LyrArc Article Gist
The US economy grew at 2% in the third quarter 2010, compared to 1.7% in second quarter 2010. Unemployment remains at 9.6%, and the growth did not generate hiring. Much of the growth came from business building inventories, exports grew at 5%, imports rose 17%. Residential construction plunged, state and local government spending contracted as it did for 6 of the last 8 quarters. This increases concerns about the economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Geithner in written testimony to the Senate Finance Committee, stated that "President Obama - backed by the conclusions of a broad range of economists- believes that China is manipulating its currency." What is noteworthy is that experts are generally in agreement that something should be done about this in cooperative fashion, from Obama's economic team, Obama's own views on this, The National Association of Maufacturers, Labor and so on. The trade deficit with China has continued at high levels even with the current economic slowdown, so this issue remains as one that the Bush administration never really addressed. Simon Johnson, a MIT Professor, and former IMF Chief economist says that even the IMF has not addressed it, and that the Obama administration needs to call China to account. He says this could lead to a spat with China, and if the US does not back down to a row. The concern has been that China would not buy up Treasury debt the way it has in the past, at the same time the question is whether there is some point where the deficit is so large and the US so dependent on foreign buyers of Treasury debt, that it needs to be addressed on a number of levels. Including addressing currency and fair trade issues, a more rational balanced consumption of everything from oil to goods from lowcost Asian countries, to reduce the toll on the overextended American consumer and on the extent of US borrowing needed. From China's perspective there may also be the same concern about export led growth, which may come to be seen as undependable anyway, because with or without some currency advantage the overextended US consumer is not buying anyway, holding off on purchases of everying from cars to flatscreen televisions. With growth at 6.8% in 4th quarter 2008, according to the Chinese Government Statistics Bureau, and expected to drop to 5% in 2009, the export growth model is no longer the panacea for China's unemployed as it once was at 12-13% growth rates in 2006-2007. In fact it may now look to be a better wiser policy if China had increased the value of its currency even more than its slow gradual approach to slow the growth rate from 12-13% to a more sustainable 9-10%, and lower American imports and lower the American trade deficit. Part of the problem in China was the difficulty of applying any sort of brakes once the local governments were set free to expand as much as they could, and prevented any controls from being effective. Steel production continued to grow even after there was evidence of large overcapacity, and government direction failed. Buy some time to shift to domestic consumption based recovery, is what the Chinese policy may be now. Indications of this are evident with its grappling at the issues it has not tackled like giving ownership of land to farmers in rural areas, and to building a healthcare system for the country, both of which are part of a host of issues to shift to domestic consumption based recovery. So unlike the way the media and some experts portray it its not a tough line that the US is taking against Chinese unwillingness. China may want to cooperate.That may be true if China was missing out on 10-13% growth rates, but these were unsustainable anyway and bad policy. At growth rates below 5% as projected by analysts China may want to jettison the export model of growth and build an alternative one. In that case as China shifts to domestic consumption, currency adjustments may be seen quite differently than they were in the past....

