Bankruptcies up 32% in 2009
posted at 12:55 pm on January 5, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
If the economy improved in 2009, it didn’t show in the bottom line of bankruptcies in the US. The number of bankruptcy filings jumped almost a third over 2008, when the financial system nearly collapsed and housing values plummeted. It only slowed down slightly as the year wore on:
U.S. consumers and businesses are filing for bankruptcy at a pace that made 2009 the seventh-worst year on record, with more than 1.4 million petitions submitted, an Associated Press tally showed Monday.
The AP gathered data from the nation’s 90 bankruptcy districts and found 1.43 million filings, an increase of 32 percent from 2008. There were 116,000 recorded bankruptcies in December, up 22 percent from the same month a year before.
While experts believe some of the increase is due to a natural recovery as consumers and attorneys become accustomed to a recent overhaul of bankruptcy laws, the numbers indicate clear correlations to recession-weary regions. Arizona saw the fastest increase, a jump of 77 percent from the year before, followed by Wyoming (60 percent), Nevada (59 percent) and California (58 percent).
But it’s getting better now, right? After all, we keep hearing that the economy is improving, and that businesses are finding their footing. Prosperity is just around the corner! Or … not:
There’s also no sign that things are slowing down. Harmon said bankruptcies have been coming in waves, first with those 18 months ago who had adjustable-rate mortages, then with those who lost their jobs due to the housing downturn. Now he’s finding wealthy individuals and business owners who have finally succumbed to lower incomes and shrinking home values.
The AP reviews the effects of the bankruptcy reform passed a few years ago, and while the AP doesn’t appear to give it much credit, it does seem to have accomplished its goals. The reform created a raft of red tape and some potential new liabilities for bankruptcy attorneys as it tried to take some of the incentives out of the bankruptcy industry. The numbers argue that it had a significant impact for a couple of years, which makes the upturn in bankruptcies now even more significant.
Filings were highest in states hardest hit by the recession and housing collapse, but as this shows, it’s a widespread phenomenon:
While every state saw a rise in bankruptcies, Alaska (up 12 percent), Nebraska (12 percent) and North Dakota (14 percent) performed best.
Every state had a double-digit increase in bankruptcies, even with the more restrictive controls. That is a depressing statistic, and one that forebodes a very slow recovery at best in 2010.
Scott Grannis sees some hope in the manufacturing report this week for a return to growth, however:
The ISM manufacturing survey released today again reinforces the fact that significant portions of the U.S. economy are experiencing a V-shaped recovery. As this chart suggests, we are likely to see real GDP growth of 4% or possibly even more in this first quarter of the new year. I’ll stick with my projection of 3-4% real growth on balance for the year. This is undeniably excellent news for the economy.
But as Grannis explains to one of his commenters, this comes in spite of the administration’s economic policies, not as a result of them:
I continue to believe, as I have for over a year now, that this recovery has nothing to do with Keynesian “stimulus.” Indeed, I think the stimulus plan has actually hindered the economy’s progress by expanding the influence of government, promoting wasteful spending, and raising the prospects of a significant increase in future tax burdens. …
This recovery is largely the result of the economy’s innate ability to adjust to adversity and the market’s ability to translate hard work into profits and progress.
Exactly. But keep an eye on bankruptcies, too. If they continue to increase, they can have a domino effect, with a dampening effect on capital investment and growth.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air


Report: Oversight on IRS targeting came from Washington all along

DOJ seized logs for five Fox News phones, possibly James Rosens’ parents’ house






Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
…great!
KOOLAID2 on April 28, 2013 at 12:35 PM
somedays I wonder what it is that the government actually does besides steal our money and live high on the hog with it.
unseen on April 28, 2013 at 12:36 PM
…so DC parties!
KOOLAID2 on April 28, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Before a federal agency, the Air Force, for example, can transfer Air Force land to a state or community, are they not required to clean up all pollutants and sources of pollution on that land prior to the transfer?
How can the White House tell BLM to give the land to the locals, or Alaska…so the receiving entity will be on the hook for clean-up?
coldwarrior on April 28, 2013 at 12:38 PM
Well, they do have to have their priority of sending billions in aid and weaponry to the Muslim Brotherhood.
skspls on April 28, 2013 at 12:39 PM
How about the feds just gift all land and wells and whatever else the hell they own in alaska to the state? Then its the states problem, and they can divert their own ridiculous royalty payments to pay for it.
Enough of every issue being a federal issue. I know that I don’t want my federal tax dollars having anything to do with drilling or cleaning up wells. Let alaska have sovereignty over their own lands and their own wells.
Timin203 on April 28, 2013 at 12:41 PM
Look up OERB in Oklahoma. That is how we manage a situation like this. We have wells over 100 years old. When we find ‘em, we fix ‘em. Of course, the bureaucrats in Washington think the coin slot on the pay toilet is for the toilet to pay them to take a pee. They know no other way.
Old Country Boy on April 28, 2013 at 12:41 PM
I guarantee it is nowhere near as expensive to cap and clean these wells as the federal government is making it sound. If I were Alaska, I’d gladly pay for it if they could get some of their sovereignty back from the federal govt.
Timin203 on April 28, 2013 at 12:42 PM
Maybe the have sneaked it into Obamacare. Now that it’s passed we can find out.
Herb on April 28, 2013 at 12:45 PM
I’m sure King Barry has some of that “stimulus” money lying around. Here’s a chance for The Chosen One to actually create some jobs.
GarandFan on April 28, 2013 at 1:29 PM
When this nation was formed, the Federal government was charged with guaranteeing the national debt and its repayment. Now this is to be turned on its head?
Obama truly has no clue, does he?
ss396 on April 28, 2013 at 1:34 PM
Maybe we should just can the fed gubmint and start all over again.
petefrt on April 28, 2013 at 1:50 PM
petefrt: ding, ding, ding!
rgranger on April 28, 2013 at 2:39 PM
You know who caused this mess in ALASKA, don’t you?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.Don’t you?
.
.
.
.
.
It’s not that hard….
.
.
.
.
.
.
Sarah PALIN!
JFKY on April 28, 2013 at 2:46 PM
Sounds like the Democrats in CA led the way again. The state has been under a federal court order to expand the prisons and improve medical care for prisoners.
After spending billions of dollars over the past decade, the courts have said not good enough. So the Dems (who hold every elected office in Sacramento and a super-majority of both houses of the legislature) said screw it. They passed a law that directs the state prison system to ship prisoners to city and county jails and give early release to others.
So the cities and counties are now stuck with the bill. Oh, yeah. The CA prison guard union bankrolls every Dem politician in the state. A few years ago former Gov. Grey Davis gave the union members a 35% pay raise just in time for his battle with Arnold. It costs something like $50K/yr to house a prisoner in CA vs. $15K in TX.
in_awe on April 28, 2013 at 4:52 PM
Everyone that lives in Alaska gets a check in the mail just for living there.
I don’t see the problem with using a portion of that check to pay for cleaning up oil and gas wells that ultimately paid for those checks.
Should the feds have administered the wells? Up to you. But in the end we’re arguing over entitlement money. And I see no reason for people in the other 49 states to pay for alaska’s dirty well when the alaskans have been getting paid for their oil all along.
It seems reasonable to me…
Karmashock on April 29, 2013 at 2:06 AM
Back in January you listed a LUST (leaking underground storage tank) site which is NOT a leaking well.
Completely different animal.
May as well and list polluted sites on Mars it would be about as accurate.
Kermit on April 29, 2013 at 8:38 AM