LyrArc Article Gist
The IMF loans of $18 billion approved in March 2014 are conditional on structural reforms in Ukraine which will be painful. This includes a 50% increase in the price of natural gas on May 1, tax increases and spending cuts, flexible exchange rates. About 10% of the state officals will be cut and decreases in pensions for judges. Higher taxes will be placed on alcohol and tobacco products. Prime minister Yatsenuyk, says without the reforms and IMF-EU loans the economy woud contract by 10%, with the package GDP would decline by 3%. Ukraine's 10 year dollar denominated government bonds had a yield of 8.94%. Years of large state subsidies for natural gas, mismanagement and corruption have left Ukraine's finances in bad shape. Ukraine now faces austerity measures similiar to that in other Eastern European countries and Greece, leading to continued political unrest.

LyrArc Article Gist
Simon Johnson reminds readers that in October 2008, Johnson, Peter Boone, and James Kwak, suggested that some European countries had given taxpayer-backed pledges to banks that had liabilities larger than their own gross domestic products. Their proposal included creation of a European Stability Fund with at least 2 trillion euros of credit lines guaranteed by all member nations, as well as Switzerland, Sweden, and the U.K., to buy time dealing with underlying insolvency in Ireland and other countries. Simon Johnson, is former chief economist of the IMF. He says the euro-zone only belatedly acted on this advice and the politicians never took responsibility for what they allowed to happen. The runaway financial globalization he says, was allowed to happen by US Treasury officials, but European banks were seriously involved in similar behaviour. These banks became too large relative to their economies, captured their regulators and acted recklessly. Europe's leaders haven't fully faced up to this and keep telling their voters that the problem is entirely because of US banks irresponsible behaviour. Ireland was the extreme example of this. And Johnson provides readers with the names of two books on the subject. David Lynch has "When the Luck of the Irish Ran Out," Fintan O'Toole has "Ship of Fools: How Stupidity and Corruption Killed the Celtic Tiger." Both laying out the intermingling of politicians, bankers and real-estate developers that resulted in the reckless growth and collapse of Ireland. In his own account in Atlantic magazine, May 2009, Johnson compared the US economc boom-bust-bailout cycle to what happened to Argentina, Russia and Indonesia. These were emerging middle class countries with crony capitalism, unsustainable debt and other problems. Johnson says, don't think these problems are limited to emerging markets. Its a global or general occurrence in which powerful people get together to build an economic model that brings growth based on debt. Under public pressure the German government keeps saying there must be burden sharing, that creditors must take losses also. Johnson says Angela Merkel and her colleagues have not thought through what signal this sends to the markets- which is to tell people to get out of Irish banks now. And the big German banks are telling the government they face big losses if Ireland or other European countries default. If the ECB can't pay, and the German taxpayer won't pay, Johnson asks, does the IMF have the resources to tackle Spain? If China offers to recapitalize the IMF with some of its $2.6 trillon in reserves, and becomes the largest shareholder, would the IMF headquarters be moved to Beijing as the Articles of Agreement require for the largest shareholder. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Oil prices are forecast to remain above $100 a barrel in 2012 because of higher social spending in Saudi Arabia, Iran and other countries after the democracy protests, and the threat of retaliation by Iran in the Straits of Hormuz. Iranian threats of retaliation for increased sanctions has embedded a $10-$20 premium in oil prices say some experts.

LyrArc Article Gist
Former U.S. president Bush says the U.S. has an important role as a beacon of freedom, human rights and democracy in the world. The U.S. should not shrink from the challenges in the name of a false and temporary stability, and flexibility should not mean ambiguity, difficulties should not mean shrugging away from America's role. Patience, creativity and active American leadership are needed. The Bush administration supported the struggles of people in central Europe and in other countries. This is from a speech Bush gave at the Bush Institute, Southern Methodist University in Dallas, a year into the Arab Spring. A speech that was giving voice to the aspirations of people in the Arab world.

LyrArc Article Gist
Official currency reserves of developing world countries almost quadrupled over the last decade to $2.9 trillion. Reserves of industrialized countries went up by 150%. In 2005 reserves went up by 18% for developing countries and declined 1.5% for developed countries. 70% of total currency reserves are in developing countries. This is a huge accumulation of reserves by developing countries in a short period. In 2005 74% of overall reserves were in U.S. dollars. The reserves help countries pay bills and make investments. For developing countries having sufficient reserves helps in two other ways. The reserves are a buffer in emergencies , and means countries like Brazil and S. Korea don't have to turn to the IMF or the U.S. for assistance. Another way this helps is for countries like China to be able to use their reserves to keep their currencies from appreciating and maintain a competitive edge in exports.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Trump administration proposes a zero policy for Iranian oil imports which says the U.S. will grant zero exemptions to countries importing Iranian oil.  Big importers China and India are likely to resist this policy.

