LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Justice Department files a civil lawsuit accusing S&P and parent company McGraw Hill of giving improper ratings to poor mortgage investments which allowed them to inflate in value, creating the conditions for a crash in these investments when the crisis happened in 2008. The penalty sought by the Justice Department and the attorney generals for 16 states is $5 billion to cover losses to investors such as state pension funds and federally insured banks and credit unions. The civil suit comes 5 years after the onset of the financial crisis of 2008, which created the greatest financial crisis since the 1930's. Negotiations for a settlement were conducted by the Justice Department with McGraw Hill for an extended period of time. The talks broke down in January 2013. In these negotiations the Justice Department sought a penalty of over $1 billion and S&P's acceptance of wrongdoing. S&P countered with a proposed settlement of $100 million. The government pushed for admission of guilt on at least one count of fraud. It is not known why the Justice Department filed this lawsuit 5 years after the crisis when the public's memory of the ratings issue is beginning to fade. Is it because the preparation of the case required this much time, the action not taken because it would be seen as punitive in 2011 when S&P downgraded the U.S. sovereign credit rating, the fragility of the economy in 2011, because of the approaching election in 2012, or some other reason. One of the reasons why it was important to take corrective action early was to preserve the integrity and credibility of financial markets, so critical for public confidence. An additional reason was to secure from credit ratings companies the internal reforms and change in leadership and culture that would prevent recurrence and damage to the economy. An example of this change is the change in leadership and culture underway at Barclays bank in Britain after the investigation into the manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate or LIBOR. The Justice Department action in this respect is an advance from the policy at the S.E.C., which has not insisted that companies involved in the crisis admit wrongdoing, setting up the process for changes in leadership and culture such as the one at Barclays....

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
Moodys Analytics forecasts U.S. unemployment at above 7% at the end of 2013. Part of the reason is the aging population effect and older people dropping out of the workforce, and another reason being businesses have to hire to grow as labor costs have already been cut sharply during the lack of hiring in 2009-2011. The problems in housing with foreclosures, the U.S. deficit, and the eurozone economic crisis will continue to affect the U.S. No mention is made of the effects of a slowdown in China and other emerging markets in addition to the slowdown in the eurozone, as these risks appear to be contained for the timebeing according to Moodys Analytics.

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
There does not appear to be a noticeable shift in gasoline consumption, its gone up by half to one percent compared to 2005, even when gasoline prices are over $3.00 per gallon. This survey and the Pew poll were done about the time of the closing of BP's pipelines from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska.

