LyrArc Article Gist
Key points in Putin annexation speech are shown in the Washington Post. Putin presented an anti-western view that went over European history of colonialism in Africa and Asia. It presented a Russian nationalist view oof European powers and the US as trying to diminish Russia throughout history, that refers more to the British than for the country that emerged from British colonies in America with the idea that "all men are created equal." This was similar to a speech made at the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine that stated some of the same points. Putin referred also to the use of total bombing on Dresden, Hamburg and Cologne, by the US and Britain, and the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the US in 1945, the US action in the Vietnam war. Putin's view- "I emphasize that one of the reasons for the centuries old Russophobia, the undisguised malice of these western elites toward Russia is precisely that we did not allow ourselves to be robbed during the period of colonial conquests. We forced the Europeans to trade for mutual benefit." About this version of history of European colonial powers - it is not entirely true, because as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms points out in his  book-  Europe- the Struggle for Supremacy  from 1453 to the Present,  Russia is itself throughout this period one of these European powers. Russia was also one of the powers present in China before the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, and in 1901 when the concessions were drawn from China in that period. Of the military force of 19,000 that entered Beijing in 1900 and crushed the Boxer rebellion of local Chinese calling for ouster of foreigners from China, Britannica.com shows that most of the them came from Russian and Japan, with lesser numbers from Britain, France, the US and Austria Hungary.  After suppressing the Boxers the foreign powers including Russia, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and also the US asked for reparations and concessions on Chinese ports. Tsingtao went to Germany, The British and Russians getting concessions in Tianjin. Only America stated under president Woodrow Wilson that the reparations were excessive. Wilson converted American reparations into funding for Beijing's first modern university Tsinghua University, where  many of China's leaders were educated. During the period 1901 to 1945 the US opposed British colonialism in India and China. The US opposition with its Pacific fleet was strong enough to prevent further division of China among the colonial powers. In the 1940's the US under Franklin Roosevelt and his representative in China General Jospeh Stilwell carried out the campaign against the Japanese invasion of China so that the national integrity of China could be preserved. Stilwell called for reforms of the corrupt Chiang Kai Shek Koumintang government which rejected Stilwell's advice. Leading to its gradual collapse to the Communists under Mao-tse-tung, as the popular support shifted. It is now known what exchanges took place between Franklin Roosevelt and British governments including Churchill and Clement Attlee, and it can be said that the US under FDR was always putting pressure on the British Empire to free India from colonial rule. In 1942 there is the letter from Gandhi at Wardha to Roosevelt asking for help just before the Quit India movement, and Roosevelt's response is clear in the way he told Churchill by 1943 that America would never go along with Britain's unfair and impoverishing rule of India after winning the war. Roosevelt did not need Churchill's "growling" response, he had already put the British as a junior and much diminished partner. American help was crucial in convincing the British to quit India, which is also why it happened so quickly after 1945.  During the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe after defeating Germany in 1945, much of Eastern Europe came under Soviet and Russian domination. Poland was partitioned between Germany then called  Prussia, Austria and Russia, as colonial powers in 1772, followed by further partitions. The roots of the Ukraine crisis in some ways involve Poland and Polish history, as Lviv is only 70 kilometres from Poland. As the view on the Ukrainian side reflects this colonial history of Russia and of Germany in western parts of Ukraine. America under Abraham Lincoln fought a great war of Emancipation to live up to the document of the Declaration of Independence of 1776 that "all men are created equal." The United States of America did not look to colonial possessions for its wealth because of the abundant land in a new continent and the early developments of the Industrial Revolution. Of rail, steamship, of mechanized agriculture and industrial production, in the period after 1850 that made America unrivaled in its industrial strength right upto the 1950's, and  which continues to the present day.  The industrial development of of Japan and South Korea, then of China, and now in India would not be possible without the  hand extended out by America to nations in Asia,  a benevolent hand in creating a tide that lifts all boats. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Russian oil policy at work in towns like Kalyazin, 100 miles north of Moscow, and across Russia. Gasification program is being extended, plan is to increase coverage from 53% to 60% of the people in Russia in the 2005-2007 program. Increase prices to discourage wasteful use and promote energy saving technologies in cooperation with German companies so that more gas is available for export at higher world market prices, especially to the European market. Use profits to promote exploration and increase exports. Germany gets 45% of its gas from Russia and has built close relationships with Gazprom. See the article in BW, July 31, 2006, Jack Ewing, "The Lines that Bind" and references to German-Russian ties: 1) Gerhard Schroeder, former Chancellor, as managing director of the pipeline joint venture, the $5.7 billion North European Gas pipeline formed by partners Ruhrgas, BASF and Gazprom. Ruhrgas owns 6.4% of Gazprom, and its CEO Burckhard Bergmann sits on Gazprom's Board. 