LyrArc Article Gist
One of the severe problems noted in the recall disaster of 2010 was that practically all important quality and safety decisions are made in Japan. Without key American decisionmakers in the process this leaves Toyota exposed to all sorts of errors like the errors that ocurred in stalling the National Highway and Traffic Safety investigations into acceleration and braking accidents in Toyota vehicles. To compound theses errors managment at Toyota focussed on the $100 million in savings that avoiding or minimizing the recalls would generate, as revealed in internal documents. Early warning signs of similiar problems in Europe were not linked to problems in the U.S.. All this was ocurring against the backdrop of a change in management at Toyota- with the Toyota family once again regaining control of the company- and the failure of the management under Watanabe and previous CEO's to put quality before rapid expansion. The new changes are to have 2 new senior executive positions in the U.S. to focus on quality and safety. A chief safety executive will focus on safety and recalls, and a chief quality officer coming from the top ranks of the American operation will now sit on a special committee for Global Quality led by CEO Akio Toyoda. The commitee for Global Quality will address the global quality issues around one table with the highest ranking executives at Toyota right at the table to talk things out. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What Handan Iron and Steel in Hebei Province 300 miles south of Beijing and ThyssenKrupp in Dortmund, Germany, have in common. The transplanting of Germany's aging defunct iron and steel furnaces and plant to Handan, boxed and crated away- its unreal that in 1998 Handan Iron and Steel bought and transferred an aging polluting plant to a city where the steel works are located in China which has 8.5 million residents. When years later the steel works were debated to be moved to a distance away from the city with Baoshan Steel, the decision was made to instead put a new plant there instead. The solution was to make pollution payments to residents of Handan. It was Mao's dream to build a steel industry in Hebei province ,which has large deposits of iron ore and coal and a rail line. Couple of questions come up to mind- one why did the first steel works go up right in Handan, and same is true of Dortmund, labor supply perhaps but couldn't homes be built nearby instead and these plants located away from cities. Second the deal for bringing the ThyssenKrupp plants was as recent as 1998, by this time China was already a big steel producer (producing more than the US by one estimate) and in a few years Chinese steel production was to exceed the US, Europe and Japan combined. With steel production already on the rise why didn't China move more carefully. Some of the Thyssen Krupp assets were built only a few years before 2000 and met stringent environmental control. China bought these.. Why didn't China pick out the best assets instead of old aging blast furnaces. The possible answers are that they were available at cut rate prices, but were they worth it. The second is that Hebei must be competing with other parts of China, and there wasn't a rational allocation of capital as would happen if a sophiticated company like a Mittal or a Tata Steel is involved. Is China operating on a outmoded concept- nationalism, competition between provinces with local government officials running the show? The other question is that in the case of the automobile industry a different pattern is seen, the most modern technology was selected , and in the case of Cherry, the most recent technology was selected for manufacturing cars, then why was this same pattern not adopted in the case of steel. In the end China has a surplus of steel mills, which makes this rush into steel production without carefully thinking through this appear to have been a mistake. The visual picture if one flies into Dortmund of manmade lakes, green park areas and residential housing and shopping from the $22 billion the EU and Germany are investing to turn the Ruhr valley region of Dortmund into a centre of education, technology and tourism now contrasts sharply with Handan in Hebei province. Can emerging countries do better, build manufacturing for jobs but keep living conditions in mind, be patient and work to achieve the best overall results, and build education, technology, appropriate for their own situation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Trump appointed Powell in 2016 in his first year in office. DJT's advisers have told him that it is important that the Fed have autonomy, and that the Fed was structured from inception for having the independent judgement for what is best for the economy. At times DJT has wanted the Fed in his first term to at least consult with the president.

In this context remember that Powell as chair of the Fed will be till May 2026. And Powell will remain as Governor on the Fed Board till Jan 2028. Of the current 7 governors the only other terms of a Fed Governor that expires early is Adriana Kugler in 2026.

DJT tariff and tax policies could increase inflation and growth which will require the Fed to recalibrate its views on cutting rates. 

LyrArc Article Gist
A WSJ/NBC poll of Sept 20, 2012 showing Obama with a eight percentage point lead in Iowa, and a five point lead in Colorado and Wisconsin.

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....

