Do you have middling or poor credit and need help rebuilding it? Sow the seeds of good credit by understanding the credit cycle and use your knowledge to improve your own credit score.

When you begin building a credit score, you have zero credit. But by opening a savings account, you can begin building your credit from scratch. With this newfound credit, you will find it easier to get a job, get an apartment, or get loans and credit cards.

What are the numbers that divide the good credit scores from the bad?

• 620 is the magic number–the dividing line between good and bad credit.
• 723 is the average national credit score.
• 740 is the magic FICO number for good credit.
• 760 is the dividing line for excellent credit.
• 675-719 is merely a mediocre credit score.
• 620-674 is a below average credit score.
• Below 500 is simply awful credit.

Usually you can begin to build your credit by obtaining a credit card. Keep your credit use to around 30% of your credit limit to get the best score. It’s not a good idea to max out your credit card, and it’s always best to pay in full at the end of each month. It’s tempting to pay only the minimum payment, but this may leave a mark on your credit report and can increase your bill with interest.

When you take out your first loan, having someone co-sign for your loan is helpful, and may qualify you for loans you may otherwise not be approved for. Pay attention to interest rates; those with lower or less established credit scores are more likely to get stuck with a higher one. Having a co-signer can prevent this.

Once you are ready to sign for a mortgage, pay attention to your overall credit score. To obtain the best credit scores, you need a mix of different types of credit, including revolving accounts (credit cards, lines of credit) and installment accounts (auto loans, personal loans, mortgages).

To continue building good credit, it’s essential that you pay all your bills on time, all the time. All it takes is a single missed payment to trash your credit scores. Every late payment hurts your score, and it can take seven years for one black mark to disappear. Making an installment payment is better than making none at all.

Falling behind can really take its toll on your credit score. Timeliness of payment makes up about 15%of your credit score. It’s never good to max out your card, especially if you can’t pay it in full at the end of each month. Under US law, prospective employers are allowed to look at your credit report in order to decide whether or not to hire you for a position.

If you do fall behind, tell your creditors if you need to make a late payment and request for it not to be reported as late. If you give advance notice, most creditors will be willing to extend up to 30 days and not consider it as late payment. Never ignore or run away from your creditors–it will only hurt your score.

If you do hit bottom, know that bad credit can prevent you from being granted further credit; interest rates on credit cards, loans, and mortgages will all be much higher for someone with poor credit. Additionally, second-rate credit cards with high interest rates or which require a deposit sometimes fail to report payments made on time–hindering credit improvement.

To start the recovery, paying bills on time is the first essential step. There are a number of ways to help improve bad credit. High yield savings are another great place to start–these accounts have higher interest rates than others and help improve credit. Secured credit cards also help–they require you to deposit money as a security measure, but watch out for those with monumental fees or interest rates.

When your credit is awful, beware–scammers will come calling. Watch out for credit repair scams! Never pay a large fee to a credit repair agency–it usually doesn’t work. YOU are the only one who can improve your credit. Instead of these programs, seek credit counseling and work to build a budgeted bill-paying routine.

You might think one way to ease the strain of rebuilding credit is through settlements and paybacks. Settlements are a lender’s way of cutting their losses when they think payments are doubtful. They let you pay off the loan easier by accepting an amount less than you owe. Although this may seem like a win and may stop further deterioration of credit score by allowing unpaid bills to pile up, it is not a positive action and will appear as a negative mark on your credit report.

Once you begin building back good credit, it will take seven years for the negative marks on your credit score to disappear but keeping up with your payments in a timely manner will show improvements after only 6-12 months. Then, loans and credit cards can be obtained at normal credit rates without having to pay monumental fees or make large deposits to earn them.

The average American household has $16,007 in credit card debt, spread over 3.5 credit cards. The approximate number of cardholders in the United States is 164 million, or 54 million households, with a total of 576 million cards in circulation. The total consumer debt in the United States is $2.46 trillion. With these sobering statistics, it’s easy to tell that credit cards are big business in America.

The credit card industry is booming, and the following credit card issuers are the top 10 in America as of 2010:

• Chase, with $165 billion in credit cards in America;
• Bank of America with $150 billion in credit cards in America;
• Citi with $102 billion in credit cards in America;
• American Express with $78 billion in credit cards in America;
• Capital One with $55 billion in credit cards in America;
• Discover with $48 billion in credit cards in America;
• Wells Fargo with $30 billion in credit cards in America;
• HSBC with $26 billion in credit cards in America;
• US Bank with $20 billion in credit cards in America; and
• USAA Savings with $12 billion in credit cards in America.

