LyrArc Article Gist
Can Britain take it, more Tory austerity cuts? Mark Landler in the NYT calls it one of the most austere budgets ever imposed on Britain, a country already in recession. Prime minister Sunak and finance minister Jeremy Hunt introduce a budget that will cut government programs saving 30 billion pounds and higher taxes of 25 billion pounds or $29.7 billion. This will mean a drop of 7% in disposable incomes of people in Britain over 2 years. After a series of missteps first under Boris Johnson and then briefly under Liz Truss, the Tory government of Rishi Sunak concentrates on budgetary constraints ignoring the promises made for growth and improving infrastructure, leveling up of regions, that were made by a series of Conservative governments. It lacks broad support as this government was not elected with this mandate. Boris Johnson won the election with traditional Labour support for leveling up, growth and infrastructure. None of this is happening. Also cut are budgets for the defense ministry, foreign aid and aid to cultural institutions in London. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Safety checks at Norfolk Southern are the subject of this report in the WSJ. The derailment of a freight train leading to spill of toxic chemicals in Ohio on Feb 3, 2023, led to concern about the safety practices at American railroads in the efforts to cut costs. The National Transportation Safety Board has opened a probe into the safety culture and practices of Norfolk Southern. One practice called PSR or precison scheduled railroading has been used by railroads in America to cut costs. This means fewer employees, longer freight trains as long as 3 miles, and fewer locomotives. The result is that employees count went down from 159,000 in 2011 to 115,000 in 2021 a drop of 28% even when freight dropped by 11%. This increased profits resulting in higher dividends and stock buybacks, with a heavier workload and less time off  even for sick days until a threatened strike. President Biden intervened to set a new pay and work deal and an element of fairness for workers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hear this America- Trumps call to end tax on social security benefits is a HUGE MISTAKE. It will result in seniors getting an average of about $560 now in exchange for a cut in social security by 25% in 2033 only 9 years from now, and Medicare insolvency 6 years from now. The insolvency dates and cuts are estimates of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

Senator Larson says Trump's plan to end tax on social security benefits is "a fatal mistake," because it does not make up for the lost revenue.The Committee for Responsible Federal Budget, bipartisan budget evaluation says it will bring forward by 6 years Medicare insolvency from 2037 to 2031 just 6 years from now, and advance Social Security Fund insolvency by 1 year from 2034 to 2033. It will lead to a cut in Social Security benefits of 25% in 2033 which would have dangerous and tragic consequences for seniors in America pushing many into poverty.

LyrArc Article Gist
Climate policy changes lead to $1.3 trillion savings according to analysis from DJT administration and EPA's Zeldin, with $1.1 trillion in savings from lower vehicle prices which addresses unaffordability of cars. Using the average price of a new basic Toyota Corolla the price in 2020 was $19,000 which has gone up to $23,000 a price increase of 21% by 2025 over a 5 year period. The cost in 2026 of operating a Gas powered vehicle is on average about $2500, for EV car about $1000 with $1500 in savings per year for EV's that need to be figured into the equation at gas prices that prevailed in 2024 of $4-$5 per gallon . At prices of $3 per gallon the gas costs come down to $1200 when driven 12,000 miles at 30 mpg for 400 gallons of gasoline consumed. This makes the difference between gas and EV yearly savings on gasoline costs down to about $200 from $1500. This makes gasoline powered cars attractive as car companies can reduce EV investments and pass on some of these savings in lower car prices in 2027 in exchange for favorable rules on emissions and EV transition dates.  Are there losses through the emissions and climate change? The DJT/Zeldin EPA analysis points to global climate emissions from China and India (the coal powered plants) continuing at a pace that would determine the overall change in climate for 2026-2027. In this kind of approach the goal is to make cars affordable over a 2-3 year period for US and European carmakers who would be expected to cut prices. It is about flexibility in fighting the Cost of Cars a big component in the Cost of living with housing as the next large component. It is not a long term strategy, simply one that offers a flexible approach. Will the US, Europe and Japan fall behind in EV's technology? Hybrids a focus of Japanese cars will continue to advance that technology which is becoming a preference where it is affordable for customers. Toyota for instance will have a wide lead in hybrids technology by 2030. Much of the Chinese market will have EV's and the EV's technology will advance in China in 2026-2027, and tariffs will be needed to protect European and American carmakers for 2026-2028. It is a strategy tradeoff