LyrArc Article Gist
Jane Perlez of the NYT describes the efforts of China to draw the new South Korean president Moon Jae-in away from close defense ties with the U.S. Moon Jae-In won the South Korean election in 2017 and favors better relations with China and North Korea. China's goal is to reduce deployment of the Thaad missile defense system the U.S. has installed in South Korea, which is seen as reducing China's nuclear deterrance because the system also protects against missiles launched from China. Economic ties are also affected in the dispute as China has promoted a boycott of South Korean cars, televisions and other products, and fewer Chinese now visit South Korea. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Altmaier is director of the chancellery in Berlin, and is the person closest to Angela Merkel. This report in the Economist points out that Altmaier has played a critical role in steps taken by Merkel- as chief whip in parliament for the CDU during the Greece financial crisis and bailouts, as environment minister implementing the program away from coal based electricity, and in negotiating deals such as the deal with Turkey on refugees, and now with Brexit negotiations. Merkel has asked Altmaier to write her manifesto for the September 2017 election. A member of the CDU's liberal wing, Altmaier is known for being a scholar on German history, especially Bismarck, and a workaholic. Here he is mentioned as a bridge maker for the CDU to the Greens Party and was part of a group of CDU and Green Party politicians who met at an Italian restaurant in Bonn. As the moderates are now dominant in the Greens Party, a CDU coalition with the Greens could be shaped by Altmaier if the election results move in that direction. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
NYT's Landon Thomas gives this exceptional report on how Deutsche Bank changed from a lender to the German auto industry and safe banking practices to enter the derivatives business and other opaque financial products that led to taking on huge risks. Deutsche Bank has agreed on Dec. 22, 2016 to settle with the U.S. Justice Department paying a fine of $7.2 billion for practices relating to faulty mortgage securities. This report says the problems started in 1995 with Deutsche Bank's leadership hiring Edson Mitchell of Merrill Lynch to promote the investment banking business at Deutsche Bank. Mitchell hired two derivatives traders Broeksmit and Anshu Jain. Mr. Mitchell died in plane crash in 2000 when he was 47 years age, Mr. Broeksmit committed suicide in 2014, 58 years in age, Mr. Anshu Jain, 53 years old, is the only surviving person of the three. Under Mr. Jain Deutsche Bank assumed more and more risk, and was involved in complex and opaque financial products leading to the toxic mortgage crisis, and manipulation of the lending rate for London banks.  It also lent $300 million to Donald Trump's businesses. Most of the profits generated from this venture have evaporated, with analysts estimating $15 billion in fines and penalties owed of the $20 billion that these ventures generated. Not counting the serious damage to the bank's reputation in Germany and the U.S. This report points out the role played by the CEO from 2002 to 2012 of Deutsche Bank, Josef Ackermann, in encouraging these ventures converting the bank from its original loan as a contintental lender to business to a bank selling opaque financial products for most of its profits. Landon Thomas also describes the events and days leading up to the suicide by Broeksmit, including a visit to a psychiatrist and Broeksmit's facing enormous stress about the investigations underway in Germany and the U.S. looking into the opaque financial products and practices of Deutsche Bank. This is also a cautionary tale about what happened in banking from the late 1990's leading to the collapse in 2008, leading to the problems of today- the need to rescue the economy in 2008-2009 and the low rate world that ensued damaging the savings of ordinary people, the infrastructure that was never built, the parallel crisis of the hollowing out in manufacturing as a false prosperity boomed in banking and finance. In a sense it is also a story of everyday lives that were damaged in the high flying boardrooms of finance in New York, London and Frankfurt. The revolving door between regulators and the banks made it harder to monitor and control banking risk letting this story unfold over decades, damaging the credibility of governments and the established political parties without clear alternatives from outside; as the dominance of Wall Street executives in the new outsider Trump administration shows.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Cochrane of the University of Chicago goes over the Federal Reserve's new "Enhanced Prudential Standards and Early Remediation Requirements" for big banks. He finds serious shortcomings in the Fed's proposals to regulate the largest banks. He points to the proposal that puts less than one dollar at risk for every 10 borrowed dollars as ridiculously low, and says the Fed is admitting it really does not know how to correctly measure and regulate credit exposure in today's banking system. The Fed's remediation requirements are basically ways to get regulators to take action early with "triggers," because regulators were slow to act in the last crisis. This is down to regulating the Fed, not the banks. As stated in recent editorials in the Journal, and supported by Daniel Tarullo at the Fed, the best way to protect the financial system is in having capital reserve requirements that are high enough and reliable enough for a crisis.

