To solve the problem, he suggests shifting focus from providing student loans to increasing the supply of education options – including trade schools, online learning, and community colleges.
Chief economist of Moody's Analytics Mark Zandi says America's immigration policy under the Trump Administration conflicts with the country's core interests.
He says what has historically made America's economy "special" is that it attracts "the best and the brightest" from all over the world.
He also says baby boomers' retirement will make welcoming immigrants a necessity in order to help keep programs like Social Security and Medicare funded.
The study, which looks at cash and cashless technology usage in four markets—the UK, Australia, Brazil, and South Africa—shows that a cashless society may not be a realistic ambition. In fact, the survey revealed an “immovable” 24% of consumers who will never abandon cash—no matter what technological advance or leap forward is available to them.
In Brazil and South Africa, where cash use is more common, there is a strong desire for wider acceptance of cashless technologies such as payment cards and digital wallets. In both markets, 60% say that they are worried about having cash stolen from them which suggests fear of theft is a key driver rather than convenience.
In the UK and Australia, however, where the use of cashless technologies is more widespread, people are happier with their use of cash. Around 80% of people in both markets say that they are comfortable using cash.
Respondents across all countries saw cash as part of their day-to-day lives. They carry cash at all times, replenishing their wallets and purses regularly at ATMs, and are unwilling to go that last extra mile and never use cash again.
The findings suggest that cashless technologies will not replace cash completely; instead people are happier with an equilibrium between the two.
“While the proliferation of cashless payment technologies has generally led to a reduction in cash usage across developed economies, banknotes have unique properties that consumers value, such as security against fraud,” said Michael Batley, Head of Strategy, Travelex. “As long as this is the case it’s unlikely that any attempts to abandon cash completely will succeed. Even Sweden’s bid to go cashless, touted as a successful model, has seen pushback. Ultimately, only consumer demand will drive the change towards a truly cashless society and our research indicates this is further away than many realise.”
As well as revealing a lack of appetite for a cashless society, the study also reveals that opinion is split on whether it is even possible. The UK, the most ‘cashless’ country surveyed, represented the highest proportion (47%) of respondents that do not see an end to cash, closely followed by Australia (42%).
Travelex commissioned Sapio Research to survey 1,000 consumers regarding their attitudes to cash and cashless technology across four markets: the UK, Australia, Brazil and South Africa. These four countries are at different points in the “journey towards cashlessness”, as defined by Mastercard’s Measuring progress toward a cashless society report, and together give a representative overview.
(Source: Travelex)
How has the wealth management landscape developed recently and what has influenced this?
The thing I love the most about our industry is that it is always changing. In addition to changing market conditions, there are new products developed and made available on an ongoing basis, and most significantly - clients’ expectations, needs and objectives are always changing too. For investors entering or being in retirement, there are more potential solutions available today than ever before. From low-cost and no-load insurance products to ETFs and separately managed accounts focused on paying a reliable income stream from high-quality dividend paying stocks. It takes a lot of research and dedication to sift through it all, determine the best in class solutions, tune out the noise from product salesmen and advertisements, all the while knowing that a changing market environment may require a complete rethinking of the current strategy.
What are common misconceptions you find that clients have towards wealth management?
One of the first discussions I try to have with clients is about what they want versus what they need. Wants are often heavily influenced by personal biases and predispositions towards one type of strategy or another. Needs are driven by circumstances and personal expectations. It’s rare that these two align, so one of my jobs is to make sure everyone is on the same page.
Secondly, I explain and illustrate to clients that predicting outcomes in the short-term is nearly impossible (or at the very least based on luck not strategy), and that in order to be a successful investor, one must have a consistent replicable process to guide us in the decision-making process. If you trust the process, then you won’t be distracted by short-term events that can derail a sound long-term strategy.
If you trust the process, then you won’t be distracted by short-term events that can derail a sound long-term strategy.
Can you outline how you go about auditing a client’s needs and then designing a successful wealth management plan? What would you advise the first course of action to be?
Naturally it starts with a discussion on what brings them to me. Understanding a client’s concerns, goals and objectives has to be the first step. Then, comes the review of their existing portfolio and understanding why they are invested the way they are. By gaining insights into their past decision-making process, their current objectives and needs, we are able to tailor a set of solutions that addresses these issues.
How does your parent company, Bruderman Asset Management, assist in enhancing GGFS’ services?
