LyrArc Article Gist
Urban renewal in Detroit, Michigan, at one time the fourth largest city in the U.S., which was hit hard by the decline in jobs in the auto industry.

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Reich, a former Labor Secretary, says that instead of "rebalancing" with Chinese consumers buying more American goods and China exporting less to the USA, things are headed in the opposite direction. Why? Because at the macroeconomic level China is devoting more of its country's resources to production capacity. Chinese consumers are taking home a smaller proportion of the total economy. In 2008 personal consumption amounted to 35% of the total economy, whereas in 1998 it was 50%. Capital investment in the same 10 years went up 35% to 44%. Chinese continue to save and these savings are going into infrastructure and manufacturing capacity. There is even a social twist to the savings, with fewer young Chinese women than men parents with boys have to compete in the marraige market and save assets for this. Households are also saving to support more elderly people as population is aging quickly with population policies. All this means that with all the talk (see links to Niall Ferguson and Krugman), the situation will likely roll on in this manner till things reach an impasse, or there is a strong political backlash in the USA which leads to stronger trade actions by the government, or there is a crisis. Meanwhile the trade deficit is headed higher and Chinese foreign reserves will go far above the current $2.3 trillion. And the Europeans will also be getting restless with their trade imbalance, as the euro edges higher and the yuan remians pegged to the dollar, leading to trade distortions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Figures from the European Commission and the ECB show that the ECB's balance sheet reached 32% of eurozone GDP in March 2012. Comparable figures for the U.S. Federal Reserve for March 2012 are 19%, Bank of England 21% and the Bank of Japan 30%. The ECB's balance sheet in March 2012 is at 3.023 trillion euros. ECB president Mario Draghi says this is high but "it will be managed very well."

LyrArc Article Gist
Brenner of McGill University and Fridson of S&P say the Bernanke Federal Reserve in the U.S. is doing what President Truman and Treasury Secretary Snyder did in the war and postwar years- paying down the U.S. debt as cheaply as possible by inflating the money supply. There are no new monetary insights here, and even though the policy is maintained outwardly as one to promote economic growth and employment, the main focus is to keep the cost of paying down the debt as cheaply as possible with low rates. This hurts savers and retirees earning very little on savings. They cite Bernanke's writings that show he is imitating the policy of the war years when the U.S. held down interest rates and succeeded in doing this for a decade.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Federal Reserve Open Market Commitee takes a position of pause and wait as it decides in March 2012 not to take any new further bond buying stimulus measures. There is uncertainty in equity markets about the effect this will have on equity prices. During the last two pauses in 2010 and 2011 the equity markets experienced downturns after withdrawal of bond buying measures by the Fed, leading to Fed action with QE 1 and QE 2 followed by a surge in equity prices and the S&P at over 1400. At the peak during the 2001 and 2008 dot-com and housing propelled booms the S&P reached over 1500. At this rate the curve for U.S. equity prices for the 2008-2012 period resembles a repeat of a narrow steep V shaped curve with only a 7% climb in April 2012 needed to reach the 1500 point in the S&P 500 average at which the previous two booms in prices ended up in a bust. John Taylor, Stanford economist, in a separate op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on March 29, 2012, called for a change in the mandate of the U.S. Federal Reserve for a more rule based policy because of the dangers of repeated boom and bust periods in the U.S. economy as a result of ultra loose monetary policies. The problem at this point in April 2012 is that profits of companies are not expected by analysts to come in strongly in the second quarter, with a slightly improving unemployment picture, expected upward pressures on oil prices from the Iranian situation, eurozone debt problems in Spain and Italy, and slowing growth in China, India and Brazil. These fundamentals do not support an S&P at the levels seen during the height of the last two booms of 2000-2001 and 2007-2008....

