LyrArc Article Gist
Sharp showed a loss of $3.1 billion for the third quarter of 2012, far larger than expected. Sharp's new forecast is for losses of $5.6 billion for 2012. Sharp CEO, Takashi Okuda, even said the company has "material doubts" about its survival because of "serious negative operating cash flow." Sharp made large bets on LCD panel manufacturing with large investments in added capacity as the television market turned into a commodity business with declining prices and with new competition from China. Just one factory in Sakai, Japan, could manufacture 6 million LCD panels a year- the total global market size at the time. Two other events hurt Sharp- missing the smartphone shift with the introduction of the iPhone in Japan in 2008 leading to a sharp drop in sales, and the collapse of the solar business with cheap products from China. The global economic crisis and overstretched consumers in the U.S. and Europe led to declining sales. Sharp's new factories for LCD panels at Kaneyama now make panels for iPads and iPhones. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
IMF research by Ocampo and Erten shows that when adjusted for inflation since the 1970's, the prices of metals have remained about the same, food prices down 58%, and energy prices up 163%.

LyrArc Article Gist
In this essay in Der Spiegel, Charles Hawley says that the Trump movement has become a movement of patriotic downtrodden whites, with a whole range of interests-of extreme right talk show hosts, Tea Party politicians, white power supremacists, those left out by globalization in the working class especially in the midwestern states. The danger he says is that this movement of which Trump has become a part, rejects the narrative on which America is based of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers establishing a country based on principles of "the inalienable rights of man," that have evolved through the years to include black people, women, and minorities.  To put this in perspective, president Obama writing for The Economist magazine in October 2016, puts this movement in a different context- that of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, Know Nothing Movement of the 1800's, the anti-Asian sentiment in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, periods when anti-immigrant or anti-foreign sentiment gained prominence. Obama's view is that it is not fundamentally economic. In this he is right in that some of the forces on the far right do not stem from globalization. Yet he would be missing a great deal if he did not address the economic problems for the middle and working class that have given such views the support of a broad segment of the population, especially in some midwestern and older industrial states compared to say the economy of California or New York. Obama is aware of the problems in his essay as he points to the problems of workers trying to get a decent wage, of job losses through globalization, and the aggravation of these problems by the financial crisis of 2008 when some of the potential physicists and engineers as he calls them went into the financial sector to create faulty mortgages. Yet he goes back to the free trade and global networks of supply chains as having reduced global poverty, without showing a keen awareness of how it has through a combination of events and decades of policy indifference to manufacturing communities in the U.S.- as documented by experts and shown in Lyrarc, with David Autor and Gordon Hansen in the WSJ, 2016- 08-16. A Gallup Study, WSJ, 2016-05-16, supports Obama's assertion by showing that many of Trump supporters are actually self-employed and not in economic distress. Yet the movement would not have taken its proportions without the merging of different groups particularly largely disadvantaged working class voters, and fortunately Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, have a better sense of this than the president. It is by their efforts that income and wealth disparities can be tackled in a way that restores the social fusion of all parts of society- in Hillary Clinton's emphatic words in the final debate by "growing the middle," growing the middle class. This is the task of the next decade, or possibly two decades. (For Gallup study see WSJ, How Economic Anxieties Explain Trump's Appeal- And Where They Fall Short, Nick Timiraos, 08-16-2016. And for Autor, Hanson, see Tallying the Toll of U.S.-China Trade, Justin Lahart, 08-27-2011)   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A study by Sentier Research from Census data shows people in the U.S. age 55-64 years make 10% less in June 2012 compared to June 2009. Every demographic has suffered income losses in this period. Median household income declined by 4.8% in these three years. Using December 2007 as astarting point shows a decline of 7.2%- $50,964 vs. $54,916. Blacks, those with some education like a high school diploma but no degree, the older Americans, and younger Americans were hit hard. Long term unemployment was the cause of the decline among older Americans. Even college graduates suffered a decline of 5.9% from $88,570 to $83,378.

LyrArc Article Gist
Iran will discontinue the second phase of the subsidy reduction program as the currency depreciates drastically in October 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
This Journal editorial says Romney is cautious and conservative in his politics, and finds his ideas for a value added tax problematic. It sees the need for Ron Paul's supporters in a successful Republican campaign in 2012 and critical for governing in 2013, because of Paul's genuine desire for change to the status quo. Of Santorum the Journal says there is need to broaden the economic message beyond reducing taxes for manufacturing companies, and going beyond the moral fervor to show how he would revive the U.S. economy and jobs growth.

LyrArc Article Gist
Americans loaded up with debt may be turning to older thriftier ways of an earlier generation. This this will affect consumer spending, have an impact on Chinese exports, and on the Japanese economy which is dependent on China for growth. Some argue that there is a culture of consumer spending that runs through recent American history. Even after one boom was over the stock boom was replaced by a housing boom, each boom and easy credit offering free spending and borrowing lifestyles. Is it going to change now? But it could be that a point has been reached where the finances of households and of the nation's credit system can only go so far, and culture won't matter if banks tighten up credit. There is a limit for the Fed to act to lower rates, and household debt has reached highly serious proportions. The savings rate went from one tenth of income in 1984, to 5% in 1994, to slightly negative in 2008. Today for those who borrowed against their homes in 2003-2007, 34 million households or one third of the US households, savings rate was negative 13% in 2006 June. Thhis came down to 7% in end of 2007, according to Moody's Economy.com, which suggests that the cutback in consumer spending from this group of people had already begun. What will this mean for consumer spending in the USA? It means that even though the top fifth of American earners who generate half of all consumer spending according to Barclay's Capital, will continue spending though a bit more carefully than before. The rest of the American people will be cutting back, especially the one third of the nation that is heavily in debt, and the unemployed if job numbers aren't that good. Which could be why Goldman Sachs predicts that Japan is already in recession using the Japanese definintion of decline in output, and China may be slowing down more significantly than is understood because of the poor data that is coming out of China. The Chinese economic activity too chaotic to accurately measure, and with large time lags before what is actually happening is detected and quantified correctly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Preident Karzai of Afghanistan joins the three way peace talks of the U.S. and Afghanistan's government with the Taliban, with the cooperation of Pakistan.

LyrArc Article Gist
A look at the history of the founding of Pakistan and the 60 years since, looking all the way back to Muslim League's activities in the 1930's under Jinnah, and the failure of politicians and the military to help build Pakistan and improve the lives of its people. One by one the generals and the politicians, including Ms Bhutto and Sharif, have all failed and the dim prospects that it would be different this time with a new elected government.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Treasury Secretary Geithner says Republicans are working to thwart the Dodd-Frank legislation- by slowing down and diluting the impact of rules required to be written under Dodd-Frank, crimping the resources of regulatory agencies, and blocking the nominations of heads of regulatory agencies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

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. ...