LyrArc Article Gist
On Monday August 8, 2010, the Dow Jones Industrial Averages went down by 634 points and closed below 11,000 points. This is not far from the 10,165 level of the DJIA on August 27, 2010. It was on August 27, 2010 that Fed chairman Ben Bernanke made the speech at the Kansas City Fed's Jackson Hole conference about the strategy for a QE II. Its about the time for this years Jackson Hole conference and the gains in the stock market are melting away. The DJIA closed at 12810 by April 29, 2011, then went below 11,000 by August 8, 2011. With higher inflation the Fed's options are limited.

LyrArc Article Gist
Gillespie lists the myths and describes the reality about Ron Paul. Ron Paul is not a "top tier" candidate- with many Republican candidates assuming top tier status and fizzling out this has become a term that has lost meaning. Paul is a doctrinaire libertarian- he has positions similiar to libertarians but also has his own views on immigration and abortion. His views on the U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, such as "ending the Fed" are crazy- actually Ron Paul's legislation on auditing the Fed is gaining credibility, and Fed policy is viewed skeptically by both the Tea party and Occupy movement, as well as some in the Federal Reserve such as Kansas City Fed chairman, Thomas Hoenig, and respected economists such as Alan Meltzer of Carnegie-Mellon University.Ron Paul is anti-military- Paul has support from servicemen in the military and raised more money from them than any other candidate including Obama. Ron Paul has youth support because he is against the war on drugs- the war on drugs has not worked that well and new approaches are needed. His support among youth comes from a believing that individuals are better at making the right decisions, his idealism, and his faith in making the U.S. a better place. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
An independent parliamentary panel in Japan described the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster as a "profoundly man-made disaster." It was sharply critical of TEPCO, the company running the plant, and the Japanese government's response. The investigation chairman Kiyoshi Kurokawa said in the report: "What must be admitted- very painfully- is that this was a disaster 'Made in Japan,' its fundamental causes are to be found in the ingrained conventions of Japanese culture: our reflexive obedience; our reluctance to question authority; our devotion to 'sticking with the program'; our groupism; and our insularity." This comes as a report by TEPCO shifted public attention to "a tsunami beyond our imagination," creating a large credibility gap with the Japanese people, because the public is skeptical about TEPCO's attention to safety during the period leading to the accident. The parliamentary report calls attention to safety factors that were ignored so that companies would be required to take further steps including costly modifications of plant equipment. A critical flaw was the lack of a independent safety agency that could enforce safety measures that TEPCO might be reluctant to make because of cost considerations. Astonishing as this may sound, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) in Japan is part of the same government ministry that promotes nuclear power, creating a sort of "nuclear bloc," which before the accident connected the safety agency to the bloc. Because of this the panel report says, NISA did not require TEPCO to prepare for a full station blackout- the loss of main and backup power- because the "probability was small." Other factors that need to be addressed are the breakdown in communication and cooperation between the people operating the plant and the people responsible for Japan's nuclear safety. The prime minister's office waited too long before declaring a state of emergency. To come up with the conclusions the panel made 1000 intervews and conducted 900 hours of hearings. The questions left behind by the nuclear accident in Japan are whether Japan should continue with the same level of dependence on nuclear power, whether it should shift out of nuclear power on a gradual basis as Germany is doing ironically after the Fukushima accident while Japan is reactivating its nuclear plants to meet energy needs. If Japan continues with a smaller reliance on nuclear power what changes have to take place for an effective safety agency completely outside the "nuclear bloc," and the series of other changes that have to take place in the nuclear power industry's handling of safety. Public opposition continues to focus on this because of distrust of the nuclear power industry after the accident....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Public-Private Investment Program of the U.S. Treasury Department has not had a good start. With most banks passing the U.S.government's stress tests and raising $50 billion in the markets, PPIP which was intended to to help resolve the situation of all the toxic securites siting on the bank's books, has gone the way of all the prior efforts to solve this problem. Simply postponed this time hoping that the housing market recovers. With the Rogoff-Reinhardt study showing that it takes about 6 years or longer before housing recovers from such aserious crisis as this one, it would be 2012, before one sees an improvement. See the link to the Business Week analysis that shows housing markets in the USA having some aspect of normalcy in 2012. Yet even this analysis is using an optimistic scenario, because it assumes Moodys Economy.com estimates of economic growth for GDP of 4-5% in 2011- 2012. This assumes the consumer debt that has reached over 100% of GDP will be reversed quickly in 2010, and the the factory capacity utilization currently at 68% and expected to drop further in 2009- with more automobile manufacturing capacity remaining to be scrapped -will recover quickly in 2010-2011. This is unrealistic considering the combination of factors at work. Here Devin Leonard talks to PIMCO chief Bill Gross, who with Warren Buffett and PIMCO CEO Mohammed El-Erian, are key proponents of the PPIP program. Both El-Erian and Warren Buffett say they conceived independently of such a program, in which toxic securties are taken off bank's books with government help. As PIMCO is one of the largest traders of mortgage bonds in the country and has years of successful experience in dealing with mortgage bonds, the New York Fed under Geithner turned to PIMCO for advice in 2008. By this time PIMCO was under ownership of Allianz, a German insurer, which bought PIMCO for $3.3 billion in 2000, with $233 million and a $40 million retention bonus going to Bill Gross. Bill Gross describes how the program would function. PIMCO puts up $500 million, and Treasury matches this with $500 million. Analysts estimate that this partnership would be able to attract as much as $ 4 billion in low interest financing from Treasury and the Fed. Gross says that some of these securities pay as much as 14% interest, and even with a 70% default rate, this partnership could make $250 million a year on the $5 billion partnership, or a 5% return, with PIMCO making a 25% return on its original investment. This isn't exactly pro bono work as Buffett had originally suggested to Bill Gross in the midst of the crisis. But a more fundamental concern is that no one really knows exactly how much of toxic securties the banks have on their books, even though estimates have been made. If this is closer to $1 trillion, PIMCO's expertise and efforts will simply fall short of dealing with a problem of this size, and the window dressing of a problem of this magnitude could only hurt efforts for the eventual resolution of this problem. If housing does not recover as is expected till 2012 at the earliest, and the economy continues to deteriorate in unemployment and factory utilization, then the toxic securities on the bank's balance sheets may pose a bigger problem that will require serious action....