LyrArc Article Gist
The language and tone of the leaders says something about what is likely to be the outcome of the G20 summit. Its a first for significant participation, as countries as diverse as Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the Netherlands are represented. The credible positions of both sides, the US, UK and Japan, and the European side of France, Germany and the Czech Republic, well presented, provide for some serious discussion and negotiations. France's Sarkozy and Germany's Merkel want to see a global regulator that would reach inside the borders of the US with stricter regulation. Sarkozy calls this "nonnegotiable." And he said that he would reject an agreement that puts off stringent new regulations on banks, tax havens, and hedge funds. He said "the compromise has to come from all countries around the world." US President Obama said that if there is going to be renewed growth it can't just be the US as the engine, everybody is going to have to pick up the pace," at the same time saying that the US had to be concerned about its own deficits. The fact is that the US stimulus will mostly help a severely impacted domestic economy recover with social safey net payments to local and state governments and unemployment insurance, as well as targeted investments in infrastructure, education, energy and health care. It will not mean anywhere near the kinds of imports the US made from other countries, especially China. And Obama made that clear when he said the US will never return to that situation, where the US had become a "voracious consumer market." For the Germans the major market for their middle companies is China, and China has its own stimulus spending on infrastructure spending, which should provide for continued imports of machinery from Germany at a much lower level. Thus Germany and France see a strong tendency to call the source of the crisis and repeat that call till the US listens, and refer to the failure of free market capitalism in its unregulated form. And to insist on fixing it through a global regulator with strict and systemwide rules. So you hear this in Merkel's words, "the foundation for this finacial architecture must be laid now, that is why we seem to be so tough." While the vivacious Sarkozy talks of compromise, and a US gesture in regulation in return for Franc's gesture of joining NATO, the mild mannered Merkel is clear and focussed about her concern. She rejects the idea of linking stimulus spending demands of the Anglo-Americans with the Franco-German demands for global systemwide regulation. "This is not a bargaining chip," she says. The media may mistakenly report lack of consensus as a failure of the summit. But in the long run in the presence of good positions on both sides, it could lead to some tough negotiations even if continued at another meeting. And result in something serious, credible and lasting in its impact, rather than something that was easy and did not in Andy Grove's useful words involve "constructive confrontation." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Important year end reveiw of the oil price forecasting work of so many anlaysts and where they failed . The IEA and the US Enery Dpt forecast have year after year underestimated this pirce by over 20%. Analysts change the price forecasts within a couple of weeks based on changing information and assumptions. Of all this the Saudi Arabian forecasts have ben within 12 % of what has actually ocurred according to a study by Ronald Berger Strategy Consultants of Muich, Germany. And whats their forecast for 2008. By extrapolating from the Saudi budget and the assumptions, used such as giving a wide margin to avoid a deficit in the budget if oil prices undershot by a wide margin, one gets $75 for US benchmark crude. Forecast by experts are in the neighborhood of $80 average for the whole year 2008. Goldman recently revised theirs upwards from $85 average for 2008 to $95 within a 4 week period. How good is the Goldman forecast. No one really knows. Lehman has a forecast of $84 average for 2008 and bases it on the opacity of the market because no one knows what OPEC will do with supply and China does not provide good information on demand. So basically anlysts are adding an uncertainty premium to the price of oil. And this is especially so because as the Chief Economist at IEA says global space capacity is so thin and any event can influence price. Last year the rhetoric about Irans nuclear intentions was enough to stir up the price, as were other smaller events disrupting supplies. But the Iranian situation has since cooled down and diplomatic solutions are in the works. So what to expect in 2008 in the way of political uncertainty. Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Lebanon have all seen a cool off in the ast couple of years and the Bush administration rhetoric has become outmoded as has other rhetoric from Iran so that does'nt look like it will stir up oil prices in 2008. Still there will be some uncertainty premium about supply from OPEC and demand from China and India. And demand from the Middle Eastern oil producing countries themselves as well as the increasing demand in India and China will mean that lower demand in the US because of a recession will still mean an increase in global demand over 2007 of 1.5 million barrrels a day over 2007's 85 million barrels a day. What will change the dynamics of this situation is the government mandated fuel economy for all vehicles on the road with Europe more aggressive in this area under the pressures of global warming. If this impacts India, China and Russia as these fuel saving technologies are transferrred there overall consumption should see an impact. Europe's targets are only 4 years away for 2012. And the environment may cause China to bring in newer technologies that both contribute to improving environment and conserving energy. Because China's environmental record is almost catastrophic one could see some of this happen much sooner than expected after the Olympics in 2008. All that might change the way the world looks at oil and its use, and all energy sources and their use. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin of NYT provides some counter intuitive ideas on U.S. Fed interest rate policy. He says it can't be take as a given that the Fed will raise rates in 2017-2018. This depends on how much punch there is in the Trump economic policies for stimulus, and for infrastructure spending, tax cuts. He cites Senate Majority Leader McConnell who said he would like to keep "tax reform revenue neutral." Getting large spending and pushing up the deficit is likely to run up against Republicans in Congress who have for 8 years opposed large spending increases and large deficits. Trump has given few details about his stimulus or infrastructure spending plans. He says the scale of the spending might not match the talk. Irwin cites JP Morgan Chase economists who have kept their forecasts for GDP growth just under 2% for 2017 and 2018. And he points out that even Trump appointees at the Fed might act independently. The Fed might look at being cautious considering that increased trade tensions with China, and the unpredictability of a Trump administration could hurt growth. Irwin does not mention the uncertainty in other areas such as policy towards Russia on which the Republican party and Congress have very different views than Trump, tensions over Taiwan, that can also affect growth. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the Obama administration plans a large stimulus spending plan that may approach $1 trillion over several years, considering also the second phase of the $800 billion first phase stimulus, there is a concern that there may be wasteful spending and social costs of borrowing and spending by the government of such proportions. In economics jargon this hinges on whether there is amultiplier effect of spending, higher if its efficiently and well spent with less impact on private consumption and investment, and lower if the opposite were true. The assumption behind amultiplier of 1.0 for an additional bridge or road is that resources like manpower and capital that would be otherwise idle are deployed to produce something useful. An increase in one unit of government purchases increases by one unit the real gross domestic product. The government has effectively created the additional bridge or road without a cut in anybody's consumption or a businesses investment. The other contrasting approaches are to say there is a multiplier of zero, meaning there is a social cost in two ways. One the reduction of consumption and the crowding out of businesses investing in new products and technologies for example, and second in the inefficent use of resources if a government bureaucracy is put to work allocating money and the additional dangers of favoritism and corruption. To say that there is a multipier of 1.5 would mean that the government figures out a way to get private investment through conversion of plants for automotive parts say to make wind turbine blades by giving incentives, tax benefits and grants, spends on a dilapidated road and public transportation infrastructure that may provide benefits in increased growth capacity over future years. The limits of a government bureaucracy and inefficiency of government would in this case be addressed by transparency rules adopted and measures that track progress that are freely available to all citizens say on a website on the internet, and by bringing in fresh management talent from the private sector. There appears to be no generalization that can be applied for one multiplier for all projects. It may be that the multiplier will vary with the project. Some projects like the conversion of a factory making unneeded auto parts to a badly needed wind energy part, to change the dynamics of energy market pricing, to meet energy needs and cut emissions, may end up having a multiplier much above 1.0. A redundant or less needed bridge has a lower multiplier than a bridge rebuilt before it leads to breakdown. And also the complication that too large a movement in one direction say of stimulus spending, might result in a shift of the curve towards a smaller multiplier and diminishing returns, as the resources to track such a large expenditure and the talent to adminster are overextended. The social cost of private investment not making that investment in new technology, new product or improved product has to be figured into all this, both at the conceptual level as all costs and benefits may not be picked up in the analysis, and at the macro level keeping in mind that the animal spirits, as they were once described, may just not be there to absorb the huge outlays which a government can make. These do not come without an opportunity cost and borrowing costs. All this leads one to to conclude that spending has to be carefully evaluated and projects assessed on a case by case basis for costs and benefits. The spending has to be balanced to provide just as many incentives for private investment to invest in new products and technologies. One way the Obama team is attempting to address this is to include a $300 billion tax cut for businesses and individuals. The business tax cuts are aimed at helping small business with losses, and for future investments and making hires and forgoing layoffs. The other part relates to careful evaluation of spending projects and transparency so the people can see if they are effective. See the link to this....

