LyrArc Article Gist
Indecision and policy missteps by the government of prime minister Manmohan Singh of India. Divisions within the Congress political party and its allies in parliament stalls moves to attract foreign investment in the retail sector and leads to a general paralysis in the government in 2011-2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
Important to distinguish in GNP, GDP and GDP per capita. The official rate of 10-11% growth is questioned by Thurow by noting that 70% of China in the rural area is seeing slow growth and if the urban economy has to grow at 33 % if the whole of China is to grow by 11%. He also brings up electricity consumption historicaly growing much faster than the growth rate of GNP or GDP. At breakneck growth rates gorwth has still been 60% of the gorwth in electricity consumption because some of it is wasted or is not used productively.He does not give his electricity consumption growth for China numbers, but we can extrapolate from the 6% growth in China analogous to Japanese growth rates in the 1970's that he comes up with, to see that electricity growth rates he assumes in his math are 10% a year in China. That is based on 6% growth he gives for China constituting 60% of the growth in electricity consumption for China. Given the validity of this math China and India are growing at much slower rates than official math states. This also means productivity of capital remains a major issue and does not simply go away when seeing the countries as a whole not just coastal and other well developed regions of India and China. So the message that is being projected about Chinese growth may be misleading as urbanization in China will still have to proceed for many decades for the growth to even out geographically. Another fact that immigration has been a source of additional people for the USA and so a significant population increase will be seen in the US in the next few decades even as China's population declines, supporting much larger economic activity in the USA. Europe also is seeing no increase in population. Europe's per capita income fell from 85% of that of the US in 1990, to 66% in 2007 according to the IMF statistics quoted here. Validation of these numbers would provide a different assessment of overenthusiasm for the kind of haphazard growth which also wastes resources and sacrifices the environment and shortchanges health, education and other goals, and instead promotes a different view that constantly looks for better ways of meeting the difficult challenges facing China and India. With these...

LyrArc Article Gist
After the huge crisis the debate about capitalism. What went wrong, and importantly what did not go wrong. Not in the sense of more punditry to place the blame but to ask questions to have a better grasp of the fact and better understanding of the twists and turns of the last decade, the complexities, the frailties, the errors of judgement, and the failings, and the outright falsehoods and ethical breaks. So that the good things are not lost for instance the individual initiative and the bad things are corrected and measures put in place to prevent recurrence and minimize damage. Has the model of anglo-saxon capitalism failed? Actually some specific things failed, deregulation at a time when banks and markets were behaving irresponsibly and without any restraint internal or external, credit ratings agencies failed, financial institutions failed in performing their first line of business which is to finance investment in the economy not in housing and mortgages, and American consumerism failed in that value of saving disappeared and abundance of debt brought American savings to zero, leaving little for investment in the economy and infrastructure except by borrowing from other countries. And living on illusions and not on sound basics the leadership failed