LyrArc Article Gist
Jenna Wortham asks the question do tech companies have undue influence in Washington especially when they are pursuing their own ecosystem expansion, citing an example from Facebook app Free Basics. There is another question that comes with the election campaigns of Sanders, Trump and Clinton, and issues of upward mobility. With this issue raised also by Janet Yellen of the U.S. Federal Reserve of the loss of intergenerational mobility in the U.S. at a conference in Oct. 2014. This question is whether the tech world in California can be sensitive to the problems of cities depending on manufacturing in the midwest and the eastern U.S. that are recovering from deep recession, because the environments are so different. Working in the tech world in California is so different from the rest of the country, almost a different way of life. It also has deep political implications, because the priorities are different. Sometimes as with the TPP trade agreement they may conflict- this includes an industry such as the auto industry that also is incorporating technology at an accelerating pace and which has employed many times more people than does the tech industry in California, and in many states. This leads to president Obama's support for the TPP trade agreement, an agreement which analysis by some experts shows is more beneficial to the tech industry in California than to the auto industry in the midwestern states. The NYT's Krugman says overall for the U.S. it is marginally helpful as most of the gains in free trade are already behind us. See Lyrarc using search terms-Trans Pacific Trade Agreement, Trans Pacific Partnership. Yet it remains a mystery why president Obama has made it a part of his legacy, when Hillary Clinton realizing the issues in this election has clearly stated she will not support it. It has other implications as well, as it has given rise to demagogic rhetoric in this election, where other issues far more significant such as the condition of western democracy are at stake. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The authors, Becker, Davis and Murphy, are from the University of Chicago. They point out that the uncertainty created by the Obama administration's programs including healthcare and social investments in education, energy conservation, and the desire to reduce carbon emissions, all tend to slow business expansion and investments to create jobs by putting additional costs on business. The expanding federal deficit and national debt also create additional uncertainty. Their point is that it was a mistake to start making major changes to transform the U.S. economy at this time, and that it would have been wiser to do these changes after the economy had recovered completely from the crisis. All efforts they say should have been concentrated on establishing conditions for a strong recovery. When combined with the lack of regulatory reforms to fix problems left behind from the crisis, and other failures, serious questions arise about how things will turn out in coming years. See Krugman- The Feeling of 1937, where Krugman takes this up from another angle, again with concerns about the future....

LyrArc Article Gist
Defense spending under the new Obama 2012-2013 budget for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1, 2012, is $525 billion, and an additional $88 billion for Afghanistan. This is $6 billon below the $531 billion budget for the 2011-2012 budget of $531 billion approved by Congress, $22 billion less than the Obama administration's proposed budget. An additional $115.1 billion was for Afghanistan. In a move to bring financial discipline to additional appropriations for foreign conflicts, the Obama administration is proposing in the 2012-2013 budget proposal a limit to "overseas contingency operations" appropriations. The total proposed is $450 billion for fiscal 2013 to 2021.