Most of these issuers reported profits for 2008, with Citi being the notable exception, with a loss of $530 million. Capital One and US Bank reported the largest profits in 2008, at $1000 and $1070 million, respectively.

Despite the boom in credit card business, the number of credit card transactions in 2009 declined across the board: Discover reported a 0.3% decline; MasterCard transactions declined by 6%; Visa transactions declined by 2%; and American Express transactions declined most steeply at 7.4%.

Given the popularity of credit cards with most Americans, it’s safe to assume most Americans carry a sizable consumer debt. It’s helpful, then to have a credit card glossary of terms to know when you are in debt, which follows below.­

Collection–in the credit world, collection is an effort by a collections department or agency to get a past-due debt repaid.

Default–to default is to fail to make a payment on a debt by the due date.

Default APR–if you are late in making payments, your standard APR may increase to a default APR. Also called a penalty rate. The average APR for credit cards is 14.5%.

Finance charge–a finance charge is the total cost of borrowing, including interest and fees, expressed in a dollar amount.

Nondischargeable debt–a nondischargeable debt is a debt that cannot be cleared away–in legal terms, “discharged”–after filing for bankruptcy.

Time-barred debt–time-barred debt is a particular type of old, unpaid debt. Every state has a statute of limitations that limits how long a creditor can get a court judgment forcing payment.

Universal default–universal default is a common practice among credit card issuers that allows them to increase cardholders’ interest rates for any change in risk profile with any lender.

Wage garnishment–wage garnishment is a court-ordered technique of debt collection in which a debtor’s paycheck is deducted a set amount which is paid to a creditor or court until the debt is paid in full.

Zombie debt–Zombie debt is old credit card and other debts that are beyond the statute of limitations, so a debt collector cannot successfully use the courts to collect them.

Which form of plastic is more popular with American consumers? There are currently 576,400,000 credit cards in the United States versus 507,000,000 debit cards, so credit cards clearly have the upper hand. Among 2010 credit cards, 270.1 million are Visa (down 11% from 2008), 203 million are MasterCard (down 22% from 2008), 48.9 million are American Express (down 9% from 2008) and 54.4 million are Discovery (down 6% from 2008). Among 2010 debit cards, 382 million are Visa (up 18% from 2008) and 125 million are MasterCard (up 1% from 2008).

In a 2009 credit card satisfaction survey, the following credit cards ranked highest in customer satisfaction and popularity:

• American Express, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 762 out of 1000;
• Discover Card, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 751 out of 1000;
• National City, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 740 out of 1000;
• Wells Fargo, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 724 out of 1000;
• Barclaycard, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 717 out of 1000;
• US Bank, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 715 out of 1000;
• Chase, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 708 out of 1000;
• Citi, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 699 out of 1000;
• First National Bank of Omaha, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 689 out of 1000;
• Bank of America, with a credit card satisfaction rank of 687 out of 1000.

The birth of the credit card industry occurred in 1958, when the first widely accepted form of plastic was issued by American Express. This was followed by the first general-use credit card that allowed balances to be paid out over time, BankAmericard (later changed to Visa in 1977) in 1959. MasterCard began in 1966, when a number of banks formed the Interbank Card Association. This association bought the rights to use the name “Master Charge” from the California Bank Association in 1969; then renamed it MasterCard in 1977.

Though credit cards remain the dominant form of plastic in America, debit cards have gained popularity, especially as a form of online payment. However, that growth is expected to stagnate at around 27%. Here is a forecast for the volume of dollars expected to be traded through debit cards, and the percent of online shopping it constitutes:

• In 2008, $47 billion dollars was traded through debit cards, which is 26% of online shopping;
• In 2009, $57 billion dollars was traded through debit cards, which is 28% of online shopping;
• In 2010, $67 billion dollars will be traded through debit cards, which is 28% of online shopping;
• In 2011, $81 billion dollars will be traded through debit cards, which is 28% of online shopping;
• In 2012, $47 billion dollars will be traded through debit cards, which is 27% of online shopping;
• In 2013, $98 billion dollars will be traded through debit cards, which is 26% of online shopping;
• In 2014, $105 billion dollars will be traded through debit cards, which is 26% of online shopping.

