LyrArc Article Gist
The dollars situation may not be as bad as it looks. There are signs that the dollar is strengthening against the British pound and the Australian dollar and other important currencies. And the weaker dollar is already working to reduce imbalances in America's trade deficit. There are two aspects of the dollar's role, one is as a means of international exchange and the other as a store of value. For the first reserves of any country need to be highly convertible and America offers highly liquid markets and this has not changed. As a store of value the dollar has lost some of it value especially against the euro. But the reason that the dollar should not see a sudden drop in value is because the largest holders of dollar reserves China with $1.4 trillion and Japan with $1 trillion would stand to lose by shifting out of dollars significantly at atime when the dollar was so undervalued besides hurting their export markets if it affected the US economy. And though the euro looks good in the short term, over the longer term Europe's aging societies may see lower growth and the future may look different once the USA has corrected some of it imbalances which is precisely what the weaker dollar accomplishes as the US exports start humming. Seen against the historical background the USA has periodically gone through this situation with dollar weakness in 1977-79, 1985-88, 1993-95. In 1985 the dollar went to 81 Japanese yen and there was concern about its reserve currency status at the time. However the dollar has weathered these storms. And there is always the option for a country to peg its currency not to one currency alone but to a combination of the dollar and the euro. This was the case before 1914 when 3 currencies the British Pound, the French Franc and the German Mark were used. In the post 1918 environment the dollar replaced the German mark alongside the Pound and the Franc. The Persian Gulf countries have this option so they can use their own monetary policy to control inflation by pegging not just to the dollar but to a basket of currencies as Kuwait has done. See the link to the Persian Gulf countries handling of this currency issue in WSJ, November 20th and Nov 1, 2007....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Bank of Japan's plans to buy 100 trillion yen of Japanese government debt in 2 years to fight deflation is having a positive effect on the eurozone economies. Japanese investors are buying eurozone sovereign debt. J.P. Morgan estimates the increase in investments for overseas bonds by Japanese investors in 2013 at 45 billion euros. This is lowering the yields on the sovereign bonds of France, Netherlands and Austria to record lows and lowering the yields of sovereign bonds of Italy and Spain. The 10 year yields on Italy's government bonds declined to 4.326%. Yields on 10 year Japanese government bonds was 0.514% on April 8, 2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
China's GDP growth in the second quarter of 2012 over the prior year quarter slowed to 7.6%, according to govrnment data.

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in the NYT explains why the loss of jobs particularly in the auto industry to Mexico, with the experience of NAFTA passed by president Bill Clinton, has caused widespread opposition to the TPP trade agreement proposed by president Obama. Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in 2016 oppose the TPP.

LyrArc Article Gist
Gordon Brown, former prime minister of Britain from 2007 to 2010, chaired the April 2009 G-20 meeting that came up with ways to tackle the global financial crisis. Brown also led the way by recapitalizing British banks, a step the U.S. followed. He comments on the volatility in financial markets in August 2007 following the S&P credit downgrade of the U.S.. Brown gives an incomplete grade to the tasks the 2009 G-20 set out to accomplish. He points to three goals the G-20 had set in the middle of the financial crisis in April 2009. The first was to prevent a recession from becoming a depression. The other two were to establish a financial stability regime, and a compact for growth. These two became paper promises says Brown. Brown sees the best approach to prevent a lost decade is for U.S. and Europe trading their way out of a downturn as the Asian market absorbs more industrial goods from Europe and the U.S. This includes policies that would keep commodity prices low and ways of coping with currency shocks. Analysts have pointed to an export led recovery as one of the solutions the U.S. was hoping to achieve with a lower value of the dollar. This has had only limited success because of deep structural problems- high consumer indebtedness, bad debt at the banks, weak housing sector following the mortgage crisis, and a rising U.S. deficit- which will take some time to clear. Brown does not come to grips with these underlying imbalances built up during the boom years of the last decade, both in Britain and in the U.S., during which he was the finance minister of Britain....