thinking that free enterprise and technology and productivity improvements somehow allowed a country or group of countries to live way beyond their means, and a tendency to excess in the popular mood of the country, excesssive consumption, excessive and profligate use of energy which sent trillions of dollars overseas over decades, and excessive expectations of the lower classes for housing and goods beyond their means, all played a part. What did not fail is the freedom to trade, the fall of "barriers to intercourse" between nations, that produced gains on a big scale so that computer and cell phone technology developed in one part of the world quickly spread around the world and the innovations and technology developed in one country spread producing benefits all over the world. It created amood of optimism in developing countries whose incomes rose especially where countries encouraged growth as in China, India, Russia, Brazil, Eastern Europe and pulled hundreds of millons out of poverty. With China, America and Germany in effect shipped technology goods in return for lower value added goods like textiles and shoes, to help China industrialize, and American consumption played a useful part until things reached an extreme and the system was abused by forgetting the basics and allowing excesses and failing to respect ethical responsibilities. Regarding regulation excessive regulation and red tape has proved to be bad as in the license Raj in India which stifled private initiative and new enterprise till it was abandoned in 1990, and no one in India is calling for more regulation. What is bad is to abandon good common sense and to rely on the illusion that no regulation is needed to run a complex financial system like we have today, a laissez fairre libertarian philosophy that was rampant in the Bush administration and in the country's leadership in the Bush years. As a result an underfunded SEC failed to deliver on its basic mission and responsibility, and the lack of a centralized regulatory authority with powers and funding to meet the challenges of modern finance as for instance ineffective derivative regulation under the CFTC, simply aggravated things further. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Eric Bellman's intervew with Rajiv Lall, chief executive officer of Infrastructure Development Finance, India's largest infrastructure financing company. Lall says the conditions are right for power development to be the next telecom of India's growth story, with some of the same impact that telecom has had bringing mobile phones to hundreds of millions of people in India. IDFC expects 20% growth in net profit in 2010 and 30% in 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Foreign institutional investors responding to negative sentiment for emerging markets in general took out $2.6 billion from India in August 2015. Yet average allocations to India for emerging market funds have increased to about 10.7% in July 2015, because India looks much better than other emerging markets. By comparison China is at 20.25%.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points to dynastic politics in India and the weak leadership of prime minister Manmohan Singh, who owes his position to Sonia and Rahul Gandhi of the Congress party. There is a vacuum in the leadership resulting in no clear policy and definite actions on tackling corruption issues. This has created a crisis of confidence for the Indian public, especially for young people who have lost faith in the government to bring much needed change. Technology with mobile phones, computers, television and mass media, increasing use of cars and motorbikes and rapid road/rail links are rapidly changing Indian society. The Indian public is looking for changes in governance to keep up with these rapid changes and greater publc awareness of the world around them.