LyrArc Article Gist
Monthly reports are issued on bank lending by the Treasury. The report for February shows business lending is down by 24% in its dollar value from the previous month, and a similiar decline in student, auto and credit card lending. The only increase is in mortgage lending as government efforts to hold down interest rates heave led to a refinancing boom. The two largest lenders Wells Fargo and Bank of America reported a 35% jump in mortgage lending in February over January. Businesses are charged more for loans by Chase, which it says is to reflect increased risks, and Chase has sharply reduced its business lending. This is bad news for the economy, because it means businesses will continue to pull back, and some businesses will layoff employees and others may close for lack of financing. The other link to the report in the WPost about the consumers who have jobs, but are acting flat broke suggests consumption will continue to decline, which puts stresses on businesses as sales revenues for all sorts of products decline across the spectrum of the economy. With less acess to costlier financing, and declining sales, the picture of continued large job losses is being etched, and will continue to be etched as these are becoming things that will not change for a long time. Banks are insolvent or close to being insolvent, so lending is only like to change if the government takesover the banks and puses through lending at attractive rates. But it has to do this quickly, before confidence drops to a level where the demand for loans just isn't there. China is able to push lending through the banks because government controls the banks, this cannot happen in the US unless the government actually steps in to take over the insolvent banks and push through a large lending program. In this sense the Obama program while admirable and helpful to stabilize things a bit, is only part effective, and can never really restore confidence or a serious measure of economic stability because of the three pillars of progress in this situation, it can impact only two directly- foreclosure prevention, and business plus consumer lending. The third consumption is something it can only indirectly control through foreclosure prevention and lending, but which is headed down as Americans convert to a frugal lifestyle. And in these two areas of foreclosure prevention and business lending the government is failing. The fourth pillar of progress in the recovery is employment, and this is also an area the government can only indirectly control through stimulus spending on infrastructure, education and energy, but is largely influenced by foreclosure prevention- which keeps home prices from falling rapidly and overshooting and reduces household wealth- and business/consumer lending. These are ER (f) FPL (CE). Economic Recovery as a function of Foreclosure Prevention and Lending, and Consumption and Employment, where indirect control is shown by ( ). With not much in place for FPL- the only two variables government can directly control if it takes strong and immediate action before its influence on these two variables begins to diminish over time- Obama's inexperience and learning curve and failure to take bold action to get serious results on FPL, may result in admirable demeanor and rhetoric but medicore results and a struggling economy for years to come. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A report by two former Census Bureau officials, Gordon Green and John Coder, shows the inflation adjusted median household income in the U.S. declined by 6.7%, to 49,909, between June 2009 and June 2011. From December 2007 to June 2009 household income declined by 3.2%. The forces behind this are the large number of people not working or not looking for work who are outside the labor force, and the hourly pay for workers not keeping up with inflation. Prof Henry Farber at Princeton, says his study shows that people who lost jobs in the recession found work again with an average of 17.5% less income than in their prior jobs. This makes this downturn very different than earlier downturns, and giving credence to the argument "that this time its different." Another statistic from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows why- in the period December 2007 to June 2009 average length of time for a person who lost a job to be unemployed increased from 16.6 weeks to 24.1 weeks, with the same figure up to 40.5 weeks in September 2011. Higher declines for Hispanics and other minorities further increased income inequalities. Coder and Green call the impact a substantial decline in the American standard of living....

LyrArc Article Gist
BHP Billiton was known as Broken Hill Proprietary in the 1990's. The largest Australian mining company, it was based in Melbourne and simply known as the Big Australian. It had huge losses in that period - $3 billion in 1998-1999. The turnaround at BHP Billiton comes as a remarkable turnaround for the whole mining sector. BHP made $6.5 billion in profit in the year ending June 2005. Its not just rising Chinese demand that has made this possible. Billiton has taken steps to avoid past boom bust cycles in mining by taking a conservative approach to investing in new mines that might create an oversupply in the market. The company is run buy a banker. CEO Charles Goodyear avoids taking on large risky projects and has announced plans to return $2 billion to shareholders in stock buybacks. Even with this discipline compared to the past, some mining analysts believe the boom bust cycle will occur over time. HP has $10 billion worth of projects in different stages of development. One advantage the mining companies enjoy is the concentration of mining in a few companies- BHP, Rio Tinto, Xstrata PLC. This makes it possible to price aggressively for the nickel, copper, iron ore, and other metals. A 72% price increase was negotiated with steelmakers in 2005. Another part of the transformation is the use of risk-analysis tools. BHP uses "Monte Carlo analysis" to check all potential outcomes once a range of parameters- commodity prices, currency vales, interest rate scenarios- are entered that affect financial performance of a new mine or a new investment. Goodyear came in as CFO under a new team led by Paul Anderson, a former executive of Duke Energy Corporation, after the huge losses in failed copper mining investments in the late 1990's. Even with the recent success and the careful investing discipline there is a sense that things could change quickly if rising demand slows in China and other developing countries. And in that situation this discipline may prove insufficient and the models may only be good as the assumptions and information entered....

LyrArc Article Gist
Proposals by economists Rajan, Stein and Kashyap on financial catastrophe insurance, and bonuses held in escrow, as corrective measures after learning from the 2008 global financial crisis.

