LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama in his speech at Georgetown, April 13, 2009, describes the thinking behind the decisions made in the first 12 weeks of his administration- why the actions are not aggressive and overreaching as some critics say, and why they are not timid as other critics have said. This was not a typical downturn of the business cycle, but a perfect storm arising from irresponsibility and poor decisionmaking in Washington, Wall Street and Main Street- in effect several crises colliding for something like an explosion, if not dealt with at once, and with strong action. He says "the key to dealing with our deficit and debt is to get a handle on out-of-control health care costs, not to stand idly by as the economy goes into free fall." The recognition that the crisis itself brings with it new possibilities, the opportunity for coming to grips with and forging a good solution to health care, energy and education issues that were neglected while Wall Street directed investments to areas other than investment in building for the future. To the critics like Krugman, Rosenfeld and others who say that the takeover of insolvent banks should be done quickly before the situation worsens, he says it is not because of any ideological or political judgement he has made about government involvement in banks, but because it is more likely to undermine than create confidence at this point. He goes on step by step, through the process of decisionmaking, first to step in and boost spending vigorously, second to get lending flowing again to businesses and families, strengthening the non-bank credit market for consumer purchases and loans, the housing plan, the auto plan, and the work at the G-20. Then President Obama goes on to project his vision and the road to getting there. The five pillars he sees for the future are: redirecting Wall Street and banking to constructive investments for the future, investments in education, investments in renewable energy and technology to create new industries and new jobs, investments in health care to cut costs for businesses and families, and new savings in the federal budget to bring down the deficit. Obama says he will look for savings line by line in every corner of the budget, and has already identified two trillion dollars in deficit reductions over the next decade. And the goal is to reduce discretionary spending for domestic programs as share of the economy by more than 10% over the next decade. Procurement reform will greatly reduce no-bid contracts and save $40 billion. Secretary Gates is attacking th problem of hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and cost overruns that have bloated the defense budget, without adding to the nation's safety. And education programs that don't work will be removed, and waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare program will be controlled. Finally, Mr Obama points to the nation's political system as one more reason we are in this perfect storm- "a fundamental weakness in our political system." He cites the putting off hard decisions for another day, scoring political points instead of rolling up up sleeves to solve real problems, an impatience that is only worsened by the 24 hour news cycle, and a short attention span that focusses on the immediate results and on poll numbers. And there is too much responding to the "tempest of the moment until the furor has died away and the media coverage has moved on, instead of confronting the major challenges that will shape our future in a sustained and focussed way." After these 12 weeks President Obama says, for the first time there are glimmers of hope, and way off in the distance can be seen a vision of America's future that is far different than its troubled past. And citing the parable in the Sermon on the Mount about that "house built on a rock", he sees America's house built on a rock, a house for which we use this moment to lay a new foundation, come together and begin the hard work of rebuilding, persisting and persevering in the face of disappointments and setbacks that surely lie ahead. Then he has no doubt "that this house will stand and the dreams of our founders will live on in our time." Its a remarkable speech in its directness, its simplicity in approaching the subject, and its borrowing from the Bible for that story of that house built on a rock, and its Lincolnesque reference to the house that will stand. And more than a speech, it describes a vision, and the set of actions and steps taken and to be taken to get there. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Reilly warns that though the U.S. Federal Reserve's stress tests of U.S. banks showed they passed- including approval for dividends and share buyback- except for Ally Financial and Citigroup, this can be deceptive. True, the Fed used 13% unemployment and sharp drop in stock market prices as conditions. The problem is with capital ratios. The Fed used a leverage ratio of 3%. It should not be forgotten that the financial crisis of 2008 was caused by excessive leverage and risk. Tested on this measure the banks fail to achieve safe levels of leverage and risk. Under the Fed's highest stress scenario Citigroup ratio was at 2.9%, Morgan Stanley's at 3.4%, Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan at 3.8%- what ths means is that the leverage for these banks was at 26-29 times capital. Reilly raises the question- how is this so different than the leverage used by these banks before the crisis. The stress tests in the U.S. by the U.S. Federal Reserve are lauded for being better than the European Banking Authority's stress tests, but is this a standard by which to judge them? Before the collapse of Lehman in 2008, experts including Anil Kashyap at the University of Chicago, pointed out that for every $1 of bank losses in a deleveraging cycle bank lending goes down at banks by $10, and for investment banks at $20-$30 depending on leveraging- in David Henry and Matthew Goldstein, Business Week, July 16, 2008, How Bad Will It Get on Wall Street? Lehman's leverage ratio was between 24-31 times capital before the crisis. Worse, by saying banks are now safe compared to the situation before the crisis, is the Fed giving the green light to banks for some of the same leveraging behaviour that ocurred before the crisis?...