LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor on the dangers of a loose U.S. monetary policy and the effects this had in fueling a housing bubble in Spain, Ireland and other EU countries. Taylor points to the bubble ocurring in emerging market economies from low interest rates. Taylor says the ECB's interest rate moves in 2003-2005 were affected by the Fed's low interest rates. He estimates the ECB set rates about two percentage points too low leading to housing bubbles in EU countries. A similiar process is taking place today with the Fed's near zero interest rate policy. Taylor points to interest rates in a group of 18 emerging market economies- including Brazil, China, India, Mexico and Turkey, which have held interest rates on average about 5 percentage points below widely used benchmarks fueling a doubling of global commodity prices between 2009-2011. The U.S. Fed's policies make it harder for central banks in emerging market economies to take aggresssive action against bubbles developing in these countries. Taylor says his does not mean that the Fed should not pay attention to the U.S. unemployment rate and long term unemployed, but should keep in mind the negative effects of slowing demand in emerging market economies and in the EU as a result of its monetary policy of keeping rates at near zero for long periods of time. This feeds back to the U.S. economy at a critical time....

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Bair, former head of the U.S. FDIC, points out flaws in the rules for capital adequacy ratios and risk weighted assets which allow banks to increase their capital adequacy ratios. The ratios show the financial strength of the banks and their ability to absorb losses, which makes their accurate calculation very important for the safety of the U.S. banking system, especially with large "too big to fail" banks. Bair says the 2013 U.S. Fed stress tests showed Bank of America as having a capital adequacy ratio of 11.4%, when it should actually be 7.8% without the risk weighted adjustment. The mortgage banking crisis showed how the risk wieighting can be flawed and give a distorted representation of the acutal risks facing the banks in its assets. For Morgan Stanley the 2013 stress tess by the U.S. Fed showed the capital adequacy ratio at 14%, taking out the risk weighting adjustment this drops to 7%. Bair says its not the idea of risk weighting that is the problem, but the way it is applied- for example considering sovereign government bonds in the eurozone as zero risk, or that only 20% of the accounting value of debt one banks buys from another bank is to be taken into account in setting the ratio. Go back to the drawing board she says, it makes no sense that Citibank debt be shown as having one fifth risk of IBM's. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The home ownership rate for the U.S. in March 2012, is 65.4%, the same rate as in 1997 before the housing bubble, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The irony of this is that the housing bubble was inflated by politicians in Congress and mortgage lenders and purchasers of mortgage securities. Fannie Mae and Countryside worked together ostensibly to promote home ownership while pursuing profits. In the case of politicians they pursued goals of raising employment and growth without understanding the risks of artificially inflating home ownership, and without consideration for incomes of subprime borrowers. A less benign view of the interests and goals of politicians comes from reflections on the impact of political lobbying by Fannie Mae and other housing lenders in the U.S. Congress. The consequences in terms of foreclosures have been devastating for minorities as well as other middle class homeowners. It has also damaged the U.S. banking system, credit growth in the economy and prospects for recovery, which will take years to correct. The federal government is also saddled with large losses at Fannie Mae because of its quasi government agency role. That role led to inflation of the bubble. Most of the consequences will be borne by middle and lower income households in the U.S. The pass-through effects in a global economy affect Europe, and emerging market countries. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out the gains on three fronts evident from the Census Bureau report of 5.2% gain in median income of households in the U.S. He says the first is the growth in incomes of ordinary working class and middle class families, second the large decline in the poverty rate, and third the further rise in insurance coverage in 2015 for people without health insurance. He points to the steady efforts of the Obama administration to improve lives of ordinary families as working based on the Census report though results have taken time, and could have been better. The Stimulus, says Krugman could have been larger following the blow of the 2009 financial crisis and increased unemployment at the time. Janet Yellen at the inequality conference of the Boston Fed in 2014 pointed out the problems of 62 million households having net worth of about $10,000, and why this was running against the American idea of a better life for all Americans. In that sense the Census report is a movement in the right direction but a lot remains to be done.