Reprint of Competition in the Education Industry

13 May

Competition in the Education Industry

Many education reform advocates believe the most effective way to improve education is through the creation of charter schools.  The evidence on whether charter schools actually improved academic outcomes for students is at best mixed.  Many studies found that academic outcomes in charter schools are often no better, and sometimes worse, than outcomes in public schools.  In addition, the growth of charter schools in an area, by taking resources and students out of public schools, may worsen the public system.

An alternative more efficient approach to facilitating choice in education would be to create a system where courses taught by outside private firms substitute for courses taught in the public school.   Competition in the education industry could be similar to changes that occurred in the electric utility industry.  Prior to deregulation, one firm controlled both the transmission and generation of electricity.  Deregulation allowed many firms to provide electricity for sale.  Similarly, in education it is possible for a school to allow outside teachers or small firms offering specific courses to compete for students inside a school or a school system.

At this point in time the education industry consists of many local monopolies.  A reformed industry might be monopolistically competitive.  There would be many potential producers but services offered by different producers are not perfect substitutes.

The first section of this post discusses the growth of charter schools.  The second section discusses the possibility of competition between schools and private providers of academic courses.

Charter Schools:

A public charter school is a publicly funded school that is governed by a group or organization under a contract or charter but is not directly run by the local school board or municipality.   The charter school is exempt from many of the rules and regulations governing public schools.  A school’s charter is reviewed periodically and charters can be revoked.  From 1999-2000 to 2009-2010 the number of students enrolled in public charter schools rose from 0.3 million to 1.6 million.  Around 5.0% of public schools are now charter schools.   Over half of charter schools are elementary schools.  Around 55% of charter schools were located in cities.

Some facts on charter schools below:

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=30

The growth of charter schools appears to be fastest in cities where the traditional school system is viewed to be of low quality and is struggling.  Charter schools can be created when public schools are closed due to poor performance.  New Orleans, Detroit, Washington DC, and Saint Louis all place more than 30% of students in a charter school.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/us/charter-schools-growing-fast-new-report-finds.html

A large city or market could sustain more than one system while scale economies might prevent growth of separate systems in a smaller market.

The evidence on whether charter schools actual produce better results than traditional public schools is mixed at best.  Some recent studies indicate that charter schools often do not outperform traditional public schools.

http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/National_Release.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/02/opinion/more-lessons-about-charter-schools.html?_r=0

Comparison of performance between traditional public schools and charter school may actually overstate potential improvements from the growth of charter schools because charter schools often are able to pick better students and expel poorer ones.

Competitions Between Course Providers:

An alternative way to foster competition in the education industry would involve facilitating choice between teachers provided to schools through the school system and courses and teachers provided to students through private course providers.   This could be accomplished by requiring public schools to give credit to approved courses taught by approved private firms.

There are several reasons why competition between course providers would provide greater improvement in education outcomes at lower cost than would competition between schools.

There is almost always intense political opposition to policy changes that would drastically reduce the number of students going to a public school. Often due to scale economies and the size of the education district there is only enough room for one large school or system and the introduction of private charter school can leave students who are struggling the most in a weaker public system.

Teacher quality varies widely in both traditional public schools and charter schools.  A student who gets a poor teacher in a charter school is no better off than a teacher who gets a poor student in a traditional charter school.  Competition among teachers or firms providing courses is a more direct way to mitigate problems caused by poor teacher performance than is the establishment of a new school.

Economies of scale are lower for a firm teaching one course than for a firm teaching all subjects.  If there are 6 periods to a day one teacher instructing 25 students per period will teach 150 students.  By contrast, one teacher teaching all students in one day will only reach 25 students.

The dollar cost of a voucher to pay for one course is much less than the dollar value of a voucher to pay for enrollment of a student in a competing full-time school.   As a result, the use of a voucher to pay for a course rather than an entire new school enrollment removes fewer resources from the existing public system.

