LyrArc Article Gist
This mortgage crisis could last a long time. House prices now down 10% could fall 30%. Losses on these mortgages could total $400 billion or 3% of total economic output. Similar to the losses in the savings and loan crisis of the eighties. The complexity of the crisis cuts two ways in one respect it prolongs the crisis because it makes it very hard to figure out what is inside which kind of package of securtieis and who holds them. Mortgages are dispersed among banks and 11,000 investment pools each with hundreds or thousands of investors. And many of these pools have been further repackaged into specialized funds known as structured investment vehicles and collaterized debt obligations that were created for these mortgages. It requires huge computing power and lots of people to figure out what is inside each package of securties. And the other effect is that because of this opaqueness or lack of transparency no one in the banking system knows who has large exposure and may run into difficulties like a Northern Rock bank in Britain or a Citigroup or UBS so that banks are not keen on lending to each other and raises the bank lending rate to each other. Banks also want to increase their reserve as a cushion against hidden losses and so are afraid to lend and lend at higher rates and after asking for stringent terms from lenders. This will create a prolonged period of credit tightnesss which would affect business expansion in a serious way. On the other hand as said earlier it cuts 2 ways and the positive side to this is that the losses tend to be overestimated in a crisis with lack of transparency or high degree of opaquenesss as Seidman who was a key person in settling the Savings and Loan Crisis told the National Press Club this month. Another negative efect in terms of credit availability for business is that there is less demand for securities in this kind of environment and business cannot get that much money from the capital markets. Cerberus found this out quickly when it found few buyers for the securities it hoped to sell to fund a portion of its buyout of Chrysler. One thing that will help the US as this crisis plays out is the better picture for exports with a falling dollar.The larger companies with international operations will have more business overseas and will export more to other countries especially to the high growth countries like China, India, Russia and Brazil as well as other countries in South America, Asia and Europe. Infrastructure spending will be huge in these countries and companies like General Electric, Caterpillar and others will benefit and companies like GM will expand more overseas. This should help the dollar and the current account deficit in a few years. It would also cushion the blow from this crisis. Overall this crisis could play out for longer than 3 years if consumer spending deteriorates significantly in 2008-2009. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Schumer calls it a "momentous 24 hours here in the US Congress, a legislative one two punch that you rarely see." Schumer negotiated a major climate change action bill for $369 billion in the Senate, that also covers tax changes to cover costs, and helps cut drug and health care expenses of Americans. The second quarter shows healthy job gains of average 375,000 a month and unemployment at 3.6%. The economy declined by 1.1% but much of this was from a slowdown in home and business construction sectors sensitive to higher interest rates and from higher inventory. Consumer spending increased by 1% during the quarter. The Fed's series of 0.75 percentage points interest rate increases had softened inflation expectations before they get entrenched in the economy. This makes it possible for Democrats to present a message to ordinary Americans that president Biden is getting things done with 2 legislative achievements. A $280 billion bill for investment in the semiconductor industry in the US. And a huge win on climate change with the $269 billion Schumer is negotiating in the US Congress. It is the opposite of what Republicans are saying is Biden's failure to tackle inflation. Appropriately Biden and Schumer are calling this the bill the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. How did Schumer get this done? After the Ukraine war and EU decision to shut down Russian oil supplies, cut oil and gas use by 15%, and the climate change action inducing fires and floods, there is increasing awareness about climate change action as vital for our future all over the world. This gives more confidence to Democrats to negotiate a temporary continuation of oil and gas, with increased exports of US LNG to Europe. Senator Manchin from an energy producing state of West Virginia was brought over to Schumer's side with this idea. What Biden gets is a 40% reduction of US carbon emissions over 2005 levels, enough to get within reach of the 50% he promised at COP26 in Glasgow. It is a win-win for all sides and for the American people, and shows that patience and hard work, and persistence in the face of adversity can bring results. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The outsize effect of a slowing economy on profits of Chinese companies, with higher interest expense on loans taken out for rapid expansion in the boom years, and the lower prices as a result of surplus capacity.

LyrArc Article Gist
On Monday August 8, 2010, the Dow Jones Industrial Averages went down by 634 points and closed below 11,000 points. This is not far from the 10,165 level of the DJIA on August 27, 2010. It was on August 27, 2010 that Fed chairman Ben Bernanke made the speech at the Kansas City Fed's Jackson Hole conference about the strategy for a QE II. Its about the time for this years Jackson Hole conference and the gains in the stock market are melting away. The DJIA closed at 12810 by April 29, 2011, then went below 11,000 by August 8, 2011. With higher inflation the Fed's options are limited.

