전체기사 최신뉴스 GAM
KYD 디데이
글로벌

속보

더보기

윌리엄 풀 총재, '돈과 분별력' 주제 연설(영문)

기사입력 :

최종수정 :

※ 본문 글자 크기 조정

  • 더 작게
  • 작게
  • 보통
  • 크게
  • 더 크게

※ 번역할 언어 선택

Dollars and Sense

William Poole*
President, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Financial Planning Association of Missouri and Southern Illinois
St. Louis
Jan. 9, 2008

*I appreciate assistance and comments provided by my colleagues at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Joseph C. Elstner, Public Affairs officer, provided special assistance. Robert Rasche, senior vice president and director of Research, and Robert Schenk, senior vice president for Public and Community Affairs, provided valuable input to an earlier draft of the speech. However, I take full responsibility for errors. The views expressed are mine and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the Federal Reserve System.


Dollars and Sense

We are certainly living in extraordinary financial times. Our nation has enjoyed a long economic expansion and inflation has been relatively low. However, since last August, financial markets have been in considerable turmoil resulting from subprime mortgage lending and a deflating housing boom. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is watching both recession and inflation risks. Recession risks are primarily a consequence of financial turmoil, which has threatened to spread housing industry woes to the broader economy.

Will housing sector problems push the economy into recession? It is too early to tell right now, but what we can do is to examine the current situation closely and try to learn from it. Perhaps “relearn” is a better word, because the mistakes that brought us to this point have been made before. There are no new lessons here. The lessons are familiar ones that need to be more forcefully driven home and incorporated in standard financial practice in the future. That is why I’ve titled my remarks “Dollars and Sense.” The Fed is working on providing the public with better and more useful financial information that we hope will reduce the odds on the housing finance industry repeating its recent financial mistakes.

My plan is to review the current situation and examine five key mistakes by borrowers and other market players. Although many borrowers have little financial expertise, we would have expected all the other players to be more sophisticated and experienced. Then I’ll review where the country stands in trying to educate Americans in basic financial literacy and economic thinking. As part of that review, I’ll include some of the things the Federal Reserve is doing to address this issue. Finally, I’ll look at what we can all do to help Americans know more about their finances and to give them the tools to make better choices. As financial planners, you of course have a large stake in this enterprise and will benefit in the long run from having better-prepared clients. I know your organization is already involved in some education efforts, and I applaud your efforts.

Before proceeding, I want to emphasize that the views I express here are mine and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the Federal Reserve System. I thank my colleagues at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis for their comments. Joseph C. Elstner, Public Affairs officer at the St. Louis Fed, provided special assistance. However, I retain full responsibility for errors.
Five Mistakes

Let’s review the five major mistakes creating the subprime mess.

First, too many borrowers took on mortgages they could not afford. Nothing new there, except for the number of such borrowers. How could something seemingly so preventable happen? One of the main culprits was the adjustable rate mortgage, or ARM. Actually, the problem is not the ARM itself but grossly inadequate borrower understanding of this type of mortgage. The “Two/Twenty-Eight” ARM called for low initial payments for two years, which would then reset to higher levels for the remaining 28 years of the 30-year mortgage. Too many borrowers, though, did not insist on knowing just what the “higher level” would mean, and too many mortgage brokers did not provide that information in a way the borrower could understand. Other borrowers, wanting to take advantage of low initial payments, gave misleading or false information about their ability to repay. It is important to emphasize that there is nothing inherently wrong with adjustable rate mortgages, and they make sense for many borrowers. However, borrowers must be prepared for interest rate resets and able to pay higher rates. In recent years, too many borrowers were not prepared. Borrowers also need to understand prepayment penalties in their mortgage contracts. These can make refinancing ARMs into fixed-rate mortgages terribly expensive.

Second in our mistakes summary, mortgage brokers put too many borrowers into unsuitable mortgages. As I mentioned in a speech to a St. Louis real estate group last July, with widely held expectations of rising interest rates priced into the markets throughout the 2003-2005 period, it is difficult to avoid the judgment that these ARM loans were poorly underwritten. It was imprudent for mortgage bankers and lenders to approve borrowers who likely could not service the loans when rates rose. It is important to understand that rising interest rates were not just a risk but actually the market expectation. Poor underwriting not only jeopardized the borrowers put into unsuitable mortgages but also the brokers themselves. Numerous brokers are now bankrupt, and many survivors have suffered large losses and sullied reputations.

Third, it is surprising to me that investment banks jeopardized their reputations by securitizing these mortgages when the underlying loans were backed by inadequate or spurious information.