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greenspan testifes before the House Oversight Committee headed by Congressman Henry Waxman (D., California). Congressmen read back quotations from Greenspan where he talked about the resilience and efficiency of American free markets and defended derivatives and complex financial instruments. Some referred to the comments he made saying that housing markets would not collapse and the worst may well be over. Almost by 10 to 1 the readers responding to a WSJ poll say Greenspan was responsible for easy money for most of the decade and his lack of the most elementary safeguards for the economy instead defending derivatives and complex financial instruments, and considering the bubble in house prices as not the Fed's concern. Many used expletives deleted or the words "clowns" or "illiterates" for Greenspan and associates at Treasury. A congresswoman from Minnesota asked pointed questions about state effforts to stop predatory lending that were nixed by the federal authorites under Greenspan and Treasury's watch. She thensuggested that they the stewards of the economy try pragmatism and commonsense for policy decisions. Describing the present crisis he seemed so out of touch that when asked about rising foreclosures and need to stabilize home prices, he still was trapped in his libertarian ideology and impulses. He said transfer payments should be tried instead as modifying the mortgages would not be good in the long run when markets return to normal. He said this crisis has still some months to go. In these observations he showed that he has still not grasped the full extent of the crisis, as a realistic assessment of the economy suggests that the economic downturn has not really hit in terms of unemployment and drops in consumption, which will hit in 2009 and 2010 and years beyond. He looked old and worn out showing every bit of his 81 years, which begs the question how could he have been chairman for 17 years till he was nearly 80, as he was still Fed chairman just 2 years ago. There are term limits for mayors, and for President, how is it that there are no term limits for Fed chairman? Should'nt the Clinton administration or the Bush administration have made a new appointment to get fresh blood, fresh thinking, just as corporations do. Wells Fargo chairman Kovacevich is supposed to retire, even though he has good skills for accomplishing the merger of Wachovia having done this for Norwest. Bloomberg is fighting the term limits to stay on for another term and will need a special vote. Doesn't senility hit the best of us, and isn't there an age when people should have to retire from these positions, long before they get close to 80. An assessment of Greenspan watching him over the years would show that he loved data and data analysis, and trusted data as almost carrying infallible weight. As most of the data he looked at was for the postwar expansion of the USA economy, he saw as he himself testified this week data that showed the economy with small setbacks to be sure but on a constant upward trend. The way down he said in response to a question the data looks completely different, with fear and lack of trust and other things making this pattern have no relationship whatsoever with the way up. Greenspan and the nation's misfortune maybe that for too long the country's political leaders trusted over two decades a man who did not have the healthy skepticism of data even when it appeared to reflect certainty, and did not have the healthy impulses for safety and safeguards that surpass all ideological thinking, and a respect for basic ethics and common sense that goes beyond everything and puts it above everything else. This is a misfortune because these are qualities required for good leadership especially leadership entrusted with such huge responsibilities which can never be taken lightly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Meltzer is a respected voice on US Federal Reserve policies since the time Paul Volcker was Fed chairman He says the Bernanke Fed is making some serious policy mistakes. The first is concentrating on near term events, such as business response to Obama administration policies, over which it has little influence, while neglecting the long term consequences of its policies. The second is its effort to tackle unemployment by interpreting its mandate as a dual mandate of tackling both unemployment and inflation. By tackling one at a time, he says, the Fed is likely to fail totally. The US is unlikely to not feel the inflation that is going on around the world. By ignoring the changes in money supply growth the Fed is making another mistake. His advice is for the Fed to increase interest rates it controls to 1%, to signal that it is aware of inflation risks. Second, the Fed should annonce a specific, detailed plan explaining how it will reduce $900 billon of the $1 trillion banks continue to hold in excess of the legally required reserves. Third, the Fed should end QE II, the most recent round of treasury bond purchases. Meltzer says if the Fed waited for two more months in Nov 2010, it would have found that a double dip recession was not about to occcur and it could have held off from pursuing QE II. Meltzer emphasizes that slow growth and unemployment is not a monetary problem, because of the ample liquidity already in the financial system. Uncertainty about government policy and the future direction has been clarified by the election which will help put the economy back on track. Philadelphia Fed chairman expresses similiar views in other articles and an interview with O'Grady of WSJ....

LyrArc Article Gist
Moody's Investor's Service downgrades China's credit rating to A1 from Aa3. Moody's predicts a slowdown in growth for China. GDP growth for 1st quarter 2017 was 6.9%. Total debt has grown from 149% of gross domestic product in 2008, to 213% in 2013, and is now 253%, according to JP Morgan. The problem is that ever higher levels of credit have supported growth and more of this is coming from the shadow banking sector. Higher levels of debt in future years from the already high levels will weigh heavily on growth, leading to an eventual slowdown in the economy's growth rate.

