one’s money cannot earn money? Ah, I know. To have cash when I need it. Presto. The reason to keep rainy day savings in liquid form, not locked away in CDs or stocks.
This isn’t always the best strategy. If and when the Big Inflation that everyone predicts actually happens, it may make more sense to get some quick profits from CDs or other guaranteed investments. Maybe banks will hand out toasters for opening CDs, the way they did in the inflationary 1970s. Not that I need another toaster, but we all like free gifts, don’t we?
That’s my primary objection to the recent credit card offers I have received. Not only are they full of threats, but also they contain no free gifts. Oh, I can earn 1% cash back on my spending, but then I’d have to spend, wouldn’t I? Nah, not interested. Many years ago, I banked at the Bowery Savings Bank in New York. Almost every time I visited a branch, they were handing out a little gift. I still have the bright red yardstick they gave me one day. Who buys yardsticks, anyway? They’re always freebies from someone. Well, I loved the Bowery Savings Bank because they gave me those little gifts. Still do, although they have long since been swallowed up by another bank.
So, no, I don’t want your credit card. I don’t want to make myself the victim of yet another bloodthirsty credit card company whose only intention is to trip me up and charge me fee after fee. And yes, I want gifts. Real gifts.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Depressing Credit Error Situations
What do we do about news stories like this, that cite how cavalier credit reporting agencies are about our good names? They basically don’t care if they attribute someone else’s bad credit to us, and they hardly bother to make the corrections we ask for, regardless of how much documentation we supply. Innocent people often find they are unable to clear their credit reports of serious errors that conflate them with the guilty, which leads to denied employment or credit. This is bad.
A few tools to fight this nasty situation:
1. Check your credit reports religiously every few months.
2. If you spot an error, immediately take steps to have it corrected.
3. If all else fails, sue.
4. Change your name legally.
1. Check your credit reports. We’re all supposed to do this, but I am quite sure most of us don’t even get our one free annual credit report from each of the three major agencies. People with very common names should pay to check more often, or even seriously consider signing up for a credit alert service. Ordinarily, I wouldn’t recommend such a step, but common names can get mixed up far too easily. If you’ve ever had a serious problem with accuracy on your credit report, get your files locked, and do pay to have your files watched.
2. If you spot an error, get it corrected. I’m not claiming this will always be a simple process, but if you do it for little errors, you’ll have the experience to know what works and what doesn’t when a serious error occurs.
3. If all else fails, sue. If the police are coming to your door because you are being confused with a felon, you need paid legal assistance.
4. Change your name legally. I know, crazy idea, right? Not so crazy. By changing your name legally, you create a clear historical record of your ongoing financial activities, as opposed to any by your former doppelgangers. If “Jack Johnson” or “Cathy Taylor” keeps getting you into trouble because there are low-lifes with the same name, become Juwann Jacks or Caitlin Tawes. Seriously. Go a step further if you can and establish a name that doesn’t call up thousands of duplicates in an Internet phone book search like Zabasearch. You are less likely to be a victim of identity errors or theft if you change your name to an extremely unusual one.
A few tools to fight this nasty situation:
1. Check your credit reports religiously every few months.
2. If you spot an error, immediately take steps to have it corrected.
3. If all else fails, sue.
4. Change your name legally.
1. Check your credit reports. We’re all supposed to do this, but I am quite sure most of us don’t even get our one free annual credit report from each of the three major agencies. People with very common names should pay to check more often, or even seriously consider signing up for a credit alert service. Ordinarily, I wouldn’t recommend such a step, but common names can get mixed up far too easily. If you’ve ever had a serious problem with accuracy on your credit report, get your files locked, and do pay to have your files watched.
2. If you spot an error, get it corrected. I’m not claiming this will always be a simple process, but if you do it for little errors, you’ll have the experience to know what works and what doesn’t when a serious error occurs.
3. If all else fails, sue. If the police are coming to your door because you are being confused with a felon, you need paid legal assistance.
4. Change your name legally. I know, crazy idea, right? Not so crazy. By changing your name legally, you create a clear historical record of your ongoing financial activities, as opposed to any by your former doppelgangers. If “Jack Johnson” or “Cathy Taylor” keeps getting you into trouble because there are low-lifes with the same name, become Juwann Jacks or Caitlin Tawes. Seriously. Go a step further if you can and establish a name that doesn’t call up thousands of duplicates in an Internet phone book search like Zabasearch. You are less likely to be a victim of identity errors or theft if you change your name to an extremely unusual one.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Credit Card Fantasyland
Oh, this is scary. I heard an interview on NPR the other day in which the financial expert said she met a girl who couldn’t wait to get a credit card. Turned out the girl did not know that you have to pay back the money you spend when you buy on credit. Seriously, this was a teenager, not a five-year-old, and she did not understand the basic concept of credit.
Every time I watch one of those “we’re up to our eyeballs in debt” shows on CNBC, I get the creepy feeling that these people think the same way. They may say they want to pay off their debts, but you can see the self-will oozing out of them as they proudly admit to their insane spending habits. These usually consist of constant shopping sprees and the accumulation of vast piles of stuff, although sometimes as a change of pace it’s eating out and ATM advances. These people simply do not understand that credit is only a means of delaying paying. It’s not free money. Even creepier, the CNBC shows are about Canadians. They’re been infected by the same spending virus we have. More than one society has bought into the entitlement fantasy of materialistic accumulation via credit.
An entitlement fantasy is just that, a fantasy. We’ve all had them. They’re the daydreams in which we inherit a fortune from a relative we never met. Guilt-free money, because we didn’t even have to go to the funeral. Or we win the lottery. Effort-free money, because we didn’t have to do anything other than purchase a ticket and pose for a winner’s photo with that giant check. Most of us are aware these are fantasies. Apparently, some people are living with these fantasies as real scenarios in their heads. They live as if money grows on trees because credit cards allow them to pretend their fantasies are real. For a while. When they don't make their payments, they qualify for the new penalty APR of 29.99% that Fidelity Mastercard just instituted. Do all these crazy spenders really want to pay almost one third of the purchase price of every transaction to the bank? No. In their heart of hearts, our materialistic spenders don’t intend to pay the bank at all. Scary.
Every time I watch one of those “we’re up to our eyeballs in debt” shows on CNBC, I get the creepy feeling that these people think the same way. They may say they want to pay off their debts, but you can see the self-will oozing out of them as they proudly admit to their insane spending habits. These usually consist of constant shopping sprees and the accumulation of vast piles of stuff, although sometimes as a change of pace it’s eating out and ATM advances. These people simply do not understand that credit is only a means of delaying paying. It’s not free money. Even creepier, the CNBC shows are about Canadians. They’re been infected by the same spending virus we have. More than one society has bought into the entitlement fantasy of materialistic accumulation via credit.
An entitlement fantasy is just that, a fantasy. We’ve all had them. They’re the daydreams in which we inherit a fortune from a relative we never met. Guilt-free money, because we didn’t even have to go to the funeral. Or we win the lottery. Effort-free money, because we didn’t have to do anything other than purchase a ticket and pose for a winner’s photo with that giant check. Most of us are aware these are fantasies. Apparently, some people are living with these fantasies as real scenarios in their heads. They live as if money grows on trees because credit cards allow them to pretend their fantasies are real. For a while. When they don't make their payments, they qualify for the new penalty APR of 29.99% that Fidelity Mastercard just instituted. Do all these crazy spenders really want to pay almost one third of the purchase price of every transaction to the bank? No. In their heart of hearts, our materialistic spenders don’t intend to pay the bank at all. Scary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)