Damaged reputations are also casualties of the fourth major mistake: rating agencies that placed AAA ratings on many securities backed by subprime mortgages. The rating agencies seemed to have based their ratings on a backward look at default experience on similar mortgages before 2006, rather than on a forward look based on careful analysis of the likely ability of borrowers to repay in less favorable market circumstances. The reason default experience on subprime mortgages was relatively favorable before 2007 is that housing prices were rising, permitting stressed borrowers to sell their properties to repay the mortgages. The rating agencies, apparently, did not believe that house prices might stop rising, in which case the music would stop.

The final entry on our major mistake list is investors who bought those securities without conducting an adequate analysis of the underlying investments. Investors too readily accepted the AAA ratings at face value. As financial planners, you are very familiar with the cliché that “if something looks too good to be true, it probably is.” A reach for yield with inadequate attention to risk is another basic lesson that apparently cannot be relearned often enough.

It is interesting, and a bit depressing, that investment professionals made four of the five mistakes. I can understand the mistakes many financially naïve borrowers made but have a hard time understanding how so many investment professionals could have been so wrong. Many observers point to greed, but I prefer a different explanation. Shortsightedness rather than greed explains actions that led to losses of tens of billions of dollars and the failure of many financial firms.

Avoiding Future Mistakes

I will now to add some detail to three of these mistake categories—borrowers who cannot repay, mortgage brokers putting people into unsuitable loans and investors who did not do their homework. Here is my question: How could better education and financial decision-making have helped people avoid these mistakes?

Borrowers. Too many know too little about credit and what its costs and risks are. Starting with coursework on credit usage in elementary and middle schools and continuing with financial literacy and economics in high school would go a long way toward equipping borrowers with the information they need, or at least give them enough knowledge to ask the right questions about what they can afford and what lending terms mean.

Mortgage brokers. Many have closed their doors and gone out of business through unsatisfactory lending. In the July realtor speech I mentioned earlier, I emphasized that a durable stream of profits in mortgage lending requires a continuing flow of capital from investors willing to buy the mortgages an originator wants to sell and securitize. Given the difficulty any mortgage broker faces in differentiating its own products, the best way to stand out and survive over the long term is to give outstanding service to mortgage shoppers. Turning outstanding service into future business prospects is precisely the role for reputation. A firm’s good name spread through word of mouth will pay the highest dividends over the long term. And going the extra mile by making certain that borrowers understand lending terms and are able to service those loans can cement that reputation and keep those doors open a long time.

Investors. Here I want to look at individual investors, the ones you know so well. It may be true that many if not most such investors put their money heavily into mutual funds, reducing some of the risk of holding individual stocks and bonds. What would help them greatly, I believe, is a much better understanding of what their funds hold. Mutual funds are professionally managed, but the subprime fallout has hit the pros hard, too. In one example from our Federal Reserve District, two investors in two Regions Morgan Keegan mutual funds severely affected by subprime mortgage problems are suing over sharp declines in the values of their investments. As of Dec. 13, 2007, the Select Intermediate Bond Fund and the Select High Income Fund were down 47 and 56 percent, respectively. News media accounts tell of disastrous results being faced by other investors in similar types of securities. Would investors equipped with better knowledge have avoided such steep losses? More organizations should get behind efforts to improve investor knowledge.

Where does the country stand in terms of educating our citizens in the financial and economic basics? The brief answer is that efforts across the nation are making progress but we have a long way to go.

According to a 2007 survey by the National Council on Economic Education:

* Economics, traditionally part of the Social Studies curriculum, is now included in the educational standards of all states.
* 41 states, up from 28 in 1998, now require these standards be implemented. Sounds good so far, but there’s more.
* Only 17 states, not including Missouri or Illinois, require students to take an economics course for high school graduation, up from 13 states in 1998.
* Only 22 states, not including Missouri or Illinois, require testing of student knowledge in economics, three fewer than in 2004.

Personal finance,a newer subject in comparison with economics, is now included in the educational standards of 40 states, up from 21 in 1998, with 28 states requiring these standards to be implemented. Still, though, only seven states require students to take a personal finance course for high school graduation and only nine require the testing of knowledge in personal finance. Missouri now requires personal finance for graduation and tests for knowledge; Illinois requires a consumer education course but does not test on the subject for graduation.

What we have, then, is a mixed bag when it comes to preparing students to learn about money and the choices to be made in handling it. Our nation is making progress, but as we have seen with the subprime mess, we as a society have a lot more to do in equipping students and adults with the knowledge they need to make wiser financial decisions.

