Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Expert Sources for Federal Reserve interest rate increase: UCI faculty members available to comment
On June 15, the Federal Reserve announced its largest interest rate hike in 28 years to try to regain control over elevated consumer prices. The Fed raised its benchmark interest rate by three-quarters of a percentage point – the biggest increase since 1994 – following a quarter-point jump in March and a half-point increase in May. “We’re strongly committed to bringing inflation back down and we’re moving expeditiously to do so,” said Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. Eric Swanson – professor of economics. Swanson’s research focuses on monetary policy, interest rates and the effects on economy, including output, unemployment and inflation. Swanson previously worked at the Federal Reserve Board and Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco from 1998-2014 as an economist and research advisor. Email: eric.swanson@uci.edu Aaron James – professor of philosophy. James co-authored the book Money from Nothing: Or, Why We Should Stop Worrying About Debt and Learn to Love the Federal Reserve, which explains the nature of money and a number of alternatives the Federal Reserve can legally employ to curb inflation other than increasing interest rates. Email: aaron.james@uci.edu Jack Liebersohn – assistant professor of economics. Liebersohn’s research focuses on banking, banking risk taking, mortgages and the housing market and he can speak to how increasing the Federal Reserve interest rate affects any of those elements of the economy. Email: cjlieber@uci.edu Christopher Schwarz – associate professor of finance and faculty director of the Center for Investment and Wealth Management. Schwarz can discuss how far the Federal Reserve will have to go and its impact on the economy and financial markets moving forward. Email: cschwarz@uci.edu Media Contact: Cara Capuano, Communications Officer, UCI | 949-501-9192 | ccapuano@uci.edu
The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement is costly, what does the UK need to do? | Aston Angle
As far as trade is concerned, the EU exit has been rather costly to the UK. At the Centre for Business Prosperity, we have been tracking the performance of UK trade in recent years. The UK’s trade dropped sharply during COVID. Like other nations, this was due to the global recession and supply chain disruptions. However, the UK failed to recover and enjoy the boom, despite the tariff-free terms of trade in goods set out in the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The UK now trades less with the EU, its largest trading partner, than in 2019. During the same period, Germany and the Netherlands grew trade with the EU by nearly a quarter, and US trade with the EU has also grown considerably. Reports suggest, including those from the British Chambers of Commerce, that exporting to the EU has become much more costly and in some cases, unviable. It appears that the “certainty” provided by the TCA has not reversed the declining trend of the UK-EU trade so far. Our new paper for the Enterprise Research Centre (ERC) has found that UK exports experienced a large, negative, statistically significant decline in 2021 at the end of the transition after the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) was put into force. We estimate that this amounts to a 22% reduction in exports to the EU and a 26% reduction in imports from the EU over the first half of 2021, relative to the counterfactual scenario of the UK remaining in the EU. How did this happen? After all, the TCA ensures that goods moving between the UK and the EU have no tariffs or quotas, so long as the rules of origin are complied with. Rules of origin help you work out where your goods originate from and which goods are covered in trade agreements. Our research found that non-tariff measures (NTMs) were responsible for the adverse TCA effect on UK trade with the EU and that the magnitude of loss was significant. It was equivalent to a reduction of £12.4 billion in UK exports over the first six months period of 2021. This equals 16% of UK total exports in the first half of 2019 and 70% of the documented total reduction in the EU exports in the same period. A number of factors can be attributed to the decline of UK exports to the EU. In particular, the increased trade frictions that occurred mainly due to sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) and technical barriers to trade (TBT) as a result of entering the TCA. Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) measures refer to the EU controls to protect animal, plant or public health. And technical barriers to trade (TBT) refers to mandatory technical regulations and voluntary standards that define specific characteristics that a product should have, such as its size, shape, design, labelling/marking/packaging, functionality or performance. On average, for the first six months of 2021, a 1% increase in SPS resulted in a 13–15% reduction in exports to the EU, most notably in the food and drink, wood and chemicals sectors. Furthermore, a 1% increase in TBT led to a 2–3% reduction in exports, especially in metals, equipment, machines and miscellaneous industrial products. What next? Since the post-Brexit dysfunctions are now diagnosed, in theory we could move on. The UK can directly tackle the trade challenges, so long as other things, such as politics, do not stand in the way. Fundamentally, what needs to happen is the removal or relief of the root causes coded by the TCA – the trade barriers newly erected. This is a key task; it is challenging but not impossible. Trade frictions due to the SPS measures are an acute problem of Brexit. Reducing some