According to data compiled during the 3^rd and 4^th financial quarters of 2009, China outranks every other country in the world in terms of a positive international trade balance. Close on China’s heels, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and Japan also showed healthy positive international trade balances. The figures were smaller for Norway, Russia, South Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and Sweden, but they also showed positive international trade balances. Rounding out the list, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, Denmark, Argentina, Austria, Israel, and Chile also showed positive international trade balances.

According to the 3^rd and 4^th quarter 2009 financial data, the United States led all other countries in the world with a negative international trade imbalance. Next in line were Spain, Italy, France, and Greece, with large negative international trade imbalances. Canada, Australia, India, the UK and Brazil also showed negative international trade imbalances. Rounding out the list, Turkey, South Africa, Mexico, Columbia, Poland, Pakistan, Egypt, Belgium, Hungary, and the Czech Republic showed negative international trade imbalances as well.

The negative international trade imbalances only tell part of the story; it’s also important to consider the percentage of the trade balance that is also part of the GDP. In that case, Greece leads the list with a negative trade balance of 36.8 billion, or 12.4% of the GDP. Spain is next at a negative trade balance of 82.1 billion, or 5.7% of the GDP; followed by South Africa at 12.0 billion, or 5.3% of the GDP. Among the rest of countries with negative trade imbalances, the numbers are as follows:

• Australia at a negative trade balance of 32.7 billion, or 3.7% of the GDP;
• US at a negative trade balance of 465.3 billion, or 3.0% of the GDP;
• Italy at a negative trade balance of 74.1 billion, or 2.9% of the GDP;
• Canada at a negative trade balance of 34.8 billion, or 2.7% of the GDP;
• Hungary at a negative trade balance of 2.1 billion, or 2.6% of the GDP;
• Columbia at a negative trade balance of 6.1 billion, or 2.6% of the GDP; and
• France at a negative trade balance of 56.7 billion, or 2.0% of the GDP.

It’s also important to consider the percentage of the GDP when looking at countries with a positive international trade balance. In that case, Norway leads the pack, with a positive international trade balance of 58.4 billion, or 15.8% of the GDP. This is followed by Malaysia, with a positive international trade balance of 32.3 billion, or 15.5% of the GDP; and Hong Kong, with a positive international trade balance of 26.2 billion, or 13.7% of the GDP. Among other countries with a positive international trade balance, the breakdown is as follows:

• Singapore at a positive international trade balance of 20.9 billion, or 12.7% of the GDP;
• Switzerland at a positive international trade balance of 42.4 billion, or 7.7% of the GDP;
• Taiwan at a positive international trade balance of 38.6 billion, or 7.6% of the GDP;
• Sweden at a positive international trade balance of 33.0 billion, or 7.4% of the GDP;
• Thailand at a positive international trade balance of 19.9 billion, or 6.6% of the GDP;
• China at a positive international trade balance of 364.4 billion, or 6.3% of the GDP; and
• Netherlands at a positive international trade balance of 34.8 billion, or 5.4% of the GDP.

What does the unemployment situation look like now? This article examines the U.S. unemployment rate change by state, from February 2009 to February 2010.

Between February 2009 and February 2010, there was an increase of unemployment rates in almost every state in America. The exceptions were Oregon, North Dakota and Vermont, where unemployment decreased by 0.1% from February 2009 to 2010.

In every other state of the Union, unemployment rates increased between February 2009 and February 2010. States reporting the largest increases included the following:

• In California, unemployment rates increased by 2.3% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Nevada, unemployment rates increased 3.1% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Idaho, unemployment rates went up 2.6% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Wyoming, unemployment rates increased 2.7% between 2009 and 2010;
• Unemployment rates in New Mexico increased by 2.6% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Illinois, the unemployment rate increased 2.7% between 2009 and 2010;
• Mississippi unemployment rates increased 2.8% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Alabama, unemployment rates increased 2.4% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Florida, unemployment rates shot up 3% between 2009 and 2010;
• Michigan’s unemployment rate went up 2.1% between 2009 and 2010;
• West Virginia’s unemployment rates went up 3.1% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Maryland, unemployment rates went up 3.1% between 2009 and 2010;
• Rhode Island’s unemployment rates went up 2.8% between 2009 and 2010; and
• Massachusetts’ unemployment rates rose 2.1% between 2009 and 2010.

