LyrArc Article Gist
How the economic fallout from the mortgage lending business is affecting Cerberus new owner of Chrysler. GMAC in which Feinberg's Cerberus has a 51% stake has losses of $2.3 billion in the 3rd quarter at ResCap, home lending unit of GMAC. Aegis Mortgage corporation a firm owned by Cerberus filed for bankruptcy protection in August. As a result of all this fallout Cerberus is taking a hard look at all its committments and is pulling out of its committment to acquire United Rentals. And the sale of $4 billion in loans connected with Cerberus deal for Chrysler has been postponed because of lack of interest in credit markets.

LyrArc Article Gist
Did U.S. Treaury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, ignore a key request by President Obama to present plans for the restructuring of Citigroup after the government bailout of Citigroup? Ron Suskind says this is what happened in his book on the Obama administration and how the White House operated to make key decisions. Ron Suskind, intervewed key members of the Obama White House economic policy team, Lawrence Summers, Christina Romer, Peter Orszag. In all Suskind conducted 700 hours of interviews for his new book in Sept 2011: "Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington and the Education of a President." According to the book, in early 2009 after Obama authorized a series of stress tests for banks he told Geithner to develop a plan for restructuring Citigroup. A month later at a meeting not attended by Geithner Obama raised a question about the status of the plan. He was told by Romer that no restructuring plan had been developed for Citi. Suskind says Geithner disagreed about a plan to restructure Citi and decided to ignore the request. Geithner and the Treasury Department say Obama asked Geithner to develop a backup plan to overhaul banks if the government was forced to keep a big ownership stake in the companies, and "there was fortunately never a need to put them in place." Geithner told Suskind that he doesn't slow-walk the President on any matter. Other aspects of the operation of the economic policy team that Suskind covers are a series of memos from top aide Pete Rouse raising questions that ongoing communication between some members of the economic team and Summers was giving Summers power to shape policy. Summers, Director of the National Economic Council, is shown as trying to keep out the views of Romer and budget director Orszag from reaching the President without going through him. When Orszag gives a private report to the president on the deficit, Summers objects saying that this was immoral. Obama lacked the fresh ideas needed to tackle the problems created by the mortgage and banking crisis of 2008, when he used the Clinton administration economic policy team of the 1990's- Rubin, Bernanke, Summers and Geithner. Fresh approaches were needed two decades after Clinton's election in 1992, and the Bush administration that followed, as many of the problems developed during this period. The similiar embedded thinking was shared during the Clinton and Bush administrations and the economic advisors about dealings with the banking sector, but the situation for deficits, unemployment, housing, and the economy had completely changed requiring fresh approaches. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Citigroup plans to raise $2.07 billion by selling its 9.8% stake in India's Housing Development Finance Corporation (HDFC).

LyrArc Article Gist
P&G CEO Lafley achieved cost reduction and reducing product lines during his return as CEO, but failed to increase growth which is at about 2% as he hands the CEO position to David Taylor.