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jacobs and Richtel of the NYT give this exceptional story of how Mexico changed between 1980 and 2016. Following the joining of NAFTA free trade zone the Mexican diet and food ecosystem began to more closely resemble the food diet system in the U.S. bringing with it severe health consequences. Soda and coke are now more entrenched in Mexico, as are fast food outlets. In 1980 only 7% of Mexicans were obese, compared to 20% in 2016, according to Institute for Health Metrics at the University of Washington. And diabetes kills 80,000 people a year, becoming the top killer according to the World Health Organization. A trade expert at Tufts University, Timothy Wise, says Mexico took on the worst aspects of a first world country like the U.S., with few protections. A similar problem is taking place in India and China as obesity grows, according to the T.H. Chan School of Public Health at Harvard, as low nutrient highly processed foods of large food companies with huge advertising budgets take a prominent place in diets. This is a growing problem for countries from Colombia to Ghana and Nigeria. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein wants to see a stronger dollar, that is less inflation eroding the value or purchasing power of the dollar at home. Abroad he wants to see a weaker dollar in relation to Europe, Japan and Canada where about half of US imports originate. And a weaker dollar in relation to lower wage Asian countries to improve America's trade balance. Better to do this now than to wait a few years when the adjustments needed would be greater. America needs to export more and import less to improve the trade balance. A competitive dollar in relation to trading partners in Europe and Asia would provide the improvement in the trade balance that the U.S. needs for keeping economic growth. With the risks to the economy from declining housing prices improving the trade balance becomes important. During the 1985-1988 period the dollar declined in value significantly, falling 37%, but the inflation rate averaged 3.1%,says Feldstein. This is what he means by having astrong dollar at home, which is to say not eroding its purchasing value, while at the same time increasing exports and reducing imports. During this period merchandise exports increased by 40% while imports increased at half that pace. A repeat of that experience is possible and necessary to maintain growth, according to Feldstein. See the link to McKinnon, at Stanford, The Yuan and the Greenback, WSJ, August 29, 2006, which cautions against anything but a very gradual and carefully managed appreciation of the yuan, giving importance to inflation and interest rate differentials between the US and China. One point to note narrowing of interest rate differentials between the US and China is seen as backdrop for dollar weakening on exchange rate basis. McKinnon appears to consider a smaller interest rate differential as a cue for an even lower appreciation of the yuan, see his example of 2% inflation in the US and 3% interest rates. Interestingly the two approaches may complement each other. Offering a perspective of China maintaining its growth and not risking deflation or slowdown, and of the US maintaining its growth and not risking a slowdown from the housing market collapse, by strong domestic investment and exports. How to keep both economies going may be the policymakers challenge for strong global economic growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
Turner Adair, head of Britain's Financial Regulatory Authority thinks that banks have assumed an outsize role in the British and world economy, and are coopting their regulators. He sees the need to check many of the excesses. Why not use profits to build up reserves rather than give out huge bonuses and paychecks, he asks. He sees the need to challenge the accepted thinking on Wall Street and in the City of London, where the ideology of efficient markets became embedded, as it did also in the regulatory community. He came in the week Lehman Brothers collapsed as chairman of the FSA. And he wants to shake up the existing thinking. In March, the Turner Review. a 126 page report was published. A lot of attention was paid to his suggesting atax on financial transactions, called the Tobin tax, but its designed more to get people thinking and questionning the existing way of running banking as Turner said in an interview, "we have begun to accept this idea of liquidity as the new God." Can British or American society and the financial industry in both countries work to the benefit of both? Nobel prize winning economists and other experts have advised ashift to productive investments that grow the economy using technology, science and brainpower and new ideas, as opposed to the investment in mortgages and other speculative investments. As the regulators -including former and current heads of the SEC, and other regulatory bodies in the US, Cox, Schapiro and others- once held on to the same theory of uninhibited operation of free markets as best for generating increased wealth for society as the banking community, they tended to get co-opted in letting bad practices flourish. Went to sleep on the job as it were. See the links in Intelilinks. Adair Turner's admonitions are designed to get people thinking. He says, "banks need to be willing, like the regulator, to recognize that there are some profitable activities so unlikely to have a social benefit, direct or indirect, that they should voluntarily walk away from them." Investments in science, technology and new products, as in the 60's that generated a revolution in living standards, than the mortgages and consumer lending of the last decade, is what he may be saying, as do these Nobel prize winning economists....