2) The survey by Berlin pollster Forsa shows that 75% of Germans support the pipeline project, 45% consider Gazprom a reliable energy supplier vs. the 26% who consider Saudi Arabia as dependable. 3) At an industrial fair in Hanover German business leaders supportive of Gazprom as follows. Klaus Mangold for Daimler management board member considers it " a totally normal market economic process" for Russia to have threatended to supply China with the same gas if European countries cultivate other sources of energy supply. Michael Gloss, German Minister of Economics and Technology, says its good thing to have a neighbor close to home as a supplier. Ruhrgas, Essen based, is a subsidiary of Dusseldorf company E.O.N., and Wintershall, Kassel based, is a subsidiary of BASF. Wintershall management Board member Rainer Seele, speaks of not just partnerships but friendships. 4) Interlocking ownership of assets between Gazprom and the German companies. Gazprom 35% ownership of the assets in the WinGas Joint Venture, Wintershall gets 35% of the equity and 25% of voting shares in the gas field that supports the pipeline. Ruhrgas traded assets in Hungary for 25% ownership of the same gas field. 5) The German relationship under Merkel changes little because she has no options, German suppliers have long term contracts with Gazprom. This article shows how the Russian policy is being shaped on the ground in small towwns like Kalyazin. The one on Gazprom about "The Lines that Bind," shows how the policy is to build relationships with German suppliers, interlocking ownership of assets, increasing the supplies to Germany from the current 45% to over 50 %. Using German investment in joint venture with Gazprom for exploration and development and building pipelines and securing long term contracts at higher prices. Note the reference in article "Can Gazprom Keep the Gas On?" by BW's Moscow Bureau Chief, Jason Bush, BW July 31, 2006- ironically the policy that caused a lot of controversy between Russia and Ukraine about Russian energy prices will actually provide Gazprom with more profits to put into exploration. Forecasts referred to by Bush show that it is expected to earn $20 billion on $62 billion in revenues. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Blinder points out that the political partisanship that has emerged in 2010 has not served America well, as it has deprived the government of the fiscal policy tools, which would be more effective than the Fed's only mildly effective tool of buying $100 billion a month of medium and long term Treasury debt. The country he says is tied up in partisan knots that prevents the use of the fiscal policy tools, and leaves the Fed with the choice of doing something only nudging the rates on government and private securites a bit (by 30 basis points for Treasury debt and 15 basis points for private securities as an example, not enough for more than a mild impact on corporate spending). The fiscal policy tools are he says of a wide variety and pack a lot more power, and he cites three as examples: offering significant lasting tax breaks for job creation, large enough to produce results (larger and long term than the HIRE program), government hiring directly onto public payrolls and government paying local and state governments for hiring at the local levels, the government offering to compensate states for a cut in the sales tax for a year to stimulate consumer spending. Would'nt this raise the deficit though? Blinder points out that the deficit problem lies in the future. Right now there is so much slack in the economy, that public spending will not crowd out private spending. And with Treasury rates at an all time low, Treasury can finance the larger deficit in the short term. A depreciation of the dollar or inflation, he says, is not a worry, because now there is worry about deflation, and the USA needs a lower dollar to push exports up and rebalance its economy. This does not slight the deficit issue and the culture of poor budgeting among both parties, as Reagan Budget Director David Stockman pointed out in an op-ed piece, but accomodates the real dangers and opportunities of difficult policy choices. This is why he laments the advertising campaign and public relations campaign against the 2009 stimulus bill, and the expected paralysis of fiscal policy from the extremely partisan 2010 midterm elections, and public opinion consumed by fear of deficits. Leaving the Fed with the unenviable choice of using only mildly effective tools. Other experts and columnists mention the risks associated with the Fed's large scale purchase of securities, if this leads to another asset bubble and subsequent collapse, and another bailout needed for financial institutions. Peter Eavis in one column in the WSJ points to the lack of effectiveness of the first round of quantitative easing of $1.7 trillion. And Kelly Evans, in the WSJ, points to the risks of "bad" inflation, if another round of quantitative easing by the Fed leads to increases in the price of commodities such as oil and food (such inflation falling heaviest on lower income households).The US Financial Regulatory Reform bill has received low grades, and recent standards for reserve capital in worldwide banking reforms are stretched out over a long period, leaving fragility in the economic system, if something were to go wrong....