Average rises in unemployment rates occurred in the following states:

• In Washington, unemployment rates rose 1.2% between 2009 and 2010;
• Alaska’s unemployment rate rose 1.2% between 2009 and 2010;
• Arizona’s unemployment rate increased by 1.2% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Utah, unemployment rates rose 1% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Montana, the rate of unemployment rose 1.2% between 2009 and 2010;
• Oklahoma’s unemployment rate rose 1.2% between 2009 and 2010;
• The unemployment rate in Texas rose 1.4% between 2009 and 2010;
• Louisiana’s unemployment rate rose 1.4% between 2009 and 2010;
• The unemployment rate in Iowa rose 1.4% between 2009 and 2010;
• Wisconsin’s unemployment rate increased 1% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Kentucky, the unemployment rate increased by 1.3% between 2009 and 2010;
• Tennessee’s unemployment rate rose by 1.1% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Georgia, the unemployment rate rose by 1.8% between 2009 and 2010;
• In South Carolina, unemployment rates increased by 1.8% between 2009 and 2010;
• Ohio’s unemployment rate rose by 1.8% between 2009 and 2010;
• In North Carolina, unemployment rates increased 1.4% between 2009 and 2010;
• Virginia’s unemployment rate increased 1.1% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Pennsylvania, the unemployment rate rose 1.7% between 2009 and 2010;
• New York’s unemployment rate increased 1.3% between 2009 and 2010;
• New Hampshire’s unemployment rate rose 1.6% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Connecticut, unemployment rates increased 1.7% between 2009 and 2010;
• New Jersey’s unemployment rate rose 1.8% between 2009 and 2010; and
• The District of Columbia experienced a 1.3% rise in unemployment between 2009 and 2010.

The following states in America experienced a rise in unemployment rates of less than 1% between 2009 and 2010:

• Hawaii’s unemployment rate increased 0.6% between 2009 and 2010;
• Colorado’s unemployment rate rose 0.4% between 2009 and 2010;
• South Dakota experienced a rise in unemployment rates of 0.2% between 2009 and 2010;
• Nebraska’s unemployment rate increased 0.5% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Kansas, unemployment rates rose 0.5% between 2009 and 2010;
• Arkansas’s unemployment rate went up 0.9% between 2009 and 2010;
• In Missouri, the unemployment rate rose 0.9% between 2009 and 2010;
• Indiana’s unemployment rate went up 0.3% between 2009 and 2010; and
• In Maine, the unemployment rate rose 0.6% between 2009 and 2010.

In 2009 and 2010, the US unemployment rate by state was as follows:

