LyrArc Article Gist
Damian Paletta of the Washington Post says that credit goes to Gary Cohn a former Goldman Sachs president, and head of the president's National Economic Council for the way he has quietly built up a group of leading experts on major initiatives of the Trump administration such as tax reform, infrastructure plans. Compared to the infighting and other problems in the first 100 days of the Trump presidency, Cohn is credited with building a core of ideas and experts that bring Trump more to the centre and with the prospect of winning Democratic party support. He has helped shift the president to set up a more balanced approach, less confrontational with China and not calling China a currency manipulator, getting support for the Export Import Bank, and more receptive to the Federal Reserve led by Janet Yellen. This report says an alliance of moderates is centering around Adviser Jared Kushner, Cohn, and in other reports Tillerson in foreign affairs is seen as being part of this group. On NAFTA the president has moved to a less confrontational approach with Mexico, which has helped the Mexican peso recover and improved prospects for the Mexican economy.  On infrastructure new ideas to find financing are needed and a plan to tax carbon emissions is intended to draw Democratic support as well as provide some of the funding. About $200 billion in taxpayer money and $800 billion from private investors is being discussed at the National Economic Council. This report says Cohn suffered from dyslexia in childhood, graduated from American University, and joined Goldman Sachs in an unconventional way. He shares a passion for deal making with president Trump, yet at the same time values the views of experts he has brought to formulate concrete plans for the way ahead. About 25 experts with extensive experience in government helped put together new tax changes, infrastructure plans, and international trade deal plans. His predecessor at the NEC, Gene Sperling, gives him credit for quietly pulling together the experts and doing the planning that the Trump administration now depends on. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Amar Bhide touches on the unpredictable consequences of devaluations while commenting on the supposed benefit of a country having its own currency vs a currency such as the euro. The euro takes away the advatantage of devaluing the national currency as a way to regain competitiveness. Bhide points out that devaluations hurt the elderly on fixed incomes and low wage workers. Protections have to be put in place for the sections of the population that are badly affected. Large union negotiated wage increases can also reduce the benefits of devaluation in terms of regaining competitiveness.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bernanke's plan to address the deep downturn is very aggressive and he is pulling out all the stops. This includes the purchase of mortgage backed securities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac corporate debt and other assets, Since it stated its intention in late November to buy such securities, the 30 year mortgage rates have fallen to 5.2% from 6%, and refinance applications have tripled. Now the purchases will be greatly expanded. See the related link to this in Hubbard and Mayer article based on their research paper, in the WSJ, that shows that at a mortgage rate of 4.5% the housing market prices could stabilize. Next step the Fed will, starting early 2009, pump money into markets for student, auto, credit card ansd small business loans in hoping to bring life to those markets. How much money is involved? Quite a bit. All told the Fed's assets could add up to $5 trillion says Ed Yardeni of Yardeni Research, up from $2.2 trillion now. Its these sweeping moves and decisions that have overshadowed the December 16 announcement cutting the target federal funds rate to a range from zero to 0.25%, the lowest in its history. Whats the thinking behind this? Coy of BW points to Bernanke's research on the depression years and the lost decade years in Japan. In 1999, in a book he contributed to, Bernanke referred to Japan's monetary policy and passive approach as a self induced paralysis, including all the zombie loans that were allowed to continue on company books and no effort to clear up the bad assets quickly. He always thought highly of the aggressive approach taken by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and felt that more tools available and a better understanding of the market system since FDR's day enabled a lot more actions to be taken to reverse the kind of steep global downturn that might occur. Yardeni's view is that even though this huge asset buildup could lead to inflation down the road, the economy in the medium term faces a deflationary environment, and the only way to cope with this series of bubbles bursting is to create another bubble, rather than risk anything going seriously wrong. Basically Bernanke is making an assessment of the current situation, and he sees bad credit situation getting worse, bad unemployment situation getting worse, consumer spending falling off and getting worse, continued home foreclosures and falling prices, the transition between administrations and lack of policy direction for a few critical months complicating things, and he sees the economies of all trading partners in Asia and Europe weakening in great speed, and sees very tough years for 2009 and 2010 no matter what the administration and the Fed do. Not enough aggressive actions to forestall the worst is as bad as inaction in Bernanke's view. And with all the aggressive moves, including the $1 trillion stimulus and infrastructure spending to create 2.5 million jobs that Obama administration plans, the US and global picture for the next 24 months will still be a long uphill climb. So the risks for Bernanke are all in the region of not doing enough and not doing it vigorously and speedily to get the best results. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about how Mr Geithner has handled his job at the New York Fed and at Treasury during the bailouts of financial firms. Were there close relationships with bankers, hedge fund managers, and others that compromised the Fed's ability to regulate the financial industry? Why was Geithner advocating loosening standards for the reserves financial institutions have to hold to insure against potential future losses, as late as 2007? Inherent in the design of the job of New York Fed President was a conflict of interest, as the institution is supposed to be a watchdog over the financial industry, but the President of the NY Fed reports to a board that is comprised of the heads of banks and financial instituitons. These financial leaders also participate in the selection of the new President. Geithner was a quick learner and a listener, who asked questions, but he was an outsider coming from work at AID, the IMF and Treasury. He is described by one bank executive Sanford Weill as "a baby face," and lacked experience in dealing with the financial industry. He was brought in by Rubin and Summers, two mentors at Treasury. These two had close ties to the financial industry, and did not question practices of overleveraging and risk taking in the financial industry. Was it too much to ask of Geithner, under the circumstances, that he would rock the boat and ask the tough questions about risk and leveraging. On the other hand did he miss things completely when he was asking for even looser capital standards for banks in 2007, less than a year before the crisis hit, which were never adopted. And was he too close to the financial industry and aggressive in the wrong sort of way when advocating in a meeting as President of the New York Fed, that the government back up all the debt in the financial system. Did he too casually overlook the conditions that could easily be put in place for the government to be able to recover some of the money put into the bailouts. And was he too close to Goldman Sachs, that he brought Goldman in for advice in the AIG bailout, even though there were conflicts of interest and money that would never be recovered from the $182 billion bailout of AIG, some of which went to banks including Goldman. If Geithner had seen some of the problems in risk taking why had he not supported FDIC's Bair in her opposing view for capital reserves, and government conditions on bailouts that enabled some recovery of capital put into failing financial institutions. And did he get too close to Citi, that at one point Sanford Weill tried to bring him in as CEO even when he was already President of the New York Fed. Does it go to show that -the very idea that this was even possible- the design of the New York Fed with the President reporting to the Board of the very same bank presidents that he was supposed keep in check, makes for an incomprehensible position of regulation at odds with the structure of reporting and selection....

