LyrArc Article Gist
Following the Nuclear Security Summit in March 2016, U.S. president Obama says world leaders had expressed concern about Mr. Trump's comments in private conversations with him. Obama said- "even those countries that are used to a carnival atmosphere in their own politics want sobriety and clarity when it comes to U.S. elections because they understand that the president of the United States needs to know what's going on around the world." Obama said that comments by Mr. Trump showed a person "who doesn't know much about foreign policy or nuclear policy or the Korean Peninsula or the world generally. Mr. Trump said in a NYT interview that "Now, wouldn't you in a certain sense have Japan have nuclear weapons when North Korea has nuclear weapons?" Trump has defended these comments in a televised townhall meeting held by CNN in Milwaukee. Obama was critical of these comments as upsetting the situation in Asia where the U.S. has made great sacrifices in World War II, and today "underwrites the peace and prosperity of that region." Adding that "you don't mess with that."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Detailed anatomy of Ford what went wrong, what can and is being done, the problems in a culture that went astray, Mullaly direction and first steps to correct things. David Kiley of BW has done a pretty good piece on Ford, best so far in breaking up the mess that is Ford into some tangible things one can see that give one a feel of whats gone wrong at Ford, and some clues to whats gone wrong at the Big 3 American makers also. I'll attempt a list in the virtues vs. vices area that appear here 1. candour and openness vs. secrecy- sharing information between operating divisions 2. simplicity vs. complexity- too many platforms 3. economy vs. waste by duplication- duplication in the organization structure 4. respect vs. arrogance- for others within the company whatever the rank 5. inclusiveness vs. exclusiveness- the creation of grades for employees that stifle communication 6. honesty about ignorance and curiosity to learn vs. not admitting and remaining ignorant - at meetings and in discussions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How the American invasion in Afghanistan and Iraq has not produced good results. See related article on the mess it has created for the US in the Middle East.

LyrArc Article Gist
Unemployed mortgage brokers now working at mortgage counseling. Those who got you into this mess now at work getting you out of it! About $180 million of federal fuding for mortgage counseling will be available this year.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist magazine looks at the mess that Brexit has become and reflects on what this means. The first explanation is that Britons always loathed the evolution of the common market into the European Union. The second that Brexit was simply a result of a simmering civil war between the successful metropolitan  liberal parts of Britain and the provincial conservative parts of Britain. A third one is seen as equally plausible that the country's leadership has failed, that its model of leadership is coming apart.  It says the problem is the chumocracy with David Cameron made the poor decision to go for a referendum on the EU without thinking this through carefully, taking risks with the future of Britain for the sake of narrow party interests. 51% and you are out of the EU was never a fair option when major decisions of such type are handled with great care, even confronted with less momentous decisions other countries use two stage votes or call for super majorities. Basically the whole referendum was flawed to begin with and the people making the decision gambled with the future of Britain and the British economy.  The Economist magazine says the current candidates for Tory leadership, are all inadequate, one even suggesting that Britain should not balk at leaving the EU with no deal because it would create a temporary shortage of Mars bars. It looks at the leaders class in Britain as says it preserves many of the failures of the old establishment by being introverted and self-serving. It sees less expertise and more bluff in their backgrounds in public relations, journalism (Cameron, Johnson) and lighter experience (May as analyst), and sees a singular lack of self restraint because it believes it comes out merit based selection compared to the old establishment. What the Economist magazine sees is meritocracy transformed into crony capitalism for Blair in Labour party and Cameron, Osborne in the Conservative Party. One of the problems it says is the erosion of other ways to enter the leadership ranks from a range of places- business, unions, local government, working class talent, and other places- something that existed in the early postwar years to the sixties. Gradually a shift is taking place already to create new options and broaden the places from which leaders can emerge for broader more effective selection. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Journal editorial says Germany and France will have to pay for preserving the Eurozone one way or another. It suggests a direct approach of the German and French governments injecting capital for recapitalizing German and French banks that would take losses on bad loans to Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain; combining this with bondholder haircuts for creditors, and reforms that include spreading the burden for Irish bank debt and cleaning up the cajas savings banks mess in Spain. This would mean exactly the opposite of what is taking place now, including the abandoning of individual country rescues and bailouts; which the Journal calls extending loans and pretending the problem is not with German and French banks that would have losses on the bad loans. The problem is that this places the entire burden on austerity measures in each bailout country which reduces growth and raises unemployment to levels that make the problem much worse than before. This is not happening because of a serious failure to reach agreement on the shared sacrifice and cooperation between the governments, creditor banks, the ECB and other parties in the eurozone, on a serious debt restructuring across the eurozone that would put the euro back to stability with some mechanism for serious financial discipline in eurozone states....