LyrArc Article Gist
Underreporting of coronavirus cases in China poses risks for other nations in not giving them a sense of the magnitude and severity of coronavirus. This leads to a false sense of security- in Japan, Sweden and other countries, much delayed action and a sense of exceptionalism that we can ride this thing through like an ordinary virus, In the U.S. and Italy, Spain, UK and Germany, loss of crucial weeks before taking action. Looking to the future this poses new risks as it still leaves people without a sense of how long to continue lockdowns.  The pandemic poses huge risks for Asia and Latin America because of poverty, crowded conditions and sanitation levels. The early action by prime minister Modi was a huge step in the right direction before coronavirus spread could damage the economy and people- as Mr. Modi said if not done right such as with a 21 day lockdown this could set India back by 21 years. It had value in that it alerted other countries such as Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Pakistan to take strong action early. As the WSJ says here in this essay by what is important for China and all other countries reporting on coronavirus is that this reporting is vital only because it can save many other countries from making costly mistakes. Which is why the direct doctor to doctor contact between Chinese doctors and American doctors is an encouraging right step, says WSJ.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Wagoner became President at age 45, CEO at age 48. So you would think that young blood is coming in to GM, but that does not appear to be the case. At the Board level most of the Board members like George Fisher formerly of Motorola, have been around for a long time, and there does not appear to be new blood that would bring in fresh thinking. And serious decisions about investment in developing new technologies to develop fuel efficient cars, like hybrid technologies, electric and other alternative technologies, diesel technology, have been held up for years at General Motors. The way decisions are made on such issues with Board members voicing their opinions more than wrestling seriously with the issues, shows serious shortcomings of management and the Board. At key points of decision making the CEO and key members of his team had not prepared carefully, and Board members did not come up with serious thinking on the problems facing GM. It, appears that the investment in technologies to develop fuel efficient cars much earlier, long before they were finally being addressed in 2006, was a failure of Wagoner's management and of the Board. Management discussed this but continued to be mired in old ways of thinking that continuing with the status quo- cars with existing low fuel efficiency- would not expose GM to illwinds as preferences changed. Its clear from the description here of discussions within GM that the old thinking is quite entrenched at GM, and Wagoner just was not the kind of person who could vigorously articulate a new vision for GM. A couple of things are noteworthy in this account of management indecision at GM. When fuel prices began hurting sales of SUV's and large vehicles in 2005, efforts to get a decision on investments in new technologies for fuel efficiency for the whole product lineup failed at the Board level in an April 2005 meeting. One Board member saying at that meeting, that" do we want to lose another billion dollars in developing new technology for fuel efficient cars." And no one calling him to account that the remark still did not address the point that GM had to respond to the changing market and world oil dynamics, and not just hope for the best, as GM had aggressive competitors, and faced continually diminishing role in the market place for the entire decade of the 1990's. While April 2005 was already at the tail end of the previous era of gas guzzling cars and a decision then would still not have shown a forward looking vision of things, it was not until 10 months later that a decision was reached. And this almost from necessity, as oil prices jumped in 2006 after hurricane Katrina, and by this time President Bush was also calling for higher mandated fuel efficiency standards. The other noteworthy point here is that by making the changes so late in the game, GM had to compress the development cycle for new and some cases unknown technologies into short time frames. If the ingenuity of its engineers comes to its rescue it still faces another hurdle that of cost, because the technologies have to be perfected and improved, so that the costs are low enough for customers, and importantly comparable with what it is costing competitors to make the same fuel efficient technology engine or other part. Which is why one Honda executive remarked, "GM like everyone else is serious about this, because they have to be, but how many of their hybrids and how many Volts will they sell? Their technology is very expensive." Even if GM develops the Volt electric car by 2010, GM will need a whole range of fuel efficient technolgies to power its large product lineup. Its just to hard to avoid the conclusion that this is going to prove costly. All the dragging of feet and indecision, and failure to prepare GM for a different world in case something drastically different from what was expected happened, will prove very costly especially considering how aggressive and well financed some of the Japanese and German competitors are. It also hard to avoid the conclusion that there is too much bureaucracy at the large auto companies, and getting new blood and new ideas and fresh thinking is tough in a place where everybody agrees with everybody else, and there is uniformity of thinking. This makes it difficult for any original or wayward types to thrive. These bureaucracies look up to the top for direction. Initiative is discouraged on one hand, and at the same time even if a new direction is taken at the top. a lot of resistance can be expected to implementing it throughout the company without persistent persuasion and reminder of new facts and realities. This is true for both Wagoner and Mullaly as they face the skepticism of subordinates to new direction. Mullaly for instance has to remind his managers that large vehicles are only a small percentage of the entire global market, and if Toyota is making money in small cars so can Ford. See the link to this. Is Toyota immune from bureaucracy type behaviour throughout the company? Not really, Toyota's chairman emeritus came out of retirement in fact and went out of the way to caution its CEO and management about their complacency a year or so before. Shoichiro Toyoda personally intervened to caution against too much expansion in the US and climbing wage costs, and other risks they perceived such as the company managers in the USA appearing to be resting on their laurels. See the link to this. A lot of discussion is probably going on within these companies about the present state of affairs, and considerable anxiety for what the future will bring. It may be useful to ask the question is there something that makes it difficult for once successful organizations -now with entrenched bureaucracy and set ways -to put forward leaders with vision and foresight, till it becomes very late? The vision and foresight about where their markets and the world is heading, and the ability to move their organizations in that direction. Or to break out of old patterns of behaviour and thinking....

LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Mulally focussed attention on Ford brands such as the Taurus, and the Fusion, to improve quality and fuel efficiency. To do this he sold brands acquired earlier- Land Rover to Tata Motors and Volvo to Geely. Under his management Ford pushed ahead with globalized product development and building a presence in the small car market. Ford still has weakness in the European and Asian markets. In Europe a large number of manufacturers are competing for a slow growing market and price competition has cut into profits. In Asia, Ford was slow to enter the Chinese market. As a result its sales in China lag far behind VW and GM, with only 2.7% market share. Mullaly is investing $1.5 billion on new factories in China, including two assembly plants and an engine plant. One of the plants in the southern city of Chongquing will produce an SUV and a luxury car. Mulally wants to see 70% of Ford's growth in this decade from Asia. The other problem facing Mulally is reviving the Lincoln brand which has seen a sales decline of 63% since 1990. Ford has hired a designer who worked on the Cadillac to redo the Lincoln's design. Mulally plans to cut the 900 Lincoln dealers to 600, to reduce the price competition for smaller sales volume. He is asking the remaining dealers to invest $2 million for new showrooms that will compete with Lexus in their look and feel. Asessing what has been achieved at Ford so far one sees the progress in pushing up quality. Ford now ranks above Toyota in J.D. Power quality surveys with its cars getting higher resale prices than some Toyota models. Ford cars are also being well received by new car buyers with market share up for the second consecutive year. This would have been unthinkable only a few years ago. Also significant is how Ford under Mulally's direction managed to make good use of the $23 billion loan secured in 2006, avoiding bankruptcy and turning the corner to profitable operations. Ford earned $6.6 billion in 2010, after losing $30 billion from 2006 to 2008. Ford's challenges going forward are how to sustain profitable growth, manage $19.1 billion in debt and a junk-bond credit rating, and maintain the momentum without reverting to a dependence solely on SUV's and larger vehicles for profits. Chairman Bill Ford is forthright about Ford's history of wasting opportunities during the good times- of "losing the plot in the good times." Mulally makes the same assessment at a November town hall meeting of 200 employees - Ford is good at crisis managment he says but then "forgets why we're here." For Mulally a bit of inspiration from Heny Ford himself counts, this being a poster from 1925 that hangs on the office walls, a Saturday Evening Post cover with the slogan: "Opening the highways to all mankind." Mullaly says looking at this makes him cry....