• Michigan had an overall unemployment rate of 12% in 2009 and 14.1% in 2010;
• South Carolina had an overall unemployment rate of 10.7% in 2009 and 12.5% in 2010;
• Oregon had an overall unemployment rate of 10.6% in 2009 and 10.5% in 2010;
• California had an overall unemployment rate of 10.2% in 2009 and 12.5% in 2010;
• Nevada had an overall unemployment rate of 10.1% in 2009 and 13.2% in 2010;
• Rhode Island had an overall unemployment rate of 9.9% in 2009 and 12.7% in 2010;
• North Carolina had an overall unemployment rate of 9.8% in 2009 and 11.2% in 2010;
• Tennessee had an overall unemployment rate of 9.6% in 2009 and 10.7% in 2010;
• Kentucky had an overall unemployment rate of 9.6% in 2009 and 10.9% in 2010;
• Indiana had an overall unemployment rate of 9.5% in 2009 and 9.8% in 2010;
• Florida had an overall unemployment rate of 9.2% in 2009 and 12% in 2010;
• Ohio had an overall unemployment rate of 9.1% in 2009 and 10.9% in 2010;
• The District of Columbia had an overall unemployment rate of 12% in 2009;
• Georgia had an overall unemployment rate of 8.7% in 2009 and 10.5% in 2010;
• Alabama had an overall unemployment rate of 8.7% in 2009 and 11.1% in 2010;
• Illinois had an overall unemployment rate of 8.7% in 2009 and 11.4% in 2010;
• Mississippi had an overall unemployment rate of 8.6% in 2009 and 11.4% in 2010;
• Missouri had an overall unemployment rate of 8.5% in 2009 and 9.4% in 2010;
• Arizona had an overall unemployment rate of 8.3% in 2009 and 9.5% in 2010;
• Washington had an overall unemployment rate of 8.1% in 2009 and 9.5% in 2010;
• New Jersey had an overall unemployment rate of 8% in 2009 and 9.8% in 2010;
• Minnesota had an overall unemployment rate of 7.7% in 2009 and 7.3% in 2010;
• Maine had an overall unemployment rate of 7.7% in 2009 and 8.3% in 2010;
• Wisconsin had an overall unemployment rate of 7.7% in 2009 and 8.7% in 2010;
• New York had an overall unemployment rate of 7.5% in 2009 and 8.8% in 2010;
• Connecticut had an overall unemployment rate of 8.1% in 2009 and 9.5% in 2010;
• Delaware had an overall unemployment rate of 7.4% in 2009 and 9.2% in 2010;
• Massachusetts had an overall unemployment rate of 12% in 2009 in 2010;
• Colorado had an overall unemployment rate of 7.3% in 2009 and 7.7% in 2010;
• Alaska had an overall unemployment rate of 7.3% in 2009 and 8.5% in 2010;
• Pennsylvania had an overall unemployment rate of 7.2% in 2009 and 8.9% in 2010;
• Idaho had an overall unemployment rate of 6.9% in 2009 and 9.5% in 2010;
• Arkansas had an overall unemployment rate of 6.8% in 2009 and 7.7% in 2010;
• Texas had an overall unemployment rate of 6.8% in 2009 and 8.2% in 2010;
• Vermont had an overall unemployment rate of 6.7% in 2009 and 6.6% in 2010;
• Maryland had an overall unemployment rate of 6.4% in 2009 and 7.7% in 2010;
• West Virginia had an overall unemployment rate of 6.4% in 2009 and 9.5% in 2010;
• Hawaii had an overall unemployment rate of 6.3% in 2009 and 6.9% in 2010;
• Utah had an overall unemployment rate of 6.1% in 2009 and 7.1% in 2010;
• Virginia had an overall unemployment rate of 6.1% in 2009 and 7.2% in 2010;
• New Mexico had an overall unemployment rate of 6.1% in 2009 and 8.7% in 2010;
• Kansas had an overall unemployment rate of 6% in 2009 and 6.5% in 2010;
• Louisiana had an overall unemployment rate of 5.9% in 2009 and 7.7% in 2010;
• Montana had an overall unemployment rate of 5.7% in 2009 and 6.9% in 2010;
• Oklahoma had an overall unemployment rate of 5.5% in 2009 and 6.7% in 2010;
• New Hampshire had an overall unemployment rate of 5.5% in 2009 and 7.1% in 2010;
• Iowa had an overall unemployment rate of 5.3% in 2009 and 6.7% in 2010;
• Wyoming had an overall unemployment rate of 4.8% in 2009 and 7.5% in 2010;
• South Dakota had an overall unemployment rate of 4.6% in 2009 and 4.6% in 2010;
• Nebraska had an overall unemployment rate of 4.3% in 2009 and 4.8% in 2010; and
• North Dakota had an overall unemployment rate of 4.2% in 2009 and 4.1% in 2010.

Population: 277,433
Median Household Income: $110,643.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 58

Fairfax County, Va.

Population: 1,005,980
Median Household Income: $106,785.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 60

Howard County, Md.

Population: 272,412
Median Household Income: $101,710.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 60

Hunterdon County, N.J.

Population: 129,000
Median Household Income: $100,947.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 52

Somerset County, N.J.

Population: 321,589
Median Household Income: $100,207.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 53

Fairfax City, Va.

Population: 23,281
Median Household Income: $98,133.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 52

Morris County, N.J.

Population: 486,459
Median Household Income: $97,565.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 52

Douglas County, Colo.

Population: 270,286
Median Household Income: $97,480.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 54

Arlington County, Va.

Population: 204,889
Median Household Income: $96,390.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 71

Montgomery County, MD

Population: 942,747
Median Household Income: $93,999.00
Percent of Residents 25 or Older with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher: 59

What are the 10 richest counties in the United States? This list compiles the top 10 wealthiest counties in America, broken down by population, median household income, and the percentage of residents who hold bachelor’s degrees and are over 25 years old.