to deal with the cost of living crisis in US, Europe and Japan answering call for a flexible approach that was also heeded by the Biden administration in relaxing carbon emissions rule changes. It will require automakers to step up and cut prices for gasoline models for buyers at the entry and lower range for affordability by 2026-2027. What about climate action? The strategy is based on the idea that climate action requires India and China (coal powered plants) on board to make a real difference so that over 2-3 years to 2027 the US, Europe and Japan need to address affordability for the lower end entry cars. There is an element of denial of climate change in parts of the DJT administration in the US but not in Europe and Japan. It is also true that leading DJT administration officials Secretary Bessent see the problem of climate as real and one that needs to be addressed yet leaving room for flexibility to tackle affordability crisis for ordinary workers with low incomes struggling to make a living. Bessent and others in the DJT administration are calling for using all of the resources to address needs of people struggling to make a living, and for a strategy for the US to get back its manufacturing capacity from China and for rebuilding the US economy after deindustrialization (caused by Clinton's huge US economy shattering failure to provide safeguards for abuse of the trading system by China in signing a poorly drafted agreement for China's entry into WTO at the end of his term in 1999-2000 just when he had fought impeachment.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
EIA says half of the benefit of higher fuel efficiency standards for Automobiles 2010-2020 in US was lost because of SUV's and the incentivizing of SUV's in the 2006 CAFE standards have made things worse. The first SUV's came in the 1980's. By 2004 SUV's made up half of car sales and by 2025 outsold cars 2 to 1. What if we took all SUV's and large cars off the roads, or even some of these SUV's by deincentivizing of SUV's in the US CAFE corporate fuel efficiency standards? What would be the savings in crude oil and in carbon footprint? Would it be about the same as releasing an additional 400 million barrels of oil into the markets in addition to the 400 million barrels that are now released through EIA and member countries? This New Yorker essay touches on this idea. During the Iran war the volatile Middle East as a source of oil supplies is a major problem for countries. Some are rationing supplies and in one country 40 million children are not going to school for 2 weeks starting this week because of the sources of oil are so precarious, government offices will only have half of the employees, the rest working from home (almost like Covid pandemic). Many other countries face that situation. The International Energy Agency recently reported that, if “SUVs were an individual country, they would rank sixth in the world for absolute emissions in 2021, emitting over 900 million tonnes of CO2.” The agency says governments must redesign their CAFE standards and their policies so that it would reduce S.U.V. sales, tax gas guzzling vehicles. EIA cites governments in the EU doing this- “Some governments have already started introducing relevant measures, such as France and Germany, which have put a tax on large and high-emissions cars.” Within SUV's also there is an opportunity to reduce the size and make more efficient space utilization designs. Small savings also add up. One has to realize that the current freedom to use energy freely in places like the US with self sufficiency in oil comes with a sense of responsibility for using it wisely so that it can be exported to cut the trade deficit, precisely what the president is doing with India, to cut a trade deficit of $58 billion before it gets to $100 billion. Section 301 is already in place for investigations by the US of 18 countries for a new basis to use tariffs after the Supreme Court decision. A similar approach is taken with EU for hundreds of billions of reductions in trade deficit that will only strengthen the US dollar and the US economy in the long run , and be good for stock markets and jobs as it reduces oil prices and increases the manufacturing capacity/cost for the Nation. Europe, India and China can do the same. Remember that in 2010 SUV's made up 17% of total world sales, and by 2025 SUV's made up 46% of world vehicle sales. This would create another 400 million barrels for the oil markets, which would triple what was released through EIA  this week to 1.2 billion barrels and this would create 120 days of supply replacement for the 10 million b/d lost from Straits of Hormuz, and effectively end the Iran War as it would be clear that prices can be kept low even in the $50's. Essentially buying time till the SU can get more production in Venezuela and other parts of the world to replace much of the Middle Eastern oil that is ending up in a quagmire. This is the best way for the US and Europe, India, China to ensure jobs growth, economic growth with low cost crude oil in the $50 range and ensure much of the poorer countries like Egypt and Indonesia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, have access to oil at prices they can afford and eliminate poverty. ...