Current Events in March 2013

The upward momentum in home prices continued in January.

The S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices -- the leading measure of U.S. home prices -- showed average home prices increased 7.3% for the 10-City Composite and 8.1% for the 20-City Composite in the 12 months ending in January 2013.

All 20 cities posted year-over-year gains with Phoenix leading the way with a gain of 23.2%. Nineteen of the twenty cities showed acceleration in their year-over-year returns. Despite posting a positive double-digit annual return, Detroit was the only city to show a deceleration. After 28 months of negative annual returns, New York came into positive territory in January.

Best showing in nearly seven years

“The two headline composites posted their highest year-over-year increases since summer 2006,” said David M. Blitzer, Chairman of the Index Committee at S&P Dow Jones Indices. “This marks the highest increase since the housing bubble burst.”

After more than two years of consecutive year-over-year declines, New York reversed trend and posted a positive return in January. The Southwest (Phoenix and Las Vegas) plus San Francisco posted the highest annual increases; they were also among the hardest hit by the housing bust. Atlanta and Dallas recorded their highest year-over-year gains.

“Economic data continues to support the housing recovery,” Blitzer continued. “Single-family home building permits and housing starts posted double-digit year-over-year increases in February 2013. Despite a slight uptick in foreclosure filings, numbers are still down 25% year-over-year. Steady employment and low borrowing rates pushed inventories down to their lowest post-recession levels.”

In January 2013, nine cities -- Atlanta, Charlotte, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Phoenix, San Francisco and Tampa -- and both Composites posted positive monthly returns. Dallas was the only Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) where the level remained flat.

In terms of annual rates of change, all 20 cities as well as both Composites posted positive change. Atlanta, Detroit, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis, Phoenix and San Francisco were the eight MSAs to report double-digit annual returns.  

Uncertainty -- some of it generated by the sequester -- has put consumers in something of a funk.

The Conference Board reports its Consumer Confidence Index, which had improved in February, fell to 59.7 in March from 68.0. Factors include a drop in the Present Situation Index to 57.9 from 61.4 and a decline in the Expectations Index to 60.9 from 72.4 last month.

“Consumer Confidence fell sharply in March, following February’s uptick,” said Lynn Franco, director of economic indicators at The Conference Board. “This month’s retreat was driven primarily by a sharp decline in expectations, although consumers were also more pessimistic in their assessment of current conditions. The loss of confidence, particularly expectations, mirrors the losses experienced this past December and January. The recent sequester has created uncertainty regarding the economic outlook and as a result, consumers are less confident.”

Survey highlights

• Consumers’ appraisal of current conditions declined in March. Those saying business conditions are “good” decreased to 16.0% from 17.6%, while those stating business conditions are “bad” increased to 29.3% from 28.2%.
• Consumers’ assessment of the labor market was mixed. Those claiming jobs are “plentiful” decreased to 9.4% from 10.1%, but those claiming jobs are “hard to get” edged down to 36.2% from 36.9%.
• Consumers are once again pessimistic about the short-term outlook. Those expecting business conditions to improve over the next six months decreased to 14.4% from 18.0%, while those anticipating business conditions to worsen increased to 18.3% from 16.6%.
• Consumers’ outlook for the labor market was also less favorable. Those expecting more jobs in the months ahead declined to 12.3% from 16.1%, while those expecting fewer jobs increased to 26.6% from 22.1%.
• The proportion of consumers expecting their incomes to increase fell to 13.7% from 15.8%, while those expecting a decrease edged down to 18.0% from 19.3%.
• The monthly Consumer Confidence Survey, based on a probability-design random sample, is conducted for The Conference Board by Nielsen, a leading global provider of information and analytics around what consumers buy and watch. The cutoff date for the preliminary results was March 14.

A little slack is showing up in the sales of new homes.

Figures released by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

show sales of new single-family houses totaled 411,000 units in February -- down 4.6% from the revised January rate of 431,000. The January rate was initially reported at 437,000.

Even with the decline, the February rate is 12.3% above the year-ago estimate of 366,000 and topped the 400,000 projected by forecasters at Briefing.com.

Home prices rise

The median sales price of new houses sold in February 2013 was $246,800 -- up $7,000 from the month before. The average sales price was $313,700 -- a gain of $18,500 from January.

Regarding home prices, The S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices -- released earlier in the day -- showed the increase in home prices in the year ending in January was the highest since the housing bubble burst.

The seasonally adjusted estimate of new houses for sale at the end of February was 152,000 -- a supply of 4.4 months at the current sales rate.

Airlines are charging fees for carry-on bags, checked bags, boarding passes, snacks, drinks, aisle seats and just about every other option you can think of. And yet, they're missing an obvious opportunity to jack up the rates for a large portion of the flying public -- charging by the pound.

After all, freight and delivery service charges usually include a flat fee plus an additional charge for each weight increment. Why not airlines? After all, it takes more fuel to transport heavier passengers and there's more wear and tear to seats and other aircraft parts.

So says Dr. Bharat P. Bhatta, a professor at a Norwegian university writing in this month's Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management.

"Charging according to weight and space is a universally accepted principle, not only in transportation, but also in other services," he said. "As weight and space are far more important in aviation than other modes of transport, airlines should take this into account when pricing their tickets."

"According to a recent article published in The Economist, a reduction of 1 kg (about 2.2 pounds) weight of a plane will result in a fuel savings worth $3,000 a year and a reduction of CO₂ emissions by the same token," Bhatta wrote. "Air Canada's regional carrier has removed life vests from all its planes in order to save weight and fuel that makes each flight about 25 kg lighter."

Some airlines, most notably Southwest, already require oversized passengers to buy two seats. Air Tran, recently acquired by Southwest, has started doing the same.

Where to weigh?

Implemention might prove a little burdensome. Since most passengers now get their board passes online, how would the airlines know how much they weigh? Would we have to go to a weighing station before making a reservation? That hardly seems workable.

Putting scales at check-in boarding would make the resemblance to a barnyard even stronger than it already is at most busy airports. Maybe passengers could be weighed as they go through security. What's one more indignity, after all?

Perhaps someone will publish an app that records our weight on a minute-by-minute basis and automatically uploads it to Google and Facebook, where it will be available to anyone who wants it.

Three models

Lightweight comments aside, Bhatta presents three possible pricing models in his paper:

• Fare according to actual weight: Charging passengers according to how much they, and their belongings weigh, fixing a rate for kg per passenger so that a person weighing 60kg (132 pounds) pays half the airfare of a 120-kg (264-pound) person.
• "Base fare" minus or plus an extra charge: This option involves charging a fixed base rate, with an additional charge for heavier passengers to cover the extra costs. Every passenger could have a different fare according to this option.
• Same fare if the passenger has an average weight, but discounted/extra fare for low/excess weight below/above a certain limit. 

It seems unlikely this will come about, but if it does, it would at least provide yet another reason to lose weight, which would probably be a good thing for everyone. On the other hand, Mayor Bloomberg may make it a requirement for airlines that fly in and out of New York City.

Not a new idea

In the spirit of full disclosure, it must be noted that this is not a new idea. I proposed it in a letter to the editor of Frequent Flyer Magazine back in 1980 when I had an assignment that involved frequent air travel.

