LyrArc Article Gist
Investors put in $136 billion into startup companies in 2018, and $141 billion in 2019, as reported in this WSJ article on startups. Before this it peaked at $75 billion in 2000 and did not recover after the 2009 financial crisis till 2014 when it reached about 75 billion dollars.  Much of the increase in money that did not go into infrastructure at low interest rates below zero appears to have been wasted as the ideas for startups declined in quality in the years 2014-2019. Softbank put up a Vision Fund which has run up billions of dollars in losses including a disastrous investment in WeWork. The resistance to shifting all the money at low interest rates to infrastructure has faded with the election of president Trump supported by a Republican party that puts the American worker first for job retention and expansion, and America first in world trade. The pandemic has changed the environment for startup companies as most startup companies are not likely to survive the environment they are in. The big ones such as Uber have built up losses, and ones such as Airbnb are borrowing $2 billion at 10 percent interest in emergency funding. Experience and sound thinking for investments were left behind as capital was wasted in many projects. The time has come to return to investments that have built the basis of the twentieth and twenty first century's advances in quality of life, in infrastructure and strong public services. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The economic crisis in the Russian city of Yaroslavl, 150 miles northeast of Moscow on the Volga river. Auto sales are down 30% and the city's diesel engine making plant is down to working only 3 days aweek. Many of the other factories and plants here are laying off people and are also on 3 days a week. Cafes and bars in the city are empty and people are filling job search centers.

LyrArc Article Gist
Poland says its President Lech Kaczynski, is not hit as hard as other countries in Eastern Europe, by which he may be referring to Hungary, and may achieve 2% growth in 2009, if things do not worsen considerably. The prime minister of Hungary had warned of a new Iron Curtain coming down over Europe, as a result of the economic downturn. Unemployment is rising, but nowhere near the high double digits of the 1990's, and exports are still holding up, and Polish banking sector is relatively healthy not having made the risky investments.

LyrArc Article Gist
As Prime Minister Aso's ratings in the polls drop to 20%, it looks increasingly likely that the Liberal Democrats will lose the election that has to be held before September 2009. Yoshimi Watanabe, who was minister for administrative reform in two previous administrations and the most visible face for reform of the bureaucracy at the current time, quit the Liberal Democratic party recently. Aso's plan to stimulate the economy with a $130 cash payment to all people in Japan is meeting with skepticism and disapproval, as it is considered doubtful it will jumpstart the economy. Polls indicate 70% of voters oppose it. Aso came in as PM in September 2008, before the full brunt of the global economic crisis hit in November 2008. Voters see him as another old face of the Liberal Democratic party, older politicians who do not have the popular appeal especially with the shift to the younger Obama type politicians in the USA. The Liberal Democratic party has ruled for all but 11 months since the Second World War. Polls also show voters trust the opposition leader of the Democratic Party, Ichiro Ozawa, more than Taro Aso....

LyrArc Article Gist
In depth interview with Kyohei Morita, chief economist of Barclays Capital, Finance Asia explores different aspects of the Japanese economy and developments after 1987 and under Koizumi, the role of exports and how ordinary households are affected. He points out a few important things about the Japanese economy that are not generally recognized. One is that Japanese banks are vulnerable in the way the subprime crisis has exposed banks in the USA. Their vulnerability comes from owning 15% of the shares on the stock market which came down from a higher number after years of reducing stock holdings. When the Nikkei drops below 9000 this reduces the bank's capital and leads to credit tightening. Morita points out the risk of turning a moderate slowdown from lower exports into a severe slowdown if banks are reluctant to lend. The other point he makes is that small nonmanufacturing companies in Japan have to thrive for Japan to thrive, but he is bearish about private consumption. In a revealing statement he says that in his research he has found that the path connecting corporate profitability to households is seriously eroding. This is due to globalization as Japanese companies are offshoring aggressively, and 30% of the Japanese market capitalization in held by foreigners. His point is that Japanese managers now tend to see wages as costs just like American managers do and not the way they did in the past, so salary costs are suppressed in favor of shareholder dividends which flow out of Japan. Finance Asia referred to an OECD study that shows Japan's ranking in terms of per capita income fell from fifth highest in the OECD in 1992 to 19th in 2002, a fact that Morita recognizes as strange as western economies have tended to follow relatively stable long term income growth, and which he attributes to Japan's terrible demographics with population shrinking since 2006 and more elderly and retired supported by a smaller percentage of working age people. In an exceptionally revealing statement Morita points out that Japan has globalized from the outside but not from the inside. Japan he says needs more foreign direct investment and ideas, and more immigrants, fresh labour and fresh taxpayers. Which is remarkably true as Japan tends to be rather insular as a country and tends to keep out immigrants. The influx of Polish and Eastern European immigrants to the UK under the Blair-Brown Labor government years would be unimaginable in Japan. In the meantime Japan's estimated $15.7 trillion in financial assets held by households or three time national GDP is something that makes it possible for now for Japan to sustain the upward trend in the debt to GDP ratio....

LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT editorial says the summit came up short on both the Stimulus that Europe was asked by the US to commit to, and the global regulation that the Europeans asked the US to agree to. The regulatory reform is not what it needs to be to address the many issues raised by this crisis says the NYT. And Germany it says needs to see that deteriorating conditions will require a strong stimulus. By committing to $1 trillion in funds to backup international trade and to help emerging countries fight the crisis, the summit did achieve its other goal of helping the vast majority of people in the world in the emerging countries deal with this crisis, including countries in the EU.

LyrArc Article Gist
This leader in The Economist magazine says a hard Brexit of the sort announced by Theresa May at a Conservative Party conference is clearly bad for Britain. It also point out that half of British people voted to remain. It is not clear that voters have voted for a hard Brexit, a soft Brexit, or voter alienation with elites and effects of years of austerity since the financial crisis have helped tilt the vote to Brexit. It points out that the rhetoric may be damaging Britain's chance of negotiating a Brexit that limits damage to GDP, which the Treasury estimates to be nearly twice the loss in GDP if a member of a single market as compared to leaving it. British government leaders may be overestimating the willingness of leaders of France, Germany and other countries to make concessions. By talking up to their party base politicians such as May may be putting German and French leaders to also toughen their positions on free movement as an integral principle of the European Union, and consequently of membership in a single market. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times editorial page on the day following the passage of the second bailout or rescue plan of $700 billion in the Senate after it was voted down in the House of Representatives. It points out that the bailout bill does little to prevent a wave of foreclosures which the NYT estimates at six million people expected to default in the rest of this year and 2009. It faults lenders unwillingness to reduce the loan balances amount. At a Congressional hearing for the Hope for Homeowners program in which the governmet wold insure upto $300 bilonin new affordable loans for troubled borrowers if the lenders voluntarily refinance delinquent mortgages by reducing loan balances to 90% of the homes' current market value, lending banks were lukewarm about taking these losses in exchange for bigger losses in foreclosures. These lenders include Wels Fargo, Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup. The FDIC's Sheila Barr has also advocated reducing loan balances in her proposal for tackling the housing crisis presented after the Bear Stearns crisis. She is taking this approach to banks that like IndyMac were taken over by FDIC. But the numbers are not large letters were sent to 28,000 delinquent borrowers of IndyMac recently to reduce loan balances. This is a serious problem and either Congress and Treasury are leaving this problem to the next administration taking office 3 months from now as there is no real consensus on this issue even today or they are missing the impact this has in dropping home price values even further in neigborhoods across the nation as foreclosures drive prices down even further compounding the problem. For the financial institutions it would appear that they are letting this drag out because their capital is at frighteningly low levels and taking losses at one time is harder than taking the foreclosure losses dragged out over 1-3 years and they are also looking for a way in which they can let the government bear the burden of losses as the crisis intensifies which can make sense from the point of view of each institution. According to a report in the Wall Street Journal on September 29, 2008, Sheila Barr told Congress this month that in recent years troubled loan portfolios have yielded about 32% of book value, compared with more than 87% for loans in which the borrower is current. These are strong statistics in favor of lenders taking an informed decision to lower loan balances voluntarily with some government help along the way but the fact that this is not happening leads one to think that something is falling between the cracks, initial lender reluctance to take losses through voluntary balance reduction at the time of Bear Stearns crisis given taxpayer reluctance and lack of government initiative to help lenders in doing this, sort of what Martin Feldstein suggested in a series of articles during the time before and after the Bear Steans crisis. And then as the credit crisis worsened with collapse of Lehman, WaMu, Freddie, Fannie and Wachovia in September 2008 fear gripping the markets and LIBOR interbank lending rate at close to 8%, banks gripped by the fear prevailing in the market, frozen practically about any steps other than preserving their hammered capital, and reluctant