LyrArc Article Gist
The tensions that exist in Australian society, as a result of the large Chinese investments and imports of infrastructure building commodities such as iron ore, natural gas and other commodities. Australia's Pilbara region in the northwestern part of the country, has become one huge quarry for China, as an estimated 1 million tons of iron ore raw material is loaded onto 2 story high trucks each day- with automated driverless trucks system being implemented- and shipped by 2 mile long trains to waiting ships on the coast. Australians remember this done on a smaller scale in the 1980's by Japan. At the time Japan brought in Japanese workers. The same is true today but on a bigger scale, with China bringing in workers with lower pay. The concern now is what it was then, as one local leader put it- are we going to have towns with mines or mines with towns, he asked. The mining companies are looking at it purely as a commercial venture, and not investing in the towns. The towns now fear they will find the boom times gone someday and nothing tangible to show for it, no schools, hospitals and no infrastructure. And because the mining project companies fly people in and out, the 8000 aboriginal people in Pilbara- the original people of this land- see little of the mining expansion's benefits. Wandoan, a small place with 300 homes in the outback in Queensland, in eastern Australia, is an example of the gut wrenching change taking place in the mining areas. The lives of the people from the local pharmacy, the local supermarket, and the local ranchers, depend on the mining decisions made in China. This area was part of a planned, on again off again, $6 billion coal mine -part of a A$150 billion complex of natural gas and coal projects for exports to Asia in Queensland- and involved Xstrata buying 70,000 acres of the best grazing land for 7 coal mines. With the locals selling off, the mining uncertain, the supermarket closing, the whole town has the feeling of being up in the air, and fading out someday. Australian public sentiment recognizes this feeling, and at the same time is ambivalent about the impact. Polls conducted by the Lowy Institute for International Policy, show 73% of Australians feel Chinese economic growth has a positive impact, and at the same time 57% feel that there is now excessive Chinese investment, and 46% feel China will be a military threat in 20 years. Australians remember the same feeling about Japan's investments in raw material sources in the eighties. In 1988, polls then showed 70% of Australians saying there was too much Japanese investment, even though they also recognized that Australia had benefitted. The difference now is that there are also fears of China's influence, and foreign investment guidelines limit investments in Australian mining companies to below 50%. China's investment in Australia's natural resources comes in several ways: in the year upto July 2009 A$42 billion in export demand, A$3 billion in direct investment in Australian companies, and about A$5 billion in project financing. Iron ore sales to China amount to A$22 billion each year, and about one fourth of Australia's exports went to China, growing at a rate of 31% in 2009. According to the chief economist of Austrade, the government trade organization, Australia benefits from the economic relationship with China- this adds A$3,400 per year to every Australian household. Efforts to use some of the profits made by mining corporations for infrastructure and other public purposes, by increasing the mining tax have failed; as the mining industry launched a campaign against the government of Kevin Rudd, who was removed from office by his party. In the recent national elections, the ruling Labor party lost its majority, after losses in the resource rich states of Western Australia and Queensland. In the meantime the Australian currency has become the currency used by currency speculators who cannot use the yuan to make a bet on the currency- as the yuan is pegged to the dollar- and instead use the Australian dollar as a proxy. This makes it volatile, with the Australian dollar losing 10% of its value in a single day, when pessimism increased about China's growth forecasts. It also shows how much of the good story of employment and gdp growth in Australia is tied to the story in China, and the extent of the negative impact a reversal in this area can mean for Australians; especially now that the bad debt in the post-2008 explosion of bank lending poses risks to China's banknig system. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ looks at Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan that marks a major shift for the U.S. economy.  Households would see their costs go down by $11 trillion, boosting their ability to spend on other goods and services. Because income and wealth was highly skewed in the past three decades in one direction, the spending capacity of lower and middle income households was pushed down. This and other similar plans would help restore a higher level of spending and with it an essential element of inflation of 2-3% to the U.S. economy which was missing in the last decade. This sets the tone for the kind of broad based recovery that happened after 1950 that strengthened America's middle class and made it the core of the economy, the core of the post World War II recovery in America and Europe. The plan would be paid for by higher taxes on corporations, tax rate of 21% for corporations going back up to 35%, and reverse depreciation schedules in the 2017 Republican tax law. The argument that this would reduce business investment does not hold that much says the WSJ because amid new trade tensions business investment has declined over the last 2 quarters, and has been sluggish overall. The other source for the estimated $13 to $20 trillion cost of Medicare for All plan of Elizabeth Warren is a 6% annual wealth tax on billionaires, in an attempt to have all pay their fair share and reduce wide disparities in wealth. Mark Zandl, chief economist of Moody's Analytics, says his sense is at the end of the day from a macroeconomic view- because $11 trillion in the hands of 80% of households who could boost spending after lagging behind in the last decade- the negative effect on business investment will be cancelled out by the higher consumer spending. The overall effect and today's context is infused in this analysis. Private insurance, premiums for insurance, and out of pocket cost that the public pays would disappear in this new system where all health payments pass through the government. Health insurance premiums paid by employers would convert into a new employer Medicare contribution to the government starting at an amount employers pay now and adjusting gradually toward national averages over time. Smallest businesses are exempted. Mr. Zandl says the most important aspect of this now is that Mrs Warren has shown that her plan's revenue sources match the cost so that the plan would not lead to deficits increasing and pushing interest rates higher, leading to negative effects on the economy. Republicans under Mr. Trump have paid little attention to expanded deficits caused by their tax law, and economists across the landscape have also shown less concern. Still attacks are made if the plans don't add up. For this reason a sound assessment in today's context of depressed consumers and an overall impact becomes essential. The WSJ quotes from a pre- assessment of Warren's plan by Simon Johnson, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who co-wrote it with Mr. Zandl and Betsey Stevenson of the University of Michigan. What they point out is that putting cash in the pockets of the lower and middle class for spending makes a lot of sense today, and taking money out of the pockets at the way upper wealthy end,  does not contract the economy at all. Other effects they say are constructive by letting all workers get health coverage from the government instead of employers, this makes it easier to change jobs increasing labor mobility and productivity. A worker getting a better job and better utilization of skills could then shift without looking at the employer health care plan. Warren says there would be a five year transition so that workers in health care insurance industry can work in other insurance fields and in Medicare, no one would be left behind. The important thing being to build America's middle class again. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How changes in technology as wireless networks move from third generation technologies to fourth generation technologies and chnages in scale of investment by its customers can lead to huge writedowns for telecommnications equipment makers. Alcatel-Lucent is taking a Euro 2.52 billion writedown on its CDMA wireless technologies. Its also making the Alcatel-Lucent comination look murkier as integrating overlapping technologies and merging two companies and meeting customer needs all while the market itself is moving forward making technologies that are promising today look like yesterday's technologies in a short period of time. This is whats happening as broadband technologies are now the thing in wireless networks. And Alcatel's valuation of Lucent at $13 billion also looks like too much was paid for Lucent. In 4th quarter alone Alcatel-Lucent lost Euros 2.58 billion.

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. ...