LyrArc Article Gist
Professors Cole and Ohanian of the University of Pennsylvania and UCLA, provide a new interpretation of FDR's economic policies during the period 1932-1934 and the period 1937-1941, based on their research. This suggests conclusions different from that of Obama advisor, Christina Romer, and Fed chairman, Bernanke about that period. Changes in economic policies under the Roosevelt administration that helped bring wages in line with productivity, reduced strikes, and gradual elimination of the undistributed profits tax, improved incentives for business investment during 1938-1939. Cole and Ohanian, say that by 1941, before the U.S. entered the war, close to half of the increase in nonmilitary hours worked in the U.S. between 1939 and the peak of the war, had already been achieved. And this was primarily the result of the changes in FDR's policies in 1938. They say a similiar opportunity is presented by the proposals of the Bowles-Simpson commission on deficit reduction, by lowering the corporate income tax through simplification of the tax code and reducing or eliminating most tax expenditures. Improving the incentives for business to hire and invest through this and other steps is likely to do more for the economy than the steps tried so far since 2009....

LyrArc Article Gist
Apartment rents went up by 5% in the 12 months through April 2011, according to Axiometrics. Senior economists at Capital Economics say rental yields (the rent divided by the property price) is expected to go up in 2011 to the highest level in more than 20 years.

LyrArc Article Gist
Some figures on the foreclosure situation. 2.3 million Americans faced foreclosure proceedings in 2008, 81% increase over 2007. 860,000 properties were repossessed by lenders, more than double the 2007 level, according to RealtyTRac a foreclosure listing firm in Irvine,, California. Moody's Economy.com predicts the numbers to go up 18% in 2009 before slowing through 2011. That is 2.71 million foreclosures in 2009. To prevent the foreclosure levels from getting much worse as unemployment drops, the new administration plans to use upto $100 billion of the remaining $350 billion TARP funds to help homeowners. The 4 states hardest hit are Nevada, Arizona, California and Florida. More than 1.1 million properties there received foreclosure notices, almost half the total nationwide. The hardest hit areas are in California, with the metro areas worst hit in order are Stockton, California, Las Vegas, Nevada, Riverside and Bakersfield, California, and Phoenix. In December more than 303,000 properties nationwide received foreclosure notices, up 40% from year ago month, and 17% above November 2008. At 303,000 the yearly rate is 3.6 million foreclosures or higher for 2009, so the Moody's estimate for 2009 must take into account acceleration of steps to help homeowners with the new administration. Are the rather modest steps taken upto now helping? RealtyTrac analysts estimate that without a state law requiring lenders to give borrowers a 30 day warning before starting the foreclosure process, the foreclosures in California would be 10% higher. There are similiar state laws in Massachusetts and Maryland. Throughout 2008 few steps were taken by the Bush administration to slow foreclosures, even though Republican economists like Martin Feldstein repeatedly advocated this. See links to Feldstein and Sheila Bair of the FDIC who also advocated aggressive action, and providing the numbers to show that it was costlier for lenders to see borrowers go into foreclosure compared to reducing principal and interest payments significantly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The corporate share buybacks announced by U.S. companies in the last 3 months now exceed $200 billion, more than double than in 2017, according to a WSJ analysis. This includes Cisco, Wells Fargo, AbbVie, Amgen, Alphabet (Google). The surge in corporate buybacks started in December after the tax cut of the Trump administration cut U.S. taxes by $1.5 trillion over a decade, cutting the corporate tax rate for large companies from 35% to 21%. The tax cut also included a one time tax for repatriation of $2 trillion held by U.S. companies overseas. This WSJ analysis says there are questions whether the tax cut is working, whether it will encourage new investment, lead to companies increasing wages, or whether this will largely result in corporations returning money to investors with larger dividends and corporate buybacks. Morgan Stanley's analysis of earnings transcripts of companies in the S&P 500 show 44% of the companies say they will use some portion of the tax gains to make capital investments and increase wages, with 28% going in the opposite direction and using them to return money to shareholders. Experts caution that corporate buybacks do not always lead to the company's stock outperforming the stock market. The future of companies depends more on the capital investments and in human capital. There is a sense that workers wages have stagnated since the mortgage financial crisis in 2008, with the economic crisis, globalization and outsourcing, reduced alternatives for workers, geographic pressures in relocation, all pushing wages down.  