LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ's Reilly says the U.S. Federal Reserve's effort to make stress tests unpredictable and keep the banks guessing is how it is supposed to be done for tests to be effective. This prevents banks from gaming the tests. The Fed has other interests to protect- the nation's financial system and taxpayers. Only by designing the tests correctly can the Fed ensure that it is doing its job of safeguarding the U.S. financial system.

LyrArc Article Gist
Fed chairwoman Yellen says she expects forces that hold inflation back to diminish in months ahead in 2017. With this assessment she expects gradual rate increases by the Fed. The financial markets now expect a rate increase in December 2017.

LyrArc Article Gist
Binyamin Applebaum cites different experts on how U.S. Fed policy could play out in 2017-2019. He cites Fed governor Dudley that there is increased uncertainty under the Trump administration, and other economists who say that aging population, lack of innovation, and steady growth under the Obama administration with falling unemployment, make it unlikely that growth will jump well above 2%. The Fed's own forecasts are for for under 2% growth in 2017 and 2018, and Applebaum says this is not expected to change by much. Janet Yellen does not see a huge stimulus as a positive, says Applebaum, because it would increase the deficit at the wrong time. He cites Yellen who prefers to see more fiscal space now that unemployment is down to 4.6%. Steady growth in the view of Fed officials has taken up much of the backlog of people looking for work since the 2008 crisis. Yellen sees some fiscal space as desirable with high debt to GDP ratio at 77 percent, so that the government could respond to some adverse event in the future. A Republican Congress is also averse to sudden increases in the deficit. See the link to views about the uncertainty of how things can play out in a separate article by Neil Irwin of NYT. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt points out in the NYT that Hillary Clinton actually won in the popular vote by a substantial margin, by more than 2 million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points. He says that Democrats need to pay more attention to the working class in midwestern states- the job losses, crumbling infrastructure, and the plight of communities such as Detroit, Michigan which suffered through the bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM, and again with the foreclosure crisis, the financial crisis of the City of Detroit. With a similar situation in the neighboring states of Wisconsin and Ohio, in places like Toledo and other parts of communities facing industrial decline. While the Silicon Valley centred region powered the economy in California, and the financial industry and real estate powered New York, older midwestern communities never really recovered from a long decline stretching over 2 decades. The result was the loss of faith in Democrats among union workers and young people, leading to the loss of Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan. For most of its history the Democratic Party was based on its union and working class base including a large number of white voters. Only under Obama because of his unique candidacy was the coalition so dependent on the minorities vote. Before minorities were part of the Democratic coalition, but not in the way under the Obama candidacy. A return to its historic and normal base among whites in unions and working class communities, liberals, minorities, is a way to go back to the historic and natural base of Democratic support. In a sense dependence on tech communities for election funding and the tech booms, globalization, may have distorted Democrats sense of their historic role as champions of the working class and middle class communities throughout the country. There is now an opportunity to restore this lost mission of protecting the interests of the middle and working class who have seen huge drop in net worth as reported by Janet Yellen of the Federal Reserve at the Inequality Conference on October 17, 2014-"62 million households with a net worth of $11,000 for the year 2013." Poorly covered in the media and not made the utmost priority by Democrats (or Republicans). In the words of Janet Yellen, this was in the past several decades "the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality since the Great Depression." She added the shocking words "by some estimates, income and wealth inequality near their highest levels in the past hundred years, and probably much higher than much of American history before then." Even discussion in the media goes back to the Obama coalition and treats it as a way forward for Democrats, when history shows it was different and the situation described by Yellen calls for a serious response. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Congressional Budget Office says the U.S. is likely to experience "a significant recession" if Congress does not prevent tax increases and spending cuts setup for January 2013. If the Bush era tax cuts expire as scheduled at the end of 2012, these tax increases and spending cuts of $100 billion on military and other programs would reduce the deficit in the fiscal year ending Sept 30, 2013 to $641 billion from the $1.13 trillion level at fiscal year end Sept 30, 2012. The impact would be to reduce the budget deficit from 7.3% of GDP to about 4%. The result- a contraction in GDP by 2.9% in the first half of 2013, and 0.5% for the full year, and unemployment would rise to 9.1% at the end of 2013 from about 8% today. If Congress postpones the tax increases and spending cuts the deficit would be at $1.04 trillion or 6.5% of GDP and unemployment would remain at about 8% at the end of 2013. A 9% unemployment rate with the "fiscal cliff' means 2 million fewer jobs. Romney's plan is to extend all the Bush era tax cuts for 1 more year and no spending cuts till he has a chance to make hs own review on spending cuts in 2013. Obama's plan is for extending all Bush era tax cuts except for those earning more than $250,000- resulting in savings of $2 billion in 2013 and $824 billion in 10 years- and making smaller spending cuts than Romney....

