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
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon's confidence in Ina Drew was based on her hands on abilities, especially demonstrated during the 2008 financial crisis. Current and former bankers in this account by the Times Silver-Greenberg and Schwartz, say things changed in the years that followed. In 2010 Ina Drew was ill with Lyme's disease. The conflicts between the risk taking propensities of traders at the London trading desk under Mr. Macris, and the more risk conscious New York trading desk under Ms. Duersten, had already led to shouting matches under Ina Drew. After her illness and her absence from the office for long periods this spilled out into the open. In early 2011 Ms. Duersten left Chase after 16 years. Her replacement who would be new to Chase could not restrain the risk taking propensities of Mr. Macris and the London trading desk, the way Duersten and Ina Drew had done earlier. Macris and a trader reporting to him, Mr Iksil (referred to as the "London Whale" for his massive trading positions and bets), were free to operate without any restraint in this environment. Ina Drew returned in 2011, but she was not the same hands on person after the illness. She moved to the corporate offices on the 48th floor, instead of being on the floor above the New York trading desk. In 2008 she had held daily meetings with traders required to defend their trading positions. This did not happen in 2011. Jamie Dimon learned about the London Whale in the Wall Street Journal, April 6, 2012. Dimon's efforts in pushing back against stricter regulation, stress tests, and other issues were to lead to the CEO of the 2008 crisis becoming a much more distracted person in 2011. He was taken unawares by the breakdown in the relationship between the London and New York offices of the Chief Investment Office, the changed situation of Ms. Drew, and that risk management controls at the bank were not in place. Risk management overly depended on one person and the trust of the CEO in that person, and was not institutionalized. At the same time it should be noted that Jamie Dimon became CEO of Chase after the acquisition of Bank One in 2005, and Ina Drew was hired in that year, only three years before the crisis of 2008. The merger of other banks into JP Morgan Chase created a bank with $360 billion investment portfolio- even Ina Drew had never previously handled a portfolio of this size and the complex risks brought in with the Washington Mutual portfolio....

LyrArc Article Gist
Kessler in the WP corrects Obama's claim that he created 800,000 jobs. He says this is clever arithmetic as it takes a low point in Feb. 2010 following the financial crisis. Kessler points out that according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. manufacturing jobs were 12.56 million in Jan. 2009 when Obama became president. In Nov. 2016, early estimates show there were 12.26 million manufacturing jobs, a loss of 300,000. This loss does not reflect the problems in the U.S. auto industry and older industries in the midwestern states as a result of trade and globalization that speeded up with the rapid industrialization of China. And led as Greg Ip pointed out in a recent WSJ report to a rapid acceleration of job losses in a decade that did not happen in the same scale during Japan's industrialization and urbanization in the sixties. This aggravated the situation in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Pennsylvania, and was met with a feeble response from Democrats. Even a economist like Krugman favoring the Obama administration's efforts came to the conclusion that TPP did not add much to gains from trade as most of the gains had already been realized. More of the gains went to tech and IT in California, at the expense of the auto industry based in the midwest. A report in WP show a president too close to IT in California and failing to grasp the situation in the midwest. Voters punish whoever is in power, regardless of being Conservative or Liberal, in Canada the hollowing out of manufacturing under Harper in Ontario and Quebec led to the win by Trudeau's Liberals.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein points out that Obama economic plans missed the real target, which was on the home front where it came down to addressing the problems of 15 million homeowners under water- with mortgages exceeding the value of their homes- and lack of solutions to deal with the $1.5 trillion in troubled commercial real estate loans. Administration plans really did not help more than a couple of hundred thousand homeowners to reduce their monthly mortgage payments. Getting banks to start lending again by selling impaired loans to nonbank investors, also failed to work, as banks were reluctant to do so and reduce their accounting capital. Health care legislation simply distracted attention from the real problems. See the links to Feldstein's repeated insistence that the new administration (and even during the late stages of the Bush administration) focus on these problems. Health care legislation that passed simply would not control the increase in health care spending, that the public correctly perceived as the real problem if the other health care issues were to be resolved. Instead Obama's health care legislation offered to increase the deficit to unsustainable levels, with no solutions to more pressing home front problems in sight. Feldstein, is one of the most eminent US economists....

