LyrArc Article Gist
A year after its fire-sale to JP Morgan Chase, Bear Stearns the company, and the name and the culture, disappears completely from sight. Of 14,000 employees only 5000 remain, and they are part of the 225,000 employees at JP Morgan Chase. And yet Bear Stearns fate is better than another name and culture that disappeared, that of Lehman Brothers. Capitalism's many faces, this one is still staring down at firms in bankruptcy and firms in liquidation, companies as large as GM and Chrysler that face bankruptcy in coming months.

LyrArc Article Gist
Matt Vela responded to Shailen's comments on this article on the BW site. Comments were on NYTimes columnist Tom Friedman's remarks, about the dangers of overdependence on Mideast oil vs. GM and Ford's efforts to simply move cars off the lot. A quick reading of reader comments about 5-6 (all comments) shows a huge perception and marketing gap for Ford and GM if this is even anywhere near a representative sample, because they were heavily negative. Friedman said in the NYT, that "GM is more dangerous to America's future" than any other company, that "its like a crack dealer" addicting Americans to SUVs in the face of higher gas prices- by offering buyers of its least fuel efficient SUV's gas capped at $1.99 per gallon. He also said GM is in cabal with Ford and DaimlerChrysler to buy votes in Congress. BY May 2006 compared to 2003, in just 3 years, once popular midsize SUV's like the Ford Explorer, Chevy Trailblazer, and Dodge Durango saw a sales plunge of 50%. And this after the gas promotions such as the Ford one for free gas upto $1000 with aprepaid Master Charge debit card, enough for 6000 miles. Add to this zero percent financing. GM offered rebates of $2500 to $3500 per SUV. In this manner the whole profit structure of SUV's is being lowered, and no new strategy is being developed to deal with changing conditions and changing consumer preferences, and a changing global situation....

LyrArc Article Gist
Whats the breakdown of costs for Detroit's Three Auto Companies. The following infomation is from documents submitted by Ford Motor Company to Congress. Detroit Auto Companies Foreign Makes like Toyota Hourly cost Hourly cost Hourly wage for workers $29 $26 (Toyota Kentucky plant) Holidays and Vacation pay & pay for Detroit laid off workers $14 $9 Cost of Health Care and Pensions for $16 Toyota has only 300 retired retired workers workers Overall cost $71 $49 The biggest difference is in the cost of paying laid off workers, jobs banks, and in the cost of paying the health care and retirement pensions of retired workers. And for GM there are about 1 million of them, (96,000 active workers, 497,000 retired workers and also the dependents of retired workers) costing GM $4.8 billion on health care. At $1500 per car for GM costs on health care vs. $200 per car for health care costs at Toyota. The difference is $1300. If this is factored in to the profitability of small cars then the field is skewed one way. On a $23,000 car that is a 5% margin right there for adiffernce of $1100 in health care costs. If this is the way profit is calculated on small cars with this health care differential factored in then there is always a muddleheaded tendency to product he bigger cars and trucks because they can absorb this differential better. But it doesn't make sense that this should dictate how the business is run. And it could lead to serious mistakes which appears to be the situation at the Detroit companies, the way they went into the downturn right into 2008 with a product mix that was going to be hit hardest by a change in customer preferences. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Results of a CBS New York Times Poll of 1018 adults in the U.S., reported Feb 28, 2006. Results show 55% showed support for gasoline tax if it reduced dependence on foreign oil, 59% showed support if it also reduced global warming. There is additional support if the money is used to fight terrorism, allocated to specific projects such as electric cars, or help low income people with extra gasoline costs. The important distinction in the results is what respondents were asked. When told about their response to a gasoline tax 85% of respondents opposed it, but when told it would reduce dependence on foreign oil 55% support it. Some respondents want to see it earmarked so that its use would reduce dependence on foreign oil through fuel efficiency improvements. The gasoline tax has remained at 18.4 cents a gallon since 1993. Politicians see the 85% and stay away from the issue and at periods of higher oil prices there is more concern about the impact on consumers. Prof. Borenstein, director of an energy institute at the University of California, Berkeley, says his calculations show a 10% increase in gasoline cost would reduces consumption by 6-8%. As the tax is regressive by putting a higher burden on low income consumers, this should be offset by income tax relief that would make middle and lower income people better off , says Prof. Borenstein. Some of the revenues would be used to support projects at automakers and research universities to develop more fuel efficient technologies for automobiles. Shows support is there if the tax and where money is spent is shaped in the right way....

