LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ committed to orthodox economic theory thinks of tariffs as tariffs such as Smoot Hawley from the 30's. This is why it is not true- It is about fentanyl flows that have led to 490,000 deaths over 12 years in the US and few in the US like to talk about it. Smoot Hawley had nothing to do with fentanyl, drugs trafficking and migrant trafficking that every nation not only has a right but a No.1 responsibility to its citizens to keep its neighborhoods and its children in neighborhoods safe. Smoot and Hawley were US Senators and US Congress was isolationist in mood. Their grasp of the world trading system was meager and they stepped in at a time when the world had economically not recovered from World War I, and the French against US General Pershing's advice had set the most punitive arrangement in Germany that crushed Germany after an armistice Pershing opposed that left the Kaiser's political structures intact. Tariffs is not DJT's idea. It is the solid experience of Deputy US Trade Representative, Robert Lighthizer under Reagan who conducted negotiations with the Japanese who stalled and stalled Lighthizer says, let negotiations drag on into endless nights, and Lighthizer and his team stood firm. The relentless Japanese relented and Lighthizer secured the agreements that ended this phase of trade relations in the 1980's. Lighthizer was Trade Representative in the DJT first term 2016-2020 and launched the negotiations with China. This is now 8 years since 2016 and 2016 itself was 35 years after Lighthizer negotiated with the Japanese. Today's US Trade Representative is Jamieson who was Deputy Trade Representative under Lighthizer in 2016. Each detail is carefully thought through to bring it to a fair conclusion in the interests of the world and the US. Information traveled slowly GM could not tell at any time how many cars were in inventory on its lots in 1920's. US lacked basic infrastructure for government that FDR and Labor Secretary added firt in New York in the 1930's and which was transferred to 50 states by 1940's. Today information is quickly at fingertips and consultation processes are built in between industry and government at all levels. A lot of information is carefully evaluated. USTR as DJT showed, the major study of USTR Office in the Rose Garden on April 2, 2025, has all trade barriers carefully analyzed in minute details for every country. And is working on this for 40 years. There isn't even a slightest  comparison between this and the Smoot Hawley crowd in the 1920's.  The goal not to beat anybody. Just to set the goal of a level playing field for world trade. That is the foundation of trade that is fair and respected, and is a win-win for all. WTO's basic foundation No. 1 principle is a level playing field. It is just that this was a kind of Marshall Plan for Asia of the US to let poor countries such as Japan war wrecked in 1950, and China colonial power wrecked by first Britain then Japan struggling and poor in 1990's, giving them some time to rebuild by ignoring unfair barriers to trade for 10-15 years 2005 for China. Barriers that never got dismantled and technology that leaked from the US 2005-2016 under the Obama administration. Smoot Hawley was not about the US Navy building its own ships and US shipyards in the 1920's. In 2025 US shipbuilding industry is stolen, this is why the words used "pillaged" "looted" were used in the Rose Garden. Little by little American private enterprise capitalism was superseded by a new form of capitalism in Japan then in China that combined state capitalism with private enterprise capitalism. This then was the threat America faced, and needed to redouble its energies and seek fair play.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With the rushed approach adopted by the Trump administration not enough consideration was given to winning support in the House from 25 conservatives in the Freedom Caucus. Without their support the bill cannot be passed in the House of Representatives. The fight also includes one over what are essential health benefits including whether  maternity care would be included. As a result some moderate Republicans are also expressing opposition on the grounds that less people will be covered and fewer benefits will be provided under the Republican House plan called AHCA. President Trump has not involved himself in the details, and the bill comes very early in the first 100 days, leading to the perception that health care has become a partisan conflict without really grappling with the problems of high cost of health care and creating a solution that all can support. Democrats are seen as having made the same error early in Obama administration's first term. President Trump sees this as a much needed win with a drop in his approval ratings, making this even less of an effort to come out with a good plan.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Journal's Jeff Bennett talks with Rodney O'Neal, the CEO of Delphi Automotive. O'Neal says Delphi's success depends on focussing on advanced technologies where emerging market producers are less able to compete. He has focussed on 33 product lines which are 'green,' safe' and connected.' If it doen't create value then revenue and cost numbers are wrong, is O'Neal's lesson from the bankruptcy filing. He likes the chaotic discussion coming form strong debate, where views are expressed with passion and counterpoints made, and he takes this debate seriously, because as he sees it choosing the right course is a significant task in itself, which takes much time to correct if wrong. There are major improvements in emission and fuel economy ahead and a high tech future for the automobile industry. He see America's future in high-tech where America can do better than emerging market producers, and ensuring that the steady flow of exceptional American talent continues to be channelled properly....