I know the Financial Planning Association of Missouri and Southern Illinois believes in boosting financial literacy. Your web site tells of the projects you’ve undertaken to better educate yourselves and your clients and the volunteer work you’ve done for the community. At the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, and in our branch cities of Little Rock, Louisville and Memphis, we’re trying to do our part, too.

We’ve got a two-pronged effort going, with one part aimed at community development and a complementary effort aimed at improving financial education in the schools. On the community development side, we work on educating community groups and through those groups, their members, about improving communities through making better financial decisions.

Last month, for example, we hosted a seminar, “HMDA to Home Improvement,” in St. Louis. HMDA is the acronym for Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. Attending were mortgage lending experts, community group representatives, economists and government officials. Discussions were aimed at helping homeowners avoid foreclosures and take advantage of programs making home improvements affordable.

The St. Louis Fed also participates in the St. Louis Foreclosure Intervention Task Force. It’s a collaboration of representatives of government, financial institutions, and real estate and nonprofit organizations One outgrowth of that effort is a hotline, 888-995-HOPE, that counsels homeowners concerned about foreclosure. Brochures and television appearances helped promote the hotline. We helped in starting a similar program in Springfield, Mo.

In Louisville, Ky., our branch staff is involved in the Don’t Borrow Trouble Coalition, an organization helping citizens deal with lending issues, particularly as they relate to mortgages. The Kentucky Predatory Lending Prevention Committee is another organization we help support; it helps families avoid money scams and to resolve financial problems. We’re also active in similar efforts in Arkansas, Indiana, Tennessee and other locations.

Besides our community development efforts, the St. Louis Fed and other Federal Reserve banks work through state economic education councils, centers for economic education and local school districts to offer mostly free economic and financial education materials and curricula to teachers. We do some work directly with students, but we find we can reach many more of them by working through their teachers. Our aim is to drop large boulders in the education pond and to encourage the ripples to expand.

We have a lot going on in this area too; I’ll highlight some of the key projects.

I mentioned earlier that Missouri now requires a one-semester personal finance course. The St. Louis Fed’s economic education experts are helping to train educators who will be teaching those courses, setting up workshops for them and training teachers in the new curriculum.

We also take part, as do representatives from commercial banks, in Teach Children to Save Day, an annual event for first- through third-graders. In the St. Louis metro area alone, our volunteer employees taught lessons in over 400 classrooms last year on the importance of saving regularly and what it means to save over the long term for something you really want.

There are many places teachers can go to for useful information and classroom-ready lessons on money, credit and economic concepts. Two of the best are web sites: first, our Bank’s web site at www.stlouisfed.org. Clicking on the “education” link brings teachers to conferences, materials, lessons, teaching tips and much more. The other site is actually a portal at www.federalreserveeducation.org. It’s an entry to web sites providing help of all kinds for teachers of personal finance and economics. Just about any topic under the general “economics and personal finance” heading is included in one or both web sites, along with support materials and tips on using them.

In St. Louis and our branch cities of Little Rock, Louisville and Memphis, our economic education staff in 2007 conducted well over 100 separate meetings, workshops, competitions or other events aimed at equipping teachers to provide their kindergarten through high school students with the skills they need to deal with money, debt, credit, saving and economic decision-making.

For example, in early 2007, high school teachers in Southhaven, Miss., attended a "Growing Smart with Money" workshop led by our Memphis Branch economic education staff. In the St. Louis metro area, we worked with local libraries to put on a program for middle schoolers called “Money Smarts for Kids.” We worked with the Kansas City Fed and centers for economic education staff at Missouri universities to conduct the first-ever Missouri Personal Finance Competition in St. Louis, Kansas City, Springfield and Columbia, with the championship held in Jefferson City. A program begun by our Little Rock Branch staff, the Piggy Bank Primer, has helped early grade school students throughout our District to learn more about saving. A program we helped roll out in Quincy, Ill., “Your Paycheck” is expanding in our District. It’s aimed at teenagers, particular those holding their first jobs, and teaches them about paychecks—what the various deductions mean and how you can learn more about benefits, saving, withholding and more.

That’s just a partial listing of the community development and economic and financial education efforts we’ve got going. And there’s more of that coming for 2008 and beyond.

What can we all do to move this trend along, to put learning the basics of saving, borrowing and credit higher in the public’s mind? There are a number of things, and it is going to take the Federal Reserve, the Financial Planning Association of Missouri and Southern Illinois, and thousands of other organizations to pull it off.

