LyrArc Article Gist
Porter cites a report by Kai Daniel Schmid and Ulrike Stein of the Macroeconomic Policy Institute in Dusseldorf. The report shows the top 10% of Germans having 26% of the country's income before taxes and transfers in 1991. This increased to 31% by 2010. For the same period of about 20 years the bottom half of the population took in 17% in 2010 dropping by 5% from 22%. The growing income inequality in Germany is comparable to what has happened in the U.S. over this period.

LyrArc Article Gist
An internal IMF document that estimates Europe's banks are short of capital by $273 billion. IMF managing director, Christine Lagarde, tries to downplay the report by saying this is not from a stress test that the IMF conducts. In August, Lagarde, called for an "urgent recapitalization" of European banks. As France's finance minister, Lagarde, steadfastly insisted French banks were well capitalized. France worked hard to prevent requirements for significant capital reserves under the Basel III rules. The higher capital requirements were supported by the U.S.. Simon Johnson said in his blog, that as long as European banks had inadequate capital to act as a buffer against losses, European countries had no safe route for restructuring their debts.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff was critical of the S.E.C.'s practice of entering into consent judgements which allowed defendents to not admit to wrongdoing. In his order Judge Rakoff rejected a $285 million settlement with Citigroup for a mortgage-bond deal. In his order he said such settlements are viewed by the business community as "a cost of doing business." He found it hard to discern what the S.E.C. would be getting out of such a settlement "except a quick headline." Rakoff summarized the problem with such settlements and the S.E.C.'s practices when it comes to the public's interest: "In any case like this that touches on the transparency of financial markets whose gyrations have so depressed our economy and debilitated our lives, there is an overriding public interest in knowing the truth. In much of the world, propaganda reigns, and truth is confined to secretive, fearful whispers. Even in our nation, apologists for suppressing or obscuring the truth can always be found. But the S.E.C., of all agencies, has a duty, inherent in its statutory mission, to see that the truth emerges; and if it fails to do so, this Court must not, in the name of deference or convenience, grant judicial enforcement to the agency's contrivances."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Systemic risks from "too big to fail" and the pushback on capital reserve requirements that leave banks with lower reserves. Ewing describes the role of the president of the Swiss Central Bank, Mr Hildebrand, in setting rules for higher capital reserves for Swiss banks than that of other countries and the pushback from the banks resisting the new regulations. "He will never find another job in Switzerland," a Swiss newspaper Der Sonntag quoted one banker saying this about Mr. Hildebrand. Losses at Swiss bank UBS during the financial crisis and the $2 billion loss at a UBS trading desk in 2011 have created a new awareness of systemic risk at banks. During the financial crisis banks used an optimistic estimate of "risk weighted assets" which led to insufficient capital reserves in a crisis even as the banks were shown to be well capitalized. A sense that banks in Europe and the U.S. will continue to have insufficient capital reserves at 3-4% of assets under new rules and with the longer phase in times for the new Basel III regulations of reserves at 7% of assets to after 2016....

LyrArc Article Gist
Macroprudential policies of central banks in S. Korea, Indonesia, China, Canada, and other countries, as concerns grow about a housing and credit bubble.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Yellen launches a sweeping review of practices for supervision of large banks in Nov. 2014. The review is designed to check "whether there are adequate methods for decisionmakers to obtain all necessary information to make supervisory assessments and determinations," and whether channels exist for decision makers to take into account divergent views when important issues arise. This is in response to questions about how the culture at the New York Federal Reserve may have stifled differing opinions on how banks should be supervised and what is proper information sharing between regulators and banks.