LyrArc Article Gist
Its now known that some of the money that the government used to bailout AIG is going to Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs, so that they can pay the hedge funds to whome they sold credit default swaps. The way it works is this. Hedge funds bet against the housing market that if mortgage defaults reach a certain level they would be paid a large amount. To do this they buy credit default swaps from banks like Deutsche Bank and Goldman. In turn Deutsch and Goldman go out and hedge the risks of selling these credit default swaps. Its hard to find someone to sell this insurance, but AIG becomes the dominant insurer for these credit default swaps. What does AIG get out of this. Only fractions of apenny for every dollar of insurance sold to the banks, less than $10 million for $1 billion of insurance. These swaps were sold in 2005, when some of these hedge funds saw risks in the housing markets excesses, and they were making the bets for an event that was a very plausible one, with very little risk to themselves. And the banks were passing on a lot of the risk for insurance on the cheap to AIG, which ends being the sucker holding a big part of the risk. What did have to gain from this, and why it agreed to sell this insurance is a mystery. Its this insurance that has caused AIG its biggest headache, to have to set aside money to pay the banks who in turn pay the hedge funds. When these pools of mortgage assets of companies like Countrywide Financial, which were created by Deutsche Bank and Goldman, called by names such as 'START' and 'ABACUS', went down in value AIG has to set aside money to pay the banks. As these assets fall in value from mid September to December 2008, AIG and by this the government which now owns 80% of AIG, paid $5.4 billion to Deutsche and $8.1 billion to Goldman under credit default swap contracts AIG has written. This adds up to $52 billion paid to all the banks that bought insurance for credit default swaps they sold and covered with AIG insurance. And this is a large part of the $170 billion of government money to AIG. Its for this kind of financial wizardry that makes little sense, and showed no sense of responsibility for the firm, that the Financial Products Group's 370 employees are to be rewarded with $400 million in bonuses, with binding contracts as reported in the Washington Post. The $165 million so widely reported in bonuses sent out recently, are only a part of the $400 million. While this is going on its surreal that on the other side Michigan is hurting , auto states in the midwest are hurting badly. And $17 billion barely makes it through in time to keep GM and Chrysler running in December 2008, and the money can be called in by the government in February 2009 leading to these companies ending up in bankruptcy. This puts the situation in new perspective, and Rattner who heads the group looking at the GM restructuring must be aware of this, when he said bankruptcy is not necessarily the best option and the loans would not be called in by the government. Its job losses in the economy, and the fragile nature of the economic outlook, and also the way in which money is being scandalously wasted in other places like AIG with no purpose, that Rattner must have in the back of his mind as he looks at money for GM restructuring and jobs for hurting workers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Problems with the July 2011 plan for Greece and other troubled eurozone economies include the lack of funding and powers for the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF). The contagion effects to Italy and Spain will require larger funding and powers for the EFSF for it to be able to deal with future crises. The bondholder debt haircut for Portuguese and Irish bondholders, and the sense that the crisis in Greece may have to be revisted yet again, are other issues that remain unresolved. Analysts sense that the EU's governance mechanisms are always a step behind in dealing with the repeated crises and EU leaders are doing only enough to get to the next crisis moment.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bordering Uganda and Kenya in the south Ethiopia is one of the populous countries in Africa struggling with a number of problems. There is very little industry or private enterprise and small businesses even by African standards, because the inept monarchy continued for too long and was followed by military rule which nationalized all enterprises. With few employment opportunities the unemployment rate for young people is as high as 70% according to the Economist. There is no democratic tradition and not enough time for it to take root, so that even after a promising start the government of Prime Minister Zenawi resorted to rigging the elections and violent suppression of dissent in 2005. About 2 million people are added to the population each year, with about 7 children for each mother, and the population is already at 75 million, one of the largest in Africa. The Economist says it could overtake Nigeria which has 140 million people, some time in the mid century. Improvements have been made is acknowledged here, with less corruption, investment in roads and schools and drinking water, significant by African standards. And in the light of the tribal divisions typical of Africa, holding the country together is also a challenging task in the midst of neighbors with different political regimes in Eritrea and Somalia. Chinese help is part of the improvement in infrastructure here, and bringing a new development oriented perspective to the thinking here, compared to purely European concerns. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The unnerving and distracting effect of a long IPO process and investor demands on two co-founders of Box Inc., as competiton and market perceptions change for a once promising tech startup in cloud computing.