LyrArc Article Gist
Ezra Klein cites Ed Luce, who writes in the Financial Times, that the real unemployment rate in the U.S. is 11%, when you count people who have no job but have given up looking after months of fruitless searching. These are the long term unemployed and pose risks for the economy and for society. Compared to 2007, the percent of people in the U.S with a job or actively looking for work has dropped from 62.7% to 58.5%. Luce's 11% is arrived at by considering these 62.7%, including millions of workers who have quit looking but would start looking again if the labor market brightens. This is important because U.S. government statistics show unemployment dropping below 9% in November 2009, supposedly an improvemment, when its actually the reverse that is actually happening. The real underemployment is nearly 20%.

LyrArc Article Gist
The TPP as negotiated by Nov. 2015 gives biologics drugs 8 years of protection. Senator Hatch of Utah and the pharmaceutical industry seek 12 years of protection to recoup costly investments in these drugs. Japan says the agreement would be difficult to renegotiate. There is opposition to extending it beyond 8 years in many TPP countries.

LyrArc Article Gist
A large increase in fuel efficiency as planned by new EPA rules creates a different environment for electric cars. Current average fuel economy is 26. New rules that raise the average fuel economy to higher than 47 mpg will result in cars that conserve gasoline, reduce emissions, and make these vehicles more attractive to operate than electric cars on a cost basis, without sacrificing too much in conservation and emissions. A new study shows that achieving the increase to 47 mpg with new technologies will cost automakers about $2000 per vehicle. At $4.50 a gallon for gasoline it takes six years for a hybrid to be more cost effective than a 47 mpg car, according to this study. For a plug-in it would take 7 years and a pure electric vehicle 8 years. This suggests gasoline would have to cost more than $4.50 for electric cars to get an economic advantage. Technological breakthroughs and new technologies in electric cars which are a nascent industry at this time are not worked into these calculations. This could result in a different situation and favor the companies doing the pioneering effort to learn these technologies and develop cost effective solutions....

LyrArc Article Gist
Stiglitz wants to put money in places where it will be spent immediately, unemployment compensation, in state and local governments hands to build critical infrastructure, state education budgets and environment spending for benefits in the long run, only limited help in the mortgage mess to the deserving and to reduce foreclosures, and no money to upperclass Americans who won't be spending much of it anyway.

LyrArc Article Gist
An exceptional journalism story of what happened on Sept 16 and September 17, 2008, and the aftermath, by Pulliam, Rappaport, Lucchetti, Strasburg and McGinty, when Morgan Stanley stock lost more than half its value and was at risk of collapsing. What caused the collapse in price? This article shows how the biggest names in financial institutions were buying protection with credit default swaps, and as the price of these swaps skyrocketed on Sept 16 and Sept 17, the shortselling in Morgan Stanley's shares also skyrocketed. Shortselling on Sept 17 reaching nine times the normal, with 39 million shares sold short adding to the 31 million shares sold short in the prior two days, according to trading records examined by WSJ. It was at this point, on the pleas of John Mack CEO of Morgan Stanley, the SEC stepped in to temporarily suspend short selling. It is hard to clearly isolate the shortselling that went on for protection, from the shortselling for speculation, but hedge funds were involved and some of the shortselling was done to make a quick profit. Citigroup has faced the problem of losing half the share's value in a couple of days in the week of November 17, and shortselling in Citigroup's shares contributed to the collapsing stock. See the 3 graphs setup to show the influence of credit default swaps on short selling, and the on share price for Morgan Stanley. On Monday November 24, the government announced a rescue plan for Citigroup. That the uptick rule has not been reinstated as yet, means that when one looks back at this period a few years from now it will show errors in handling this economic and financial markets crisis were made, different from that in the 1930's, but with serious consequences. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Economists score Geithner's performance an average of 51 out of 100, Obama's an average of 59, and Bernanke's 71. 42% of respondents scored Obama below 60.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Black teen jobless rate in 2011, the third year of the Obama administration- a shocking 46.5%!