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman highlights the importance of an interview with President Obama by Atlantic magazine's Jeffrey Goldberg. In this interview Obama gives a thoughtful understanding of what it means if Iran acquires nuclear weapons. The greatest danger is in nuclear proliferation. Obama brings to this an understanding of this issue from the time he focussed on this issue as a student at Columbia University, when he described the risks of nuclear proliferation in the Columbia student newspaper. There is the risk of an escalation in the development of nuclear weapons in the Middle East first, and then elsewhere. And there is the risk that nuclear weapons fall into the wrong hands. The situation would create problems like that faced in North Korea or in the India-Pakistan region, but increased by many times the current dangers. The entire nuclear de-proliferation effort and the efforts to de-nuclearize weapons stockpiles that took decades to accomplish with the Soviet Union could come undone- and it would then be necessary for all countries to invest in advanced technologies for defending against nuclear weapons, setting in motion another arms race. The current situation reminds people that the issues raised by nuclear weapons development will always be with us, and require a worldwide concerted effort, at official and public level, bringing in scientists, public opinion worldwide, and educating the public in all countries of the larger danger to mankind. The issues need to be put in the right context beyond nations and politics, beyond international conflicts and competing interests or ideologies, including Israel, Iran and any other nation looking for nuclear weapons as a solution for conflicts. Shultz, Perry, Kissinger and Nunn after a series of meetings at the Hoover Institution called for the update of the old policies of nuclear deterrance based on mutually assured destruction used with the Soviet Union, to reflect the new threat of terrorism- in an op-ed NYT 3/7/2011. The focus of this effort is on a new Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, with all nations giving up nuclear material to an international nuclear material bank. Senator Obama strongly supported the efforts of Senators Lugar and Nunn in de-proliferation work after the collapse of the Soviet Union and joined the senators on one of their trips- Broad and Sanger, NYT, 7/5/2009. A major effort to reduce NATO, U.S. and Soviet nuclear weapons is called for to lead by example, providing a framework for other means of settling regional conflicts and educating public opinion in these countries, and moving forward the negotiating of the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. In many ways public opinion will have to lead the way in all countries as governments can lag behind- the efforts of Sam Nunn and Dick Lugar and the many unnamed people in the Soviet Union who aided their efforts show the importance of this....

LyrArc Article Gist
Jurgen Kroger, is the chief negotiator for the European Commission, and Poul Thomsen, heads the IMF negotiating team, for the 78 billion euros in loans extended to Portugal under a bailout agreement. Kroger offered his views on the agreement in Lisbon. Kroger said he was convinced that the program gives Portugal the means to boost growth and jobs, as it builds a sustainable and competitive economy. Two thirds of the loans come from the EU at an interest rate that is yet to be set. The yield on Portugal's 10 year bonds keeps rising and is now at 10.20%. The IMF will provide one third of the funds. The IMF's Thomsen said the issue of interest rates was addressed by arranging for two thirds of the loan package money coming in the first of the three years of the program. What this does is to take Portugal out of the markets for medium and long term debt for a "little over two years" he said and gives Portugal the "breathing space" it needs to restore credibility before going to the financial markets. The fear expressed by analysts is that the tough austerity measures in the programs of the EU and IMF can cause the economies of these countries to worsen, making it even harder to repay the much larger debts when the loan package money is added to the original debt. The IMF and the EU negotiators had to create a credible program for recovery in the light of these facts. Already Portugal's finance minister is predicting a contraction in the Portuguese economy of 2% in 2011, and 2% in 2012. The negotiators appear to have taken this into account in setting interest rates. Portugal will pay the IMF an interest rate of 3.25% for the first 3 years, with the rate going to 4.25 in the fourth year. By comparison Greece's loans are for seven years with an average interest rate of 4.2%. Ireland's seven year loans carry an interest rate of 5.8%, which it is working to renegotiate. To give Portugal more breathing space the terms of the loans set a slower reduction in the budget deficit than originally planned. Portugal gets to cut its budget deficit to 5.9% of GDP in 2011, and 4.5% of GDP in 2012. The 3% target is set for 2013, one year later. Economists such as Carl Weinberg of High Frequency Economics, say the loan package will only increase Portugal's debt and lead to a larger default later on when the debt amount owed is larger. The debt restructuring solution is being actively debated in the EU, including the risks that European banks would take large hits. Negotiators are also mindful of keeping any negative impact on Spain as low as possible. As Portugal's financing costs have risen, Spain's have risen also. Spain offered higher rates to sell 3.4 billion euros of five year bonds on May 5, with the average yield on Spain's bond sale rising to 4.55%, up from 4.39% on March 3. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ilan Berman, vice president of the Foreign Policy Council in Washington D.C., cites former finance minister Alexei Kudrin about capital flight from Russia reaching as high as $160 billion in 2014. This is a result of Russian policies in Ukraine that are creating a high degree of uncertainty and investor fears about the Russian economy. The result Kudrin says would be a stagnating economy. This follows the emerging market crisis in the beginning of 2014, which hit Turkey, Argentina, and Brazil. Kudrin is respected for his efforts to strengthen Russia's finances in Putin's first term in office, and left the administration over disagreement with prime minister Medvedev on damage to finances from higher defense spending. This suggests Putin and Medvedev in their first terms as president conducted more prudent policies for the economy than they are doing in Putin's second term. A certain recklessness seems to have crept in as many respected advisors from that period have left over differences in policy, including how protests and the opposition's views should be handled. This includes Medvedev's early efforts after elections for dialogue with the opposition parties which were set aside by Putin. The danger with having a Bolivarist class of tycoons as in Venezuela and some developing countries, instead of wiser heads around him for Putin, is that he will lose the advice and counsel he so badly needs to conduct policies without letting emotions getting the better of a sound judgement. A large foreign exchange reserve is a buffer for Russia, but this needs to be used to diversify the economy away from dependence on oil and commodities by investing in technology industries to create jobs in other fields, and not wasted in higher defense spending and fighting investor sentiment for the value of the ruble. It also shows that there is an inherent value in having a "loyal opposition" and "shadow cabinet," and these institutions were not invented over centuries of practice in government without a reason, in that they actually help the governing administration pursue prudent policy without arbitrary actions. The irony is that the very fears of 1998 repeating itself with the "chaos" of western style democracy and politics and manipulation by oligarchs- a Putin complaint- is reversing the gains made by Russia since then, with another set of tycoons and vested interests in place. Russians, like the Germans can learn to make democracy work without a centuries long history of democratic traditions, elections and free media. Czarist traditions can be overcome just as the Prussian traditions were overcome, and Russians can come up with their own Wily Brandts and Gaucks, leaving behind the old history of suppressing contrary opinions. For this to happen Russians including Mr. Putin need to leave their own fears behind, and trust the Russian people for the right instincts and values and maturity of judgement, just as the Germans have done and succeeded. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Modi's success in tackling problems of electricity development in Gujarat state and the model for India, as a new Modi administration is elected for India in 2014. Other areas that are the focus for development include high speed rail and transportation, other infrastructure development, creating new jobs in manufacturing. Modi made three trips to China in the last decade as a four term chief minister of Gujarat state (similiar to a governor of a U.S. state), and has adopted a China type focus on infrastructure development and manufacturing for the western state of Gujarat, which was part of the old Bombay state in British times. Mumbai, the new name for the old British settlement of Bombay on the west coast, is about 300 miles south of the major Gujarat city of Ahmedabad, at one time a major textile manufacturing center. Mumbai and commercial minded people from Gujarat occupy a role similiar to Shanghai in India's economic development. Under British times trading minded Gujaratis settled on the east and southern coast of Africa, in the Persian Gulf, with retail businesses. Of India's two largest companies the Reliance Group made its early start in textiles in Gujarat in the seventies, set up by a young emigrant who returned from the Persian Gulf. The Tata Group which owns Land Rover was set up by a Parsi immigrant community in Gujarat. Its founder Jamshedji Tata set up India's steel industry under the British at the turn of the century. The Parsis settled in Navsari, Gujarat, immigrating from Iran and other parts of the Persian Gulf centuries ago. When the media talks of Modi's origins as a tea seller's son, one has to take this in the context of the origins of people such as Reliance founder Ambani who was the son of a schoolteacher from a rural village in Gujarat. With about a 1000 mile coastline facing the Persian Gulf, Gujarat has been known to engage in the textile trade long before the arrival of the Portuguese and the British in the 1600's, and before the Muslim period from the 1300's. Many Gujaratis settled in Mumbai and are a key part of the commercial, financial center in the city. Just as Britain with its commercial centre of London evolved over centuries with commerce affecting attitudes towards democracy, free media and capitalism compared to more feudal France, Gujarat and Mumbai has evolved in a similiar manner compared to other states in the north of India. With all the media infomation and misinformation on Modi's mishandling of communal riots little has been said of the unique position of Gujarat and Gujaratis in the industrial development and modernization of India. Compared to other parts of India historically there is a greater degree of tolerance in Gujarat for other communities, similiar to Britain's compared to France and Spain, because of this commercial outward looking orientation for new ideas. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Olivier Blanchard, chief economist of the IMF says that as government borrowing around the world surges, interest rates will go up. Governments borrow by selling bonds to investors, and to attract investors the government competes with stock and corporate bond markets for investor's money, leading to rising yields for investors. As the confidence has returned to corporate bond markets this is already happening. From the end of 2008. the yield on the benchmark 10 year Treasury note has increased by one and ahalf percentage points, rising to 3.54% from 2%, the sharpest upward movement in 15 years. In Germany the yield on German 10 year bonds has also risen, rising to 3.57% from 2.93%. Similiarly British bond yields have risen to 3.78% from 3.41%. Congressional Budget Office estimates are that net government debt for the USA will rise to 65% of GDP at the end of fiscal 2010, from 41% at the end of fiscal 2008. In 2009 and 2010 the US government will sell $5 trillion in new debt, according to Citigroup. A decade from now the government's outstanding debt could equal 82% of GDP, or about $17 trillion. Every one point rise in interest rates costs the Treasury $50 billion annually over a few years, and Kenneth Rogoff estimates that this could reach $170 billion annually if the average yield on 10 year Treasury note goes up to 4.7%, as the Congressional Budget Office estimates. This will dampen the effects of stimulus spending. It is a big issue says Rogoff. A year ago under old policy and assumptions before the financial crisis the Congressional Budget Office projected outstanding debt at $5.3 trillion in 10 years. Now the estimate is $17 trillion, which is triple the old number and an increase of $11 trillion. A recovering economy would make these numbers less relevant. But with struggling industries like autos and banks needing more help from the government, and with consumers having to reduce a mountain of debt, a weak economy for a long time and small growth for a decade would make this a story that won't go away. Rogoff says its like what happened to the subprime borrowers, people assuming that the funding is always going to be there. In 2009 and 2010 Citigroup says, the Euro zone countries will sell nearly 1.6 trillion euros or $2.6 trillion in new debt, and Britain will offer 490 billion pounds or $799 billion in new debt. Over the next decade this would slow Europe's recovery and prolong the downturn. Britain faces a bigger problem in the near term as Britain's governmetn debt equals 55% of GDP, and Standard and Poors estimates it could approach 100% by 2013. South America and Eastern Europe will also face the situation of rising rates. Asian countries like China with lower levels of debt are in a better situation, IMF's Blanchard says....

LyrArc Article Gist
Joe Nocera says, that its like the Wizard of Oz story, and the curtain being pulled back to reveal that it was the end of quarter games that enabled GE to make earnings estimates, quarter after quarter, for years. Last April is when the curtain gets pulled back because with the Bear Stearns collapse and the crisis in financial markets, these games could not be played anymore. The fact is that after all the talk about how great GE's infrastructure business and other businesses were, GE was making somewhere near half its profit from its financial businesses under GE Capital. And during this period very little was disclosed by GE about the complicated financial machinery of its GE Capital unit and how it generated its profit, everything had to be taken on faith. This does not work anymore, after all the excesses, leverage and errors that have taken place in the financial markets. After repeated denials that it needed to raise new equity, GE raised $15 billion in new equity in late September 2008, including $3 billion from Warren Buffett. Then there was the two thirds dividend cut in early March 2009, after repeated denials, so that GE could conserve cash. Investors want to know more. Is GE Capital marking to market its assets that have fallen in value, now that its clear that these assets are likely to decline further, and stay that way for a very long time. Two analysts at Sterne Agee questioned GE Capital's accounting. Two days after GE cut its dividend, on March 3, 2009, Nicholas Heymann issued a report saying that GE Capital " is now confronting the prospect that a downward trend in fundamental performance, fueled by weakening end markets and magnified by several liquidity constraints, could potentially lead to an extended period of steadily lowered earnings, depleted loss provisions, lower credit ratings, rising borrowing costs." A day later GE stock hit $6. And credit default swaps suggested investors were worried about a default. As investors look for more transparency from GE, its going to clarify whether embedded losses are at $4 billion as GE claims or at $21 to $54 billion as Heymann is saying. GE's CFO Mr. Sherin appeared on CNBC with defense of the company's position, saying the company had $45 billion in cash, and there were no triggers that would have call on the company's cash in the short term. He said GE is trying to rebuild its credibility, and also trying to be clear, open and honest. Sherin promised to do this at a meeting on the week of March 16, 2009, where he would give details on the parts of the portfolio causing the most distress, $20 billion of subprime mortgages in the UK, the loan portfolio in Eastern Europe, and the commercial real estate holdings. And he told Joe Nocera of NYT, that GE had nothing to hide. But no one including Nocera is giving GE the benefit of the doubt, and no one today is taking anything on faith....

