LyrArc Article Gist
Evern though the Detroit carmakers initial quality as measured by J.D. Powers Initial Quality Survey is slightly higher than Japanese carmakers in pickup trucks, the Japanese carmakers still have a lead in the more popular cars and in crossovers. The Prius is made in a factory in Japan which ranks as one of the highest in quality. Quality is higher at plants in Japan for Toyota cars, and a bit lower here in the states for Toyota plants. Its on a par with Ford for the Toyota cars made in the USA. As the quality gaps shrinks to near zero between the quality of American and Japanese cars made in the USA, Toyota continues to maintain its edge in quality for its plants in Japan over both the Americans and the Germans. And the one carmaker that intends to surprise is Hyundai which surpasses Toyota, Honda, Ford and Chevy in quality and does this with a lower price. Consumers are noticing and making the switch, as Hyundai's market share is increasing. See Hyundai link. Here are some of the results. First the plants that produce the best quality, as measured by the J.D. Powers Initial Quality Survey. A survey of 80,900 cars between November 2008 and February 2009, for the first 90 days thses cars were driven, using the number of problems per 100 vehicles. All numbers refer to problems per 100 vehicles. Toyota plants in Japn that scored highest- Higashi-Fuji at 29 making Lexus SC and Toyota Corolla, Fuijimatsu at 30 making the Prius, Kyushu at 34 making the Lexus ES and Highlander. At the next level German plants, Bremen at 40 making the Mercedes Benz Classes- C, CLK, SL, and SLK. Daimler in E. London, S. Africa at 38, and BMW at 40 in Dinggolfing, Germany. And a cluster of Japanese and American plants in the USA that produce cars of comparable quality. Honda in E. Liberty Ohio at 41, making the Honda Civic, CRV and Element. GM at Oshawa, Ontario, at 42 making the Buick LaCrosse and Chevy Impala at 42. GM at Bowling Green, Kentucky at 43, and Toyota, Georgetwon, Kentucky making the Avalon and Camry at 43. What is notable from the last survey in this highly competitive market is the following. 1. Hyundai at 91 problems per 100 vehicles surpasses Honda at 95. Better quality at a lower price, so its no wonder Hyundai is gaining market share and is the new carmaker gaining a presence in the USA. 2. Toyota is at 101, Ford at 102, Chevy at 103, so the difference now in carmakers quality is perception, perception, perception. Its about lifestyle, what you like to be associated with and what you want your friends and neighbors to think about you in your choice of car, younger buyers who are the next generation that makes or breaks your business, the new trendy things among younger people, and design that appeals to them. 3. VW is at 112. So even though there is aggressive marketing and VW is picking up some market share with the Jetta, it still lags slightly in quality. 4. The American car makers still lack consistent quality. You have the Buick at 117, GMC at 116. Ford with Lincoln at 129. The Koreans with Kia at 112. 5. Chrysler is at the bottom of the list. Dodge at 134, Chevy at 136, Jeep at 137. THe lack of resources, changes in management and ownership, and the distractions of bankruptcy and dealership closings, and most of all dire lack of resources including the layoff of large parts of its engineering talent, all hurt. 6. GM sold Saab, Ford sold Land Rover and Jaguar. The neglect of Saab shows with Saab at 138, and Ford's distraction during the last 3 years shows with Jaguar at 134 and Land Rover at 150. also. 7. In summary Ford has done well overall, Toyota is coming up short in the USA and resting on its laurels, GM has a perception gap with younger buyers, Hyundai looks like a winner with both price and quality, and VW has work to do. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This analysis by Gerald Seib in the WSJ shows the FBI chief Comey reopening the investigation into Clinton's email server just one week before election date November 8, as a move that does not enhance the democratic process because either way it will lead to questions why this was done at this late stage. The emails were found on a laptop used by Huma Abedin, an assistant to Hillary Clinton. Experts say the emails can be processed in a few days, and the FBI, the Justice Department are moving quickly to do this. 

Election experts say most of the decided voters for both parties will not be affected by this especially since most people will have made up their minds by now. Some voters who had questions about Trump might be moved to vote for him, and some undecided voters may be less enthused to come out to vote, though it is not clear at this stage. By mid week a clearer picture is likely to emerge. 

LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street Journal Survey of how the credit ratings firms have performed in prediciting looming defaults. The Journal's Matt Wirz looked at 35 years of data. He found the ratings firms did not do an effective job with predicting defaults in the 12 month period before an actual default. Of the 15 government defaults since 1975 tracked by S&P, S&P's sovereign ratings division rated 12 of the countries single B or higher in the 12 months preceding the default. S&P says a single-B rating on sovereign debt signifies that the government has only a 2% average default rate in the next 12 months. For Moody's Investors Service the figures show that of the 13 governments rated by Moody's, 11 were rated B or higher one year before an actual default. By contrast the investment grade ratings of the credit ratings firms have worked better- as no government defaulted within 15 years of having a tripe-A, double-A, or a single-A rating. Ratings firms say that the ratings indicate a relative default risk for countries and not an actual default probability, a rank ordering for different countries and their relative risk. Research chiefs at investment management firms point out that once a crisis develops the ratings firms are not much help. They also say the ratings firms use static indicators like current account balances and other critical indicators for countries in emerging markets such as political sentiment and bank deposit flows get less attention. Historically bond yields have priced in higher risk premiums into government bonds before a default and investors look at the bond yields in assessing risk conditions, and not at the ratings which change only slowly. Brazil and Argentina both had a double B-minus rating in Jan. 2001. A year later Argentina had defaulted....

LyrArc Article Gist
Pozen calls for smaller Boards of Directors, and suggests about 6-7 directors for a board. Having closer to 11 directors, as is the norm he says, leads to "social loafing" where the directors do not contribute to effective governance. He cites research showing 6-7 is the most effective size for directors to take personal responsibility and take decisive action. This is important as Boards of Directors at GM, Citigroup and other companies failed to take action, leading to a government bailout of these companies. In other cases the situation was less dire, but the Boards failed to provide effective governance. He suggests the board be comprised of people with experience in the areas the company operates in, with one or two generalists to provide a larger perspective. The Citigroup board in 2007 was comprised of luminaries and only one independent director had worked for a financial services firm. The current practice of a board meeting in person every other month for one day, plus conference calls, is just not adequate to stay abreast of the global operations of a company. What is needed is for an outside director to spend 2 days a month on company business between board meetings. For this reason independent directors should be restricted to serving on just two boards of public companies, Pozen says. This would mean having experienced retired persons in the industry, who are over 60. Compensation which is about $200,000 for a board member would be increased to $400,000, as directors would be putting in twice as many hours. Pozen would like to see board members taking their duties seriously, and having expertise in the field the company operates in, making the board duties their primary job rather than an avocation....

LyrArc Article Gist
Boudreaux and Bjork of the WSJ interview Mariano Rajoy, prime minister of Spain, in September 2013. Rajoy says he used to look at an app on the iPad hourly for changes in Spain's borrowing rates at the height of the banking crisis and found it a bit stressful. He hopes the current improvements in the economy will not stall the progress towards a closer union and setting up the financial architecture for the euro which puts the financial strength of the EU countries behind EU banks. Rajoy would like to see a banking union. He sees Spain's banking system not needing a bailout in 2014 and the changes having improved transparency, and capitalization of Spain's banking system. Other signs of improvement are increase in exports, a historic high in tourism revenues as a record is being set for the number of tourists visiting Spain in 2014, lower labor costs, and a current account deficit that reached 10% of GDP now in surplus.The 3rd quarter of 2013 brought an increase of 0.1% to 0.2% increase in GDP. If maintained this represents an annualized growth of 0.4% to 0.8% in GDP. GDP has declined 7.5% in the last 3 years. Rajoy expects GDP to go up 0.5% to 1% in 2014 and jobs being created but the progress only gradual. The government will consider further improvements for a flexible labor market. Increases in pension payments will not automatically be indexed to inflation for Spain's 9 million pensioners in 2014 as part of expected changes. Electricity rates will also not be indexed to inflation. Rajoy's main worry now is that there is a shortage of credit to increase household spending and the dire need for job creation....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Harz labor reforms in Germany in 2003 changed the way unemployment was treated. The idea was to get the government to work more closely with private employers through several initiatives to fund jobs that did constructive work within these companies. This helped reduce structural unemployment because of the almost indefinite unemployment benefits that existed earlier, reducing it from 12.7% in 2005 to 7.1% in November 2008. In November 2009 even after a year of recesion it stands at 8.6%. Are there lessons for other countries in the German experience? THe Harz reforms directed the German Labor Agency to work closely with private employers to fund newly created jobs. One such program paid a Dutch staffing agency Randstad to teach 15,000 Germans information technology, business English an other skills. THe Labor agency funds jobs at a Daimler truck facility in Worth, near Stuttgart, where short term employees instead of being laid off work as mechanic trainees. Another initiative pays parts of the wages of workers hired from those who are jobless, so that the costs of retraining are shared by the government and the employer, making it more attractive to take a chance and go out and hire. And if you lose your job the Harz reforms made it possible to get unemployment benefits for an additional 6 months, if you went out and started a small business. Like the case of an employee who worked at a Kawasaki motorbicycle dealership, who started his own bike repair shop. There are political pressures to extend unemployment benefits as the recesssion becomes more severe. And the structural mismatch in jobs going unfilled, and the number turned out by universities is still a problem. One study by Adecco Institute, shows 29% of large German companies having trouble filling technical jobs, which is why these companies try to keep all their experienced employees....