LyrArc Article Gist
The current or former vice presidents or executive committee members at the top of the FIFA soccer organization who were arrested by Swiss authorites at the request of the U.S. Justice Department are from small countries such as Paraguay, Uruguay, Trinidad and Tobago, and two officials from the Cayrran Islands which most people have not heard of. Others are from Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Venezuela in the central American region. This tells a lot about why the FIFA is in such a mess today. One nation, one vote means Trinidad counts for as much as England and Germany. There are 209 members with many being small nations such as Botswana. It is based in Zurich, was founded in 1904, and is subject to Swiss law. The result say critics is that there is very little change at the top, with Seth Blatter the FIFA head since 1998 in near complete control and very little prospect of change. He worked his way from secretary to president, and was previously employed by Swiss watchmaker Longines. Some critics describe the situation as reminiscent of medieval fiefdoms, and lacking the openness and transparency so essential in a body governing one of the most popular sports in the world....

LyrArc Article Gist
A second term Trump-Vance will face uphill risks and a mess in economics from a Trumpian Republican party and Congress, says WSJ. WSJ Editorial Board says a second Trump term is not without risks. Tariffs cost 1.1% in annual growth in the Trump first term says WSJ, and it did have an impact on inflation. It would have had greater impact on inflation with the supply chain crisis of Biden's first term, had this supply chain crisis happened in Trump's first term. A second term Trump-Vance support tariffs as high as 60% on Chinese imports which would have a bigger effect on inflation and economic growth than of the first term. The key difference is that with tax cuts a basic rule for Republican policies Trump-Vance second term would not invest in infrastructure the way Mr. Biden has done and Biden will do so in a second term. As a result the economic growth is likely to be greater and inflation smaller under a Biden administration. Trillions of dollars in investment in the economy and infrastructure under Biden in a second term will be missing in a Trump-Vance tax cuts administration policy. And with it hundreds of thousand of jobs created each quarter will be missing in Trump-Vance second term. Add to this the level of clarity of stable economic policy under a Biden second term and contrast it with some of the chaos in economic policy of a Trump-Vance second term. The basic contradiction between tax cuts policy and the nation's need for infrastructure spending/rebuilding under a Republican under Trump administration will not go away, present a huge stumbling block. Chaotic policy could come from Project 2025 that says consider abolishing the US central bank Federal Reserve. This kind of erratic and unwise policy proposals are clearly not happening under Biden and Yellen. Another key difference is the cost to the economy of delays of several years in doing nothing for climate in Trump-Vance 2024-2028. Severe effects on climate if nothing is done could cause acceleration of climate negative costs which a future economy under Democrats would face, in reality the Nation would face. America's Business has taken a short term approach to climate change, when the time comes to pay the costs of short term thinking it assumes it is somebody else's problem- this happened with supply chain concentration in China the burden falling on the middle and lower classes, it would happen again with missing climate change action under Trump-Vance second term. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The October 2012 meeting of EU leaders ends with agreement for setting up the EU banking supervisor in the course of 2013. German chancellor Merkel turned down Spain's push for direct aid to its troubled banks and not aid from the ESM bailout fund to Spain which would increase Spain's sovereign debt. The Spanish government has indicated that it might take 40 billion euros out of the 100 billion euros approved by the EU for Spain. Merkel's view is that any direct aid will only go for future recapitalization not to clean up the mess at Bankia and other banks that stems from the failure of Spain's banking regulators and the housing bubble. Merkel said at a news conference: "If recapitalization is possible, it will only be possible for the future." Merkel also said preparations to set up the single banking supervisor would probably go into 2014, and by then "we won't have any more problems with the Spanish banks- at least, I hope not." Germany sees the need to have a carefully developed banking supervision system setup rather than a hurried approach. Merkel is aware that this might be seen as action taken to avoid committing German taxpayer money before elections for chancellor in Sept 2013- "No matter what I'm going to say, it will probably not be the right answer by your standards." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Eric Cantor, a House member from the Richmond area, who is the face behind the zero Republican votes in the House for the Stimulus Plan. He says Democrats should not take the message from this that they should not mess with the Republicans anymore in discussing the plans for the economy. Is this good policy though, when the bill has given some middle ground between tax cuts and spending, and the spending is on areas neglected for years such as roads and bridges, classrooms and energy infrastructure? And is there an element of lack of comprehension by Republicans stuck on ideological grounds, of the seriously deteriorating nature of this crisis which is likely not to come back with recovery in several years, and is a global crisis? When Prime Minister Thatcher, UK Prime Minister, left office, the British infrastructure rail, rapid transit, hospitals and schools, had been neglected for many years and voters were looking for ways to rebuild the dilapidated infrastructure. The economy was weakening under her Conservative party successor, giving the Labor Party its chance to make a come back on the grounds of rebuilding infrastructure and services, and improving the economy. In which case there are just as many risks in this approach of being left out entirely and losing credibility across the country. Sometimes a feel good position may not be the best, or the wisest option, and may be shortsighted. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In his annual budget speech to Parliament, chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling, said things are much worse than appeared 5 months ago. Britain will have to borrow 57 billion more pounds, and the budget deficit is to reach 175 billion pounds or $255 billion. The British economy will shrink 3.5% thisyear instead of the 1.25 percent predicted in November, 2008 This is the highest deficit of any nation in the G-20. Britain's net borrowing is exppected to reach 11.9 percent of GDPin 2010, and finances can't be balanced before 2016. In March 73,000 jobs were lost for a total unemployed of 1.46 million. With smaller numbers of people paying income taxes, and smaller corporate tax revenues, the revenues are just not there for Britain to spend heavily to make its way out of this recession. The renewable energy projects like wind farms and biotechnology are small, and shows the government has difficulty paying for larger programs. In an effort to increase revenures the government imposed a tax of 50%, up from the current 40%, on individuals earning more than 150,000 pounds, which was promptly criticized by the British Chambers of Commerce as a disincentive to bring talent to London as a world financial center. Darling also added acar-scrapping scheme like the one in Germany. Opposition leader David Cameron said in Parliament "everyone can see the utter mess this government made of the British economy. Our children will be in poverty for decades." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Simon Johnson, is Professor at MIT's Sloan School, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute of International Economics, co-founder of BaselineScenario.com a widely cited site on the global economy, and is a member of the Congressional Budget Office's Panel of Economic Advisors. Here he talks to the WSJ's Deal Journal reporters. He says the stress test don't mean much because the government using a milder scenario, made the banks look better than they really are. He suggests a wait-and-see strategy, as banks have 1 month to file plans on how they will raise needed capital and 6 months to do it. He sees a steeper yield curve on Treasury debt as a result, with long term Treasury securities like 20 year Treasury notes yielding higher than short duration securities, which should stimulate long term lending. Expect banks to issue more bonds than stocks which dilute shareholders value, and as bond prices are low. Johnson sees real risks of inflation in 1-2 years, becaue of the way the government has inflated the economy, in a manner he says like the private sector bubble. Expect the government to cut back to prevent this from happening. He also sees pretty good earnings in the financial sector in the second quarter which should help stocks. The question remains about how sustainable all this will be, because he says " the government by oversubsidizing the financial sector will get us stuck in the same kind of financial bubble that got us into the mess in the first place." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Taxpayers not the banks are Secretary Paulson's clients and he needs to remind himself of that says the NYT editorial page. It wants to see the government bring in new more competent management and not use the management that got us into this mess in the first pace especially where that management has demonstrated poor judgement and made errors that caused the bank to be in trouble. And it does not want to see the government a passive investor. It want the government to have a sy in mergers an acquisitions. Its not saying tha the government should take on the job of running the banks but protecting its investment means Treasury has to be involved in critical decisions that affect its investment and in the way the business is run and what risks are taken. Also Treasury is asked to watch for and take steps against conflicts of interest. Many of the same banks that are selling their assets to Treasury will also be asked to help Treasury to run the troubled asset program. Treasury to take care that these banks do not end up writing the rules on one side for Treasury and selling Treasury the assets by being on the other side because it won't be good for taxpayers. See Guillermo Ortiz's advice to Fed chairman Bernanke at the recent G20 meetings which says says be sure to take ownership stakes, as there was serious, lasting and damaging political fallout in Mexico during the 1994-95 peso crisis, from conflicts of interest and the failure to take ownership stakes and dividends on preferred shares. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
S&P must be in some kind of disconnect if it doesn't get whats happening about its ratings mess with all the storm around it from here to Germany (calls to nationalize the ratings services). Ms Kathleen Corbett is leaving to spend more time with her family- in Japan company executives have a meeting where they are seen bowing to show their apologies to the public after something bad the company had done and accept complete responsibility, thats the first thought that comes to mind.

LyrArc Article Gist
Over 9% of Countrywide's loans are past due by 30 days and the situation will continue to deteriorate through 2008 and 2009. For those loans that had weak credit checks like the Fast and Easy program the about 36% are 30days overdue on payments. During one conference call Countrywide showed a chart that indicated that loans with poor documentation were 50% more likely to go delinquent. And Federal investigators and the FBI are looking into Countrywide's Fast and Easy mortage program which turned a blind eye to inflated income figures did not bother to check pay stubs and employment information and in other ways left the program open to abuse. this may be at the heart of how the housing subprime morgage crisis got started in the last couple of years between 2003 and 2008. And the packaging of these Fast and easy mortgages as Fannie recently announced that it will no longer buy any mortgages that are in the Fast and Easy program. Its significant that in recent years about one third of all Countrywide prime mortgages eligible for sale to Fannie Mae were Fast and Easy. Its significant also that Fannie Mae did not require verification of employment on all loans and relied on Countrywide to verify the employment on a sampling of loans and still continued to buy these Fast and Easy program mortgages right down to the present day in April 2008. So Fannie Mae and others who purchased these mortgages and investors in these mortgage securities did not due the basic due diligence or ask the simplest of questions. Amazing and also the kind of thing that is at the heart of the crisis and about which a lot will be coming out as federal investigators get to the bottom of this mess. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Trade economists from Ivy League universities, are still peddling the old theories on trade from textbooks that make no sense and have got America in this huge mess that it is in where other countries are ripping America off with unfair trade practices. These economists have turned a blind eye, turned their backs to the great damage done to industrial towns and communities across America for two decades with the loss of manufacturing. Take Irwin's point that the US would have to monitor rates on 13000 tariff line items. This is ridiculous because the US simply needs to monitor the key products such as semiconductors, oil and gas, LNG. In just one negotiation with India the US having a trade deficit DJT states of $100 billion with India- terrible trade. By opening up supply of LNG and oil US can fill India's needs for Oil and LNG and cut the deficit to zero. Who came up with this idea. Indian PM Modi and his trade team. Once it was known that the status quo was unacceptable India came up with its own ideas lets import what we get from Russia from the US. Yes we had discounts from Russia but that was when oil prices were high. DJT's effort to get oil prices down by increasing US production will make it possible for India to get this oil at similar prices. India is a much bigger economy now than during Covid 5 years back India can do this. US and India win-win by doing joint aviation production deals and US gains with sale of F-35 stealth fighters. It is just common sense. Sadly, much of this is common sense that is beyond Ivy League Economics departments at American universities.  