Students differ widely in their abilities.  Public school teachers often are forced to teach to the median student (or even lower) in order to avoid leaving some students behind.  Specialized courses that substitute for or complement an existing curriculum could allow for specialized instruction geared towards a wide range of abilities.   A gifted student could be placed in a program similar to the one offered by Johns Hopkins University.

http://cty.jhu.edu

A less gifted student could be placed in a different course.

The cost of private school could be lowered by providing instruction either fully or partially on line.  There are now many high-quality on-line resources that complement and could compete with in-school instruction.

 

Links to resources here:

http://www.khanacademy.org

 

http://www.ixl.com]

 

http://cty.jhu.edu

Increasingly parents have chosen these private sources to complement school work.  Competition between teachers and private course providers would likely increase use of these new on-online resources.

 

Concluding Thoughts:

 

The emphasis of school reformers on the creation of charter schools that compete directly with traditional public schools is in my view misguided.  Fixed costs associated with a completely separate school are too high.   Existing public schools  (the existing firm) have a large advantage over potential entrants.  Often the market is only big enough for one school system. Students and teachers vary widely in their needs and ability.  Competition among course providers and teachers is a more cost efficient and direct way to provide educational choices than is competition between schools.

 

About these ads

Retiring at 40?

24 Apr

CNBC had an interesting article “Retire Before 40?   Some Say It Can Be Done” originally published on March 27 by USA today.  The article interviewed some young individuals who are saving massive amounts of money and are planning to retire around age 40.  There are more things to do in life and other ways to contribute to society than simply working 9-5 forever.  It will be great for them if they can get it done.  There are more things to do in life and other ways to contribute to society than simply working 9-5 forever.

This blog simply lists some “issues” both ways to facilitate this goal and impediments.

Proponents of early retirement advocate the use of the 4% rule under which retirees spend 4% of their savings (in real terms) per year.  This rule would not work if the current financial environment (low risk-free rates and inflation slightly higher than the risk-free rate) persists for a prolonged period of time.

In order to attain early retirement workers would need to pay off their mortgage as quickly as possible.  (I am assuming homeownership because renting would lead workers subject to rent increases.)  Early mortgage payoff requires the use of 15-year rather than 30-year mortgages.

Retiring at 40 means that your Social Security benefit will be very small.  Proponents of early retirement claim that they will have enough savings but unless they have an annuity of some form there is significant risk that they will outlive their savings.  Defined benefit plans are now the exception.  Most households do not have private annuities, which are complex and often expensive.  Moreover, Social Security is one of the few annuities out there that, because it is linked to the CPI, provides inflation protection.  Individuals who retire at 40 are exposed to substantial financial risk from inflation.

The cost of health insurance is a major concern.   People are not eligible for Medicare until age 65. The ACA, despite all of its problems, will help early retirees because it guarantees access to insurance outside the job.  The cost of health insurance under ACA rises with age but this is infinitely better than getting a huge premium spike when becoming ill, something that can and usually does happen to everyone.

There are limits and penalties attached to withdrawals from 401(k) plans and IRA.  In order to retire as early as 40 a greater proportion of your wealth needs to be saved outside tax-deferred pension plans.  Alternatively, it is important to study rules that allow conversion of 401(k) assets to Roth IRAs.

Not all people start life at the same line.  Individuals with a ton of student debt are less likely to be able to retire early. It would be interesting to know how many individuals who retire early had inherited some wealth at some point or had received transfers from parents.  Also, what proportion of extreme early retirees are not encumbered by children,

Having part-time employment in retirement would make a large difference.  The USA today/CNBC article was interesting but readers need to be skeptical.