LyrArc Article Gist
Infratest Dimap polling institute is commissioned by DW.com to find out what Germans think of the refugee policy of chancellor Merkel one year later. In summer 2015 Merkel said on Aug 31, "We can do it." Costs related to the refugees are about $17 billion, do Germans think services are overstretched for education, healthcare housing and other services. On the other side German society is aging and for every 100 unemployed people there are 200 open positions for skilled personnel. But the refugees who are accepted do not have the skills required and have to acquire the skills or given training and education. On this issue DW.com asked the question whether it will strengthen the German economy. About 51% agree and 45% disagree on this question, and about the same number agree and disagree on the question that Germany will be overstretched providing the services for housing, education, healthcare and other services. The higher educated and young are more favorable to accepting refugees, with those over 50 and basic schooling unfavorable. On the AfD side most people are unfavorable, and in the Greens party most are favorable. On terrorist incidents probability, over 58% think this is more likely, 38% disagree. On the question of whether this will make Germany more diverse 56% agree, 40% disagree. Overall the situation appears to be balanced, with a range of views expressed, and the positive and negative sentiment "evenly balanced", says DW.com.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Nouriel Roubini says nationalization is the right solution. Similiar to action taken in Sweden, where the government nationalized the banks, and then after fixing them privatized the banks. He thinks about six months from now would be good timing, as most of the banks will be insolvent by then. The government does not have the risk of disturbing other solvent banks, if at that time it just moved in and nationalized the banks. Obama has cover, because already Republicans like Graham are endorsing nationalization as an option. And Republicans would prefer nationalization over putting in trillions of dollars into banks, and letting good dollars go in after bad. Roubini says that between guarantees, liquidity support and capitalization, the government has provided between $7 trillion to $9 trillion to help the financial system. Defacto the government is already controlling a big chunk of the banking system he says. This would just make it official. Another reason for doing this, is that the earlier solution of taking one failed bank or financial institution and merging it with another, as was done for Merrill, Countrywide, Bear Stearns, WaMu, is like merging two zombie banks. The result is not a stronger institution but one that is just as weak as before. In his picturesque language he says its like having two drunks trying to keep each other standing. He would like to see the big bank split into three or four pieces, creating a number of regional or national banks that are stronger. Because nationalization has become the N-word he says, it could be referred to as temporary receivership. Has Roubini been more prescient than others? No, says Roubini, a number of other people got it right. Robert Shiller on the housing bubble, Steve Roach on asset and consumption bubbles, Ken Rogoff on global imbalances in the current account deficit. He says he put the dots together and gave a more fleshed out picture. This interview was conducted by a fellow Professor of Roubini's at the Stern School of Business of New York University, Tunku Varadarajan. What about Greenspan? I think he says, a belief in market economics led to an excessive ideological belief that there are no market failures and no issues of distortions of incentives. "Central banks were created to provide financial stability. Greenspan forgot this, and it was a mistake. I think there were ideological blinders, taking Ayn Rand's view of the world to an extreme." Did the media play its proper role as this situation developed with all its inherent dangers, asks Varadarajan. In the bubble years everybody became a cheerleader, and the media became a cheerleader. The tough questions were not asked, and there was a failure there says Roubini. They failed in one of the duties of good journalism. The Masters of the Universe were on the cover, the imperial CEO, private equity, and others, no one asked how is it that this guy is producing such high returns each year, is it because he is so smart, or because he is taking on so much risk that he may face bankruptcy in two years? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In an effort to normalize trade relations Pakistan's government plans to move forward with a step by step approach that will end the restrictions on Indian imports by Jan 1, 2013. The first step is ending a system that allows a list of 2000 import items from India and replacing it with a list of 600 items from India that are banned, allowing the flow of all other goods. This negative list will be eliminated by the end of 2012 leaving in place restrictions on sensitive defense items and some staple goods. Ashfaque Khan, dean of Pakistan's National University of Sciences and Technology Business School advises the government on trade issues. The trade between India and Pakistan stands at $2.7 billion for the year ending March 2011. This is much smaller than the $60 billion in trade between India and China which is growing. The trade between India and Pakistan is likely to grow significantly in the next ten years as trade barriers are removed and normal trade is established.