LyrArc Article Gist
Note that Goldman Sach's analysts who first predicted that oil prices could reach $100 are now predicting that the downward momentum is building up. The prediction from them now is that prices may go up further than the $96 right now but should drop to $80 by April. Its not too difficult to see why. First on the supply side the momentum for downward shift is not so significant but still there are signs. The Iraqi oil flow disruption either from a Turkish invasion of norther Iraq or from internal disruption is shrinking as the Turks see this as a small operation at most, and the Iraqi law and order situation is improving. The Iranian situation may be stabilizing without US intervention possibilities shrinking. On the supply side the oil majors except for Total see their output shrinking somewhat, and OPEC has not increased supplies significantly as oil inventories have not built up as they do before winter. But overall the supply situation is stable. On the demand side is where the significant downward momentum exists. With the US economy slowing down amid the buildup of the housing tumble and the credit crunch which looks to get worse in 2008 before stabilizing in 2009 and a stronger euro and other factors affecting Europe's expansion oil consumption by industry in the industrialized countries is slowing. Much of the pressure on oil prices comes from increases in demand each year from China and India. Here gasoline is subsidized by the government and this reduces incenive for conservation. The policy of letting market prices be reflected at the pump to a limited degree so as not to seriously affect people is now taking hold in these countries. In China prices were raised 10% and there is likely to be further increase in the near future. This along with the increasing awarenes of the dependence on foreign oil and the need for conservation in both China and India should build pressures in both countries to make the best use of resoures and have users share some of the burden of higher prices. The American and European gasoline market is driven by a public that has not been too conscious of conservation especially in America. It appears that high oil prices have not encouraged conservation, witness that with rebates for higher oil prices and zero interest rates financing large pickups are still selling at levels of 2005, and there has not been a significant reduction in consumption at the pump. What may shift this equation now is probably government mandated fuel economy standards. Europe already has new standards and the automakers there are racing to meet it with new technologies, in America its now almost certain that public sentiment and congressional sentiment is likely to lead to similiar standards or at least significantly improved standard. Public sentiment is already pushing the automakers in the USA to introduce new models with higher fuel economy and use this as a n advertising and competitive edge. This reduction in gasoline consumption at the pump through new technologies in the industrialized countries and through price increases being allowed to flow through in the developing countries of China and India in a stable supply environment where the downward political risks are stable may be the pivotal turning point for the price of oil. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Lack of meaningful reform of credit rating agencies by 2014, 6 years after the 2008 financial crisis.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. home ownership rate drops to 64.8% of American families in the 1st quarter of 2014, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. This is the lowest since 1995.

LyrArc Article Gist
S&P's faulty ratings on U.S. mortgage securities was a critical factor leading to the financial crisis of 2008-2009, and the deep recession that followed in the U.S. Recovery was only made possible by large government stimulus and central bank intervention with monetary easing on a massive scale. The effects are still evident after millions of people lost their homes in foreclosures and widening income inequality. Yet it took about 7 years before S&P accepted responsibility and settled with the Justice Department. Earlier S&P accused the Justice Department of suing the company in retaliation for a downgrade of U.S. government debt in 2011. In the convoluted upside down nature of such lawsuits and protests by defendents, McGraw Hill said that the settlement "contains no findings of violations of law." Yet the government produced 290 million documents in response to discovery requested by S&P. Associate U.S. Attorney General, Stuart Delery, the top negotiator for the government, says "put simply, the department brought this case because S&P committed fraud." Delery says no case in Justice Department history has produced this many documents. The Justice Department cited several instances of breach of duty in a statement signed by both parties. In 2007 an internal group's downgrade recommendation for a large number of mortgage securities was rejected by upper management because of concern S&P would lose business. In another cited instance S&P alters its ratings model for grading complex risky securities in 2004 with the goal of being able to issue grades for "2-3 notch improvements" and resulting "improving of S&P market share." S&P had about $1.9 billion in cash balances in third quarter 2014, say analysts, and the settlement was designed to set the right course but not hurt S&P in carrying out its role of issuing about 95% of ratings globally along with counterparts Moody's and Fitch. Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood says S&P's responsibility lies in that banks might be expected to do something shady, but credit ratings agencies were the ones the country looked up to to do the right thing and flag this....

LyrArc Article Gist
Crude from Canada's Alberta oil sands brings about $65, a large discount from the $115 for Brent crude and the $97 price in the U.S. The increase in U.S. oil output is causing a surplus in the U.S., reducing demand for Canadian crude. The lack of enough pipelines to bring this crude to the U.S. also affects prices. The $50 discount to Brent crude affects Canada's oil revenues and economic growth. Canada's central bank cut the growth rate forecast for 2013 to 2% from 2.3%. This is also likely to weaken Canada's currency.