of the non-tariff measures between the EU-UK would help by exploring other mechanisms such as equivalent SPS measures or other ways to reduce businesses burden to a minimum. The technical barriers to trade are more complicated and challenging and they could potentially cause significant damage to the UK economy. Despite its limitation, maintaining and broadening the established arrangements of the current TCA provision, through some form of mutual recognition of specific practices or international regulations for selected sectors, should be the ambition of UK government to help ease the TBT trade barriers. Future EU-UK co-operation is critical and mutually beneficial but requires political will and strong leadership. In the short and medium term, supporting firms should be the priority, especially small- and medium-sized firms that are productive enough to have exported to the EU in the past, but now face hurdles to continue exporting. These firms tend to be limited on resource but have the infrastructure and ambition to internationalise. Targeted support for specific challenges could be also fruitful. The UK Department for International Trade Export Support Service, the British Chambers of Commerce and local growth hubs have the expertise and experience to help firms export. Therefore, resources should be made available to allow for customised and responsive support with exports, as well as taking advantage of technologies that can identify and reach businesses who require support. Provision should also be made to collect feedback on the quality of the support provided, to enable further improvement. Helping businesses continue to access EU markets, while enabling the economy to take advantage of welfare-enhancing benefits from trade, remains imperative. Given the economic benefits of the roll-out, the new free trade agreements are expected to be limited and effective only in the long term. UK domestic policies should be the focus to improve the competitiveness of exporters and their ecosystem. By Professor Jun Du Director of the Centre for Business Prosperity Professor of Economics, Finance and Entrepreneurship, Aston Business School Lecturer in Politics and International Relations School of Social Science and Humanities Dr Oleksandr Shepotylo Senior Lecturer, Economics, Finance and Entrepreneurship, Aston Business School
Dr Keith Bradshaw OBE and the West Midlands Mayor met students on the Introduction to Healthcare programme at Aston University ‘NHS outbreak’ experience day The Introduction to Healthcare programme is generously funded by Keith Bradshaw 55 local school students attend the one-day event on Aston University campus. Dr Keith Bradshaw OBE and West Midlands Mayor Andy Street have visited Aston University to meet Year 9 students who were attending a healthcare experience day on campus as part of the University’s Introduction to Healthcare programme. 55 school students took part in a full day of activities experiencing some areas of the healthcare professions. In one activity, the students acted as NHS finance directors during a disease outbreak, where they were asked to make financial decisions, such as choosing which departments in a hospital would be allocated funds from a £1 million budget. The students listened to pitches from different NHS departments before creating a presentation outlining which areas would get some of the budget and the reasons why. The exercise allowed them to develop their teamwork, as well as reasoning and presentation skills. Keith Bradshaw, a prominent businessman and philanthropist, generously funds the Keith Bradshaw Introduction to Healthcare programme, which is designed to increase students' awareness of the various careers within the healthcare sector and support students with their journeys into higher education. Working with students in Years 8, 9 and 10 from schools within the Solihull, Birmingham and Black Country area, the programme aims to educate young people about opportunities within healthcare and the importance of achieving the right GCSE grades to pursue those professions. The programme was launched in 2018 following the success of Aston University’s Pathway to Healthcare Programme. Keith said: “It’s been a pleasure to meet students attending the healthcare programme and hearing more - through their presentations - about their ideas on how they might manage an NHS budget and in which areas they would choose to allocate funds. “One of the key objectives of this programme is to support young people so they can develop and deploy their skills for the benefit of the local community. “We must get the most out of our young people, so they can support our health and welfare and live fulfilling and rewarding lives, which is why this programme – intended to widen participation into healthcare – is so very important.” Andy Street, Mayor of the West Midlands, said: “I was pleased to have the chance to visit the Introduction to Healthcare experience day, to learn more about the programme and to hear directly from the participating students. “A key part of my mayoral mission is to help young people from across our region to raise their aspirations and support the creation of high-quality job opportunities for them here in the West Midlands. “So, I congratulate Aston University on their wonderful widening participation efforts and will certainly play my part in advocating to Government the merits of funding and expanding these sorts of pathway programmes that do so much to help young people from all backgrounds to not only aspire to brilliant jobs but also be practically supported on the best possible route into these professions.” For more information about the Introduction to Healthcare Programme at Aston University please visit our website.