LyrArc Article Gist
Typical of so much of what is written about the World Health Organization and its role in the pandemic, this podcast in the WSJ fails to quickly convey the critical function of the WHO as an early warning system the world has depended on, including China. The H1N1 epidemic originated in Mexico. Asian countries including China and India depended on very quick response from the country where the epidemic originated  in allowing entry into the affected area for experts from advanced countries such as the U.S. The global response was then coordinated across countries quickly with complete transparency. The head of China's CDC himself faced a problem with transparency with the provincial authorites in Wuhan. 1.    Fundamentally this quick entry was denied the U.S. Request by U.S. to China was made on Jan. 6 for U.S. team to go to Wuhan, quick permission was denied and given only about 6 weeks later on Feb 16. This delay is the crux of the problem for the U.S.. Taiwan confirmed human to human transmission on Jan. 1, the WHO was saying this was not clear as late as Jan. 14. These costly delays are what the U.S.  letter is about.  The head of the CDC China Gao Fu called Dr. Redfield head of CDC in the U.S. on the next day after he suspected Wuhan provincial authorites were vague about what was happening. Gao Fu was alarmed when scanning the internet on December 30, 2019, about rumors of a vaguely worded lung disease in internal memos of Wuhan. He called Wuhan authorites and was not getting clear answers on that day, then deciding on December 31 to send his own team to Wuhan, as reported in German magazine Der Spiegel- Hackenbroch, Zand, 05/20/2020.  Der Spiegel says in its special report on the early period in Wuhan that Gao Fu was so alarmed about what was happening enough to be in tears in his series of calls with Dr. Redfield in the immediate days that followed. The date was shortly after the GAO Fu sent the team to Wuhan, December 31 and New Years Day 2020, as reported in Der Spiegel. See the link to Lyrarc gist of Der Spiegel's "A Failed Deception: The Early Days of the Coronavirus in Wuhan."  2.  President Trump points out the standards of the WHO- in the concluding point of his letter to WHO- when a three time prime minister of Norway, Gro Brundtland was head of the WHO during the SARS crisis of 2003. She acted quickly and decisively and no time was lost. It is this failure of the early warning system under the new president of the WHO after 2017 Dr. Tedros that alarms the U.S.  with about 100,000 deaths.  3.  This failure it can now be said was partly a result of a election in 2017 for the position of WHO president which was flawed. This was the first time a WHO head, an important position was put up for an election. The Executive Board was responsible for this appointment since the founding of the WHO as part of the UN, based in Geneva, Switzerland, after World War II. This system worked. The election was clearly a bad process for appointing the president of the WHO which should be done entirely on the capabilities of the person holding this position not on a flawed voting process. It is flawed because India and Bangladesh hit by a cyclone during the coronavirus have suffered greatly, as have other countries, but had only 2 votes for 1.5 billion people, when Barbados (385,000 population) and Laos (7 million) which had less than one  hundredth the population had the same number of votes. The U.S. had one vote. The election resulted in lobbying and a process in which many candidates stayed away because they simply would not go through such a process. The position was too important to the world- most of the advanced countries had forgotten about the danger of epidemics to let this happen by 2017, as shown in the way the austerity years led to cancellation of the preparations for pandemic in France and Britain. The austerity years and neglect of public health during these tech boom years in the western world made it possible for this to happen. 3.   Along with the 1 month ultimatum action is already being taken to restore the effectiveness of the importance of the Executive Board. The head of the health ministry in India, Dr. Harsh Vardhan, has been appointed the new chairman of the Executive Board on May 22. This restores the voice of billions of people in Asia in the process, and brings the major countries with the greatest risk in a pandemic into the decision process for tackling the pandemic, this includes the rest of the world.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Kostin, Goldman Sach's U.S. equity strategist and his prediction of the S&P 500 at 1250 at the end of 2012. The S&P was at 1421 on April 1, 2012, the highest it has been since May 20, 2008. In his research note Kostin says that over the longer term the stock market will offer opportunities after a more normal growth environment is reestablished. This is similiar to the view held by John Bogle, founder of Vanguard. For the short term- the 2012-2013 time frame Kostin sees tactical risks, and results below average. The reason he gives is low economic growth and the large degree of uncertainty. The situation in Europe shows slowing to no growth and more deficit problems, and the sanctions on Iran pose risks for oil prices.

LyrArc Article Gist
Central Huijin, part of China's sovereign wealth fund, China Investment Corporation, bought shares of China's four major banks in October 2011 to prevent steep price declines. China's bank stocks have lost about a third of their value in 2011. The four major banks- China Construction Bank, Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of China, and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China- control two-thirds of the banking industry in China. In China's interlocking system of relationships between the state, the banks and the state controlled industrial companies, Central Huijin owns 35.4% of Industrial and Commercial Bank, 67.6% of Bank of China, and similiar stakes in the other 2 banks. It was created in 2003 to bail out China's banks after bad loan losses, and was transferred to China Investment Corporation in 2007. As part of the 2007 move bonds were issued by CIC to compensate the central bank. This means the banks pay dividends to CIC so that it can make payments on the bonds. Today the 4 major banks pay half of their earnings in dividends to CIC. CIC chief Lou Jiwei, says Central Huijin needs 300 million renminbi a day, or $47 million to pay interest on the bonds to the central bank. The 4 major banks are also under pressure from China's regulators to increase their capital reserves, because of large bad loans to local governments after the global financial crisis of 2008....