Readers interested in this post should also consider some of my work at www.dailymathproblems.blogspot.com.  Interesting finance memos at that blog include:

Interest Expenses over the Life of a Mortgage

http://dailymathproblem.blogspot.com/2013/04/interest-expenses-over-life-of-mortgage.html

Doubling your money in a low rate environment

http://dailymathproblem.blogspot.com/2013/04/doubling-your-money-in-low-rate.html

 

Also, consider the post at this blog on advantages of 15-year mortgages

http://financememos.com/2012/12/03/the-mortgage-term-decision/

 

 

 

 

Four considerations when checking out your forex broker

15 Apr

This author of this article is Sara Petersen.  She can be reached at

Sara.p@getqualitypartners.com

 

First 4 Mandatory Aspects to Check out about Your Forex Broker

The popularity of the Forex markets has led to a large number of Forex brokers trying to attract various potential Forex clients. The result of this situation has proven beneficial for traders since they can choose from various options and find better deals in terms of trading account features. At the same time, the large number of available options leads to a fair amount of confusion when it comes to choosing the right Forex broker. Here are the top 4 aspects that you need to investigate before you even start to go any further.

  1. Association with regulatory bodies – There are no global regulatory bodies that govern how brokers or traders should operate in the Forex markets. This makes checking out each Forex broker rather difficult. However, you need to know that each country has a financial institution that ensures that some semblance of law and order is maintained in the Forex markets. When creating a short list of brokers that you might consider, confirm with the third party regulatory body whether the Forex broker is registered with them or not. You may also want to review their track record.

 

  1. Trading platform – While reading avafx review (for example, we can understand that Forex broker spends a large amount of time in front of the trading platform. Whether it is churning out technical analysis, looking at the balance of the trades, assessing risks, placing trades, stopping loss or converting profits, these transactions are carried out on the trading platform itself. This is why it is important that the Forex broker you choose have a platform that is responsive, quick, easy to use and comprehensive. There is an easy way to check this out. Most forex brokers allow a demo period in which you can use the platform to trade in ‘play’ money. This is the time when a trader can evaluate the performance of a trading platform.

 

 

  1. Trading costs – It is foolish to think that there are no commissions or fees.  The no-dealing desk Forex brokers do charge a fee. The others make their revenue on the basis of the spread that they offer. The spread is the difference between the ask price and the bid price. The smaller it is, the better it is for the trader. Spreads can also be fixed or variable and it is judicious to opt for the fixed bid if you are just starting out in the area of Forex trading.

 

 

  1. Payment options – The payment or withdrawal options that a Forex broker provides are ways in which a trader can get some of the profits back into his regular account. A good Forex broker provides various options for this so that removing money is not an issue when the trader decides to do so. It is important to check this aspect because most of the Forex broker scams take place in this manner.

 

There is wide divergence in economic performance, policy and outlook among nations.   As a result, there are significant gains from potential international diversification and the use of forex markets.  However there are differences in forex brokers and complexities that need to be fully understood by market participants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Taxes and the decision to claim Social Security

27 Feb

Taxes and the decision on when to claim Social Security benefits

Many experts make a persuasive case that workers should delay claiming Social Security benefits for as long as possible and that financial advisers do not provide the correct advise on this important decision.  Here is some of the literature supporting this view.

http://pensionresearchcouncil.org/publications/document.php?file=1018

http://research.prudential.com/media/managed/wm/claiming_guide.pdf

http://crr.bc.edu/working-papers/why-do-married-men-claim-social-security-benefits-so-early-ignorance-or-caddishness/

http://financememos.com/2012/12/24/the-social-security-claim-decision/

 

There are two very strong reasons why many more individuals should delay claiming Social Security benefits.

First, Social Security benefits are provided as an annuity that continues to the end of life.  Most retirees do not have much in terms of annuity income.  As a result, the larger Social Security benefit obtained by delaying claiming benefits can provide important insurance against a retiree outliving his or her assets.

 

Second, the decision to claim Social Security benefits early will reduce the widow’s or widower’s benefit thereby weakening the financial security of a spouse.

Many retirees ignore these important considerations when deciding when to claim Social Security.  These retirees may conduct a break-even analysis, which compares the present value of benefits gained from claiming early to the present value of benefits claimed by delaying claiming benefits.  Income tax is one of the factors impacting the decision on when to claim Social Security benefits.

Many (perhaps most) retirement-age individuals have a large portion of their financial assets in a 401(k) plan.  Disbursements from 401(k) plans are fully taxed as ordinary income under the federal tax code.  Many (I believe most) states which rely on an income tax will also fully tax disbursements from 401(k) plans.  By contrast, Social Security benefits are not taxed for lower-income household and are only partially taxed for higher-income households.