LyrArc Article Gist
Professors Cole and Ohanian of the University of Pennsylvania and UCLA, provide a new interpretation of FDR's economic policies during the period 1932-1934 and the period 1937-1941, based on their research. This suggests conclusions different from that of Obama advisor, Christina Romer, and Fed chairman, Bernanke about that period. Changes in economic policies under the Roosevelt administration that helped bring wages in line with productivity, reduced strikes, and gradual elimination of the undistributed profits tax, improved incentives for business investment during 1938-1939. Cole and Ohanian, say that by 1941, before the U.S. entered the war, close to half of the increase in nonmilitary hours worked in the U.S. between 1939 and the peak of the war, had already been achieved. And this was primarily the result of the changes in FDR's policies in 1938. They say a similiar opportunity is presented by the proposals of the Bowles-Simpson commission on deficit reduction, by lowering the corporate income tax through simplification of the tax code and reducing or eliminating most tax expenditures. Improving the incentives for business to hire and invest through this and other steps is likely to do more for the economy than the steps tried so far since 2009....

LyrArc Article Gist
Transcripts from U.S. Federal Reserve meetings in 2006 that show Bernanke, as Fed chairman, and Geithner, as head of the New York Fed, ignored the risks of a collapsing bubble in housing and mortgages.

LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor, says Obama and Alan Krueger (Obama's new head of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors), said some of the same things in early September, 2011, that were part of Obama's old plan to revive the U.S. economy. And the old plan has failed to produce results. The part that puts construction crews to work on the roads, railways and airports was tried earlier in the stimulus plan. Because of a lack of showel ready projects, and the state governments putting most of the money in their state coffers, this only increased infrastructure by a miniscule 0.05 percent of GDP, according to research by Taylor and John Cogan. Taylor's sees the moves by the Obama administration and the Bernanke Fed as not only being ineffective, but having the opposite effect of lowering investment and consumption demand through increased concerns about the federal debt, another financial crisis or the risk of inflation or deflation. The U.S. private sector has the money to make the investments that create jobs but their concerns have led to holding back. Taylor points to the need for a comprehensive economic strategy to replace these temporary interventions. The debt limit agreement of 2011 is a part of this strategy, and he agrees with reducing spending in a gradual way in a weak economy. The other parts of this strategy he says are entitlement reform, tax reform, regulatory reform, monetary reform, including a reappraisal of the role of government in the economy. This should lead to a more stable and predictable economic environment and reduced uncertainty about the future, which is critical to improving supply and demand....

LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor on the dangers of a loose U.S. monetary policy and the effects this had in fueling a housing bubble in Spain, Ireland and other EU countries. Taylor points to the bubble ocurring in emerging market economies from low interest rates. Taylor says the ECB's interest rate moves in 2003-2005 were affected by the Fed's low interest rates. He estimates the ECB set rates about two percentage points too low leading to housing bubbles in EU countries. A similiar process is taking place today with the Fed's near zero interest rate policy. Taylor points to interest rates in a group of 18 emerging market economies- including Brazil, China, India, Mexico and Turkey, which have held interest rates on average about 5 percentage points below widely used benchmarks fueling a doubling of global commodity prices between 2009-2011. The U.S. Fed's policies make it harder for central banks in emerging market economies to take aggresssive action against bubbles developing in these countries. Taylor says his does not mean that the Fed should not pay attention to the U.S. unemployment rate and long term unemployed, but should keep in mind the negative effects of slowing demand in emerging market economies and in the EU as a result of its monetary policy of keeping rates at near zero for long periods of time. This feeds back to the U.S. economy at a critical time....

LyrArc Article Gist
The failure of the MF Global Board of Directors to question the huge bets on European sovereign bonds taken by Jon Corzine. This board had members with sophisticated knowledge of financial markets. Then why did it act passively, asks Davidoff. Boards have some of the same blinkers that the CEO has, and may have been led to believe that this was a good course of action. Failure of boards of directors in recent times include a long list- Lehman Brothers, GM, H-P, Toyota, most recently Olympus, and others. In some cases as with Corzine and the head of Lehman, one sees a headstrong executive with a history of success, in others as at GM and Toyota the Board is stacked with members selected by or favorable to voting with the CEO. And at H-P or Olympus, an inside group that runs things the way they see fit. Most boards of this type are highly insulated from outside opinion, and highly confirmed in the correctness of their own opinion even when the situation has dangerously deteriorated.

