LyrArc Article Gist
Matthew Slaughter of the Tuck School, Dartmouth, says that the principle of comparitive advantage should determine what America exports and imports. Under comparitive advantage each country concentrates its energies on the particular goods and services that it does better than other countries. Free trade operates under the idea of comparitive advantage, but in practice it is quite different than its textbook economic counterpart. It is constantly changing as new countries or industries in different countries try to upset the existing pattern. Under a textbook example Airbus should not exist because Boeing was the most efficient manufacturer upto that time, and new entrants in a industry are nurtured for years with support from the governments of their countries. And in some situations the governments may exclude certain companies or industries from support such as Komatsu and construction equipment in postwar Japan, and Infosys and software outsourcing in India, and still survive and grow. Under comparitive advantage Japan should still be importing construction equipment from Caterpillar in the US, and there would be no serious competition in that industry. This would work to the detriment of the principle of competition in free trade which is just as important to free trade as the idea of comparitive advantage, with new entrants in an industry upsetting the old way of doing things and creating price/quality improvements. Slaughter simply pulls back off the shelf the old idea of comparitive advantage without seriously considering its real life aspects. Without dealing with trade distortion from currency manipulation, from the impact on jobs, without considering the continuing critical role of manufacturing in developed economies to provide the standards of living for a large middle class, and creating the kind of society that people of developed countries aspire to. He mentions GE's Immelt and the President's Council on Jobs, but makes no effort to engage Immelt 's statement in his recent op-ed article in the Washington Post, that the concept of transitioning from a export-oriented economic powerhouse to a services led consumption based economy could be done without loss of jobs, prosperity and prestige, was fundamentally wrong. He has only one line for manufacturing's role in America's economy. This line says knowledge intensive industries such as education and software are just as important as manufacturing, but fails to mention that manufacturing has received less attention in recent decades. In so doing he is discounting his own profession of concern for the high rate of joblessness in the U.S., and the need for a new focus on manufacturing in the U.S. to reverse that trend. By saying that imports are not a sign of failure but can raise standards of living, and leaving it at that, Slaughter does not acknowledge that consumer debt that US consumers have taken on in the process certainly affects future prospects for the US economy. And he makes no mention of the need for rebalancing the world economy, which is exactly how free trade should work ideally. Countries that have high imports export more to rebalance the world trading system, as currency valuations are allowed to adjust makig their exports more attractive. By not taking into account the realities of free trade, and the need for practical measures to rebalance without policy induced distortions by state run economies, Slaughter ignores the idea of free trade that works as it should and for all countries. The irony is that Immelt's own committment to jobs and competitiveness has been questioned in online blogs and most recently by an editorial in the Wall Street Journal on January 26, 2011, titled "The Misallocators." That editorial refers to the outsize role of GE Capital in GE's earnings during the past decade, and the lack of credibility of a focus on competitiveness and jobs that this creates for GE. It mentions the loss of 34,000 GE jobs in the US during the last decade. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Raising the minimum wage makes sense because it is low and has not caught up with inflation. In real terms it is lower today than in the 1960's, even though productivity has doubled, which is why it makes sense. Economic sudies show that it is not likely to reduce jobs.

LyrArc Article Gist
Morgenson cites Paul Diggle, property economist at Capital Economics in London, about why the $26 billion mortgage settlement between the state attorneys general, the U.S. government and the large U.S. banks is unlikely to make much difference to the foreclosure problems in the housing market. The agreement provides for reducing principal by $17 billion over 3 years for homeowners under water. Diggle points out that $17 billion is a drop compared to what is needed, because 11 million homeowners are now under water on their loans to the amount of $700 billion. The $17 billion is a mere 2.4% of the negative equity of $700 billion.

LyrArc Article Gist
Unemployment rate up from 8.1% to 8.5% , with 663,000 jobs lost in March, 2009, according to the Labor Department. The number of unemployed hits 13.2 million. Labor Dept data shows that between 423,000 to 9 million people were forced to work parttime for "economic reasons."