This is being closely watched with articles on stagnation in wage growth this week in the NYT and WSJ, and earlier in the Economist magazine. Reports on the Trump administration tax cuts passed by a Republican Congress suggested a large tilt towards benefitting the highest income households. Problem with higher stock prices reaching the broader middle class are recognized in that one third of stocks are owned by overseas investors, and 84% of the remaining stocks are owned by the wealthiest 10%. Republicans have turned to bonuses typically of $1000 per person given by companies yet this amounts now to about a few billion dollars over an estimated 4 million Americans, says this WSJ analysis. This is not enough to justify a huge tax cut and raise the deficit by over a trillion over 10 years on the assumption that it would lead to higher wages or capital investment when about $200 billion goes to boosting stock prices. This comes at a time when the American middle class is not broadly invested in the stock market after the exit following the battering stock prices took during the 2008 financial crisis. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in The Indian Express shows that even though Subhas Chandra Bose differed with Mohandas Gandhi during the late 1930's, Bose had a deep respect and affection for Gandhi in mobilizing the Indian people for Swaraj. Bose's relationship with Nehru and Patel were of people at the same level and appeared to compete for attention compared to the relationship with Gandhi which was one of mentor and follower. In the end Bose's restlessness at British refusal to negotiate Swaraj and Gandhi's patience led to Bose actively resisting British rule in 1940.  Mohandas Gandhi had deep faith in the Bhagavad Gita and believed the lines in the Bhagavad Gita where it says- "Whenever, O descendent of Bharata, there is decline of Dharma, and rise of Adharma, then I embody Myself. For the protection of the good, for the destruction of the wicked, and for the establishment of Dharma, I come into being in every age." Gandhi wrote in his Discourses on the Bhagavad Gita on November 11, 1930- "God dwells in our hearts as the holy spirit within us, and when yearning for knowledge, like Arjuna, we take our spiritual difficulties to Him, and seek his guidance, seek refuge in Him, He is ever ready to instruct us." The other way in which Gandhi differed was in his deep insights and views of the British as a people that Bose lacked. Some of this came from his days in London and some of this from his days in South Africa working with and negotiating with the British. Mohandas Gandhi says in Hind Swaraj in 1910- "The English merchants were able to get a footing in India because we encouraged them. When our princes fought among themselves they sought the help of Company Bahadur. That corporation (British East India Company) was vested alike in commerce and war. It was unhampered by questions of morality. Its object was to increase its commerce and make money. It accepted our assistance, and increased the number of its warehouses. To protect the latter it employed an army which was utilized by us also. Is it not then useless for us to blame the British for what they did at that time? The Hindus and the Mahomedans were at daggers drawn. This too, gave the Company its opportunity, and thus we created the circumstances that gave the British control over India. Hence it is truer to say that we gave India to the British than India was lost. The causes that gave them India help them retain it. Some Englishmen say they took India and they hold India by the sword, both these statements are wrong. The sword is entirely useless for holding India. We alone keep them." Gandhi''s view of India was of a nation of shopkeepers, even citing Kruger of South Africa when he was asked if there was gold on the moon. Kruger said likely not, for if there was the British would have annexed it. By 1945 when Gen. Wavell, the Viceroy wrote back to London that he would require more army divisions to control India than Britain could afford, or the British people had the will to support or had commercial interests worth protecting after the war, the British moved up the year of their withdrawal. And began the negotiations with Gandhi for independent India.  Gandhi also says that in his reading of Vivekananda's writings the love that I had for my country became a thousand-fold. Gandhi looked to Vivekananda for inspiration in some of his ideas on Swaraj. Bose says Vivekananda's writings sent him into raptures yet saw Vivekananda "simple as a child" not realizing the spiritual strength Vivekananda had drawn from which overcomes all. As the Lord says in the Bhagavad Gita- "I am the Self, O Gudakesa, existent in the heart of all beings, I am the beginning, the middle, and also the end of all beings. Of the Adityas, I am Vishnu, of luminaries, the radiant Sun; of the winds I am Marici; of the asterisms, the moon."   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The apartment vacancy rate declined to 5.2% in fourth quarter 2011 from 6.6% in 2010, and down from 5.6% in the third quarter, according to Reis. The vacancy rate went up to 8.5% in 2009. Data from Reis shows rents went up in 71 of 82 markets it tracks. For the U.S. rents went up by an average 0.4% in the 4th quarter, to $1064 a month, increasing from $1026 in 2009. Rent growth for 2011 was 2%. Factors helping demand for apartment rentals are the reluctance of buyers to invest in a home when prices are declining in an uncertain economy, and fears of another downturn. Factors holding price increases down in New York are the declining jobs inthe financial services industry and the already high levels of rental prices- reaching $2876 a month. Demand in San Francisco and San Jose was higher and prices were up over 5% in 2011, with better properties raising rents by 10%.

