LyrArc Article Gist
Novartis is taking a new approach to drug research and drug discovery. The old one which was popular in the drug industry was to go directly for blockbuster drugs for large numbers of users, with a long time in the research pipeline because the area of research was largely an unknown. This was costly and becoming less and less productive. Dan Vasella who heads Novartis, is taking a different approach which comes from his understanding of medical science as a physician, in an industry run by accountants, lawyers and business people. This is to go after wellknown molecular pathways identified by Dr Fishman at Harvard in his research, and do this by taking on problems in diseases that afflict small numbers of people. These drugs have some established medical science to work with, and the research work takes a shorter period. Once the drug proves its effectiveness in one illness, it is tested for other illnesses that afflict a large number of people but which shares some of the same underlying phenomena that cause the disease in the two situations. Dr Vasella stumbled on this approach after the development of the drug Gleevec by Novartis. Gleevec was originally approved for a rare blood cancer, but has now shown to be effective against six other dieases. Gleevec brought 3.7 billion in revenues in 2008 for Novartis. In 2002 Vasella made a bold move to discard the old drug development model. The basis of this approach was to go after new drugs that were desperately needed and where the genetics of the illness were well understood. Whereas pursuing rare dieases is considered foolhardy by most drug company leaders, Vasella's idea is to use the common genetic underlying arrangements for that drug to go after other diseases that would be good prospects for the now proven drug. The known genetics makes it possible to complete the research in a shorter time. In 2009 Novartis has 93 drug candidates in the pipeline, 40% more than 3 years ago and 80% of Novartis' drugs last year made it from early testing to late stage development. This was a 60% improvement over 2005. The new approach fits the current regulatory climate, with regulators concerned more about safety, and Medicare and Medicaid and other payor less willing to pay for treatment with modest benefits or with uncertain outcomes. The approach had to be executed in terms of organization and staffing. Vasella moved the R&D global research operation from Basel to Cambridge, Massachusetts, and spent $4 billion on the move. He recruited a renowed researcher and cardiologist at Harvard University, Dr Mark Fishman, who had done research on the genetic mutations in the cardiovascular systems, to run the center and set the new direction for global research. Fishman convinced Vasella that medical research should focus on a small number of molecular pathways- the complex suquences of interactions among chemicals, proteins, and larger cell structures in the body that are behind all illnesses. Says Fishman, there are 24,000 genes in the genome, but only a few dozen pathways conserved through evolution. Fishman's theory is that you find all the links in a pathway and then locate the signals that can turn the genes on or off to develop medicines for illnesses. Bercause disease after disease share a common pathway, the knowledge gathered can then be applied across that region with more accuracy and directly, to address a range of illnesses. Fishman's approach means marketing and sales no longer make the decisions. There is a new method for doing things. Fishman focusses on clinical data and insists that commercial analysis comes after sufficient clinical data. A major restructuring in 2007 led to shedding 1260 sales and marketing jobs, as clinical science now takes precedence and medically trained scientists take senior leadership positions. The new approach is being used for a drug developed for Muckle-Wells syndrome. Computer simulations are shortening the time to late stage trials. The drug has applications for Type 2 diabetes and severe arthritis. The whole process will take many years, as its a sea change for the industry and for Novartis, a fresh approach when the approach used by the pharmaceutical industry for so long is failing. An oral drug treatment for multiple sclerosis is being developed along these lines. Afinitor. approved by the FDA for kidney cancer in March shows potential in six other diseases, including lymphoma where Afintor shrank tumors by 50% in one third of the patients in a trial. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Rising wages and rising production costs for Chinese exports of low tech products like shoes, clothing, toys, clothing, furniture, means a lot of these factories will shut down and move to lower wage countries like Vietnam and India or elsewhere. Elimination of rebates on more than 2000 export items raises cost of manufacturing 14-17% according to Guangzhou based American Chamber of Commerce in South China. And the the tough new labor law enforcing worker rights would increase manufacturing costs by 40% according to the Textile Council of Hong Kong. Additional costs would be incurred to meet tougher environmental controls and anti pollution laws and stricter enforcement. As a result of this Adidas wants its suppliers like Taiwan based Apache Footwear with 18000 employees in Guangdong to