LyrArc Article Gist
The first significant action to help homeowners threatened with foreclosure comes from Sheila Bair, Chairman of the Federal Deposit insurance Corporation, one of the few people after Bernanke and Paulson who have shown initiative and foresight in the current crisis. Bernanke and Paulson had the foresight to open the Fed lending window to investment firms like Lehman Brothers and others but little has been done for homeowners to have significant impact. When interviewed on television in the days surrounding the Bear Stearns crisis Sheila has shown a good grasp of the issues and courage to take the initiative. This action is similiar in line to what Martin Feldstein has suggested on the pages of the WSJ for some time now. Martin wanted the Federal government to step in to loan homeowners the 20% of their outstanding loan and work towards bringing the homeowners payment to an affordable sum. According to Feldstein's calculation this would be about the right amount as a percentage of their loan so that homeowners rationally would not be better off walking away from the loan as the best possible decision under the circumstances. If the rational option was taken under a scenario that homeowners would get no direct help here is what would happen even though it may be intuitively read in one's mind. Homeowners would walk away in increasing numbers, it would become the popular option, one that has happened in prior housing crises in Colorado for example but this time it would be spread out across America, making it dangerous. This would launch a downward spiral or cycle in which the more homeowners walk way, or default the more house prices drop, and the more house prices drop a new group of homeowners who previously had enough equity in the house now because of the last price drop enter the category of homeowners who would be better off just walking away as a rational option. During the next wave this gorup would default and set the spiral or cycle moving again to lead to further price declines and another group of homeowners finding not enough equity in their homes to justify making payments and this group would walk away. At each turn of this spiral another cycle would be set in motion which is why it is so dangerous once it gets started, and the need for timely but also well thought out plan and good execution. This cycle is that of the economic system as a whole. As house prices drop at each turn of this cycle, it would have a serious impact on consumption for an already indebted American consumer. A drop in consumption means fewer product purchases by consumers, and the falling demand means factories would close as companies consolidate operations around the remaining factories to keep capacity utilization at reasonable levels, and this would mean layoffs and cuts in investment and other spending. The layoffs in turn would add another layer of homeowners leaving their homes through foreclosures adding to the pool of homeowners who have left their homes, and adding to the downward pressure on house prices. The pickup in inflation would bite at exactly the worst time as this would mean consumers would have to spend even more carefully. The price of oil which normally would respond to changes such as a fleet of cars with higher mileage on American roads would take a longer time to respond as this fleet change would take a few years to occur. It would respond to lower demand for oil in American factories but the considerable demand in Asia and other countries where the economies are likely to slow down but still be growing at rates to accomodate the large number of people who have not benefited from the market economy, would make the price decline in oil a gradual affair. The weaker dollar would add to the price of imports adding to the inflation. This bite from inflation would lower consumption even further in the economic cycle. And this would mean lower production in factories and even more layoffs at the next turn of the economic cycle. The Federal Reserve would find itself having difficult choices between maintaining confidence in the dollar, for which Capman and McKinnon argue on the pages of the WSJ recently and lowering rates but not achieving much in terms of stimulating either consumption or investment as this would take time to work itself out and all the Fed could achieve by its interest rate making tool is to buy time to weather these adjustments in an orderly manner. There is almost a consensus among experts that interest rate reductions in the current climate of inflationary movements in prices and the current currency exchange rates moving towards a loss of confidence in the dollar is something to be done very carefully and each action taken only with careful understanding of the possible consequences. A look at the proposal itsel shows that it gets around the whole issue of moral hazard by having the cost paid for in this manner. The mortgage investors will pay for the 5 years of interest on the 20% of the loan the government provides. The homeowner takes over after that. The mortgage investors cannot add deferred interest, prepayment penalties or other ways to make the homeowner pay some of the interest charges. And the homeowners payment has to be afforadable so mortgage investors have to show that the payment is not more than 35% of income of the homeownercalled the debt to income ratio (DTI). And only homeowners with mortgage payments above 40% DTI are eligible. And the government would raise the money needed through a $50 billion offering. To show there is no moral hazard that is the government bailing out any of the parties involved, the government will get back all of its money or intends to do so, the government will have the first rights to the money should a home foreclose and before anybody else is paid. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Bair gets credit for anticipating the banking crisis and gets credit from people in the Bush Administration like Robert Steel Undersecretary at Treasury till recently for a comprehensive approach to the banking and credit and mortgage crisis. Steel says that the Bush administration first relied on a case by case approach and only later came around to Sheila Bair's comprehensive approach which also underpins the recent legislation passed by Congress to tackle the mortgage crisis. She has advocated better terms for borrowers as the best approach for lenders and borrowers and the banks and for the economy which has not been favored by the banking industry and lenders aseach group followed its own vested interest seeing only the immediate short run and failing to grasp the full extent of the crisis. Sheila Bair has taught public policy at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and also worked for the Bush administration at Treasury and in other capacities till her appointment to lead the FDIC. She also oversees the IndyMac bank as the FDIC took over that failed bank recently. She has over 100 banks at risk on her watch list and sees more fialures of banks ahead and the worst of the credit crisis still ahead of us when she says in this interview that " we have not seen the trough of the credit cycle yet", and referring to the hard headed work with a lot of work and not enough staff of examiners that " its going to be a slog to work through this."