LyrArc Article Gist
Applebaum talks to two researchers at the University of Chicago and Princeton, Prof. Sufi and Prof. Mian, on the record of U.S. president Obama and Fed chairman Bernanke in helping homeowners facing foreclosure and underwater borrowers, comparing that record with their record in helping the banks. The issue is relevant as the policy and handling of homeowners had to be part of an overall effective plan for recovery in the U.S. economy, because ultimately without the U.S. consumer any recovery would be weak in the long run- a situation the U.S. faces in early 2014. The response to the issue of irresponsible homeowners borrowing beyond the limit without an equally robust response to irresponsible bank management that allowed wildly excessive leveraging of assets, and successful aggressive lobbying by banks in a shortsighted policy of going through with a wave of foreclosures; besides creating questions of fairness and equitable handling of the problem, also had major ramifications for the future of the U.S. and global economic growth. Here Christina Romer and other administration advisors say Bernanke was right in tackling the problem from the perspective of the banks needing to be recapitalized. Thoughtful advisors looking at the entire problem, Martin Feldstein and Sheila Bair strongly pushed for providing the same help to homeowners without getting caught up in the issue of who was responsible home buyers or the banks, and looking at the interests of the U.S. economy and the U.S. people. Proposals by Feldstein and Bair were equally robust in helping banks as they were in helping homeowners, only the banks understood their interests narrowly and had more access to policymakers in the Bush, as well as the Obama administration, Paulson as well as Geithner. This leaves us with the ultimate irony of the Obama administration pushing for the minimum wage, even to the point of electoral posture, when lasting damage had been inflicted on homeowners from the weaker portions of America's middle class by a policy that went against what two respected financial and economic experts from the Reagan period, Sheila and Bair had strongly advocated. See links and groups on Feldstein and Bair. Applebaum has followed most aspects of this problem closely and continues to provide exceptional reporting including the piece on the thinking of new Fed chairman, Janet Yellen. Private enterprise rules that require management at banks just as for other companies to take responsibility for failures, and be replaced with new management, was largely avoided leading to a fundamental failure in how a free market economy such as the U.S. and western European economies are supposed to function. Rules aggressively pushed by Geithner's mentor Treasury Secretary Rubin for a vigorous cleanup at banks in South Korea during a similiar situation in 1997, were not followed in any way here, also setting wrong precedents for the long run. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Washington Post editorial on the Obama Georgetown speech of April 13, 2009. It questions whether President Obama has the candour and courage to tackle the tough issues of deficit reduction and entitlement reform. New healthcare spending for coverage itself will add to entitlement, and it says some of the savings mentioned by the President are phony or already needed for new spending for the economic recovery and health care. At the same time the paper gives Obama good marks for his clarity and grasp of the crisis and steps for recovery, and the policy agenda in the areas of health care, energy and education. The questions about courage and candor also raise all the questions about facing upto the facts about insolvent banks that Krugman, Rosenfeld, the Economist and others have raised. Is Obama dodging the hard choices, is he dithering? On the toughest issues like foreclosures, insolvent banks, global regulation pushed by the Europeans, will he end up making inadequate or faulty choices, and when he comes around to making the tough choices, will he have lost so much valuable time as to prolong the crisis and stretch it out to many years....

LyrArc Article Gist
A seven member panel formed by Toyota to look into Toyota's recall problems made its recommendations recently. The panel's report says Toyota was not good at responding to criticism from outside. Company executives looked at complaints about sudden acceleration defensively or skeptically, and viewed regulators in an "adversarial" manner. The NHTSA also has come under criticism in investigations, because to some extent Toyota's close connections with the NHTSA made it possible for the company to drags its feet in responding to complaints. Edmunds.com CEO, Jeremy Anwyl, says Toyota has a stable and predictable way of doing things and this does not work well in a crisis, leaving Toyota uniquely vulnerable to this. The insularity of executives in Japan because of the lack of non-Japanese on the Board. and in other important positions, magnifies the problems when they are rooted in a crosscultural environment. Such complaints in the U.S. media are viewed differently than in Japan. The report also pointed out that safety and quality are two different things - that processes that improve quality will not necessarily produce safe vehicles. By putting safety under quality and making everyone responsible for quality, no specific executives were assigned responsibility for safety. One of the lessons learned from the recall crisis is that specific responsibility needs to be assigned for safety, and the person in charge has to report directly to the President and top managers. One of the panel members, Brian O'Neil, a former president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Saferty, says the old adage is true in this case- when everyone is responsible, no one is responsible....

LyrArc Article Gist
Gretchen Morgenson sees systemic risk looking ahead beyond 2013 in the $4.6 trillion repurchase obligations market or repo market. Problems in the repo market caused the collapse of Lehman Brothers in the financial crisis of 2008. Bernanke, Dudley, Bair and other finance officials have referred to the risk in the repo market which have not been reduced since the 2008 financial crisis. In the repo market money market mutual funds provide short term funding to banks accepting collateral such as mortgage securities. These are overnight loans made to banks and other financial institutions based entirely on trust. During normal functioning the trades are rolled over. The risk is that the trust disappears in a few days as happened for Bear Stearns and Lehman and the firms not able to obtain this short term financing. This is a very unstable form of financing and Lehman depended on it because of the low cost and not having to set aside capital for the trades. Basel III rules require that banks set aside capital against the assets they finance inthe repo markets, and a recent JP Morgan report says the 8 largest banks would need to raise $28-$34 billon in capital for their repo business....