LyrArc Article Gist
By July 2013 only about 40% of the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation rules were completed, 60% of deadlines were missed, according to law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP. A singular aspect of the Dodd-Frank legislation was that rule making was left to regulators in different agencies and open to lobbying by the financial industry. This has the effect of delaying the rule making until a consensus is reached, diluting some of the original intent as financial firms jockey for advantage, and making it voluminous in many cases because of the wording designed to achieve consensus and account for objections by various interests. Reform legislators such as Barney Frank openly said they had no interest in learning enough about the financial industry to do the rule making, and may have left an excessive amount of the rule making to regulators in the future. A consumer protection agency was established under the new law and derivatives are required to be traded on exchanges. The Volcker Rule to separate investment banking from deposit taking and a requirement that banks hold onto a portion of mortgage securities marketed are not completed. The S.E.C. has to write the rule on how much money brokerages must set aside for losses on swap trades. Another bubble in financial markets would leave the U.S. and European economies vulnerable to problems similiar to the global financial crisis of 2008, which is why the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and the European regulatory authorites are requiring large banks to set aside more capital reserves. The S.E.C. under its new chief is also taking a more active role in overseeing the banks for violations of securities laws, including a series of actions taken against JP Morgan Chase bank in 2013. This has a deterrent effect as the huge monetary easing by the U.S. Federal Reserve to reduce unemployment also creates bubble conditions in financial markets, according to Fed governor, Jeremy Stein. Former FDIC chief, Sheila Bair, says the lack of leadership in this area is simply astonishing....

LyrArc Article Gist
This Wall Street Journal editorial comes out in favor of higher capital reserve requirements similiar to that suggested by Federal Reserve Board governor Daniel Tarullo. The Journal says that if regulators are serious in the U.S. about controlling systemic risk, then the 14% rule or a 15% rule for assets held in reserve by banks should be adopted. Daniel Tarullo had suggested a 14% capital reserve requirement. These requirements would be phased in gradually over several years. Basel III requirements require only a 7% requirement and is phased in over many years. Capital standards are likely to be gamed. For this reason the requirement for only Tier 1 capital to be eligible is essential. What about the Basel III standards and the European banks? Would this put them in a better position to earn higher returns. This should be a problem left for European taxpayers to tackle says the Journal. As long as U.S. taxpayers are supporting U.S. banks with an implicit subsidy to take on larger amounts of risk -because they will be saved in a crisis with taxpayer dollars- the Journal says it makes sense to require 10-14% in capital reserves. It cites the Japanese banks which were highly overleveraged with lower capital reserves compared to American banks, and fared poorly. The Dodd-Frank bill imposes a complicated set of regulatory requirements with regulators required to write new sets of rules. The editorial concludes that it is far better to tackle the problems in the banking system with a sufficiently high requirement for capital reserves to manage risks than to have the detailed rule making on every subject that Dodd-Frank suggests....

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's finance minister, Wolfgang Schauble, says Germany can move faster than expected to allow shared liability of eurozone debt. He also accepts the need for short term measures such as the European Stability Facility buying bonds of Spain and Italy in private markets to drive down yields. Schauble indicated this flexibility in an hour long interview with the WSJ on June 27, 2012. This comes after Angela Merkel's remarks made in talks with coalition partners the Free Democrats that she would not accept any mutualization of debt in the eurozone in her life time. Schauble reiterated his view that before joint liability of debt can take place there has to be a joint EU fiscal policy, and sequencing was critical. He called for a EU fiscal commissioner arrangement for reviewing EU member budgets and policies. At the same time he said Germany was open to some level of mutual financial support between members of the eurozone, under the right conditions.

LyrArc Article Gist
Jon Hilsenrath of WSJ provides an illuminating account of how Daniel Tarullo as head of the Large Institution Supervision Coordination Committee has changed the way bank supervision and rules are set for U.S. banks since the days of the 2008 financial crisis. Tarullo started the effort under Ben Bernanke and continues this in 2014-2015 under Fed chairwoman Janet Yellen. The New York Fed is seen as ineffective in bank supervision and the supervisory role is now entirely performed under the leadership of Tarullo, assisted by Kenneth Gibson and Timothy Clark. The trio are some of the great unsung heroes of the effort to put the U.S. financial system and the economy on a safer footing.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Federal Reserve governor Daniel Tarullo tells the Council on Foreign Relations that so much remains to be done four years after the financial crisis. The law firm of Davis Polk says 67 percent of deadlines were missed for new rules required to be set in place by the Dodd-Frank legislation, including the Volcker Rule. Tarullo said: "It is sobering to recognize that more than four years after the failure of Bear Stearns began the acute phase of the financial crisis, so much remains to be done." Tarullo fears that crucial momentum may be lost because of the long delays stemming from resistance by the banks. Tarullo met with bank CEO's in April 2012. Banks have protested that Fed stress tests have not revealed the parameters for the testing. Tarullo's response given at a recent Fed conference in Chicago were that this would let banks game the exercize by running the Federal Reserve model and not improving risk management and capital planning, making this a mechanical compliance exercize. Banks have particularly opposed a requirement that limits the risk in business between two banks to 10% of their credit risk....