LyrArc Article Gist
Sternberg points out that China's banking system lacks the experience in consumer credit and consumer finance products that would provide the impetus to a surge in consumer spending in China for imported products from the US or Europe. Outstanding consumer credit in China is only 13% of GDP, according to a 2009 study by McKinsey and Company, compared to 48% in Malaysia and 70% in S. Korea. China has lost a decade or more he says in allowing foreign banks to develop a consumer-finance market, and Chinese banks have little compettitive pressure to serve lower income consumer borowers. The Dutch PPF Group was allowed into this field for the first time in November 2010 to introduce in-store financing for durable goods purchases, something available to consumers in Brazil and other developing countries for many years. Large banks have an entrenched mindset to lend to businesses, and especially to state owned enterprises which have the collateral and government guarantees and support to obtain this lending. Risk averse banks in a financial system that lacks the kind of credit ratings system for consumers that the US and Europe have, prefer to lend to make loans to state owned enterprises where the government guarantees the loans. Interest rates on deposits are low and the government deliberately allows a wide spread for the banks so that they can ensure enough earnings to pay for non-performung bad loans, both from the last decade and from the binge in stimulus lending in 2009-2010. This reduces consumption by reducing the earnings on savings for consumers and households. These problems can only be solved gradually if the government and leadership want to change course, but this oddly enough is not happening. Other problems are that China's export factories are part of a global supply chain in which other countries do the product development, logistics, marketing, and retailing. Chinese firms lack the experience in these areas to shift to domestic consumers. As a result, says Sternberg, to lose a foreign customer can mean going out of business. Without government leadership and new direction through large scale re-allocation of capital and labor to the small scale businesses that serve consumers in the domestic market, all the talk of rebalancing will be just that, talk only and no real rebalancing....

LyrArc Article Gist
Detail about Tata's $2500 car. What it looks like- a jelly bean small in front, larger in the back for aerodynamics, 30-35 horsepower, with bearings good for 45 mph, top speed 75 mph, trunk in front to hold a briefcase and battery, rear mounted engine with continuous variable transmission, a hollowed out steering wheel shaft, engine designed by Bosch 600 to 660 cubic centimetres 35 hp. Tata CEO, Ratan Tata, says in a interview the car will do far better on emissions than today's low end cars, and that the emissions standards were much easier to meet than the crash and safety tests, because of the lightness of the vehicle. Todays lower emissions standards in developing countries makes it easier by not having to use more expensive technologies. Electronic sourcing and internet auctions are used by Tata to a greater degree, 30-40 % of parts sourced this way compared to 10-15% by other larger carmakers. This helps meet the aggressive cost target. On the safety isssue its interesting to note that most of the people buying this car will be millions of motorcycle families and individuals (typically a couple of people can ride an Indian motorcycle). They may be safer in a light car than on a motorcycle. This has to be seen in the particular context of India. Renault-Nissan used the experience of lowcost car engineering techniques and secrets from its Logan car made in Romania and transferred it to its other models. Tata started with a clean sheet of paper, asked the quesion what they really had to have and was there some other way. It was Ratan Tata's dream to build a car in 1 lakh or 100,000 rupees or about $2500. The project had all out backing and tested Indian engineers ingenuity. The Tata effort will be studied by carmakers from around the world. Bosch does not underestimate the value of this business, as the car will target a market of hundreds of millions of people in India and China and developing countries. Ariba a supplier to Toyota, and BMW a supplier to Tata, helped Tata buy parts through electronic sourcing. China's Cherry Automobile company, another pioneer, had an Austrian firm help it design its engine for its small car. Tata worked with German company Bosch on the engine. And both must have used cutting edge technology but with a different goals and specifications to achieve unique tasks....