LyrArc Article Gist
Problems of declining production at the Cantarell oil field in Mexico have been known for some time. Now President Calderon is trying to take on this issue. Brazil's Petrobras reached an impasse also some years back but was able to make the reforms, see the link to Petrobras. See the link in the WSJ for 8/30/07 on Petrobras . In 1995 President Cardozo of Brazil pushed through reforms after a oil workers strike at Petrobras. Upto that time Petrobras had problems similar to Pemex with underinvestment, state meddling in its affairs and finances, and too much bureaucracy and inefficiency. Can Calderon get reform for Pemex. Which amount of Pemex revenues should go to the government, how much should Pemex have so that it can adequately fund investment in new oil field exploration offshore, how to overcome bureaucracy and inefficient management, and how to arrange board representation so that Pemex can transform itself like Petrobras did. Some of the answers to these questions are emerging. Calderon wants to prepare his political position as the reform of Pemex is something that previous Presidents have failed to tackle. To do this the Senate's Energy Committee is holding a private debate on the issues. Calderon may try to forge a consensus with the Institutional Nacional Party, as he did with pension reforms if an all party consensus eludes him. Already in reforms of public finances that Calderon has pushed through Pemex will pay 71.5 centavos on every peso of oil extracted by 2012, instead of 79 centavos as royalty payments to the government. One reform being considered is to givePemex control of its own budget. At this time $10 billion a year goes back to the government on top of the royalty tax payments. Another reform would open up refining, transport and distribution to private enterprise. A think tank expert at CIDAC in Mexico City thinks that this can be done without reforming the constitution as was done to allow private investment in electricity generation in the 1990's. The same methods could be used to promote risk sharing contracts with other companies to bring in new technology for oil exploration, including companies from emerging countries like Petrobras, Petrochina and others, given Mexican's bias against the western oil majors. Especially because Petrobras has proven expertise in deep water drilling offshore. There is no question that Mexico is falling behind. One energy expert at the National Autonomous University estimates that the density of drilling rigs in the American portion of the Gulf of Mexico is 20 times greater than in the Mexican part, with Mexico having drilled only 20 exploratory wells in water deeper than 980 feet. in other areas like refining Pemex has not built a new refinery in 20 years, and imports 40% of its gasoline from US refineries, and its 7500 gasoline stations need expansion as Mexico's economy expands. Cardozo's transformation came with setting up an independent Board of Directors and putting an investment banker in charge. International oil companies were allowed into Brazil as a way to get Petrobras to compete with western oil companies and increase efficiency. And Cardozo got Petrobras listed on the New York Stock Exchange selling some 16% of Petrobras in the capital markets. This listing ensured transparency and improved corporate governance, as about 50 analysts now tracked Petrobras. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
See Suzlon and Mr. Tanti April 18, 2008, WSJ link

LyrArc Article Gist
Wind energy in Texas and trying to forecast winds so that supply can be stable and predictable a tough thing to do.

LyrArc Article Gist
Boone Pickens $ 2 billion investment in Texas to buy land and 700 turbines from GE for wind energy.

LyrArc Article Gist
The publisher of the Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Co., is working to overturn a court injunction that prevents the public from seeing the Medicare billing records of individual doctors. Dow Jones & Co., filed court papers in January 2011, to overturn the court injunction. The American Medical Association has fought to keep secret the amounts of money individual doctors get paid by Medicare. The AMA filed a lawsuit against the government to keep secret these Medicare records, on the grounds of privacy rights, and won a court ruling in 1979. This court ruling still stands. The position of Dow Jones in its efforts to change this situation, is that giving the public access to the records is essential to the monitoring of so large a public expense as Medicare. These records would then be available to state medical boards, nonprofit organizations, universities and newspapers who can act as watchdogs over the $500 billion Medicare program. Such transparency and monitoring is an essential feature for the proper functioning of such programs and to prevent misuse of public money. For a program like Medicare, fraud and waste has enormous implications, as it adds to the spiralling cost of healthcare and to the unsustainable budget deficits. In one of the largest cases so far, the FBI, Justice Department, 700 state, federal and local agents, worked together to charge 114 defendents nationwide with Medicare fraud in February 2011. A senior law enforcemet official says Medicare fraud is so rampant, "there's no way in hell you can prosecute your way out of this problem, no way." He says the the answer is more effective monitoring of the money that goes out. And a key part of that is transparency and public access to how the money in Medicare is spent, what individual doctors and healthcare providers are getting paid by Medicare. The lack of this transparency for a program the size of Medicare can only lead to a lack of monitoring as the Dow Jones suit asserts, and make it difficult for the government to check abuses in the way money goes out. At a time when teachers and public workers and seniors are expected to make their share of the sacrifices to fix the budget deficits, it is incomprehensible that money should then be allowed to go out of the Medicare system through fraud and waste, because of a lack of transparency....