One gloomy Monday morning, I watched nervously as my boss, who modeled himself physically and temperamentally on Ed Asner, thumbed through the magazine, stopping at the letters section.

"Here's some idiot saying airlines should charge by weight," he scowled. "That sounds like something you'd dream up, Truman."

I nervously suggested we adjourn to the Pastrami Palace without further delay, successfully distracting my hot-tempered superior before he read further. 

If you ask me, food fads are kind of interesting for a couple of reasons.

First, it’s interesting to see how millions of people will all of a sudden decide to stay away from a certain food or choose to eat only one type of food in order to lose weight.

Like the Atkins craze for example, which seemed to peak a few years ago in terms of popularity, for a third time since it was first introduced in the late 1950s.

By the time 2001 and 2002 hit, many people abruptly decided to shun all carbohydrates and they considered things like rice, pasta and bread to be the actual Devil in food form.

Technically, diets like Atkins and The South Beach Diet aren’t fads, because they’ve been around forever, but for some reason, depending on maybe just one study, a widespread news report or a manipulated study finding, many consumers will abruptly shift their regular eating habits to replace it with the newest and latest diet craze.

According to a study released by the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture Research & Extension, there are very specific ways to spot a fad diet, which can be helpful for new dieters, who may think a particular diet is an across-the-board scientifically proven approach.

The study shows that if a company is saying its product has quick weight loss potential, and it’s not pitching long-term permanent fat loss, removed healthfully, you really want to be suspicious of that product and place it in the here-today-gone-tomorrow category of fad diets.

Initial weight loss

Researchers say initial weight decline is from loss of muscle and water, and the successes of a diet product shouldn’t be measured by this type of weight loss, since it’s predictive of how long you’ll be able to keep off that weight.

In addition, if a diet product says that you’ll be able to lose more than one to two pounds per week, you should press your inner consumer alert button, since quick loss generally means quick gain, the study shows.

Another telltale sign, of course, is if a diet plan doesn’t include exercise in its program, which many don’t.

A lot of these companies cater to the folks who don’t like to exercise and they use the reasoning that all you have to do is either eliminate or add certain foods. Products hardly ever deal with the problem of over-eating or inactivity, in case you haven't noticed.

Completely removing certain foods or choosing to stock up on another is a basic characteristic of the fad diet and many companies choose to use customer testimonials over scientific evidence to sell their products.

Furthermore, fad diet companies either make huge sweeping claims about what the results will be after using a product or they’ll draw a simplistic and catchy-sounding conclusion from a very intricate study, researchers show. 

And they’ll do this just to make a decent sales pitch, the study shows. There’s very little concern about your actually losing weight to keep it off.

Dollars over health

Additionally, researchers say the entire concept of buying a certain product to lose weight should be the first sign to consumers that something isn’t right, and it shows that the company is placing dollars over health and not using an approach that includes patience, hard work and follow-up.

In fact, researchers say choosing to eliminate or add a particular food to follow a diet plan can lead to all kinds of health risks and even death in some cases.

“This practice is extremely dangerous because it can lead to nutritional deficiencies and starvation,” said researchers in the study. “It can also lead to anemia, malnutrition, decreased renal function and ultimately death. Weight loss does usually occur but sticking to the plan tends to be difficult because of the monotonous nature of the diet.”

But yet and still, why are so many popular fad diets, well, popular?

Because you would think common sense would engender a bit of caution among consumers when it comes to using a diet product that’s advertised in-between one of those wretched reality shows.

For some reason, it’s hard to take a product seriously when it follows some Brandi Glanville rant from the “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills.”

Yes, unfortunately, I know who that is.

Kristi L. King, who’s the Senior Dietitian for Texas Children’s Hospital, Clinical Instructor at the Baylor College of Medicine and a spokesperson for the Academy of Nutrition of Dietetics says a lot of these kinds of diets are merely repackaged and sold again throughout the years, and each time, new people are sucked into the giant promises of quick results.

It’s really nothing new, says King.

“Earliest reports of fad diets are from early 19th century, so we have been at this for a long time,” said King in a statement for ConsumerAffairs.

“Fad diets sometimes do produce results, however, they don’t necessarily teach someone how to sustain a good quality of life on the diet and most importantly, how to live a healthy lifestyle. So, one goes off the diet and the pounds come back quickly. Someone then repackages the diet again and viola a new 'fad' diet. It’s a vicious cycle,” she says.

In addition, King says the luring combination of small work and large results are the perfect line to cast out towards a sea of people who don’t have the time or desire to lose weight the traditional way.

Instant gratification

“Instant gratification,” she says. “Many people think quick fix when they see the new diet. We as a society tend to be fixated on immediate results with as little work as possible. So when the newest diet pops up in the media or on the front display of the bookstore, people tend to want to try it, seeking those quick results.”

Another tactic by companies, experts find, is they’ll take a basic weight loss truth and apply it to the results of their own product. Like with the Atkins diet, for example.

Researchers point out diets like Atkins take a simple and scientifically proven result and combine it with a quick and fast, usually unhealthy, weight-loss approach.

And continually, people all over the world buy into this concept, when they should really be hyper-aware and stay away from companies that put health over convenience, improper time over proper methods and fast results over actual well-being.

“The Atkins diet essentially eliminates several foods and food groups like fruits, cereals, breads, grains, starches, baked goods, dairy products, starch vegetables and sweets,” wrote the University of Arkansas researchers.  

“This simply translates into a significant daily calorie reduction—the basis of any weight loss diet. Any reduction of calories—whether from protein, carbohydrate or fat—will result in weight loss."

"The basic weight loss formula, is calories burned must exceed calories consumed. Easily done when the majority of foods on a typical day’s diet are eliminated. There’s nothing revolutionary about this regimen," said researchers.

If you think about it, addiction doesn’t have any grey areas, because either you’re dependent on something or you’re not. But what addiction does have are stages, some might say.

Meaning, one can be at the tail-end of an addiction and along the way they’ve learned—not mastered—a way to co-exist with it, while others can be in the throes of their habit and be both aware and content with it at the same time.

Then of course there are those who don’t know they’re addicted and don’t want to know.

This happens in the case of sugar addiction more often than people realize, experts say, and although many are aware of eating too much sugar in things like sweetened beverages, pastries and candies, a good number of people aren’t thinking about the hidden sugars in those foods that aren’t necessarily sweet.

Toxic and difficult to avoid

Dr. Robert Lustig, who’s a pediatric endocrinologist at the University of California-San Francisco and a well-known crusader against the overuse of sugar, says the addictive white sweet stuff isn't only toxic, but one of the most difficult addictions to avoid.

Sugar, of course, falls into the same accessible and legal category of addictive substances as alcohol, cigarettes and prescription drugs, which makes avoiding these things even more difficult compared to illegal substances, which are more commonly associated with the word “addiction.”

And Lustig says because of this reason and others, our culture has a predisposition to being sugar-addicted for the mere reason that our brains heavily associate it with goodness, enjoyment and satisfaction, which certainly aren’t the brain signals one needs when they’re trying to cut back on something.