LyrArc Article Gist
Some ideas from Robert Shiller of Yale University who has widely written about bubbles including the stock bubbles and has jointly developed the Shiller-Case index of housing prices. Shiller suggests creating futures contracts tied to home prices. And the thinking goes once there is enough trqding in these futrues contracts people can sell the housing market short-that is bet on afall in house prices- so that there is a restraining effect on housing bubbles developing. But the reviewer thinks that this is debatable because its possible to sell stocks short and yet we have stock market bubbles. Shillers other suggestion is for developing new types of insurance to protect people from a fall in house prices or from a longterm loss of income as a result of jobs becoming obsolete, but its not clear who would pay for this insurance and its cost. Another suggestion is for the government to to give subsidies or tax credits for ordinary people to get unbiased financial advice. This could be a useful suggestion if there are credible and honest sources of such advice and they are identified and made widely available to the general public by the government. A related suggestion is the development of a supplement to the consumer price index that is based on a realistic basket of goods and services that people use that gives people a realistic idea of what is happening so that they do not assume that houses are always a good long term investment and can separate inflation. And Shiller suggests a standard mortgage contract be developed so that people who cannot understand the fine print like most of us especially when its put in by lawyers for mortgage companies can turn to htis contract. This is an excellent suggestion but one wonders why something so obvious has been not already widely available as an alternative to those who cannot figure out all the machinations behind all that small print. The book is titled SubPrime Solution and one wonders whether much more than this is needed to control all the fog and euphoria about housing prices, and all the incentives and pressure in hard selling tactics of most of the large mortgage companies, and all the ethical violations of credit ratings companies who rated mortgage securities and ethical violations of mortgage companies....

LyrArc Article Gist
Allan Meltzer, a former economic adviser to President Reagan, and an expert on monetary policy at Carnegie Mellon School of Business says that "this is scare tactics to try to do something that is in the private but not the public interest, its terrible." Vincent Reinhart a former Fed economist says Paulson has lost credibility, people don't believe him anymore. And Elmendorf of the Brookings institution says that taxpayers should get more out of this deal with ownership stakes in the companies that use government money. Others like Bruce Bartlett, a former White House economist under president Reagan say the problem is nobody knows what the hell is going on and there are some naive assumptions about how this would function. Martin Bailly, a former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President Clinton says for financial institutions to take the funds Treasury has to pay a premium because otherwise they would have sold already. While Bernanke told the Banking Committe that the government would pay more than the distressed prices to get broad participation which is a goal of Treasury and the Fed, neither he nor Paulson could reassure the committee about how taxpayers would be protected. Most of the economists surveyed here by the NYT are skeptical about a Wall Streeter from Goldman Sachs credibility on this as they see him paying financial institutions a premium price. The sore point in all this for the taxpayers and the public would be that the Bush administration has done nothing to help homeowners with foreclosures that are also at the root of the problem when you look beyond the immediate clogging up of the financial system and present a threat via declining home prices. And Paulson now offers a plan that also is very hazy about protecting taxpayers with equity ownership or some other protections, and has nothing to assuage the public's outrage about ceo compensation in the midst of distress. Not just the Banking Committee but experts from all sides of the political spectrum are raising concerns stressing one or other of these points, and find the lack of details in the Paulson Bernanke plan a sign of a hastily put together plan with little research even considering the lack of time, and the lack of any details a strain on people's intelligence for a proposal of such magnitude....