LyrArc Article Gist
Former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh's views on the need for greater transparency and disclosure from the large U.S. banks and the risks to the financial system from "too-big-to-fail" banks in 2012-2013. He says the U.S. should not be dependent on the Basel standards for capital requirements and use its own system of stricter requirements similiar to the UK and Switzerland. His views are that the Dodd-Frank law puts too much dependence on regulators doing the right thing, information transparency is lacking for markets to impose discipline, and delegates too much to Basel standards which are not rigorous enough for protecting the U.S. economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Warren Stephens, head of Stephens Inc, in Little Rock, Arkansas, says repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act was a mistake. U.S. banks should have a 5% cap on holdings of total deposits in the U.S., and no "grandfathering" of banks over the 5% limit. Five institutions controlling 50% of the deposits in the U.S. creates too much systemic risk in another financial crisis. Banks should be expected to be one or the other, commercial banks or investment banks, not both. These recommendations are not new. Bank of England Governor, Mervyn King, called for breaking up the largest banks or shrinking the size of the largest banks during the global financial crisis in 2008. This position for banks that are smaller in size is supported by veteran bankers Paul Volcker, Thomas Hoenig and other experts.

LyrArc Article Gist
Guerrera describes the vital role that FDIC chairman Gruenberg's plan for unwinding failing financial institutions will play in tackling the "too-big-to-fail" problem facing the U.S. He points to the increasing importance of this after the failure of risk management systems at JP Morgan Chase bank.

LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Cochrane of the University of Chicago goes over the Federal Reserve's new "Enhanced Prudential Standards and Early Remediation Requirements" for big banks. He finds serious shortcomings in the Fed's proposals to regulate the largest banks. He points to the proposal that puts less than one dollar at risk for every 10 borrowed dollars as ridiculously low, and says the Fed is admitting it really does not know how to correctly measure and regulate credit exposure in today's banking system. The Fed's remediation requirements are basically ways to get regulators to take action early with "triggers," because regulators were slow to act in the last crisis. This is down to regulating the Fed, not the banks. As stated in recent editorials in the Journal, and supported by Daniel Tarullo at the Fed, the best way to protect the financial system is in having capital reserve requirements that are high enough and reliable enough for a crisis.

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
U.S. Treasury Secretary Geithner says Republicans are working to thwart the Dodd-Frank legislation- by slowing down and diluting the impact of rules required to be written under Dodd-Frank, crimping the resources of regulatory agencies, and blocking the nominations of heads of regulatory agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

LyrArc Article Gist
This article by Gerald Seib in the WSJ says not enough was done to attract white working class voters- critical for Trump in industrial swing states- at the Democratic National Convention. He says only on the last night of the convention did a factory worker, a home care provider and a laid off restaurant worker, appear on the stage. These are the voters who have drifted away from the Democratic Party. The convention draws ironically on Republican themes, defense foreign policy as in the speeches by Leon Panetta and retired General Allen, and in efforts to portray Hillary as more human with frailties but a 40 year public service record that includes exceptional work for children. Actually the appeal to traditional Democratic white working class voters was there always in the background with most of the speakers, as it colored most speakers comments including Biden and Kane, who have the colloquial language and style to appeal to this group. The appeal to traditionally white working class voters is in the party platform with the $15 minimum wage for service industry workers, and in the promise to provide college free tution for people making less than $125,000. The Democrats simply painted this with a different brush. Contrasting the callous attitude to the poor and struggling of billionaires like Trump with those who have fought for pushing people up the ladder since FDR- with the lapses in recent years from the tech boom which left some workers short now being addressed. This was expressed by Hillary Clinton saying to Bernie Sanders voters- "your cause is our cause." For Democrats it was more effective to tackle the traditionally Democratic working class voters first, before shifting to working class voters who are border line Republican because of social issues or those who are so disaffected so as to be beyond reach. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Miller says the whole thing about the super-committee, the polemics between Republicans and President Obama about deficits and billionaires, could end up being a charade with Obama hoping to squeeze by in the 2012 presidential elections and the Republicans equally intent on getting 51%. In the end Obama's poor handling of the debt ceiling, including an unwillingness to go ahead with raising the debt ceiling even if it went to court, says Miller, shows a basic failure of the Obama presidency. In the end he thinks its not that the centre-left is going to be mad at Obama, they will be mad at themselves for believing he was going to be any different.

