LyrArc Article Gist
The major provisions of the Republican House healthcare bill that passed by a vote of 217-213 are- 1. To help people buy insurance coverage the bill offers $2000 to $4000 a year, upto $14,000 a year in credits based mainly on age, reducing them for families making $150,000, individuals making $75,000. 2.  Under the Affordable Care Act insurers cannot charge older Americans more than 3 times for same coverage they offer to younger people, the new bill makes this 5 times. This would increase premiums for older Americans and reduce it for younger Americans. This is the most controversial part of the bill. Older Americans supported the Republican party in the presidential election. 3. The new bill ends Medicaid as an open ended entitlement and places this on a budget with cuts of $880 billion over 10 years. 4. To mollify conservative Republicans a provision allows state to opt out some provisions of the ACA that requires minimum benefits such as maternity care and emergency services. It retains coverage for pre-existing conditions to mollify moderate Republicans. The bill provides states with $138 billion over 10 years to subsidize premiums, provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, mental healthcare and drug addiction. 5. The bill removes the taxes imposed under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on high income people of about $300 billion over 10 years by repealing a payroll tax increase and tax on investment income. This bill and the ACA offer 2 competing visions on healthcare, both bills passed only by a margin of 4-5 votes in the House. The ACA overlooked the impact on premiums causing discontent among middle income Americans. The new bill lets premiums rise for older Americans in order to keep premiums down for other Americans. This shows the many tradeoffs involved and choices being made, and the lack of a consensus on the issue of healthcare in the U.S., becoming a highly politicized issue instead of the way it is treated in western Europe.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Raghuram Rajan, Professor of Finance at the Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, was appointed chief economist at the IMF in 2003. He presented a paper, titled "Has Financial Development Made the World Riskier," at the annual Jackson Hole meeting of economists and central bankers for 2005. Rajan says he had planned to write about how financial developments during Greenspan's 18 year old tenure had made things safer, but the more he looked the more evidence came up that the risk reward relationships in a normal functioning financial market had been terribly distorted. Market participants were being rewarded for wins but were not being asked to take on commensurate risks and impacts on their bonuses and rewards. He also cautioned about the use of credit default swaps which acted as insurance against bond defaults, and said insurers were generating big returns on this but with the appearance of little risk- even though the pain could be immense in a default. Banks were carrying credit securties on their books that posed risks to the whole financial system if things went wrong with the credit securities. Reaction from the gathering was unfavorable. Lawrence Summers, a former Treasury Secretary said, "the basic, slightly lead eyed premise of the paper was misguided."...

LyrArc Article Gist
A brief history of Xinjiang which translates as New Frontier in Chinese. Its the western frontier of China and a vast area that comprises the desert region of the Tarim basin. It has 13 sizeable ethnic minority groups and borders eight countries. Because of the lack of irrigation technologies these arid expanses were settled very late in history, says Victor Mair, a Professor of Chinese language and literature at the University of Pennsylvania. Even the Uighurs were tribes from the Mongolian steppes who settled Xinjiang in the 10th century. For China it was mostly aplace for havin border military garrisons. Around the 10th century and the Tang dynasty in China, trade on the Silk Road- with places like Kashgar oasis towns on the fringes of the desert as hubs- was at its height. It was not until 1760 under the Quing dynasty of ethnic Manchus, that this area was annexed by CHina and serious effort made to settle it with demobilized troops. A civil and military administration encouraged immigration, say scholars Millward and Perdue in a 2004 book of essays by 16 scholars, "Xinjiang: China's Muslim Borderland." About 50,000 demobilized troops were offered benefits, seeds and land if they stayed. A similiar situation seems to have been repeated after Mao annexed Xinjiang in 1949. In the early 1950's the Chinese government established the Xinjiang Province Production and COnstruction Corps, which was setup to manage large farms and construction projects called bingtuan and provide jobs for demobilized troops. The bingtuan are profitable enterprises and an estimated one of every six people in Xinjiang are employed in bingtuan, or 1.3 million people. THe HAn who were 6% of the population in 1949, now comprise 40% of the 20 million population of Xinjiang. Another source of employment is in the oil and gas industry, with the Communist party secretary of Xinjiang for the