Bruderman Asset Management has been deeply rooted in the asset management business since 1879 and has worked with some of the wealthiest families in the world. Because of their broad expertise and our ability to tap into these resources, we are able to provide sophisticated solutions and money management services to investors who might typically not be able to access these services. Of course, sometimes the simple solution is the best solution, but if something more complex is required, we have access to the expertise and tools required.
Do you expect any changes in wealth management in the US in the upcoming years?
A lot of advisers are retiring, and that will impact both clients and the industry. One of the reasons I developed our firm’s mentorship program almost a decade ago, is because we recognise the need to develop talent and we want to ensure that in 10 or 15 years our clients will receive the same level of expert advice they are getting today.
Market conditions and product availability will change, but what shouldn’t change is a well-thought-out, consistent, replicable and reliable investment process.
What are your top tips for wealth management in 2019?
Same as always, trust the process! Market conditions and product availability will change, but what shouldn’t change is a well-thought-out, consistent, replicable and reliable investment process. Don’t allow short-term events and ‘noise’ from the media to distract you from your long-term goals.
You recently spoke about trade deficits in the US. Can you briefly summarise how they hurt the economy?
In the short and sometimes intermediate term, tariffs act like a tax on consumers, as they raise prices. The real question is what will the long-term result be? If, this time next year, the United States has been able to negotiate better trade deals with China and Europe, as we already have with Mexico and Canada, then the short-term pain may be well worth it. From an investment perspective, it simply means that your process should guide you towards investments that are less susceptible to the impact of tariffs or the trade war – that’s our approach.
Website: http://www.ggfs.com
What would happen to the US if it paid off its debt?
She's only the second African-American female broker in the Exchange's 226-year history. According to a 2017 study by Stanford University, men comprise 75% of the wealth management field and fill more than 80% of leadership roles.
Most recently, it was the turn of automotive giants General Motors (GM) to feel the wrath of the POTUS, who waded online to criticise the decision of the firm to close key manufacturing plants in the States as part of a major structural reorganisation.
In this post, we’ll consider the fall-out in a little more detail, while asking whether or not GM are right to consider closing some of its domestic plants.
A Look at the Closures and President Trump’s Reaction
GM dropped the bombshell earlier this week, by announcing that it would end production at a total of five plants in the US and Canada.
This includes three major manufacturing sites in Ohio, Michigan and Maryland, while the firm’s strategic manoeuvre will slash 15% of its domestic workforce and up to 14,000 jobs in total.
Not only this, but the brand is also planning to kill off several of its renowned passenger cars, including the Chevrolet Impala, as it strives to reduce operational costs, boost profits and realign its product range to suit America’s changing tastes in vehicles.
The brand is also planning to kill off several of its renowned passenger cars, including the Chevrolet Impala.
Trump is one of several politicians to have expressed dismay at the move, with the President predictably taking to Twitter to vent his frustration. In one of a number of Tweets, he also claimed that the 25% duty applied to imported trucks and commercial vans play a key role in supporting this facet of the industry, while hinting that a similar tariff may applied to cars.
Trump’s also asserted that applying such duties to car imports would prevent firms like GM from closing their domestic plants, increasing the number of vehicles manufactured in the States and boosting the industry as a whole.
This is typical of the President’s inherently protectionist stance, and with separate tariffs also being considered for Chinese cars that are imported into the US market it’s clear that GM are merely the catalyst for the latest outburst rather than the underlying cause.
Is GM Right to Restructure in this Way?
Under the stewardship of any other administration, this would not be such an emotive issue, but Trump built his election campaign on the notion of restoring America’s car industry and has polarised opinion with his strong views on immigration and foreign trade.
While the aggressive response of the President is understandable (if somewhat misplaced) given his desire to deliver on his manifesto, however, the question that remains is whether GM are right to restructure their business in this way?
The brand are certainly right to consider reviewing their product range, particularly with customer behaviour changing and consumer borrowing across loans and credit growing at a noticeably slower rate in 2018. More specifically, as customers look to spend less on cars and seek out SUV and crossovers as opposed to standard passenger vehicles, GM has sought to be proactive and realign its production to suit demand.
Ultimately, private sector firms are always governed by profit and loss, while they retain the autonomy to structure their venture however they wish in a capitalist economy.
From an economic perspective, America’s GDP growth rate also declined from 4.2% to 3.5% in September 2018, hinting at a slight economic slowdown that has caught the attention of manufacturers across a number of industries.
This, when combined with an uncomfortably high debt-to-GFP ratio of 105% and incrementally rising labour costs, may well have forced the hand of GM executives and encouraged them to restructure their venture as a way of optimising profitability.