LyrArc Article Gist
Juleanna Glover points to the need for financing of the Kurdistan regional government in Iraq as the central government in Baghdad has failed to make payments to the KRG for its share of national oil income. The KRG would receive 17% of Iraq's national oil income under negotiated agreements, but only $2 billion of $12 billion owed to KRG has been transferred in 2015. The Kurds also have to support 1.8 million refugees from Syria and Iraq with the ongoing civil war. The World Bank predicts a shortfall in funding for KRG of $1.5 billion in 2015, and it needs a $2.4 billion bridge loan. Peshmarga forces it is reported have not been paid for 3 months even as the Kurds have borne a disproportionate share of the burden in the war.

LyrArc Article Gist
Investors such as hedge funds and mutual funds that are investing in U.S. mortgage backed securities in the hope of returns in the range of 6-12%. With the recovery in prices since 2010 some of these mortgages bundled into securities are going for about 70 cents on the dollar.

LyrArc Article Gist
Central Huijin, part of China's sovereign wealth fund, China Investment Corporation, bought shares of China's four major banks in October 2011 to prevent steep price declines. China's bank stocks have lost about a third of their value in 2011. The four major banks- China Construction Bank, Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of China, and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China- control two-thirds of the banking industry in China. In China's interlocking system of relationships between the state, the banks and the state controlled industrial companies, Central Huijin owns 35.4% of Industrial and Commercial Bank, 67.6% of Bank of China, and similiar stakes in the other 2 banks. It was created in 2003 to bail out China's banks after bad loan losses, and was transferred to China Investment Corporation in 2007. As part of the 2007 move bonds were issued by CIC to compensate the central bank. This means the banks pay dividends to CIC so that it can make payments on the bonds. Today the 4 major banks pay half of their earnings in dividends to CIC. CIC chief Lou Jiwei, says Central Huijin needs 300 million renminbi a day, or $47 million to pay interest on the bonds to the central bank. The 4 major banks are also under pressure from China's regulators to increase their capital reserves, because of large bad loans to local governments after the global financial crisis of 2008....

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the true cost of the Obama health care legislation and the assumption that the legislation cuts the deficit by billions of dollars. This WSJ editorial says one has to look at this closely, and not merely look at CBO projections, which may be based in a certain context and not reflect the true costs, especially because many accounting gimmicks and use of numbers to present a particular picture is taking place. The information this editorial cites is that: it uses 10 years of taxes to fund six years of subsidies, Social Security and Medicare revenues are double-counted to the tune of $398 billion, a new program funding long-tem care frontloads taxes but backloads spending, and the assumption of an automatic 25% cut to physician payments that Congress is unwilling to authorize. Rep. Rand Paul has tried to present an alternative view which needs to be studied just as closely, because of the enormous impact of a jump in spending at a time when the public finances are fragile. WSJ also cites the work of Richard Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, as an alternate perspective of how things could turn out, Doug Holtz-Eakin, and Eugene Steuerle. It calls for common sense in evaluating programs, entitlements, defense or other government spending. They not only cost money, but costs escalate over time as history has shown over decades, till they eventually are discovered to be not affordable unless the middle class is willing to dig deeper into its finances to pay for them. Alternate perspectives from a range of informed opinion, Howard Dean, Martin Feldstein, and the head of Harvard's Medical School show that the issue needs to be looked at closely and carefully and cannot be something in which CBO numbers can be trusted to tell the whole story. Especially when common sense, history, and informed opinion across a spectrum of thought advises caution, and fragile public finances also suggest caution. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont, says the health care bill is not real reform, and may do more harm than good. He says in a Washington Post article, December 17, 2009, the Obama health care bill does not insert competition into insurance markets, does not significantly reduce costs, and does not improve the delivery and use of health services. It was he says done with a political calculus and crafted for votes not real reform. Jeffrey S. Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School, gave the Obama health reform bill an "F" grade, saying in a Nov 18, 2009, WSJ article, that it was disingenuous to call this reform, Congress and the White House were simply deceiving the public. He said the bill will accelerate US health care spending, postpone most of the major health care problems, expecially the ones that drive cost, including the "fee for service" system and delivery of health care. He says in his discussions with economists and other health care leaders the opinion was unanimous that the bill will accelerate health care spending. He cites Massachusetts as an example, where access to care was expanded under the same dysfunctional system, and spending went up, and it doesn't work. Feldstein, who in early 2008 suggested proactive solutions to the mortgage debt crisis which were never adopted, says that the Obama health care law means higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of health care for the uninsured group over 10 years. Feldstein says that the Obama plan is to cut Medicare to cut spending, and will reduce the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reducing payments to providers. And he asks if the cost reductions are weighted too heavily towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers ,would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% of the American people who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Congress passed free-trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama, in October 2011. The deals are expected to increase U.S. exports by $13 billion, including $11 billion to S. Korea.