LyrArc Article Gist
What can be guessed easily the less forunate or poorer sections of society are way more likely to be charged high interest rates or exorbitant interest rates by credit card companies is confiremed by a research report. Demos, a nonpartisan public policy research and advocacy group, says in areport, that low-uincome and lower-middle class income cardholders were about five times more likely than the wealthiest cardholders to pay more than 20% interest. It breaks down users into 4 categories, with the last two being late payers and people with revolving balances. If this graphed out the picture would show practically the entire profit of the credit card companies coming from these two. The reason being that the other two categories are those who have cards and don't use them so don't get billed, and those who pay before the due date so they pay no charges except what the credit card companies make from the business from whom the purchase is made. This means says Singletary of the WPost that the better off well to do sections of society are actually having their annual fees subsidized by the poorer sections of society, or the lower middle class. Singletary says to a online discussion person who though his cards without annual fees were free, they were never really free, and few people think of this. As a society its like hitting oneself in the foot, because by impacting students, minorities, the lower middle class and other sections of society- which form amajority of the people in the country- at a time when they are deeply in debt, is to make for another hurdle to economic recovery. Its going to impact consumption, foreclosures and worsen the cycle that creates more unemployment. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As many politicians and commentators deride programs by the government in the infrastructure area as " mere spending programs", Robert Frank, an economist at Cornell and NYU offers some much needed clarfication. High savings rates are not bad for the public, savings go into investment int he economy, and higher savings properly channelled can lead to higher productive investments that in turn generate a virtuous cycle of more investments. There is thus no conflict between private savings and economic growth. China's and India's higher savings rate leads to savings going into investments in the economy for higher economic growth. Only in sharp economic downturns does the paradox of thrift operate, here lower consumption leads to lower production and layoffs, and the economy goes into a tailspin as consumers hoard their cash and postpone purchases. There is an element of fear in that kind of downturn. So its aunique animal. With the government stepping in to provide investment, make up for jobs lost, and restoring confidence, the paradox of thrift does not operate. ANd its ok and desirable to have consumers save especially when they are so overstretched as they are today. A real world example is that much of the US credit card debt is at 20% interest rates or more. In just 5 years says Robert Frank each dollar invested in reducing debt would support more than $2.50 of additional consumption, in 10 years more than $6. Savings matter. The wastefulness of spending is not a given. It depends on where the government is spending. If there are productive investments like infrastructure that are waiting to be made, then with some due diligence and care the investments can be very efficient....