Expert Says Financial Technologies Can Help Address Climate Change
“Financial technologies offer great promise to tackle climate change and provide pathways for developing sustainable economies and lifestyles,” says Aparna Gupta, a professor of quantitative finance at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and co-director of the Center for Research toward Advancing Financial Technologies (CRAFT), the first-ever fintech research center backed by the National Science Foundation. CRAFT brings together industry partners and policy makers to conduct research that is relevant for industry and has potential for commercialization. Dr. Gupta says that blockchain technologies combined with smart contracts and Internet of Things (IoT) devices are set to transform property and casualty insurance that is subject to increasing threats from climate change. Similarly, distributed ledger technologies can be utilized for issuing innovative climate finance securities, such as green bonds and climate derivatives, by facilitating traceable, transparent, and standardized transactions. Regulatory readiness to support blockchain-enabled green bonds and other climate finance securities issuance is underway across the globe. Climate fintech is also set to play a pivotal role in increasing renewable power generation and accelerating the transition to clean energy, according to Dr. Gupta. Digital lending platforms use crowdsourcing models to provide debt financing for residential solar energy systems. Climate-conscious consumers can make spending decisions that minimize their carbon footprint through solutions such as using a credit card that allows them to round up their purchases and use the change for planting trees. In the investment management and advisory space, there is a growing recognition of the need for environmentally sustainable investing. Responding to this need, fintech startups are offering platforms for clean energy investments and enabling investors to construct low-carbon-impact financial portfolios. “Financial technologies innovations are poised to transform almost all aspects of financial services, and in doing so, offer great opportunities to address climate change challenges,” Dr. Gupta says. In addition to her leadership in fintech, Dr. Gupta is at the helm of a team of financial and renewable energy experts developing risk management tools to incorporate renewable energy into the energy market. They will set and standardize risk factors to make it easier for this critical industry to be both productive for investors and creators and systematized for users, similar to the rating system created for the bond market. Dr. Gupta also serves on the Climate Risk Working Group of the Financial Risk Manager Advisory Committee for the Global Association of Risk Professionals tasked with identifying the important climate issues for the training of future global risk professionals. Dr. Gupta is among the many experts and researchers at Rensselaer available to speak on this topic.
Professor Jun Du and Dr Oleksandr Shepotylo from Aston University analysed the effects of the end of the Brexit transition period on UK exports This equals to a nearly 16% of UK total exports in the first half of 2019 and 70% of the documented total reduction in the EU exports in the same period The research suggests non-tariff measures (NTMs) are responsible for the fall in trade between the UK and EU. New research by experts at Aston University for the Enterprise Research Centre (ERC) has found that UK exports experienced a large, negative, statistically significant decline in 2021 at the end of transition after the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) was put in force. The TCA is a free trade agreement signed on 30 December 2020 between the European Union (EU), the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) and the United Kingdom (UK). Professor Jun Du and Dr Oleksandr Shepotylo used a Synthetic Difference in Differences (SDID) estimator to construct a counterfactual of the UK had it not exited the EU and entered the TCA, to compare its trading performance. This was done by comparing the actual performance of the UK with the modelled performance in 2021 with the same periods of 2018-2020. They also examined the extent to which the overall TCA effect has been due to the increased frictions due to non-tariff measures (NTMs). They estimate that this amounts to a 22 per cent reduction in exports to the EU and a 26 per cent reduction in imports from the EU over the first half of 2021, relative to the counterfactual scenario of the UK remaining in the EU. The research confirmed that NTMs are responsible for the adverse TCA effect on UK trade with the EU and that the magnitude of loss was significant. It was equivalent to a reduction of £12.4 billion in UK exports over the first six months period of 2021, notably in food and drink, wood and chemicals sectors. This equals to 15.6% of UK total exports in the first half of 2019, and 70% of the documented total reduction in the EU exports in the same period. Jun Du, professor of economics at Aston University, lead on internationalisation research at the ERC and director of the Centre for Business Prosperity (CBP), said: “These results underscore the heavy costs of erecting trade barriers on the UK’s side with its largest trade partner. “Trade frictions, due to sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures (measures to protect humans, animals, and plants from diseases, pests, or contaminants), are acute problems due to the EU exit. “Reducing some of the NTMs between the EU-UK, by exploring mechanisms such as equivalence in SPS measures or other ways to reduce businesses’ burden to the minimum level possible. “More complicated and challenging are the technical barriers to trade, but they could potentially cause significant damage to the UK economy. Maintaining and broadening the established arrangements of the current TCA provision, despite being limited, through some form of mutual recognition of specific practices or international regulations for selected sectors, should be the ambition of UK government to ease the TBT (technical barriers to trade). “Future EU-UK co-operation is critical and mutually beneficial but requires political will and strong leadership.” Dr Oleksandr Shepotylo, a senior lecturer in Economics, Finance and Entrepreneurship Department at Aston Business School, co-wrote the working paper and said: “Continued alignment with the EU regulations was a demand from many businesses throughout the Brexit process, and it is expected to be still important post Brexit. This must be conveyed to policy makers. “In the short term, preparedness and adaptability have rewarded and will continue to reward businesses facing challenges and disruptions. The need for learning and training remains paramount. “In the medium and longer term, businesses will have to stay competitive to retain access to the global market, to perform better in it, and to gain more benefit from it. This is the case for all firms even if the ways to achieve it may differ. In addition, businesses need to consider adopting new business models through which they can balance the need for lean production with resilience, as well as weighing up economic, social, and environmental gains. Despite the many considerable challenges, there are boundless avenues where opportunities for breaking through are present.” You can read the full report on the ERC website here.