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
Transcripts released for the U.S. Federal Reserve's Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) 2006 meetings show Fed chairman Bernanke and then New York Fed president Geithner ignored the risks of a hard landing from the mortgage and housing bubble. Geithner even went so far as to say about retiring chairman Greenspan, who also ignored the risks from the bubble and set the tone during his long period as chairman at the Fed: "I'd like the record to show that I think you're pretty terrific, too...And thinking about the probabilities, I think the risk that we decide in the future that you're even better than we think is higher than the alternative." In evaluating the risks facing the U.S. economy in December 2006, at the height of the bubble, Geithner stated: "The current weakness in the economy still seems principally to stem from the direct effects of the slowdown in housing on construction activity... The softer than expected recent numbers don't argue in our view, for a substantial reassessment of the risks in the outlook." The Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, said at the first meeting in March 2006: " Strong fundamentals support a relatively soft landing in housing... I think we are unlikely to see growth being derailed by the housing market." When a Fed economist gave a presentation in March 2006 on the risks in Iceland, Bernanke said- "We'd like a full report on the Icelandic," at which point the rest of the group erupted with laughter. Iceland defaulted on its debts in 2008. Warnings about housing by Fed Governor Susan Bies were ignored by Bernanke and Geithner. Two highly leveraged Wall Street investment banks collapsed in 2008- Bear Stearns in March and Lehman in September- from the impact of the bursting of the bubble in housing and mortgages. When they collapsed these banks were leveraged at about 30 to 1, as most of the warning signs had been ignored by regulators including the Federal Reserve....

LyrArc Article Gist
Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, tells Italian newspaper La Repubblica on September 1, 2014, that Russian president Putin made some abnormal remarks in a phone conversation. Responding to Barroso's question about whether Russian troops had crossed into eastern Ukraine, Putin is reported to say: "That is not the question... But if I wanted to, I could take Kiev in two weeks." The WSJ editorial on September 3 referred to an earlier editorial on "Putin Bonaparte," giving some idea of how such comments by Putin are seen in the media, and how Putin's actions in Ukraine are creating new tensions with the NATO alliance and the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
Applebaum talks to two researchers at the University of Chicago and Princeton, Prof. Sufi and Prof. Mian, on the record of U.S. president Obama and Fed chairman Bernanke in helping homeowners facing foreclosure and underwater borrowers, comparing that record with their record in helping the banks. The issue is relevant as the policy and handling of homeowners had to be part of an overall effective plan for recovery in the U.S. economy, because ultimately without the U.S. consumer any recovery would be weak in the long run- a situation the U.S. faces in early 2014. The response to the issue of irresponsible homeowners borrowing beyond the limit without an equally robust response to irresponsible bank management that allowed wildly excessive leveraging of assets, and successful aggressive lobbying by banks in a shortsighted policy of going through with a wave of foreclosures; besides creating questions of fairness and equitable handling of the problem, also had major ramifications for the future of the U.S. and global economic growth. Here Christina Romer and other administration advisors say Bernanke was right in tackling the problem from the perspective of the banks needing to be recapitalized. Thoughtful advisors looking at the entire problem, Martin Feldstein and Sheila Bair strongly pushed for providing the same help to homeowners without getting caught up in the issue of who was responsible home buyers or the banks, and looking at the interests of the U.S. economy and the U.S. people. Proposals by Feldstein and Bair were equally robust in helping banks as they were in helping homeowners, only the banks understood their interests narrowly and had more access to policymakers in the Bush, as well as the Obama administration, Paulson as well as Geithner. This leaves us with the ultimate irony of the Obama administration pushing for the minimum wage, even to the point of electoral posture, when lasting damage had been inflicted on homeowners from the weaker portions of America's middle class by a policy that went against what two respected financial and economic experts from the Reagan period, Sheila and Bair had strongly advocated. See links and groups on Feldstein and Bair. Applebaum has followed most aspects of this problem closely and continues to provide exceptional reporting including the piece on the thinking of new Fed chairman, Janet Yellen. Private enterprise rules that require management at banks just as for other companies to take responsibility for failures, and be replaced with new management, was largely avoided leading to a fundamental failure in how a free market economy such as the U.S. and western European economies are supposed to function. Rules aggressively pushed by Geithner's mentor Treasury Secretary Rubin for a vigorous cleanup at banks in South Korea during a similiar situation in 1997, were not followed in any way here, also setting wrong precedents for the long run. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The ruble goes from a low of 80 to the dollar in Dec. 2014 to 50 to the dollar by May 2015. The euro also strengthens against the dollar with weakening economic conditions in the U.S. leading to a reversal in the strength of the dollar.