* Contact your local schools and ask them where learning about saving, spending, investing and borrowing fit into their curricula, what lessons are being taught and how. Bring up this subject at school board meetings and parent meetings.
* Support legislative efforts to require coursework in economics and personal finance for high school graduation. Let your state representatives and senators know through calls, letters or e-mails and personal contact.
* Write op-ed pieces highlighting the need for expanded financial education and offer them to local news media. Don’t overlook influential Internet bloggers…they can help spread the word quickly.
* Get behind or start financial and economic education programs in professional organizations and lend your skills. We ask a lot of our educators; they can do a lot, but they can’t do it all. We can all add our voices…and ourselves.

Concluding Comment

The current financial turmoil will take awhile to play itself out. The fundamentals of our economy remain strong, however, and 2008 looks to be a year of rising growth. Economic forecasters expect slow expansion in the first half of the year and a quickening pace in the second half. Meanwhile, if borrowers, lenders and investors can refocus on financial basics and re-emphasize critical lessons about credit and risk, the financial future can be brighter than the second half of 2007. For that brighter future, we need to infuse our education at all levels with the lessons of 2007—old lessons to be sure but easy to understand at a very practical level from 2007 experience. With continuing effort we can expect that financial upsets such as the current one will be infrequent and milder when they do occur.

Thank you and I’d be glad to take your questions.

[관련키워드]

[뉴스핌 베스트 기사]