LyrArc Article Gist
Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University economist, author of the well researched book on the 2008 financial crisis, "This Time Is Different," gives his thoughts on the economic prospects for the U.S under the new Trump administration. He says 4% GDP growth and 3% inflation is possible temporarily for a while with stimulus policies, less regulation, and increased private investment. After 8 years of not investing in much needed infrastructure because of concerns about the deficit, the timing is right for such investments, especially as the economic effects of the crisis of 2008 gradually fade.  This is about taking advantage of ultra low interest rates to invest in infrastructure. He says it helps that Trump policies are pro-business. He sees drawbacks as the stimulus program adds a 25% increase with extra debt, adding $5 trillion over 10 years, but adds that for many years Nobel prize winning economist Krugman and others have said that there is good reason to increase borrowing to invest, and this is now being tried. Inflation remains an uncertainty- if there are large quantities of underutilized and unemployed resources it would raise prices less than its effect to increase output. The reverse would apply if the U.S. economy is closer to full capacity. One factor that would help- increasing confidence for business and increasing investment. Against this what he calls optimistic view or spin, is the idea of mistakes under a Trump administration, errors made and a degree of incompetence which he says is a real possibility. Overall his view is that some risks are appropriate now, and from his deep study of financial crises sees the slow growth of the last 8 years a result of a financial crisis that now begins to fade, creating the possibility of higher growth under prudent policies.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Analysts fear an oil shock in 2012 similiar to that in 2008. There is similiarity in the situation now and in 2008- as in 2008, the surge in oil prices comes at a time of higher tensions with Iran and shrinking spare capacity. Spare capacity is at 2.5 million barrels a day on average for January and February 2012, according to the Energy Information Administration. This compares with 3.7 millon barrels a day for the same period in 2011. Part of the reason is that global oil demand is increasing in 2012 by 1 million barrels a day, to 89 million barrels a day. Technical and political problems have shutdown another 750,000 barrels a day. The problems begin to kick in during the second half of 2012. The U.S. ban on dealing with the Iranian central bank for oil trades starts in June 2012. According to the International Energy Agency, the EU embargo and U.S. sanctions will take 1 million barrels a day of Iranian crude out of the market. The result will be that demand exceeds supply by the third quarter by 1.1 million barrels a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Use of existing reserves in Europe, the U.S. and other countries will make up the gap. The effect will be to put pressure on oil prices. May Brent crude on the ICE Futures Europe exchange was up to $125.81 a barrel, on March 16, 2012, and prices for April delivery were at $107.06 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange....