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman says Obama's 2012 presidential campaign lacks bold vision, a failure to articulate tangible achievements, and owes too much to campaign consultants. He describes it as being developed in test tube fashion. The failure to embrace and strongly advocate his own presidential commission's Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction plan, which could be coupled with long term investment in the productive potential of the U.S. economy, shows the lack of courage to prepare a plan going forward. It is likely to cost support of independent, center and center-right voters in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany went through a period of stagnant growth and persistently high unemployment leading to reforms of the welfare system and entitlements under the Schroeder administration. The reforms led to lower unemployment benefits and an effort to get the unemployed take up jobs. Instead of unemployment benefits that amounted to half the salary indefinitely, unemployment benefits ended in 12 months under the reforms, and workers were forced to take up jobs or dig into their savings. The cuts to benefits led to more of the unemployed taking jobs that were not their first choice with lower incomes. Unions agreed to defer wage demands and wages remained relatively flat for a long period. The "kurzarbeit" system of government subsidizing employers to retain workers during economic downturns, helped cushion the workforce from ups and downs in the economy. Unemployment which was in double digits a decade ago, is now 6.1%. The system still preserved some other aspects of generous benefits- parental leave of 14 months at two-thirds salary, vacation time and publicly sponsored health insurance. Recent changes include raising the retirement age to 67 from 65. The Organization of Economc Cooperation and Development estimates that the 200,000 jobs saved in Germany during the recession of 2008-2009 cost the government $7 billion. Government funds helped companies retain workers by paying a portion of worker salaries and averting layoffs.This comes to $35,000 per job. Compare this with the $38.9 billion allocated to a loan program at the Energy Department under the U.S. stimulus. 8050 jobs were created under this program according to the Washington Post- for the money spent so far in Sept 2011- 2 years into the loan program, of $19.3 billion. This comes to $2.4 million in government guaranteed loans per job. The Energy Department says that 33,000 jobs were saved under the $5.9 billion that was given to the auto industry under this program for investments in manufacturing to improve fuel efficiency. This comes to $178,000 per job. The Energy Department and Congress estimated a 5%-10% loss on the $38.6 billion loan program for loans that go sour, such as the Solyndra solar company $535 million loan. This comes to $1.9 billion at 5% loss and $3.8 billion for a 10% loss. The purpose of these figures is to show the cost of programs when the programs fail to achieve job goals or produce too little for the investment. The $3.8 billion loss under the program is over half the $7 billon Germany invested for the 200,000 jobs saved as estimated by the OECD. That ranks as a far superior investment than the Energy Department program. For the U.S. there are aspects of German reforms such as "kurzarbeit" that bear emulation, with serious questions about the effective use of the U.S. stimulus funds. For the rest of Europe the stingier unemployment benefits, raising the retirement age to 67, and other reforms send a different message. From the average German the message is: we made the tough changes, the rest of Europe cannot expect Germans to pay higher taxes while they put off similiar changes. Italy needs to change its retirement age, just as the Germans have done. As Chancellor Merkel puts it: "People in countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal shouldn't be able to retire earlier than in Germany. It's important for everybody to put in effort to make it roughly equal. Germany will only help when others really make an effort." Which is why Greece, Spain, Italy, even France are faced with making serious changes. This isn't stalling when it comes to euro bonds, from the German perspective. And it isn't about the lack of committment to the idea of a European Union, as all major political parties in Germany, the CDP, the SDP and the Greens, all strongly support the idea of a European Union. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Edward DeMarco is head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which is the independent regulatory agency overseeing U.S. housing lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The FHFA was formed in 2008 after merging two existing agencies. Later that year Fannie and Freddie were taken over by the government. FHFA head, DeMarco, is reluctant to help homeowners with underwater mortgages on their homes with reduced payments because this would mean losses to the taxpayer. He sees his mandate as protecting the taxpayer. Sheila Bair, former head of the FDIC, says she understands DeMarco's mandate is not to provide fiscal stimulus, and the Obama administration has been all over the place when it comes to providing homeowner assistance. The result is that there is little help by the U.S. government to homeowners with underwater mortgages since 2008, and this creates larger headwinds for the Federal Reserve Bank to provide momentum to the U.S. economy. Many experts see this as a serious problem and a well respected economist, Martin Feldstein, has made repeated proposals for structuring the help to homeowners since 2008. ...