LyrArc Article Gist
Adjusted for the 35,000 workers on strike at Verizon counted as unemployed, the 38,000 jobs figure in the government report is still considered quite low. Especially striking even as unemployment drops for May from 5.0% to 4.7% is that the drop is attributed to people dropping out of the work force. The average monthly gain for the March through May is 116,000 jobs well short of the 240,000 jobs added on average in 2014-2015. Average hourly earnings were up 0.2% in May and up 2.5% for the year. A widely accepted measure of unemployment that includes workers too discouraged to look for work or working part time because of a lack of full time job was at 9.7%. The labor force participation rate was at 62.6%.

LyrArc Article Gist
Discussion at a U.S. Fed meeting in Jan 28-29, 2014, as revealed in the minutes for that meeting. It shows Fed officials such as Bullard of the St Louis Fed asked for a debate on interest rates, but most Fed oficials at the meeting including Lockhart of the Atlanta Fed, supported current tapering policy to wind down bond purchases buy the end of 2014. Some of the discussion went to how fast the unemployment rate had declined from 7.9% to the 6.5% threshold set by the Fed, and what this meant as other signs show weakness in the U.S. economy. The drop in the unemployment rate reflected more older workers retiring and to an unusual degree discouraged workers dropping out and not looking for work. Should the Fed put more weight on inflation and financial stability some officials argued, especially as inflation was still about a percentage point below the 2% target by some estimates.

LyrArc Article Gist
Spencer Jakab points out reasons why interest rates will remain low for some time to come- inflation of around 2%, even lower interest rates in Europe and Japan, foreign buying of U.S. bonds keeping the dollar strong, and sluggish economic growth in the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times reports from the comments of current and former members of the Chase Chief Investment Office (CIO), that risk officers at Chase were ignored when they raised issues about the complex trades made by trader Iksil. Iksil's trades had the support of his manager Mr. Macris, and Ms. Drew who was in charge of CIO. The comments also indicate that at one point Mr. Macris brought in a Risk Officer with whom he had worked closely for many years. Risk Officers are supposed to be independent and their concerns seriously heard, with the authority to halt trades that pose excessive risks. Which made this kind of cozy behaviour in the CIO trading offices in London cause for alarm. These reports also say Mr. Braunstein, the new CFO at JP Morgan Chase, did not strengthen controls after he assumed office in 2010. Bank officials disputed this. The New York offices did not fully grasp the complex trades being made in the CIO London offices, and upper management let the CIO operate pretty much on its own, especially with CEO Jamie Dimon's confidence in Ms. Drew's management of the CIO. This led to another gap in the process of risk management. Dimon had other priorities and distractions, from problem mortgages coming with the acquisition of Washington Mutual, pushing back aginst financial regulation after the 2008 crisis, stress tests and others. At the same time the U.S. Federal Reserve, regulators, and Treasury's coordinated effort to merge failing banks with other larger banks- because of the lack of the process of unwinding failed banks provided later under Dodd-Frank legislation- created mega financial banks. Unlike what the U.S. under Treasury Secretary Rubin pushed for in the case of S. Korea during a banking crisis in 1997, Treasury under Geithner and Fed officials did not push for unwinding of failed financial institutions such as Countrywide and Washington Mutual in 2008-2009 Chase's own portfolio of assets under the CIO, increased by an astounding amount from $76 billion in 2007 to $356 billion in 2011. Even if Ms Drew had managed CIO well before, managing a portfolio of this size is most likely to have presented a whole set of new challenges and problems for which the CIO office was not prepared. Similiar concerns were raised by other Fed officials such as Fed governors, Hoenig and Fisher, who raised the issue that such mega-banks posed unacceptable risks and were too big to manage. Pressures to increase investing profits, growing complacency, relaxing risk management controls, led to the situation where a single trader Mr. Iksil, who had only joined the bank in 2007 according to other reports, could create large losses. This follows a situation at UBSin 2011, where a novice trader made bets that resulted in large losses....