See IRS link below for a discussion of Social Security taxes.

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Are-Your-Social-Security-Benefits-Taxable%3F

Taxes on Social Security benefits are lower than taxes on 401(k) disbursements.   A person relying on withdrawals from 401(k) plans to fund the near-term loss of resources to fund a delay in claiming Social Security benefits will consider the higher cost of 401(k) funds when deciding to claim Social Security benefits.

Remember, many people use a break-even analysis when deciding when to claim Social Security benefits.  This may not be the best thing to do because a delay in claiming Social Security benefits provides insurance against depleting your assets but some smart people and financial analysts do take this approach.  A person that is withdrawing $15,000 from a 401(k) for living expenses while not receiving Social Security benefits might have a substantially higher tax bill because of his decision to disburse 401(k) funds rather than claim Social Security benefits.  How much more depends on the person’s federal marginal tax rate and his state’s tax regime.

Taxes are generally not a major concern unless 401(k) disbursements are the source of the replacement funds.  The tax rate on capital gains is lower than the tax rate on ordinary income.  Assets sold at or near the value of their original basis are not taxed.  Most gains on owner-occupied housing are not taxed.  Disbursements from Roth IRAS are not taxed at least at the federal level.  State rules vary.  Also, note that Roth IRAS do not count towards the income threshold determining the taxation of Social Security benefits.

Unfortunately, avoidance of taxes often impacts financial decisions.  Many people keep a large mortgage delay paying off their mortgage and then lose their job.  401(k) plans are more popular than Roth IRAS, largely because of taxes.

I suspect that a desire to minimize the tax bill may motivate some individuals to claim Social Security benefit early rather than late.  This may not be wise but may make sense in a cost-even analysis under some assumptions.

Chasing yield by investing in long term bonds?

15 Feb

Allan Sloan in a 2/14/2013 article “Interest rate predictions make long-term Treasuries look bad” examines implications of interest rate predictions made by the Congressional Budget Office.  The CBO budget forecast is based on the view that interest rates will begin to rise in two years.  This forecast suggests that investors should stay away from long term bonds.

Link to Sloan’s article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/interest-rate-predictions-make-long-term-treasurys-look-bad/2013/02/14/60eb1c02-76ef-11e2-95e4-6148e45d7adb_story.html

My view:

Interest rates are very hard to predict.  Even when you are correct about the direction you can be wrong about the timing.  There is a famous story about Keynes anticipating the German hyperinflation, shorting the DM and losing his shirt because he placed his bet too soon.

See Lords of Finance for this story.  It is a great book.

http://www.amazon.com/Lords-Finance-Bankers-Broke-World/dp/0143116800/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1360951200&sr=8-1&keywords=lords+of+finance+book

I don’t believe an interest rate increase is imminent.  Countries of the world will continue their beggar thy neighbor monetary policies.  If interest rates do increase in the United States it will be because of policy mistakes (premature Fed tightening or Congressional Shenanigans on the debt limit.) I suspect the economy will remain weak in 2013.

The post below states my concerns about the current status of the economy.

http://www.policymemos.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-new-recession.html

I agree with the view that investors should stay away from long term debt. Higher returns from holding long term debt are not sufficient to compensate investors from the risk of a large interest rate increase.   Something can happen in the world that could make interest rates rise by a lot.  Bonds, even government backed ones, are risky financial assets.   Sloan’s back of the envelope calculations understate the risk of investing in long term bonds because under his calculation interest rates only go up a couple of points.

Many investors are frustrated and chasing yields.  I understand the frustration and the temptation.  Housing appears to have bottomed.  REITS and MBS are probably better bets than long term government bonds but BE CAREFUL AND DO YOUR RESEARCH BEFORE INVESTING!!!!!!

Good luck!!!!!!!!

