LyrArc Article Gist
J.P. Morgan Chase announces $2 billion in trading losses in May 2012. The Chief Investment Office unit made a bet with a trading strategy that CEO Jamie Dimon said had grown very complex. These losses could grow or shrink during the rest of the year.

LyrArc Article Gist
A report released by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows growing income inequality in 34 OECD countries. OECD Secretary General, Angel Gurria says: "The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries. This study dispels the assumptions that the benefits of economic growth will automatically trickle down to the disadvantaged and that the greater inequality fosters greater social mobility. Without a comprehensive strategy for inclusive growth, income inequality will continue to rise." Countries with the largest ratios between incomes at the top and the bottom, are the United States, Turkey and Israel, roughly 14 to 1. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have ratios of 6 to 1, with their ratios up from the 1980's. Gaps in Chile and Mexico are at 25 to 1. The study covers the period from 1980 to 2008. Overall inequality went up by 25% in the U.S. from 1980. In 2008 the top ten percent in the U.S. earned $114,000, 15 times than incomes for the bottom 10%. The top 1% of Americans saw incomes go up from 1980 to 2008, increasing from 8 percent to 18 percent. The richest 1% having $1.3 million in after tax income, and the lowest 20% making $17,700. The trends have accentuated an increase at the highest end- the top 1% and top 10% of the people- and a sharp decrease for the bottom 20%, which can be grasped from the $17,700 and the $1.3 million, both at extreme ends. The study attributes the rise in inequality to a growing gap in wages for highly skilled workers as technology advances, a surge in foreign direct investment and a looser regulatory regime that reduces employee protections leading to wage premiums for financial jobs and smaller incomes for workers at the bottom. Income groups and professions and sectors that had the greatest influence in government were able during this period to get the greatest protection for incomes, and able also to maximize their incomes. Incomes in the financial sector increased dramatically in the last decade, as a result of deregulation leading to higher risk and speculative activities in the financial sector, leading to the financial crisis of 2008-2009. Financial crises further depress incomes at the lower end. Similiar income inequality trends can be seen for India and China. China has a Ginni coefficient of 0.5 according to researchers at Beijing Normal University, up from 0.3 three decades ago- a Ginni Coefficient above 0.4 is considered destabilizing. Another factor that played a part in these countries is corruption and lobbying by special interests for favored treatment of sectors or groups. Austerity measures taken in Europe and in the U.S. are likely to widen income gaps by depressing the lower end income groups, creating social unrest, especially in the absence of efforts to stimulate growth....

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
Erskine Bowles, a former chief of staff under President Clinton, and Alan Simpson, former senator from Wyoming, say the U.S. Supercommittee members should remember that their personal priorities and the common good are not at odds. The authors of the Bowles-Simpson Presidents Commission for deficit reduction say there is growing discontent among voters with politicians who are obsessed with gaining partisan advantage. Using issues of national importance that require a common approach from all parties as a way to score political points will only backfire on these politicians. Personal priorities of members of Congress are now no longer at odds with the common good, they are converging. It is upto the Congress, members of both parties, to push back against the special interests and partisan politics, and show leadership on the deficit. The eurozone crisis has shown the dire consequences of any sluggishness or procrastination. The failure of the political class and leadership in Italy and Greece, and in other nations of the EU, has put the fate of these countries in the hands of markets, which have relentlessly pushed up the borrowing rates of Greece, Italy, Spain and other countries, and taken future direction out of the hands of politicians. Erskine and Bowles say don't wait for a fiscal crisis to take action because it will be disastrous economically and politically, with everyone as losers and no winners. Timidity is not an option, leadership is required to take action that is big and broad, tackling tax expenditures, entitlement expenditures, defense, across the board....

LyrArc Article Gist
Monica Langley provides an excellent account of how U.S. Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, is using the $100 billion from the Stimulus funds in the 2009 Recovery Act to implement the Common Core education program in U.S. states and districts. Common Core is about raising student math and reading scores and standards, and implementing teacher evaluations based on test scores to make teachers accountable. This is the one significant area in which the Obama administraton in the U.S. is likely to leave a valuable legacy. Republicans in Tennessee, including Lamar Alexander, have embraced the program, showing how Duncan is using his persuasion skills to speed up the implementation across political party lines in a period of strong partisan feelings about programs. When governors have hesitated, Duncan has gone straight to the school districts using the funding. Teachers union say the program is moving too fast as evaluations would affect teacher careers, and Duncan agreed to a one year reprieve on the consequences of new teacher evaluations for states applying for an extension. This makes Duncan uncomfortable. He says he has only three and a half years left and he is going tooo slow. Business leaders such as P&G CEO, Robert McDonald, say the only political party they have is their educated workforce. Duncan has persuaded 40 states in the U.S. to sign up for higher standards in reading and math. Democrats see the Duncan initiative as helping poorer schools, which is also important to reduce the increasing inequality in the U.S. Since 2008 high school graduation rates increased by 3 percentage points, with a 5 point gain for black students and a 7 point gain for Hispanic students. After $4 billon in new funding to low performing schools, so called "dropout factories," the number of such schools has declined to 1424 from 1746. Teachers unions are only gradually adjusting to the need for accountability in math and reading scores. Duncan's father was a psychology professor at the University of Chicago, and Duncan grew up in Chicago neighborhoods before attending Harvard and playing for the basketball team. Duncan tutored younger school students in the afternoon at his mother's after school program in a black neighborhood on the South Side of Chicago. In 2001 he was made the head of the Chicago public school system by Mayor Daley, where he took action to shut down poorly performing schools and reopening them with new staff. All the time he pushed for greater parental choice, charter schools, new teacher talent and using data to track school and student performance. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
O'Malley, Sanders, and Clinton emphasize the issue of wages, income disparities, rising inequality, and a shrinking middle class in the first Democratic debate of the U.S. 2016 presidential election. Clinton points out that "at the center of my campaign is how we're going to raise wages." Sanders says that "the middle class of this country for the last 40 years has been disappearing." Clinton points out her opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement because it does not help raise American wages. Clinton calls herself a progressive, but "a progressive who gets things done," and a moderate when it comes to getting things done. Sanders points to the "deep injustice, an economic injustice that threatens to tear our country apart, and it will not solve itself." Sanders points to the wealth concentration in the U.S. "with the top one tenth of 1 percent owning about as much as the bottom 90 percent, and 57% of all new income going to the top 1 percent." Clinton comes to Sanders defense on the issue saying "it's our job to rein in the excesses of capitalism so that it doesn't run amok and doesn't cause the kind of inequities we're seeing in our economic system."...