...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Sept 2012 Census Bureau report shows the median income of a typical U.S. family declined or was flat in almost all states in 2011. Median household income declined in Nevada by 6%, in California by 3.8%. In Arizona and Florida incomes declined by 2.9%. For the U.S. median income declined by 1.3% to $50,502 in 2011. Poverty continues to increase, with California showing 335,760 people falling into annual income levels below $23,021 for a family of four in 2011, giving the state a 16.6% poverty rate.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama in his speech at Georgetown, April 13, 2009, describes the thinking behind the decisions made in the first 12 weeks of his administration- why the actions are not aggressive and overreaching as some critics say, and why they are not timid as other critics have said. This was not a typical downturn of the business cycle, but a perfect storm arising from irresponsibility and poor decisionmaking in Washington, Wall Street and Main Street- in effect several crises colliding for something like an explosion, if not dealt with at once, and with strong action. He says "the key to dealing with our deficit and debt is to get a handle on out-of-control health care costs, not to stand idly by as the economy goes into free fall." The recognition that the crisis itself brings with it new possibilities, the opportunity for coming to grips with and forging a good solution to health care, energy and education issues that were neglected while Wall Street directed investments to areas other than investment in building for the future. To the critics like Krugman, Rosenfeld and others who say that the takeover of insolvent banks should be done quickly before the situation worsens, he says it is not because of any ideological or political judgement he has made about government involvement in banks, but because it is more likely to undermine than create confidence at this point. He goes on step by step, through the process of decisionmaking, first to step in and boost spending vigorously, second to get lending flowing again to businesses and families, strengthening the non-bank credit market for consumer purchases and loans, the housing plan, the auto plan, and the work at the G-20. Then President Obama goes on to project his vision and the road to getting there. The five pillars he sees for the future are: redirecting Wall Street and banking to constructive investments for the future, investments in education, investments in renewable energy and technology to create new industries and new jobs, investments in health care to cut costs for businesses and families, and new savings in the federal budget to bring down the deficit. Obama says he will look for savings line by line in every corner of the budget, and has already identified two trillion dollars in deficit reductions over the next decade. And the goal is to reduce discretionary spending for domestic programs as share of the economy by more than 10% over the next decade. Procurement reform will greatly reduce no-bid contracts and save $40 billion. Secretary Gates is attacking th problem of hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and cost overruns that have bloated the defense budget, without adding to the nation's safety. And education programs that don't work will be removed, and waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare program will be controlled. Finally, Mr Obama points to the nation's political system as one more reason we are in this perfect storm- "a fundamental weakness in our political system." He cites the putting off hard decisions for another day, scoring political points instead of rolling up up sleeves to solve real problems, an impatience that is only worsened by the 24 hour news cycle, and a short attention span that focusses on the immediate results and on poll numbers. And there is too much responding to the "tempest of the moment until the furor has died away and the media coverage has moved on, instead of confronting the major challenges that will shape our future in a sustained and focussed way." After these 12 weeks President Obama says, for the first time there are glimmers of hope, and way off in the distance can be seen a vision of America's future that is far different than its troubled past. And citing the parable in the Sermon on the Mount about that "house built on a rock", he sees America's house built on a rock, a house for which we use this moment to lay a new foundation, come together and begin the hard work of rebuilding, persisting and persevering in the face of disappointments and setbacks that surely lie ahead. Then he has no doubt "that this house will stand and the dreams of our founders will live on in our time." Its a remarkable speech in its directness, its simplicity in approaching the subject, and its borrowing from the Bible for that story of that house built on a rock, and its Lincolnesque reference to the house that will stand. And more than a speech, it describes a vision, and the set of actions and steps taken and to be taken to get there. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China and India pass Mexico as immigration to the U.S. from Mexico declines rapidly, as a result of an improving Mexican economy, the 2008-2011 recession in the U.S. with sharp drop in jobs for construction, lower birthrates, and stricter U.S. law enforcement at the U.S. border with Mexico. Researchers using the American Community Survey of the U.S. Census Bureau found immigration from China increased to 147,000 from China, 129,000 from India, as it declined to 125,000 from Mexico, for 2013. This Survey counts a person as an immigrant for a particular year who says he was living abroad previously. Mexico shows a decline from 400,000 in 2000, with steady decline for every year after 2005. In 2000 India and China were at about 75,000, and did not cross the 100,000 mark till 2007. Other Asian countries are also at the top including S. Korea, Philippines and Japan. William Frey documents this surge in diversity in the U.S., -which is supplemented by now common intermarraige between young people from different countries of origin- in his book "Diversity Explosion."...