It Works on TV - Do Property Rehabs Drive Up Prices in Surrounding Neighborhoods?
When a house is distressed, the negative impact tends to ricochet around its surrounding neighborhood. Distressed homes (e.g. foreclosures) can significantly bring down the value of other homes in the area, as these properties are often poorly maintained and then typically sold at discounted prices In the past, and particularly in the wake of the 2008 subprime crisis, federal and local governments sought to mitigate this negative effect by incentivizing the rehabilitation of distressed properties through programs like the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). Until now, there has been some skepticism as to whether or not these kinds of initiatives actually work. New research by Goizueta Foundation Term Associate Professor of Finance Gonzalo Maturana and Goizueta’s Assistant Professor of Finance Rohan Ganduri might change the narrative definitively. They have analyzed new data that shows that rehabilitation projects not only help to stabilize housing prices in affected neighborhoods but can also actually increase the value of neighboring properties by as much as four percentage points. Using highly robust, non-parametric statistical analysis methods, Maturana and Ganduri parsed more than 10 years of information on rehabilitated property transactions and real estate prices across the United States. The effect of renovating dilapidated or derelict houses in these areas pushes prices up between 2.3 and four percentage points in their surrounding blocks, they find. And that’s not all. While the average amount spent by authorities on these renovations comes in at roughly $36,000, their study estimates a societal welfare gain of $134,000 per rehabilitated property—almost four times the cost of the rehabilitation. These insights should provide interesting food for thought for the U.S. Congress and local governments, Maturana notes. After the housing crash in 2008, Congress allocated $6.9 billion in funding to the NSP to help stabilize communities affected by high vacancy and foreclosure rates, but the Department of Housing and Urban Development didn’t find any positive impact on local housing markets at the time. “Our findings suggest that rehabilitation projects do drive a positive uptick in prices that can help revitalize distressed neighborhoods,” says Maturana. “And they provide very timely support for policy interventions, such as President Biden’s infrastructure spending program which proposes an allocation of $20 billion to rehabilitate 500,000 single-family homes in low-income neighborhoods in the United States.” With the current economy facing some uncertain times - this is a topic that is important for everyone. And if you're a reporter looking to know more then let us help. Gonzalo Maturana is an associate professor of finance at the Goizueta Business School. He is an expert in the areas of corporate, household and real estate finance. Rohan Ganduri's research interests include banking, credit risk, real estate, household finance, and corporate finance. Both Gonzalo and Rohan are available to speak to media regarding this topic – simply click on either icon now to arrange an interview today.