LyrArc Article Gist
Australia's minimum wage is set for 2015 at $16.87 Australian dollars per hour, or $13.55 U.S. dollars for people over the age of 20. This is 30% higher than the minimum wage of $10 in California, and almost double the federal minimum wage in the U.S. For years since the late 1990's it has been increased as Australia benefitted from a commodities boom. With the lower employment in the mining and other sectors in 2015, and a fading of the commodities boom, experts say the minimum wage needs to be restrained to reflect the changes in the economy. Unemployment at 4% in 2008, is now 6.1%. Unemployment for people 15-24 not attending school increased to 14.1% in Nov. 2014, declining to 13.1% in Dec. Workers under 21 are paid much less significantly lower on a sliding scale, an idea that could be borrowed in the U.S. as the minimum wage is raised higher to provide adequate income for workers with families to support. Experts point to high unemployment in the 1990's even when there was a low minimum wage. As a matter of fairness the wage setting body in Australia takes into account the median wage. It was 54% of the median wage in 2013, compared to 37% for the U.S., according to the OECD....

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

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

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Bair releases her new book in Sept 2012 on the financial crisis of 2008-2009 and the efforts to introduce financial reforms for a safer financial system: "Bull By the Horns: Fighting to Save Main Street from Wall Street and Wall Street from Itself." She is particularly critical of U.S. Treasury Secretary, and former head of the New York Federal Reserve, Timothy Geithner, as protecting the interests of Citigroup and Wall Street in his position as Treasury Secretary of the U.S. government. She describes in detail the situations in which Geithner tried to water down essential reforms to the financial system to make it safer, including the Volcker Rule. Of particular concern is the revolving door by which banking regulators or government officials join banks after service in the government which leads to weakening of regulatory and government oversight and systemic risks as in 2008-2009. Sheila Bair is widely respected for her efforts during the financial crisis from 2008 to 2011, when she headed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the FDIC. Her active involvement in defending reforms and setting up the system by which financially failing banks could be taken over and unwound without risks to the U.S. financial system are lasting contributions. She also succeeded as a manager by setting up an experienced and effective successor in Martin Gruenberg as head of the FDIC, to continue this work. A former Congresswoman, she describes herself as a Republican populist from Kansas. Her current role is as senior advisor to the Pew Charitable Trusts, which itself is a rare phenomenon today for a senior government official leaving government....

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

LyrArc Article Gist
This New York Times editorial says a smaller Wall Street and growing jobs in other fields will be good for New York as well as good for the country. It says New York politicians should focus on finding new ways for New York to broaden its tax base and get new businesses and new opportunites in fields such as media, advertising, entertainment, health care and tourism. Especially welcome are initiatives such as the science and tech campus of Cornell University promoted by Mayor Bloomberg. Tighter financial rules and higher capital requirements are good for the country and for New York the editorial emphasizes, because they help control reckless banking practices that destroy capital and opportunities for growth elsewhere in the economy. It points to Kevin Rose's Nov. 21, 2011 account in the Times showing a healthy culture shift in New York and the country with the status jobs being seen not at Goldman Sachs but at Google, Apple and Facebook. Rose's account shows that in the last 3 years the number of Wall Street employees of ages 20-34 declined by 25%....