LyrArc Article Gist
Being linked to the dollar emerging country economies see the effect on their economy of a reduction in interest rates by the Fed. This is clearly evident in the Gulf countries and Middle East where the link has produced a looser monetary policy in a booming economy and only increases inflation which is already high in many countries. China, India and Russia are seeing increasing inflation as their currrencies are linked to the dollar and though a revaluation of their currency can reduce price of imports and lower overall inflation this is not an easy thing to do because in the case of China it increases the price of goods it exports to the US at the very time the US is in a recession.

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial Board opinion piece in the WSJ gives exceptional insights into major issues facing Germany, the cost of electricity generated from renewables, failure to meet climate change emissions targets set by the government, and the difficulty of forming a new coalition government with conflicting goals of the Greens vs the CDU and the FDP.  By one estimate it cost households and business about $125 billion extra in higher electricity bills for 2000-2015 to subsidize renewable energy from solar and wind. Utilities are required to buy renewable at above market rates, especially since the energy revolution called Energiewende was launched by chancellor Merkel in 2010. German electricity prices are about 36 cents per kilowatt hour compared to 13 cents in America. The 2011 decision following the Fukushima disaster to phase out nuclear power by 2022 made the effort to meet renewables targets of 40% by 2020 compared to 1990 -exceeding the 20% for the EU- even harder. Germany sees a 30% target for 2020 as reachable.   Even though renewables can generate 50% of required energy supplies, only 30% of the supplies are utilized as the renewables are generated mostly in the north of the country and there is a lack of transmission lines to bring it to the industrial south. The dirty secret says the WSJ editorial board for the renewable story in Germany is that a lot of coal is used in dirty coal plants to meet electricity needs when wind and solar energy are not available. Cheaper coal not natural gas is preferred for such generation as daytime peak use that recoups more expensive gas cost is managed with renewables. Leading to the situation that Germany generates only 9% of energy from natural gas compared to 30% in the U.S.. The further Germany has gone in renewables has also led to the paradox of increased dependence on coal. Getting to the new Jamaica coalition being planned between the CDU and the FDP and the Greens. The problem is that the Greens want to see the 20 most polluting coal plants closed, the CDU and the FDP are willing to close only ten coal polluting plants. The WSJ's opinion is that voters chose the AfD right wing party with 13% of the vote because of the platform promise to shut down Merkel's Energiewende policy.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Bank of International Settlements warns that China's "credit to GDP gap" is 30.1. A figure of 10 normally is considered to be high and needs watching. The People's Daily carried an article presumably by president Xi Jinping warning about the consequences of the debt that had been growing "like a tree in the air." The debt to GDP ratio was at 255% at the end of 2015, and is up 107% since 2008 when the financial crisis led to a huge stimulus that has accelerated debt growth. The corporate debt is at 171% of GDP. The article in the People's Daily warned about reflexive stimulus every time growth slows and said that China cannot any longer "force economic growth by levering up." Cross border liabilities is one area of progress falling by a third to $698 billion, as companies cut debt quickly before the U.S. Federal Reserve raises rates. In the future China is more likely to roll over debt as Japan had done following its debt surge and bad debt with zombie companies, which would in turn lead to lower growth. In the past the government was able to absorb the growing debt because it was not as high as it is today, and the economy was growing rapidly. This is no longer the situation, the reason for alarm at the situation facing China. A spike in interest rates of 250 basis points is cited as one situation which could affect China adversely. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Zombrun describes the effect of low interest rates on savings for the bottom half of households in the U.S., the pressure to invest in stocks without the skills and experience of the better educated part of households in the top 20% of households by wealth and income. This resulted in a negative effect, a depletion of savings compared to an increase under a higher interest rates scenario with less pressure to take risks in a volatile stock market. This is the direct cost of the crises in stock and financial markets of 2000 caused by a internet bubble, and the larger crisis of 2008-2009 caused by the bubble in mortgages and housing. The secondary effects of the mortgage price bubble and faulty mortgage securities was in the millions of homeowners who went into foreclosure in 2009-2013, which further depleted wealth and savings of households in the bottom half lacking the experience and skills to navigate this type of housing market. The failure of the Obama administration to stem the foreclosures with practical steps which would have helped not hurt the banking sector, as suggested by FDIC's Sheila Bair and Harvard economist Martin Feldstein in many WSJ op-eds in 2010-2012, added to the erosion of savings and wealth of the bottom half. Minorities in particular were hit hard. A third effect is of communities across America that are feeling the effects of job migration to emerging markets such as China that has been underway as part of the globalization of the last three decades. A fourth effect in the rising cost of education, particularly since 2000, has reduced the opportunities for struggling working class people to enter the middle class and enjoy the higher incomes in precisely the very period when the divergence of incomes between less educated, less killed people and the more educated and better skilled people was taking place. The last two effects were neutral as part of the overall process of emergence of a globalized economy with a premium on more skills and education, requiring action by the government, universities and business for a concerted effort to mitigate in some places the negative effects and enhance in other places the positive effects. The first two effects were man made crises which required managing in constructive and positive ways for the entire American people, taking risks where necessary such as fears about the financial system if foreclosures did not go through. The risks of a long period of extremely low interest rates for savers and the middle as well as working class were poorly understood by the Fed since 2000. A similiar crisis is being faced in Europe with extremely low interest rates. Janet Yellen was only doing the honest thing by acknowledging how far and how different the situation is now compared to the period of three decades following 1945- a question not just of values cherished in America, also of the need for societies to advance through creation of wealth across all sectors of society or regress, as described by Smith in the Wealth of Nations....

LyrArc Article Gist
The $2 billion losses at Chase highlights the need for completing the Volcker Rule with language that prevents banks engaging in risky trading activities. Former FDIC chairman Sheila Bair says precise language is needed to clarify the defiinition of hedging after the losses by a single trader's complex hedging bet in London. Individual traders have too much authority in existing trading arrangements to make complicated bets in finanial markets. Large losses were incurred by Swiss bank UBS when an individual trader in London made risky bets in 2011, raising all sorts of questions about the bank's risk management systems.

LyrArc Article Gist
Transcripts released for the U.S. Federal Reserve's Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) 2006 meetings show Fed chairman Bernanke and then New York Fed president Geithner ignored the risks of a hard landing from the mortgage and housing bubble. Geithner even went so far as to say about retiring chairman Greenspan, who also ignored the risks from the bubble and set the tone during his long period as chairman at the Fed: "I'd like the record to show that I think you're pretty terrific, too...And thinking about the probabilities, I think the risk that we decide in the future that you're even better than we think is higher than the alternative." In evaluating the risks facing the U.S. economy in December 2006, at the height of the bubble, Geithner stated: "The current weakness in the economy still seems principally to stem from the direct effects of the slowdown in housing on construction activity... The softer than expected recent numbers don't argue in our view, for a substantial reassessment of the risks in the outlook." The Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, said at the first meeting in March 2006: " Strong fundamentals support a relatively soft landing in housing... I think we are unlikely to see growth being derailed by the housing market." When a Fed economist gave a presentation in March 2006 on the risks in Iceland, Bernanke said- "We'd like a full report on the Icelandic," at which point the rest of the group erupted with laughter. Iceland defaulted on its debts in 2008. Warnings about housing by Fed Governor Susan Bies were ignored by Bernanke and Geithner. Two highly leveraged Wall Street investment banks collapsed in 2008- Bear Stearns in March and Lehman in September- from the impact of the bursting of the bubble in housing and mortgages. When they collapsed these banks were leveraged at about 30 to 1, as most of the warning signs had been ignored by regulators including the Federal Reserve....