LyrArc Article Gist
Joe Parkinson of the WSJ gives a in-depth account of the emergence of Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey's politics, with contributions by Emre Peker, Ayla Albayrak, Yeliz Candemir. Erdogan grew up in a poor neighborhood of Istanbul, and became the head of a local youth branch of the Islamist National Salvation Party in 1976 after an adolescent period steeped in mosque culture and Islamic ideas. In 1994 he is elected Mayor of Istanbul amid voter discontent with corruption and problems with infrastructure and public services. He served for four years making improvements. After reciting a poem publicly that said "the mosques are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets and faithful our soldiers," he is jailed for 4 months by a military backed secular government in 1999. During this period Erdogan, described by friends from his youth as having a unique ability to adapt to difficult situations, makes a transformation. He moves to the centre, coming out in favor of stronger ties to the EU, and works hard to attract support from the secular and nationalist voters to add to his conservative religious base. In 2003 he is elected prime minister as head of the Justice and Development Party. This begins a period of ten years in which Turkey sees remarkable period of economic growth during which Turkey's GNP nearly quadruples from a little over $200 billion in 2002 to $794.5 billion in 2012, according to the IMF. It may be partly coincidence and partly good management of the economy under Erdogan. Turkey's previous banking and currency crises before 2003 created a better understanding and discipline for managing the economy. Emerging markets such as Brazil, India, China, Russia, Indonesia, and other parts of Asia and Latin America were able to achieve high rates of growth during this 10 year period. Competitiveness in Brazil and Turkey has not improved significantly in this period according to experts, and large capital inflows into Turkey partly supported the credit boom in Turkey. And just as growth is slowing significantly in all emerging markets, Turkey under Erdogan faces a new test. Especially now that Erdogan is seen as autocratic in his effort to suppress protests to build an Ottoman era army barracks in Taksim Square, Istanbul. The fears of secularists in Turkey are that this is the Erdogan of the period in 1999, after serving as Mayor of Istanbul. Just as Turks turned away from the overreaching actions of the military, the public sentiment may be shifting beyond the overreaching actions of the religious parties in Turkish politics. The protests in Brazil against the Rouseff administration after the popularity of the Lula administration, show that slowing economic growth and missteps by the elected government can alienate younger voters. The parties still retain a majority but face an uncertain future in which lower economic growth and missteps lead to a search for alternatives. At the same time Turkey's efforts for accession to the EU are beng put on hold as Germany opposes the actions to suppress protests of the Justice Party in Turkey. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Two realities are affecting exchanges. One is that trading commodities and derivatives is a $600 trillion business worldwide and is more profitable than trading in corporate shares. This shows in the value of ICE and NYSE in the stock market. In April 2011 ICE was valued at $1.5 billion less than NYSE, in Dec 2012 ICE was valued at $4 billion more that NYSE as it makes its bid to merge with NYSE. The other is that the Dodd-Frank financial system overhaul in the U.S. after the 2008 financial crisis has created a new model for derivatives trading providing advantages to regulated electronic exchanges and clearinghouses that handle derivatives trades with transparency. Jeffrey Sprecher, CEO of ICE, the IntercontinentalExchange, which handles derivatives trading through its clearinghouse operations, says: "For the past decade, our solutions made our markets increasingly electronic and increasingly clear. Today, financial reform is imposing that vision on many markets through a rule-making process." Bart Chilton, a member of the CFTC which regulates derivatives trading says Dodd-Frank legislation supports the business model of derivatives exchanges. This is especially true for Mr Sprecher and ICE. Sprecher has a good relationship with regulators with whom he talks directly, and is supportive of CFTC efforts to close loopholes as he is confident he can make money as long as the rules are clear. His confidence stems from his model which is technology based from day one, with its own clearinghouse and technology based transparency of the ICE data vault, information it shares with regulators. Sprecher stumbled upon this opportunity. He is an executive