LyrArc Article Gist
Equity markets in Europe and the U.S. are likely to see some of the 62 trillion yen, or $630 billion, which the Bank of Japan plans to add to holdings of banks and households in two years 2013-2014. A senior advisor to Deutsche Bank, Thomas Mayer, says equities of Germany, France and Britain are likey to see interest from Japanese investors, as are bonds and equities of the U.S. Japanese companies such as Toyota and consumer product companies such as Sony and Panasonic will now be able to better compete on price against their S. Korean, American and European competitors.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman has some legitimate concerns. Noting that 600,000 jobs were lost in February, 2007, which would mean several million jobs lost, anywhere from 5 to 7 million jobs lost in 2009. In the face of this generating 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2010 as Obama plans to do, looks like not having done enough, and letting the worst effects of the downturn go on. And the lack of a plan to resolve the situation of failing banks, which are only drawing more of the government's capital, leaves continued weakness in credit markets and the economy that will hurt the unemployment picture through 2009. So in spite of all the rhetoric and good intentions, the lack of experience in dealing with a crisis of this magnitude, political deadlock, and an element of trial and error, learning and observing, as the President and his advisors deal with the evolving crisis, leaves the American economy exposed to many risks.

LyrArc Article Gist
June unemployment numbers will jump say experts at IHS Insight as GM and Chrysler downsize even more to become smaller companies with even less market share. This will reflect closing Pontiac and sale or closing of the other GM brands Saturn, Saab, and Hummer. It will reflect closing of more dealerships of GM and Chrysler. THis might be offset by a pickup in sales if something like the European trading clunkers for new cars program takes off in the USA. But with the US customers more in debt and with rising job losses, the pattern may be different in the US. It may only offer a small boost in sales. Manufacturing still matters in a recovery. In 1980 manufacturing was 20% of America's output, now it is 11.5% says Mark Zandl of Moody's Economy.com. Manufacturing, he says, has a bigger impact than its size suggests, because it responds quickly. As sales resume workers are called back to their jobs. The sharp V shaped recoveries in the early 80's reflected the rapid response of manufacturing. After the 1980's both the declines and the recoveries were shallow in 1990-1991 and 2001. Now with GM and Chrysler shrinking further under the government plan to fix these companies, and taking the supplier impact, the rebound leg of the V is missing. The kick from the Big Three and their suppliers is missing, says Nigel Gault of IHS Insight. Of the 5.7 million jobs lost from Jan 2008 to June 2009, 1.6 million were in manufacturing and 289,000 were in motor vehicles, split almost evenly between assemblers and supplier networks....

LyrArc Article Gist
The US economy is growing at a much faster pace than Europe or China in the last quarter of 2021- at 7% annualized growth in the fourth quarter up from 2% in the third quarter, according to Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. This compares to 2% in eurozone and 4% in China. Major US ports such as Los Angeles are processing 20% more container volume in 2021 than in 2019, while Rotterdam and Hamburg are almost flat compared to 2019 level. Consumption of durable goods has jumped 45% above 2018 levels in the US, only 2% in eurozone, according to ECB data. The factory gate prices in China are far outpacing the consumer prices in China, suggesting weak domestic demand and strong foreign demand. Lars Jensen, head of network at container ship company A.P. Moller-Maersk says the global supply bottlenecks were started by this surge in US demand with more ships headed for the US taking ships away from other places. The US economy will grow at 6% in 2021 and 4% in 2022, with wages growing 4% a year above the pre-pandemic trend rate, compared with 1% in eurozone, according to Bank for International Settlements. This is pushing inflation up in other countries by pushing up the value of the dollar. In Mexico hitting 7.4% and the central bank raising interest rates 0.5% point to 5.5%. In Russia inflation up to 8.4% and central bank raising interest rates by 1percentage point to 8.5%. The equipment investment in the US is up by 13% this year according to JP Morgan Chase, only 3.6% in eurozone, 0.1% in Japan. All this is creating a large gap between the US and Europe, US and China in economic growth and demand growth, and in income growth. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman says the kind of spending on helping the US economy never happened. That is relative to the size of the US economy, not much happened uder the Obama administration. As evidence, he cites the figures that total government payrolls have declined by 350,000 since January 2009. And he says government purchases of goods and services increased only by 3% in the last 2 years.