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ Editorial Board speaking for the business community traditional Republican groups finally takes up the election on issues of policy difference between Trump run Republican party and Harris run Democratic Party which it should have from Day One. The former president says something that has never happened in the last hundred years- policy will be decided after the election depending on what he decides to do. Cost of Living action is No 1 on voter priorities. "Drill, Baby Drill," is the whole Republican party platform for cost of living action. What is the Harris Democrats policy plan for cost of living action? WSJ says it is spending blowouts that caused inflation, the Green New Deal, entitlement expansions and student loan forgiveness.The real reason for the increase in cost of living comes from the overconcentration of supply chain by American business in China, on which every president Bush, Obama, Trump, did little or nothing. The lack of an effective vaccination program and ineffective vaccines in China by 2021 and 2022 led to the loss of the supplies from China leading to shortages for automobiles parts and other supplies and surge in prices in 2021-2023. Powell and the US central bank correctly raised rates but cautiously and waited for this to correct, president Biden brought manufacturing home through huge investments called the "spending blowout" that brought down the inflation from 9% to 3%. Some of that "spending blowout" went to chips and science to correct the errors of American Business and Reagan-Friedman theory of the Republican party that created this problem with a culture of utter  indifference to the ultimate costs of who makes what and where. The Inflation Reduction Act also tackled higher health and other costs paid by American workers and families, and invested in public services and in repairing the dilapidated crumbling American infrastructure. Are Republicans saying let the roads, bridges, airports, built in the 1940-1960's heyday of American industrialization as China and India's is now, let them crumble? What do the educated minds of the WSJ Board say about coal in China and India and their effects on their massive use multiple times that of US and EU in history, is it not damaging to the environment and why the Chinese realized the health in North China with coal winter use was worse than in South China cut their coal use. Are they saying lets burn fossil fuels and ignore, and if investment has to be made in solar who is going to do it? Is it Ok for Republicans thet we just import from China all our solar panels indefinitely into the future. "Green New Deal" is just a perjorative term, policy has to be made thoughtfully and without prejudice or bias of any sort for the best that we can do for the American people, ignoring so called "right" or "left." Doing what is right, what makes sense, is a lot harder.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Its incorrect to call a loan that has only slightly lower, same or higher monthly payment after modification, a loan modification. The intent is to make a loan affordable in monthly payments for the borrower, for it to be a meaningful modification. Says Tom Miller, the Attorney General of Iowa, "it should'nt be called modifications if people pay more or approximately the same." Many lenders and banks do not want to have to mark to market a whole set of loans of one type in one geographical region, as an accounting rule now requires, just because they have modified one loan of that type, because their reserves are severely depleted and most are already or nearly insolvent. So their way of discouraging loan modifications as a solution is to respond by saying that loans go into foreclosure even after modification, when the modification they are talking about is tacking on interest penalties and fees that accelerate the home into foreclosure in some cases, and in others by leaving payments higher or the same make foreclosure just as likely as before. Tom Miller, attorney general of Iowa, also says that " if you do real modifications, the default rate is significantly lower." Some mortgage companies say that default rates drop significantly, some to as low as 25%, when loan payments are reduced to the 30-40% of borrower income range, which is becoming the standard for a meaningful modification. Analyst Ron Dubitsky's research at Credit Suisse confirms this, showing lower payments reduced defaults to less than 50%. Research by Credit Suisse and Alan White, a law professor at Valparaiso University also show that at this time loan, 2 years into the foreclosure crisis, modification has mostly resulted in higher monthly payments. White says banks like Wells Fargo, a large servicer of loans, have done have modified few loans as apercentage of their delinquent mortgages. Sheila Bair and others have long advocated reducing loan payments to 30-40% of monthly income since early 2007, because foreclosure is costlier for banks than loan modification, but met resistance from the banks and lenders and their lobbying groups. The relevant question is that if the banks are misquided in pursuing this course, and its not in the interests of the banks or the country's economy- because accelerating foreclosures or not taking modification action in the middle of a huge wave of layoffs may result in a even bigger wave of foreclosures that threaten housing prices and effectively leave banks insolventleading to nationalization- then what purpose did all this serve except to exacerbate the crisis and increase the price tag of the government's and country's ultimate rescue of homeowners?...