Expert Insight: Properties on Confederate-named U.S. Streets Sell for Less
Houses on streets that are named after Confederate figures or themes sell for 3% less than similar properties in neighboring areas, says a new study led by John W. McIntyre Professor of Finance, Clifton Green. For an average property worth $240,000, the mean discount works out to around $7,000. Not only that, these homes take considerably longer to sell than comparable houses on streets that are named for secessionists. Green and his co-authors reviewed data from home sales across 35 states in the U.S., analyzing nearly 6,000 transactions between 2001 and 2020. Their data set looked at properties located on streets named after Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, as well as the more generic options of “Confederate” and “Dixie.” The majority of these streets are located in former Confederate states, though some are also found in California and Massachusetts, as well as a number of Midwestern and Western states that had not been created before the U.S. Civil War. To be certain of their findings, Green et al looked at homes with similar features and characteristics such as lot size, age, building type, and the number of bedrooms and bathrooms. The findings are unequivocal, says Green, although the effect is not equally distributed across states. What is the Confederate Discount? “The discount in prices for homes of Confederate-named streets is geographically variable. In those states that make up the former Confederacy, the effect is more muted at around two percent,” he notes. “And in some states where you find the most Lost Cause memorials, there may even be a fraction of a percentage point boost in sales for properties on streets with secessionist names.” Beyond the South, the “Confederate discount” effect is notably more visible. The debate around changing street names in the U.S. has gathered momentum in recent years, with some 1,400 streets still named after Confederate figures. Much of the discussion, however, has focused on what Green calls the “principled reasons” for name changes–arguments that may or may not stack up favorably against the cost of changing signs. This new study lends more economic clout to the cause of revising street names in the U.S.–albeit that the effect is more pronounced in Democratic-voting areas or areas with a higher share of Black or highly-educated residents. “In these places, sales on streets with Confederate names dipped even further, going for eight percent less on average, and this is particularly noticeable after events that have shone a spotlight on race inequity or white supremacy in the U.S.” Interested in knowing more? Get in touch today. T. Clifton Green is a Professor of Finance at the Goizueta Business School. He is an expert in the areas of market microstructure, with an emphasis on behavioral finance and his research has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, Barrons, Financial Times, and on CNBC.
The Centre for Research in Ethnic Minority Entrepreneurship (CREME) has partnered with NatWest for the Time to Change report It sets out ten evidence-based recommendations for advancing the growth potential of ethnic minority businesses (EMBs) including increasing their GVA contribution from the current £25 billion a year to £100 billion The report is being launched at a special event on 10 May at NatWest Conference Centre in London with keynote speaker Sir Trevor Philips OBE. A new report from Aston University has set out a plan for advancing the growth potential of ethnic minority businesses (EMBs) in the UK. The Centre for Research in Ethnic Minority Entrepreneurship (CREME) has partnered with NatWest for the Time to Change report which sets out ten evidence-based recommendations to promote greater success and inclusion of ethnic minority businesses (EMBs) in finance and business support in the UK. Experts say the implementation of the recommendations could help tackle the multiple barriers faced by EMBs, particularly in accessing finance, markets and quality business support, and could increase their GVA contribution from the current £25 billion a year to £100 billion, highlighting the significant potential of EMBs to the UK economy. The report says that to combat racial inequality, there should be a UK-wide support for ethnic led businesses should be a standard feature of all future plans. This includes integrating them into broader policy agendas of inclusive growth, productivity and innovation. A more inclusive approach to enterprise is key to tackling wider social structural barriers such as unequal access to employment opportunities and product markets, and gender and ethnicity pay gaps. Concerted action is needed to support the growth ambitions of EMBs, particularly in light of damaging consequences of the pandemic for ethnic minority communities. The report calls for a strong action to eliminate the longstanding challenge of discouragement of ethnic minority entrepreneurs from seeking finance and business support. It found EMBs have been particularly hit hard by the Covid-19 pandemic due to the sectors in which they tend to operate and recommends recovery support is focussed on the businesses that need it most. The report also highlights the need for greater accountability of organisations across public, private and third sectors, including business support agencies, finance providers and large purchasing organisations, for their business engagement with EMBs. Professor Monder Ram, director of the Centre for Research in Ethnic Minority Entrepreneurship at Aston Business School, said: “This major report sets out an ambitious yet practical agenda to realise the potential of UK’s ethnic minority businesses. “The entrepreneurial ambition of ethnic minorities can play a crucial role in the UK Government’s vision of ‘Levelling Up’ prosperity across regions, promoting trade opportunities of ‘Global Britain’ and creating a more cohesive society. “Drawing on the latest research and examples of international best practice, the report presents a comprehensive approach to tackling the barriers faced by firms owned by ethnic minority communities. “We pinpoint key challenges and present recommendations – informed by extensive consultation with business support practitioners and entrepreneurs – that invite policy-makers, corporations and entrepreneurs to collaborate