The number one richest county in the United States is Loudon County, Virginia. The population of Loudon County is 277,433 people as of 2010. The median household income in Loudon County is $110,643 as of 2010. Nearly 58% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Loudon County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The second richest county in the United States is Fairfax County, Virginia. The population of Fairfax County is 1,005,980 people as of 2010. The median household income in Fairfax County is $106,785 as of 2010. Nearly 60% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Fairfax County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The third richest county in the United States is Howard County, Maryland. The population of Howard County is 272,412 people as of 2010. The median household income in Howard County is $101,710 as of 2010. Nearly 60% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Howard County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The fourth richest county in the United States is Hunterdon County, New Jersey. The population of Hunterdon County is 129,000 people as of 2010. The median household income in Hunterdon County is $100,947 as of 2010. Nearly 52% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Hunterdon County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The fifth richest county in the United States is Somerset County, New Jersey. The population of Somerset County is 321,589 people as of 2010. The median household income in Somerset County is $100,207 as of 2010. Nearly 53% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Somerset County have attained a bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The sixth richest county in the United States is Fairfax County, Virginia. The population of Fairfax County is 23,281 people as of 2010. The median household income in Fairfax County is $98,133 as of 2010. Nearly 52% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Fairfax County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The seventh richest county in the United States is Morris County, New Jersey. The population of Morris County is 486,459 people as of 2010. The median household income in Morris County is $97,565 as of 2010. Nearly 52% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Morris County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The eighth richest county in the United States is Douglas County, Colorado. The population of Loudon County is 270,286 people as of 2010. The median household income in Douglas County is $97,480 as of 2010. Nearly 54% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Douglas County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The ninth richest county in the United States is Arlington County, Virginia. The population of Arlington County is 204,889 people as of 2010. The median household income in Arlington County is $96,390 as of 2010. Nearly 71% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Arlington County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

The tenth richest county in the United States is Montgomery County, Maryland. The population of Montgomery County is 942,747 people as of 2010. The median household income in Montgomery County is $93,999 as of 2010. Nearly 59% of the population of residents aged 25 and older in Montgomery County have attained bachelor’s degree or higher degree of education as of 2010.

• In both time periods banks closed, recovery seemed long and painful, and the general country’s mood was negative about the future .
• During both crises the banking system was crippled by bad loans due to stock speculation.
• During both crises banks loaned significantly less money, which slowed the economy even further.

…this is just a teaspoon of hurt compared to the tsunami of financial pain caused by the depression.

• During the Great Depression unemployment in the U.S. rose to 25%, whereas the current unemployment rate is only 10.4%
• Because deposits weren’t insured during the great depression millions of Americans watched their deposits literally dissapear.
• During our meltdown the DOW lost about 42% from it’s Oct 9th in 2007 to Oct 27, 2008. But during the years coming after the Great Depression, the DOW had fallen 89%.
• The word “depression” became so terrifying that economists have ever since stopped using it to describe economic downturns, they’ve been called recessions.
• Perhaps the greatest difference is between the crisis of today and the great depression is how quickly the government and banks have acted to try to stop the me

Is the current economic meltdown comparable to the Great Depression?

Though it kind of seems the same, there are crucial differences between the two economic scenarios. On October 25, 1929, the day after the stock market crashed, newspaper headlines discussed the disaster in calamitous terms. The Daily News announced, “Billions Lost in Wall St. Debacle,” and ran a picture of a newspaper seller swamped with customers desperate to find out accurate stock price levels. The October 24, 1929 edition of the Brooklyn Eagle shouted, “Wall St. In Panic as Stocks Crash: Stocks Crash in Rush to Sell, Billions Lost.” Directly beneath this ominous headline ran another, unrelated story about the attempted assassination of the crown prince of Italy, as if to underscore the sudden, worldwide panic that was sweeping the globe.

