LyrArc Article Gist
Applebaum talks to two researchers at the University of Chicago and Princeton, Prof. Sufi and Prof. Mian, on the record of U.S. president Obama and Fed chairman Bernanke in helping homeowners facing foreclosure and underwater borrowers, comparing that record with their record in helping the banks. The issue is relevant as the policy and handling of homeowners had to be part of an overall effective plan for recovery in the U.S. economy, because ultimately without the U.S. consumer any recovery would be weak in the long run- a situation the U.S. faces in early 2014. The response to the issue of irresponsible homeowners borrowing beyond the limit without an equally robust response to irresponsible bank management that allowed wildly excessive leveraging of assets, and successful aggressive lobbying by banks in a shortsighted policy of going through with a wave of foreclosures; besides creating questions of fairness and equitable handling of the problem, also had major ramifications for the future of the U.S. and global economic growth. Here Christina Romer and other administration advisors say Bernanke was right in tackling the problem from the perspective of the banks needing to be recapitalized. Thoughtful advisors looking at the entire problem, Martin Feldstein and Sheila Bair strongly pushed for providing the same help to homeowners without getting caught up in the issue of who was responsible home buyers or the banks, and looking at the interests of the U.S. economy and the U.S. people. Proposals by Feldstein and Bair were equally robust in helping banks as they were in helping homeowners, only the banks understood their interests narrowly and had more access to policymakers in the Bush, as well as the Obama administration, Paulson as well as Geithner. This leaves us with the ultimate irony of the Obama administration pushing for the minimum wage, even to the point of electoral posture, when lasting damage had been inflicted on homeowners from the weaker portions of America's middle class by a policy that went against what two respected financial and economic experts from the Reagan period, Sheila and Bair had strongly advocated. See links and groups on Feldstein and Bair. Applebaum has followed most aspects of this problem closely and continues to provide exceptional reporting including the piece on the thinking of new Fed chairman, Janet Yellen. Private enterprise rules that require management at banks just as for other companies to take responsibility for failures, and be replaced with new management, was largely avoided leading to a fundamental failure in how a free market economy such as the U.S. and western European economies are supposed to function. Rules aggressively pushed by Geithner's mentor Treasury Secretary Rubin for a vigorous cleanup at banks in South Korea during a similiar situation in 1997, were not followed in any way here, also setting wrong precedents for the long run. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Dionne cites comments by Bowles and Simpson saying the Paul Ryan U.S. budget proposal falls short of a serious bipartisan effort for deficit reduction for a number of reasons. The reasons cited by Bowles and Simpson are: The proposal exempts defense spending from reductions, does not apply savings from tax expenditures to deficit reduction, relies on much larger reductions in domestic discretionary spending than the Bowles-Simpson deficit reduction plan, and at the same time making reductions in safety-net programs that could in their words "place a disproportionately adverse effect on certain disadvantaged populations." This should give moderates in this debate time for pause and reflection says Dionne.

LyrArc Article Gist
Public sentiment shifts sharply against free trade in the March 2016 Michigan primary for the U.S. presidential election, with candidates saying trade agreements do not take into account the interests of American manufacturing workers making large gains. Between 1999 and 2010 public sentiment shifted against trade agreements for all age, education and income groups. A study by Autor, Hanson and Dorn showed loss of 5.6 million jobs in the last decade and large trade deficits, and demonstrated the effect by counties in the U.S. most hurt by trade policies.

LyrArc Article Gist
The rarely mentioned origins of the U.S. Medicare reform proposal of Rep. Paul Ryan and Rep. Ron Wyden, which includes work done at the Hoover Institution and liberal think tanks, in a debate subject to distortions on all sides.

LyrArc Article Gist
Lower amounts for financial aid available offset the lower rise in tution costs to leave students just as worse off as before with large amount of student debt in 2013-2014.

LyrArc Article Gist
In 2000 student debt in the U.S. was at $200 billion. In 2010 student debt at 1 trillion dollars will surpass credit card debt. Student debt is now become a serious macroeconomic factor. Budget cuts will also increase the level of student debt as fewer grants are available and tution goes up. It is expected to shape when young people can afford to buy a home, start a family, or save for their kids education. This would have serious economic implications for the future.

LyrArc Article Gist
A worldwide trend to shorter term borrowing means that institutions and sovereign governments will compete in the capital markets, as they try to roll over existing borrowing by 2012. The US has $1.3 trillion to roll over by 2012. Worldwide about $5 trillion has to be rolled over, and of this $2.6 trillion is in Europe. With the European financial crisis which started in Greece it is becoming harder for sovereign governments to borrow in capital markets at favorable rates. A former economist of the Bank of England says this is of the highest importance for lending and for growth. The implications are reduced lending by banks to businesses and consumers, reducing output and growth, and limiting reductions in unemployment. It is a big issue say analysts, as debt needs to be rolled over over shorter periods. Moody's study shows new bond issues by banks during the last 5 years matured at an average 4.7 years. The stress say experts is likely to be on the less healthy banks like the savings banks in Spain, Landesbanks in Germany. Stress tests on European banks will be out July 23, 2010....