in a new partnership to advance entrepreneurial activities and the UK’s diverse communities.” The report calls for central government and local decision makers to develop clear objectives for inclusive entrepreneurship, informed by evidence, and ensure that EMBs can access quality business support that helps them grow. Dr Eva Kašperová, a research fellow at CREME, said: “To address the barriers faced by EMBs and help them realise their entrepreneurial potential will require commitment and leadership from the government as well as local business support ecosystem actors. “The current lack of an explicit UK-wide policy on inclusive entrepreneurship could mean that some parts of the country are left behind in terms of tackling structural inequalities and enabling entrepreneurs from ethnic minority communities and other under-represented or disadvantaged groups to access finance, wider markets and quality business support. “If past experience is a guide, ensuring commitment from key stakeholders may be the biggest challenge.” Andrew Harrison, head of Business Banking at NatWest Group, said: “As the UK’s biggest bank for business, we’re committed to championing small businesses and supporting growth, but we know that there are barriers which disproportionately affect Ethnic Minority Businesses (EMBs). “This is why we aim for at least 20% of the places on our 13 nationwide accelerator hubs to be for ethnic minority entrepreneurs. In 2021, 26% of businesses in our hubs were EMBs. “Only close collaboration can deliver meaningful change to ensure EMBs get the support they need to reach their full potential. Now is the time to accelerate action, and at NatWest we commit to playing an integral role in the change that is required.” The Centre for Research in Ethnic Minority Entrepreneurship (CREME) will share this report, inviting policy-makers, corporations and entrepreneurs to come together in a collaborative and strategic partnership to champion enterprise and advance entrepreneurial activities and the UKs diverse communities, further building an inclusive entrepreneurial eco-system supporting businesses to thrive at a launch event at NatWest Conference Centre in London on 10 May.
Regulatory expert and former SEC economist on Elon Musk bid to buy Twitter
Joshua White, assistant professor of finance, is available for commentary on Elon Musk's bid to buy Twitter. Josh is a former financial economist for the Securities and Exchange Commission and is an expert in regulation. Josh can speak to: The impact on shareholders, the board's response, Musk's strategy for the offer and the SEC's concerns Concerns raised about the delay in Musk filing the required SEC form and that he filed the incorrect form, as well as speculation that his hostile bid will raise further scrutiny of this action The market's belief that there is only a small chance this deal will go through, based on the price right now
Market jitters making you anxious? Our expert might have the remedy to calm your nerves.
So far, 2022 has been, in a word, volatile. With the emergence of omicron, supply chain issues choking the economy, inflation the highest it has been in decades and now the war drums beating in Europe, investors are getting nervous and the markets are showing the strain. As political guru James Carville once said, "It's the economy, stupid!" Following that sage advice, Augusta University’s Wendy Habegger is here to offer expert perspective to journalists looking to figure out just what’s going on with the markets and what investors and the public can expect in the coming months. Q: What's the best advice to give people when the stock market is on such a roller coaster ride? “Frankly put, if one can't stomach when the roller coaster drops, don't get on the ride. If one does not have much tolerance for risk, they should not invest in the stock market. If one is already invested in the stock market and breaking into a cold sweat every time they look at their stocks, then they need to take a cash position, meaning cash out of the stock market. The market does not reward anyone based upon their level of anxiety. What good is making gains on stocks if one will turn around and spend those gains treating their ulcers? I liken it to pro sports athletes who don't retire when they are still healthy. What good is all the money they earned if they are only going to be spending it on medical treatments for the rest of their lives? What kind of quality of life is that?" Q: With the market trending down right now, if people can invest, is this the best time to do so? “Whenever the market trends down, it is always a great time to buy stable companies with solid cash flows and certain commodities. Look for those companies and commodities that always do well regardless of what is happening in the economy. But remember my response to the above question. One should do this if and only if they can tolerate risk.” Q: Should people look at safer places to put their money for the time being, and what would some of those places be? “Again, this depends upon their level of risk tolerance. If they are risk tolerant, they should shift into less risky investments. If they are not risk tolerant, cash out and put it in their savings accounts or CDs.” Q: Does the emergency fund rule of thumb still come in to play, maybe now more than ever? “Yes, but I don't go by the standard rule of thumb for emergency savings – having three to six months of expenses saved. I teach students their goal should be to have 12 months of expenses saved. The three to six months rule is obsolete. We saw this with the recession of 2007-09 and with the pandemic. People need to be able to live without employment longer because there is no definitive time frame for when one will find gainful employment and the government should not be relied upon to support the mass population in the meantime. Also, even when the government does provide assistance, not everyone receives it and some still never recover from the aftermath. “ The economy is front and center for just about every American business, investor and household – and if you’re a reporter looking to know more, then let us help. Wendy Habegger is a respected finance expert available to offer advice on making the right money moves during volatile times. If you’re looking to arrange an interview, simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