in the power industry. Working on developing power plants Sprecher found it was difficult for power firms to hedge investments in energy with financial contracts because there was no well organized, clear and transparent market for such contracts. This he set out to do by buying a little know exchange in Atlanta for buying and selling electricity, later getting the the backing of BP, and investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, to form ICE in 2000. Banks liked the idea of a having an organized clear place to buy and sell derivatives in oil and other commodities, and having an alternative to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange in futures trading. Swaps trading under Dodd Frank supervision is converting to old style futures contracts where there is less competition for ICE's futures trading creating new opportunity. ICE setup its own clearinghouse, and acquired the Clearing Corporation, which was the base for a derivative called credit-default swap. To make derivatives trading transparent and reduce systemic risk Dodd-Frank legislation required exchanges to provide information to data warehouses which would then share the information with regulators. ICE setup its own data warehouse to do this called ICE Trade Vault. Dood-Frank rules envisioned the formation of clearinghouses and exchange such a ICE to provide a clear process, transparency and reduce systemic risk in derivatives trading. ICE under Sprecher by making this vision its own and using technology has created new opportunity. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT Editorial on June 2, 2009, says the Obama anti-foreclosure plan is woefully inadequate, and can't stop the wave of foreclosures. The administration's foreclosure plan that went into effect in March 2009, offers upto $75 billion in incentives to lenders to reduce loan payments for homeowners facing foreclosure. Lender participation is largely voluntary under the Obama plan, making it weak. Since March about 100,000 homeowners have been offered a modification according to the Treasury Department. This is a small dent in the plan's intent of preventing 4 million foreclosures. And it continues the Bush administration's apathy and lack of effective action to prevent foreclosures. The Mortgage Bankers Association reported that in the first quarter 2009 5.4 million mortgages were delinquent or facing foreclosure. There are 15.4 million "underwater" homeowners, those who have no equity in their homes, and with average person deeply in credit card and other debt, these people have little to fall back on if they lose their jobs or have a medical crisis. The simple arithmetic of these 15.4 and the 5.4 million, adding upto 20.8 million households, shows that anywhere near a fifth of American households are in deep financial trouble. The same numbers, or another fifth of American households, are approaching foreclosure. Drawing concentric circles of these homeowners inside a circle showing all American households, and seeing these concentric circles increasing in size with every quarter of job losses, one can clearly see why this is the biggest problem facing the economy. Job losses in January 598,000, February 681,000, March 699,000, April 539,000, totalling 2.5 million for Jan-April 2009, and 8.9 million working parttime. The underemployment rate at 15.8%. Till this foreclosure situation exacerbated by rising under employment is addressed, the credit easing and the small recovery thats been managed since December 2009, is like a mirage in the desert. A false sense of comfort. The NYT editorial makes the point that the foreclosures prevention efforts focus entirely on reducing monthly payments. Even here it falls short, in not reducing the payments enough, or programs not big enough in scope to address the millions of homeowners needing help. But an even bigger problem remains unaddressed, says the NYT, and this is not reducing the principal. An effective anti- foreclosure plan has to reduce the principal for the 15.4 million homeowners under water. This as Martin Feldstein has argued repeatedly in the oped pages of the WSJ since early 2008- the homeowners under water or approaching that situation have no incentive to hold onto their homes- has to be addressed by government taking responsibility for loan principal reduction in a carefully designed plan requiring participation of lenders. NYT points out that the mortgage industry has resisted taking this approach, and the Obama plan does not emphasize this important part of an effective plan to reduce foreclosures. By opposing this, the banks with the toxic mortgage assets and the government by going along with this, are shooting themselves in the foot. This makes any recovery at best weak, and more likely a false hope lacking fundamental support, foresight and vision....