Reciprocal Tariffs make a lot of sense because this is how fairness is done- for China, for India. In the case of Mexico, Canada, China, on stopping flow of fentanyl- this reciprocal tariff is not a tariff it is as Commerce Secretarty Luttnick pointed out domestic policy of the United States. Which country would tolerate 490,000 deaths from fentanyl over 12 years and not take domesti policy action. It is not that the policy actions are taken it is that these action should have been taken a long time back. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Conventional monetary policy is ineffective in a liquidity trap. At that point short term interest rates are at zero, and conventional monetary policy is ineffective at this zero bound. Unconventional policies such as buying long term Treasury bonds by the Federal Reserve may be adopted, but their effectiveness has not been proven. This is something the Fed is attempting to do in the U.S. after the 2008 financial crisis. This was tried in Japan in a deflationary situation and the results did not show conclusively that it works, because Japan remained at a borderline deflationary situation for years while this policy was implemented by the Bank of Japan. The $600 billion bond buying program of the U.S. Fed in late 2010, known as QE II, was implemented to reduce the chance of deflation taking hold and to stimulate growth. Krugman and others argue for the need of fiscal policy and government spending to step in to support the unconventional monetary policy. This becomes more difficult to do with the increasing budget deficit the U.S. is facing in 2011....

LyrArc Article Gist
Joe Nocera talks to experts like Simon Johnson at MIT. Johnson says that when he talks to other experts, after a two minute discussion, they say we should just nationalize the banks. Here Christopher Whalen, a veteran bank analyst, of Institutional Risk Analyst, and Joshua Rosner of research firm Graham-Fisher, say the same thing, with the phrases, lets get on with it or just do it. Says Simon Johnson, thats what we told emerging market countries, Thailand in 1997, or Russia in 1998, when he worked at the IMF. He says we told them to close down some of the banks, and take over the others, and inject government capital. He adds its the best practices, and its straightforward. So asks Nocera, is Geithner talking about the stress test banks will be subjected to, as first step preceding nationalization, more of a calculated approach to gradually introduce the idea of nationalization. But he isnt sure, as Geithner also told David Brooks of the NYT, that governments were not so good at managing banks. No one knows for sure. But says Nocera thats exactly what the government did to solve the S&L crisis. And the man who was former chairman of the FDIC, and helped run the program for the Resolution Trust Corporation, says the government did a pretty good job of it, taking over banks, replacing top managers and directors, and stripping out the bad assets and selling off the now healthy banks to private buyers. So can it be done again and will it be that hard? Yes, its been done before, and its not that hard say these experts. Every month that the administration and Geithner procrastinate puts the banks in a deeper hole, and will mean more layoffs and a worse crisis, even years taken to recover. What he has'nt mentioned is that even if after some procrastination the government gets around to doing it to clean up the mess, there is one added complication this time that is different than what happened with the S&L crisis or with the Swedish cleanup, or the Japanese cleanup after 2003, this time the global economy is caught up in the crisis which makes recovery that much tougher....

LyrArc Article Gist
Provides another view of what was covered in detail in a WSJ article on the role of the ratings agencies in this subprime mess. Lehman Brothers and Morgan Stanley say that there were signs of the problems even a year earlier, HSBC a British bank set aside $1.76 billion to cover potential losses, and a former Federal Reserve Governor published a book in June on subprime mortages going bust. So for ratings agencies to wait till July 2007, to reduce their ratings makes them look ridiculous. Lehman's Malvey, global fixed income strategist quoted here sees a recession in 2008 into 2009, as the impact spreads to retail stores and to car buyers. One reason for this is that jumbo loans on homes are going to cost much more than before, slowing the housing market even more, and the number of housing loans going bad will rise in coming months.