LyrArc Article Gist
Toyota moves back to its utilitarian roots, where costs matter and pricing matters. Higher cost technological advances are being rejected in favor of older approaches that accomplish the same thing in the manufacturing process at alower cost. And pricier features like the solar ventilation system option on the new Prius are being rejected so that the price can be made more competitive with American cars. Even the idea of pricing Toyota's cars at apremium of $1000 or $1500 over American cars is being questioned in this market. The new Prius mad due to come out this year, developed at a time when Toyota was coasting as it emerged as the most profitable and the largest auto manufacturer in the world, has a price tag of $28,000 versus the $22,000 for the current Prius. This has alarmed some of the bigger Toyota dealers so much that Akio Toyoda the new CEO visited Southern California to talk to these dealers about what has gone wrong with the pricing. These dealers told him that they were worried about that price when they were drastically discounting current Prius models to maintain their sales rate. This is also happening when Toyotas are piling up unsold on car lots at most ports in the US. As Toyota competed with GM for top spot in sales Toyota's management of Watanabe and Kinoshita, the outgoing CEO and his assistant, say critics inside Toyota, lost sight of the need for caution as the company's manufacturing capacity expanded in Japan and overseas. Now with the selection of Akio Toyoda to succeed Watanabe as new CEO, the decision has been made to make a shift to anew generation of managers, with the retirement of 3 executives including Kinoshita and Watanabe. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
If Morse's thinking holds and crude prices drop to $90 range per barrel (see the link to Morse) then we have another major problem on our hands as the incentives for conservation diminish and there is less money invested in energy conservation, and investment, effort and enthusiasm for new technologies for conservation also diminishes. This risks the environment and carbon dioxide emissions and keeps sending money on expensive oil imports to Saudis, Russia and the middle east which could be better invested in the US for innovation and R&D or returned tothe public. For energy saving conservation technology investors the drop in incentive through a return to cheap oil or expectations of prices that are below $100 for instance can be the worst of both worlds high prices and low investment says Vinod Khosla. He advocates a floor on the price of oil. Stanford Professor Hillard Huntington, executive director of the Energy Modeling Forum, a group of energy experts, says energy saving initiatives could easily take 4 million to 5 million barrels a day of demand off the market in 10 years from the 20 million barrels a day that the USA uses to heat homes, power industry, and fuel cars, trucks and planes. It would be a huge loss for that not to happen. And this has happened before as the oil crisis in the 1980's became a dim memory once oil prices hit a low of $11 in the mid 1980's after conservation kicked in at the time. The idea then is to have some sort of gasoline tax that would keep a floor on the price of oil that Europe already has. And British Columbia has shown how by having a small tax and returning money to the taxpayers with a $100 check refund and in other ways to small business and other txpayers....

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bill Clinton, says about his foundation, in talking to voters in Detroit- " all we have done is save lives. If creating jobs and saving lives is bad, I guess you can zing me with it." He told another crowd in Durham, N.C, that he was tickled by Trump's comment that the Clinton Foundation was a "criminal enterprise." The criticism of the foundation hurts Mr. Clinton because of the lifesaving work it has done for AIDS, malaria and saving lives. The Clinton Foundation made the error of taking donations from overseas in the zeal for donations, which gave some critics an opportunity to smear the foundation. Another error was not to strictly separate the work of Bill Clinton from Hillary's work at the State Department. Even though in its activities it has been exceptional in its work. In poor countries like Haiti it has helped people overcome poverty. On one achievement alone the Foundation's work is exceptional- bringing HIV/AIDS medication at affordable prices to 11.5 million people in 70 countries. It has also worked to reduce obesity among American school children, and improved lives through its health initiative, including lives of farmers in African countries. George W. Bush did exceptional work in Africa for AIDS/HIV. Clinton's activities continue an American tradition of helping people in Africa's poorest regions.  In this case the funds raised aggressively by Bill Clinton during speeches, were used to save lives or improve lives. This has been lost in the criticism of the Clinton foundation, as if the good work done by George W. Bush for AIDS in Africa can ever be fairly diminished in the slightest way by criticism of the Bush family. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Li Keqiang, China's new premier, is a member of the "Class of 77," who gained entry to Peking University when university entrance exams were reinstated after Mao's death. This is a period of great curiosity in China about the outside world. Li described it this way in 2008: "In this period knowledge was expanding with the speed of an explosion. I came here not just for knowledge, but to mold a kind of temperament, to master a kind of academic discipline." This he did by working extremely hard trying to master the English language and Western legal theory. He is now the only leader in China who can speak fluent English and is familiar with western concepts of law. For this he owes much to one of his professors, Gong Xiangrui, who studied at the London School of Economics in the 1930's and supported a multiparty system for China. Li was selected as one of the students to translate "The Due Process of Law" by Lord Denning, a British jurist. He spent the next 15 years in the Communist party's Youth League and moved up through the ranks. Many of the "Class of 77' " are still close friends and in academic positions in Singapore, Hong Kong and other universities. He understands the weaknesses in China's legal system because many of his close friends are lawyers, judges and law professors. Evidence of his intellectual openness, is his return to Peking University for a masters degree in economics years later, his thesis on urbanization, and his sponsorship through the Development Reform Commission think tank and the World Bank's Zoellick, of the report published in 2012, "China 2030." That report called for China to change course and reverse the role of state owned firms in the economy, giving consumers a bigger role. Like many of China's leaders this openness also meant during the period of turmoil of the Mao period and the decades following this, of a reticence to talk about political change that came over the entire country, in the words of the 2012 Chinese Nobel Prize Laureate's name, Mo Yan, a kind of "Don't Speak." Taking any kind of political position was simply too risky. The presence of 4 older Politburo members in their mid-60's who are close allies of former president Jiang Zemin and likely to preserve the status quo, also suggests a cautious approach in making changes. One key difference between Jinping- Keqiang from the Jintao-Wen Biao leadership is that Jinping has experience in provincial leadership positions in Hebei, and Keqiang was provincial leader in Henan, China's most populous province, as well as leader in industrial Liaoning province. By odd contrast Hu Jintao was a leader in the remote Tibet region and Wen Biao was a geologist in the northeast for many years. This gives the new leadership team a first hand knowledge of conditions in populous provinces, and the connections with the World Bank's Zoellick a kind of window to the outside that no other leader has had. Jiang Zemin, a former mayor of Shanghai, China' most westernized city in the 1930's and today, was himself a experimenter in his own right when he initiated the changes tht gave China entry into the World Trade Organization. His support of Xi Jinping gives Xi the needed backing for making change happen when the time comes....

LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street Journal report -after interviews with former TEPCO engineers and executives- throws more light on the failure of power and cooling at certain reactors in Fukushima Daiichi that led to the nuclear meltdown. The difference not grasped at the time turned out to be the critical difference between the reactors where electricity to cool the reactors worked and where the the electricity failed. Of the 10 nuclear reactors at Fukushima, only the 4 with the earlier Mark 1 design failed. These reactors were the earliest reactors installed by G.E. beginning in the 1970's. The Mark 1 reactors were serviced by an American engineering firm called Ebasco. Ebasco designed the reactor buildings really small so that they would be compact and economical. Because of the small size of the reactor buildings the generators providing the electricity supplies to the Mark 1 reactors could not be installed inside the reactor buildings made of fortified concrete and were installed in buildings outside lacking similiar protection. These outhoused generator buildings could not withstand the tsunami, resulting in the loss of power and cooling for these reactors, and leading eventually to the meltdown. The reactors with the Mark II and later designs were installed along with the generators in the same fortified concrete buildings, and these survived the tsunami without disruption in power supplies and cooling. This critical difference was noted by older TEPCO executives who were intervewed, but nothing was done about this because of the added cost of making the major modifications that would be needed. The regulatory system also failed to catch the problems with the original blueprints and design for housing the reactors and generators for cooling reactors. In 2001 the original 30 year operating permit for the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor was renewed, and again in 2011 for another ten year period. Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency is part of the industry ministry, and not kept separate and independent from the nuclear industry, a structural flaw. The ministry considered its job to be promoting nuclear power, and increasing nuclear power from 30% in 2010 to 50% of Japan's electricity output. One inspection official says fundamental design and construction of the reactors from a 30-40 year old design were never looked at in safety reviews by regulators approving the extensions. He even goes to the point of saying that the reviews focussed on things like pipes and fittings, missing entirely the safety of the outhouse buildings housing the generators. One of the top TEPCO engineers says this difference stood out like a sore thumb when did a walk through during inspections. He failed to get the support from fellow engineers and Tepco executives for changes that would add to the cost....

LyrArc Article Gist
Greenspan's legacy is called into question with the bursting of the housing bubble which he had not expected and the growth of subprime which he did little to slowdown. His libertarian spirits took a dogmatic view of free markets that said that the best approach was an handsoff one. This conflicted with the proper monitoring and supervision of rapid growth of subprime and the abuses that went on in the market for mortages and mortgage securities. He was also slow to raise rates after the rate cuts were down to as low as 1% which fueled the housing boom. Greenspan actually felt the borrowing on home equity loans for consumption was a good thing but failed to see the excesses in consumption spending and dangers of a negative savings rate. He felt that it was necessary to keep rates low to keep deflation from happening at that point in time. He was too complacent and in the position for too long to do the job well for so long. He was appointed by Reagan in 1987 and retired in 2005 three years ago in this role for 18 years. Could the Clinton or Bush administrations have chosen a fresh face who could have performed quite well and had to prove himself and not become complacent in a wave of adulation during good times? He argues that is decision making process was sound. This showed in the LTCM crisis and during the 9/11 crisis. But what went wrong were that his assumption about the goodness of human nature inherent in an innocent view of free market innovation where only the best happens ignores the possibilities of bad things happening when this innocent innovation is converted into a negative kind of innovation by human greed as happened in the mortgage securities market. And the lack of transparency that can creep in when a watchful eye is taken off the financial machinery and it is left all to its own devices as when these mortgage securities were made complex and dispersed in protfolios all over the global financial in places like Nordic towns in Arctic Norway as well as in far off places in Asia. So the basics: careful watchdog role, continually reassessing things like the patchwork of regulation that Secretary Paulson criticized recently fit for 10-20 years ago, getting interest rates right etc requires a good mind, some grace and a fresh face and energies that a man close to 80 years in 2005 after 18 years in the position got too complacent, overstayed and in the end made crucial errors of judgement and wisdom that his libertarian logic may have made all too easy. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Lessons from the Mexican financial crisis of 1994-95 with the collapse of the Mexican peso, and a massive government bank bailout and Mexico's biggest slump since the Great Depression. Guillermo Ortiz, now central bank governor, was finance minister at the time. He discussed things with Fed Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke, about the Mexican experience which could be seen as the first financial crisis of the global economy. What lessons can be learned? Ortiz says there comes a moment when something happens that leads to a general loss of confidence. Once this happens things can deteriorate fast. This happened when Mexico could not successfully manage the devaluing of the peso. For the USA this might have happened with the collapse of Lehman, which may have triggered a sequence of events leading to a general loss of confidence and banks fear of lending to each other and credit markets getting frozen. At that point Ortiz says its better to do too much than to do too little, as it takes a lot to restore confidence. "And don't be ruled by ideology, stay flexible and act decisively. Help those with mortgages they can't pay. Take stakes in troubled banks. Don't expect to turn a profit on government investment." How do you tackle mortgage workouts or modification. Vicente Corta who led Mexico's bank bailout program says "we tried fancy scemes that did not work. We ended up saying 'OK you pay half your mortgage, and we'll pick up the other half." Sounds similiar to what FDIC's Sheila Barr is doing on a small scale at IndyMac bank, basically " making mortgages affordable." And take stake of ownership in banks in exchange for injection of capital. Paul Krugman says the Bush administration earlier was reluctant to do this, thinking oh that is socialism, because they let themselves get into an ideological bind. Until Gordon Brown did just this in the UK with RBS and HBOS banks on Monday October 13, 2008. In that case because no on else came forward Britain took a majority stake. British finance Minister, Alistair Darling, stated that the British government was not in the business of running banks and that this was taking a necessary step to restore lending. The Mexican experince in this context is very instructive. It cost Mexico dearly in terms of political warfare about this, because once Banamex for example- to which the Mexican governmet gave money without any ownership stake- became healthy it was sold to Citigroup for $12 billion and the government got nothing. In Mexico Lopez Obrador and other politicians have created a running debate about this as totally unfair and it has been divisive for Mexican politics, making passing even basic legislation difficult. Ortiz now says take ownership stakes and if you don't forget about socialism you will have political fallout of a different kind when banks once healthy and profitable are on their own owing little to the government; just when the government falls short of financing the basic programs for the elderly, for children, for schools, for health care,and for collapsing bridges and roads that are falling apart, not to speak of funding shortfalls for Medicare and Social Security. So Guillermo Ortiz has some very useful advice for Ben Bernanke and the Fed and for Treasury and for the next President. Edmund Phelps of Columbia University was interviewed on Bloomberg today, October 13. He is a recent winner of the Nobel prize in Economics. He also believes capital injection into the banks- like other economist have suggested -is the key to getting the banks to lend. He thinks the auction process and buying up toxic assets is way too complicated and would take way too much time. He thinks keeping homeowners in their homes and reducing foreclosures is critical and thinks Martin Feldstein has some good ideas on this. See the links to Martin Feldstein. What if things still deteriorate? The government may have to nationalize or takeover some of the banks, he says. Gordon Brown has already taken over RBS and HBOS. What are some of the ways to improve things. One is that credit ratings firms he says have become almost oracular. Do they know what can happen in the future he asks. We have to rethink what it means to give a rating he says. And the U.S. financial institutions have to go back to doing what they should be doing in the first place, which is to finance investments in companies and business, and not homes and residential construction. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Norbert Rottgen, chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the German parliament is realistic about the prospects of Minsk 2, after the failure of Minsk 1, which was negotiated in the Belarus capital Minsk in September 2014. The Russians have the upper hand militarily and the demarcation line moves further to the west in current negotiations in Minsk. The breakdown in Minsk 1 comes as Putin continues to support the separatists in Ukraine, who declared a Donestsk People's Republic with elections held recently, and have now taken territory to make their positions in eastern Ukraine more defensible. The war could end there with a de facto split of eastern Ukraine on the Russian side, or lead to further guessing of Russian president Putin's intentions if the conflict continues. Italy's foreign minister Paolo Gentiloni, points out that arms aid by the U.S. to Ukraine would only fail as Russia could respond, and it gives the Russian president the added advantage of the narrative that the U.S. and NATO are a threat to Russia at its borders. All sides say they respect the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine, but the fact remains that Ukraine is deeply divided with the eastern region bordering Russia having close ties to Russia, and the western region near Poland having strong ties to a newly emergent EU that includes much of Eastern Europe. Prudence and restraint is needed on all sides for a settlement. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Its clear from the task force's rejection of the plan GM submitted in March 2009, that the restructuring at GM was moving too slowly, too many brands, too many dealerships, no clear idea of what the new GM should look like. And a wistful look back to the past that clouded every decision. Wagoner and his team could not leave the old GM behind and clung onto too many brands, plants, dealerships, and sales numbers that were too optimistic at every turn of the economy, even as they were lowered. The task force said GM was "far too slow" to adapt and that "a substantially mmore aggressive restructuring plan" was required. That GM was just a year ago 2008 about this time still thinking in terms of sales numbers that would match Toyota's, as the largest carmaker in the world, shows how this wistful looking back at the past may have blinded GM to all the potentially dangerous bets that it was making, wihtout realizing it. Bets that the huge gap between the US carmakers and the Japanese and the Europeans in fuel efficiency and the technologies that went with it, would not someday come to hurt GM. Bets that the numbers game could be played without huge risks, that incentives related sales couild simply be inflating the market now with bigger risks ahead. That simply relying on sales revenue to support unsustainable retiree and union costs would be another dangerous bet on unsustainable sales numbers of a16 million market. The other large industrialized societies were seeing shrinking car sales, Japan, Germany, are prime examples, where sales are nowhere what they were at the peak in the postwar recovery of these industrialized countries. See the links/groups to these two countries car markets. Had GM considered the prospect of similiar declines in the US? Even if the car sales had remained at levels much lower than 16 million without the consumer buying spree and incentives, the market would be shrinking, the sales inflation simply made the sales fall that much steeper, hitting the 40% range. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions may relate more to how these situations affected the role of Gates and similar individuals in protecting the interests of the US, Europe, India, Latin America and Africa in health organizations such as the World Health Organization. As globalization spread governments in the West surrendered some of the essential role they played in world health organizations to individuals and NGO's, and countries lacking experience needed for such an important task. The mishandling of the pandemic is partly a result of this retreat by western governments from the role that they have played during the nineteenth and twentieth century. In the US letter to the WHO by president Trump the role of Gro Harlem Brundtland of Norway was shown in handling an earlier virus epidemic that originated in Asia so that it would not spread and could be controlled. This is the H1N1 crisis in 2003 cited in Mr. Trump's letter to the World Health Organization. Brundtland took strong action that was missing during this pandemic after the US and western nations surrendered the essential role they have played for centuries based on role in medical science discovery for maintaining public health. Surrendering this role or seeing it erode is one of the biggest mistakes of our time and a mistaken form of globalized behaviour. It is only now being corrected as the realization dawns on major nations such as US, UK, France, Japan, Russia, India and other countries about the essential stability provided by western nations knowledge, experience and resources to this task of maintaining global health. Even a nation like India has to base its role on hundred or more years of work in medical science and commitment to public health that transcends political preferences or national interest to take on and be a worthy participant with the advanced nations that have played so great and beneficial role for the world in public health. What to speak of transient interest of nations in the developing world or countries where national interest or political preferences play a part in public health of the peoples of the world. This responsibility for world's public health can never be delegated to individuals, foundations or any one country, or small countries, or a combination of these, only to the collective experience of the last 300 years in medical science discovery and the role of Europe including Russia, and the US in leading the way.  The Biden administration has the same underlying concerns as the Trump administration about this mishandling of the pandemic and the disasters that followed bringing so much death and suffering This excerpt on Brundtland of Norway is from the letter the US sent to the World Health Organization- "In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director-General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China. She also did not hesitate to criticize China for endangering global health by attempting to cover up the outbreak through its usual playbook of arresting whistleblowers and censoring media. Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India's Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar said at an Atlantic Council event in Washington D.C. that estimates have been made of what the British took out of India over two centuries and this has come to $45 trillion in today's value. India suffered humiliation for two centuries from 1756 to 1947 with British rule. The country was "bled" and this was first documented by a member of parliament Dadabhai Naoroji in 1901 in London in his book explaining the causes of India's deep poverty in his book with the title- Poverty and Un-British Rule in India. For the first time detailed financial figures were put together on what Britain took out of India and India's Mohandas Gandhi says this was how he learned about how much India suffered economically under British rule with the neglect of agriculture, the peasants and landless laborers making up the vast population of India. Taxation was