"We love it"

“We love it,” said Lusting in a 2012 television interview.

“We go out of our way to find it. And I think one of the reasons evolutionarily is because there are no [foods] on the planet that have fructose that are poisonous to you. It is all good, so when you taste something that’s sweet, it’s an evolutionary Darwinism signal that says this is a safe food. We were born this way,” he said.

In addition, Lustig says that, chemically, there is absolutely no difference between conventional sugar and high-fructose corn syrup, which many people have just recently learned about, thanks to a continued national dialogue that’s been taking place over the course of the last decade or so.

Although high-fructose corn syrup has taken a beating by many people during this dialogue, Lustig says both are equally bad for you and have the same addictive qualities.

And whether you’re consuming sugar or the syrupy additive on a daily basis, it doesn’t really matter from a health-risk perspective.

Additionally, you’ll be equally challenged when it comes to being able to completely remove yourself from wanting, craving and being addicted to sugar.

“But I don’t have a sweet tooth," some might say. 

"It doesn’t matter," an expert might reply, for the mere fact that just about every processed food under the big bright yellow sun has either sugar or high-fructose corn syrup in it, which is why many scientists have compared sugar to cocaine in terms of being extremely hard to eliminate.

As addictive as cocaine

In a study published in the medical journal PLOS One, researchers found that not only is sugar just as addictive as cocaine, sugar replacements like saccharin are even more addictive and resemble cocaine dependency.

“Our findings clearly demonstrate that intense sweetness can surpass cocaine reward, even in drug-sensitized and addicted individuals,” wrote the researchers.

“We speculate that the addictive potential of intense sweetness results from an inborn hypersensitivity to sweet tastants. In most mammals, including rats and humans, sweet receptors evolved in ancestral environments poor in sugars and are thus not adapted to high concentrations of sweet tastants.”

“The supranormal stimulation of these receptors by sugar-rich diets, such as those now widely available in modern societies, would generate a supranormal reward signal in the brain, with the potential to override self-control mechanisms and thus to lead to addiction.”

And when it comes to the similarities between cocaine and sugar, in terms of addiction, the line is pretty darn slender.

Dopamine festival

Dopamine levels dramatically increase in the brain with both substances. Both sugar and cocaine trigger the part of the brain that controls incentives and being rewarded, experts say, and both produce mental and physical withdrawals of very serious proportions.

According to Lustig, the government only did it half right when it set a mandate to lower the amount of fat in foods in order to lower the chance of people getting heart disease, because the cases of heart disease are still extremely high, and most people don’t attribute this to sugar use.

He says the removal of fat in certain foods meant there was an increase in the amount of sugar that we started using, and that had a lot to do with consumers eating too much sugar in recent years.

After fat was removed “heart disease, metabolic syndrome, diabetes and death are skyrocketing,” said Lustig. “When you take the fat out of food it tastes like cardboard and the food industry knew that, so they replaced it with sugar.”

Of course some may say Lustig’s war on sugar is a bit over the top and if sugar or high-fructose corn syrup are completely avoided, there will still be the same health problems, like heart disease, metabolic syndrome and obesity to deal.

Others might say that lowering our sugar intake is an absolute must, not only in the foods commonly associated with sugar, but in other foods that are more likely to fall under the sodium umbrella and fall under our radar of overconsumption too.

Lustig and many other experts believe that too much sugar and a fried greasy sandwich, let’s say, will produce the same results. Sugar, fat and salt can all contribute to heart disease and other deadly disorders, so all of us could be at risks, he suggests.

Tiffany is sort of famous for its little blue boxes. But it's what in the box that counts, and that has been a problem lately for some of the consumers we've heard from.

Eric of Buena Park, Calif., sent a necklace to Tiffany for repairs. He said he watched a Postal Service employee, Paul, pack the necklace and mail it.

But then, "I got a call from Tiffany and they told me I shipped them an empty box," he said in a posting to ConsumerAffairs. "Later, Raymond (Tiffany customer service) told me that there was no way I could have shipped them my necklace because the shipping box was too small. He told me to call the post office."

Eric said he asked Raymond to review the security video that was taken when the package arrived.

"He brushed me off and told me to call the post office," Eric said.

Even worse is the experience of a consumer who asked that we not use her name so let's just call her "M."

"I ordered online from Tiffany an Elsa Peretti Open Heart, 18K gold bracelet as a birthday present for a friend of mine. She is 90 years old, has a broken neck, and is in an assisted living facility in Vero Beach, Florida," M said. "When her gift arrived the first time, the box was empty.

"When I contacted Tiffany, I was told that they had to go through a 7 to 10 business day investigation period before they would replace the item," M said. She asked them to call the elderly friend and apologize, but Tiffany did not do so.

After waiting nine days, M called Tiffany to see about the investigation but no one could tell her anything.

Strike 2

"A poor experience all around," M said. "But it got worse. Today my friend received her second Tiffany package. The box was empty."

M once again called Tiffany and asked if they could speed up shipping the replacement but got nowhere.

"I was flabbergasted. As I write this, I'm sitting here with three Tiffany rings on my fingers. My husband and I have dealt with Tiffany's for years, as has my friend," M said. "I feel that we were treated as if we were suspect. This is the worst internet customer experience that I have ever had. It is my last customer experience with Tiffany."

For obvious reasons, Tiffany is a tempting target for those who might have a predilection to tamper with deliveries, so it's not surprising that missing merchandise and empty boxes have been problems for years. But you'd think Tiffany would be pretty good at dealing with the problem by now. Then again, maybe not.

"I ordered a ring as a Christmas gift, it was the wrong size so, following the return center's instructions I insured it with the Post Office and mailed it back for an exchange," said Anne of Utah back in 2007. "Short version, it was stolen during shipping, and three months later they let me know they wouldn't send a replacementer, after telling me they would.

"They refused to submit it to the Post Office so the insurance I paid for would cover it, and by the time they mailed me back the original package and I submitted it to the Post Office they refused my claim because it was past the time period allowed for submitting a claim. I'm out $200+ and not very happy," Anne concluded.

And what you might conclude from these tales is that the best way to be sure there's actually something in that little blue box is to go into the store and make the purchase in person.

Some of us are old enough to remember when making an online purchase was something of a novelty. For example, Amazon.com was founded in 1994 to sell books on the Internet.

“Yeah, right,” many people thought.

Today Amazon.com is an international online retailer selling a lot more than just books. And it has plenty of company. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, online sales, or e-commerce, totaled $225.5 billion in 2012.

In many of those sales, the consumer was able to purchase the products without paying state sales tax.

From the beginning of the consumer-based Internet, companies selling online didn't bother collecting sales tax. The individual purchases were small and so were the totals. By the time the states began to sit up and take notice, the U.S. Supreme Court had taken a position.

Supreme Court ruling

In 1992 the high court held that requiring out-of-state retailers to collect sales tax for the jurisdiction of each and every customer would be an unreasonable burden. Besides, in 1992 Internet sales were minuscule.

Since then online retailers have operated without having to collect sales tax, perhaps a small competitive advantage but more likely a greater advantage administratively. Online retailers don't have to file monthly sales tax returns with 50 different states.