LyrArc Article Gist
The truth is very different from the rhetoric coming from the Obama administration about helping Main Street America and ordinary workers against "fat-cat bankers," says Goldfarb. Under the Obama administration banks have grown larger and gained more influence over administration decisions. No conditions were made part of the agreement that would require banks to lend a portion of the money handed out to the banks to ordinary borrowers. And not much of significance was done to help homeowners under water, which would enable a faster recovery. In this respect the policies slanted in favor of banks of the Obama administration worsened the prospects of an economic recovery. Experts from Reagan advisor Martin Feldstein- who as early as 2008 advocated serious help to homeowners under water to reduce principal and interest- to the FDIC's Sheila Bair and Princeton Prof. Krugman, across the ideological spectrum, perceived this being in the national interest. Feldstein's first op-ed on his plan appeared in the Wall Street Journal on 3/7/2008, followed by ones on 4/15/2008, 10/4/2008, 1/20/2010/ 10/12/2011 in WSJ, and a oped on 10/30/2008 in the Washington Post, repeating the call for siginificant debt reduction to homeowners. Banks had extraordinary influence on successive administrations in the U.S., both Republican and Democratic- the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations- so that policy actions could be distorted from what would otherwise take place. A study by two University of Michigan professors shows that banks did not increase lending after receiving government money. Instead taxpayer money was used to invest in risky securities for profits from short term price movements, resulting in gains of about 10% in investment returns. Ran Duchin, one of the two professors, says helping ordinary borrowers was not the most profitable use of capital for banks. Without the necessary conditions from the Obama administration, the banks depolyed capital in ways that did not help the economy. Similiarly when banks needed to be restructured no preparatory action was taken because of resistance within the administration- a request by President Obama to Treasury Secretary Geithner for preparing a plan for the restructuring of Citigroup was ignored, according to a report by Goldfarb and Wallsten on 9/17/2011 in the Washington Post....

LyrArc Article Gist
David Stockman was Budget Director under President Reagan and known for his prodigous grasp of statistics in the national budget. Here he takes on what he describes as disproportionately large and destructive banking system for the U.S. economy, which he says the nation desperately needs less of. He supports the small tax of 0.15% of the debts other than deposits of financial conglomerates. His words are some of the strongest yet to come from one of the most prominent people on Reagan's economic team about how the nation's banking system has beome unproductive in supporting economic activity which is its reason for existence. The destructive effects on social cohesion and the middle class is emphasized. He says for years the Fed has run an insanely loose monetary policy that has encouraged this behaviour and socially detrimental profit seeking by the banks and other companies. He sees the big banks as dangerous institutions in today's economy engaged in a bull market culture which believes in entitlement and profitseeking behaviours regardless of its detrimental nature for the national economy. The recent profits of the banks in 2009 and the resulting bonuses are a result of the Fed's easy money policy and bank's gambling at the Fed's monetary casino as he puts it, with money obtained at little cost from Fed-controlled money markets. This article helps to eliminate the distorted perspective in today's climate that paints criticism of splitting up the banks, or otherwise restricting banks in engaging in proprietary trading and risky behaviours, as government interference. As Stockman puts it these banks are already in some sense wards of the state and not private enterprises and this issue is not relevant. The question now is how to set things right and this involves possible solutions such splitting up banks that are too big to fail, restricting risky behaviours and preventing proprietary trading, and other actions as unusual steps for unusual times to get things working back to normal. In other times Stockman would not have said this in an op-ed piece if this were not so....

LyrArc Article Gist
Did U.S. Treaury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, ignore a key request by President Obama to present plans for the restructuring of Citigroup after the government bailout of Citigroup? Ron Suskind says this is what happened in his book on the Obama administration and how the White House operated to make key decisions. Ron Suskind, intervewed key members of the Obama White House economic policy team, Lawrence Summers, Christina Romer, Peter Orszag. In all Suskind conducted 700 hours of interviews for his new book in Sept 2011: "Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington and the Education of a President." According to the book, in early 2009 after Obama authorized a series of stress tests for banks he told Geithner to develop a plan for restructuring Citigroup. A month later at a meeting not attended by Geithner Obama raised a question about the status of the plan. He was told by Romer that no restructuring plan had been developed for Citi. Suskind says Geithner disagreed about a plan to restructure Citi and decided to ignore the request. Geithner and the Treasury Department say Obama asked Geithner to develop a backup plan to overhaul banks if the government was forced to keep a big ownership stake in the companies, and "there was fortunately never a need to put them in place." Geithner told Suskind that he doesn't slow-walk the President on any matter. Other aspects of the operation of the economic policy team that Suskind covers are a series of memos from top aide Pete Rouse raising questions that ongoing communication between some members of the economic team and Summers was giving Summers power to shape policy. Summers, Director of the National Economic Council, is shown as trying to keep out the views of Romer and budget director Orszag from reaching the President without going through him. When Orszag gives a private report to the president on the deficit, Summers objects saying that this was immoral. Obama lacked the fresh ideas needed to tackle the problems created by the mortgage and banking crisis of 2008, when he used the Clinton administration economic policy team of the 1990's- Rubin, Bernanke, Summers and Geithner. Fresh approaches were needed two decades after Clinton's election in 1992, and the Bush administration that followed, as many of the problems developed during this period. The similiar embedded thinking was shared during the Clinton and Bush administrations and the economic advisors about dealings with the banking sector, but the situation for deficits, unemployment, housing, and the economy had completely changed requiring fresh approaches. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Galston cites a Federal Reserve Board of Chicago 2014 study showing setbacks for black people in achieving improvement in income status. Even for children born into middle income black families about 55% are expected to fall below middle income status compared to 36% for children of white middle income families. The problem is not just the gap as Galston points out but what it says for the declining income mobility for the white middle class when 36% are likely to see declining status and prospect for the future, and 23% will see no improvement. Overall it shows a lack of income and social mobility for whites and minorities alike compared to the past improvements since the 1960's, not a bright prospect and less hope for the future the way things are, and why so many of the establishment candidates and existing policies are being questioned by voters.

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman compares the anti-corruption movements in India and the U.S., the world's two largest democracies. The Occupy Wall Street anti-corruption movement in the U.S. focusses on the excessive influence of banks on lawmakers, regulators, and the government, through the use of campaign money, revolving door for government officials and regulators to join banks, and intense lobbying. The anti-corruption movement focusses on corruption in government at higher levels, such as the handling of government licenses, and at the basic levels of needing to bribe officials for something as simple as getting a birth certificate or other government document. Both have pernicious effects, in the U.S. excesssive bank influence leads to taking excessive risk for higher bonuses, putting the entire financial system at risk and creating a crisis in housing that delays the economic recovery. And in India the corruption leads to retarded progress, as funds to invest in infrastructure and development are siphoned off, business and entrepreneurs are required to pay bribes at each step, and ordinary people face the need to pay bribes for the most routine interactions with government officials. In the process this creates more unequal societies by skewing the distribution of benefits from wealth created to groups that are better equipped to game the system. The economic system once distorted in these ways has tendencies to take talent away from productive activity and innovation which create wealth, and direct it towards speculative activities....