LyrArc Article Gist
How will countries like India generate jobs when technology enables manufacturing and other activity to do work with fewer and fewer people. Even Hon Hai in China is shifting work to robots. Technological progress is leaving more people unemployed and widening income gaps with the benefits going to a few people, says the Economist in this research based essay. It will require carefully managed governance to invest in infrastructure, raise skills of less skilled workers through education, and wage subsidies for those left behind to ensure our current system works in the future.

LyrArc Article Gist
Wallsten describes the tense and now frayed relationship between Obama and immigration groups and the way this has evolved from idealism to frustration to mere coexistence amid loss of faith. Obama's frustration expressed in words such as "I am not a king." And the immigration groups voicing their concerns about Obama's loss of credibility, as minorities especially Hispanics have fared poorly during his adminsitration, hit by rising deportations, foreclosures and the impact of high unemployment in construction and other sectors.

LyrArc Article Gist
A move by the Obama administration to reenergize its Hispanic base with action on immigration three months before the U.S. presidential election of 2012. A new policy issued as a directive by President Obama allows one million young illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. A 16 page guideline issued by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services states that applicants have to show they lived in the U.S. for five years and pay a $465 fee. The policy applies to people in the ages of 15 to 30, applicants must show they completed high school, or were honorably discharged from the U.S. military. The program will offer a two year renewable expemption from deportation and work permit to people coming to the U.S. as children. President Reagan was the last president who issued a directive of this type offering amnesty in 1986 to 3 million illegal immigrants. The Obama administration says this will help conserve enforcement resources are not spent on low priority cases of young people who came to the U.S. as children, as there are an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. The Dream Act legislation to legalize undocumented young people is stuck in Congress with no agreement on how to move forward. The states and cities where people mainly from Latin America and Asia would benefit are- California with 400,000 who could benefit, Texas with 225,000, and New York City with 55,000....

LyrArc Article Gist
As Mayor Bloomberg nears the end of his third term as Mayor of New York City, 48% in a recent poll by the New York Times say they approve of his job performance, 39% disapprove.

LyrArc Article Gist
Francois Hollande is elected French president. Greek voters vote against the austerity measures by giving a majority of the votes to parties on the far right and far left.