burdensome on a poor population during most of the period. Railways and mass communication only helped keep the vast region together under British rule and most of the budget went into security and policing for the Empire. Investment in industry or agriculture was neglected for most of the nineteenth century and half of the twentieth. Strangely the first Indian edition of Naoroji's book was only in 1962 with most Indians unaware of what had happened and where this was first documented. Even Cambridge educated Nehru looked at the railways and mass communication as British contributions to india when in actual fact this was of a strategic security aspect for the British in a vast region, and little was done to improve the standard of living of the people in the villages who worked in subsistence agriculture. Gandhi's task was to increase awareness at the grassroots level of the condition of the country. Something he never hesitated to do even writing to the Viceroy who was in charge directly showing how the budget in the 1920's was entirely lacking in any funds for India's development. This letter can be seen today in the Sabarmati Ashram in Ahmedabad, the museum for Gandhi in his home state of Gujarat. One of the lesser known facts about the independence struggle is that Gandhi wrote a little book in 1910 with title "Hind Swaraj" on a steamship making its way back to South Africa from Britain where Gandhi led a deputation for rights of Indian coolie laborers in South Africa. I picked up this book at the original home of Gandhi and his parents in Porbandar, India, recently. In this book "Hind Swaraj" written in 1910 we find astonishingly all the details of the planned struggle for independence that were to happen over the next 20 years. In 1930 with a new edition Gandhi wrote that he had followed this unchanged for 20 years and would change nothing except one line in the book. The book in 1910 was promptly banned by the government of Bombay, yet Indian editions appeared soon afterward. It is written in question and answer format with Gandhi himself posing the questions which he answers, some challenging his view of India, Britain, Indians and the British. He did not blame the British, and called for Indians to take responsibility for letting the British rule in India happen and what was the best way out.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the deadline of July 22 approaches for the 160,000 members of the UK Conservative Party to elect a leader, former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and the current Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt are running for the leadership position. Boris Johnson has 68% member support with Hunt at 23%, according to YouGov survey. Both candidates are in favor of Britain leaving the European Union without an agreement. Hunt has stated he would cancel leave for Britain's 16,000 civil servants in August to prepare for the departure of Britain from the EU by October 31.  Only 27% of Conservative Party members believe Mr. Hunt can do the preparation needed for an abrupt exit after 45 years of economic integration with the European Union. By contrast 90% of members think Johnson would do the preparation needed. Preparation is needed because of food and medical supplies trucks and in flights awaiting customs at border points. The result could be chaotic without adequate preparation. Under a Johnson government many ministers would leave the government including Mr. Hammond who runs the finance ministry. He is expected to join rebel ranks in the Conservative Party that does not think an abrupt exit like this is good for Britain. If these members in the House of Commons join Labour party members they could vote to block this from happening. Britain's opposition Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn has finally decided to call for a second referendum if Johnson pushes to leave the EU abruptly, and to campaign wholeheartedly this time for staying inside the EU. During the last referendum Labour leaders did not push hard for Remain, and David Cameron as prime minister and head of the Conservatives proved to be a weak and ineffective leader using the promise of a referendum as a ploy to win votes for the Conservatives in an earlier election and then finding himself stuck with promises made in the election with his party's right wing led by Johnson. Years of austerity policies promoted by Germany in the EU after a flawed entry of southern European countries with faulty not transparent finances such as Greece too early  into the eurozone had soured Britons on the EU. The friendly migration policies of German leader Merkel for economic as well as war torn country migrants from North Africa finally not just soured Germans on Merkel policies but also soured British working class families struggling to make ends meet and seeing migration as taking British resources that were needed at home. This has split most of Europe including Britain along lines of the major cities and the rural areas plus smaller towns, and in Eastern Europe, East Germany region along the lines of the old Soviet bloc countries which with deeply conservative thinking do not favor such migration policies. These divisive changes have taken place over along period of decades and will take time to heal through economic recovery and a fairer distribution of wealth, better investment in infrastructure, health, education, public services, neglected during the Tech driven flawed investment diversion of economic resources. Yet the hope of this type of change if grasped by Britons as well as Europeans could bring new life and revive the vision of a Europe with shared benefits for all Europeans, not just a French-German project. For this to happen new leaders have to rise to the challenge inside Britain and the rest of Europe.      ...