LyrArc Article Gist
Coordinated action by the governments of France, Britain and Germany each with its own package depending on its own circumstances but committing over a trillion dollars to rescue plans for financial institutions. In Britain the government moved to take majority stakes in 2 of its largest banks, the Royal Bank of Scotland, and the newly combied bank of Lloyds TSB and HBOS in exchange for a $64 billion capital infusion. In Berlin the German government setup a 480 billion euros package consisting mostly of loan guarantees, with 400 billon euros in guarantees for inter-bank loans and another $80 billion euros for direct injections of capital to help weak balance sheets and purchase toxic or illiquid assets of German banks that are at the brink of collapse. The French have setup their own 360 billion euros package. The French government will create a fund to raise money to guarantee debt for upto 5 years in a bid to make cash available to banks. The banks can access these funds in exchange for putting up their own collateral, including debt not currently accepted by the ECB. And a state sponsored company will provide upto 40 billion euros in direct capital injections to banks that request it in exchange for equity stakes. In addition Netherlands made $220 billion euros available for capital injection into banks and other efforts and Spain will insure upto 100 billion euros in bank debt. Britain's step are the boldest ones yet and Britain's crisis is also likely to be one of the worst because of years of leveraging and overborrowing. But the German financial system is also under heavy strain and strong swift action was necessary to keep its banking system functioning. While other countries have setup the funds for capital injection like other European countries and the USA, Britain has also take the lead in taking majority stakes in two of its largest banks by Monday, October 13, with the departure of the executives who got these banks into such a mess. Gordon Brown has shown cosiderable leadership in this crisis and has been at the forefront in proposing and acting on workable solutions and swift response while Germany and the USA lagged behind. France's Sarkozy's contribution has been in the area of global coordination which he has argued and worked for and successfully achieved during the last 2 weeks....

LyrArc Article Gist
A joint article by Robert Rubin, Clinton era Treasury Secretary and Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute. Rubin was senior adviser to Citigroup during the period that Citigroup leveraged itself and invested in lower quality securities that have left the firm exposed to substanital losses, and led to hiring a new CEO Vikram Pandit to clean up the mess. And this may explain the joint article with a less well known economist Jared Bernstein, and the tentative nature of their advice as the two differ on the important issue of long term fiscal deficits and still agree on investing heavily in healthcare, education infrastructure, worker training and energy. In a short recession they may be complementary and you could have the best of both worlds as in the other postwar recessions. But this is unlike any of the postwar recessions and is shaping up to be a long and deep downturn unlike anything seen in the postwar period. That Rubin does not even mention this shows that probably he is out of touch, as he was during his years when Citigroup was acting much like the other banks that were in serious trouble this year. Some of the decisions for lax regulation during the Clinton years were taken with the support of Rubin and Greenspan. What Rubin calls the longest expansion could have been for the most part good fortune and a steady period for the economy with Rubin's contribution being fiscal discipline, stewardship of the Mexican rescue package and committment to free trade policies, but not facing upto huge headwinds in the economy that required challenging leadership and judgement. Here Rubin mentions nothing that suggests bold vision and judgement, instead hoping that old policies that worked during the good times would somehow work today. And on some issues like labor being squeezed and getting a smaller portion of the economic pie with no support for unionization, a drop in the number of unionized workers and weakened labor bargaining strength, Rubin who now sees this as a bad trend for the working middle class incomes, did little in his years in the Clinton administration to reverse or slow this trend. He cites productivity growth of 20% from 2000 to 2007, and yet the real income of working age middle class households was falling $2000 or 3%. ...