LyrArc Article Gist
The lack of a change in culture at Moody's two years after the financial crisis of 2008.

LyrArc Article Gist
Zaragoza a city of 700,000 is the capital of Spain's fastest growing region, and its halfway between Barcelona and Madrid. It has grown rapidly. The arrival of GM here was a big turning point in 1982. The GM plant here can turn out 2000 sub compacts, small minivans and delivery trucks a day, now it is one of 7 GM plants in Europe to suspend production for 2 weeks in October to work off inventories. About 600 of 7000 workers were laid off. Young people here who have never seen anything but good times see this as a big shock. And its a sign of how things across Europe are shaping up. Spain's economy contracted by 0.2% this summer. The European Commission expects the 15 nation eurozone to be flat next year with no growth, but this is an early estimate and may be revised to show a contraction as the economic downturn is just beginning.

LyrArc Article Gist
The terms of the debt restructuring deal with the bond swap in Greece become clear on March 9, 2012. In the deal with private bondholders -using collective action clauses to force remaining bondholders into the deal- about 96% of the 206 billion euros of Greece's bonds will be exchanged. Private bondholders held out throughout most of 2011, delaying the inevitable as Greece's economic situation became increasingly hopeless. This created a logjam with the German government, which insisted on serious private sector participation and bondholder haircut as the cost of poor lending decisions of the French, German and other European banks that made loans to Greece out of proportion of the ability of Greece to payback loans. Charles Dallara of the Institute of International Finance, negotiating for European banks, offered a 10% average loss on the bonds in July 2009. It was not until German Chancellor Merkel told Dallara at a late night meeting on October 27, 2011: "this is my last offer," for a 50% loss on the face value of the bonds, was agreement reached. The Greek debt swap that now takes place will give private bondholders a loss of 53.5% from the face value of 200 billion euros of bonds that they hold. The new Greek bonds issued in place of the old bonds include short-term bonds issued by the eurozone rescue fund at 15% of the face value of the old bonds, and a series of Greek bonds with maturity ranging from 11-30 years valued at 31.5% of the face value of old bonds. That even this 53.5% bondholder loss will not be adequate, as Greece's economy looks irretrievably damaged as it spirals downwards, is shown by the value of these bonds already trading in a hypothetical "gray market." The new 30 year bond is quoted at 17 cents and the 11 year bond at 22 cents. The questions remain about the stalling by the banks in taking the losses earlier- was this the wisest move considering the losses beyond Greece as the eurozone economy as a whole has suffered from the prolonged negotiations stretching through 2011, lurching from one crisis to the next? Even if the stalling was designed to give time for banks to repair their balance sheets, was this the best strategy, considering the damage inflicted on European economic growth. John Taylor of Stanford points out that the European banks delayed the unavoidable serious debt restructuring for too long, when insolvency was the real issue not illiquidity, and exaggerated the effect of contagion from the beginning- in John Taylor, WSJ, 2/22/2012, A Better Grecian Bailout. And John Cochrane of the University of Chicago, points out that French and German governments if they bailout French and German banks should do so openly and frankly rather than cover this up as bailouts of countries, because this would lead to serious questions about the poor lending decisions of the European banks and government supervision of the banks- in Cochrane, WSJ, 12/2/2010, 'Contagion' and other Euro Myths. As early as Feb. 2010, Cochrane was suggesting the forced exchange of new bonds with long debt maturities for exisiting bonds with short debt maturities, as short term debt was the major issue here. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in the Guardian points to the differences within Catalonia about the independence referendum planned for October 2017. The Spanish government says it will prevent a referendum from taking place. In a symbolic poll that took place 3 years ago in 2014, only 2.3 million of 5.4 million Catalan eligible voters took part. Sentiment is in favor of self-determination but only among less than half of Catalans, as most Catalans would not come out to vote. The Spanish government says the referendum would be a violation of the constitution.