to take losses which would further impair their capital. Also in the WSJ Sept 8, on help for homeowners, Deutsche Bank estimates 40% of homeowners or about 20 million households will owe more than their home is worth by the time the housing market stabilizes. This will lead to some homeowners making the rational decision as Martin Feldstein argued to walk away from their homes, leading to more foreclosure losses for th banks. This article Rescue Includes Steps to Help Borrowers Keep Homes by Ruth Simon also has some information that confirms the NYT editorial. An analysis it says of 144 mortgage modifications by the Massachusetts Attorney General's office found that none reduced mortgage balances and onoly a handful reduced monthly payments. Even with interest rate reductions, the study showed borrrowers wound up paying more because of missed paymmets penalties and fees. Another study by Credit Suisse mentioned in the same article points out that the percentage of borrowers who were behind 6 months after loan modifications dropped to 17% when lenders reduced the loan balances and 13% when mortgage companies froze the interest rate of adjustable rate mortgages. A bigger problem is the effect on consumption, if 40% of homeowners end up owing more to the bank than their home is worth as Deutsche Bank estimates, combined with higher unemployment and higher parttime employment, by the time things stabilize. And this is the big looming problem for a new administration in January even if the bailout plan passes Congress this week after revisions and eases the crisis in the credit markets. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What is happening here appears to be that the whole American system of government as it operates today has some serious weaknesses, which if exposed in a critical situation- and with some life threatening situation for an industry group- can subvert the whole system and the economic life of the country. The serious weaknesses are the lobbying of Congress that is legal, and the financing of Congressmen and Senators election campaigns by industry groups which is legal. The life threatening situation for an industry group are the accounting rules and nuances that require that the banking and financial industry that holds these mortgage home loans, if they change one loan to lower payments in one geographic area, have to then show the lowered value of that loan in their books on all other loans of that type in that geographic area. Without this the banks and financial institutions were already or close to insolvent with losses of over $1 trillion. With that accounting change the industry losses would make large parts of the industry insolvent. This becomes incentive enough to fight loan modifications at all costs for the industry, and explains why Hope for Homeowners has generated only 25 loan modifications when it was advertised to generate 400,000. This creates a once in a lifetime or once in a hundred year chance of the whole system of democratic government working to destroy the economic life of the country. How? By providing a big enough reason for the banking and financial industry to fight loan modifications almost to the death, against even their better judgement when in late 2008 and January 2009 this would mean suicide for the economic life of the country, and the chance that they would both go down into the depths, the industry and the boat that is the American economy. This is what this story tells us, all key Congressmen and Senators were taken into their fold by the lobbying groups with large donations to their election funds, both Republican and Democrat, Shelby, Frank, Dodd, Durbin, and their aides. After Hope for Homeowners program failed, the new Hope Now program was again designed with the connivance of lawmakers in both parties by the banking industry representatives. It was designed so it would largely fail by not doing enough to keep homeowners in their homes. The industry faced with a life threatening situation did the wrong thing. Instead of saying lets get the government to help to change the accounting rule, and advocating that the government join the industry to share the losses and go out aggressively to restructure the loans in a three way loss sharing arrangement with homeowners, government and the industry, the industry instead decided to stick its head in the sand and let nobody do anything period. To do this it had to create the illusion that somehow the problem would fix itself with housing recovering on its own. In addition to the donations many Republicans like Preston, Secretary of HUD with oversight of FHA, and others in the Bush administration, may have had the mistaken notion that somehow the housing industry would recover without much help, that the economy was basically still healthy, that the crisis was not as bad as it appeared, that freemarket principles were still the best guide, and that toxic assets of banks and foreclosures were two entirely different things, with foreclosures for those who had borrowed recklessly not a bad thing....

