LyrArc Article Gist
As the final Republican tax bill is debated in Congress on December 19, 2017, Senator Bob Casey cited the following points from the Joint Committee on Taxation Report on the floor of the Senate.  1. Americans building their hopes that their pay checks in February 2018 will be increasing are in for a big disappointment said Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, a senior member of the Finance Committee. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimate is that for the 57 million families making less than 100,000 dollars a year the tax cuts in the Republican legislation will either not reduce their taxes or reduce the taxes by about $100 a year. 2. The bill does little for the big tasks facing America of rebuilding failing infrastructure. Senator Casey cited 4500 bridges needing repair or replacement in Pennsylvania alone. It also does little for health care access for middle class families and is likely to lead to 10% increase in health care premiums. Affordability of college and other hurdles of middle class and working class families remain unaddressed.   3. The $9 billion in the estate tax cuts would finance the Children's Health Insurance program which has expired.  4. The $36 billion in tax cuts for corporations comes at a time when corporate profits are at the highest they have been in 15 years, according to Vanguard founder Bogle. He also points out that wages as a percentage of GDP are the lowest in 15 years. The tax cuts in the Republican bill are not likely to correct this imbalance.  5. The share of GDP of people making more than one million dollars in 1980 was 11%, this is up now in 2017 to 20%. This has led to questions about the wisdom of these tax cuts which disproportionately benefit a very small percentage of Americans who do not need these tax cuts, and come with significant sacrifices for the middle class in terms of what is available in public services, and the cost to their children as infrastructure and access to health and education is made more distant because of a growing U.S. debt from this tax cut. The big problem then with this bill is that it further damages intergenerational mobility in the U.S., undermining the foundation of a democratic society. Damage has already happened in the past three decades as Federal Reserve chairman Janet Yellen pointed out at a conference on Economic Opportunity and Inequality on Oct. 17, 2014, saying-"The past several decades have seen the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality following the Great Depression." This is why there is substantial agreement in the media from the Wall Street Journal's Greg Ip to Krugman in the New York Times that the bill fails to correct a harmful trend, and goes further in the wrong direction for a democratic society.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Tankersley points to the broken links between economic growth and growth in jobs and incomes since 1989, which have created a shrinking U.S. middle class. In the postwar period before 1989, a one percent increase in economic growth generated a six tenths of one percent increase in jobs growth during economic recoveries. During the 1992 recovery under George Bush this was down to 0.4%. In the 2001 recovery under George W. Bush this dropped to 0.2%, during the current recovery under Obama this is at 0.3%. Income growth also showed a similiar pattern. Median household incomes declined from 1990-1992 and from 2002-2004, after adjusting for inflation, even with economic growth of 6% during this period. For the 2009-2011 recovery period the economic growth was about 4% yet real median incomes increased barely at 0.5%. By contrast from 1982 to 1984 with economic growth of 11%, real median incomes went up by 5%. The result workers median wages are lower now in the beginning of 2013, after inflation adjustment, than at the end of 2003, and real household income lower in 2011 than in 1989, says Tankersley. Why were the recoveries of 1990 and 2001 for the most part jobless? U.S. Federal Reserve studies show employers mindset had changed, instead of hiring back laid off workers during recoveries, employers did not add many jobs. Automation in factories requiring fewer workers, global outsourcing and supply chains, manufacturing overseas, lack of union-management cooperation on wages and jobs in industries such as the auto industry, increase in temp workers, all played a part in creating fewer and fewer good paying jobs. Some of this is playing out worldwide. In Japan the economic recovery has also come with similiar costs- moving jobs overseas for the auto and electronics industries, increase in temporary worker jobs with lower pay and benefits to about one third of all jobs, and depressed consumer spending as a result lowering the economic growth potential. Even the recent German economic recovery has come with an increase in lower paying temporary jobs and driven by exports to Asia. For the U.S. the situation was worsened by three additional factors- housing foreclosures and the hit to savings from the 2008 financial crisis, high cost of college tution and resulting debt, and the high cost of medical care. The Obama administration's effort to increase the minimum wage would help the poor, but do little to address the broken links between economic growth and jobs growth/income growth. The push for college education does not address affordability and neglects jobs training. Most of the questions raised by the changing patterns remain unanswered, which may be why Obama calls this a generation's task, not that of one administration....