Today, it's not only states that think online retailers should collect sales tax but so do brick-and-mortar retailers, most of which are independently owned. They argue that if they have to collect sales tax, so should their online competitors. Not having to charge sales tax gives online retailers, the argument goes, a competitive price advantage.

Some online retailers add on a state sales tax if the company has some type of physical presence in the customer's state. States and brick-and-mortar retailers have pushed for something more.

Marketplace Fairness Act

The result is a bipartisan move in Congress to require all online retailers to charge sales tax. It's called the Marketplace Fairness Act. Brick-and-mortar businesses – already smarting from “showrooming,” the consumer practice of looking at a product in a store then ordering it online – say it helps level the playing field.

Some Internet retailers are fine with that. Amazon.com has publicly endorsed the legislation. After a high-profile dispute with California over the sales tax collection issue Amazon agreed to start collecting sales tax from California customers last September.

When the U.S. Senate last week approved the Marketplace Fairness Act, as an amendment to its budget resolution, the National Retail Federation (NRF) claimed it as a major victory.

“This is a critically important issue for retailers – both large and small – across the country,” said Mathew Shay, CEO of the NRF. “Both brick-and-mortar stores and e-commerce leaders understand that the Marketplace Fairness Act is common-sense legislation dedicated to protecting states’ rights, strengthening our communities and preserving our free market system.”

$24 billion in lost revenue

According to NRF, 45 states are losing an estimated $24 billion every year because of unreported Internet purchases.

But the battle in Congress isn't over as the Marketplace Fairness Act faces some opposition. eBay, for example, is among the Internet retailers who oppose the sales tax collection mandate.

eBay's circumstances are different from Amazon's. While some people do, in fact sell items on eBay as part of a business, most are consumers who are trying to sell used, hand-made or collectible items online. eBay argues that requiring them to collect and file sales tax on their sales would be like requiring someone to collect sales tax on items sold at a yard sale.

The popular arts and craft marketplace site Etsy could also be similarly affected. Would it be up to individual sellers to figure out the proper tax rate for customers in all 50 states, collect the tax and file the paperwork? 

Politics

There's an element of ideology in all of this as well. Some conservatives who generally don't like taxes are opposed to giving up the Internet as an oasis of tax-free commerce. The right-leaning Washington Times even disputes the idea that the marketplace is currently unfair to brick-and-mortar retailers.

“Store chains with physical locations have many advantages which offset tax disadvantages,” the newspaper notes. “They can attract casual and impulse buyers and allow them to examine their products with access which is impossible online. Their size and the bulk in which they buy products wholesale give them an advantage through economies of scale which allow them to sell products through their stores at substantially reduced prices. They can further undercut online retailers because they do not have to pay shipping to deliver each product.”

Effect

The real question, of course, is will having to pay sales tax on Internet purchases dampen consumer enthusiasm for the online marketplace? A study by Stanford University suggests it would – at least it would among eBay customers. Studying eBay's online marketplace, the researchers said they found “significant sensitivity to sales tax.”

While it might affect a few online retailers like eBay, a sales tax might not dissuade consumers from making an online purchase, according to some other industry experts. They argue that online retailers have a lot more advantages over brick-and-mortar competitors than no sales tax. Lower overhead, for starters, gives them a significant price advantage before taxes are even considered.

The reality may be that the mandate to collect sales tax will have an uneven effect. It might not affect traditional online retailers like Amazon but might be a negative for sites with a business model like eBay's. That's another reason why the fight in Congress over the issue may just be beginning and the Supreme Court, which was pulled into this argument 21 years ago, might be again.

Some of us who read Shakespeare either in high school, college or in our leisure time had sort of a love, hate relationship with the playwright’s work, especially the first time we picked it up and tried to become familiar with the language of his day.

Oh sure, as we got older some of us began to appreciate stories like “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” and “Hamlet” and before we knew it, we thought to ourselves, man, I wished I would have paid a little more attention in high school English class, but I guess some of us didn’t yet develop the literary palate to properly receive Shakespeare’s incredibly written stuff.

Plus, it’s hard to appreciate the nuances of a story knowing that a test or quiz is just around the bend.

For some reason a lot of schools forget this when their trying to teach the written classics and they wonder why some students don’t get more enjoyment out of reading Shakespeare and the other literary greats.

And if high school and college professors are having trouble getting students excited about Shakespeare, imagine those teachers that try to introduce it to younger kids—like middle schoolers for example. 

Well, a group of researchers from Wexner Medical Center at Ohio State University have been working with autistic elementary school children, using Shakespeare plays like “The Tempest," to teach them a host of different skills.

More specifically, the researchers are using these plays to help teach social and communication skills to autistic children, since the English writer’s works are full of exaggerated voices and facial expressions, which can be used for both teaching and therapy.

Hunter Heartbeat Method

The idea was conceived by Shakespearian actress Kelly Hunter, with the Royal Shakespeare Company in London, where she started a program called the “Hunter Heartbeat Method,” in order to “release the communicative blocks within children with autism.”

Eventually, the program caught the attention of some university researchers.

Dr. Marc J. Tassé, who’s the director of the Nisonger Center at Ohio State University’s Wexner Medical Center, says he was pleasantly surprised to learn how well the children in his pilot study have responded to the legendary creations of Shakespeare.

“It’s quite amazing to see how a Shakespearian play can be transformed into, really, a therapeutic intervention,” he said.

The main purpose of the study was to confirm if there was any scientific proof in Hunter’s artistic approach, and so far, Tassé says he’s seen noticeable improvement in the children and he's eager to see what the next level of research will bring about.

The next phase of the study will last for 42 weeks, says Tassé, so researchers can determine just how successful this Shakespearean approach towards helping children with autism really is.

Although the "Hunter Heartbeat Method" has produced some successes with autistic children—as it relates to their social and communication challenges—researchers still needed to take a closer look to determine if the positive results had a firm level of consistency.

Hunter “has what we would call a lot of anecdotal evidence, but there hasn’t really been any empirical evidence,” said Tassé. “We are trying to figure out scientifically what exactly happens with Shakespeare that strikes a chord with these children.”

And to help figure that out, Tassé and his team will conduct research on two groups of autistic children in Columbus, Ohio. One group will be introduced to Shakespeare as a form of therapy and the other group will use therapy that doesn’t include the famed writer’s works.

Eventually, scientists will be able to determine just how one group responds to Shakespeare compared to the other.

Truly optimistic

However, on the basis of the first study, which included 14 children, Tassé says he’s truly optimistic.

“With the first pilot study, we saw some significant improvement in communication, in social relationships and in pragmatic language skills,” Tassé explained. “Things like eye contact, emotion expression, emotion recognition, and expressive communication also improved dramatically.”

“We can then compare if the gains that we see in the children who participate in the Shakespeare intervention are greater than the gains other children with autism are achieving through just regular school and just regular intervention,” he said.

Robin Post, who works with Ohio State University’s theater department, says she was not only thrilled to learn that children were open to the sometimes-hard-to-understand plays, but that she felt privileged to witness the sheer joy that it bought to the children too.