move as fast as they can to India where it opened a second factory. This process will unfold over several years till India and Vietnam bercome the new sources of cheaper goods because of the large supply of manufacturing labor for lower value added products, as it will take years to build the logistics and infrastructure for these plants in these countries. But because wages will also rise in India and the laws in India are more likely to be enforced than they were in the atmosphere in China where the Communist led government may have turned a blind eye to enforcement and worker rights in the interests of growth, the export of deflation to the west in the way of cheap Chinese products may be a thing of the past. China is doing this as a planned move it appears. Why? On the surface it makes sense that the heavily polluting factories making lower value added products like shoes, clothing, toys, furniture, would not receive rebates from te state and to improve living conditions and promote consumption at home the government woud pass tough new laws to ensure employee benefits and collective bargaining rights, and employee job security. It also reduces trde tensions at a time when the US economy will be in poor shape and jobs lost become a political issue in the 2008 presidential campaign. But there may bigger pressing concern and urgency in these moves after so many years of this being discussed and this may be that China finally may be at a moment when it is confronted with a sober fact that the US consumer is heavily in debt and may not support China's export growth model much longer and with it China faces a really significant slowdown in its growth rate from 11% to maybe half that if China does not develop its own domestic markets for growth. The old foreign investment model may not work anymore. See the link to Ireland where growth is falling off quickly. Higher wages and longer term jobs with benefits would enable a large middle class to develop from this huge manufacturing worker base especially as China moves to more value added products where even higher wages would be paid. This in turn creates a domestic market over time that would insulate China to some extent from the winds that would be blowing from a US economy suffering from a deep recession that may last several years. This may be evident in the words of the Governor of Guangdong when he says that the government is not abandoning the exporters but that selling domestically is good for the country and good for the people. Something deeper is at work here and one would expect an about turn in policy where instead of workers not receiving back wages and lax enforcement that went on freely in the last decade we would see an effort to build the kind of middle class that would provide the market for Chinese goods that would sustain growth at a more modest but sustainable pace. Which means in the short term all those workers at factories that make toys, shoes, clothing and furniture in provinces like Guangdong would be jobless. Some of these factories may move to provinces in the interior like Sichuan and Hunan provinces which may pickup employment. A report by the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai written by Booz Allen says that a fifth of the companies surveyed are considering relocating outside China, and that over half of foreign manufacturers surveyed think that mainland China is losing its competitive advantage to places like Vietnam and India....

LyrArc Article Gist
Modernizing India's construction industry may be one of the keys to keeping global growth from slowing down significantly. Here's why. If China slows down significantly after almost two decades of breakneck growth since the 1990's, as nothing like that goes on forever and China is facing significant environmental challenges, skilled workers and managerial talent constraints, and demands for fair treatment and compensation for workers, that stem from this uncontrolled and haphazard growth and export drive. This would leave India as a potentially large engine for world growth if properly managed, a role China has played alongside the USA for so long. India's infrastructure is one of the critical hurdles to achieving this potential. And neither India or the world can afford not to overhaul India's construction industry which is a roadblock to accomplishing what needs to be done in infrastructure. As described here more than 80% of the people in the construction industry are unskilled workers, usually working as day laborers or migrant workers in tiny crews. The other 20% - the carpenters, welders, painters, tile layers, pipe fitters, brick layers, and other skilled trade workers, are becoming harder to recruit and those unskilled workers that receive basic training by companies like Reliance are keen on looking for better opportunities in the Gulf region. The unskilled workers work at construction sites with little training are mainly workers coming from agricultural areas and villages for better wages and living conditions. One of the striking things about Indian construction sites is the use of few machines with most of the unskilled workers, men and women, carrying loads of bricks on their heads, digging holes with shovels and cutting steel bars with mallets and moving sand with spades. There is a huge opportunity for foreign and Indian manufacturers