Author Topic: 2008  (Read 11918 times)

aspiringnomad

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 956
Re: 2008
« Reply #50 on: January 24, 2018, 09:09:15 PM »
For those who were too young or disinterested to really remember what that time was like, there were serious debates about nationalizing our entire banking system. Yes, the financial system of the most unabashed and successfully capitalistic society in world history (up to that point, anyway) was under serious consideration for a socialist-style nationalization:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-financial-nationalization/will-united-states-be-forced-to-nationalize-banks-idUSTRE50F1KI20090116
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/13/AR2008101300184.html
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95700786
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/wall-street-humiliated-by-nationalisation-of-banks-961397.html

It sort of happened, but instead of outright nationalization, they came up with the clever but still politically unpopular idea to inject new capital via preferred shares. Preferred shares were a relatively happy and palatable medium - not quite new debt (which the markets knew banks couldn't handle) and not quite common equity (which would have been outright ownership/nationalization). The preferred equity injection worked to stabilize the broader system, but a few large institutions did end up being partially nationalized for a period of time because the market started viewing the preferred equity as additional debt in those instances. Crazy times.



edgema

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 106
Re: 2008
« Reply #51 on: January 25, 2018, 02:46:05 AM »
Absolutely no doubt that when you graduate impacts your fortunes and therefore probably your outlook. There is quite a bit of cohort research looking at earnings for graduates going into the workplace in different economic climates and this shows that graduating into a recession really does impact lifetime earnings for the group. I suppose you are permanently playing catch up with people with a little more experience than you compounding that experience, while struggling to fend off younger graduates who are cheaper and more fresh faced.

It is a little like the Malcolm Gladwell analysis of Canadian Hockey players which shows something like 70-75% were born Jan-Mar as this is the beginning of the academic year. The initially 'small' benefit of being a little older and a little larger for your year in a physical sport compounds all the way up to the professional level.

I graduated in 1998 and went to work in finance into the teeth of the Russian Debt crisis which caused my employer to fire half the graduates in the first three months (thankfully I made it). Two years later we hit 2000 with the dot com crash. These early work experiences definitely influenced me as a saver rather than spender. Not to mention that 10 years into my career, when you are hopefully cooking with gas, we go into 2008 and while I was employed over that time it was a fight and involved lower earnings than had it not occurred.

I have no complaints and there is always 'stuff' happening.

aspiringnomad

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 956
Re: 2008
« Reply #52 on: January 25, 2018, 10:59:39 AM »
For those who were too young or disinterested to really remember what that time was like, there were serious debates about nationalizing our entire banking system. Yes, the financial system of the most unabashed and successfully capitalistic society in world history (up to that point, anyway) was under serious consideration for a socialist-style nationalization:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-financial-nationalization/will-united-states-be-forced-to-nationalize-banks-idUSTRE50F1KI20090116
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/13/AR2008101300184.html
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95700786
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/wall-street-humiliated-by-nationalisation-of-banks-961397.html

It sort of happened, but instead of outright nationalization, they came up with the clever but still politically unpopular idea to inject new capital via preferred shares. Preferred shares were a relatively happy and palatable medium - not quite new debt (which the markets knew banks couldn't handle) and not quite common equity (which would have been outright ownership/nationalization). The preferred equity injection worked to stabilize the broader system, but a few large institutions did end up being partially nationalized for a period of time because the market started viewing the preferred equity as additional debt in those instances. Crazy times.
I think Bernanke said afterwards that we were on the verge of a total worldwide economic collapse and had those changes not been implemented it all would have crashed and burned. Hyberbole or truth? I don't know but seemed like truth at the time.

He also said it was worse than the Great Depression. Not because financial collapse happened but because so many more "regular" people were investing, and thus effected, compared to 1929. Back then Ma and Pa Kettle in Pig's Holler Arkansas weren't likely personal investing in the stock market like they would be today. Since most on this forum ate younger and were likely in their teens or early 20s in 2008 I doubt it effected them much. But for those who were 35 and older and had been saving and investing a long time, maybe for decades, it was pretty tough to see much of your NW vanish seemingly overnight.

The "worse than the Great Depression" line specifically references the shock that hit the financial system, and yes it was definitely bigger in 2008 than in 1929. Thinking of it like an earthquake, 2008 was higher on the Richter scale, but as it turned out we had better "building codes" in place, including in the form of Bernanke himself who happened to be the world's foremost scholar on the Great Depression. So despite the shock being greater, the devastation in terms of intensity and duration was less.

jpeizie

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 32
Re: 2008
« Reply #53 on: January 25, 2018, 01:55:19 PM »
Absolutely no doubt that when you graduate impacts your fortunes and therefore probably your outlook. There is quite a bit of cohort research looking at earnings for graduates going into the workplace in different economic climates and this shows that graduating into a recession really does impact lifetime earnings for the group. I suppose you are permanently playing catch up with people with a little more experience than you compounding that experience, while struggling to fend off younger graduates who are cheaper and more fresh faced.

I graduated grad school in May 2008 but already had a job lined up. It took me several years to recognize how lucky I was. Many of the students in my graduating class took a long time to find jobs, and I know very few students from my class who are still working in the field our degree is in.

On the other hand, I had zip invested in the market, so I didn't feel it much on a personal level. I do remember having several conversations with older colleagues who were freaking out about the drops in their account values - especially the ones who'd thought they were going to retire in a year or two.