Apparently, the playful methods Post and her team have been using to incorporate Shakespeare, have allowed the children to receive the stories as a game instead of a cumbersome literary lesson.

“There’s this opportunity to have this real joyful experience with this kids, and I’m really honored that the kids will let us [teach them],”said Post.

When deciding whether to dine in or dine out there’s usually a few things to consider. For one, you’ll have to decide what you’re in the mood for, as figuring out what you feel like eating is usually way more difficult than it needs to be.

Then you have to determine if you really want to spend the money, because in some cases people continue to eat out—several times a week even—regardless of whether they’re on a tight budget or not.

“An evening out with friends, good food and wine over paying my light bill on time, why not?” some might say. “Hopefully, I’ll have so much fun it’ll be worth it," they'll rationalize.

Using this type of reasoning is practically a way of life for some young adults, who are still figuring out the balance between financial responsibilities and trying to maintain at least a semblance of the social life they had when they still lived with their parents.

And even those who don’t live on a tight budget and are able to eat out anytime they want—at the best places, mind you—have occasional difficulty finding a restaurant that meets their expectations and offers both the high quality food and service that most expect when they’re shelling out big money.

Some people like chains

Most people have at least one favorite place to eat out and it’s usually not a chain restaurant or an establishment that works as part dining facility, part assembly line—popping pre-made dishes onto the stove or into the microwave, serving you in about 15 minutes flat and getting you out the door soon after.

But for a good number of people, chain restaurants are their favorite places to eat, since some people love familiarity and uncomplicated menus.

In fact,  it’s safe to say that more consumers in the U.S. will visit a place like Red Lobster, instead of a high-end seafood place, one that charges so much for  a piece of fish, that you probably could have bought a boat and caught the darn thing yourself.

So the question is, why not go to a chain restaurant? Are they really that bad?

Sure, the food won’t be as fancy, or even as good as a one-of-a-kind place, but for the price, it can be worth it sometimes, especially when you can get out of the house and eat at a place that focuses on fun rather than reputation, which can sometimes make all the difference in the world when you’re out on the town with friends.

Of course, there are some people who are releasing their inner food snob as they read this, and these people love saying they’ll never step inside a chain restaurant, as if they’re just too above it all.

Stop it already. It’s just a meal. Plus, no one said you had to go to the Macaroni Grill each and every time you want a bowl of pasta, and because of co-workers, friends and family members, you’ll probably be forced to go to a chain restaurant sooner or later, so you might as well face it.

Besides, my guess is places like Applebee’s and T.G.I.F won’t kill you; they’ll just kill any chances of you paying a lot of money for a little bit of food, because most high-end restaurants love to do that.

Il primo

So out of the countless chain restaurants in the U.S., which ones do consumers consider the best?

In a survey conducted by the research company Technomic, Carrabba’s Italian Grill won for best food and drink out of the 115 major restaurant chains consumers were asked about.

And when it came to service and hospitality, Cracker Barrel Old Country Store took the prize for having the best service and hospitality.

When it came to overall restaurant appearance, as well as ambiance, Ruth’s Chris Steak House was crowned No. 1 and its competitor LongHorn Steakhouse was considered the place that offered the best value, consumers said.

And completing the top five of full-service chain restaurants was Red Lobster for convenience and for having the best take-out service, and if you’ve ever been to a busy Red Lobster, you’ll notice its takeout line can be as busy as the dining room.

Technomic said about 80,000 consumers who visit chain restaurants were included in this survey, and their answers serve as a good indicator for other people who want to know which chains to visit and which ones didn't make the top five. 

Darren Tristano of Technomic says, that many chain restaurants are aware of what consumers are looking for in their dining experience, but often times don’t have the dollars to respond to consumer wants, so it’s safe to say that any existing problems you may have with a chain restaurant, won’t be fixed anytime soon, so you’ll have to be patient.

“Restaurant operators are making efforts to track consumer purchasing habits and attitudes,” says Tristano.

“But very few of them have the resources to benchmark their results against their competition and measure performance over time. Today, success depends on excelling on the touch points that consumers feel are most important.”

Are happy days here again? New research from Bankrate.com finds consumers' feelings of financial security improved markedly over the past month, thanks to new stock market highs and continued job growth.

Bankrate's March Financial Security Index reading of 101.5 is the highest since the monthly polls began in December 2010. The 4.7-point jump from February's 96.8 is the second-biggest monthly gain in the Index's history (after a five-point gain from April 2011 to May 2011). This is only the third time in the past 28 months that consumers are feeling better about their financial security versus 12 months prior.

A non-starter

Bankrate found that more than half of working Americans either haven't noticed (48%) or have been unaffected (7%) by the January 1 expiration of the payroll tax cut. Another 30% have cut their spending as a result, 8% are putting less money into savings and 3% have scaled back retirement contributions.

"What is shocking is that the lowest-income households were the least likely to have cut back on spending and the most likely not to have noticed the change in the payroll tax," said Greg McBride, CFA, Bankrate.com's senior financial analyst. "These results contradict the widely held assumption that lower-income households would feel the biggest squeeze from the payroll tax cut expiring."

Surprising result

Those most likely to have cut spending were households with income between $50,000 and $75,000 per year. The same surprising results were evident when evaluating on the basis of educational attainment: households headed by college graduates were the most likely to have cut spending, whereas households headed by those with less than a college degree were the most likely not to have noticed the higher payroll tax rate.

Four of the Financial Security Index's five components -- job security, debt, net worth and overall financial situation -- indicate that Americans are better off now than one year ago; savings is the only laggard. All five components improved over the past month.

The survey was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International.

If you have requested an extension for filing your 2012 federal tax return, you may be getting a break from the Internal Revenue Service.

The agency is providing late-payment penalty relief to individuals and businesses who asked for the extension because they are attaching to their returns forms that couldn’t be filed until after January.

The relief applies to the late-payment penalty -- normally 0.5 percent per month -- charged on tax payments made after the regular filing deadline. This relief applies to any of the forms delayed until February or March, primarily due to the January enactment of the American Taxpayer Relief Act.

Covered forms

Taxpayers using forms claiming such tax benefits as depreciation deductions and a variety of business credits qualify for this relief. A complete list of eligible forms can be found in Notice 2013-24.

Individuals and businesses qualify for this relief if they properly request an extension to file their 2012 returns. Taxpayers who are eligible need not make any special notation on their extension request, but as usual, must properly estimate their expected tax liability and pay the estimated amount by the original due date of the return.

The return must be filed and payment for any additional amount due must be made by the extended due date. Interest still applies to any tax payment made after the original deadline.

The problems with payday loans are well-documented. These short term loans carry fees that translate into triple-digit interest rates, trapping most borrowers in an ongoing cycle of debt.

Even when consumers are able to repay the loan within the two-week term they can meet with problems. Jo, of Hammond, Ind., says she asked Payday Loan Yes for $250 but received $350 instead. Now, she says she's frustrated when she tries to pay off the loan.

“I have attempted to pay in full on my last two paydays, but they have not taken out the full amounts and keep charging me a finance charge,” Jo wrote in a ConsumerAffairs post. “I have e-mailed several times, along with calling but have not received any response by either e-mail or phone.”

Jo may be a rarity among payday loan borrowers in that she can so quickly repay. The Center for Responsible Lending says the typical payday loan borrower is indebted for more than half of the year with an average of nine payday loan transactions at annual interest rates over 400%.

Just providing a service

Payday lenders, meantime, insist they are providing a needed service for people with no or poor credit who are in need of emergency cash. If the payday lender isn't there to make the loan, the question goes, who will?

What about the old-fashioned pawn shop? Could it be an acceptable alternative? It might be in some cases.

A payday lender lends money by using your future earnings as collateral. When your paycheck is deposited, the lender can access your bank account and withdraw funds. The problem is, you need those future earnings to pay rent, buy groceries and put gas in the car. If you had extra money in your budget each month, you wouldn't need a loan.

A pawn shop accepts something you own as collateral. If you don't pay, it recoups its money by selling your property. There is no cycle of debt.

Pawn procedure

Here's how it works: You bring in a piece of property for the pawn shop to hold as collateral. First, the pawn broker has to decide whether the item has any value. Next, it has to decide if it even wants it.

Suppose you bring in a portable TV but the store has 25, just like it, sitting on a back shelf. It might not want one more.

Even if the pawn broker decides your item has value and they could sell it, they might only offer a small percentage of what it's worth as a loan. A ring they value at $250 might only net you $25 to $50 as a loan. Again, it's based on a judgment of how long it will take to sell and what price it will actually bring.

If the pawnbroker agrees to accept your collateral and loan you the money, you will be charged an interest rate. The rate is going to be steep but in nearly all cases, it will be less than what a payday lender would charge.

You receive a pawn ticket that lists the details of the transaction – the amount borrowed, the item used as collateral and the amount that must be repaid at the end of the term, usually 30 days. If you need more time to repay you can return to the pawn shop and pay the interest and renew for another 30 days. If you decide not to repay the loan, the pawn shop keeps your collateral and puts it up for sale.

Other business activities

Another difference between a pawn shop and a payday lender is that lending money is only part of a pawn shop's business. In addition to taking in items as collateral it also purchases items outright and resells them.

The cable TV reality series Pawn Stars has popularized pawn shops in recent years, showing the behind-the-scenes decision-making process of running a successful pawn shop. The broker must first arrive at the value of an item, then determine what they would be able to sell it for and how long it would likely take. That means the customer selling the items usually gets only a small portion of the value.

Pawn shops are highly regulated and each state has its own rules as to how they operate. They cooperate with law enforcement agencies in their jurisdiction to make sure the items bought and sold in a store are not stolen. Anything you bring in to pawn will be checked out in that regard.

While a payday loan might trap you in an endless cycle of debt, you shouldn't have that problem with a pawn shop. At some point the store will simply sell your merchandise, so anything you use for collateral should be something you are willing to part with.

If you are willing to part with it, maybe you should consider selling it on eBay or somewhere similar to start with. That way you avoid any interest charges. And it may be the best way to deal with a need for quick cash – sell an asset and avoid going into debt.

Have you noticed that you’ve been getting your allergies a little sooner each year? And have you noticed that some of your symptoms feel way stronger the last few years?

If the answer is yes on both fronts, you certainly aren’t alone, because according to researchers at National Jewish Health Hospital (NJH) in Denver, global warming is making allergy season worse and the bad news is, things won’t be reversing themselves anytime soon.

“With the combination of increased temperature and carbon dioxide, we are seeing a dramatic change, and allergy sufferers can probably feel that change,” explained Richard Weber, M.D., president of the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, and an allergist at National Jewish Health.

“We are experiencing longer allergy seasons, earlier onset and there is just more pollen in the air," he says.

National Jewish Health allergy experts recently examined Janet Clement, a local patient who typically gets her allergy symptoms each April, but this year, the symptoms started to present themselves in the dead of winter, and they came with much more of a wallop compared to last year, she said.

 “You don’t typically have allergies in the winter,” she said in an interview with National Jewish Health.

“But this year they got really bad and I was trying to figure out what was going on. In the past I’ve taken over-the-counter things to try to help, but I think, really, this year I need something more.”

Pollen counts up worldwide

In his own research, Weber referenced three other studies that showed pollen counts are going up all over the world due to global warming, as British researchers found a total of 385 plant species that were budding much earlier than they used to, which is obviously triggering allergy symptoms for some people much sooner in the year.

In the past, ragweed pollen season used to be for 13 days, Weber explained, but now it’s been extended to 27 days in the United States and in Canada, which has certainly caused more people to suffer stronger symptoms, for a much longer period of time.

“With the increased temperature, many plants tend to pollinate earlier in the season,” said Weber. “Not only that, but they're producing more pollen, so pollen counts are going up, and in some cases, dramatically so.

“A year ago, we saw pollen counts of certain trees that were about three times higher than what we normally would see in years past. It was awful. Plants that ordinarily were pollinating in April, by the beginning of March, they were going gangbusters,” he said.

In addition, Weber says depending on where you live in the U.S., but particularly in the northern states, there's not as much frost or cold temperatures as early as before. That's bad because it takes a “killing freeze” to keep ragweed pollen from persevering through the winter months.

“The season has broadened out so we're dealing with a much longer exposure,” says Weber.

“There’s going to be increased dampness and the like, especially in the coastal areas and that’s going to have an impact on molds like alternaria and cladosporium [which] will increase with increased temperature and increased CO2, so it is more dramatic -- longer season, earlier onset and more pollen in the air,” warns Weber.

Moreover, he says if people haven’t felt the difference in severity in their allergy symptoms yet, they probably soon will.

“The overall exposure of people that have allergies to these particular pollens is that they’re getting a bigger snoot full of allergenic protein over a longer period of time," says Weber.

What to do

In order to combat some of these allergy symptoms, Weber says it’s all about planning and trying to do things a little bit differently than you normally would.

First, begin taking your allergy meds earlier -- before your immune system is working at full capacity, which can cause your medication to be less helpful and cause it kick-in at a much slower pace.

Additionally, if you have to get outside during the day, do it earlier rather than later, as experts say weed pollens peak at midday, and at night. Also, close your windows, because those same pollens will still be in the air once twilight hits, so you want to be sure to close all windows once you’re inside.

And if you’re allergic to ragweed, you should stay away from these specific fruits, NJH says: Melons, bananas, honeydew melons and watermelons, since these fruits can cause people to have the same allergy symptoms that ragweed produces.

PETA -- People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals-- is the animal rights group that stages spectacular demonstrations aimed at galvanizing opposition to animal cruelty. It opposes wearing fur, condemns all types of cruelty to animals and encourages veganism, a form of vegetarianism that eliminates all animal products. It also operates a large animal shelter at its headquarters in Norfolk, Va.

PETA's in-your-face tactics have made it Public Enemy No. 1 as far as the food industry is concerned, and now the organization's animal shelter is giving its enemies an opportunity to tar PETA with the same brush it uses on restaurants, the fur industry and meat growers.

Something called the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a restaurant industry front group, is hoping to put PETA squarely in the doghouse by publicizing statistics indicating that it killed almost 90 percent of the dogs and cats placed at its shelter last year, a much higher percentage than other shelters in Virginia. CCF says that since 1998, the shelter has euthanized a total of 29,398 pets.