LyrArc Article Gist
Entergy is one of the largest energy companies. Its CEO for nine years, Wayne Leonard, talks to Joseph Rago of the Wall Street Journal. Its the No.2 generator of nuclear power in the USA, and uses coal for only 7% of its energy. He has made his name in nuclear energy, and here he talks about the government's cap and trade program and nuclear energy. He points to today's technology as far superior to the technology that was used in the Failed Three Mile plant, that put back nuclear energy plants in the USA for decades. He believes that price signals are needed for CO2, and the cap and trade program helps to do this, so he supports the cap and trade program. He admits that self interest colors perception of Entergy, compared to coal using utility producers like Duke Energy and American Electric Power. With coal only 7% in its portfolio of plants, and big in nuclear energy, it stands to gains from a cap and trade program, whereby Congress will set a ceiling on emissions, then allows businesses to sell any of its extra allowances that stand for the right to make emissions. And in doing so creating the largest commodity market, in carbon backed securiites. He and the government agree on the point that the allowances should be auctioned off, rather than given away as the companies with many coal plants believe. And the billions in new revenue from these allowances would be returned to the public. He understands that the view of companies like Duke and AEP, that use coal and would have to increase rates, and face the anger of ratepayers as they pay more for the allowances. He also thinks the bill should be written with a fine pen, so that if Congress mandates 20% of energy come from renewables. That it should specify replacing coal not natural gas as what this replaces, to get rid of the most polluting sources. He points to the real need for looking at things globally, as doing things locally, even to show responsible leadership in the world community, can lead to no progress in the global picture. The reason is that China is going ahead with the rapid construction of conventional coal plants. It has surpassed USA coal capacity, and is on track to double it sometime in the next decade. If the USA closed down every single coal plant, and all the time new coal plants are going up in China and India, then we would have ruined our economy, and it was'nt making much difference globally. And he says, if we just say lets lead and people will follow us, "its silly", because China isn't going to follow us, especially when they have $2 trillion invested in their coal plants, and they still aren't feeding feeding all their people. So how to deal with this? Develop the new technology for carbon capture for existing conventional coal plants, and help the Chinese with retrofit technology to curb emissions in a realistic manner. At this time most current funding is devoted to technology for second generation systems, that are still 10-20 years away....