In contrast, the newspaper headlines discussing the economic meltdown of 2008 were somber but definitely more subdued. The November 21, 2008 edition of the New York Times announced, “Stocks Drop Sharply and Credit Markets Seize Up,” and a sidebar notified readers that the “Dow Falls 5.6% Amid Worries Over Banks.” The Financial Times headline was more portentous, and focused on the global impact of the financial crisis, shouting “Market Crash Shakes World.” Under that headline, four different pictures of people (presumably traders) showed their faces frozen in disbelief, while a statistic ran above each picture: “Tokyo Down 24%, Frankfurt Down 21.6%, London Down 21.1%, New York Down 18%.” Underneath these photos, another sub-headline announced, “US Stocks Suffer Worst Week Since Depression,” but are the two economic crises really that similar?

There are a few striking similarities between the two financial crises:

• In both 1929 and 2008 banks closed, recovery seemed long and painful, and the country’s general  mood was negative about the future;
• During both 1929 and 2008 the banking system was crippled by bad loans due to stock speculation; and
• During both 1929 and 2008 banks loaned significantly less money, which slowed the economy even further.

However, the financial crisis of 2008 is just a teaspoon of hurt compared to the tsunami of pain caused by the Great Depression. Following are a few key differences that show how much more severely the Depression impacted the economy:

• During the Great Depression unemployment in the U.S. rose to 25%, whereas the current unemployment rate is only 10.4%;
• Because deposits weren’t insured during the Great Depression millions of Americans watched their deposits literally disappear;
• During our meltdown the Dow Jones lost about 42% from October 9, 2007 to October 27, 2008. But during the years coming after the Great Depression, the Dow Jones had fallen 89%;
• The word “depression” became so terrifying that economists have ever since stopped using it to describe economic downturns, they’ve been called recessions; and
• Perhaps the greatest difference is between the crisis of today and the Great Depression is how quickly the government and banks have acted to try to stop the meltdown.

Your favorite payment options go head to head in the fight we had to call Wallet Wars 2010.

Charge card, credit card, or debit card: which card deserves your cash? We break down the benefits of each kind of consumer credit so that you can make an informed choice.

Charge cards are much like credit cards however they require you to pay off the full balance every month. Debt doesn’t build up; however, if you fail to pay off the balance, the penalty is heavy. American Express is the only major issuer to offer charge cards.

• Less Temptation

Since you have to pay it off every month you won’t rack up charges and procrastinate payments. Debt won’t have a chance to linger and gather interest like a snowball.

• Higher Credit Limits

Charge cards usually have significantly higher credit limits or no limit at all.

• Greater Rewards

American Express charge cards offer great incentives and rewards including double points, free companion airline tickets for big accounts, hotel upgrades, and free memberships in “elite” travel programs.

• Expense Tracking

American Express has tools that make it very easy to track spending, including very detailed expense records that allow tracking by spending category.

Credit card–Make purchases on credit, and carry your unpaid balance and accumulating interest forward each month. However by only paying minimum monthly amounts you’ll end up paying many times more than the initial charge amount.

• Greater Flexibility

In an emergency like a car breakdown or hospital visit, having a credit card could be useful.

• Build Credit

By paying back your monthly balance in a timely fashion, you can build good credit.

• No Monthly Fees

Most credit card companies do not charge monthly fees (aside from interest) like charge cards typically do.

• Better Protection

Credit cards typically have better theft protection than debit cards. With many debit cards you have two days to report misuse or you could be on the hook for up to $500!

Debit cards–instead of buying on credit, a debit card withdraws money directly from your account. It’s a great way to make sure you are living within your budget, but offers poor theft and fraud protection. Also, using debit cards won’t build your credit.

• No Temptation

Debit cards force you to live within your budget. Since you aren’t buying on credit you can’t be crushed by the boulder of credit debt.

• Ease of Use

Accepted almost everywhere a credit card is accepted.

• Cash Accessibility

It’s easy to get cash back when you make a purchase with most retailers.

Newspaper Death Watch: Statistics show that print newspapers are cutting back on employees and switching from print to online versions in an attempt to save money. Many small newspapers across the country are disappearing altogether. How much will they be missed?  A survey by the Pew Research Center asked readers if they would feel the loss of either print or online versions of their local newspaper. Forty-two percent said they would not miss their city paper much or at all. Twenty-six percent didn’t think the loss would hurt civic life in their communities, and nearly 30 percent said there would be other ways to get news if their local paper shut down.