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the Economist says Britain's economic recovery will not be complete until interest rates are well above zero and productivity growth is established. Without productivity growth and growth in wages, both lacking in the economic recovery since 2009, tax revenues will not be enough to reduce the deficit, requiring more spending cuts. That means the Bank of England will not raise interest rates, keeping a situation of no rate changes prevailing since March 2009 when the central bank cut rates by 0.5%. In the current situation the Bank of England is not expected to raise rates till 2016, only after the U.S. Federal Reserve increases rates to avoid appreciation in the pound and further deflationary pressure, according to Goldman Sachs. With inflation currently at zero, following the drop in oil prices, and 10% appreciation in the pound since mid 2013 making imports cheaper, there is little pressure to increase interest rates. In 2011 inflation with rising food and energy prices reached 5.2% , but the Bank of England did not raise rates because of the eurozone economic crisis affecting growth. Only since 2013 has economic growth picked up with 1.2 million jobs created since the beginning of 2013, bringing unemployment down from a high of 8.5% in 2011 to 5.6% in May 2015. Throughout the recovery productivity growth is falling behind- 2014 productivity measured by output per hour worked was 1.3% lower than in 2011, and 14% below the pre-crisis trend, according to the Economist....

LyrArc Article Gist
Jack Horton of BBC Verify screens the former president Trump's speech at the Republican National Convention. “Our crime rate is going up, while crime statistics all over the world are going down".  Fact: FBI data shows crime down 6% and a drop in the murder rate by 13% in 2023. For the First Quarter of 2024 crime down by 15% and recorded murder rate down 26%. "We've had the worst inflation we've ever had under this person [Biden]. I will end the devastating inflation crisis immediately, bring down interest rates and lower the cost of energy . We will drill, baby, drill."  Fact: Inflation went up to 9.1% from 1.4% at the end of the Trump term in the first 2 years of of the Biden Administration by June 2022. Biden and Federal Reserves Powell brought this down to 3%. Explained: This inflation jump to 9% would have happened from supply chain in China for Trump administration as well. Trump's last year was 2019 the Covid pandemic started in January the lockdown by midyear meant sharp drop in demand and little room for inflation. The concentration of supply chain in China was the cause of the surge in inflation as China shut down and restarted late into 2022 causing shortages in factory parts and supplies. Biden focused on vaccination in 2020-2021. This inflation would have happened under Trump- this concentration of supply chain started with Reagan economic philosophy to ship production (and jobs) overseas, Clinton Bush Obama and Trump did little about it. Biden invested heavily in Make in America manufacturing and jobs at home. Biden and Powell did a good job of bringing this inflation down by 2023 to 3% before the European Union and UK. Younger voters don't know this they get their news from the internet and show little interest, see only that the low inflation under Trump and the higher inflation during the pandemic recovery under Biden and blame Biden. will Trump do better on inflation in 2024-2028. The WSJ does not think so its analysis shows inflation higher under Trump than Biden because of a planned 60% tax on imports from China. Trump follows Reagan/Friedman theory of the old Republican party of higher tax cuts for the wealthy, so no money is left for investing in American manufacturing and jobs as Biden free of this theory is able to do, leading to slowing growth with inflation under Trump.        ...