PMC Weekly Review - October 28, 2016
A Macro View – The Trillion Dollar Problem?
Nearly 45 million Americans, representing about 40% of those between ages 20 and 40, have student debt. Total loans outstanding recently eclipsed $1.3 trillion—higher than the amount all of Americans owe on credit cards—so it is no surprise that these figures have captured widespread attention. Throughout this heated presidential election season, the issue of student loans has been a common topic of conversation between both candidates. With the dollar amounts so daunting, and the number of Americans affected by student debt increasing, politicians, economists, and voters alike debate whether student loans benefit the overall domestic economy, or instead, could be the catalyst for the next financial crisis.
By way of background, student loans, sponsored by the United States Government as part of the National Defense Education Act, were first issued in the 1950s, and initially were offered only to select groups of students. The Higher Education Act of 1965 made student loans available to a wider group, and by the 1970s, students were borrowing billions of dollars each year. According to the Wall Street Journal, new federally backed student loans today total roughly $100 billion annually, as the price of education has increased far faster than the rate of inflation, and more people are pursuing college. Additionally, looser borrowing requirements and restrictions have made it easier to obtain student loans than in the 1950s.
With more than a trillion dollars in loans outstanding that are held mostly by millennials, those opposing the current student debt system believe this debt burden creates an unnecessary strain on our economy. Most notably, it is likely that student loan burdens prevent the younger working generation from making large purchases, such as automobiles or their first home, and even starting families—all of which support economic growth. Carrying this weight is also detrimental to this generation’s (and the economy’s) future, as it creates challenges in saving for retirement and building wealth at a crucial stage in their careers. Furthermore, this same group is concerned that the ease of borrowing and the sheer figures described earlier could signal a looming bubble that could, in turn, ignite another financial crisis. This can be compared to the housing crisis experienced several years ago, when lenders were overly lenient in their loan-approval process, and defaults ensued that sparked the Great Recession.
Conversely, proponents of student debt argue that in general, these debt instruments are more beneficial than detrimental to the economy. They point out that the majority of borrowers who are unable to repay their loans are those who dropped out of university and represent the minority of all student loan borrowers. Those who do graduate, particularly those with the largest student debt balances, go on to above-average paying careers and add to economic productivity, as they have been taught the skills employers seek. This group also contests the notion that our national student loan liability resembles the mortgage bubble, noting that student debt currently is a substantially lower portion of aggregate disposable income than mortgage debt was in 2007 (9% vs. 84%, according to the Wall Street Journal). Thus, this statistic, coupled with the fact that most borrows who default on student loans have lower debt balances, is not likely to trigger the next financial crisis.
Both sides of the student debt story are far more complex, but there is no doubt the issue has captured the public’s attention, as evidenced by its prominence in the presidential race. Although it seems unlikely that student loans will precipitate the next financial crisis, growing evidence suggests that America’s substantial student debt is a burden both for millennials and potentially the overall economy. Whoever wins the election would be wise to address the issue in a substantive manner.
The information, analysis, and opinions expressed herein are for general and educational purposes only. Nothing contained in this weekly review is intended to constitute legal, tax, accounting, securities, or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment, nor a solicitation of any type. All investments carry a certain risk, and there is no assurance that an investment will provide positive performance over any period of time. An investor may experience loss of principal. Investment decisions should always be made based on the investor’s specific financial needs and objectives, goals, time horizon, and risk tolerance. The asset classes and/or investment strategies described may not be suitable for all investors and investors should consult with an investment advisor to determine the appropriate investment strategy. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Information obtained from third party sources are believed to be reliable but not guaranteed. Envestnet|PMC™ makes no representation regarding the accuracy or completeness of information provided herein. All opinions and views constitute our judgments as of the date of writing and are subject to change at any time without notice.
Investments in smaller companies carry greater risk than is customarily associated with larger companies for various reasons such as volatility of earnings and prospects, higher failure rates, and limited markets, product lines or financial resources. Investing overseas involves special risks, including the volatility of currency exchange rates and, in some cases, limited geographic focus, political and economic instability, and relatively illiquid markets. Income (bond) securities are subject to interest rate risk, which is the risk that debt securities in a portfolio will decline in value because of increases in market interest rates. Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) are subject to risks similar to those of stocks, such as market risk. Investing in ETFs may bear indirect fees and expenses charged by ETFs in addition to its direct fees and expenses, as well as indirectly bearing the principal risks of those ETFs. ETFs may trade at a discount to their net asset value and are subject to the market fluctuations of their underlying investments. Investing in commodities can be volatile and can suffer from periods of prolonged decline in value and may not be suitable for all investors. Index Performance is presented for illustrative purposes only and does not represent the performance of any specific investment product or portfolio. An investment cannot be made directly into an index.
Alternative Investments may have complex terms and features that are not easily understood and are not suitable for all investors. You should conduct your own due diligence to ensure you understand the features of the product before investing. Alternative investment strategies may employ a variety of hedging techniques and non-traditional instruments such as inverse and leveraged products. Certain hedging techniques include matched combinations that neutralize or offset individual risks such as merger arbitrage, long/short equity, convertible bond arbitrage and fixed-income arbitrage. Leveraged products are those that employ financial derivatives and debt to try to achieve a multiple (for example two or three times) of the return or inverse return of a stated index or benchmark over the course of a single day. Inverse products utilize short selling, derivatives trading, and other leveraged investment techniques, such as futures trading to achieve their objectives, mainly to track the inverse of their benchmarks. As with all investments, there is no assurance that any investment strategies will achieve their objectives or protect against losses.
Neither Envestnet, Envestnet|PMC™ nor its representatives render tax, accounting or legal advice. Any tax statements contained herein are not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding U.S. federal, state, or local tax penalties. Taxpayers should always seek advice based on their own particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor.
© 2016 Envestnet. All rights reserved.