last 15 years being aprotege of President Hu Jintao, from his days in the Communist Youth League, coming from the oil industry province of of Shandong. These jobs are mostly all reserved for Chinese which causes resentment among the local Uighurs. Wong quotes a Uighur university student as saying, who is the foreigner here and whose culture, language and way of life should be protected. This may be the crux of the grievances of the Uighurs, as their use of the language and religious practice is restricted, and they feel they are second class citizens in their own land. Other articles in the NYT and Economist go to point out that the links with international terrrism are not a source of the problem, and the unrest among the Uighurs is more about a feeling of loss of culture, language, religion and identity, and jobs. And the idea that the best way to work with minorities, or regions with different language, religion and culture, just as the British did in South Asia and India is doing now is through tolerance. See the links to NYT and Michael Wines on 7/11/2009 about the Communist party secretary for Xinjiang, Wang Lequang, whose policies in Xinjiang and now in Tibet through a protege, may be worsening this situation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ireland went off the cliff by taking enormous unregulated loans. The banks lent money freely and the regulators simply ignored the bubble that was developing through the last decade. The speculators, developers, bankers and regulators all let the bubble reach astounding proportions. One developer got a $6.3 million loan on a personal guarantee without meeting his banker. One 1000 square foot Dublin carraige house went for 3 million euros in an auction. One of the developers, Simon Kelly, says that everything was funded by the Germans through the European Central Bank. The sale of the Jury's hotel in 2005 resulted in the amazing price of 60 to 70 million euros per acre. Ireland's GDP which was $25 billion in the 1980's, reached $267 billion in 2008. The boom that was initially based on export competitiveness and the low corporate tax rate combined with an educated English speaking workforce, was followed by a speculative boom in real estate financed by Irish banks, where regulators simply looked aside and placed no controls on lending. To get an idea how the government looked at anyone who raised a red flag, look at this quote from Bertie Ahern, prime minister of Ireland from 1997 to 2008, who said at a trade union conference: "sitting on the sidelines cribbing and moaning is a lost opportunity. I don't know how people who engage in that don't commit sucide." And this coming from an Irish politician who helped in arranging the Irish peace accords with the help of Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. The risks of such uncontrolled speculation in real estate was lost on regulators, the government, and politicians. And the bankers stopped paying attention to their loans, with everyone wanting to lend money to 10-15 deveopers who were able to drive the market. The regulator at the central bank simply didn't pay much attention to the reports he received every quarter about the lending. Now the average household in Ireland owes 132,000 to the banks, according to David McWilliams of the Central Bank of Ireland, and unemployment is at 14%. If the Irish had completely lost track of the picture, what about the German and British banks that loaned money to Ireland? Why was money being made so freely available to Ireland. One Irishman says getting a mortgage in those days was like getting cupcakes. With prices haveing reached the stratosphere at 60 million euros an acre, were the European banks also pushing money into Ireland beyond the ability of a small country like Ireland to repay? According to the Bank for International Settlements based in Basel, Switzerland, Ireland owes $139 billion to German banks and $132 billion to British banks. Easy money was also available from US banks for countries such as Argentina which suffered similar crisis in prior decades. Banking crises ocurred in Asian countries in the 1980's. Much of this experience was lost in the manner German, British and other European banks loaned money to countries such as Iceland, Greece, Ireland and Portugal. The Asian banking crises of the 1980's are being followed by European banking crises over two decades later. The ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new Ford Focus being unveiled at the Detroit Auto Show in 2009, is a new kind of car for Ford. This is a new kind of effort, a new discipline that Ford CEO Mullaly has advocated from the beginning. Making one car for all markets worldwide. Early on Mullaly told Ford's chairman Bill Ford that Boeing did not have a 737 for Europe and a 737 for the US and a 737 for Asia, why was Ford building a Focus for Europe and a Focus for the USA. In fact before Mullaly the Focus for the USA was a stripped down version of the European Focus and did not make much of an impression. The new Focus will have 80% common parts and 75% of parts from the same suppliers worldwide, so that a Focus made in Germany and the USA will share the same parts as a Focus made in Russia and a Focus made in China. And all of these plants