LyrArc Article Gist
House Speaker Pelosi and Majority leader Reid prempt the Bond-Levin proposal to use the $25 billion of funds from the energy efficiency retooling for operating expenses. They said there were just not enough votes to pass the change. And the general feeling was that the automakers had hurt their case more than they had helped it after 2 days of hearings in the Senate and the House on November 18-19, 2008. Pelosi put it this way, "until they show us the plan, we cannot show them the money." The automakers were asked to come up with a plan that shows accountability and viability. Pelosi is from California, a state that has seen its mandate for controlling auto emissions held up by the automakers lobbying and the Bush administration EPA, and which favors higher fuel efficiency, higher than the numbers passed in recent legislation, also held up by the automakers lobbying efforts. So there is a three way battle going on with the states in the midwest and the Bush administration pitted against Pelosi-Reid-Waxman and the younger Obama supporters in Congress for the $25 billion in energy efficiency retooling to be used for salaries and so on. And the other battle pitting the midwestern states against all those who call for strict conditions including firing management, and serious restructuring within or outside prepackaged bankruptcy. Reid and Pelosi called for Congress to reconvene on December 2. Reid said that what happened this week has not been good for the auto industry,, which is ominous, because the hearings showed an unrepentant automaker management which did not accept any of the errors made by management long before the credit crisis in October, which riled Congressmen. Another thing was the reference to corporate jets which came up in the hearings, and Reid emphasized as did others that these guys flying in in their corporate jets did not send a good message to people in Searchlight or Reno, Nevada. The reason this is important is that executive compensation and golden parachutes are moving right to the top as they do in such times, as evidenced by the story in the Wall Street Journal frontpage on November 20 about 120 executives making $21 billion in compensation in the last 5 years including failed companies, see the link. . ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Former U.S. Supreme Court justice, Sandra Day O'Connor, started a nonprofit civics education group, iCivics, in 2009. iCivics has 19 free online games with lesson plans for middle school students to learn about how the branches of government of the U.S. work, and the Constitution. About 3.2 million students used these online games in 2016, according to iCivics. Justice O'Connor now considers this her most important legacy. She says civics has to be taught to each generation, that it is not inherited. In one of the games Supreme Decision, a justice has to cast the deciding vote in a case. Another online game is Win the White House, and it teaches students about what a candidate has to go through in an election, a political platform, what a liberal or conservative is, selecting a vice presidential candidate to broaden his appeal, and making compromises in his positions where necessary. Justice O'Connor started iCivics after she realized schools were not teaching student how to engage in the political and other processes of governance. Filament Games, a learning games company in Madison, Wisconsin, designed the games for iCivics. O'Connor came across educational interactive online games after retiring from the Supreme Court in 2006, and this has become a passion for her, to teach young people how to become engaged in the process of governance at an early age....

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden's $2 trillion infrastructure spending plan is being compared to the New Deal infrastructure plans of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1930's. FDR was preceded by Republican administrations under Hoover and other presidents who followed policies that can be compared to the Reagan administration policies when public sector spending was not seen to be as efficient as private sector spending. By the time of the economic collapse in the 1930's it had become clear that only the federal government could save the country in the depression. During the pandemic and collapse of the health systems it was clear that only the federal government could save the country. It is now also evident that infrastructure building led by the government can rebuild America. In the 1930's and during other periods in American history such as the building of the Erie Canal and other public sector infrastructure projects in the 19th century it was the federal government that led the way to building America. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ros Douthat sees the crisis only putting things more in the hands of the same elites that got us into the mess in the first place. The mess with an out of control financial sector which began under Treasury Secretary Rubin, is now being handled by his proteges Summers and Geithner. The lack of any new solutions and the continuation of the "too big to fail" era, says Douthat.