Financial Advisers and the Social Security Claim Decision

7 Feb

Bad Advice on the Social Security Claim Decision

A recent Wharton study written by Mathew Greenwald, Andrew Biggs, and Lisa Schneider provides a great deal of insight into the Social Security claim decision.  This paper can be downloaded from the Pension Research Council

http://pensionresearchcouncil.org/publications/document.php?file=1018

I found out about the study from the August 28, 2012 InvestmentNews blog by Mary Beth Franklin.

http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20120828/BLOG05/120829933

The Social Security claim decision has a large impact on retirement security for many Americans.   The opening paragraph of the paper cites research indicating that a worker who delays claiming Social Security from age 62 to 70 will get a 76% inflation-adjusted increase in Social Security benefits.  Despite the potential gain from delaying claiming most workers claim benefits at age 62.

The paper includes a concise description of literature describing different claim decisions.  The main contribution of the paper is a discussion of results from the author’s survey of 406 financial advisers.  Many of the surveyed financial analysts acknowledge gaps in their knowledge of complex aspects of Social Security – especially spousal benefits and the retirement earnings test.  Over half of the advisers considered a break-even analysis either an excellent way or a very good way to determine when their clients should claim Social Security benefits even though break-even analysis ignores the reduction in risk obtained from having a larger lifetime annuity.

The authors ask the 406 financial advisers who took part in the survey how they would advise five different hypothetical clients.   For each of the five potential clients, the financial adviser was asked to recommend one of three strategies – (1) claim Social Security benefits as soon as possible, (2) claim when you stop working, and (3) delay claiming benefits as long as you can.   All of the five hypothetical Social Security beneficiaries had investable assets of at least $700,000, more than enough liquidity to easily defer claiming Social Security benefits if the delay strategy was deemed optimal.

The main differences in the five hypothetical clients involved differences in the respondent’s health and marital status; although, the households also differed in their annual income.  The results reveal that financial advisers place a high priority on health status when providing advice to their clients on the claim decision.

Around 60 percent of financial advisers would advise a woman in poor health earning $100,000 a year with a retired husband getting $2,000 a year in Social Security to claim Social Security benefits as soon as possible.   Reported health status is an imperfect predictor of future life expectancy.    The advice to claim early may be misguided if many people who report they are in poor health are actually able to live for a long period of time.  It would be useful for financial advisers to have more information about the relationship between current health status and the likelihood of living a long period.

One of the scenarios involves a man in average health who earns more than his wife.  Only 20% of financial advisers recommend that this man delay claiming as long as possible even though such a strategy would maximize his wife’s widow’s benefit.  This result suggests that financial advisers do not fully consider the value of the widow’s benefit when providing advice to their clients on when to claim Social Security benefits.

The Social Security claim decision has a large impact on whether a beneficiary will have adequate income in retirement.   The paper by Greenwald, Biggs and Schneider is an excellent resource for increasing your understanding of this decision and its impact on your retirement.

Downsizing and the Social Security Claim Decision

30 Jan

I am making up and answering my own financial questions.  Please send your actual questions to me.

Question:  I am turning 62 in 2013 and it is definitely my time to retire.   I am single and would like to do something other than work.  I have modest means.  My main assets are my house, my 401(k) plan and a small amount of liquid assets.  The current value of my home is $450,000.   My 401(k) balance is $250,000.  I have a mutual fund with $30,000.  I have no loans on my car, which is eight years old and has 100,000 miles.

I will be entitled to a Social Security benefit of $1,000 as soon as I reach age 62.  I need to leave my job and have some fun but I am worried that I will outlive my savings.  What is your advice?

Caveat:   Your situation may be similar to my fictional questioner but there are always more details to be considered.   Please consider but do not over rely on this advice.

Analysis:  Many people are in this situation.  Their total assets are relatively modest and most of their assets are tied up in their home.  Some liquid assets are needed for emergencies.  A new car purchase may not be far off

Since you were born in 1951, your full retirement age is 66 years.  The decision to claim Social Security early will result in a reduction in your Social Security benefits of around 25% relative to the benefit that could be obtained by delaying a claim until age 66.