LyrArc Article Gist
What Handan Iron and Steel in Hebei Province 300 miles south of Beijing and ThyssenKrupp in Dortmund, Germany, have in common. The transplanting of Germany's aging defunct iron and steel furnaces and plant to Handan, boxed and crated away- its unreal that in 1998 Handan Iron and Steel bought and transferred an aging polluting plant to a city where the steel works are located in China which has 8.5 million residents. When years later the steel works were debated to be moved to a distance away from the city with Baoshan Steel, the decision was made to instead put a new plant there instead. The solution was to make pollution payments to residents of Handan. It was Mao's dream to build a steel industry in Hebei province ,which has large deposits of iron ore and coal and a rail line. Couple of questions come up to mind- one why did the first steel works go up right in Handan, and same is true of Dortmund, labor supply perhaps but couldn't homes be built nearby instead and these plants located away from cities. Second the deal for bringing the ThyssenKrupp plants was as recent as 1998, by this time China was already a big steel producer (producing more than the US by one estimate) and in a few years Chinese steel production was to exceed the US, Europe and Japan combined. With steel production already on the rise why didn't China move more carefully. Some of the Thyssen Krupp assets were built only a few years before 2000 and met stringent environmental control. China bought these.. Why didn't China pick out the best assets instead of old aging blast furnaces. The possible answers are that they were available at cut rate prices, but were they worth it. The second is that Hebei must be competing with other parts of China, and there wasn't a rational allocation of capital as would happen if a sophiticated company like a Mittal or a Tata Steel is involved. Is China operating on a outmoded concept- nationalism, competition between provinces with local government officials running the show? The other question is that in the case of the automobile industry a different pattern is seen, the most modern technology was selected , and in the case of Cherry, the most recent technology was selected for manufacturing cars, then why was this same pattern not adopted in the case of steel. In the end China has a surplus of steel mills, which makes this rush into steel production without carefully thinking through this appear to have been a mistake. The visual picture if one flies into Dortmund of manmade lakes, green park areas and residential housing and shopping from the $22 billion the EU and Germany are investing to turn the Ruhr valley region of Dortmund into a centre of education, technology and tourism now contrasts sharply with Handan in Hebei province. Can emerging countries do better, build manufacturing for jobs but keep living conditions in mind, be patient and work to achieve the best overall results, and build education, technology, appropriate for their own situation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Important year end reveiw of the oil price forecasting work of so many anlaysts and where they failed . The IEA and the US Enery Dpt forecast have year after year underestimated this pirce by over 20%. Analysts change the price forecasts within a couple of weeks based on changing information and assumptions. Of all this the Saudi Arabian forecasts have ben within 12 % of what has actually ocurred according to a study by Ronald Berger Strategy Consultants of Muich, Germany. And whats their forecast for 2008. By extrapolating from the Saudi budget and the assumptions, used such as giving a wide margin to avoid a deficit in the budget if oil prices undershot by a wide margin, one gets $75 for US benchmark crude. Forecast by experts are in the neighborhood of $80 average for the whole year 2008. Goldman recently revised theirs upwards from $85 average for 2008 to $95 within a 4 week period. How good is the Goldman forecast. No one really knows. Lehman has a forecast of $84 average for 2008 and bases it on the opacity of the market because no one knows what OPEC will do with supply and China does not provide good information on demand. So basically anlysts are adding an uncertainty premium to the price of oil. And this is especially so because as the Chief Economist at IEA says global space capacity is so thin and any event can influence price. Last year the rhetoric about Irans nuclear intentions was enough to stir up the price, as were other smaller events disrupting supplies. But the Iranian situation has since cooled down and diplomatic solutions are in the works. So what to expect in 2008 in the way of political uncertainty. Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Lebanon have all seen a cool off in the ast couple of years and the Bush administration rhetoric has become outmoded as has other rhetoric from Iran so that does'nt look like it will stir up oil prices in 2008. Still there will be some uncertainty premium about supply from OPEC and demand from China and India. And demand from the Middle Eastern oil producing countries themselves as well as the increasing demand in India and China will mean that lower demand in the US because of a recession will still mean an increase in global demand over 2007 of 1.5 million barrrels a day over 2007's 85 million barrels a day. What will change the dynamics of this situation is the government mandated fuel economy for all vehicles on the road with Europe more aggressive in this area under the pressures of global warming. If this impacts India, China and Russia as these fuel saving technologies are transferrred there overall consumption should see an impact. Europe's targets are only 4 years away for 2012. And the environment may cause China to bring in newer technologies that both contribute to improving environment and conserving energy. Because China's environmental record is almost catastrophic one could see some of this happen much sooner than expected after the Olympics in 2008. All that might change the way the world looks at oil and its use, and all energy sources and their use. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Providing an insight for the auto industry and other industries, Nokia has managed its own downturn from a few years ago. Nokia has taken a strong position in emerging markets without letting profit margins sink and keeping the average price of a Nokia cellphone from dropping much. See the groups and links to Motorola's situation. Continued dominance in India and China helped Nokia achieve mobile phone shipments growth of 27%in 2007 over 2006 to reach 133.5 million units. Nokia is also gaining market share increasing it to 40% in the 4th quarter 2007 from 39% in the 3rd quarter. And Nokia is now poised to gain back the market share it lost in the USA in the last few years. It sees the market for mobile phones growing by 10% a year wordwide with strong growth in Asia balancing slower growth in developed countries. Nokia follows the average selling price of mobile phones which suggest the direction the market is taking in price and higher end lower end sales distribution, especially at a time when Nokia competes in price sensitive Asian markets with higher lower end sales distribution. Here the average selling price of Nokia phones dropped from euro 89 in the fourth quarter 2006 to euro 83 in 4th quarter 2007. Nokia is careful to keep introducing new feature laden phones that customers want to keep this average price up. In the 4th quarter 2007 the average price was up from euro 82 in the 3rd quarter to euro 83. Nokia's operating margins in the mobile phone business reflect a surprising result, actually increasing from 17.8% to 25% even as average price is dropping from euro 89 to euro 83? How was this achieved? Some of this is probably from better manufacturing in better locations without compromising quality, moving factories to eastern europe and other places. Nokia plans to close a factory in Germany with 2300 workers and move this to Romania by mid-2008. The increased sale of higher margin multi media phones also helped. Another aspect of Nokia's approach- grasping the fact that extremely high sales were needed to do well in in the lower end of the market at the euro 30 price level. This means that competing in India and China with the high sales volume helps it stay ahead in this lower end. These markets are also interesting in another way, they are fast changing markets with a lot of things happening. Because they are price sensitive there is a lot of competition including from lower end makers in China. Asian markets also have young users who have different usage, lifestyle and trends and Nokia can learn a lot on how to stay abreast of these demographics and other changes. And competing at this level helps you develop the manufacturing knowhow to bring down the cost of the higher end phones with more features. There are crisscross benefits to competing at every price range in different demographics and in different regions, and continually learning and building the people and structures to compete effectively. . Nokia's successful strategies in 2008. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
People with doubts about Obama and McCain being agents of change or just bearers of the latest popular slogan for electioneering, would benefit from looking at the details gathered by the New York Times about the two candidates ties to lobbyists. Obama is second only to Senator Dodd in the amount of donations received from employees and PAC's of the 2 companies Fannie and Freddie. Mr McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, is a longtme lobbyist, and previously was head of Homeownership Alliance. Homeownership Alliance is a coalition of banks and housing industry interests led by Fannie and Freddie to counter another organization FM Watch, which was an alliance of financial institutions and lobbying associations that wanted to even the playing field against Freddie and Fannie by challenging the implicit government guarantee that allowed them to borrow funds at lower rates. And both candidate's vetters for vice Presidential picks have links to Fannie. Its former chairman, James Johnson, initially led Obama's search committee and Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., McCain's vetter was a Fannie Mae lobbyist. For McCain, confidant and adviser, Charlie Black, and deputy Finance Chairman, Wayne L. Berman, lobbied for the 2 companies. For Obama, Robert Tsien, Freddie Mac VP, and directors. William Lewis , Brenda Gaines, a Chicago businesswoman, come up as names of contributors. There are so many such names right at the top of these two candidates advisors, that it makes one wonder seriously who are these people fooling when they make statements about Fannie and Freddie- like the one made recently by McCain about Fannie and Freddie enriching their executives by millions of dollars while things were going downhill, and the picturesque phrase "going to hell in a handbasket". And did he talk to Rick Davis about this. And Obama did he talk to James Johnson about this, and Brenda Gaines? One, McCain is a maverick yes, meaning he is independent, and the other can talk intellectually and excite young people about the future, but its a thin veneer, when all is said and done both promote their careers above anything else, and the difference is in degrees with one perhaps more than