Potential debt problems more common among the educated, study suggests

Oct 09, 2012 by Jeff Grabmeier

(Phys.org)—Before the financial crash of 2008, it was highly educated Americans who were most likely to pile on unmanageable levels of debt, a new study suggests.

Overall, the percentage of Americans who were paying more than 40 percent of their income for debts like mortgages and increased from about 17 percent in 1992 to 27 percent in 2008.

But college-educated people were more likely than those with high school or less education to be above this 40 percent threshold - considered to be a risky amount of for most .

The association between more education and higher debt was true even after taking into account the fact that people with more education tend to have higher incomes.

In addition, people who reported being more optimistic about the future of the economy for the next five years were more likely to have a heavy debt burden, the study found.

"People who piled on debt may have been too optimistic about their economic future, but you can't blame that on a lack of education," said Sherman Hanna, co-author of the research and professor of at Ohio State University.

"People with college educations may have thought they were immune to any . But when people stop believing things might go bad, that's when they get in trouble."

Hanna and his colleagues also found that the didn't just involve homeowners who took out bigger mortgages than they could afford. In fact, 35 percent of renters had a heavy debt burden in 2007, compared to 21 percent of homeowners.

Overall, Hanna said the research suggests that despite generally held , it wasn't just uneducated people, and not just homeowners, who precipitated the by taking on too much debt.

"There wasn't just one group of Americans who were at fault," Hanna said.

"All types of households, renters and homeowners, educated and not, were taking on more of debt burden than they could bear. And lenders of all types - not just mortgage lenders - seemed to be taking more risks."

Hanna and his colleagues conducted two related studies, one appearing in the current issue of the International Journal of Consumer Studies and the other in the most recent Consumer Interests Annual.

In both studies, the researchers were interested in finding households that were paying more than 40 percent of their yearly income to pay off debt, including rent or mortgage, vehicle leases or loan payments, property taxes, credit cards, student loans and more. These were defined as households with a heavy debt burden.

"If more than 40 percent of your income is going toward debt, you're at a danger point, because if household income drops for any reason, it would be very difficult to keep up all your payments," Hanna said.

In both papers, the researchers looked at data from six rounds of the U.S. Survey of Consumer Finances held between 1992 and 2007, which included a total of 25,889 households. The SCF is sponsored by the Federal Reserve Board and asks detailed questions about families' balance sheets, pensions, income and demographic characteristics.

In the IJCS paper, the researchers found that college-educated people were more likely to have a heavy debt burden, even after taking into account not only income, but also expectations, as well as their age and other characteristics that may influence debt burden.

"We just can't blame the lenders and say they were exploiting uneducated people who didn't know better. Many of those who got in over their heads were highly educated," Hanna said.

"There's plenty of blame to go around."

The percentage of households with a heavy debt burden increased from 1992 until 1998, but then dropped by 2001, when the United States went into a short recession, before rebounding again through 2007.

"Americans pulled back on their spending slightly during the slight recession of 2001, but after it was over debt levels continued to rise," Hanna said.

The Consumer Interests Annual paper found that the percentage of homeowners who had heavy debt burdens increased from about 15 percent in 1992 to 22 percent in 2007. However, the increase was even more dramatic for renters, going up from 20 percent to 35 percent during that same period.

"The percentage of renters who piled on debt really surprised me," Hanna said.

"It shows that the financial crisis wasn't all about housing speculation. There was too much debt in all parts of the economy."

Explore further: Tax benefits for housing not as outsized as previously thought, study says

More information: www.blackwellpublishing.com/jo… al.asp?ref=1470-6423
www.consumerinterests.org/2012… nference-papers.html

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Chinese-Americans don't overborrow, study finds

Oct 17, 2011

Bad mortgage loans and rampant consumer debt were two of the primary causes for the recent economic recession in the U.S. Despite a national trend of debt problems, a University of Missouri researcher has found one American ...

Researcher says Chinese credit market remains underdeveloped

Aug 03, 2010

The Chinese government has made several reforms to its economic policies in recent years. Despite these reforms, a new study shows that Chinese households are not utilizing their credit market to its fullest extent. Rui Yao, ...

Chinese credit card usage growing quickly, study finds

Aug 28, 2012

(Phys.org)—In the past two decades, the Chinese economy has undergone many drastic reforms in an effort to compete more effectively on the international market. These reforms included allowing foreign banks to offer credit ...

Did watching television put Americans in debt?

Nov 18, 2011

A new study conducted by researchers at Hunter College reveals that the role of advertising in household consumption and debt may be greater than suggested by existing research. Drs. Matthew Baker and Lisa George (Economics) ...

Recommended for you

The tyranny of realism in energy planning

17 hours ago

A report exploring the political economy of energy planning under democracy and the Integrated Energy Planning (IEP) process due to conclude this year was launched by the British High Commission, Project ...

Organising is the key to efficient purchasing

Aug 19, 2014

A well-functioning purchasing organisation is a powerful tool for companies. Chalmers researcher Ingrid Hessel shows in her thesis that internal purchasing operations affects and is affected by relationships ...

User comments : 4

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

IronhorseA
not rated yet Oct 09, 2012
But the question is 'educated in what?' Most college education is not focused on the world of finance, which leaves most college graduates in the same situation as less educated people when it comes to loans and debt.
Eikka
not rated yet Oct 09, 2012
it was highly educated Americans who were most likely to pile on unmanageable levels of debt


Students who are duped into unemployment through bullshit degrees with expensive tuitions tend to end up highly educated and waist-deep in debt.

chromosome2
not rated yet Oct 11, 2012
I can speak to this-- when I was going to school for nursing, I wasn't as frugal as I should have been because I thought "I'll be making nursing wages in a few years, it'll be fine". Not if you fail out the first quarter of the program, it won't. I'm just now getting up to $12 an hour in a field I'm well-suited to, and I intend to pay it all back on this, using as high a percentage of my income as possible. After that, I might go back to school.. I can't say I'm sure whether the idea of the stress and debt will appeal to me at that time though.
antialias_physorg
not rated yet Oct 11, 2012
But college-educated people were more likely than those with high school or less education to be above this 40 percent threshold - considered to be a risky amount of debt for most households.

Considering that in the US you have to actually pay for your education beyond highschool (and pay dearly) that isn't too surprising. You start your any career (beyond the most basic ones deep in debt by definition in the US.

And lenders of all types - not just mortgage lenders - seemed to be taking more risks."

How much of a risk do you take as a lender when there are two outcomes:

1) Borrower pays back the loan (plus a huge profit of margin for yourself and a bonus)
2) Borrower does not pay back the loan and government bails you out (plus also a bonus)

No wonder they gave loans left and right without asking any questions (and no wonder they're still doing it exactly the way they were doing it before the crisis)