LyrArc Article Gist
The startling truth about health "reforms," - they won't control spending, and without that the whole system of health care will rapidly become unaffordable and unsustainable. Obama's Council of Economic Advisors points out in new report that since 1975 annual health spending per person, adjusted for inflation has grown 2.1 percentage points faster than overall economic growth per person. At this rate health spending which was 5% of the GDP in 1960, and is 18% of GDP today, would grow to 40% of GDP in 2040. Medicare and Medicaid would increase from 6% of GDP now to 15% in 2040, or equal to three fourths of federal spending. Employer paid insurance premiums for families which grew 85% in inflation adjusted terms from 1996 to $11,941 in 2006, would increase to $25,200 by 2025 and $45,000 in 2040. This would force employers to reduce take home pay. Samuelson says the uncontrolled health spending is singlehandedly determining national priorities, reducing discretionary income, raising taxes, widening budget deficits and squeezing other government programs, while it is producing large amount of waste in medical spending. See the link to Prof. Tyler Cowen of George Mason University in NYT, 6/14/ 2009, who cites the habit of doctors to write many expensive tests as one of the prime culprits in the wasteful spending. And in the process it delivers higher cost for lower overall quality of health for the American people. This at a time when many European countries provide live examples of doing it in a better way- lower cost, better health. The serious problem with the Obama health reforms says Samuelson is that it talks about restraining spending but may end up increasing spending. Its talk about controlling spending he says is good intentions, but based more on hopeful thinking, public realtions and risks becoming cosmetic reform. Because to really control spending will require coming to grips with its fundamental cause- hospitals and doctors are paid mostly on a fee-for-service basis and reimbursed by insurance, private or governmental. Such a system encourages doctors and hospitals to provide more services, expensive tests, favors heavy use of expensive medical technologies to increase profits, and for patients to expect them. Samuelson puts his finger on the root of the problem - there is no incentive and every disincentive for all the players in this game , doctors, hospitals and patients to seek reform of this system. For doctors and hospitals the hope would be that this cosmetic "reform" would leave the system basically unchanged, and patients to continue with a lifestyle and expectations that do not not acknowledge the fact that a lot of healthcare does not come from spending but from preventative care, education, good eating and exercize habits, and healthy lifestyles. And the uninsured are no exception, they would simply start consuming the expensive care for lower quality of overall health like everyone else. With this kind of situation confronting us, the views of Samuelson, and Professor Tyler Cowen of George Mason University, as welll as a growing chorus of informed public opinion on this subject, is that insuring the uninsured is a good idea, but doing it within the bounds of the present system, can only increase the costs. And too much is at risk, to rely on what Samuelson calls a scattershot of measures to control costs made up by Congress such as "evidence -based guidelines," "electronic record-keeping," "bundled payments to hospitals, to give the illusion of progress that won't make a serious difference. A sweeping restructuring of health care is needed, that would overhaul "fee-for-service" payment and reduce the fragmentation of care. It will also need what has not even be touched on adequately in the debate. This is the massive need for education in the schools about nutrition, eating, exercize, healthy lifestyles. It would also require opinion leaders in each field from sports and other fields to lead by example and with constant public presence, the media, and companies to form a partnership with private institutions to change existing eating habits and lifestyles that encourage obesity, smoking, fast food eating habits, large portions in restaurants....

LyrArc Article Gist
It is not clear what this bazooka is. China's leaders are studying the economy carefully. Recent actions for stimulus were designed to offset weak performance of stock markets which have rebounded with Shanghai index up 11% into positive territory. Consumption spending is weak with worries about the safety net and propensity to save so that lower mortgage rates will mean households will pay of their mortgage first before increasing spending. Real estate construction is weak after bankruptcies in this sector. Some suggestions are for China to improve its safety net as in the US for working class people, low income families- to give them better medical insurance. And increase pensions of farmers, migrant workers, and low income families. They may still be inclined to save yet it is a move in the right direction as is happening in the US, and the trend worldwide is to reduce stark social divisions. China just lacks the resources for the kind of revival in the US that Harris has planned. As long as the US was frittering away its resources in foreign wars it had one hand tied behind it's back, as long as it did not invest these dollars going to wars overseas in the domestic economy it would languish and fall behind. It was in this sense Joe Biden who did the hard work that Trump after raising the alarm signals failed to do for lack of focus, and now it is Harris who is building the game plan for the kind of US that led the US into the twentieth century once before- optimism, imagination and hard work. ...