LyrArc Article Gist
Fitch Ratings reports that 10 of the largest U.S. money market funds have combined assets of $755 billion, and as of May 2011, half of these assets are in instruments issued by European banks. These assets have been held for 5 years. In the event of a crisis it is feared that the funds will withdraw from the European market. Money market fund holdings for the ten largest funds show that no European bank has more than 7% of its short term funding from these money market funds, according to Fitch. A combined withdrawal would affect global credit markets.

LyrArc Article Gist
The new Chancellor of the Exchequer in Britain, George Osborne, put forward a new budget that marks a big change from the past. In an effort to cut the budget deficit by $180 billon over 5 years, Osborne announced a cut in spending for the public sector and welfare spending. There will be cuts in the budgets of government departments of 25% by 2015 except for health and international aid. Reduced spending on public housing benefits, disability benefits and other costs in the $285 billion welfare budget is part of this budget. He announced a 2 year wage freeze for public employees, and new medical screeing for persons claiming disability benefits. On the tax side the value added tax on many goods and services goes up from 17.5% to 20%. Capital gains tax goes up to 28%. And overall the proportion of tax increases to spending cuts is 1 : 4. Osborne referred to rich people in Britain "paying less than the people who clean for them" in instituting higher taxes, and he removed entirely 900,000 of the poorest people in Britain from the income tax system. Corporate taxes will be reduced from 28% to 24% over a 5 year period....

LyrArc Article Gist
Analysts say that if Greek banks pass the European banks stress tests to be announced this week, the stress tests must not be rigorous enough.