of construction equipment and rapidly increasing production within India of all types of construction equipment should be one of the first things to be tackled. Special incentives by the government and efforts should be made to bring new foreign and domestic investment and plants for construction equipment. Big construction firms that handle large projects, construction equipment manufacturers worldwide and domestic firms interested in investing, and firms involved in large construction projects throughout the country should be brought together in executing the plans for modernization of the construction industry. Training of unskilled workers chosen and recruited for aptitude, discipline and interest in learning new skills from villages as opposed to just working with "nakas" should be initiated in large numbers. A new vocational training system should be initiated borrowing from ideas of systems in countries that have excelled in this in Europe such as Germany so that workers can go straight from villages or urban areas to vocational schools for training in a craft or trade in the construction industry or in the manufacturing industry. And living conditions have to be improved for workers so that skilled workers see advantages in remaining in India rather than leave their families behind for work in the Gulf, and unskilled workers have the basic but good living conditions, access to clean water, basic but decent housing, and clean toilets and showers, and kitchen facilities. One thing is clear one cannot reach organized and well though out development goals on the back of such a haphazard and ineffective sytem of using the human and machine resources in the best possible manner, and free markets and capitalism may not be the best guide in this matter. China's example may not be a good guide in this matter either. There has to be a better way where treating people right and using the most intelligent use of resources brings better results than haphazard approach as with week by week recruiting through "nakas" and minimal use of machines, and recycling of agricultural labor through free markets in labor. The haphazard approach rejects the idea that the training, the discipline and the well thought out approach on recruiting training and best use of human resources without losing sight of costs can lead to superior and continually improving results. The continual improvement and better methods in the construction industry would free up the infrastructure bottleneck and hurdle to growth. Then it would be best to take an original path to development which would be true to the Indian character and spirit and emphasis on education and thoughtful way of doing things, which means that India should make an efficient use of its human and machine resources, and take advantage of all its human resources and intelligent approaches to develop industry and agriculture and avoid the waste in human resources. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Union leaders at plants more receptive to the VEBA, Voluntary Employees Benefit trust.Trust funding at discounted rate an issue. The VEBA could work both ways if its short on funds GM could step in, if it has more funds due a national health care plan being passed then GM could have access to liquidity from the VEBA. Meanwhile Clinton speech in Des Moines, Iowa on new Health Plan addresses the burden on GM to fund retirees health and other costs in the range of 1600 dollars vs Toyota's 200 some dollars. Senator Clinton offers for Governnment to take up the burden of catastrophic coverage for the large companies like GM in her Plan. She also cites the Mayo Clinic study as example of a consensus on the need for action on health care.

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ looks at Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan that marks a major shift for the U.S. economy.  Households would see their costs go down by $11 trillion, boosting their ability to spend on other goods and services. Because income and wealth was highly skewed in the past three decades in one direction, the spending capacity of lower and middle income households was pushed down. This and other similar plans would help restore a higher level of spending and with it an essential element of inflation of 2-3% to the U.S. economy which was missing in the last decade. This sets the tone for the kind of broad based recovery that happened after 1950 that strengthened America's middle class and made it the core of the economy, the core of the post World War II recovery in America and Europe. The plan would be paid for by higher taxes on corporations, tax rate of 21% for corporations going back up to 35%, and reverse depreciation schedules in the 2017 Republican tax law. The argument that this would reduce business investment does not hold that much says the WSJ because amid new trade tensions business investment has declined over the last 2 quarters, and has been sluggish overall. The other source for the estimated $13 to $20 trillion cost of Medicare for All plan of Elizabeth Warren is a 6% annual wealth tax on billionaires, in an attempt to have all pay their fair share and reduce wide disparities in wealth. Mark Zandl, chief economist of Moody's Analytics, says his sense is at the end of the day from a macroeconomic view- because $11 trillion in the hands of 