This chart, using official figures from the Virginia Department of Animal and Consumer Services, the state agency that regulates animal shelters, compares figures for all shelters in Virginia with those operated by humane societies, county shelters, the Charlottesville SPCA and PETA. 

"It is a large number, they took in more than 1,800 last year and euthanized 1,600," said Elaine Lidholm, director of communications for the Virginia agency. "If you look at the Richmond SPCA last year, I think they took in over 3,000 and euthanized fewer than a dozen."

But Lidholm noted that the Richmond SPCA is a "no-kill shelter. "They won't take an animal they think is not adoptable but PETA will take anything." 

Lidholm noted that her department, like most government agencies, collects and compiles the statistics but does not independently verify them and does not make value judgments about how the shelters are operated.

Who's hypocritical?

The restaurant group says the statistics show that PETA is being hypocritical in its defense of animal rights.

"With a $30 million annual budget, PETA could make an effort to provide for homeless animals -- if it wasn’t too busy harassing farmers, diners, and shoppers with media stunts," CCF said in a statement. "PETA can run, but it can’t hide from its shameful animal-killing record."

For its part, PETA says it does the best it can for the hard-luck cases it takes in. 

"We have a small division that does hands-on work with animals, and most of the animals we take in are society's rejects: aggressive, on death's door, or somehow unadoptable," PETA spokeswoman Jane Dollinger told ConsumerAffairs. 

"CCF's goal is to damage PETA by misrepresenting the situation and the number of unwanted and suffering animals PETA euthanizes because of injury, illness, age, aggression, and other problems; because their guardians requested it; or because no good homes exist for them," Dollinger said. "Anyone who is shocked to learn how many animals have to be euthanized annually should ask themselves if they're spaying and neutering their companion animals, adopting from shelters instead of buying from breeders and pet stores, and demanding higher animal care standards in their own communities."

PETA says a peaceful death is sometimes the only answer for worst-case animals.

"We never turn our back on animals who need help, even if the best we can offer them is a peaceful release from an uncaring world. PETA also works every day to prevent animals from ending up abused, homeless, and euthanized in the first place—a fact that the CCF never mentions," the animal-rights group says on its website.

 "[T]he statistics that CCF reports don't include the many adoptable animals we have referred to high-traffic open-admission shelters where they will have the best chance of being seen and finding a new home. Those numbers also don't take into account the tens of thousands of animals whose lives we have improved and saved — by providing free spay and neuter surgeries, sturdy doghouses stuffed with straw, nutritious food, and much more."

Netflix will pay $9 million to resolve a privacy case that began in 2011. U.S. District Court Judge Edward J. Davila in San Jose, Calif., has granted final approval in the case that charged Netflix with retaining consumers' viewing histories and other personal information.

Plaintiffs Jeff Milan and Peter Comstock filed suit in early 2011 alleging violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), recently amended to allow wider sharing of viewing information. A wave of similar suits followed and the court consolidated the cases. After court-supervised mediation, the parties reached a settlement, which the court has now approved.

Those covered by the settlement include all Netflix subscribers as of the date of the preliminary approval, a group estimated at more than 62 million. Because of the unwieldy size of the class, individual class members will not receive any payment. Named plaintiffs Milan and Comstock will each receive a $30,000 payment and, after payment of court costs, attorney fees, etc., any remaining funds will go to nonprofit orgniazations and programs promoting consumer education and privacy protection.

Minimal recovery

"In light of the minimal monetary recovery" that individual class members would receive, the court agreed that the lump sum payments to further consumer education about privacy issues was an appropriate solution. Details can be found at www.videoprivacyclass.com.

This is what is known as a "cy pres" remedy, a structure that gives class members an indirect benefit rather than a check or other direct direct personal benefit. It is frequently used where proof of individual damage would be difficult. In this case, for example, it was not conclusively shown that any of the viewing histories or other data were distributed to third parties in a way that made individual users identifiable by name.

A similar settlement was used in privacy litigation involving Google Buzz. In that case, it was argued that tens of millions of Gmail users' personal information was wrongly disclosed when Google introduced its now-defunct Buzz social networking service. In that case, the settlement included an $8.5 billion payout to nonprofit groups working to further consumer privacy protection and security.

Besides making the payment, Netflix has agreed to "decouple" viewing histories from customers' identification and payment methods within one year of the settlement.   

If you've paid attention to car commercials on television lately, you may have noticed there are some jaw-dropping deals on auto leases – or so it seems. Some sharp entry-level sedans carry monthly payments as low as $150.

But the first rule of shopping for any kind of car, whether for purchase or for lease, is to forget the monthly payment and instead, focus on the purchase price, interest rate and the length of time you'll be making payments.

“Unfortunately, I think most people define affordability by how much the monthly payment is,” said Mike Sante, managing editor of Interest.com. A lot of people think, if the check doesn't bounce I must be able to afford it.”

Sante and his team conducted a study in February and concluded that most consumers can't afford most new cars. And that's part of the seductive appeal of an auto lease – it looks much cheaper than buying. The monthly payment is lower and so is the down payment.

Paying for just part of the car

That's because, with a lease, you aren't paying for the entire car, just the part that you're using. In a typical lease, you surrender the car at the end of three years. The car still has a lot of its value left, which the lessor recoups when they sell the vehicle on the used-car market. You are only paying for the first three years worth of value.

But are you overpaying? That's the question you must answer before deciding whether leasing a vehicle is right for you. Often, it depends on the kind of vehicle and the price.

Let's look at two different vehicles and approach them from both a lease and sale perspective.

Before going any farther, let's get business leasing out of the way. Many businesses, both large and small, lease their vehicles because they can deduct the entire lease payment from their taxes. We're ignoring that in this discussion, which is intended striclty for consumers.

A pricey ride

We'll start with an expensive car, like the Audi S5 coupe.

To lease the vehicle, the dealer determines how much depreciation should occur from the $50,900 MSRP when it's in the showroom until you return it three years later. The dealer applies an interest rate and amortization schedule, adds in some other fees and charges, and comes up with a monthly payment.

To purchase the same car a consumer would have to put down as much as $10,000, with the monthly payment reflecting the full value of the vehicle.

For that reason the buyer would likely be making payments longer than three years. Some payment plans for a car in this price range could easily extend six or seven years.

The Chevrolet Cruz, with an MSRP of $17,130, would most likely carry a much smaller lease payment but would lose a greater percentage of its value than the Acura.

To purchase the Cruz you would need a down payment of no more than $2,500 and the montly payment, while higher than a lease payment, might only be for three or four years. At the end of that time you would own the vehicle. So it would seem a lease probably makes more sense for an expensive car and less sense for an inexpensive one.

But many personal finance experts say it depends on a lot of factors. Do you change cars every three or four years or do you drive one until the doors fall off? If it's the latter then buying is a better deal. But if you change your wheels more often, then leasing starts to look like a better deal.

Just like buying, it only becomes a good deal if you negotiate one. Many consumers don't realize that a dealer will negotiate a lease, just as they would a sale. To dealers, there's very little difference. The consumer should view it the same way, and that means not paying so much attention to the monthly lease payment, which is what the car commercials flash on the screen.