the other. And people have short memories. The Times reminds us that McCain was one of the "Keating Five" senators investigated by the Senate, accused of interceding with federal regulators for the operator of a failing thrift and received a rebuke. This is what Paul Gigot, who as editorial page editor of the Wall Street Journal has directed the investigative reporting on Fannie and Freddie for years, says in his recent column about all the dishonesty and failure and efforts to corrupt the whole political system across the political spectrum with lobbying and donations and tactics. In a note of pessimism he says "not that either presidential candidate is interested." Quite a comment on the political system. Which is also why Vincent Reinhart, who headed the Monetary affairs section at the Federal Reserve, when asked about the bailouts of Bear Stearns and of Fannie and Freddie, and the help Detroit auto companies are seeking, on Bloomberg News on September 8, 2008, said that "free markets is a thin veneer" when things really get rough. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The story of a Russian startup company MeshNetics, that had a research project called Golden Box with a team of software programmers. It succumbed to the global financial crisis as it hit Russia and with it dreams of a new wireless technology that would help utilities keep track of energy conservation and other uses. No new investors could be found and the Russian investors cut the funding. Even western investors could not make the investments. Programmers like Bagrak, 27, from Berkeley, California, who worked at Google on an internship and came back to Russia to build its high tech sector. Luzhetsky, 26, from Obninsk, a city built by the Soviets for nuclear and military scientists, which fell into decay and poverty in the post soviet period, this was his first programming job after being educated in the Soviet Union. Mr Grinkug, 57, from a generation of the Soviet period that considered science a religion, he headed the 12 programmer team working on the Golden Box project. The project three ers in the making was expected to release in early 2010. Suvorov who headed MesNetics, who saw his work as part of the move by President Medvedev who came into power in the spring of 2008 to take Russia away from dependence on oil, with investment of $5 billion in a state corporation for nanotechnology. Anatoly Karachinsky, President of the Russian internet technology company IBS Group, who spun off MeshNetics using the brightest talent from his software development team and financed it with his venture fund Oradell Capital. First the optimism in the face of difficulty in the fall of 2008, as the global crisis began to hit Russia, then in October the message to Suvorov that he had to look for a new investor. Then the cuts, first 10% of jobs gone, nine days late a dozen more fired, then the shutdown phase. One person fired after coffee with Suvurov, as things moved quickly. Alexei Rybakov, director of the division that makes the ZigBit, calls 50 investors aday, makiung every kind of pitch, practical, global, patriotic. Grinkug packs up his things, 40 years of codes fit into a few CD's , a few programmers are retained if things change, but for Grinkug the Golden Project he says, will probably die in his head. Its mind boggling how mistakes and unethical behaviour in the banking systems in the west can wash ashore in emerging countries like Russia, and wash away what little stability to build anew life has been achieved in a few years after the 1998 collapse of the ruble and the Russian economy. Its also a contrast between the dreams, hopes and aspirations and the innocence of ordinary young Russian tech engineers and the swings of reality that surround them, of poverty and collapse in early post soviet Russia, then optimism , and now a new kind of reality trying to salvage what has been achieved, and the difficulties in forging a new future that goes beyond 120 million people collecting around a oil wellhead....

LyrArc Article Gist
The last days of the Gaddafi regime as a final assault begins in Tripoli, Libya on August 22, 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany has 4 million Muslims and Russia 13 million Muslims. Germany is considering banning the anti-Islamic video in Sept 2012. Russia will ban the video and has warned internet companies not to show the video because of its extremist content.

LyrArc Article Gist
Seib cites as a key reason why the presidential race in the U.S. could change- Romney leads by three percentage points over Obama among voters most intensely interested in voting. Another related reason is the plan to reach out to low intensity voters, with the Romney campaign having knocked on 2 million more doors already than they did in all of 2008. Some of the intensely interested voters are more against Obama than in favor of Romney, something Obama experienced in 2008 with the anti-Bush sentiment over the war in Iraq carrying over to support for the Democratic ticket. Another part of the undecided voter sentiment is that more of these voters compared to other voters are dissatisfied with the current condition of the economy and the direction the country is taking. Other reasons that could be cited are the volatile situation in the Middle East which could create questions in voter minds about American resolve in that region, dissatisfaction among some black voters with the deteriorating economic situation for black people, and the lack of intensity among Hispanic voters who feel the Obama administration did not keep its promises on immigration changes, the poor performance of the economy in industrial states of the midwest and east with decline in incomes....