LyrArc Article Gist
Losses on aTishman/BlackRock property in New York , the 11,000apartment, 56 building, Bedford Stuyvesant property built by MetLife for veterans of World War II, is in danger of default. Losses would approach $500 million for Calpers, $575 million for Singapore's GIC, $250 million for Florida State Board, and $70 million ofr the Church of England. The property was purchased in the hope of using easing rent control laws to increase rents but tenants successfully blocked the rent increases in court.

LyrArc Article Gist
Its going to be very difficult to adopt the bad bank option in current circumstances, where the banks find their situation continually and rapidly deteriorating with renewed loss of public confidence and collapsing share prices. The efforts with the first TARP under Treasury Secretary Paulson to isolate the toxic assets of banks did not take off and had to be diverted to capital injections for precisely this reason. Banks in November and December 2008 went through a continually escalating problem situation, with losses, collapsing share prices and so on, and the government had no breathing room to develop the bad bank solution. In some cases decisions had to be made in a few days to prevent the collapse of some banking institution like Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley or Citicorp. At the same time its very clear that there can be no restoration of confidence in lending, and no recovery, without lending by banks, without a bad bank to separate these toxic assets from the banking system in the USA. The Swedish and American example in the 1990's of a bad bank, was possible because the banks were either gone bust, or under government ownership. With the banks in private hands, it is somewhere between difficult to impossible to value these toxic assets without serious problems. So nationalizing these banks becomes the only serious option, which would become more acceptable as the crisis unfolds in 2010, and it becomes clear that one way or another the government is guaranteeing these assets. Banks are in reality entirely dependent on the US government for capital and support, and it would not be wise to pretend otherwise. The safest and most direct option would be to mitigate the risks of nationalization, with prudent safeguards, and develop the bad bank option with the government in ownership of banks, in which case the bad bank option can proceed quickly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist looks at the 3 options facing Britain and America to tackle the financial crisis, and evaluates each option for its merits. It says nationalization is an option, and adds that it supported the nationalization of Northern Rock in the UK early on. Where nationalization is the best option considering the scale of the problem, as in the case of RBS in the UK, this should be followed without exacerbating the problem by pretending that it can be avoided. With its huge losses and large committments by the government of Britain, the state ends up with majority ownership. So for individual banks this policy would be a good one. With the government on both sides of the table, this avoids the major problem of how to value the assets, and of the bank's shareholders plotting to grab taxpayer's money. Expect to hear more about nationalization as a best option under the circumstances, says the Economist. This may also be because the situation is likely to get much worse in 2010. The single most important criteria should be it says returning the individual bank to good health. The other option is to collect toxic assets in a bad bank, with the clean bank rid of these assets not having to set aside reserves for losses of an unknown magnitude. This helps get lending and credit starting to flow again if banks are more willing to lend. The third option is guarantees by the government regarding the bad assets and insurance. The Economist does not think the insurance and gurarantees offered by the British government recently will work by itself, and feels it should have been combined with the separation of toxic assets of banks in a bad bank. The Economist also feels scale will be needed considering the magnitude of the problem and its continual escalation....

LyrArc Article Gist
A plan being put together in eurozone financial circles is for Spain to request aid and the European Stability Mechanism fund to provide far less than 100 billion euros approved for aid to Spain. With the request Spain would agree to conditions set by the EU, ECB and the IMF for improving competitiveness, reducing rigidity in labor markets, and controlling spending by regions in Spain. This would lead to the ECB taking action to buy Spanish bonds and lower borrowing costs.

LyrArc Article Gist
Analysis by Sentier Research of U.S. census data shows U.S. median household income declined from $54,983 in Jan. 2009 to $50,964 in June 2012, adjusted for inflation. This is $4019 in lost real income. The decline is 8% from $55,470 in 2000 before the burst of the dot come bubble. Some of this is because of trends of smaller family, lower fertility rates and more Americans living alone. But as a look at the figures in this research by Catherine Rampell of the NYT, 8/23/2012 shows, the losses in income affects all demographics, hit blacks and people with some education like a high school diploma but no degree the hardest, and also reflects the persistence of long tem unemployment which lowers income.

LyrArc Article Gist
By June 10, 2010, the Democratic Party of Japan has recovered in poll ratings with 60% ratings for the new premier Naoto Kan and the DPJ. Ratings for Mr Hatoyama had dropped to 20% by the time he resigned. Hatoyama resigned June 2, 2010.