LyrArc Article Gist
As Japanese prime minister Noda prepares to restart the Oi nuclear plant in June 2012, former prime minister Naoto Kan, who was premier during the Fukushima nuclear disaster, answers questions in a parliamentary inquiry. He says he realized how dangerous nuclear power can be when it got to the point where the evalcuation of Tokyo was being considered, Japan was then on "the verge of national collapse." His fears were that a number of meltdowns could together " release into the air and sea many times, no, many dozens of times, many hundreds of times the radiation released by Chernobyl." The Japanese public has focussed on the parliamentary hearings because the previous inquiry is thought to have been perfunctory, and not really examined in depth all the issues the Fukushima disaster had raised, and the general feeling is that a proper public dialogue had not taken place. In contrast in Germany the issues had been discussed openly, and the Angela Merkel government which had been receptive to nuclear power reversed its stand on nuclear power. Germany is phasing out dependence on nuclear energy. Kan pointed out that the "nuclear village," the network of nuclear power companies, bureaucrats, and researchers, had hijacked national nuclear policy and was putting Japan back on the same path. He went so far as to compare it with the situation facing Gorbachev in Russia after Chernobyl: "Gorbachev said in his memoirs that the Chernobyl accident exposed the sickness of the Soviet system. The Fukushima accident did the same for Japan." In his assessment of what happened Kan said: "It is impossible to ensure safety sufficiently to prevent the risk of a national collapse. Experiencing the accident convinced me that the best way to make nuclear plants safe is not to rely on them, but rather to get rid of them."...

LyrArc Article Gist
There are similarities in the Republican and Democratic party platforms in 2016. One area of agreement is in the reinstatement of Glass Steagall Act. That legislation made in the Depression period to separate commercial banking from investment banking was changed  when president Clinton made changes in a deal with Senators Phil Gramm and Jim Leach in 1999. The too big to fail problems of banks and the problems of investment banks during the 2008 financial crisis are attributed to the lack of Glass Steagall protections for financial stability and safety. The result is that in the post 2016 environment banks can expect a tougher regulatory environment. Another are is in trade where both parties are expected to take tougher positions to protect U.S. interests. The Republican platform calls for "better negotiated trade agreemets that put America first."

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post editorial says vice president Biden's comments that "I guarantee you, flat guarantee you, there will be no changes to Social Security. I flat guarantee you," made to a voter in Southern Virginia, is downright disheartening. It points out that this is not the conclusion of the trustees of the Social Security Fund, which includes the secretaries of Treasury, labor and health and human services of the Obama administration. The April annual report of the trustees says that the disability portion of the trust fund "becomes exhausted in 2016," and the overall fund "becomes exhausted and unable to pay scheduled benefits in full on a timely basis in 2033." Actions suggested by the trustees include: raising the payroll tax, tweaking the inflation calculator, reducing benefits, or some combination of this. It is clear from polls that the U.S. voter does not want either party to touch Social Security, but the reality is something different. The idea of a flat guarantee in the light of facts that all can see is seen by the Post as going too far, trying to win votes at the cost of postponing necessary decisions which will become harder and costlier if not addressed early....

LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson warns that turning seniors into a protected class making no sacrifices whatsoever, will mean shrinking all other social programs, defense and investments in education and infrastructure. This is the reality of the budget deficits facing the U.S. He cites the Congressional Budget Office projections that even with cutting defense and non defense discretionary spending by a third, the U.S. risks a deficit in 2023 of about 6.75% of the economy or gross domestic product (GDP). To cover this would require $1 trillion in higher taxes, an increase of a third above the 1970-2011 average. He says Democrats are using demagoguery and intimidation on this issue, and ironically even Paul Ryan's proposal reflects a desire not to touch seniors benefits and willingness to pass on the costs to the young to pay for these programs. Social Security and Medicare are a critical part of the American fabric, and no one wants to dismantle them, it is about modernizing them to reflect higher life expectancy and larger wealth accumulated by the elderly compared to previous generations, and to reduce the burden on the young. ...