LyrArc Article Gist
Winkler says Nokia may make it but it looks more likely that Research In Motion may not make it through the current storm.

LyrArc Article Gist
Ip's point about the actions of previous president's in promoting a recovery long after they are in office has to be qualified by the uncertain economic outlook for 2013, with a slowdown in the eurozone, China and India, and the efforts to control the deficit in the U.S. also affecting the economic outlook. The process of deleveraging has still to work itself out and the economy is still being supported by the Fed's continual easing of monetary policy.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says opposition to the military rule and suppression of liberties in Egypt will only grow as the Egyptian military government of Gen. Sissi cracks down on the secular liberal opposition. Meanwhile all sorts of xenophobic theories about the western influences are growing in Egypt similiar to the period under Mubarak. The editorial points out that the Muslim Brotherhood should have been voted out of office not pushed out by the military taking over in a repeat of previous decades of military rule.

LyrArc Article Gist
The debates about the spending are taking place in standing room only meetings in Congessional discussion rooms. With longer term project suuporters callling for spending not to be skewed towards building the roads in the far flung areas that only encourage the same kind of long commutes and urban sprawl that created the energy crisis raher than look at alternatives (perhaps like the ones in Sacramento where new kind of layounts with lower commutes and more proximity of housing and jobs is designed), give public transit and other projects equal importance, and finance projects for a greener America. See te link to Jan Corzine on a view from the perspective of the state governors.

LyrArc Article Gist
Apple faces large hurdles in China with models made locally by Huawei and other Chinese companies that offer similar features at a price about one third less. Chinese buyers are also looking for products that are made locally by Chinese companies. As a result Apple's market share in China has declined from 9% in 2015 to 7% in 2016. The future for Apple does not look bright apart from a core group of Apple fans that look for new product launches every year. Social media comments cited here show the comments about the iPhone 7 that say buyers should not pay $159 for Air Pods, the cordless earbuds. With the economic situation changing buyers are careful to pay so much for the iPhone 7, when it looks so much like the iPhone 6. In India Apple iPhone price are much higher and remain a significant hurdle for price conscious buyers.

LyrArc Article Gist
After heated debate Governor Christie and leaders of the democratic party in the legislature agree on changes to New Jersey's public employee retirement and health benefits and pension system. New Jersey's pension system has unfunded liabilities of $54 billon and some estimates forecast that it will run out of money to pay pensions by 2018. The retirement age for new workers is now set at 65 not 62, pension contributions go up to 7.5% from 5.5% for state workers and to 10% from 8.5% for public safety officers. A major change is to delay annual cost of living adjustments till the pension fund returns to a stable financial footing. The absence of this change would have meant reducing retirees pension value by 30% in the next ten years. After the plan is 80% funded a new employee-employer pension governing board will modify the contribution rates and pension rules based on advice from actuaries. On health benefits the changes are for workers earning more to pay a larger share of premiums- so that a worker earning $60,000 would pay 27%, and a worker earning $95,000 would pay 35%. This particular change is phased in over 4 years and saves $300 million....

LyrArc Article Gist
The maximum that can be paid out to executives in upfront cash for bonuses is 20% under the rules set by the European Union starting in 2011. And the amount of time that at least 40% of an EU banker's bonus must be deferred is 3-5 years. The US has not set up similiar rules restricting up front cash bonuses to prevent executives from taking excessive risks. During the 2008 financial many banking executives collected huge bonuses by taking excessive risks, even though the banks suffered huge losses after the departure of the executives. Now the SEC, the Federal Reserve and other government agencies in the US are reviewing the rules. Projected pace of Wall Street profits in 2010 are 28.7 billion for 2010, and the fear is for a repeat of the situation in 2008 as the US has no rules similiar to the EU. Britain's Financial Services Authority passed similar restrictions recently. The Dodd-Frank legislation for financial reforms requires the pay related regulations to be set by April 2011. That legislation specifically prohibits any bonus plan that "encourages inappropriate risks" at financial firms with more than $1 billion in assets. The view of the European Union's financial services commissioner, Michael Barnier, is that not enough has ben done in this area in the US, and doing nothing is to ignore the right lessons from the financial crisis....

LyrArc Article Gist
Total compensation and benefits at publicly traded Wall Street banks and securities firms was a record $135 billion in 2010, according to an analysis by the Wall Street Journal. This is up 5.7% from the $128 billion in 2009 for the same firms. The 25 largest financial firms saw revenues increase to $417 billion. Things are going back to where they were before the financial crisis with total compensation and benefits now exceeding the levels in 2007. In 2010 deferred compensation made up half of the total pay compared to being one third of total pay in prior years.

LyrArc Article Gist
Instead of "ring fencing" bad loans one bank at a time, which is what is being done for Bank of America and Citigroup by the government , Bair, Bernanke and others favor something like the Resolution Trust Corporation, which would contain all bad assets of banks. Bair in an interview said she would like to see them priced at what they would get in today's market, meaning that the steep discounts issue would be faced squarely. What this will need is a lot of government money to restore confidence so that investors are willing to put their private money in the banks. And Senator Schumer says he is hearing the number of $1 trillion or more. This would let banks take these bad assets off their balance sheets, like they did with the Brady bonds for bad Latin American assets and with the Resolution Trust Corporation for bad assets in the savings and loan crisis. It was the original intent of TARP but two things happened, first the pricing of these assets was in limbo, with nobody willing to say how steep the discount should be. The auction process proposed was a vague and shaky one. Second, things deteriorated so quickly that it became urgent to instead do bank recapitalizations for $250 billion. Now the same issue has to be addressed directly by another administration with control of Congress, so that the big bucks funding of $1 trillion can be possible to do. Something like a separate institution that holds all bad bank assets. And the government taking on a big part of the burden, and with it some ownership of the banks that hopefully could payback some of this $ 1 trillion....