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The dollar has reached the mark of 86 yen by the begining of August 2010. Japanese analysts see the dollar at 90-100 yen as reasonable for Japan's export based companies. One factor causing this is the Chinese government increasing its holding of Japanese government bonds. By May 2010 China had accumulated 1.27 trillion yen according to the Japanese government. This rise of the yen will have a negative effect on Japanese exporting companies.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S consumer spending declines by 0.9% in Dec. 2014 over the prior month, according to the Commerce Department. Consumer spending was up in Nov. 2014 by 0.4%. Excluding auto sales and falling gas prices the Dec. 2014 decline in consumer spending was 0.3%. This shows that consumers are saving most of the money saved as a result of gasoline at about $2 a gallon, or using it to pay off debt. Analysts had estimated a significant increase in retail spending which turned out not to be happening.

LyrArc Article Gist
Electricity production and consumption data from the provinces has been overstated say experts making the decline in economic growth in China look less severe than it really is. Coal stockpiles at one key storage location in Qinhuangdao port reached 9.5 million tons in June, says an analyst for Wood Mackenzie, global energy consulting firm, a level not seen since the level of 9.3 million tons in November 2008 during the height of the 2008 financial crisis.

LyrArc Article Gist
Similiarities with Japan are in the exploding monetary base growth by the Fed, just as bank lending is dropping. And as in post bubble Japan of the 1990's, all of the behaviour says Wood invites legitimate comparisons with Japan. The government has lent, spent or guaranteed about $11 trillion to the financial sector broadly defined, because of letting financial institutions remain "too big to fail," whether Fannie Mae, AIG or Citigroup. None of them have been broken up. And this is similiar to the lack of bank cleanup in Japan with regulatory forbearance for years after the bubble. He thinks there is evidence that America is already in a Japanese style "liquidity trap."

LyrArc Article Gist
As the Obama administration plans a large stimulus spending plan that may approach $1 trillion over several years, considering also the second phase of the $800 billion first phase stimulus, there is a concern that there may be wasteful spending and social costs of borrowing and spending by the government of such proportions. In economics jargon this hinges on whether there is amultiplier effect of spending, higher if its efficiently and well spent with less impact on private consumption and investment, and lower if the opposite were true. The assumption behind amultiplier of 1.0 for an additional bridge or road is that resources like manpower and capital that would be otherwise idle are deployed to produce something useful. An increase in one unit of government purchases increases by one unit the real gross domestic product. The government has effectively created the additional bridge or road without a cut in anybody's consumption or a businesses investment. The other contrasting approaches are to say there is a multiplier of zero, meaning there is a social cost in two ways. One the reduction of consumption and the crowding out of businesses investing in new products and technologies for example, and second in the inefficent use of resources if a government bureaucracy is put to work allocating money and the additional dangers of favoritism and corruption. To say that there is a multipier of 1.5 would mean that the government figures out a way to get private investment through conversion of plants for automotive parts say to make wind turbine blades by giving incentives, tax benefits and grants, spends on a dilapidated road and public transportation infrastructure that may provide benefits in increased growth capacity over future years. The limits of a government bureaucracy and inefficiency of government would in this case be addressed by transparency rules adopted and measures that track progress that are freely available to all citizens say on a website on the internet, and by bringing in fresh management talent from the private sector. There appears to be no generalization that can be applied for one multiplier for all projects. It may be that the multiplier will vary with the project. Some projects like the conversion of a factory making unneeded auto parts to a badly needed wind energy part, to change the dynamics of energy market pricing, to meet energy needs and cut emissions, may end up having a multiplier much above 1.0. A redundant or less needed bridge has a lower multiplier than a bridge rebuilt before it leads to breakdown. And also the complication that too large a movement in one direction say of stimulus spending, might result in a shift of the curve towards a smaller multiplier and diminishing returns, as the resources to track such a large expenditure and the talent to adminster are overextended. The social cost of private investment not making that investment in new technology, new product or improved product has to be figured into all this, both at the conceptual level as all costs and benefits may not be picked up in the analysis, and at the macro level keeping in mind that the animal spirits, as they were once described, may just not be there to absorb the huge outlays which a government can make. These do not come without an opportunity cost and borrowing costs. All this leads one to to conclude that spending has to be carefully evaluated and projects assessed on a case by case basis for costs and benefits. The spending has to be balanced to provide just as many incentives for private investment to invest in new products and technologies. One way the Obama team is attempting to address this is to include a $300 billion tax cut for businesses and individuals. The business tax cuts are aimed at helping small business with losses, and for future investments and making hires and forgoing layoffs. The other part relates to careful evaluation of spending projects and transparency so the people can see if they are effective. See the link to this....