LyrArc Article Gist
The shift away from Iranian oil with U.S. pressure and sanctions, and higher oil prices, could pose challenges for the Indian macroeconomic outlook in 2020.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Hindusthan Times on president Trump's 25% steel tariff on steel imports focuses on the trade deficit with China of $375 billion in 2017. It shows the trade deficit for the month of February 2018 citing data from China as growing rapidly in 2018 over the prior year by 45%, even as imports went up only by 6.3%. In looking at coverage in the U.S. on this topic many of the reports in the Washington Post and the New York Times were critical of the tariff without mentioning the size of the trade surplus of China. Hardly any reports mentioned the growth by 45% in the February 2018 trade surplus of China with the U.S. over the prior year.  This report cites a tweet by president Trump that China was asked to come up with a plan to reduce its trade surplus by $1 billion in 2018, only 0.27% of the trade surplus, which looks strange as this would do little to change the trading relationship except that it puts pressure on China to change the direction of the surplus that is growing because of the strengthening dollar and the growth in the U.S.  This suggests that even with the 25% steel tariff America's basic problem of the imbalance in trading relationship with China will continue.  The headlines critical of Trump for starting a trade war therefore look strange in this context and show how little this subject is understood or debated with facts. Even today textbook economics principles are cited after two decades of hollowing out of industry in the midwestern U.S. and in Ontario, Canada. This led to public sentiment shift electing a liberal Justin Trudeau in Canada, and an outsider real estate businessman Donald Trump in the U.S.  For Democrats in the U.S. the support of marginal additional gains in trade with president Obama's push for another free trade agreement in the TPP may have cost them theiir working class base and the election.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points to a second hit from bad debt in the post 2008 stimulus binge of spending in China. This is after an earlier hit, that was absorbed as a result of high growth rates and high savings. About $420 billion was injected into 5 state owned banks since 1998, according to one estimate, as a result of the first hit to China's banks from bad debt. In this second round of bad debt, covered in more detail by David Barboza in the New York Times, and merely alluded to here, many bad loans to infrastructure projects were rushed through by local governments. The Economist considers this one of the successes of the state directed banking system, that loans were quickly made and projects started in the post 2008 crisis period; and expresses the view that this hit will be absorbed just like the last hit. However the more detailed account by David Barboza and in Business Week, points to the working of a system of incentives gone astray in a capitalist system without the necessary controls or regulation. Local governments used investment companies to take on loans, which were then used to prepare properties to be auctioned off at a profit and speculative prices to state owned companies in different industrial sectors. This is part of rampant speculation in China in real estate markets. Can China with its high savings and growth absorb a second hit? This depends on the magnitude of the hit and the size of the bad debt, which depends on how long this speculative market continues to operate, and how bad debt is hidden in the books. The difference this time is that large state owned companies in different industrial sectors are engaged in this speculation. The other difference is that the high growth rates in China depend on continued large trade deficits with the USA and Western Europe, something which is not likely to continue for long, as consumers in Europe and the USA with high debt are becoming cautious spenders. This suggests that China, like the US with the mortgage crisis, faces the same effects of unregulated or uncontrolled speculative behaviours, that can endanger the banking system....