LyrArc Article Gist
Rubin questions the idea that lowering the deficit by reducing tax expenditures, deductions and loopholes at the same time as lowering rates would work. It would not raise enough revenues if many of the deductions that help the middle class were not considered doable and crossed off the list. He disagrees with Republicans about increasing taxes to Clinton era levels as creating disincentives for work and business by citing the economic record of growth in jobs and GDP during the Clinton period. On the proposal to use limiting deductions and loopholes for the the rich as away to provide a more equitable distribution of the tax burden he says this would still require increasing taxes on the middle class to achieve deficit reduction.

LyrArc Article Gist
The first significant action to help homeowners threatened with foreclosure comes from Sheila Bair, Chairman of the Federal Deposit insurance Corporation, one of the few people after Bernanke and Paulson who have shown initiative and foresight in the current crisis. Bernanke and Paulson had the foresight to open the Fed lending window to investment firms like Lehman Brothers and others but little has been done for homeowners to have significant impact. When interviewed on television in the days surrounding the Bear Stearns crisis Sheila has shown a good grasp of the issues and courage to take the initiative. This action is similiar in line to what Martin Feldstein has suggested on the pages of the WSJ for some time now. Martin wanted the Federal government to step in to loan homeowners the 20% of their outstanding loan and work towards bringing the homeowners payment to an affordable sum. According to Feldstein's calculation this would be about the right amount as a percentage of their loan so that homeowners rationally would not be better off walking away from the loan as the best possible decision under the circumstances. If the rational option was taken under a scenario that homeowners would get no direct help here is what would happen even though it may be intuitively read in one's mind. Homeowners would walk away in increasing numbers, it would become the popular option, one that has happened in prior housing crises in Colorado for example but this time it would be spread out across America, making it dangerous. This would launch a downward spiral or cycle in which the more homeowners walk way, or default the more house prices drop, and the more house prices drop a new group of homeowners who previously had enough equity in the house now because of the last price drop enter the category of homeowners who would be better off just walking away as a rational option. During the next wave this gorup would default and set the spiral or cycle moving again to lead to further price declines and another group of homeowners finding not enough equity in their homes to justify making payments and this group would walk away. At each turn of this spiral another cycle would be set in motion which is why it is so dangerous once it gets started, and the need for timely but also well thought out plan and good execution. This cycle is that of the economic system as a whole. As house prices drop at each turn of this cycle, it would have a serious impact on consumption for an already indebted American consumer. A drop in consumption means fewer product purchases by consumers, and the falling demand means factories would close as companies consolidate operations around the remaining factories to keep capacity utilization at reasonable levels, and this would mean layoffs and cuts in investment and other spending. The layoffs in turn would add another layer of homeowners leaving their homes through foreclosures adding to the pool of homeowners who have left their homes, and adding to the downward pressure on house prices. The pickup in inflation would bite at exactly the worst time as this would mean consumers would have to spend even more carefully. The price of oil which normally would respond to changes such as a fleet of cars with higher mileage on American roads would take a longer time to respond as this fleet change would take a few years to occur. It would respond to lower demand for oil in American factories but the considerable demand in Asia and other countries where the economies are likely to slow down but still be growing at rates to accomodate the large number of people who have not benefited from the market economy, would make the price decline in oil a gradual affair. The weaker dollar would add to the price of imports adding to the inflation. This bite from inflation would lower consumption even further in the economic cycle. And this would mean lower production in factories and even more layoffs at the next turn of the economic cycle. The Federal Reserve would find itself having difficult choices between maintaining confidence in the dollar, for which Capman and McKinnon argue on the pages of the WSJ recently and lowering rates but not achieving much in terms of stimulating either consumption or investment as this would take time to work itself out and all the Fed could achieve by its interest rate making tool is to buy time to weather these adjustments in an orderly manner. There is almost a consensus among experts that interest rate reductions in the current climate of inflationary movements in prices and the current currency exchange rates moving towards a loss of confidence in the dollar is something to be done very carefully and each action taken only with careful understanding of the possible consequences. A look at the proposal itsel shows that it gets around the whole issue of moral hazard by having the cost paid for in this manner. The mortgage investors will pay for the 5 years of interest on the 20% of the loan the government provides. The homeowner takes over after that. The mortgage investors cannot add deferred interest, prepayment penalties or other ways to make the homeowner pay some of the interest charges. And the homeowners payment has to be afforadable so mortgage investors have to show that the payment is not more than 35% of income of the homeownercalled the debt to income ratio (DTI). And only homeowners with mortgage payments above 40% DTI are eligible. And the government would raise the money needed through a $50 billion offering. To show there is no moral hazard that is the government bailing out any of the parties involved, the government will get back all of its money or intends to do so, the government will have the first rights to the money should a home foreclose and before anybody else is paid. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Reasons why the U.S. Stimulus spending failed to give the economy the boost it needed.

LyrArc Article Gist
A study by Charles Elson of the Center for Corporate Governance of the University of Delaware which refutes the idea that excessive compensation is needed to retain good talent in industry.