LyrArc Article Gist
Hilsenrath points out that Japan's central bank, the Bank of Japan's holdings of securities and loans has increased by 35% in 2008-2013 compared to an increase of 2, 3 and 5 times respectively in the assets of the ECB, the U.S. Federal Reserve and the Bank of England. Experts in Japan say what was considered commonsense by Bank of Japan chief Shirakawa and others, that aggressive monetary policy doesnt work, is considered nonsense in other parts of the world. They say aggressive monetary policy was never tried and Shirakawa diluted its impact by saying he did not think it would make much of a difference. Communicating the right message to financial markets was part of the approach taken by Draghi at the ECB, Bernanke at the U.S. Fed and King at the Bank of England. Anil Kashyap of the University of Chicago agrees. He says the Bank of Japan missed its inflation target for 15 years. BOJ also bought shorter term bonds in its bond buying efforts, with maturities of three years compared to the average maturity of nine years for bonds being purchased by the U.S. Fed. This reduces the effect. The Abe administration is careful to present the approach as similiar to that in other countries, and intended to spur growth in Japan, which in turn should spur global growth. U.S. Fed chairman Bernanke has supported this effort. Prime minister Abe was on a visit to the U.S. communicating Japan's approach and winning support, something never done before....

LyrArc Article Gist
Goldstein at the Energy Policy Research Foundation sees a moderation in demand for oil holding the increase to less than 1 million barrels a day. Goldstein sees improvements in crude oil supply, spare refining capacity,and product inventories which should help moderate prices. A lot depends on how the slowdown in the US affects Russia, India, China and Brazil. China's export based economy is likely to be affected and India and Russia to a lesser extent. Already the stock markets worldwide have come down in synchronized fashion in January 2007 leading to action by the Federal Reserve in the USA. There is likely to be a slowing down worldwide with Europe and India and Russia doing better than the USA. The USA may already be in recession. On the supply side the investments in Saudi Arabia and other places in OPEC and production increase in Russia should lead to supply increase of 2.5 million barrels a day according to analysts. At these supply and demand levels prices could range from $65 to $80, with a consensus of $80 under present conditions. There is a possibility of it going down to the $60 range if global economic conditions get worse and consequently demand decreases more. A price in the $60 range will still be needed to increase the incentives of exploration and production of new oil sources and to pay the higher costs of exploration and drilling for oil, especially in remote difficult locations like Russian Siberia and in deep sea offshore locations....

LyrArc Article Gist
Bear Stearns is taken over by JP Morgan Chase at $2 a share, a year ago it was trading at $170 a share. This was arranged with the Federal Reserve agreeing to protect JP Morgan from liabilities on Bear Stearns balance sheet and was done overnight in an emergency basis by the Fed and Treasury to protect the rest of the financial system from scares originating from a collapse of Bear Stearns.

LyrArc Article Gist
The first of a series of quarterly reports put out by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, on the subject of household debt and credit. It shows that the process of unwinding consumer debt in the US is a slow and painful one. The figures tell the story, which touch every aspect of the US economy and business, with ripple effects through the world economy. Total consumer debt is $11.7 trillion as of June 30, 2010, which is down 6.5% from the crest reached in the third quarter 2008. Credit card accounts are down 23% from the high reached in second quarter 2008, and mortgage obligations down 6.4% from 2008. By mid 2010 11.4% of consumer debt was delinquent, and this was up from 11.2% in 2009. $1.3 trillion of consumer debt is delinquent, and $986 billion is seriously delinquent- that is 90 days late. Serious delinquencies are up by 3.1%. Other figures fromt he Fed report: Half million people in the USA had a foreclosure added to the credit reports for the period March 31, 2010 to June 30, 2010. This was up 8.7% above the figure for first quarter of 2010. New bankruptcies showed up in credit reports for 624,000 people during that quarter, an increase of 34%. Another major problem stacked on top of this for consumer spending- the Fed's interest rate policy according to Todd Petzel, chief investment officer of Offit Capital Advisors, burdens consumers with a tax of $350 billion in income lost from low to zero interest rates. This creates two problems of its own. Not only does it depress consumer spending. It also makes consumers reach out for riskier investments. This figure was calculated by taking $14 trillion in debt issued by Treasury, federal agencies and municipalities. Rates are near zero on short term Treasuries compared to 3% average over the years. Taking 2.5% on $14 trillion, the figure of $350 billion was arrived at. Or 2% of gross domestic product. Analysts say that it would be better not to save a few zombie banks at the expense of consumers and pension funds. It lowers the cost of the deficits through the lower interest rates the government pays on its debt, but lower consumer spending and a limping economy hurt tax revenues and increases the deficit....

LyrArc Article Gist
After years of monetary easing under former Fed chairman Ben Bernanke to boost the economy since the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed plans to modestly increase rates in December 2015. The broad measure of unemployment including part-timers and discouraged workers dropping out has fallen from a high of 17.1% to 9.9%. The economic recovery is still slow and inflation below 2% for a long period, letting the the Fed set a very gradual trajectory for raising rates to accomodate downward pressures on the economy. GDP growth is lower than in previous recoveries, and after tax incomes adjusted for inflation up 1.8% in this recovery compared to 3.3% in the three previous recoveries.