Three things

Instead, there are three things you should pay attention to. The first is the “capitalized cost.” This is what you and the dealer agree that the vehicle is worth right now. Just as if you were buying the vehicle, you want to negotiate the number as low as possible.

The second is the “money factor.” This translates into the cost of financing. The entity leasing the vehicle has to purchase it before they can lease it to you. This is the cost of the money they use.

The third factor is “residual value.” This is what the parties agree will be the value of the vehicle at the end of the lease. A high residual value will result in lower payments but make it more expensive for you to purchase the vehicle at the end of the lease. If you want to trade the vehicle before the lease is up, it reduces a lot of your flexibility.

Yes, it is possible to trade in your leased vehicle before the term is up without taking a bath. Websites like SwapALease.com and LeaseTrader.com, where consumers can find other consumers to take their car and take over the lease payments, have in recent years, added more flexibility to leasing.

What to do

In the end, the problems many consumers face with an auto lease are  caused by not completely understanding how they work. Leases are different from a sale but not that much different. By focusing on the bottom line – what the vehicle actually costs – the consumer has a better chance at a satisfying lease deal.

That means doing your homework on the car before ever setting foot in the dealership, just as you would do if you planned to purchase it. Checking automotive sites like Edmunds and Kelly Blue Book will help you arrive at that all-important number – what the car should cost.

Here we go again. With the slow turnaround in the housing market, investors are beginning to come back, shopping for what are perceived as under-valued properties.

Books and seminars are beginning to proliferate once again after a hiatus prompted by the 2008 housing collapse and Great Recession. Radio commercials again tout property buying “systems” in which the purchaser isn't required to use their own money. Dozens of new websites offer “a treasure of real estate investing advice, training and techniques.”

It is true that some early investors during the housing downturn have done pretty well. Investors with cash were in a perfect position to snap up foreclosures that had been damaged or neglected – homes that couldn't pass an inspection for a conventional or FHA loan.

These homes often went for well below the amount of the mortgages that were in default, resulting in a huge loss for the investors who owned the note but a windfall for the investor. Hedge funds were early to the party, buying up thousands of single-family homes that have been converted into rental property.

Rental market

Because fewer consumers can now qualify for a mortgage, more people are limited to renting. That has led to a shortage of rental property in some markets and rising rents. It has been that trend that has drawn small investors back to real estate investing.

But the first pitfall of investing in real estate is actually managing the property. First, it must be prepared for leasing, then advertised. Once tenants move in, the rent has to be collected and repairs made on a regular basis.

You have to hope the tenants don't damage the property and few purposefully do so. But most people don't take care of someone else's property the same way they would their own.

Any profit on the property must take into account local taxes, painting the property between tenants –- required by law in many jurisdictions -- and the lost rent while it sits empty. And that assumes the tenant pays the rent each month.

here are other pitfalls as well. You could buy a home in an area where rental income isn't growing but unemployment is. That usually translates into more months without a tenant and stagnant property values.

"Despite the fact that home sales and home prices are increasing on average across the country, we are still seeing weaknesses in some markets," said Ingo Winzer, president and founder of Local Market Monitor, a real estate investment company. "Sometimes weaknesses can signal opportunity for real estate investors, but not in the markets we ranked as 'dangerous.' In those markets, the risk far outweighs any opportunity."

Winzer's company is one of those behind the “We Buy Ugly Houses” signs you tend to see everywhere. But these days Winzer is selective about where those signs appear. For example, he's not putting any up in Battle Creek, Mich. That city tops the company's list of “most dangerous” real estate investing markets.

Also making the list are Norwich, Conn., Augusta, Ga., and Port St. Lucie and Daytona Beach, Fla.

"All of the markets we ranked as dangerous have a combination of factors such as high unemployment or weak job growth and falling or weak home prices," said Winzer.

That's not to say that there isn't money to be made. But it does mean you have to know what you're doing and be fairly well capitalized.

HomeVestors is another company that buys up houses at a discount. Co-president Ken Channell says that's the key – getting the property at the right price. Most novices tend to overpay. That's why he says investors must do lots of homework and collect lots of data before making an offer.

"This information can help investors determine a purchase price for a property that will allow them to build equity over the long term while generating rental income immediately," he said.

Along that line, the steady rise in home values off their bottoms appears to be slowing and even retreating in some markets. A recent report by Pro Teck Valuation Services suggests the Federal Reserve's stimulus policy of purchasing mortgage-backed securities isn't as effective at stimulating home prices as it once was.

"Affordability is definitely improved when interest rates are lower," said Norman Miller, professor at the Burnham-Moores Center for Real Estate at the University of San Diego. "But it is very likely that the top tiers of the owner-occupied housing market are the ones benefiting the most from lower mortgage rates as this group has been less affected by credit score downgrades or more restrictive underwriting."

What to do

The real estate investment market is probably not fertile ground for the novice investor. As with any investment, you are well-advised to seek the counsel of a trusted and objective financial adviser – preferably one familiar with the risks and travails of investing in rental property, before investing in real estate.

A better real estate investment could well be in one of the many real estate investment trusts (REITs), which are securities sold on the stock market and which usually pay an attractive dividend. Depending on the REIT, the income could rival what you would net for a rental property, with a lot fewer headaches.

Before investing, do lots of homework and seek good advice.

Banks making payday loans continue to trap customers in a cycle of debt, according to a new study by the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL).

Banks pitch payday loans as short-term borrowing that allows customers to deal with a financial emergency, repay the loan and move on. But is that really how it works? The new study says these triple-digit interest rate loans -- averaging from 225% to 300% APR -- trap borrowers in a long-term cycle of repeat loans.

Senior borrowers

One of every four payday borrowers is a senior citizen receiving Social Security.

The finding on Social Security recipients highlights how changes in federal rules make seniors even more vulnerable. As of March 1, 2013, Social Security benefits must be distributed electronically, through a prepaid card or direct deposit into a checking account. As part of this new mandate, the Treasury Department specifically prohibits Social Security benefits from being distributed on prepaid cards with payday loan features -- but deposits into checking accounts remain vulnerable.

Are they or aren't they?

Banks offering payday loans -- Wells Fargo Bank, U.S. Bank, Regions Bank, Fifth Third Bank, Bank of Oklahoma and its affiliates, and Guaranty Bank -- say their product is not a payday loan because they call it an open-end line of credit. But this study found that these products are structured like non-bank payday loans and function the same way. These are short-term balloon loans that borrowers are unable to repay in full when due. They carry triple-digit interest rates, lack meaningful underwriting to assess a borrower’s ability to repay and ensnare customers in a cycle of long-term debt that leaves them worse off.

Many states have passed laws to limit or prohibit payday lending, and federal law forbids payday loans to active military service members and their families -- but some banks are ignoring both state and federal laws. 

The report, an update of CRL’s 2011 report, “Big Bank Payday Loans,” urges the three prudential regulators -- the Federal Reserve Board, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation -- to issue guidance or a rule that would put an immediate end to this product before it spreads from a handful of banks to the entire system.