LyrArc Article Gist
The median net worth of Hispanic and Black families has been severely affected by the recession. Because minorities hold a much larger part of their assets in household equity the foreclosure crisis and the recession have had a devastaing impact on both minority groups. The median net worth of Hispanic families dropped by two thirds and black families by half after the 2008 recession from the 2005 figures, and was around $6000 for 2009 for both groups, according to data from the Pew Research Center. The Pew report shows median net worth of a white family is 20 times that of a black family, and 18 times that of a Hispanic family, with the gap between these minorities and whites twice as large in 2009 compared to the period before the recession in 2005. This was even true for Asian American families, whose median net worth dropped by half from 2005 to 2009, to $78,000. The figure for whites dropped much less from $135,000 to $113,000 during the same period. Another significant finding is that within each group the share of the wealthiest 10% of the people increased between 2005 and 2009, for all households this went up from 49% to 56%, for Hispanics from 56% to 72%, for Blacks from 59% to 67%....

LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Baker of the New York Times takes a detailed look at Obama and the Presidency in October 2010. He has a long informal interview with President Obama, and uses his knowledge of prior Presidents, to provide a revealing look at Obama's first term in office upto this point. It provides an exceptionally insightful look at the man and his administration, in all its facets, facets that have create both hope and disillusionment. Obama comes across as the cerebral person even in his musings about popular disappointment with the administration, and does not seem connected with the gut-wrenching issues of jobs, foreclosures, the economy, and the economic future as a President needs to be. After all the inspirational rhetoric, Obama, says Baker, did not stay connected to the people who put him in office in the first place. And revealingly Baker shows that even today Obama talks only to a few insiders, compared to Clinton's wider circle, to understand what is happening in the country.

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Krugman points out that the Bush tax cuts if continued in the US for all income levels will cost $680 billion over the next decade. This estimate is from the Tax Policy Center.

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein says that for the 85% of the people who have healthcare the Obama proposals are not a good deal. The Obama proposals mean higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of healthcare for the uninsured group over 10 years. This lower income group has no coverage despite the $300 billion Medicaid program. Feldstein says there surely must be better and less costly ways of getting this lowincome group healthcare. Raising the top income tax rate to 45% from 35%- as a result of letting the Bush tax cuts expire and adding aproposed health surcharge on higher income individuals- would actually lower revenues for the government, as it would change behavior of high income individuals in ways that lower their taxable inome. The result is higher deficits and higher taxes when even without this large deficits are projected for the future. How to slow the rapid growth in healthcare spending? The Obama plan is to cut spending on Medicare. Feldstein sees the govenment's effort aimed at reducing the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reduced payments to providers. Will this result in enough of acost reduction to make the system work. And if the cost reductions are too heavily weighted towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare, even though it is structured to allow cost escalation. Feldstein offers no solutions to the problems of cost escalation except to suggest that the Obama plan does not really tackle the cost escalation issues directly with providers, and instead burdens the national finances to an extraordinary degree. And the need for apause and reflection....

LyrArc Article Gist
There are gaps between this version of the differences and the version on the Wiki site which compares the government version and the civil society version. As the differences can be important because of the local conditions in India it is necessary to read the actual bill and all the details to understand clearly what is at stake. The version on the site suggests the government bill gives the anti-corruption body few powers and operates in a way that would make it ineffective if the government in power decides it is in its interest to do nothing. That situation actually exists today as the current government does not see it in its interest to pursue the corruption cases except in the slowest way possible.