LyrArc Article Gist
Ann Lee a former investment banker and now adjunct Professor at New York University, gives us facts that show the smaller banks that lend to small and medium sized businesses in the country are being closed by the FDIC. According to ADP small business that employs between 1 to 49 people, accounts for 48 million jobs, those between 50 and 499 employees account for 42 million jobs, and large business for only 17 million jobs. Without access to capital these small and medium sized businesses will continue to layoff employees, creating a vicious cycle of falling credit and demand. According to Automatic Data Processing's August employment report large business shed 60,000 jobs, medium sized business 116,000 jobs and small businesses shed 122,000 jobs. These smaller banks says Lee have done most of the lending to small and medium sized businesses. And overall lending has dropped from pre-crisis levels. Treasury's Capital Purchase Monthly Lending Report shows that banks that received government money actually reduced loan balance by $54 billion. According to reports issued by major credit rating agencies $700 billion of asset backed securities were underwitten in 2007. In 2009 only $10 billion was issued. This has a significant impact in every area. Banks have no incentive to lend with all the bad nonperforming loans on their books. They only hope that over time renegotiated loan terms would enable to recover these loans. But this might take a decade says Lee, if this is similiar to other crises like the one in Japan. She says what the banks do to make money is to borrow virtually unlimited amounts from the Fed at near zero rates and earn money from the spread when they lend to the Treasury. Does our current banking system make sense she asks. Banks are not investing in economic activity, in real products and services,but engaged in agovernment backed shell game that enriches bankers at the expense of everyone else. She says that the banking lobby may prevail in preventing the nationalization of the banking system, but this will not prevent questions about the status quo and its assumptions from arising if the recovery and regulatory reforms fail. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ghosn of Renault-Nissan used to be a skeptic about electric cars. Now he is on board. Nissan plans to sell an electric car in the US and Japn by 2010. It will be only hundreds of vehicles at first so it will take more time to take it to mass market, but the goal is to go for mass market. By 2012 Nissan will plan for a lineup of electric vehicles, so it will extend beyond small cars to small minivans and small commercial vehicles and small crossovers. 100% electric cars also are described as zero emission vehicles. But Nissan won't be the only company doing this. Mercedes is moving "very fast" in the direction of emission free vehicles, see the the interview with Daimler's Zetsche. Mitsubishi Motors and Fuji Heavy Industries are testing versions of electric cars. And GM plans to introduce the Chevy Volt in 2010. Toyota plans to have a plug in hybrid about this time. Mercedes will be the first to bring a lithium oin battery in its S400 coming out later this year which will be a hybrid. It is the cooling of lithium ion batteries that has been a major hurdle to development of electric cars and Daimler's Zetsche says they have solved this problem, have 24 patents, and developed a cooling system that works inside the car. Nissan has an electric car project that it is working on with California based Project better Place to produce electric cars for the Israeli and Danish markets. Ghosn has grasped the idea that the market is signalling a major and irreversible change towards smaller emissions and regulators are way behind on this curve. He says that if one is to sensibly participate in the growth of emerging markets which Nissan is doing in North Africa and India and Eastern Europe then one has to think in terms of sustainability and lower emissions, as putting tens of millions of more cars on the road around the world can damage the environment. And the only way this can be done to meet the aspirations of people in emerging markets is to lower emissions and to set this as the overriding goal. One gets the same sense from the Germans, see Zetsche, Daimler....