LyrArc Article Gist
About 400 million or one in 4 people people smoke in China. State ownership of the tobacco industry only makes this worse. Enforcement of bans on smoking is lax. Experts warn that this would become a major healthcare problem in China.

LyrArc Article Gist
Fitch Ratings downgrades Brazil's bonds to double-B-plus in Dec. 2015, a junk rating from an investment grade rating. The yield on Brazil's 10 year benchmark dollar denominated bond increased to 6.97% from 6.7%. Other emerging markets such as Turkey and South Africa now expect ratings downgrades in 2016 as the U.S. Fed raises interest rates. Standard & Poors downgraded Brazil's sovereign debt to junk status in September 2015. GDP in Brazil declined 4.5% in the third quarter of 2015 from a year earlier. Brazil's currency, the real, declined by 32% in 2015, making it harder for companies that borrowed in dollars to pay off debts. President Dilma Rousseff is facing impeachment proceedings following a corruption scandal at Petrobras.

LyrArc Article Gist
Khalid al-Falih, chairman of Saudi Aramco, says at the World Economic Forum in Davos, on Jan. 26, 2016- "If prices continue to be low, we will be able to withstand it for a long, long time." With $630 billion in foreign currency reserves the Saudis are following a long term policy of full production. Gasoline subsidies are being reduced, IPO of Saudi Aramco being discussed to raise additional capital, and other steps being taken to plan for long term oil prices. Flexibility for a change in policy is diminished with the addition of Iranian oil production to supplies following the lifting of sanctions. The events in 2015-2016 of Russian bombing campaign in Syria, and the cutoff of diplomatic relations with Iran, have worsened the standoff with Iran and Russia in the Middle East conflict. As a result it appears that the Saudis are settling down for a long term policy of full production which would keep oil prices low for the long term. India, Japan, China, the U.S. and the European Union, Turkey and other countries benefit from low oil prices when their economies need a boost in 2016-2017....