LyrArc Article Gist
Glen Hubbard, who was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President George W. Bush and is now Dean of Columbia University Business School, Hal Scott professor of International Fiancial Systems at Harvard Law School, and Luigi Zingales professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, say a different plan of action is needed from what the Obama administration is doing to tackle the banking crisis. They are really skeptical about the the Public Private Investment Program and other plans put forth upto now for several reasons. First, in every case they say there is a lot of carrot but very little stick, and this won't work. TARP program was mostly carrot, with Treasury getting back securities worth $78 billion less than the $254 billion invested, as pointed out by the Congressional Oversight Panel.The FDIC's guarantee of short term debt was worth $100 billion just for the original nine TARP participating banks, and the mortgage related asset guarantees offered Citibank and Bank of America were worth tens of billions. They see anew round of TARP injections with the conversion of the government's preferred stock into equity after release of the stress test results. Then there is PPIP the Public Private Investment Program, and its plans to subsidize the purchase of bank's"toxic assets" by hedge funds and other investors. They estimate the government will spend $2 for every $1 the private sector puts up. And even with this subsidy their thinking is that the probability of succes is low for the same reason that has prevailed since the earlier efforts by Treasury Secretary Paulson- there is just too big a gap between the bid and ask prices on the toxic assets, and add to that the reluctance of investors to partner with the government. Its time for more stick say these experts as the problem of toxic assets, and of credit and lending in the economy, will hang like a large shadow over the economy, as long as these tough problems are not wrestled with. This is the Hubbard-Scott-Luigi Plan: 1) The FDIC should announce that its guarantees of short term debt set to expire in October will not be renewed. Insolvent banks, defined not by stress tests but as those that cannot fund themselves in the private market, will be taken over by the FDIC under aclear and credible action plan. 2) The FDIC lacks the resources to run several large and complex banks which may become insolvent. And waving the idea of nationalization the creditors may try to get the government to bail them out. The authors of this plan say the FDIC should solit each bank into a "bad bank" and a "good bank." The "bad bank" would carry all the residential and commercial real estate loans and securitized mortgages as assets, and all the long term debt as liabilities. THe "bad bank" would obtain along term laon from the good bank to fund the assets of the bad bank. Al the remaining assets including the derivative contracts and the loan to the bad bank would be assets of the good bank. It would also have all the insured deposits and the FDIC guaranteed short term debt as liabilities. With the split accomplished the good bank can be released from FDIC receivership. 3) The long term debt holders would be compensated by receiving all the equity of the good bank. The old shareholders would get the equity in the bad bank. And in any restructuring bondholders should do better than equity holders. If banks are not really insolvent as some say and just facing temporary dislocations, then the bad bank will eventually surge in value, and the equity holders will do alright, and if not they will receive nothing as they should. 4) For this to work legislation needs to take effect before October for FDIC procedures for handling failed banks to be also applicable to bank holding companies. And this new legislation puts no new cost on the taxpayer....