will go into production at about the same time with the new Focus. To accomplish this transformation of Ford for "One Ford" worldwide, which is also on every business card carried by Ford managers, Mullaly appointed Derrick Kuzak as head of global manufacturing. See link for Derrick Kuzak. And the strategy was announced in mid-2008 with the start of retooling of truck factories in Mexico, Kentucky and Michigan, to make small cars designed in Europe for global markets. The task of coming up with one design for a global car was given to Martin Smith, a British designer based in Cologne, Germany. Smith says tastes are converging worldwide with the internet use, and customers are more unified than one would think, and whats emerging is a new kind of global cool if one looks for it. This is what happened when Focus protypes were shown to consumer panels in Europe, the USA and Asia, with a good impression created in all 3 markets. Aligning the US and European tastes was easier, China was a bit harder and the yellow leather interior popular in Shanghai had to be crossed out. Another challenge that had to be met in adisciplined manner was the varying safety rules and emissions around the world. For example European designers liked to have the windshield further forward, and Ford's global small car chief had to tell his engineers to move it back to meet US crumple zone standards. Similiar challenges had to be met in purchasing by global purchasing chief, Tony Brown, with a massive coordination effort needed to be done globally. And plastic trim from Michigan has to fit perfectly with sheet metal stamped in Michigan, and Ford used a virtual manufacturing system that allows the car to be built in cyberspace, and the bugs taken out at that early virtual build stage. The entire change is part of a metamorphosis at Ford, a change of culture and mastering a new discipline in coordinated effort worldwide for "One Ford." One year ago the Wayne Truck plant here in Detroit made the Navigator and the Expedition large vehicles.. With a $550 million investment this plant will make the Ford Focus a year from now. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the flaws in China's development model are shown by the Economist. Over half of the economy is dominatd by state run enterprises. And the remainder is also heavily influenced by local government and officials from the government. Financing goes through state run banks which lend to state run enterprises, and only a small fraction of lending goes to small businesses. These busineses are not actively looking to support innovation and new products. The other weakness that the Economist correctly points out, is that by contrast even in the 1960's, about 10 years into Japan's postwar development, quality control was a big thing with companies in Japan. The Deming Prize was seen as the most prestigious prize for Japanese companies, and Japanese engineers tried to learn everything they could about quality control to make Made in Japan mean high quality. They succeeded by the 1980's in making this happen, with leading global brands like Sony, Matsushita, Panasonic, Toyota, Honda, Canon and a host of other brands. If 1980 in China, is where Japan was in 1950, now about 30 years later there is nothing like what was seen happen in Japan in the area of quality and global brands. The area in which the freewheeling culture of capitalism has been most successful is the economic zone, a 2 hour drive between Guanghou and Shenzen. It manufactures mostly low tech goods like toys and apparel and shoes, and these manufacturing facilities are of low quality, with poor conditions for labor. With the efforts by the government to move to higher value added and high tech products these businesses came under pressure by mid 2007, with new labor laws, more enforcement, pollution control laws and resulting higher costs. As they felt the impact by mid 2008 from the higher costs, some businesses disappeared. Then another and even bigger problem hit these businesses. The global economic crisis, the shortage of credit in western countries to sustain import orders, and the rapid fall off of demand from highly indebted consumers in the USA, has led to closure of most of these businesses. The rapidity with which many of these businesses closed is amazing, as row after row of these buildings are now empty in the Guangzhou-Shenzen area. Another development is happening in Taiwanese firms like Hon Hai, that with little disclosure, make IPods, laptops, PC's, and other electronic products in the same area. At one point this firm employed 250,000 people in a industrial city sized factory campus. Now it is shifting production to places like Vietnam. Now Taiwanese reports say that the workforce of Hon Hai in Shenzen area will drop to 100,000. Other Taiwanese firms are also shifting production to other countries. Climate change and the heavily polluting industries that are widespread in China is one of the other flaws in the Chinese development model. Another is the lack of energy efficiency in these industries. With all these changes exposing the deeper flaws in the model China has used for development for the last 30 years, this a time for change in the way economic development takes place in China. ...

