LyrArc Article Gist
Under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order of 2012, a group of immigrants brought to the country as children can have temporary status to stay and work in the U.S. In 2012 this was restricted to children brought in under the age of 16, with a maximum age of 30. The program was called "Dreamers." Under president Obama's executive order this will be changed to children brought in under the age of 18, with no maximum age. The number of immigrants goes up from 1.2 million in 2012 to 1.9 million with this particular change in 2014. A new group of parents of children who are citizens or legal residents residing in the U.S. for more than 5 years adds another 3.3 million to this number, with an additional 100,000 for parents of Dreamers. The total 1.9 million children and 3.4 million parents would be 5.3 million given new status to stay and work in the U.S. The 5.3 million will not be eligible for subsidies and for the Affordable Healthcare Act assistance. All will be required to pass security checks. This leaves about 6 million, including farm workers and other undocumented or illegal immigrants not touched by the new executive order. President Obama is expected to make the announcement of the executive order on Nov. 20, 2014, in Nevada, a state with a large Hispanic population. On the question of legal authority for the executive order, Prof. Stephen Yale-Loehr, an expert on immigration law at Cornell says the U.S. president does have broad authority to decide which group should get a reprieve from deportations. The decision to exclude benefits of government subsidies and subsidized healthcare was made to appeal to increased support of the American public for the executive order. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the true cost of the Obama health care legislation and the assumption that the legislation cuts the deficit by billions of dollars. This WSJ editorial says one has to look at this closely, and not merely look at CBO projections, which may be based in a certain context and not reflect the true costs, especially because many accounting gimmicks and use of numbers to present a particular picture is taking place. The information this editorial cites is that: it uses 10 years of taxes to fund six years of subsidies, Social Security and Medicare revenues are double-counted to the tune of $398 billion, a new program funding long-tem care frontloads taxes but backloads spending, and the assumption of an automatic 25% cut to physician payments that Congress is unwilling to authorize. Rep. Rand Paul has tried to present an alternative view which needs to be studied just as closely, because of the enormous impact of a jump in spending at a time when the public finances are fragile. WSJ also cites the work of Richard Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, as an alternate perspective of how things could turn out, Doug Holtz-Eakin, and Eugene Steuerle. It calls for common sense in evaluating programs, entitlements, defense or other government spending. They not only cost money, but costs escalate over time as history has shown over decades, till they eventually are discovered to be not affordable unless the middle class is willing to dig deeper into its finances to pay for them. Alternate perspectives from a range of informed opinion, Howard Dean, Martin Feldstein, and the head of Harvard's Medical School show that the issue needs to be looked at closely and carefully and cannot be something in which CBO numbers can be trusted to tell the whole story. Especially when common sense, history, and informed opinion across a spectrum of thought advises caution, and fragile public finances also suggest caution. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont, says the health care bill is not real reform, and may do more harm than good. He says in a Washington Post article, December 17, 2009, the Obama health care bill does not insert competition into insurance markets, does not significantly reduce costs, and does not improve the delivery and use of health services. It was he says done with a political calculus and crafted for votes not real reform. Jeffrey S. Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School, gave the Obama health reform bill an "F" grade, saying in a Nov 18, 2009, WSJ article, that it was disingenuous to call this reform, Congress and the White House were simply deceiving the public. He said the bill will accelerate US health care spending, postpone most of the major health care problems, expecially the ones that drive cost, including the "fee for service" system and delivery of health care. He says in his discussions with economists and other health care leaders the opinion was unanimous that the bill will accelerate health care spending. He cites Massachusetts as an example, where access to care was expanded under the same dysfunctional system, and spending went up, and it doesn't work. Feldstein, who in early 2008 suggested proactive solutions to the mortgage debt crisis which were never adopted, says that the Obama health care law means higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of health care for the uninsured group over 10 years. Feldstein says that the Obama plan is to cut Medicare to cut spending, and will reduce the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reducing payments to providers. And he asks if the cost reductions are weighted too heavily towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers ,would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% of the American people who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Joint Editorial by U.S. president Barack Obama and India's prime minister Narendra Modi in the Washington Post on September 30, 2014. Strobe Talbot, a former deputy Secretary of State says he does not remember a situation in which this type of joint editorial was put out by two heads of government. Speaking on Indian television "Times Now" with Arnab Goswami, Talbot says this is a result of intense advance preparation on both sides that he is personally aware of from his contacts in the two governments. The editorial says the two countries are "natural allies" using the words of former BJP Indian prime minister Vajpayee. It emphasizes the fact recognized by both sides that the true potential of the relationship has not been realized. It sees the election of a new government in India (with a decisive mandate) as a natural opportunity to move the relationship in line with India's rapid development agenda, and the U.S. own need to generate economic growth. Specifically Modi and Obama plan to discuss building up Indian manufacturing, and expanding affordable renewable energy including nuclear. The "Clean India" program is received with particular enthusiasm and an area of collaboration for improving sanitation and hygiene throughout the country. The relationship is viewed as bigger than projects and investment, in that it can add to helping build a more peaceful future for the global community- with the two countries tradition of interest in peaceful development that benefits all nations....