LyrArc Article Gist
Speaker Boehner and Republican's backup Plan B is for Bush tax cuts to be given to taxpayers with incomes below $1 million. President Obama and Democrats have proposed a revised figure of $400,000 from the earlier figure of $250,000.

LyrArc Article Gist
It is too much to expect central bankers to solve the US economy's problems, especially with rates nearly zero, and no agreement between the political parties before mid-term elections. The Federal Reserve by itself cannot fix the economy's problems, with the US economy facing prospects of deflation in 2011; and local governments cutting back as they face revenue shortfalls. Deficit concerns have led to inaction on further stimulus or help to local governments, and the Bush tax cuts are expiring shortly. In 2011 austerity cuts will be the singular theme in the western world, and these cuts are of a magnitude not seen in 40 years. In this situation there is only so much the US Fed can do.

LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Blinder points out that the political partisanship that has emerged in 2010 has not served America well, as it has deprived the government of the fiscal policy tools, which would be more effective than the Fed's only mildly effective tool of buying $100 billion a month of medium and long term Treasury debt. The country he says is tied up in partisan knots that prevents the use of the fiscal policy tools, and leaves the Fed with the choice of doing something only nudging the rates on government and private securites a bit (by 30 basis points for Treasury debt and 15 basis points for private securities as an example, not enough for more than a mild impact on corporate spending). The fiscal policy tools are he says of a wide variety and pack a lot more power, and he cites three as examples: offering significant lasting tax breaks for job creation, large enough to produce results (larger and long term than the HIRE program), government hiring directly onto public payrolls and government paying local and state governments for hiring at the local levels, the government offering to compensate states for a cut in the sales tax for a year to stimulate consumer spending. Would'nt this raise the deficit though? Blinder points out that the deficit problem lies in the future. Right now there is so much slack in the economy, that public spending will not crowd out private spending. And with Treasury rates at an all time low, Treasury can finance the larger deficit in the short term. A depreciation of the dollar or inflation, he says, is not a worry, because now there is worry about deflation, and the USA needs a lower dollar to push exports up and rebalance its economy. This does not slight the deficit issue and the culture of poor budgeting among both parties, as Reagan Budget Director David Stockman pointed out in an op-ed piece, but accomodates the real dangers and opportunities of difficult policy choices. This is why he laments the advertising campaign and public relations campaign against the 2009 stimulus bill, and the expected paralysis of fiscal policy from the extremely partisan 2010 midterm elections, and public opinion consumed by fear of deficits. Leaving the Fed with the unenviable choice of using only mildly effective tools. Other experts and columnists mention the risks associated with the Fed's large scale purchase of securities, if this leads to another asset bubble and subsequent collapse, and another bailout needed for financial institutions. Peter Eavis in one column in the WSJ points to the lack of effectiveness of the first round of quantitative easing of $1.7 trillion. And Kelly Evans, in the WSJ, points to the risks of "bad" inflation, if another round of quantitative easing by the Fed leads to increases in the price of commodities such as oil and food (such inflation falling heaviest on lower income households).The US Financial Regulatory Reform bill has received low grades, and recent standards for reserve capital in worldwide banking reforms are stretched out over a long period, leaving fragility in the economic system, if something were to go wrong....

LyrArc Article Gist
Andrew Stuttaford's excellent review of a book on the hyperinflation of Weimar Germany. In early 2010, the out of print book, "When Money Dies," by Adam Fergusson was trading for four figure sums. It describes life under hyperinflation in Germany and the events leading to it, the efforts to find a solution, and the collapse of the German economy with the worldwide great depression. The book describes the death of the German mark, with 20 marks needed to buy one British pound in 1914, going to 310 billion in late 1923! The story starts with the onset of war in 1914, and the fateful German decision to fund the war effort largely through debt and the printing presses. What exacerbated the situation was the relatively shallow capital markets in Germany, the creation of 'loan banks' funded by a printing press used by the central bank, and the muffling of all information. The stock markets were closed during the war and foreign exchange rates were not published. The destruction of the war, revolution, protests, imposition of reparations by the victorious powers, and terrotorial occupation worsened the situation. The efforts of central bank president, Rudolf Havenstein, to prevent mass unemployment by devaluing the currency to keep exports competitive, worked only for a time. In the end, says Fergusson, the music stopped. Lacking a reliable pricing mechanism and faced with huge strains, including the onset of the worldwide depression, the whole German economy stopped functioning at even the most basic level. The whole economy was reduced to barter. Rent was payed with butter and lumps of coal were bartered for something else. The only time an economy was reduced to barter in recent times (in the last 2 decades) was the situation in Argentina after a sharp devaluation. The Russian economy also faced a trying period in recent years with the collapse of communism and a collapse of the currency. And the Asian economies faced a difficult period during the 1997 Asian financial crisis. But nothing compares with what happened in Weimar Germany. The book was originally written for a British audience at a time of rapid inflation in the 1970's, and it reminded readers of the connection between the quantity of money in circulation and price stability. Financial crises play out in different ways in different periods, but it is a sobering warning for the need for prudence in financial affairs, avoiding excesses, the need for global cooperation and a measure of peaceful coexistence in world affairs that enables financial systems to work. With excesses in asset bubbles of the stock market or housing kind, bad loans in the financial system, overleveraging in the financial system, lack of reserves, or huge trade deficits, posing the new types of risks in today's environment. Bad loans in the financial system caused problems in Japan in the past and pose risks in China today, overleveraging caused problems in the US in 2008, lack of reserves in S. Korea in 1997, a collapse of the currency in Russia in the 1990's, and a sharp devaluation with a lack of reserves in Argentina. Too much money in the system, as in China today with the sharp increase in bank lending as part of the stimulus following the 2008 crisis, can distort the functioning of the financial system with excesses in real estate speculation and overproduction. The nature of the crises are different but all have a common factor of tolerance for excesses over a long period and a lack of prudence, exacerbated by international tensions and wars that weaken a country's finances. The twin wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are estimated to cost a trillion dollars each and this can only exacerbate the finances in the US, when coupled with other factors such as bad real estate loans in the financial system, and huge trade deficits....