LyrArc Article Gist
Collapse of the easten european economies says the Economist would raise questions about the idea of a united Europe, the idea of the EU itself, and destabilize the euro - as countries in the EU like Ireland and Greece are in just as bad a shape. And in talk of enlargement of the EU will be doomed, and this is true of the western Balkans, TUrkey, and some countries int he former Soviet Union. Politically letting these countries derift could mean they fall for populists and nationalists of the bad type. And there is the serious economic consideration for banks in Austria, Italy and Sweden, which are heavily involved in lending to Eastern Europe. They could see catastrophic losses and put the banking systems of these countries at risk. Sweden has already chosen to help the Baltic Countries, and sees it has its political responsibility, and the whole Baltic region as its home, see link. The Economist suggests a differentiated approach depending on which group of countries in Eastern and Central Europe something that Angela Merkel of Germany also supports. For Ukraine the Economist says its best to let the IMF provide assistance. For the Baltic countries, plus Bulgaria, the Economist advocates an accelerated path to the euro, on the grounds that they are tiny and shouln't affect confidence in the euro. The Baltic countries have a population of 7 million. This approach is not supported by the European Commission or the European Central Bank. For the 4 larger countries, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Romania, the Economist says the priority should be to prevent further currency collapse, and to rescue the banks responsible for the foreign currency loans that are going bad, with the pain being shared between debtors and the banks, governments of lending and borrowing countries. Financial institutions like the ECB, the IMF, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Developemnt, and the European Investment Bank should help support the rescue effort. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Economies in eastern europe are being hit hard by the crisis especially countries that borrowed hevily overseas and that have large amounts of debt.

LyrArc Article Gist
Europe has something that is just as bad as subprime mortgages that have troubled the US, its the bad debt of European banks to Eastern European emerging market countries. This plus the high indebtedness of companies in Western Europe is creating serious problems for the economies of western Europe. In addition to the property bubble in Ireland, the UK and Spain, Germany is facing falling demand for its exports as a result of the steep descent of the global economy, especially China. As a result of all this the EU is facing a problem of the magnitude of that faced by the US, if not worse. In much of Europe especially in Germany and the Eastern European countries what generates growth and jobs is exports. Three quarters of the cars made in Germany are exported, and many of the parts used in BMW's and VW's come from plants in the eastern european countries, some form Slovakia, Poland and from plants elsewhere in Eastern Europe. With the collapse of some Eastern European economies and serious problems in others these markets are shrinking. The same thing is happening to exports from Eastern European countries where factories there manufacturing goods for Western Europe are closing. And banks in the western European economies like UniCredit Group of Italy, Germany's Commerzbank, and Belgium's KBC Group have large loans outstanding in the eastern European countries to companies and consumers. And some of these countries have run up huge current account deficits. Bulgaria the deficit is 20% of GDP. Increasing the risk and hitting consumers in the east is that banks issued low rate mortgages and other laons in euros and swiss francs. With the Hungarian forint, Romanian leu, and other weaker currencies seeing big drops, the cost of repaying these loans has jumped. Instead of consumers being overstretched from overspending as in the USA, or facing foreclosures, these consumers are facing huge loan repayment problems from borrowing in other currencies. Morgan Stanley says more than half of the private debt in Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria is in foreign currency. And customers in Eastern European countries owe foreign banks loans equal to one third of their combined GDP, according to the Bank of Internatonal Settlements. A lot of these loans could end up turning into bad debt if the economies of Eastern Europe deteriorate further as consumers there pull back, factories close and job losses mount, and currency values drop even more. This would create huge problems for Western European banks and restrict lending in Western Europe as these banks make fewer loans creating more problems for Western European economies, in the same manner as ricotcheting effects have done in the USA....