LyrArc Article Gist
"There is'nt another planet to export to," is what Paul Krugman of the New York Times says, when referring to the impossibility of all countries keeping up exports and reducing imports at the same time. In crises similiar to what the US faces today, countries have increased exports as a way to stage an economic recovery. But this time countries are depressing their currencies to gain or preserve a large share of global demand achieved through high exports. China has resisted demands for a significant revaluation of the yuan, and persists in efforts in currrency markets to keep the value of the yuan low. This cuts off one avenue of recovery. Bloomberg Business Week and Bloomberg News interviewed Edmund Phelps, Jan Hatzius, Krugman, and other economists, with the idea of figuring out how the US could stage an economic recovery. Krugman is not optimistic, considering the effects of the financial crisis being really protracted. Krugman points out that when comparing the US currently to the eaarly stages of Japan's lost decade, the US is doing worse. Unemployment is worse, and overall he says, a weaker policy response. And he says Japan is still a depressed fragile economy 18 years after its financial crisis. Jan Hatzius of Goldman Sachs, predicts that the unemployment rate will rise back to 10% in early 2011, with a 30% chance that the economy will fall back into a recession. He says that in the postwar economy, there has never been an increase in the unemployment rate of one third of one percentage point that did not result in a recession. Phelps and Hatzius see one way the US could stage a recovery is with replacement old structures and equipmet as wear and tear and obsolescence takes place. Phelps sees the possibility of technological innovation resultig in a new burst of activity. Robert Gordon of Northwestern University, is less optimistic about this, and predicts a lower growth rate of 1.5% over the next 20 years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Portuguese government asked the European Union for bailout loans. The aid the EU is providing to Portugal comes with conditions- asking Portugal to make additional austerity cuts even as new elections loom. The aid is essentially more loans at high interest rates, even if the rates are lower than the steep rates in financial markets for a country with a collapsing credit rating. There is serious concern about whether this formula applied by the EU is going to work because at this rate it may take a decade or more for Portugal to pay off all the loans. The major problem is that with severe spending cuts- a country that lacks competitiveness and cannot devalue its currency because of being the euro zone- it is that much harder to generate growth. Simon Tilford, chief economist for the Center for European Reform in London, says the EU leaders have failed to come to grips with the core of the problem for Ireland, Greece and now Portugal- which is how to restore the finances to some sustainability, and how this could ever be achieved by a policy of deeper and deeper spending cuts. Tilford points out that the other more fundamental problem EU leaders are not tackling, is that the problem is deep down the large amount of Portuguese, Irish and Greek debt held by German, French, British, Spanish and Dutch banks. If these countries default the governments of these countries would have to recapitalize their banks at the expense of the taxpayers of Germany, France, Britain, Netherlands. Political leaders of these countries want to avoid confronting angry taxpayers and lose political support. Germany has called for a bondholder haircut, something that banking interests do not support. Tilford says Portugal is not getting a bailout, because for a bailout there would need to be a default by Portugal. What it is getting along with Ireland and Greece, are loans at high interest rates, and an EU plan that simply stifles the ability to pay back accumulated debt, leaving the situation in limbo for some future resolution....

LyrArc Article Gist
Ireland and Portugal both have debt to GDP ratios of more than 100%. Still Ireland is better positioned to weather the eurozone crisis. Foreign investment attracted by low taxes and an educated labor force gives Ireland signficant advantages to return to growth. Citigroup forecasts show a 5.5% decline in GDP for Portugal in 2012, and large probabilities that the deficit will overshoot. Ireland expects 0.5% growth in 2012. Ireland's exports are 60% of GDP, compared to 24% for Portugal. Yields on Portuguese bonds due 2020 are at 13%, compared to less than 7% for Ireland. But funding Portugal through the end of 2015 is expected to cost 40 billion euros, according to Capital Economics estimates, or only 0.4% of eurozone GDP, making the problem in Portugal very manageable for the EU.

LyrArc Article Gist
Ben Inker of Grantham Mayo sees profitability at U.S. companies at a high because of savings in labor costs while consumption has not declined because of government transfer payments and fiscal policy. He sees profits of U.S. companies declining in 2012-2013. This makes the U.S. stocks less likely to perform well in the future, especially the stocks outside of the blue chips which he sees as highly overvalued. A better choice in his view is in Europe and Japan which are undervalued. His funds have 39% in U.S. stocks and most of it in blue chip stocks. His view is that interest rate policy will not have a large effect as the changes will be very gradual, and going from zero percent interest rates to one percent interest rates will not lead to much change in economic activity. From his point of view the largest risk is in shrinking of profits at U.S. companies as the deficit comes down, because today workers are able to maintain consumption because of fiscal policy and companies are able to cut costs. In Europe the austerity cuts are being taken seriously and this will impact profits, so the U.S. will look better in 2012. But value will prevail in the long run as European and Japanese stocks are undervalued and the U.S runup leaves stocks overvalued in terms of future stream of profits....