LyrArc Article Gist
This is a big desicion by the Obama administration, and has global implications for the amount of oil consumed and the emissions discharged. The Obama administration will introduce one national standard for automile emissions and mileage standards, replacing the patchwork of standards and skipping over the challenges to the California standards by using those standards to set the national rules. The rules take effect in 2012. It will create a new national standard for a car and light truck fleet in the USA, that is 40% cleaner and more fuel efficient by 2016 than it is now, with a new average of 35.5 miles per gallon. The current national standard is 25 miles per gallon, and this standard has fallen way behind the Japanese and the Europeans. The Europeans went through their battles for fuel efficiency a few years ago with auto industry resistance, and this was finally settled with tougher standards, giving the European industry advantages in technology over the Americans. The American car industry stalled higher standards, and what standards were passed were whittled down by heavy lobbying in Congress. As a result a battle raged between those interested in conservation and the environment and the Detroit car industry, especially in a deteriorating global environment for this type of prolific oil consumption on American highways. This lack of foresight on the part of Detroit carmakers, and their management, accelerated their financial collapse in 2008 and 2009, as large car and truck sales collapsed. That this tough new standard of 40% improvement in 2016, would in fact not have been possible without this fiinancial collapse and turning to the government for a bailout - with the entire board of General Motors being replaced- is one of the ironies of this situation. This decision will almost certainly accelerate the development of smaller models, and bring the kind of attention to them that will give them the quality and features and comfort to make them command higher prices and become profitable, as is the case in Europe. For too long the American small car became synonymous with being a lesser car in many dimensions of design, quality, comfort and performance, so that it became a cheap car that you upgraded from to a larger car as you became affluent. It had been that way, but did not have to be that way after the world had changed. And the larger models like the pickup trucks and large cars are more likely to be phased out with the new regulations. This will also bring a `new sanity to oil prices, as the reduced consumption in the US will accomodate the increased consumption in India from the small cars like the Tata Nano which look set to sell in the millions, and still keep oil affordable for tight budgets worldwide. In this sense it is a victory for global good sense. For President Obama this is a personal quest, as he co-sponsored 2 bills in 2006, during this second year in the US Senate, one to raise fuel economy standards, and the other to encourage the use of alternative fuels....

LyrArc Article Gist
Harry Markovitz who invented Portfolio Theory and won the Nobel Prize in 1990 on the economic crisis and solutions. His idea in portfolio theory is that you reduce risk by creating a portfolio of uncorrelated assets. Owning GM and Ford together is more risky because they are correlated. The securities owned by banks were not not portfolio type with uncorrelated risk, they were all of one type in the mortgage securties industry. He goes to the heart of the problem saying until all these securities are scrutinized and underlying mortgagesare scrutinized, sorted out down to the individual zip code level, and this is not as complicated as it seems given the amount of resources that can be thrown at this problem, and given what is at stake, and they are striped of their lack of transparency, the country and the global economies that are intertwined with America's problems cannot see a solution to this problem. And this is true for the banks like Bank of America and Chase and the government run banks like the FDIC Indymac bank, where only a small fraction of homeowners can be helped with loan modifications to make monthly payments affordable, as a big part of the mortgage loans they hold or service are in the form of mortgage securtities where they don't make the decisions. Unless mortgage securities are sorted out to restore transparency and the government steps in with help and mandates a direction, the foreclosure process will lead to dropping property prices and further deterioration and economic stagnation similiar to the experience of Japan. Markovitz says it could take a year to do this. He says "the valuation process will take as long as takes, but it is the primary step toward effectively utilizing the very controversial bailout and avoiding the structural problem of a stagnant economy." Writes Gordon Crovitz of WSJ, "to put the issue in probability terms, the odds are very remote and nonexistent that the economy can recover until these basic steps are taken."...