LyrArc Article Gist
A look at the role that David Cameron played in the Brexit vote. Cameron did this by promising to hold a referendum to assuage hard line Tories within his Conservative Party in Britain who feared that the right wing Independence Party of Nigel Farage would cut into the Tory vote and hand the 2015 election over to the Labour Party. Cameron made the pledge in 2013. The Brexit vote referendum happened in June 2016 with a slight margin for the "Leave" vote as voters shifted to an anti-establishment vote, and a wave of immigration from Africa and Arab countries in conflicts into Europe created fears of uncontrolled immigration. Both were factors that had little to do with Britain's place in Europe over decades in post war Europe, and not permanent shifts in sentiment. Cameron agreed because he thought the would lead to a result favoring the Remain Vote to stay in the European Union. Cameron badly miscalculated leading to the mess Britain is in today with no clear path forward and negative effects on the economy of Britain. The Labour Party now favors a second referendum as voter sentiment again shifts following the failure of the Theresa May Conservative government to lead in the way forward, and splits in the Conservative Party. Immigration from Arab countries and Africa is now restricted and down to a small trickle. The problems generated by Brexit for the economy, Northern Ireland, business uncertainty, and second thoughts among pro-Brexit supporters, are leading to a rethink of the course set by the referendum based on a temporary shift in sentiment. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Roger Scruton on John Stuart Mill, famous British writer on political economy and theory. Mill's books include On Liberty, and Principles of Political Economy. Mill followed his father's political philosophy, which his father acquired from Jeremy Bentham, who developed the theory of Utilitarianism. This theory's main point is stated briefly: "that action is right which promotes the greatest happiness of the greatest number." Scruton critiques Mill on the 200th anniversary of the birth of John Stuart Mill. He says that Mill's writings and ideas still dominate jurisprudence in the English speaking world. As for example the idea expressed in "On Liberty," that the purpose of law is to protect the will of the individual, and the concept of harm. If one person's actions do not harm another person then the law should protect the individual to act and speak as he chooses. Other writings are Principles of Political Economy, which expresses liberalism in its modern sense. A liberalism where the state steps in to help and assist in equitable distribution of resources and opportunites to all people within the framework of "On Liberty," which sets maintaining individual freedoms as an aim of good government. Even though Scruton is right in saying that wisdom is deeper and more valuable than rational thought alone, Mill's thought processes for that build on and expound on Adam Smith in Principles of Political Economy may be right for his time. Especially considering the problems of Charles Dickens Victorian England, of industrialization, poverty and so on, and this because they were the wisdom of the time. The same thinking taken in a different context, distorted, with different labels in the 20th century, (socialist state that destroys individual rights) gave rise to many evils but they have little to do with the author and his context of Victorian England. Wisdom may very well suggest that the state overreached and in some cases destroyed freedoms and economic wealth in recent times, and now is in a moral vacuum when it comes to social issues like raising of children, society, etc. In each situation the best approach appears to be to look at each situation in its own special context and background, and history, to find creative and human solutions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
S&P's faulty ratings on U.S. mortgage securities was a critical factor leading to the financial crisis of 2008-2009, and the deep recession that followed in the U.S. Recovery was only made possible by large government stimulus and central bank intervention with monetary easing on a massive scale. The effects are still evident after millions of people lost their homes in foreclosures and widening income inequality. Yet it took about 7 years before S&P accepted responsibility and settled with the Justice Department. Earlier S&P accused the Justice Department of suing the company in retaliation for a downgrade of U.S. government debt in 2011. In the convoluted upside down nature of such lawsuits and protests by defendents, McGraw Hill said that the settlement "contains no findings of violations of law." Yet the government produced 290 million documents in response to discovery requested by S&P. Associate U.S. Attorney General, Stuart Delery, the top negotiator for the government, says "put simply, the department brought this case because S&P committed fraud." Delery says no case in Justice Department history has produced this many documents. The Justice Department cited several instances of breach of duty in a statement signed by both parties. In 2007 an internal group's downgrade recommendation for a large number of mortgage securities was rejected by upper management because of concern S&P would lose business. In another cited instance S&P alters its ratings model for grading complex risky securities in 2004 with the goal of being able to issue grades for "2-3 notch improvements" and resulting "improving of S&P market share." S&P had about $1.9 billion in cash balances in third quarter 2014, say analysts, and the settlement was designed to set the right course but not hurt S&P in carrying out its role of issuing about 95% of ratings globally along with counterparts Moody's and Fitch. Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood says S&P's responsibility lies in that banks might be expected to do something shady, but credit ratings agencies were the ones the country looked up to to do the right thing and flag this....