LyrArc Article Gist
This article has several information links for different groups. One to "Putin and Russian oil policy"- consolidating into state hands all the major oil properties by buying the privately held company holdings such as BP-TNK's Kovykta gas field. A link to remarks to the New York Times in an interview by Medvedev, deputy CEO of Gazprom. And a separate link to "How Russians see Themselves and the World around them." The other link is in comments by Surkov, Mr. Putin's deputy chief of staff at a news conference and Putin's remarks in pre-8 Summit television interviews. Content Links 1. Link To the group "How Russians See Themselves and the World." In remarks at a news conference, Vladislav Surkov, Putin's deputy chief of staff referred to Russia's desire to keep its national sovereignty in terms of how it manages its oil resources in Russian interest. Russia did not want to have to respond to western demands for access to its oil resources and oil and gas pipelines. Surkov pointed out that Russia was a free nation among other free nations and did not want to be controlled by outside interests. Putin in pre-summit television interviews had an interesting view of the criticism of Russian oil policy and its consolidation of oil resources into state hands, as well as the centralization of powers and putting media into state hands, and its new stance in foreign affairs. He told this to the French channel TF1: Putin suggested old views of Russia stemmed from outdated cold-war competition, and misguided colonial-era arrogance. If we go back 100 years and look through the newspapers, we see what arguments the colonial powers of that time used to justify their involvement in Africa and Asia. They justified their involvement with statements that is was about playing a civilizing role, the white man's burden, the need to civilize these people, Putin told TF1. All you have to do is change the words "civilizing" to "democratization" and then we see the application almost to a word of what the newspapers were saying in 1900 to day's world. These are the arguments one hears from our peers in the U.S. and Europe on democratization and democratic freedoms. This is remarkable statement in revealing how the post Berlin Wall 90's experience with democracy has soured Russians view of democracy. And the peculiar way Putin and other Russians see the western exhortations for openness, transparency, freedoms, self interested, motivated by gains for western economic interests, and disregarding Russian interests such as national pride, economic-higher energy prices to sustain growth, national sovereignty. The NYT article can be seen in the context of a strategy article in Foreign Affairs, July/August 2006, "Russia Leaves the West," by Dmitri Trenin. Trenin says the U.S. and Europe want a weak Russia that they can exploit and manipulate, which means Russia needs to assert itself and its own interests just like the U.S. and China. The idea presented by Deputy Director of Carnegie Moscow Center, echoes Putin's own suspicion of western interests and their "colonial era arrogance". Trenin's view is of a fundamental shift in Western-Russian relations: the United States and Europe could protest this change in Russia's foreign policy all they want but it will not matter. For Trenin the U.S. and Europe had to agree that the terms of the Western-Russian interaction, set after the collapse of the Soviet Union's collapse, was now fundamentally changed. 2. The second link is with the "Putinand Russian Oil Policy" group. It provides details about the Kovytkta field owned by BP-TNK and what is happening there. Alastair Ferguson, director of BP-TNK's gas operations describes the situation in a interview with NYT at his Moscow offices. Ferguson says it makes sense to do what Russia is doing if you are the Russian government. By letting BP-TKN build its own pipeline Russia would lose influence over gas prices. According to Gazprom allowing private companies to ship gas independently would drive down gas prices. And Ferguson says this gas field is huge and supplies going to China and rest of Asia could lower prices of liquefied natural gas in California. Medvedev, Gazprom's deputy CEO was also interviewed in his Moscow offices. Gazprom and the government would answer the question about export sales, not BP-TNK. Medvedev's view is that this is a technical question for Gazprom and Russia to decide and has little to do with the G-8....

LyrArc Article Gist
Muhammad Azhar Ali, factory manager for National Foods plant near Karanchi, Pakistan, describes what it is like running a manufacturing operation in Pakistan. National Foods is the largest manufacturer of pickles and other spice products in Pakistan. A big problem is the lack of security and terrorism. This remains a constant cause of anxiety for business people in Pakistan. Its like being in a war zone says the National Foods chairman Abdul Majeed. Another major problem is lack of reliable electricity supplies. Supply of electricity is only one third of national demand in Pakistan. Larger companies such as Lucky Cement generate their own electricity, with Lucky Cement producing 150 megawatts from its plants. Smaller companies like National Foods rely on diesel generators. To conserve electricity many factory, floor office and bathroom lights are turned off. For workers the lack of electric supplies and high inflation affect lives in many ways. National Foods has a weighing department and assesses workers picked up from many parts of Karanchi to see if they are fit for work or are unduly stressed from poor living conditions. This is a side of Pakistani life that is rarely touched on-the daily lives of workers and managers. Ali works harder than other production managers in other countries because of the power shortages and lack of security. He would like to devote time to increase productivity and be more like other production managers. The war with the Taliban has cost Pakistan $68 billion in destroyed infrastructure, security costs, lost foreign investment according to one estimate. ...