The Last Word
Ultimately, private sector firms are always governed by profit and loss, while they retain the autonomy to structure their venture however they wish in a capitalist economy.
So, while the Trump administration can talk in emotive terms about domestic manufacturing and consider the actions of GM in the context of their own protectionist agenda, individual brands should not be concerned with this or have their interests compromised by punitive tariffs.
With the indictment of two former senior Goldman Sachs bankers, accused by US prosecutors of paying bribes, stealing and laundering money from a Malaysian sovereign-wealth fund, the Wall Street giant finds itself at the center of one of the world's largest-ever financial scandals.
China's technology industry is developing into a serious rival to Silicon Valley, but there are political hurdles ahead. Bloomberg QuickTake explains how China's tech companies went from copycats to cutting edge, and why the US government is crying foul.
Earlier this month Z/Yen published their global financial centres index which stated that for the first time in 15 years, New York has overtaken London as the world’s top financial centre. The report focused on a number of factors including infrastructure and reputation and was combined with a survey to show the most attractive financial cities. To follow on from this, job search platform Joblift looked into the financial job markets in both London and New York to find out if these results matched or contradicted the Z/Yen conclusions. While New York may have become the most attractive worldwide financial centre, Joblift’s results show that the crown still lies with London when it comes to job availability and growth.
London has more than twice the number of vacancies and three times as much job growth
According to Joblift, 124,788 financial job vacancies have been posted in London in the last 12 months. In comparison, New York has been the location of 49,526 financial vacancies in the same time period, around 2.5 times less than in the UK’s capital. To further bolster London’s claim as the financial job market top spot, vacancies in the capital have increased at three times the rate of New York’s. While the US city’s financial job market increased by 1% each month on average in the last 12 months, London’s market saw a 3% average rise.
Both cities share the most in-demand professions and top employers but vacancies in new york were more secure
Despite the differences in number of vacancies and job growth, the financial job markets in the two cities have a lot in common. Accountants are the most in-demand professionals in both cities, making up 12% of the job market in London, and 9% in New York. They are followed by Finance Managers in London (11%) and Economists in New York (6%), with these professions switching in each location as the third most in-demand – Economists in London (4%), and Finance Managers in New York (6%). Additionally, while not in the same ranking order, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were the top employers in both New York and London. However, while the same professions are in demand, jobs in New York were more secure. In the last year, 87% of the finance vacancies advertised in New York were for permanent contracts, while postings offering the same contract type in London made up just 75% of the capital’s financial market.
(Source: Joblift)
The biggest risk to stock market investors right now is US Federal Reserve policy error - not a sharp bond market sell-off.
Tom Elliott, International Investment Strategist at deVere Group, is speaking out as financial markets have shown increasing nervousness in recent days.
Mr Elliott comments: “Investors in all assets can be forgiven for fearing a bond market sell-off, given the recent sharp increase in Treasury yields. Higher Treasury yields are likely to lift yields in other core government bond markets, increasing the risk-free rates that other assets have to compete against.
“But if the stock market rally is about to end, is it really going to be because bond investors become afraid of the growth and inflation risks of the strong US economy?
“This is, surely, not realistic given the modest inflation data.
“Fed chair, Jay Powell, has repeatedly made clear his nervousness of reading too much into the recent uptick in US wage growth, and the tightening labour market, which are often considered key determinates for inflation.
“Indeed, it is worth noting not only that September’s hourly wage growth, of 2.8% year-on-year, was actually lower than August’s 2.9%, but also that inflation expectations are broadly stable.
“The Fed’s preferred measure of inflation, the core PCE index, stands at just 2%.”
He continues: “With three more interest rate hikes expected next year, which would take the Fed’s target range to 2.75% – 3%, there is a growing risk not of inflation derailing the U.S economy, but Fed policy error whereby growth is harmed because of an overly-aggressive policy mix.
“This would include not only raising interest rates too fast, but also its quantitative tightening programme that is withdrawing $50bn a month from the U.S. economy, and so contributing to higher bond yields.”
Mr Elliott concludes: “Therefore, the risk to stock market investors comes not from a sharp bond market sell-off which raises the risk-free yields on Treasuries. It is from the Fed ignoring its chair’s own advice and tightening monetary policy faster than the American economy can stand.”