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/quickcalc/earlyretire.html

Your financial security would be greatly enhanced if you could delay claiming Social Security benefits.  In order to delay claiming Social Security you need to either take disbursements from your 401(k) plan or somehow tap your housing equity.

 

Your 401(k) plan is modest and taking immediate disbursements is not a wise financial strategy.  First, the 401(k) balance might grow more if disbursements are delayed.  Growth in 401(K) assets is of course determined by market outcomes.  Second, a delay in 401(k) disbursements will allow you to either receive 401(k) benefits later in life or take a larger disbursement each year.

While your marginal tax rate is low it is important to remember that 401(K) disbursements are taxed as ordinary income.

Let’s consider the possibility of tapping home equity to fund your retirement.  In particular, let’s consider five options – (1) selling your home and renting, (2) selling your home and buying a smaller home, (3) renting your home to a tenant and renting a smaller place for yourself, (4) finding a roommate, and (5) taking out a reverse mortgage.

Selling your home and renting:    The viability of this option depends on the rent you must pay in your new place.  Moreover, you become susceptible to rent increases, which could be significant over time.   Work by Jonathan Skinner cited in a previous post indicates that renters must save more to have an adequate retirement income than do homeowners.

http://econweb.rutgers.edu/killings/Econ_364/7_Skinner_lecturenotes.pdf

http://www.nber.org/papers/w12981

The capital gain up to $250,000 on owner-occupied homes is not taxed.

Selling your home and buying a replacement home:  The viability of this option depends on the cost of the replacement home.  The replacement home could be in a place with a lower cost of living.  There are lots of articles on the web listing affordable retirement locations.

http://www.aarp.org/home-garden/livable-communities/info-07-2011/affordable-cities.2.html

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2011/real_estate/1109/gallery.retirement_home_deals/index.html

One risk of relocating is that you may be unhappy in your new location, especially if you move away from family and friends.  You may want to keep your home and rent until you are sure you are happy at your new location.  However, you may have to pay capital gain tax on your old home if you delay its sale and it becomes an investor-owned property.

Renting your home to a tenant and renting your own place to live:   The viability of this option depends on the amount of rental income you will get. This option would allow you to move to a new location and determine if you like it.  There is a risk that your home will be vacant some months.   There is also a risk that your tenant will trash your home.  (I heard of one family who rented their home and had their home destroyed by their tenant’s six dogs.  The insurance company refused to pay.)  You will need to hire a reliable property manager.  You will be subject to unexpected expenses.  Rental income is of course taxed but your marginal tax rate is low.

Under this option, you may have to pay capital gains taxes on the gain on your home.

A roommate:  The viability of this option depends on the amount of rental income obtained from the roommate.  You need a compatible or at least non- disruptive tenant.

Reverse mortgages:  Many financial advisors advocate that individuals in your situation stay in their home and take out a reverse mortgage.  Reverse mortgages entail risk.  A recent New York Times article documents problems with reverse mortgages uncovered by federal and state regulators.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/15/business/reverse-mortgages-costing-some-seniors-their-homes.html?_r=1&

Increasingly, the reverse mortgage market is dominated by smaller mortgage brokers and firms that were formerly subprime lenders.  Fees tend to be high and are often unrevealed.  There have been several cases where a spouse that was not on the reverse mortgage loans was required to repay the entire loan in order to remain in her home.  The rate of default on reverse mortgages is at a record high, 9.4%.  Moreover, an increasing number of people obtaining a reverse mortgage are doing so at a younger age; thereby, adding to their financial risk.

Concluding thoughts:  In my view, you need to delay claiming your Social Security benefit and delay disbursing funds from your 401(k) plans.   This could be accomplished by tapping your home equity.  There are a variety of ways to tap your home equity.

Avoid taking out a reverse mortgage.

Also, your retirement could be made much more secure if you found a part-time job.

Finance Memos

Discussing Personal Financial Decisions

economicmemos

Questioning Conventional Economic Wisdom

DailyMathProblem

Discussing Personal Financial Decisions

Policy Memos

Discussing Personal Financial Decisions

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.