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
Tata has a couple of things going for it to make a car at a price under $2500- a different vision behind it and a longer term idea of the market and its opportunities for Tata Motors. This is a personal vision of Ratan Tata, the last in the series of Tata family members who have run a company that was at the leading edge of industrialization in India since British times in the closing years of the 19th century. He sees this as a way to bring a car that is affordable to millions of Indians, the average Indian, just as his father and great grand father were pioneers in India's early steps towards industrialization. This also will serve another purpose. It will provide momentum to India's manufacturing base by putting India's auto industry on its way to sell cars by the millions in the next ten years. The cost was a challenge to Indian engineers ingenuity. It would help them develop something from scratch from a clean slate, and as he hoped reinvent the car if possible. The cost also was doable in India because of the wages paid to Indian engineers and workers are different. The entire cost structure with suppliers like Bosch providing the engine also and internet purchases of parts coming under a completely different way of doing business, again a reinvent of things. And the skimping on a lot of basics like a radio is possible in the Indian context where the inital target market is the scooter family of which in India there are millions. People who would simply be waiting for such a bare bones car, not see it as such because it is a great advance over a scooter even in terms of safety. What most people who have never been to India would not be able to grasp is that a whole family of four can be seen riding on a scooter or motorbike in India on weekends in Indian urban areas. Tata's idea of the market potential is the way it can ride the next stages of increasing incomes in India. Once it has come up with this car it can come up with enhanced versions with an airconditioning and radio and so on, and still price it way below competitors with Tata's quality and brand name and innovative design. As long as Tata can sell all the cars it makes it can expand production rapidly. Tata's costs for engineering a top selling model may be only 20% of the $350 million it costs western companies, according to Alix Partners, with savings of $300 to $1000 per car right there. Labor costs are about $1.20 per hour in India, less than what auto workers make in China, this provides more cost savings. Tata plans to supply kits to dealers who will do the final assembly in small workshops. This distribution strategy will save Tata another chunk of costs, as about 20% of the car's cost is in distribution in the USA. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Volcker was Fed Chairman from 1979-1987 and is now 81 years old. He is best known for taming the runaway inflation of that period. He is now the senior economic advisor closest to Obama and they have a developed a sense of rapport and trust through frequent discussions and meetings in which Obama has sought Volcker's advice, especially at critical junctures of the present crisis. So close is the association that Volcker now keeps a cellphone with him at all times and he has gotten used to Obama's messages at all times. And this week he is due to appear on the campaign trail with Obama for the first time. At a round table discussion with voters in Lake Worth, Florida, he will give his view on the state of the economy and the credit markets. This puts the 81 year old Volcker on the campaign stump for the first time. In his debate with McCain at Hofstra University Obama said "let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed chairman Paul Volcker, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House." Obama is increasingly relying on Volcker. His staff now routinely reviews policy proposals and speeches wit Mr. Volcker. And conference calls and face to face meetings of economic adviers are increasingly organized to accomodate Mr Volcker's schedule. When there is a discussion of the financial crisis Jason Furman the campaign's economic policy director says the most important question for Obama is "what does Paul Volcker think?" It all started when Obama sought advice from Volcker through his economic adviser Austan Goolsbee, a 39 year old University of Chicago Professor. The bond between the two started with a dinner invitation in June 2007, when Obama was still a long shot candidate, setup by Mark Gallogly, cofounder of Centerbridge partners, a New York private investment firm. He invited a number of financial executives like Gary Cohn of Goldman and Fleming of Merrill and Mr. Volcker. At a private dining room in a Capitol Hill restaurant Volcker was seated directly opposite Obama. That night on a return flight to New York Volcker told the group that he "was genuinely impressed" by the Senator from Illinois. When this was passed on to Goolsbee his reaction was- "Volcker is a legend.. we want to pick his brain." Since late summer 2007 Goolsbee had regular discussions with Mr. Volcker. Some of them were about including Volcker's ideas that the housing downturn would snowball into a larger financial crisis into Senator Obama's policy positions. A September 2007 speech by Obama to Nasdaq stated that the oversight lapses and abusive practices would cause the markets to "be ravaged by a crisis in confidence." Since then at almost every turn of the crisis after Bear Stearns collapse, Obama and Volcker have consulted together....