LyrArc Article Gist
Alex Frangos says mainland shares are still trading at a premium. He cites the Hang Seng A-H Share Premium Index, that shows the difference for shares in the freely trading Hong Kong market with the less freely trading mainland China market- the mainland shares trade in Jan 2016 at a premium of 38%, when the five year average premium is 8%. He cites other figures to show that Beijing policymakers face a difficult task to keep stock prices from reaching a natural valuation.

LyrArc Article Gist
Rauhala cites an email from Apple CEO, Tim Cook, saying updates he gets about performance in China every morning show strong growth for Apple's business for July and August. China's retail sales are up 10.4% for the first 7 months of 2015, according to the National Bureau of Statistics. The services sector as a whole showed growth of 8.4% in the first half of 2015, and it now makes up 49.5% of GDP, according to government statistics. Overall economic growth is about 4-5%, as the 7% official figure is considered overstated. Zhao Longkai, the executive director of the Beijing Univerisity Guanghua School of Management, says the retail sector should not be affected that much because losses are largely limited to a small number of wealthy investors, though some ordinary retail investors are affected, with overall stock market participation quite low compared to the U.S. and Europe. This and other expert opinion points to a situation of slower growth and debt overhang from the last stimulus, but not a strong connection between the stock market and the economy. The government's credibilty is affected by the failed intervention in July and this time during the sharp declines on August 24-25 the government is letting the market finds its own level, believing it will be better for markets and let them stabilize. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
One big concern says Nancy Keates of the WSJ about the National Association of Realtors, is that the organization collects and puts out objective data about home sales, and at the same time provides a commentary on the statistics. It also has a mission to advance the interests of its members. There are 2.6 million licensed real estate agents, and NAR represents about 1.3 million of these real estate agents. Would the real estate agents and the NAR tolerate an economist who raised concerns about the boom in lending? David Lereah, is former chief economist for the NAR ,and worked there from 2000 to April 2007. He remained upbeat throughout these years, even when the market was headed downwards. And the way he sees it he was doing for 7 years everything the NAR wanted him to do, and he was pressured to issue these upbeat reports. Critics called him "Baghdad Dave", after a Iraqi information minister for his false upbeat reports even when the war on the Iraqi side was lost. And a Credit Suisse analyst called him Liar-eah for some of these upbeat assesments, when things were clearly going wrong. The way Nancy Keates sees it this economist was eager to profit himself in the boom years. He was an economics Professor at Rutgers, at the University of Virginia, and later an economist and regulator at the Federal Deposit and Insurance Corporation. He himself bought condos 2 in Washington in 2003 and 2004, and one each in Tampa, Richmond, Va. and Alexandria, Va. and Naples, Florida. Owning by 2006 six condos worth between $150,000 and $400,000 a condo. He had an expensive lifestyle says his wife, with a big house worth $780,000, a country club, sports fishing boat. So in some ways suggests this reporter, he was caught up in the boom himself with his investments and the demands of a expensive lifestyle, with little room left for independent opinion and analysis. This is a striking example of things gone wrong, with all the meticulousness and comprehensiveness with which data is collected having its value destroyed by the lack of strict objectivity in the analysis. And the intrusion of strong personal interest bias in one direction making the destruction of objectivity complete. Looking at the economists at companies and associations, there is a subtle bias in operation that needs to be discounted by CEO's and association heads, a bias for giving the CEO's better and optimistic assessments on a consistent basis. An example is the way a large number of economists see the recovery taking place in 2009. Another related example is the sales forecasts for the Detroit auto companies that continued to assume sales in the 16-17 million a year rate into the latter half of 2008, even after the Bear Stearns collapse in March and the increasing foreclosures suggested something was amiss. All with horrendous consequences for the companies or industries involved, and the US and global economies....

LyrArc Article Gist
Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England, wants to see stricter requirements than Basel III on capital reserves for U.K. banks. The Bank of England has expressed its strong disapproval of UK banks lobbying activities in Brussels to push for a dilution in Basel III standards. The British government and the Bank of England want to have the flexibility to set their own stricter standards and not to be bound by a relaxed standard set by the EU. The risk to British taxpayers is a principal concern. In the U.S. Fed governor Daniel Tarullo is pushing for capital reserve requirements stricter than Basel III's 7% requirement- calling for a requirement of 10-14%.

LyrArc Article Gist
The chairman of the high level group on Financial Supervision for the EU says central banks neglected their roles as guardians of financial stability. He is proposing asystemic-risks council with central bankers from all over Europe as members , and with the clear intent of overseeing financial stability. Jacques Larsiere's plan is part of the overhaul of the regulatory framework for the EU. It has been endorsed by the European Commission.

LyrArc Article Gist
The lack of prosecutions in cases of financial fraud and other cases of wrongdoing after the financial crisis of 2008 by both the Justice Department and the S.E.C. in the U.S. Both agencies of the U.S. government have preferred an approach that does not name executives as defendents and works with the company or financial institution, in many situations having the firm committing the wrongdoing conduct its own investigation.This has led some to question the deterrent effects of this approach. This is particularly important considering the possibility of recurring behaviour in a future crisis. Cozy relations between financial institutions and government agencies and government departments in the U.S. was a key feature of the system before the financial crisis of 2008.

LyrArc Article Gist
The truth is very different from the rhetoric coming from the Obama administration about helping Main Street America and ordinary workers against "fat-cat bankers," says Goldfarb. Under the Obama administration banks have grown larger and gained more influence over administration decisions. No conditions were made part of the agreement that would require banks to lend a portion of the money handed out to the banks to ordinary borrowers. And not much of significance was done to help homeowners under water, which would enable a faster recovery. In this respect the policies slanted in favor of banks of the Obama administration worsened the prospects of an economic recovery. Experts from Reagan advisor Martin Feldstein- who as early as 2008 advocated serious help to homeowners under water to reduce principal and interest- to the FDIC's Sheila Bair and Princeton Prof. Krugman, across the ideological spectrum, perceived this being in the national interest. Feldstein's first op-ed on his plan appeared in the Wall Street Journal on 3/7/2008, followed by ones on 4/15/2008, 10/4/2008, 1/20/2010/ 10/12/2011 in WSJ, and a oped on 10/30/2008 in the Washington Post, repeating the call for siginificant debt reduction to homeowners. Banks had extraordinary influence on successive administrations in the U.S., both Republican and Democratic- the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations- so that policy actions could be distorted from what would otherwise take place. A study by two University of Michigan professors shows that banks did not increase lending after receiving government money. Instead taxpayer money was used to invest in risky securities for profits from short term price movements, resulting in gains of about 10% in investment returns. Ran Duchin, one of the two professors, says helping ordinary borrowers was not the most profitable use of capital for banks. Without the necessary conditions from the Obama administration, the banks depolyed capital in ways that did not help the economy. Similiarly when banks needed to be restructured no preparatory action was taken because of resistance within the administration- a request by President Obama to Treasury Secretary Geithner for preparing a plan for the restructuring of Citigroup was ignored, according to a report by Goldfarb and Wallsten on 9/17/2011 in the Washington Post....

LyrArc Article Gist
German regulatory authority takes a tougher stance in 2014, as the time when regulatory authority passes on to the ECB approaches. In the past BaFin has been seen as too supportive of Deutsche Bank.

LyrArc Article Gist
Binyamin Applebaum cites different experts on how U.S. Fed policy could play out in 2017-2019. He cites Fed governor Dudley that there is increased uncertainty under the Trump administration, and other economists who say that aging population, lack of innovation, and steady growth under the Obama administration with falling unemployment, make it unlikely that growth will jump well above 2%. The Fed's own forecasts are for for under 2% growth in 2017 and 2018, and Applebaum says this is not expected to change by much. Janet Yellen does not see a huge stimulus as a positive, says Applebaum, because it would increase the deficit at the wrong time. He cites Yellen who prefers to see more fiscal space now that unemployment is down to 4.6%. Steady growth in the view of Fed officials has taken up much of the backlog of people looking for work since the 2008 crisis. Yellen sees some fiscal space as desirable with high debt to GDP ratio at 77 percent, so that the government could respond to some adverse event in the future. A Republican Congress is also averse to sudden increases in the deficit. See the link to views about the uncertainty of how things can play out in a separate article by Neil Irwin of NYT. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says AFL-CIO union leader Trumka's questions about the Lew nomination at Treasury are appropriate even though they come 2 years later. The questions relate to clauses in bank contracts that allow accelerated vesting of equity awards for executives who may be likely to join the government- looking towards favorable treatment of the banks by these executives that join the government. In this case it is Citicorp where Treasury Secretary Lew worked before becoming Treasury Secretary. The original Lew employment contract with Citicorp had a bonus guarantee if Lew left the bank for a "high level position with the United States government or regulatory body." The revolving door has a pernicious effect on America's regulatory system especially for financial markets and bank regulation by permitting behavious that would otherwise be discouraged or penalized.

LyrArc Article Gist
J.P. Morgan Chase CEO, Jamie Dimon, and his relationship with the Democratic Party and President Obama. Dimon was a strong backer of Obama during the early part of his first term, which affected how the president viewed regulation of the banking industry. Dimon strongly opposes the Volcker Rule and other regulatory changes for "too big to fail," designed to make the financial system safer after the global financial crisis of 2008.

LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Blinder points out that the political partisanship that has emerged in 2010 has not served America well, as it has deprived the government of the fiscal policy tools, which would be more effective than the Fed's only mildly effective tool of buying $100 billion a month of medium and long term Treasury debt. The country he says is tied up in partisan knots that prevents the use of the fiscal policy tools, and leaves the Fed with the choice of doing something only nudging the rates on government and private securites a bit (by 30 basis points for Treasury debt and 15 basis points for private securities as an example, not enough for more than a mild impact on corporate spending). The fiscal policy tools are he says of a wide variety and pack a lot more power, and he cites three as examples: offering significant lasting tax breaks for job creation, large enough to produce results (larger and long term than the HIRE program), government hiring directly onto public payrolls and government paying local and state governments for hiring at the local levels, the government offering to compensate states for a cut in the sales tax for a year to stimulate consumer spending. Would'nt this raise the deficit though? Blinder points out that the deficit problem lies in the future. Right now there is so much slack in the economy, that public spending will not crowd out private spending. And with Treasury rates at an all time low, Treasury can finance the larger deficit in the short term. A depreciation of the dollar or inflation, he says, is not a worry, because now there is worry about deflation, and the USA needs a lower dollar to push exports up and rebalance its economy. This does not slight the deficit issue and the culture of poor budgeting among both parties, as Reagan Budget Director David Stockman pointed out in an op-ed piece, but accomodates the real dangers and opportunities of difficult policy choices. This is why he laments the advertising campaign and public relations campaign against the 2009 stimulus bill, and the expected paralysis of fiscal policy from the extremely partisan 2010 midterm elections, and public opinion consumed by fear of deficits. Leaving the Fed with the unenviable choice of using only mildly effective tools. Other experts and columnists mention the risks associated with the Fed's large scale purchase of securities, if this leads to another asset bubble and subsequent collapse, and another bailout needed for financial institutions. Peter Eavis in one column in the WSJ points to the lack of effectiveness of the first round of quantitative easing of $1.7 trillion. And Kelly Evans, in the WSJ, points to the risks of "bad" inflation, if another round of quantitative easing by the Fed leads to increases in the price of commodities such as oil and food (such inflation falling heaviest on lower income households).The US Financial Regulatory Reform bill has received low grades, and recent standards for reserve capital in worldwide banking reforms are stretched out over a long period, leaving fragility in the economic system, if something were to go wrong....