LyrArc Article Gist
G-7 nations reach agreement for a global minimum tax of 15% a floor for taxes that the Biden administration finds acceptable. This agreement was reached at a meeting of the Treasury chiefs of the 7 G-7 countries in London on June 5, 2021. The G-7 countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, and US. Next agreement from Russia, China, India and Brazil in the G-20 nations would establish new ground rules for the major economies. The G-20 meeting is in Venice July 9-10. The OECD is steering the international efforts to achieve that goal. For the agreement to be effective a number of small nations that use tax rates of below 15% to attract business have to be part of the new rules. One of these countries is Ireland with a tax rate of 12.5%. For the Biden administration in the US the goal is a significant one as president Biden seeks business to pay its fair share so that long neglected priorities for education, healthcare, infrastructure, post pandemic improvements can be met. France and other nations in the EU face similar needs in the post pandemic environment. By setting a floor the Biden administration is both creating a new cultural concept of fairness in taxation and making it possible to finance the $2 trillion spending programs for these priorities of president Biden. Behind this are important facts that have left the large tech businesses paying little or no tax depriving governments of the very revenues that are needed for infrastructure and services for a modern well run state. The Biden administration seeks to include the tech businesses as well as all businesses in the new tax rules so that a uniform idea of fair taxation applies across the whole economy for the first time in two decades. In this way it makes up for the missed opportunities in the OBC administrations of Obama, Bush, Clinton that have led to loss of faith in the state and institutions in the US. A similar situation prevails in the UK,  France and Germany where previous administrations failed to address this important issue of fair taxation and financing infrastructure and priorities in health, education, and critical needs of the people.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump reiterated his threat to place tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese goods in addition to earlier tariffs on $250 billion in goods.  The problem China faces is that it China imports less, far less than the U.S. does. China has only $10 billion in U.S. goods to place tariffs on. This is after placing tariffs on $110 billion in U.S. goods, mostly agricultural products such as soyabeans in retaliation for U.S. tariffs on the $250 billion of Chinese goods. China could place a ban on imports from Boeing or restrict the access for U.S. companies to the Chinese market. U.S. companies have invested billions of dollars in the China and employ about 2 million Chinese in well paying jobs. Concerns about unemployment would be uppermost to prevent these jobs being affected. Other concern for China is the loss of foreign investment as relations deteriorate. Already supply chains in some products such as clothing and consumer products is shifting other countries in Asia. In automobiles the regional hubs are expected to shift with India as a potential hub for Asia, and Mexico preserving its place as a North American hub following renegotiation of NAFTA. In media the dispute is leading to a shift from Chinese consumers buying Adidas instead of Nike and Huawei smartphones instead of Apple.  For an already slowing economy this hurts China more than the U.S. which is why the U.S. is pushing China to settle with an agreement that the U.S. can trust to bring down China's trade surplus. For the U.S. as most of the loss in exports is in agricultural products the solution has been to provide government aid to farmers, and for Mr. Trump to use the issue to point out that he is fighting for U.S. interests and for fairness. This is why the trade dispute poses more problems for China. Because the surplus is so wildly skewed in China's favor after the inaction of many U.S. presidents just as it was for Japan in the eighties, the situation appears to be headed towards a definite reversal of the lopsided trade surplus enjoyed by China. In the process the U.S. plans to build up the competitive edge it has lost to some degree.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
An assessment of Brazil compared to the other leading emergig market countries Russia, China and India, shows that Brazil has a lot going for it. Compared to Russia and China, Brazil has a stable multiparty democracy. And the differences between the countryside and the urban areas is not quite as large as it is in China and India. Surprising as it may appear about 83% of Brazilians now live in cities. And the process of urbanization that is taking place in China and India took place much earlier in Brazil. Between 1940 to 1980 industrialization and a growth rate that averaged 7% for most of that period brough large numbers of people from rural to urban areas. And the problem of inflation which wracked the economy from 1986 to 1994 before being brought under control is now well under control at about 4.7%. Debt problems from the Asian crisis contagion effects are now behind it as Brazil is a big exporter of commodities from coffee, soyabeans, orange juice to iron ore, with the real strengthening from 68 as measured in the currencies of its trading partners in 2001 to 100 today. Brazil's growth rate has reached 5.4%. and has been at an average of 4.5% since 2004. Between 1980 and 2000 Brazil's growth was in a slump so this has been a period of great changes in Brazil. Brazil is importing more plant and equipment with a stronger currency and booming exports. Brazil invests 19% of GDP according to Vale of MB Associados and that number should reach 25% of GDP at which point it would be easier to maintain a growth rate of 5% a year. With consumer credit growing at 25% each year for the last 2 years consumption is growing. And Brazilian companies were the second largest source of foreign direct investment in developing countries after China, according to the Fundacao Dom Cabral, a business school, and Columbia University, with the stronger real helping the balance sheets of Brazilian companies. The big change is that under the Lula government Brazil has done much better for the working classes and the rural poor. The Bolsa Familias is a program of cash transfers to poor people under the poverty line but which has strings attached so that they are required to send their children to school and have them vaccinated. It reaches 11 million families and is considered a major success in reducing poverty and in helping to see that poverty is not passed on from generation to generation. A program that may be copied in India. Acccording to the Observador Brasil/ Ipsos survey 23 million Brazilians have left social classes D and E and joined class C which means that they can have a rented apartment, a car and some gadgets. This give more confidence in Brazilian democracy and capitalism as more of society's diverse groups have a stake in the future....