2009 By the Numbers–following are more figures detailing the decline of newspapers in the United States:

• 919 employees were laid off at the Orange County Register on Sept. 1^st when delivery was outsourced to the Los Angeles Times–the largest single layoff incident of 2009;
• 34 newspapers laid off 100 or more employees (that number does not include the Associated Press, which is a cooperative, not a newspaper; or the Chicago Sun-Times, Dallas Morning News, or Sun newspapers;
• 40.7 was the average number of newspaper layoffs per day, including weekends and holidays;
• 143 newspapers stopped publishing a print edition in 2009;
• 55 newspapers reported layoffs in California–the most layoffs of any state;
• 584 newspapers laid off employees in ’09. Does not include corporate/non-newspaper specific layoffs (Associated Press, Dow Jones Co., Gannett Co. Inc., GateHouse Media News Service, Lee Enterprises, McClatchy Interactive, Media General Washington bureau, and Sun newspapers);
• 1,123 is the difference in the number of layoffs recorded in 2009 vs. 2008;
• 1 newspaper publishers or editors who have returned e-mails or other messages inquiring about layoffs; and
• 1 newspaper reported layoffs in Rhode Island and Delaware. In all other states, layoffs were reported at 2 or more papers.

Some of the hardest hit: percentage of newspaper staff laid off in 2009. These numbers show that large layoffs are occurring around the United States:

• 16% of newspaper staff at The Plain Dealer were laid off in 2009;
• 5% of newspaper staff at Newsday were laid off in 2009;
• 15% of newspaper staff at The New York Times were laid off in 2009;
• 10% of newspaper staff at USA Today were laid off in 2009;
• 17% of newspaper staff at The Houston Chronicle were laid off in 2009;
• 28% of newspaper staff at The Dallas Morning News were laid off in 2009;
• 40% of newspaper staff at The San Francisco Chronicle were laid off in 2009;
• 10% of newspaper staff at The Seattle Times were laid off in 2009;
• 10% of newspaper staff at The Star Tribune were laid off in 2009; and

36% of newspaper staff at The Chicago Tribune were laid off in 2009.

Fluctuations in the American economy between 2008 and 2009 can be tracked in the top imports and exports of US merchandise. Overall, the prices of both exported goods from America and imported goods to America fell between ’08 and ’09.

Focusing solely on US merchandise imports, the biggest fluctuation was found in crude oil and petroleum prep, which decreased from $225 billion in 2008 to $104 billion in 2009, nearly half its original cost. Large fluctuations were also noted in vehicles, which went from $103 billion in 2008 to $51 billion in 2009. Natural gas also took a tumble, going from $19 billion in 2008 to $8 billion in 2009; as with vehicles and crude oil, this was a decrease of nearly half its original cost.

Prices have decreased across the rest of the top imports as well:

• Consumer electronics prices have decreased from $112 billion in 2008 to $91 billion in 2009;
• Machinery prices have decreased from $109 billion in 2008 to $80 billion in 2009;
• Chemicals prices have decreased from $54 billion in 2008 to $48 billion in 2009;
• Textiles prices have decreased from $47 billion in 2008 to $40 billion in 2009;
• Metals prices have decreased from $32 billion in 2008 to $21 billion in 2009;
• Home goods and recreation prices have decreased from $28 billion in 2008 to $22 billion in 2009; and
• Power generating machines prices have decreased from $24 billion in 2008 to $17 billion in 2009.

Turning the focus to US merchandise exports, the top export was machinery, and the prices fell from $95 billion in 2008 to $70 billion in 2009. The largest decrease in price was tied to vehicles, which fell from $51 billion in 2008 to $27 billion in 2009. Metals also experienced a large decline, from $33 billion in 2008 to $15 billion in 2009. The price of gold non-monetary also experienced a large decline, from $11 billion in 2008 to $6 billion in 2009.

There was a decrease in price among all the top US exports, including:

• Chemicals prices have decreased from $70 billion in 2008 to $58 billion in 2009;
• Airplanes prices have decreased from $42 billion in 2008 to $39 billion in 2009;
• Consumer electronics prices have decreased from $27 billion in 2008 to $21 billion in 2009;
• Petroleum prep prices have decreased from $25 billion in 2008 to $15 billion in 2009;
• Scientific instruments prices have decreased from $21 billion in 2008 to $18 billion in 2009; and

Power generating machines prices have decreased from $16 billion in 2008 to $13 billion in 2009.