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
Russian economy is faltering under the strain of the global financial crisis. The stock market is plunging, with the RTS Index down 19% on October 6, 2008, and the market down 60% since the high in May, 2008. Construction spending is winding down. Th economy growth rate was 8.1% in 2007 but its slipping. If oil prices hit $50 and they were already at $78 on October 10, 2008, then says Anders Aslund at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, there will be a sharp decline in the growth rate. Moscow analysts say the growth rate could drop to 4%. For Americans Russia may seem remote excpt for investors. But in a global economy there are connections to emerging markets and Russia is one big emerging market, next to China, India and Brazil. When General Motors shares dropped 31% and Ford's 22% on one day on October 9, 2008, the news that spooked the markets was ofcourse a credit watch and questions about liquidity from Standard and Poors rating agency, but alsoimportant was that the one bright spot for GM and Ford in Europe and in Russia in particular was disappearing as GM sales declined in Europe and in Russia. In the prior 12 months GM had seen sales jump by 40% in Russia giving it 10% of a car market that passed Germany recently as the largest car market in Europe. Couple of important things about Russia. Russians today are big spenders, savings are small and Russians do not trust their banks so bank deposits are very low. Household deposits are equivalent of 17% of GDP, compared with 45% in the USA. Only 4% of Russians trust commercial banks according to a poll by National Financial Research Agency in Moscow. So Russia depends on the outside world for much odf the cash flowing through its financial system. Foreigners purchased two thirds of the $170 billion in bonds isued by Russian companies and foreign banks put up half of the accumulated $900 billion in bank loans including almost all longterm debt estimates Moscow investment bank Troika Dialog. With global credit markets in a lockdown mode Russia is simply running short of cash. The government has $560 billion in foreign exchange reserves from years of high oil prices plus $160 billion in two sovereign wealth funds with most of this money in fixed income securities abroad as a rainy day cushion should oil prices tumble. On October 7 the governmet announced $36 billion in emergency loans to Russian banks following earlier pledges in September of $150 billion in loans and relief for Russian companies in danger of defaulting on international debts. One danger here is that about 55% of outstanding corporate loan are of maturity less than 1 year. One of Russia's largest developers Mirax Group is putting 50 projects on hold as bank financing for developers has almost ceased. On the other hand Russia's financial sector is relatively small and the credit crisis cannot hurt Russia as much as it will USA ad Europe. Bank loans account for 10% of corporate finance and the bond market is only a decade old, so about half of all capital investment by companies comes from retained earnings. And Russia has huge needs for investments in infrastructure after years of underinvestment, a stable political structure, an educated workforce, and an economy that is just getting started. As Secretary Paulson answered questions after the G7 meeting October 10, this was another point on the minds of the secretary and questoners, the hope that emerging markets like Russia, India, and China would continue to grow though slower than before, even as the US and Europe slipped into a long recession, and provide a little cushion to the global economy....

LyrArc Article Gist
What are conduits and how do they operate, what problems can they create.