LyrArc Article Gist
A "Best Countries" ranking was announced in Davos forum by U.S. News and World Report and its editor-in-chief, Mortimer B. Zuckerman, in Jan. 2016. This is the first time this rating is being done. It gives top spots to countries based on surveys of 16,000 people, 8000 from informed elites of better educated people, the rest from the public. The rankings are in many categories including quality of life, cultural influence, heritage, entrepreneurship, citizenship, raising kids, green living. Canada takes the top spot for quality of life, followed by Sweden, Denmark, Australia and Netherlands. France takes top spot for cultural influence, Italy for heritage, Germany for entrepreneurship, and second spot for forward looking, Sweden takes top spot for citizenship, raising kids and green living. Japan takes the second spot for green living, Canada takes the fourth spot, with Germany in the third spot, the U.S. and the UK in the top ten for green living. India takes top spot for movers with its rising economy. The U.S. suffers because of its obesity levels in some groups. Overall Germany comes first, Canada second, UK third and U.S. fourth. Overall ratings included correlation with per capita GDP purchasing power parity level figures from the IMF....

LyrArc Article Gist
How does the National Rural Employment guarantee Scheme compare with what Brazil has done under President Lula with the Bolsas Familias program to help rural people with income below the poverty rate? India its reported is looking at the Brazilian program. There the focus is on cash payments with cards like debit cards issued on each individual's name that only that person can use so that the funds cannot be stolen by corrupt intermediaries with the person receiving it having to make sure that his children are in school and vaccinated. The focus there is on nutrition, education and health care especially of the family unit and in this way it has been a success according to the World bank and other experts.

LyrArc Article Gist
Coal India, is a state run monopoly which is a huge stumbling block for India's economic development. India lags behind Brazil, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia in the percentage of the population having electricity. Production methods do not use modern technology similiar to mines in other countries, and the average age of the 333,000 employees is 45-50 years. An eight hour shift at some mines produces as much coal as a mine in the U.S. does in 5 minutes, because of the lack of modern technology. About 300 million Indians lack electricity. The Modi administration's focus is on improving efficiency, introducing competition, and bringing major technological changes to the coal industry. Piyush Goyal, India's Coal minister faces one of the biggest challenges in the Modi administration. His focus is on efficiency, and the Modi administration has set a target of 1 billion tons for 2020, a 15% increase in production each year for the next 5 years.

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's energy efficient industry is a role model for the western world and for India and China. For years Japan has had a national consensus on consuming less energy an industry has focused on developing energy efficent technologies and investing in it even when oil prices were low. Japan wants to now contribute to the world in this area at the G8 summit on the island of Hokkaido. According to the International Energy Agency in Paris, Japan consumes half as much energy per dollar worth of economic activity as the European Union or the United States, and one-eighth as much as India or China in 2005. According to the Japanese Economic Ministry data corporate Japan has kept its energy consumption annually at a billion barrels of oil since the early 1970's even as the country's economy doubled in size during the 1970's and 1980's. The Japanese steel industry invested $45 billion dollars between 1972 to 2006 in developing energy saving technologies, according to the Japan Iron and Steel Federation. By capturing heat and gases that go into waste JFE Steel at its Keihin mill on Tokyo Bay uses it to power generators that produce 90% of the plant's electricity. The Japanese government is now pushing an initiative that sets Japan's level of energy conservation as targets of global industries. For instance the group leader of JFE's climate change policy group says that by adopting Japanese conservation technologies the global steel industry could reduce carbon emissions by 300 million tons a year. The sector approach advocated by Japan means setting the same numerical goals for all companies in an industry, regardless of location. At next week's summit meeting Japan willl back an initiative that sets its conservation induced energy levels as the new standards for global industries. This will also promote the sale and use of Japanese energy saving technologies around the world....

LyrArc Article Gist
India's Foreign Investment Board clears investments by Vodafone and Tesco.

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
Response to question whether this $100 a barrel oil is possible is yes, if something big happens in the oil flows from middle east or if there is a Katrina style hurricane. Reason being that oil demand has not slackened up either from Asia or from the U.S. automobiles. How would this impact the USA, Europe, Asia? The impact on Japan and Europe would be less because of the high efficiency in use energy use. This could slowdown the U.S. economy considerably as gasoline approaches $5 a barrel. India would be hurt with a drop in GDP growth from 8% to 6% according to an estimate by Crisil, Mumbai. It would affect Chinese growth also but the main impact would be indirect through a decline in the U.S. market for Chinese made products. Russia would gain and economic growth there could accelerate further from 6% to 9% according to estimate by MDM Bank, Moscow.