LyrArc Article Gist
One in six dollars generated by the U.S. economy goes to pay for health care, almost twice the average for rich countries. It hurts America in many ways; by being a burden on the taxpayer when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid paying for the poor and the elderly, on companies being one reason GM went bankrupt, it eats up federal and state budgets, rising costs make any form of future coverage for all unsustainable, and it robs other priorities such as infrastructure building and other national scale investments. The Economist says that if it had to design a system from scratch, it would go for a system based mostly around publicly funded health care. For the uninsured the solution of an employer mandate is now well accepted, so this is not an issue. What is an issue is how to make the new system affordable? Here the Economist says that whether in stages or in one move, the tax deductability of employer paid health insurance, which is costing the U.S. government $250 billion ayear, has to go. It is necessary to remove this deduction, and its something all interests involved will have to swallow, as other savings are smaller and will not be adequate. The deductability of insurance makes the true cost of insurance transparent, so it supports gold plated insurance. This does not make cost control the pressing priority it needs to be. So the deducatability of employer paid health insurance hurts both ways. The other necessary action is in the area of moving out of the current culture where most doctors work on a fee-for-service basis, where the more tests they prescribe or procedures they perform the greater their incomes. This acts as a perverse incentive, and has aruinous effect in mushrooming health care costs in America. Cutting back on unnecessary tests and procedures, and prescriptions , would save 10% to 30% of health costs says the Economist. And it says this has been proven with the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and Kaiser Permanente in California showing that cutting back doesn't hurt care and outcomes., so much so that cutting back would occur along with improved outcomes. But Americans with employer paid insurance just take things for granted as its not much out of pocket expense for them. THis creates the lack of a force for controlling costs even as employers are shouldering abigger and bigger burden, and the employee who thinks he is doing fine actually is seeing more of his salary dollars going to pay for his health insurance. In a way the consumers of health care are stuck with the perception that they are not somehow paying for these mushrooming costs and too manytests, procedures and prescriptions. This perception leads them a false sense of comfort with the system they are in, and a fear of something new fanned by the medical lobbies, that any change will impact users negatively. This makes the whole discussion on health care or the process of finding solutions to become an exericize in which terms like "rationing" and "choice" play a distorting role. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Experts say Chief Justice Roberts somehow found a path through in bridging the ideological divide and avoiding a show of partisanship in an election year. He somehow navigated and found a path through in his vote on the U.S. healthcare law letting it stand. Early on Roberts advocated "judicial modesty and humility" in jurisprudence. He compared the judge's role to that of an umpire in baseball during the 2005 confirmation hearings. The umpire would not pitch or bat, his job would be to call balls and strikes. It was seen as a determmined show of independence at a time when Justice Kennedy was seen as the swing vote. He has also earned political capital to be able to vote independently on other issues before the court instead of becoming embroiled in controversy about the role of the Court in overturning the work of Congress during the early part of the Obama administration.

LyrArc Article Gist
Petrobras and the discovery 200 miles offfshore of the Tupi field with estimated reserves of 5-8 billion barrels of light crude oil. As Brazil is self sufficient in energy with its own ethanol industry helping substitute ethanol for oil at the pump, it can become a major exporter with this find. However even with Petrobras technology and expertise in offshore drilling its a challenge as the oil is 4.5 miles below the oceans surface, and involves drilling through 7000 feet of water and 17000 feet of sand rock and massive salt layer. Cost could approach $20 billion according to analysts with current inflation in oil drilling rig costs. It involves challenges like building floating liquefied natural gas plants. Gabrielli, the Petrobras CEO thinks Petrobras has the expertise to develop it on its own. If oil majors are given the chance to join in the development the investment terms will be ones that favor Brazil. Gabrielli pointed this out saying that Brazil had already incurred most of the risk in exploration offshore so the oil majors have far less risk and Brazil should invite them only on its own terms if needed. The Tupi field puts Brazil ahead of Canada in oil reserves and in the leagues of China and Nigeria, with new Brazilian reserves at 17.2 billion from the 12.2 billion barrels currently. Brazil has invested in refineries with 2 new refineries coming up in 2010 and 2014 to increase refining capacity by 40%. It is also investing to convert heavy crude oil into diesel and $8.6 billion to reduce sulfur at 11 refineries. The Tupi field will take about 7 years to develop. Similiarly the Kashgan field in the Caspian in Kazakhstan is also in difficult in this case icy and gases filled environment that will take years for a Eni led consortium to develop. When oil does come will the demand situation have changed with new conservation taking hold in the developed world and the cars in developing countries more like the Tata Nano at 54 miles per gallon consuming less gasoline? Even with increase in energy needs of developing countries, improved efficiency and new technology for conservation brought into developing countries could if not significantly reduce, at least moderate demand. To the point where prices drop from $100 a barrel to something more affordable to developing countries....