80% of households who could boost spending after lagging behind in the last decade- the negative effect on business investment will be cancelled out by the higher consumer spending. The overall effect and today's context is infused in this analysis. Private insurance, premiums for insurance, and out of pocket cost that the public pays would disappear in this new system where all health payments pass through the government. Health insurance premiums paid by employers would convert into a new employer Medicare contribution to the government starting at an amount employers pay now and adjusting gradually toward national averages over time. Smallest businesses are exempted. Mr. Zandl says the most important aspect of this now is that Mrs Warren has shown that her plan's revenue sources match the cost so that the plan would not lead to deficits increasing and pushing interest rates higher, leading to negative effects on the economy. Republicans under Mr. Trump have paid little attention to expanded deficits caused by their tax law, and economists across the landscape have also shown less concern. Still attacks are made if the plans don't add up. For this reason a sound assessment in today's context of depressed consumers and an overall impact becomes essential. The WSJ quotes from a pre- assessment of Warren's plan by Simon Johnson, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who co-wrote it with Mr. Zandl and Betsey Stevenson of the University of Michigan. What they point out is that putting cash in the pockets of the lower and middle class for spending makes a lot of sense today, and taking money out of the pockets at the way upper wealthy end,  does not contract the economy at all. Other effects they say are constructive by letting all workers get health coverage from the government instead of employers, this makes it easier to change jobs increasing labor mobility and productivity. A worker getting a better job and better utilization of skills could then shift without looking at the employer health care plan. Warren says there would be a five year transition so that workers in health care insurance industry can work in other insurance fields and in Medicare, no one would be left behind. The important thing being to build America's middle class again. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this thoughtful essay Bob Davis of the WSJ asks whether the decision of the Clinton administration to admit China into the World Trade Organization was a bad one for the U.S.  Mr. Clinton in 2000 tried to persuade Congress citing words of president Woodrow Wilson that of a dream "of a world full of free markets, free elections, and free peoples working together."  Every year China would have its most favored nation status renewed with help from supporters in Congress. After WTO entry this was not necessary. Chinese leaders saw the entry into WTO as a way to knock down trade barriers, to act a wrecking ball for the planned economy, to give the economy a big boost.  In 1994 China was a relatively backward economy with 60% of the population living on less than $1.90 a day. Hard to imagine today.  Not everyone was convinced that it was good for the U.S. This included a trade attorney who had tackled a huge trade deficit with Japan in the Reagan period- Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer was Deputy Trade Representative negotiating with the Japanese. His prediction was that no job in America would be safe once China entered the WTO, that China would become a dominant trading nation.  Robert Cassidy, 73, trade negotiator for president Clinton looks back on that time and says that he regrets what has happened, that all his work night and a day only benefited business and hurt workers. David Autor, MIT economist and his colleagues,  in a later study documented loss of 2.4 million jobs to Chinese competition between 1999 and 2011, in many manufacturing towns dotting the landscape of America, particularly in the midwestern states. And the expectation that the higher economic growth would lead to less political control did not turn out to be true.  In the process multinationals rushed to China after WTO entry and China became the world's manufacturing floor. By 2013 China's per capita income reached $7000, after years of fast GDP growth approaching 10% a year.  About 400 million Chinese were lifted out of poverty from living on less than $1.90 per day from 1999 to 2011, according to the World Bank. A big problem was that the U.S. did not plan for the change from WTO entry. No resources were allocated for the plan to let American workers adjust through worker retraining and special trade handicapped income support, to allow for a slow planned shift. Instead the pace of growth was faster than that which the U.S. faced with the Japanese export offensive in the eighties. China experienced double digit growth after 2000. The irony is that the Republican administrations that followed Clinton followed a policy of free trade to the advantage of China's state run economy when working class Americans voted mostly for the Democratic Party. Little was done and little said in the media from Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the establishment during this time even after Mr. David Autor documented the effects of trade in the U.S.  