LyrArc Article Gist
Steven Mnuchin, a former Goldman Sachs executive is the new Treasury Secretary in the Trump administration. His ties to Goldman Sachs go beyond his own work at the firm. His father joined Goldman in 1957, and worked for his entire career at the investment bank. Steven's brother Alan also worked at Goldman. During the campaign Trump was severe in his criticism of his opponents Cruz and Clinton's ties to the bank. Ironies abound, not only is the new Treasury Secretary from Goldman, his connections go back a generation. The Treasury Secretary under Clinton was Goldman Sachs executive Robert Rubin. Under Bush who followed Clinton the Treasury Secretary was Goldman Sachs executive Henry Paulson. Under Republican and Democratic administrations Goldman Sachs executives have held key positions. Mr Mnuchin was campaign finance chairman for Trump for 6 months leading to him being chosen for Treasury Secretary. Mnuchin joined Goldman in 1985. During the campaign Trump was also severe in his criticism of financier George Soros, making this a key point in a debate with Clinton for taking Soros's support. This report by Das and Ensign points out that in 2002 Mnuchin left Goldman to run a credit fund set up by George Soros. In 2004 Mnuchin founded hedge fund Dune Capital Management LP with Soros support.  When IndyMac bank collapsed a deal with the government was arranged that covered a part of any future loan losses being taken by FDIC, and Dune was one of several hedge funds and private equity funds including Soros funds that acquired it for $1.5 billion. The renamed IndyMac bank was called OneWest with Mnuchin as chairman. OneWest was sold in 2014 at a large profit to CIT Group Inc. This report says CIT Group took a $230 million charge in July 2015 for accounting problems at OneWest.  During the latter part of the Trump campaign after he joined it in May 2016, Mnuchin set up a joint fundraising agreement with the Republican National Committee. This made it possible for major donors to give to the Republican party and Mr Trump. The head of the Republican National Committee is Mr. Lewis Eisenberg. Having run the technology division at Goldman, Mnuchin was prominent in Goldman and investment banking circles in New York.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ulrich Volz of the German Development Institute says the $250 billion the IMF has- counting the $100 billion Japan has contributed- may not be enough to prevent some countries in Eastern Europe and Asia or Latin America from defaulting. Especially because a lot of debt is coming due and has to be renewed. There may be some sovereign country defaults. Even China and India have a lot of debt coming due. India and China have external debt payments of $260 billion and $2.4 trillion respectively this year. According to ING Wholesale Banking emerging market governments and companies have to repay some $6.8 trillion of debt, bonds, loans and interest payments and trade finance, and this excludes any debt taken on for stimulus. Russia has $600 billion to renew this year. Latin American governments according to Harvard economist Hausmann need to rollover $250 billion in debt. The US and developed countries are soaking up a lot of funds, with the US eexpected to issue $2 trillion in government bonds, and the big developed countries placing another $1 trillion. So there will be severe competition for limited capital. Mr Volz suggests a Global Support Fund to which the developed countries would contribute to help emerging market countries....

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
WSJ Lingling Wei's interview with Ding Xuedong, chairman of China Investment Corporation on its plans and strategies for 2015-2016, and future years. China's government formed CIC in 2007 to improve the returns on its foreign exchange reserves, estimated at $3.8 trillion in 2015. China Investment Corporation had largely stayed with low yields on U.S. Treasury debt till 2007. CIC has about $650 billion in assets in 2015. Its strategies provide insights into how China sees the outlook for the global economy. Ding sees opportunities in real estate and infrastructure, with a focus on the U.S. and Europe for steady cash flows. He singles out the U.S. as of particular interest as its economy rebounds. Strategies also include paring down of energy holdings. Foreign holdings are now $220 billion and have increased by 16.6% since 2009. A special unit CIC Capital was formed recently to more directly participate in managing foreign holdings with a long term view. Earlier focus of CIC on natural resources and commodities is now shifting as the commodities crisis has reduced long term prospects in that sector. The plan for the future is to shift to an allocation where financial products such as stocks and bonds are about 50%, and long term assets such as infrastructure investments, real estate and other investment take up the other 50%. At the end of 2013 equities and fixed income represented 57.4% of CIC global assets, and 28.2% were in long term assets. Ding wants to see China as the No. 2 engine for the global economy after the U.S. as No. 1. He sees the prospects for Brazil, Russia and South Africa as poor, and is optimistic about good performance from India, Mexico and Nigeria. On Japan Ding is skeptical of prime minister Abe's plans because he sees the lack of structural reforms in the efforts leading to a kind of lazy effort in his view. CIC is learning from the experience of other national investment funds and improving its in-house investment and management capabilities. Ding has many years of experience with China's Finance Ministry, the Cabinet, and the State Council. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The crisis in Eastern Europe where 13 countries have accumulated close to $1 trillion in collective debt to western European banks or in foreign currencies. The need for a fund like the one proposed by Hungary, with roughly $240 billion, to bailout the Eastern European countries.