LyrArc Article Gist
Lobbying by the American pharmaceutical industry and the Obama administration. Emails showing the negotiations between the administration and the pharmaceutical companies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hangzhou, hard hit by closing export focussed factories, is trying a$100 million voucher program to increase spending. Since January, a fifth of the residents of this city have received $30 vouchers, and more vouchers are being issued. Taiwan just tried a voucher program with $102 going to each Taiwanese citizen. Taiwanese President Ma says 50,000 retailing jobs were saved and about two-thirds of one percent addded to GDP. The problem in China is the lack of a safety net and poor access to health care, that is making average Chinese to save over one fourth of incomes. Consumer spending is 35% of GDP. The government has focussed on exports, and used export generated revenues for huge infrastructure spending. With exports down by over 25% in January, the export model is fading away quickly. Japan and Taiwan have seen much higher drops in exports, and China should see even more deceleration in exports, with a lag of some months, as a lot of products made in China use parts made in countries like Japan and Taiwan. The China Development Research Foundation says one fourth of the population have no health insurance at all. Though by some estimates this number may be about two thirds of China's 1.3 billion people. Hundreds of millions of people have huge bills for treatment of serious illness that are not covered by even the most basic insurance. Public pensions cover less than one third of the workers. And an estimated 130 million migrant workers have no unemployment insurance. Even payments to the poor reach only a fraction of people eligible. The government has only tentatively moved to correct his. And outside economists say that something needs to be done in abig way to build this safety net. The government has announced a $123 billion 3 year initiative to deliver basic, universal health care and health insurance. This follows a 3 year drive to provide compulsory and free education to students through 9th grade. David Dollar, the World Banks's country director, described ameeting with Finance Ministry officials, and wrote in areport on the Bank website that the government had the resources to expand these programs quickly. Instead the government has taken a piecemeal approach when action on a large scale is needed. One of the problems may also be that to make universal health insurance, the current health system may need to be examined and rebuilt, so that economical cost effective treatments are encouraged and costs are managed effectively. This would make universal health care affordable by keeping costs manageable, in the same way that the Obama administration is trying to do in the USA. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bernanke's speech at the annual Fed Jackson Hole meeting put any future policy action off for the September meeting of the Fed's Open Market Committee, which will meet for 2 days to allow lengthy discussion of issues. He repeated his focus made in earlier statements that other actions are needed to reduce the headwinds facing the U.S., actions other than the Fed's monetary policy. He called for "good, proactive housing policy," which has been a major missing piece in the jigsaw puzzle of the American economy. Specifically, "families with mortgage debt bigger than the value of their homes facing unusual financial hardship which is also hurting the banks." Martin Feldstein and other experts have repeatedly called for action to help homeowners under water since the mortgage financial crisis hit in 2008. And the government's response has been tepid at best. Most evaluations of the Home Affordable Modification program and other programs to help prevent foreclosures consider them a serious failure of the Obama administration. Higher unemployment has only increased the urgency for government action in this area and good proposals were made by Feldstein and other experts. On the deficit and debt issues Bernanke would like to see debt to GDP ratios "at least stable, or preferably, declining over time." He also cautions that this be done bearing in mind "the fragility of the current economic recovery." He says his estimate for the U.S. economy's growth rate is 0.7% annual rate for the second half, and 'looks likely to improve." His prediction is for inflation to settle at around 2%. His main concern is that the there will be "an erosion of skills and loss of attachment to the labor force" for the long term unemployed....