Till Mr. Trump recognizing the alienation in communities hit by job losses from trade upended American politics, shifted this part of the electorate to the Republican base. Mr. Lighthizer's view is that complaints about China should be left out of WTO because it is naive to tackle it that way. With a $375 billion China trade deficit for 2017 the challenge has to be met in a different way, and the U.S. has to rely on regaining its economic strength within a fair trading framework. Having negotiated with the Japanese Mr. Lighthizer sees the approach adopted then as the one right for today. During the long negotiations Lighthizer is said to have received many negotiating positions of the Japanese signifying no change in long sessions. He once simply made a paper plane and sent it right back, in one of these sessions. He meant that the U.S. was serious about reversing the imbalance in trade. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
About the reorganization of IBM under Sr. Vice President Robert Moffat Jr. that is underway. The idea is to make IBM more efficient by increasing the productivity of its people and reduce costs. There are over 200,000 people in the IBM services business. Operating margins increased by 2.3% to 10.3% with productivity improvements in the 1st quarter of 2006. IBM's revenues declined by 1.2% in the 1st quarter to $11.6 billion. This IBM Tech services restructuring will be watched closely by Indian IT and IBM's competitors. Moffat hopes to attack the IT tech services business with a new format to improve productivity and reduce costs, and bring IBM' strengths such as research capabilities to bear. The format is being a virtual factory with competency centres of excellence across the globe. The question is can Moffatt pull this off and convince a bureaucratic large organization to overcome inertia and do things differently. Especially as Indian IT is smaller and not yet affected by Big Company Syndrome. What Moffatt is attempting to do is to create a virtual global factory with specialized centres of compency in different global locations so that work can be transferred from one location to another- much as we see in the automobile industry- based on who does best what at what cost. Nilekani of Infosys, says American competiitors are "seeing it as a compelling threat after years of putting their head in the sand." They are responding to megatrends but not fast enough, according to Business Week. This may be attributable to the fact that Indian IT is younger, smaller, faces more competition inside India, and is more agile for these reasons compared to an IBM or an EDS. Hamm points out that IBM is shifting to a new posture as a globalized business, one that puts behind it its days as a multinational company or MNC, no more MNC geographically based independent country businesses, not an outsourcer as frequently assumed when IBM shifted some jobs overseas recently. The new IBM is an organization that builds on competency centers across the globe with concentration of skills and talent in different locations worldwide. It uses the competency centres to pull together the best people and sequence of operations to meet customer needs. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Proposals for using a plan in the euro-zone, such as the Brady Plan. The Brady plan arranged for bondholders for Latin American debt to take losses of 30% in return for longer term debt instruments with lower rates, and backed by 30 year US zero coupon bonds. This helped restructure Latin American debt in the late 80's and early 90's, and helped countries in Latin America forge an economic recovery. At this time Angela Merkel from the German side is pushing for bondholders to take losses for having made risky loans, which was made part of the EU bailout plan in late November 2010. However investors in financial markets continued to push up bond yields for Belgium, Portugal, and also for Germany. There is the sense that something is needed that would require bondholders to take losses, with some compensating mechanism such as the Brady bonds. Also needed is a restructuring of debt without which euro-zone countries cannot stage an economic recovery. Ireland, Portugal and Spain can no longer devalue their national currencies as a way out of the financial crisis. This increases the urgency for coming up with a solution. Mr. Brady was asked about this at a financial markets conference recently. He said what is needed for such a plan to work, is to have a unified decision. In the Brady plan the US took the lead and agreement was arranged bringing together the bondholders and the sovereign countries. Nicholas Brady was Treasury Secretary of the US in the 1980's. Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and other countries restructured their debt, and commercal banks were able to reduce their exposure at a discount. The principal benefit to the lending banks was that they were able to exchange their claims on developing countries into tradeable instruments, and were able to get this debt off their balance sheets. The negotiations for the Brady bonds involved some form of "haircut" - meaning that the value of the bonds resulting from the restructurings was less than the face value of the bonds. All of the Brady bonds were eventually retired. By Mexico in 2003, and also by Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela....