LyrArc Article Gist
Andrew Roth describes a situation in Russia where president Putin is more popular than the ruling party. The United Russia Party was shown having support of 45% in pre election polls. The election campaign used Putin posters and the slogan "the party of the president," to increase voter support.  Some voters see Putin working really hard to improve the economic situation. Samuel Greene, director of the Russia Institute at King's College, London, says that even after efforts to increase support United Russia Party has failed to generate voter enthusiasm. Voter turnout was low especially in Moscow and St Petersburg. The election result is seen by experts as a way to give Putin support to tackle the economic problems facing the country, and ensure stability. About 343 members of the parliament out of total 450 are from the United Russia Party. The budget shortfall of 3% is being met by the government  by using state funds, and one of the sovereign funds is likely to be exhausted in 2017. One of the options is to cut back on social entitlements, increase the pension age. Prime minister Medvedev has already said state pensions cannot be indexed because "we don't have the money right now." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street Journal report -after interviews with former TEPCO engineers and executives- throws more light on the failure of power and cooling at certain reactors in Fukushima Daiichi that led to the nuclear meltdown. The difference not grasped at the time turned out to be the critical difference between the reactors where electricity to cool the reactors worked and where the the electricity failed. Of the 10 nuclear reactors at Fukushima, only the 4 with the earlier Mark 1 design failed. These reactors were the earliest reactors installed by G.E. beginning in the 1970's. The Mark 1 reactors were serviced by an American engineering firm called Ebasco. Ebasco designed the reactor buildings really small so that they would be compact and economical. Because of the small size of the reactor buildings the generators providing the electricity supplies to the Mark 1 reactors could not be installed inside the reactor buildings made of fortified concrete and were installed in buildings outside lacking similiar protection. These outhoused generator buildings could not withstand the tsunami, resulting in the loss of power and cooling for these reactors, and leading eventually to the meltdown. The reactors with the Mark II and later designs were installed along with the generators in the same fortified concrete buildings, and these survived the tsunami without disruption in power supplies and cooling. This critical difference was noted by older TEPCO executives who were intervewed, but nothing was done about this because of the added cost of making the major modifications that would be needed. The regulatory system also failed to catch the problems with the original blueprints and design for housing the reactors and generators for cooling reactors. In 2001 the original 30 year operating permit for the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor was renewed, and again in 2011 for another ten year period. Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency is part of the industry ministry, and not kept separate and independent from the nuclear industry, a structural flaw. The ministry considered its job to be promoting nuclear power, and increasing nuclear power from 30% in 2010 to 50% of Japan's electricity output. One inspection official says fundamental design and construction of the reactors from a 30-40 year old design were never looked at in safety reviews by regulators approving the extensions. He even goes to the point of saying that the reviews focussed on things like pipes and fittings, missing entirely the safety of the outhouse buildings housing the generators. One of the top TEPCO engineers says this difference stood out like a sore thumb when did a walk through during inspections. He failed to get the support from fellow engineers and Tepco executives for changes that would add to the cost....

LyrArc Article Gist
Problems with the rural development and agriculture projects conducted by USAID in Afghanistan include overspending in 2009, followed by sharp cutbacks in 2010 and 2011 as budget cuts were made. In 2009 USAID made a grant of $300 million to Arlington based International Relief and Development (IRD) to help farmers in Kandahar and Helmand improve productivity over just one year, at the insistence of Richard Holbrooke. The focus was on paying for day labor jobs to clean canals, offer subsidized seeds to encourage switching from opium poppies, distributing tractors, and building gravel roads. Because many districts of the two provinces were considered unsafe for work, much of the money was concentrated on a few districts and in one year. As a result farmers in Kandahar got more seed than they needed and they in turn sold tons of seed and tractors in Pakistan for cash. A senior program official at IRD says it wasn't realistic to pour so much money in one year. But USAID officials say overspending and poor oversight made the program seriously flawed. There was also a difference in the views of the military and USAID on the value of day jobs. The U.S. military sees this as away of protecting its efforts, of literally protecting its flanks, as this keeps unemployed youth from joining the Taliban. At the same time senior USAID officials wanted to see multiple companies bid for the next $350 millon on a follow-on project. When the USAID team of specialists again awarded it to IRD, senior offficials at USAID decided to cancel the program. The program was then redesigned in the expectation that other companies would bid for it. In the meantime USAID gave IRD 3 quarterly extensions, the last expiring June 30, 2011. The US military sees the day labor program as crucial for its military efforts, so there is kind of an impasse with USAID reluctantly giving in. IRD meantime is shutting down activites in Helmand and will do this also in Kandahar probably by the end of May, as its contract has not been renewed because of problems with the program. USAID has a high staff turnover rate of 85% a year in Kabul which complicates things with the shifting priorities of different officials. Some programs are being scaled back- a job retraining program seen as requiring $125 million over 18 months is being scaled back to $40 million. Others such as a USAID project for coordinating disparate rural rehabilitation projects for $140 million is held back because of lack of agreement with the Afghan government about how it should proceed. In parts of Kandahar USAID had found several contractors doing the same work. See the groups on Dexter Filkins, and on Commander Adams, which touch on serious development issues and the war....

LyrArc Article Gist
Annamaria Andriotis does enormous service to millions of borrowers for student loans by putting down in simple payments terms everybody can understand the approach to take for a university education. She points out the pitfalls in taking federal loans and following the advice of the student loan office. The federal student loans have an origination fee of about 4.2%, so even if you pay off the loan early you are stuck with the origination cost, which private lenders such as major banks do not normally charge. On a $100,000 loan this could be $4200 right off the beginning, reducing the loan to $95,800. Private lenders offer fixed rates also at attractive terms of about 4%-4.25%, with added reduction of 0.25 to 0.5% for loans with automatic payment. The lenders include Wells Fargo, Suns Trust. It is important to have good credit ratings. Scores of over 700 or 720 in credit ratings provide the most attractive rates, yet a good credit rating is also acceptable. FICO scores range from 350 to 850 for credit ratings. Added reduction of quarter to half percentage point for automatic payment. A loan for $100,000 taken with Federal PLUS loan and government guarantees could run 7.21% for fixed rate. Andriotis points out that compared to the $4586 payment on a $100,000 student fixed rate private loan at 4.25% for 10 years, a federal guaranteed PLUS loan at fixed rate of 7.21% for 10 years would cost $3541 more over the life of the loan. Mortgage loans for 30 year fixed rate jumbo loan is about 4.14%. In September 2014, the rates for jumbo mortgage loans offered by private banks are now converging at the 4.18% for conventional mortgage loans. For auto loans zero percent financing from auto company lenders such as Toyota Financial are a better option. Rates of 2% on auto loans may be available from private banks and credit unions. SunTrust Banks has an online lending division LightStream that is offering personal loans to borrowers having good credit ratings scores, with interest rates of as low as 1.99%. The borrowers with excellent scores can get the unsecured option at the best rate of 1.99%. Credit unions are offering lower auto loan rates of 2.64% and 2.74% compared to banks charging average of 4.79% and 4.9%, according to data from SNL Financial. Millions of borrowers with good credit ratings, especially for student loans, need to start early in checking out the rates and shopping for the best rate. A good credit rating of parents can enable a student to make a huge difference in payments for undergraduate or postgraduate education, and avoid the unnecessary burden of high interest rate loans in a low interest rate environment....

LyrArc Article Gist
Trofimov provides a much needed perspective to the situation in the Middle East in 2015. The title about redrawing borders on ethnic lines is misleading, as the essay's conclusions point to the need for various communities to find a way to live together without ethnic cleansing and intolerance in attitudes. With modernization different communities, Sunni and Shiite, already live together in the larger cities in the Middle East. Trofimov points out that the original intentions of U.S. president Woodrow Wilson were for diversity, and building modern institutions of government as the best way forward. This was not carried out by British and French rulers following struggles for independence against the colonial authorites. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, Britain and France were the dominant powers, and the boundaries were drawn up for Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia and other states, under the British-French Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916. Britain and France increased the role of minority groups to maintain their control following independence struggles in Iraq and Syria, a situation which helped Alawites gain control in Syria and Sunnis in Iraq. Shiite rule in todays Iraq has not lessened tensions, and intolerance only creates tensions in the broader region. Which makes redrawing boundaries around ethnic lines in a defacto acceptance of the current situation, not the lasting road to peace in the Middle East. In Iran, Russia with Britain was involved in the partition of parts of Iran into three zones, a Russian zone including Isfahan in the north, a British zone in the south east and a neutral zone in the middle. This happened in 1907 soon after a independence movement helped write a constitution in the 1901-1907 period, showing that many foreign powers were involved in the region, not just Britain and France. The discovery of oil in 1908 by a British company created the question of how to distribute the profits, which led to 70 years of disagreement and tensions in Iran. The resulting tensions exacerbated the conflict between religious authorites and Mossadegh in the early fifties with the fear of Communism, and exacerbated the conflict between the religious authorites and the government under the Shah by 1979 with misuse of oil wealth, ending with his overthrow and the supreme authority of the Ayatollah. Oil has proved to be as divisive, and wasteful of development opportunities, in Iran as it has been in Nigeria and other oil dependent nations. Multiple issues exist in the Middle East, not just the artificial redrawing of boundaries by the French and British, which makes the defacto redrawing of boundaries along ethnic divisions, not the answer but another step with its own dangers, along the path towards peace and economic development in the region. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
ECB president, Mario Draghi, is interviewed by Wall Street Journal reporters Blackstone, Karnitschnig, and Thomson, at his offices in Frankfurt. The reporters press questions such as- are austerity measures going to work in Greece, what happens with Portugal, what is "good" and "bad" austerity, why aren't eurobonds the answer. Draghi sidesteps the Greece question by saying it will depend on implementation of the commitments in fiscal policy and structural change. He takes the discussion to the general situation in southern Europe, in Italy and Spain, with the high youth unemployment and inflexible labor markets, making the point that there is no alternative to fiscal consolidation considering the excessive debt to GDP ratios of Italy, Spain and other countries. Good fiscal consolidation is where the taxes are reduced and government expenditure is on infrastructure and capital investments. Bad fiscal consolidation merely raises taxes, leaves current expenditures as is, and reduces capital investments. From his experience with the situation in Italy- and a similiar situation exists in Spain- Draghi points to the ways in which inflexible labor markets for the protected part of the population leads to temporary work contracts and few job opportunities for young people. The unemployment rate in Spain for young people exceeds 50%. Draghi's view is that fiscal consolidation is contractionary in the short term, but leads to growth in the longer term as structural changes are made and the confidence channel operates. It is also necessary to be put in place first, so that there is time to put the structural changes in place. He sees the program in Portugal on track. At the same time Draghi is aware of the drying up of credit in Spain, Italy and other countries even after the Long Term Financing Operation, and will respond as the situation changes. On the point of eurobonds, Draghi says it cannot be accepted that you spend and I pay, countries spend as they see fit and then they issue bonds jointly. For there to be trust its essential that each country stand on its own, and this is also a condition for setting up a durable fiscal union. This aspect of his views are consistent with the views of German chancellor Merkel and the northern European countries, Germany, Netherlands, Finland. Draghi is not new to this job after being president of the ECB for 4 months. He was on the Governing Council of the ECB for 6 years and has a good grasp of decisions made in the past. When asked if there is more that he could do for growth, Draghi's response is that the ECB will do the most it can do for price stability in the medium term and at the same time within the terms of the Treaty to promote financial stability. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Its incorrect to call a loan that has only slightly lower, same or higher monthly payment after modification, a loan modification. The intent is to make a loan affordable in monthly payments for the borrower, for it to be a meaningful modification. Says Tom Miller, the Attorney General of Iowa, "it should'nt be called modifications if people pay more or approximately the same." Many lenders and banks do not want to have to mark to market a whole set of loans of one type in one geographical region, as an accounting rule now requires, just because they have modified one loan of that type, because their reserves are severely depleted and most are already or nearly insolvent. So their way of discouraging loan modifications as a solution is to respond by saying that loans go into foreclosure even after modification, when the modification they are talking about is tacking on interest penalties and fees that accelerate the home into foreclosure in some cases, and in others by leaving payments higher or the same make foreclosure just as likely as before. Tom Miller, attorney general of Iowa, also says that " if you do real modifications, the default rate is significantly lower." Some mortgage companies say that default rates drop significantly, some to as low as 25%, when loan payments are reduced to the 30-40% of borrower income range, which is becoming the standard for a meaningful modification. Analyst Ron Dubitsky's research at Credit Suisse confirms this, showing lower payments reduced defaults to less than 50%. Research by Credit Suisse and Alan White, a law professor at Valparaiso University also show that at this time loan, 2 years into the foreclosure crisis, modification has mostly resulted in higher monthly payments. White says banks like Wells Fargo, a large servicer of loans, have done have modified few loans as apercentage of their delinquent mortgages. Sheila Bair and others have long advocated reducing loan payments to 30-40% of monthly income since early 2007, because foreclosure is costlier for banks than loan modification, but met resistance from the banks and lenders and their lobbying groups. The relevant question is that if the banks are misquided in pursuing this course, and its not in the interests of the banks or the country's economy- because accelerating foreclosures or not taking modification action in the middle of a huge wave of layoffs may result in a even bigger wave of foreclosures that threaten housing prices and effectively leave banks insolventleading to nationalization- then what purpose did all this serve except to exacerbate the crisis and increase the price tag of the government's and country's ultimate rescue of homeowners?...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Chinese government is concerned that lack of a safety net, fears about a general access to health care, and lack of other assistance for the farmers, elderly, rural poor, lack of unemployment protections and welfare, all are making Chinese to cramp up and spend less. Chinese households save a quarter of their income in normal times, now unless the government steps in a big way, which it has done only in small faltering steps, savings will increase even more in response to fears about the future. Lu Mai, secretary general of the China Development Research Foundation, says China has reached a point where it has to make a big decision, does it spend more on security and the police or on social benefits. He put out a report last week which estimates the government needs to spend 2.6 trillion yuan or 380 billion dollars by 2012 for the first phase of a social safety net. With a further spending of $838 billion dollars by 2020 to complete the improvement of health care, education, pensions for the elderly, low income housing, disability benefits, unemployment protections and welfare for the poorest. And these estimates may be low depending on the assumptions made, as the situation has taken a steep descent from the time these estimates were probably made. In the last few months tens of millions have been added to the jobless, and the severe drought has created a difficult situation on the farms in rural areas, even while millions of migrants return to these rural areas as businesses dependent on exports collapse in cities in coastal areas. What is the government allocation at this time? A target for health care overhaul of $124 billion was set recently. But the actual stimulus package is heavily skewed in favor of infrastructure and investment in construction. About 1% of the big stimulus package that was announced goes to health care and 7% to public housing. Says Zhuang Jian, an economist with the Asian Development Bank, this excessive investment in infrastructure, heavy industry and manufacturing will cause serious problems, if there is not strong consumption to match it. And Eswar Prasad of Cornell University, who was head of the China division at the IMF, says that an ambitious agenda is needed for higher social spending to take away the fears of average Chinese about the future. Chinese premier Wen says the government needs to do more, but the instincts of China's planners, and decades of development with built in incentives for promoting investment in construction, infrastructure and industry, have left China with huge unsustainable underinvestment in basics like education, health care and social benefits....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Europeans led by France and Germany demand stricter regulation and a financial regulatory system that oversees the entire financial system, and oversees all the larger countries. The US in contrast wants to see a lighter regulatory system, and lighter regulation of parts of the financial system like hedge funds. For the USA where the crisis originated, the emphasis is on larger stimulus spending. For the Europeans which have a larger safety net that they would like to see considered as part of their stimulus- and their social arrangement such as reduced hours in Germany to avoid layoffs, and the presence of a large public sector in France that is about 52% of GDP- the situation as they see it does not require breaking the EU's committment to control large deficits. The cultural and historical roots are also different. Germany was hit by hyperinflation in the period between the two wars, and there is thought there that this helped the rise of demagogic leaders and the collapse of democracy there. At that time the issue was war reparations that Germany found difficult to absorb in an economy devastated by the first war, which strained German finances. France and Germany also have no foreclosure crisis, and car sales and consumer spending are not in the deep decline that is seen in the USA. In fact car sales have increased in the two countries with the refunds for scrapping old vehicles, with no such plan in place in the USA. Making there is a credible position on the European side. Germany does see itself hit by the collapse in international trade. Germany and France face the prospect of helping their banking systems deal with the large bad loan situation facing them in Eastern Europe. At the same time Germany and France want to save some firepower for coming to the aid of key parts of the European community like Spain, Greece, and Ireland, which are facing a worsening crisis. In short both sides have credible positions, and some form of accomodation as events unfold may be a better desired outcome than some unified outcome. And little has been said of the position of the other countries in the G20, the emerging countries like Brazil, India, China, Russia, Indonesia, Argentina and others, and the position of the World Bank speaking for the poorest countries. These countries may favor stronger stimulus, and would favor the stricter regulation and supervision of global financial systems favored by the Europeans. This is because they may rightly feel that the messups in the global financial system have stolen their chance, at just the point where they were turning the corner in their efforts at bringing better standards of living to their peoples....

LyrArc Article Gist
The life of one young family with children since 2001 when the couple married from midle class prosperity to surviving on handouts with things deteriorating rapidly after 2003 when Al Quaeda bombed a holy mosque of the Shiite faith starting a wave of Shiite and Sunni conflict and making it impossible for Sunni and Shiites to live together. There are about 2 million refugees or displaced persons in Iraq largely a result of the Sunni and Shiite conflict and defacto partition of Iraq as Sunnis move to Sunni areas and Shiites to shiite areas much like what happened in the Punjab during partition and the creation of Pakistan. Another 2 million are refugees in Syria and Jordan. In 2008 its 5 years since the US invasion of Iraq and there is an assessment of what has happened since. The war and the insurgency has led to 180,000 killed according to one estimate by Iraqi Ministry of Health. There were elections leading to a Shiite dominated government and regional autonomy for the Kurdish part, but after Sunnis from the old regime took up arms as insurgents the Americans largely failed to provide the security to ordinary Iraqis. Then after local militias of Sunnis and Shiites took over their areas security, it was largely provided by the militias in their areas and the whole tone of the conflict shifted to that between sectarian communities. Since 2007 the tribal leaders who supported the insurgents shifted their allegiance to the Americans, who essentially now ensure security and transition for an interim administration, while a defacto partition of Iraq has already ocurred and is being completed. The Americans will essentially have reversed the creation of Sunnis as a privileged minority, which happened under the British after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire turned the area over to the British, and the British crushed a Shiite uprising. Leading afterwards to the creation of an independent Iraq from territories put together from the British colonial period following the Ottoman collapse. Now the area reverts to what it was before either the Ottomans or the British to what it was when it was a Shiite region, without the borders such as Iran and Iraq and Shiite religious centers extended from Iran into Iraq, which may account for the strong religious feeling of Shiite communities regardless of these borders. What of the Sunni minority around and in provinces near Baghdad? These communities could only prosper with some kind of neighborly coexistence with the Shiite communities of the region, which is the best the U.S. can do for the region promote some kind of neighborly coexistence between the communties and exit gracefully. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A 2004 rule made under SEC Chairman Donaldson and requested by the investment banks one of which Goldman Sachs was headed by Paulson changed the whole playing field and created the dangerous situation of huge leveraging that has led to the collapse of some of these banks. Older regulations limited the amount of debt that these investment banks could take on. With the new rule billions of dollars held in reserve as a cushion against losses could now be used by these banks to invest in mortgage securities and credit derivatives, a form of insurance for bond holders. Others on the SEC who supported it included Goldschmid, an authority on securites law at Columbia who asked relevant questions but relied on the assurance of Annette Nazareth, head of market regulation that under the new rules the investment banks would also be restricted by the commission from risky activity, that under the new rule the SEC would be able to look into the books of the parent companies and subsidiaries of the investment banks. But no detailed and strict oversight methods were laid out, and instead these banks were allowed to go out on their own without any restrictions. The riskiness of investments would be measured by the computer models and brains not of the SEC but of the investment banks themselves. And these banks went on a leveraging binge with 33 to 1 for Bear Stearns which collapsed in 2008. One lone dissenter was a person who wrote the computer models to determine the riskiness of investments which were used by the banks, was at the University of Chicago, and was a risk management expert. He cautioned in a letter that these computer models had failed in the 1997 LTCM collapse and could not be relied on as environments change. At the SEC oversight was handled by 7 people and this was to oversee some $4 trillion in assets, hopelessly understaffed, and most of them believing that the investment banks would self police themselves as they were ideologically believers in deregulation. So no inspections were done for an year and half upto August 2008 even when there were clear signals of trouble according to an Inspector General's report. This group had no director since March 2007. Soon after the rule Donaldson the SEC chairman left and a Congressman from a conservative district in California became Chairman, Christopher Cox. He favored deregulation and may not have even been aware that the 2004 rule had created a new and dangerous environment, so he followed his instincts and even dismantled a risk management unit Donaldson had established. Which is why McCain has called for his firing....

LyrArc Article Gist
The S&P 500 was down 41.9% in 1931 and 38.6% in 1937. In 1974 it was down 29.7%. What was it down by in 2008. In 2008 the S&P 500 was down 45.5%. This matched what happened in the Great Depression and we are not through 2008 yet as one can see from what is happening to the share price of Citigroup, other banks and the Detroit automakers. It a hell of a year and the errors during the Great Depression were different but there are errors in policy and in managing the crisis in this one also. For example the announcement by the Treasury Secretary Paulson that none of the money in the bailout will go towards buying mortgage securites may have led to renewed doubts about Citigroup's portfolio of toxic assets. The failure of the banks and other companies to get the uptick rule reinstated also ends up causing a run on the stocks of faltering companies exaggerating the impact of any doubts and creating a need for government help. Whern the history of this is rewritten the management of this crisis and the policy making will also be faulted in amanner that the Great Deprtession policies were faulted but for different reasons. The failure to address foreclosures early in 2008 as Martin Feldstein repeatedly urged in the WSJ since the early months of 2008 and continues to do so, and as other policymakers like Sheila Bair at FDIC have urged repeatedly, will be one of these major errors. Any failure to address the automakers cash funds crisis for operating expenses both with money and with the proper conditions could also go out of control and cause a major unemployment crisis in the midwest that could spread to the rest of the country. The NYT editorial took note of this on November 22, 2008, asking for funds however distasteful the behaviour of the automakers management may be. See this link. And public opinion could get the managemnt to resign or this could be a condition for signing onto the bridge loan from the government. In this particular issueof automakers Detroit automaker's management's serious errors will be written about years from now which combined with any indecision or slippage on the part of awmakers could lead to the economy and unemployment spiralling out of control, because so much is happening at the same time. It comes at atime when the storm is shifting to the consumer side to credit card and other consumer loans even as it is continuing to take its toll on the housing sector in the USA and on exports and the auto industry and other sectors around the world. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Much of what is written here about Xi Jinping pursuing Chinese socialist vision was known since he became president in 2013 when China's Communist party was losing its appeal, and efforts were made to seize power within the communist party by a leader in the western province of Chongqing. Bo Xi Lai attempted to take advantage of the situation with appeals to the working class and without any genuine commitment beyond a power grab. It was well known that Xi Jinping is a son of one of the veterans of the Communist party under Mao, Xi Zhongxun, unlike leaders who followed premier Deng Xiaoping such as Jiang Zemin. Zemin was a relatively unknown figure who was in university during the crucial period of 1947-49 when Mao came to power in mainland China. It would not be correct to say that little was known about Xi's own ideas about socialism as the long term answer to China's problems. Xi also came in as president at a time when the Communist party was losing its appeal to working class people after three administrations that followed premier Den Xiaoping. These three administrations followed a form of state capitalism that allowed companies to pollute the environment, compete without any regulations, and allowed to operate without any controls as long as they pursued growth aggressively and expanded the economy.There was an effort by Communist party regional leader in western Chinese province of Chongqing, Bo Xi Lai, to use this as an opportunity to grab power in China. During his first year as president Xi had to resolve this issue by having a court trial after revelations of corruption and misuse of power by Bo Xi Lai.  Xi's father Zhongxun's role in the revolutionary movement offers clues to Xi's own convictions and faith in the party. Zhongxun was a communist soldier who set up the revolutionary base areas in Shanxi-Gansu northwest border region of China that provided a refuge for Mao's army following the Long March. Other clues come from Zhongxun's role as head of propaganda during the period after 1944 and in 1952. Xi's family background particularly on his mother's side shows a fervent commitment to Chinese socialist vision during the chaotic years when the Japanese invaded China and Chiang Kai-Shek's nationalist forces failed to defend China's sovereignty. One reason Xi has been less understood is that little attention is paid to Xi's mother, Qi Xin who was highly educated and fervently believed in Chinese socialism and nationalist spirit during the Japanese invasion in 1938. In fact Qi Xin had to leave middle school after the Japanese took over Beijing. She joined the Counter Japanese Political and Military University to continue education and in 1941 attended the Central Party school. She met Xi's father Zhongxun in 1944. In 1953 she enrolled in the Marx School of Communism, and it was her position at the school that offered her husband added protection during the Cultural Revolution that affected Deng Xiaoping and others. With such a history in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's it is likely that Xi was profoundly influenced by his father's role in the revolutionary movement, and his mother's faith in socialism with national spirit as the way to protect against the foreign invasions. It would now appear that by the time Xi joined the Politburo in 2003 there was no question about the future course China would take given the role of his parents, and the events of 1938 the fall of Beijing, his mother having to flee, and the events that followed. Xi showed resilience during the period of the Great Proletarian Revolution when he was sent to the villages at a time when he would be studying in school and college. He was sent to an agricultural commune in largely rural Shanxi province where he worked as a manual laborer alongside other people and developed a relationship with the local farmers. Unlike other leaders during that period which could even be said about premier Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Xi took a different lesson from this experience largely because his father and mother were committed to the socialist vision for the long run. His father was still not fully rehabilitated by premier Chou en-lai when Xi was allowed to enter Beijing's Tsinghua University in 1975. He studied chemical engineering at Tsinghua graduating in 1979. Upon graduation he worked as a assistant for 3 years to a vice premier who was minister of defense. He then left Beijing for Hebei province to work as a deputy secretary of the provincial CCP. He was made Mayor of Xiamen, then governor of Fujian province in 1999 where he tackled environmental conservation before moving to Zheziang province. His father passed away in 2002 and it would appear that he was carefully trained in different provinces instead of staying in Beijing, for a position of national leadership. Xi got his break in 2007 when the upper leadership of Shanghai city was tainted in a wide ranging pension fund scheme. He was made party secretary for Shanghai. This was the position Jiang Zemin had held before he succeeded premier Deng Xiaoping. In only a few months in October 2007 Xi was made one of the 8 Politburo members, ready to succeed Hu Jintao as president. Xi's perception of being sent to the villages and making it to university education was that it was part of the long run socialist struggle, with pain that his father had also endured as simply a phase in which things would be right in the end. Xi's mother comes across as a resilient figure and one who had herself gone through the struggles of the 1930's and aided her husband on one occasion. Some of this resilience could have been passed on to the son. Xi's wife is a zealous participant in Chinese dance and music performances that created enthusiasm for the Chinese socialist revolution from the 1930's period. In his conversations  with colleagues in the party, in culture and temperament, Xi has been forthright about this background and his style of work.  Xi is unlike premier Deng and the presidents who succeeded him such as Hu Jintao mentored by a former mayor of Shanghai Jiang Zemin who came to power in 1989. Xi is more in line with the leaders around Mao like his father in his outlook and thinking, with a cautious temperament that comes from years going through ups and downs of political struggles. He is once said to have responded with dismay about being in a top position in the government knowing how precarious this had been for his father. The education at Tsinghua, his engineering background, and his easy familiarity with farmers in the provinces, mean that he understands China and its history well enough to have the confidence to shape Chinese policies in a way that none of his predecessors had except Mao, premier Chou-en-lai, Liu Shao Chi and a few veterans from that time in the 1930's. That Xi waited patiently for so long to gradually assert his ideas about socialist vision for China may be the surprising part of his behaviour till 2021.  It may be that he wanted to make the changes only after he could persuade party leaders and colleagues of his vision and long run goals. And because the Chinese economy had grown so large that it would take time to steer the ship in a different direction for the long term. In most of the negotiations with president Trump he cautiously let trade negotiators handle the situation, all the time learning about how to tackle problems of China's relationship with US and Europe. US president Biden also has a vision that is veering towards a socialist perspective in terms of bringing gains of progress to workers and families. So does Mr. Trump, Mr. Boris Johnson in UK, and Social Democrat's Scholz in Germany. It is both economic and political as Mr. Xi is quoted as saying in this WSJ report. The necessities of such action are both economic, social and politically driven as capitalism has veered way off course.  In this report it is mentioned that Soho China 40% stake was taken by a large capital markets firm in New York in the hope of large gains, as Soho China developer was a tycoon who wanted to leave China. Seeing it as not favorable to his company following events in Hong Kong. This behaviour of capital markets groups in New York and tech companies in Silicon Valley, driven by profits and not aware of the social and economic problems of working class American families is a problem in the US and in Europe. It is also what has driven so many large tech companies to expand manufacturing operations in China, that hurt US manufacturing capabilities and American workers jobs- an issue raised by president Trump and taken up by president Biden. Biden has already moved to make Intel Corporation change its plans and invest in American manufacturing technologies in a quietly implemented U turn. US president Biden is left with the unenviable job of solving this huge problem during the pandemic. He has also committed to a somewhat socialistic vision with a $3.5 trillion plan for workers and families, as has vice chancellor Scholz in Germany with his own version of programs, after the failures of unregulated forms of capitalism. Scholz goes so far as to say his mission is to show that there is really no such thing as a self-made man, that it is help from society, his fellow citizens, and government, that makes it possible for him to do his work. In a sense the world is shifting away from Reagan forms of capitalism without regulation after seeing disastrous results during the pandemic. Not just China. Some form of government guidance and regulations are now seen as essential in China, the US, UK, Germany and India for a better society and a better, healthier life, and for opportunity for all in each country.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The situation in Iraqi Kurdistan is covered in this WSJ report, with the referendum by the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq set for Sept 25, 2017. This is a region of 5.2 million people in northern Iraq. Adjoining it is a region with a mixed Arab and Kurdish population in oil rich Kirkuk province. The referendum is being held also in these areas as the Kurdish militia the Peshmerga took control of Kirkuk following the hasty withdrawal of the Iraqi army from attacks by Islamic State. Like the other aspects of the long war in Iraq this again complicates the U.S. position. As this report shows Arabs are being displaced in this part of Iraq after moving south as refugees. The Kurdish forces were a reliable ally for the U.S. in the war in 2015-2016, yet the U.S. maintains a policy of fairness towards all communities in Iraq.