LyrArc Article Gist
Deborah Liljegren, a 49 year old accountant working for an advertising firm, was laid off during the coronavirus first wave. She now works as a warehouse worker in 12 hour shifts at a warehouse near Lake Geneva in Illinois. She gets up at 4.50 am for a 30 mile drive to the Kenosha, Wisconsin, located warehouse, a 1 million square feet Amazon warehouse facility. She is by herself most of the day in a 10 foot long area where she takes hundreds of items an hour from containers and puts them in tall shelves on a robotic run container production line. During the lunch break she eats a 30 minute lunch of a sandwich and cup of Cheetos inside her Focus car in the parking lot. This is the only time she gets to herself. At 12.00 pm she starts a new shift till 6 pm. At 2.45 she gets a 15 minute break.  Liljegren says it is a totally different experience going from a white collar to a blue collar job. On a typical day she may sort 2000 items. The pay is $15 an hour. She decided to take the job  because it looked like it would take a long time for another job to be available. Liljegren is one of the millions of workers whose lives have changed after the coronavirus. While a small section of society of professionals continue to work from home and do not feel the economic effects of the pandemic, much larger parts of the people of each country are vulnerable to the impact of the first and second waves of the coronavirus. With the second wave comes more economic uncertainty, loss of jobs as some businesses close, and others layoff employees.  Government budgets are strained in November 2020 to provide the kind of stimulus provided in March 2020, leaving businesses of all sizes vulnerable.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ looks at the unanimous vote in the House of Representatives delisting hundreds of Chinese companies trading on U.S. stock exchanges. The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act passed by unanimous voice vote in the House of Representatives after a similar vote in the Senate in May, and will be signed into law by president Trump. The law says foreign companies should be delisted if they fail to comply with U.S. Public Accounting Oversight Board regulatory agency's financial audits for 3 years in a row. The basis of the law is that all companies should be equally treated and required to meet U.S. regulatory standards to be listed. It also ensures safety for investors who may be defrauded of their money investing in companies that have not met such audit requirements. Wirecard in Germany and some Chinese companies have failed in the past because of lax overseas standards. This gives three years for the Chinese companies to prepare. This report also points out that the MSCI Index has 43% Chinese companies even more than before. American investors can still buy these stocks on the Hong Kong exchanges so that if fairness and investor protection should prevail American investors have to think and act along the same lines. China is also decoupling from the U.S. to some extent and pushing to have its companies listed on the Hong Kong Shanghai and  Shenzen stock exchanges. For these reasons the access to global capital is not likely to be affected by this law particularly with the behaviour of major American institutional investors. China is providing incentives to these investors even though it did not do so in the past creating another hurdle to the goal of creating a level playing field in regulatory requirements stock for all companies listed on American exchanges and safety for investors.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Swedish supplier Autoliv's scientists say GM in the late 1990's asked the supplier to match Takata's airbag that saved several dollars per airbag. The problem say the scientists at Autoliv was that the Takata airbag that was made at lower cost used a dangerous volatile compound. Autoliv cited here by Tabuchi of the NYT, says it refused to do this. Years later 100 million of the Takata airbags are installed on cars in the U.S. made by GM and other automakers.  The chemical ammonium nitrate used by Takata is still being used to make airbags with modifications to reduce its explosiveness. In this indepth account Tabuchi looks at the evidence against using ammonium nitrate, the warnings that were not heeded from Autoliv, and the work of Italian and other scientists that confirm the explosiveness of the substance when exposed to temperature and moisture changes. Here Tabuchi cites reports from suppliers of the nitrate who were hesitant to supply the substance to Takata because of liability issues. And he points out that there was manipulation of testing quality control for the defective airbags that passed the test, so that in addition to the use of the faulty chemical, the company failed to maintain strict quality control as required by the automakers. The pressure from automakers for cost reduction is given as one of the reasons for the problem, just as the pressure from BP to cut costs led to some of the faulty work done by suppliers at oil wells leading to explosions on a oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico. Before the approval of the faulty chemical for airbags Takata airbag business was in dire straits leading to management looking for ways to develop a viable business, as other propellants had failed to deliver results. It is at that point that Takata approved ammonium nitrate despite evidence of its explosiveness that led to TRW, another airbag maker, to reject it.  ...