In “The 'Democratization of Credit' Is Over -- Now It's Payback Time,” Wall Street Journal reporter S. Mitra Kalita takes a hard look at how after decades of legislation making it easier for financial institutions to offer credit to even the lowest income earning Americans, these lenders have pulled back on offering services to the riskiest borrowers.

Federal Reserve data shows that the ratio of credit-card debt to income is 50% higher for the lowest two-fifths of Americans by income than for the top two-fifths. In the coming years those who have earned less but turned to credit to live like those in the middle class will no longer be allowed to live off their plastic and a lengthy repayment plan.

In many ways that’s a good thing given the testimony of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner gave before Congress in July. Geithner said: "We now know that millions of Americans were...unable to evaluate the risks associated with borrowing to support the purchase of a home, a car or an education."

Actually, he and others knew that at the time, but I digress.

In her piece Kalita chronicled the stories of those who were forced to wean off their credit card usage and repay their debts.

In one debtor’s case:

“Out of college and working at the shoe store, Ms. King kept up a busy social life, eating out several times a week and going to movies -- even as the collectors called. But she lost the shoe-store job in January, and then learned that a prospective new employer had rejected her after running a credit check. Fearing that her credit record would trip her up again and again, she resolved to fix her financial mess.

Gone are dinners at Red Lobster and Olive Garden and purchases like new basketball shoes. She has a part-time job as a tour-bus driver that pays $13 an hour plus tips. She held a second part-time job, in telemarketing, for several months, but it was on suburban Long Island, and getting there, using both the subway and a commuter train, finally became too much. She now is looking for a second part-time job closer by.”

I’m all for the debtor’s revolt, but one form of criticism from the other side is the question of what has happened to personal accountability. These banks charging outrageous interest rates that ultimately feel like financial indentured servitude ought to be fought. Yet, what are we doing to curtail our spending habits?

To those of you marred in debt, what lifestyle changes have you made to tighten your budget and pay what you owe?

Do you shop less? Have you cut your cable? Do you only eat Popeye’s on Tuesday? Have you turned to generic products at the grocery store? Have you traded in the salmon for ground turkey breast? Are you candles the new night light?

I’d love to hear from you.

Leave your comments below and send your recession tales to therecessiondiaries@gmail.com

When I think of most celebrity clothing lines I instantly picture the racks of Ross, Marshalls, Nordstrom Rack, and Off Fifth. Now thanks to the recession I can think of Goodwill.

The Wall Street Journal has reported on the downturn in high-end fashion from celebrity-backed brands. According to the trade publication, Licensing Letter, U.S. sales of celebrity-licensed products fell to $2.9 billion last year after peaking in 2006 at $3.5 billion.

As you can imagine this has forced a number of celebrity clothing lines to close up shop. Recession Wire has a nice list of those stars that have passed and failed their test in the fashion industry. Among the notable losers include Jennifer Lopez, Eve, Snoop Dogg, Andre 3000, and Lauren Conrad. Those that have faired better include lines from Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen, Jessica Simpson, and Lindsay Lohan.

I know what you’re wondering: Who actually wants to do anything like Lindsay Lohan in 2009? I asked myself that same question, but as it turns out, her high end leggings line is doing surprisingly well. To be fair to her leggings and coke were quite the 80s staples. So in other words, it’s that decade's fault.

As for those who've failed – namely the reality TV stars who suddenly envisioned themselves as Diane von Furstenberg – I believe Anna Wintour surmises my thoughts perfectly.

The infamous Vogue editor-in-chief told the Journal, “Every D-level celebrity who thought they could make a quick buck by designing a handbag or whatever is going to disappear. And I think that's a good thing."

This means you, Dina Lohan, the latest “star” to sign a deal to start her own shoe line.  I’d rather see her throw on shoes to walk her daughter to rehab anyway.

A-listers like Justin Timberlake, who hasn’t yet met expectations for his William Rast line but is determined to persevere, is trying to shift focus on the line away from his celebrity. But is it too late?

A lot of these lines are nothing more than rip-offs of existing designers’ style with higher prices. While I’m certain there are still ways for celebrities to use their star power for commerce (perfume line anyone?) are clothing lines still the answer?

Are any of you still shaking your derriere in your Dereons?