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
It makes for good political rhetoric, but in reality the flow of money goes both ways. A lot of investments are made by American companies overseas. This time the flow of oil money because of high oil prices, from the USA and Europe to the Middle East is being recycled back to the USA in the form of investments in the US through small equity stakes in companies and more so through purchases of capital equipment and services to build Saudi infrastructure projects. The $500 billion investment plan over several years in Saudi Arabia is to build everything from new cities, aluminium plants, electricity generation plants and chemicals and plastics plants. The fears and rhetoric are overblown, as the USA also invests overseas with holdings according to the Treasury department of $6 trillion of foreign stock and debt. The acceleration of foreign investment in the US is to be seen in the numbers, as the dollar gets weaker, and its more advantageous for Canadians and Euuropeans to invest here. Last year $414 billion of foreign investors money went into buying stakes in American companies and building factories and purchasing stock, according to Thomson Financial. Thats up 90% from 2006 and represented one fourth of all announced deals. This year in just 2 weeks foreign investors poured $22.6 billion in just the first 2 weeks of January, and that represents one half of all deals. Shows how quickly the picture is changing. One way of looking at it is that Americans buy a lot of foreign goods and the money Americans use to pay for a lot of imports is now being returned to the USA in the form of foreign investments. Note that foreign investment is desirable because it brings new ideas and technology and new management methods to the host country from other countries. These foreign investors in many cases are able to make these investments overseas because they are good at what they do, having them in the host country benefits the host country and shakes up competition in the particular industry in the host country that is receiving the investment. This is why economies once relatively unfavorable to foreign investors like Japan and S. Korea are now passionately seeking foreign investment to make their economies thrive through the exchange and inflow of new ideas and ways of doing things. The same can be and is true for the USA. The other aspect is that most of the investment is still from countries like Canada, Germany, Japan, S. Korea which are big free trade partners of the USA. Manufacturing investment is heavily skewed to European and Japanese companies. Foreign multinational investment (Sony, Toyota etc) grew to $43.3 billion in 2007 from $39.2 billion in 2006 according to OCO Monitor, and will accelerate significantly as companies like VW and other German companies find it cheaper to build in the USA and shift more manufacturing here. To get an idea why the rhetoric is overblown Canada spent the most in buying American companies, $65 billion in 2007, according to Thomson Financial. Russia spent $572 million and India $3.3 billion. How will this improve the chances of the USA making it out of this recession? Five million American work for foreign companies in the USA. Of these one third are manufacturing jobs. These jobs pay about 30% more than jobs in American owned companies. Figures from Treasury Department. There will be more of these jobs as companies like VW build plants here. Roubini Economics estimates that an infusion of about $300-400 billion is needed for the USA to overcome the effects of the current mortgage and credit crisis. $414 billion was invested in the USA by foreign investors according to Thomson Financial in 2007, going up from something like $200 billion in 2006. If this pace continues becasue of some of the same underlying reasons as the weaker dollar, stronger economies overseas, then $200 billion additional investments this year would add that much to a stimulus package of $150 billion by one estimate, to provide a boost of somewhere around $350 billion. In the range of the needed boost. Companies like IBM and GE which have significant investments in India and China and investments in software or infrastructure industries that are growing rapidly or Caterpillar with growth in construction overseas, may keep growing through this downturn. This recession may hit selectively and differently, not be a complete hit to the USA economy, and could prevent it from going beyond 2009 with recovery in 2010. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Federal Reserve vice chairman, Janet Yellen and Laurence Meyer, a former Fed governor call for consideration of downside risks emerging from the eurozone crisis and from the approaching fiscal cliff of government spending cuts, as the Fed debates policies in July 2012.