LyrArc Article Gist
The revised AIG rescue plan helps banks recover some of their losses on collateralized debt obligations and helps AIG by cancelling the credit default swaps it wrote on these CDO's, and thus helps shore up the financial system. This is what happened. During the boom period banks bought protection from the insurer AIG on securities backed by now-troubled mortgage assets. These securities are called CDO's or collateralized debt obligations backed by subprime mortgage bonds, commercial mortgage loans and other assets. Banks in the US, and Europe bought credit default swaps on these securities from AIG, and AIG promises to compensate them if the securites default. Now with the housing and the credit crisis the values of these CDO's plummet, banks go to AIG and AIG has to provide them collateral to help cover these losses of the banks. AIG ends up giving $35 billion in collateral to the banks including Goldman, Merrill, UBS, Deutsche Bank and others. The continuing fall in value of the CDO's meant AIG had to give more and more collateral to the banks leaving AIG severly exposed, which is along with other problems on its accounting books when the government stepped in in early October to bailout AIG with loans, with interest rates that became punitive for AIG leaving it in a struggling condition. What does the new revised plan do. It eases conditions on the interest rates and the New York Fed puts $30 billion of its money to buy the multisector CDO's at market prices averaging 50 cents to the dollar and AIG provides an additional $5 billion. With than one action banks get to recover their $35 billion and AIG gets to cancell its credit default swaps on these CDO's, in effect freeing AIG from thses swaps that were creating a hemorrhaging effect as it had to keep posting more and more collateral to banks, and banks got to recover the money on CDO's. In effect helping shore up the financial system. There are other problems at AIG but this was the biggest and most draining, and it helps AIG protect its other businesses, and banks get to put this dismal chapter behind them. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT editorial talks about growing inequality and the falling back of both the people below the poverty line defined as $22,205 for afamily of four, and the falling back of the middle class. According to the Census Bureau median household income fell in 2008 to $50,300 from 52,200 in 2007. Economists Piketty and Saez found that from 2002 to 2007 the top 1% of households- those making ,ore than $400,000 a yea- received two thirds of the USA's total income gains, largest sine the 1920's.

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Barr is brining her innovative ideas to help homeowners at IndyMac Bank which is being run by the FDIC. It could be a blueprint for the entire industry and is formulated upon a simple idea that a homeowners mortgage payment should not exceed 38% of his or her income. FDIC says those taking part in the fastrack loan modification have seen their monthly loan payments lowered by $430 on average. It is a blueprint for solving the mortgage foreclosure crisis that economists from Martin Feldstein to Hubbard and Alan Blinder think is at the root of the problem in the worldwide financial crisis. Bovenzi, the senior FDIC executive who is serving as CEO of IndyMac is overseeing the effort. He is an FDIC veteran who worked at the agency durng the savings and loan crisis of the early 1980's and 1990's. And one the key lessons from that period Bovenzi and Sheila Barr believe is that debt workouts help lenders and borrowers. A key statistic Bair pointed out in a Sept 17 speech to Congress is that the FDIC's recovery rate on nonperforming loans or loans in foreclosure averages just 32% of a loan's value. If the loan is kept current by making payments affordable and preventing foreclosure the agency has recovered 87%. And Sheila Barr's efforts are the one or two bright spots in an otherwise bleak picture for troubled homeowners, in which the Republicans have ignored two of their last 3 Presidents' key economic advisers, head of the Council of Economic Advisers under Presidents Reagan and Bush senior, Marty Feldstein and Hubbard, and not supported efforts for loan modification to help homeowners avoid foreclosure. Shortsightedness, lack of foresight, or simply not able to grasp the true nature of the crisis....

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Bair is playing a larger and larger role in this crisis as the Bush administration and Paulson take a series of missteps. She had earlier proposed her own plan for addressing the roots of the crisis which she said are home prices, and preventing risisng foreclosures was the best way to address this. She has offered loan modifications through FDIC run IndyMac bank. Now she speaks up about her disagreement with how the crisis should be handled as little has been done to help homeowners considering the scale of the crisis. Alan Blinder of Princeton university, a former Fed vice chairman has called her the real hero in all this throughout this year as she has had the foresight to suggest action to help homeowners, and has acted vigorously in other areas related to the banks. "Why there has been such a political focus on making sure we are not unduly helping borrowers but then we are providing this massive assistance at the institutional level, I don't understand it." And Sheila Bair went on to say "This agency, with its genesis in the Great Depression, has a sense of purpose now perhaps more than any other agency." Her term as chairman of the FDIC lasts till mid 2011 and her term on the FDIC Board till 2013. With 2 weeks to go for the Presidential election and her term going into the next administration, her voice is increasingly the one that will be heard by policymakers coming to grips with the economy. ...