LyrArc Article Gist
Th Obama administration's Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, is designed to provide relief to homeowners facing foreclosure. HAMP has also prevented these homes -from the seven million home loans that are delinquent -from joining the overall inventory of homes, and depressing home prices further. Eighteen months after HAMP was introduced, it looks like HAMP has failed to help homeowners to the extent needed to revive housing. Of the 1.3 million modifications extended to homeowners, about half have been cancelled, and about one third or 422,000 homeowners have received permanent loan modifications. The results for July 2010 show that it is slowing down even more. The number of homeowners receiving modifications in July is growing at a much slower rate. 17,000 new trial modifications were started in July, 2010, but 5 times that number of loan modifications were cancelled. HAMP has reduced the montly payment through a lower interest rate and longer term, with the average borrower receiving a montly modification of $500. But even with lower payments and permanent modifications homeowners still have lots of debt. The median rato of total debt payments to pretax income is around 63.5%. And analysts estimate that 20% of borrowers with permanent modifications will re-default. The program had aroused huge expectations, hoping to help 3 million homeowners. Which is why Professor Kenneth Rosen, of the University of California, Berkeley, considers the results embarrassing for the Obama administration. Adding that the Obama administration should be ashamed of these results after all the hopes that were aroused for real help to homeowners. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Barr is brining her innovative ideas to help homeowners at IndyMac Bank which is being run by the FDIC. It could be a blueprint for the entire industry and is formulated upon a simple idea that a homeowners mortgage payment should not exceed 38% of his or her income. FDIC says those taking part in the fastrack loan modification have seen their monthly loan payments lowered by $430 on average. It is a blueprint for solving the mortgage foreclosure crisis that economists from Martin Feldstein to Hubbard and Alan Blinder think is at the root of the problem in the worldwide financial crisis. Bovenzi, the senior FDIC executive who is serving as CEO of IndyMac is overseeing the effort. He is an FDIC veteran who worked at the agency durng the savings and loan crisis of the early 1980's and 1990's. And one the key lessons from that period Bovenzi and Sheila Barr believe is that debt workouts help lenders and borrowers. A key statistic Bair pointed out in a Sept 17 speech to Congress is that the FDIC's recovery rate on nonperforming loans or loans in foreclosure averages just 32% of a loan's value. If the loan is kept current by making payments affordable and preventing foreclosure the agency has recovered 87%. And Sheila Barr's efforts are the one or two bright spots in an otherwise bleak picture for troubled homeowners, in which the Republicans have ignored two of their last 3 Presidents' key economic advisers, head of the Council of Economic Advisers under Presidents Reagan and Bush senior, Marty Feldstein and Hubbard, and not supported efforts for loan modification to help homeowners avoid foreclosure. Shortsightedness, lack of foresight, or simply not able to grasp the true nature of the crisis....

LyrArc Article Gist
The supporters of free university education bring up some practical and important points. Not providing free university education at a time of rising inequality after a severe financial crisis that worsened inequality and led to a lost decade for middle class families in the U.S. leads to a situation in university attendance is restricted to people from wealthier backgrounds. Studies in Britain show this says the Economist magazine.  A report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, a think tank, showed an increase in tution fees paid out of pocket of 1000 pounds ($1243) is associated with adecline of 3 to 9 percentage points in university attendance. Work by Thomas Kane at Harvard University confirms this. Other studies in the U.S. show attendance and completion rates higher for university education with  education being more affordable. Results of studies also show that the tangle of application processes and eligibility rules can reduce the benefits of tackling this by the current approach of financial aid. For this reason free tution which is easy to adminster and easy to understand for all is the real option for today's situation. Wealthy students can pay for it later in life with the progressive taxation. Warren proposes higher taxes on multimillionaires, and Sanders would tax financial transactions such as on stock and capital markets, as ways to address this and bring back free university. As the Economist magazine for the first time  puts this in its Free Exchange column the real support for free university comes not from economic efficiency, or even the way it benefits all in a free, open and equal opportunities society, but from the values that society believes in. There are broad social benefits to a well educated citizenry. The nation is stronger economically, more open to new ideas and more open to technological change to be able to grow when it has promoted to the fullest extent the education of all its citizens. This is especially true in today's world where more than 12 years of education are needed to build a strong base for a country to grow its economy and industry. A warning is presented by the Economist magazine that as the rich pull away from the rest of society they can actually undercut the very values based solutions that are needed today. Their increased political power can restrict the tax increases needed to fund the higher education the nation deserves, that the people deserve.  Social safety nets are also reinforced and societal harmony is strengthened when everyone cooperates to help everyone.  ...