사진
코르다 '6개대회 연속 2위 이상' 대기록 [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 세계 1위 넬리 코르다가 멕시코 필드마저 정복하며 미국여자프로골프(LPGA) 전설 소렌스탐과 어깨를 나란히 했다. 코르다는 4일(한국시간) 멕시코 플라야 델 카르멘의 엘 카말레온 골프코스(파72)에서 열린 리비에라 마야 오픈(총상금 250만 달러) 최종 라운드에서 이글 1개와 버디 2개, 보기 1개를 묶어 3언더파 69타를 쳤다. 최종 합계 17언더파 271타를 기록한 코르다는 2위 아피차야 유볼을 4타 차로 따돌리고 우승컵을 들어 올렸다. 시즌 3승이자 통산 18승이다. [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 넬리 코르다가 4일(한국시간) 리비에라 마야 오픈 우승 트로피를 들고 포즈를 취하고 있다. [사진=LPGA] 2026.05.04 psoq1337@newspim.com 올 시즌 출전한 6개 대회에서 우승 3회, 준우승 3회를 기록한 코르다는 2001년 소렌스탐이 작성한 시즌 개막 후 6개 대회 연속 준우승 이상 기록과 타이를 이뤘다. 개막전 힐튼 그랜드 베케이션스 토너먼트 오브 챔피언스와 셰브론 챔피언십에서 우승했고, 포티넷 파운더스컵·포드 챔피언십·아람코 챔피언십에서는 3연속 준우승을 기록했다. 3타 차 단독 선두로 최종 라운드에 나선 코르다는 5번 홀(파5) 이글을 시작으로 6, 7번 홀 연속 버디를 낚으며 초반에 승기를 굳혔다. 마지막 18번 홀(파5)에서는 티샷이 숲으로 향하며 분실구 위기를 맞았으나 장거리 퍼트를 성공시키며 보기에 그치는 집중력을 보였다. [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 넬리 코르다가 4일(한국시간) 리비에라 마야 오픈 18번홀에서 챔피언 퍼트를 넣고 기뻐하고 있다. [사진=LPGA] 2026.05.04 psoq1337@newspim.com 주수빈은 버디 4개와 보기 2개로 2타를 줄여 합계 6언더파 282타, 단독 8위에 올랐다. 2023년 투어 합류 이후 통산 두 번째 톱10이다. 2라운드 공동 62위로 컷을 통과한 강민지는 3~4라운드에서 반등했다. 최종일 보기 없이 버디 4개를 기록하며 합계 5언더파 283타, 공동 9위로 데뷔 첫 톱10에 진입했다. [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 주수빈. [사진=LPGA] 2026.05.04 psoq1337@newspim.com [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 강민지. [사진=LPGA] 2026.05.04 psoq1337@newspim.com 임진희는 합계 4언더파 284타로 공동 13위에 올라 순위를 끌어올렸고, 루키 황유민은 대회 첫 60대 타수(69타)를 기록하며 합계 3언더파 285타, 공동 20위로 대회를 마쳤다. psoq1337@newspim.com 2026-05-04 07:15
사진
안세영의 한국, 中 꺾고 우버컵 우승 [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 셔틀콕 여제' 안세영이 선봉에 선 한국 여자 배드민턴이 만리장성을 넘고 세계 정상에 우뚝 섰다. 한국 여자 대표팀은 3일(한국시간) 덴마크 호르센스에서 열린 2026 세계여자단체배드민턴선수권대회(우버컵) 결승전에서 중국을 3-1로 제압했다. 2010년과 2022년에 이은 통산 세 번째 우승이다. 조별리그에서 탈락한 남자 대표팀의 아쉬움을 씻어내는 '금빛 스매싱'이었다. [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 한국 여자 배드민턴 대표팀. [사진=BWF] 2026.05.04 psoq1337@newspim.com 첫 번째 단식 주자로 나선 안세영은 세계 2위 왕즈이를 2-0(21-10 21-13)으로 완파했다. 안세영은 한 번의 동점도 허용하지 않는 무결점 경기를 펼쳤다. 하프 스매시와 헤어핀을 자유자재로 구사하며 상대를 쥐락펴락했다. 안세영은 이번 대회 조별리그부터 8강, 4강전에 이어 결승까지 모든 경기에 첫 주자로 출전해 단 한 게임도 내주지 않는 전승 행진을 벌이며 세계 1위다운 위력을 과시했다. 안세영은 왕즈이를 상대로 통산 20승(5패)째를 수확했다. 중국 언론에서조차 '공안증'(안세영 공포증)이라는 용어를 쓸 만큼 안세영에게 약한 모습을 보였던 왕즈이는 지난 3월 전영오픈 결승에서 맞대결 10연패를 끊고 안세영에 일격을 가하기도 했으나, 4월 아시아선수권대회 결승에 이어 이날까지 안세영에게 2연패를 당하며 천적 관계를 재확인했다. [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 천위페이를 꺾은 김가은. [사진=BWF] 2026.05.04 psoq1337@newspim.com 두 번째 주자였던 복식 이소희-정나은 조가 세계 1위 류성수-탄닝 조에 0-2로 패했지만, 세 번째 주자 김가은이 해결사로 나섰다. 김가은은 천위페이를 상대로 1게임 8-15의 열세를 뒤집는 무서운 뒷심을 발휘하며 2-0(21-19 21-15) 승리를 따냈다. 분위기를 바꾼 천금 같은 승리였다. 마침표는 네 번째 주자가 찍었다. 파트너 공희용의 부상 결장으로 백하나와 손을 맞춘 김혜정은 찰떡 호흡을 과시하며 세계 4위 지아이판-장수셴 조에 2-1(16-21 21-10 21-13) 역전승을 거뒀다. 첫 게임을 내준 백하나-김혜정은 전열을 가다듬은 2게임에서 시원한 공격을 퍼부으며 21-10으로 승리했다. 마지막 3게임은 더 압도적이었다. 3-2 상황에서 무려 9점을 몰아치며 승기를 잡았고, 끝까지 리드를 지켜내며 한국의 우승을 확정했다. 마지막 단식 주자였던 심유진(인천국제공항·19위)은 세계 5위 한웨와의 경기를 치르지 않고도 동료들과 함께 시상대 맨 위에서 우승의 기쁨을 만끽했다. [서울=뉴스핌] 박상욱 기자 = 중국 남자 배드민턴 대표팀. [사진=BWF] 2026.05.04 psoq1337@newspim.com 올해 초 아시아단체선수권에 이어 우버컵까지 석권한 여자 대표팀은 명실상부한 세계 최강임을 증명하며 오는 9월 아시안게임을 향한 청신호를 밝혔다. 남자부에선 중국이 돌풍의 프랑스를 3-1로 물리치고 토머스컵 우승컵을 안았다.  psoq1337@newspim.com 2026-05-04 06:16
기사 번역
결과물 출력을 준비하고 있어요.
종목 추적기

S&P 500 기업 중 기사 내용이 영향을 줄 종목 추적

결과물 출력을 준비하고 있어요.

긍정 영향 종목

  • Lockheed Martin Corp. Industrials
    우크라이나 안보 지원 강화 기대감으로 방산 수요 증가 직접적. 미·러 긴장 완화 불확실성 속에서도 방위산업 매출 안정성 강화 예상됨.

부정 영향 종목

  • Caterpillar Inc. Industrials
    우크라이나 전쟁 장기화 시 건설 및 중장비 수요 불확실성 직접적. 글로벌 인프라 투자 지연으로 매출 성장 둔화 가능성 있음.
이 내용에 포함된 데이터와 의견은 뉴스핌 AI가 분석한 결과입니다. 정보 제공 목적으로만 작성되었으며, 특정 종목 매매를 권유하지 않습니다. 투자 판단 및 결과에 대한 책임은 투자자 본인에게 있습니다. 주식 투자는 원금 손실 가능성이 있으므로, 투자 전 충분한 조사와 전문가 상담을 권장합니다.
안다쇼핑
Top으로 이동