(Source: deVere Group)
We speak with thought leader Andrew Morris - a wealth transfer expert who’s dedicated his career to helping clients plan, grow and protect their assets. For over 25 years now, he’s been passionate about helping families with setting up charitable remainder trusts and assisting families with special needs to secure their future through the use of insurance. As a Social Security Analysts, Andrew helps clients maximise and understand their Social Security benefits to optimise their retirement planning.
What trends are you seeing in the current insurance landscape and how do you intend to keep up with these?
The current trend I see in the industry is the tremendous need for an alternative form of guaranteed lifetime income in addition to social security for the aging baby boomer population. Since many major corporations no longer offer a defined benefit type pension plan, many retirees are looking for ways to have a guaranteed lifetime income stream which can only be offered through insurance companies and their living income benefit riders. The recent DOL (Dept. of Labor) legislation regarding the fiduciary rule has made the return of guaranteed lifetime benefit riders popular again, since many companies have now lowered fees and have simplified the benefits to adhere to the new rules.
Another trend that I see in the insurance industry is the need to make sure that older whole life policies are upgraded to make sure that the aging 76 million baby boomer population has adequate life insurance coverage. With the increase in American retirees living longer and the standard life expectancy numbers increasing from age 78 to age 85, life insurance mortality tables had to be updated a few years ago to reflect these longer life expectancy rates. This increase in the mortality tables has left many old policies old and ‘underinsured’. Clients can now enjoy receiving larger coverage increased face values for old permanent life policies for a lower cost or the same amount due to the recent change in mortality tables. The only way I can keep up with the amount of new service for these older policies and aging clients is through the use of technology.
What is the biggest challenge the US insurance sector faces today? What would be your solution?
The biggest challenge the insurance industry faces today is technology and the ability for insurance companies that are considered old and antiquated to keep up by updating their systems for servicing and cybersecurity. As a result, I anticipate that there will be further consolidation within the insurance industry over the next couple of years. With the baby boomer population turning 65 at a daily rate of 10,000 per day, it is an enormous number to keep up with. So, the companies that are not up to speed technology wise will fall by the waste side and will be acquired by larger insurance companies.
The only solution for companies that are currently behind in their technology would be to establish a new strategic alliance or joint venture, where they partner up with a third-party vendor and potentially outsource the work. Very few insurers have all the resources they need to become truly cutting edge. Technological advances are changing business and operating models, which is challenging to an industry that is accustomed to slow evolution.
What do you find businesses commonly fail to consider when it comes to insurance?
Businesses commonly fail to consider the fact that that they are ‘underinsured’ in relation to price. Many businesses will value good price as opposed to the proper amount of insurance for their business. Having a good insurance adviser or consultant can help business owners who are underinsuring themselves to start saving them money. Insurance is one of the most important needs for a small business, yet it is something that many owners skimp on. People don’t reevaluate their insurance needs as their companies grow and numerous small businesses don’t have business interruption insurance in addition to property and casualty coverage, even though it is something that can put their companies and livelihoods at risk. I think that it is vital for company owners to consider and be mindful of the damaging impact that an emergency incident can have if your business is not properly insured.
New research reveals a UK technology market which has attracted the eye of US businesses and seen a huge increase in transactions, with acquisitions of UK technology companies up 386% in 2017 than there were in 2009).
Of the 247 UK companies to have exited into the US in 2017, almost a third (32.3%) of those were technology companies, followed by manufacturing, which has also seen an increasing interest from the US over the same period.
While technology has been one of the principle drivers of the UK M&A market in the mid-market, the results highlight there has also been a wider trend of increasing activity from US acquirers. Overall, the UK has seen the acquisition of companies below £1billion increase by 86% over the last decade (2009 to 2017), with sectors such as Business Services and Manufacturing having increased in the number of sales to US acquirers.
Commenting on the findings, Andy Hodgetts, Senior Corporate Finance Manager at Buzzacott said: “The UK’s technology landscape is changing dramatically and is far more active than it was just under a decade ago. Silicon Valley is no longer the sole proprietor for developing new innovations, the UK is a hotbed for talent, and in the US’ acquisitions of UK companies, they are gaining access to that talent pool.
Hodgetts continued: “There has been a lot of uncertainty around Brexit and what it means for the UK, which has left many businesses unsure as to when might be a good time for them to sell. What we are seeing however is that there are a number of opportunities and buyers out there, especially in the US. For UK companies that are planning on exiting, but have waited due to the uncertainty the UK faces, it is important to not just think about companies within the UK that might want to acquire the business, but explore internationally too as there are plenty of buyers available, whatever the sector.”
(Source: Buzzacott)