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
Entergy is one of the largest energy companies. Its CEO for nine years, Wayne Leonard, talks to Joseph Rago of the Wall Street Journal. Its the No.2 generator of nuclear power in the USA, and uses coal for only 7% of its energy. He has made his name in nuclear energy, and here he talks about the government's cap and trade program and nuclear energy. He points to today's technology as far superior to the technology that was used in the Failed Three Mile plant, that put back nuclear energy plants in the USA for decades. He believes that price signals are needed for CO2, and the cap and trade program helps to do this, so he supports the cap and trade program. He admits that self interest colors perception of Entergy, compared to coal using utility producers like Duke Energy and American Electric Power. With coal only 7% in its portfolio of plants, and big in nuclear energy, it stands to gains from a cap and trade program, whereby Congress will set a ceiling on emissions, then allows businesses to sell any of its extra allowances that stand for the right to make emissions. And in doing so creating the largest commodity market, in carbon backed securiites. He and the government agree on the point that the allowances should be auctioned off, rather than given away as the companies with many coal plants believe. And the billions in new revenue from these allowances would be returned to the public. He understands that the view of companies like Duke and AEP, that use coal and would have to increase rates, and face the anger of ratepayers as they pay more for the allowances. He also thinks the bill should be written with a fine pen, so that if Congress mandates 20% of energy come from renewables. That it should specify replacing coal not natural gas as what this replaces, to get rid of the most polluting sources. He points to the real need for looking at things globally, as doing things locally, even to show responsible leadership in the world community, can lead to no progress in the global picture. The reason is that China is going ahead with the rapid construction of conventional coal plants. It has surpassed USA coal capacity, and is on track to double it sometime in the next decade. If the USA closed down every single coal plant, and all the time new coal plants are going up in China and India, then we would have ruined our economy, and it was'nt making much difference globally. And he says, if we just say lets lead and people will follow us, "its silly", because China isn't going to follow us, especially when they have $2 trillion invested in their coal plants, and they still aren't feeding feeding all their people. So how to deal with this? Develop the new technology for carbon capture for existing conventional coal plants, and help the Chinese with retrofit technology to curb emissions in a realistic manner. At this time most current funding is devoted to technology for second generation systems, that are still 10-20 years away....

LyrArc Article Gist
Andrew Rosenfeld, a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, and chief executive of an investment advisory firm, says the Public-Private Investment Program proposed by Secretary Geithner has serious flaws. It risks government money, and expects too little from private investors. The government will essentially finance the private investor's purchase of these toxic assets at an auction, with the private investors putting some money of their own, to buy these assets at prices emerging from the auction. It runs right smack into the problem that Secretary Paulson under President Bush faced when he suggested the auction plan as a way for these toxic assets to be sold off to buyers. It was never clear how shuch an auction would work, and whether it would work at all. Meantime the worsening credit crisis required direct injection of capital into banks. Now Secretary Paulson's abandoned effort has been essentially revived in the Geithner program, with the same problems but with the carrot of government taking up most of the risk with its financing. Rosenfeld argues that under this plan the government assumes all the risk of losses, and if private investors make too much money off of it it will create a public outcry and the risk of an AIG type situation. This might lead to lower bids and the money generated for the banks might end up being too small to make a difference. There is a better way he says, and this is for the government using existing authority to seize banks that look insolvent. Its fairer because the government will own the toxic asets, and the bank, and the proceeds for the sale of the bank, and these would be offsetting the cash that it would inject to recapitalize the bank. The way it would do it is to inject cash in the form of Treasury notes as equity in the bank, and at the same time remove the bank's toxic assets and place them in the basement of the Treasury building, while it waits to see what they turn out to be worth. Bank regulators would swap Treasury securties for the toxic assets "at par," which is at the amount of the original purchase price of assets removed. Within a short time, a month or a few months, the bank could be sold to private investors. This is sounder because it takes away the pricing problem which looks like its never going to be resolved, as banks and investors are never going to agree on toxic asset price. And the new bank could start clean and start lending flowing in the economy. If the bank turns out to be so badly managed and with so many bad bets that it cannnot be sold, its essentially insolvent and irrecoverable, so it should be liquidated. Nobel winner Krugman says some of the same things in his columns in the NYT. He has a sense of despair seeing the return of the failed Paulson solution of auctions with a new twist, even as the economy is flailing in the wind, with job loss numbers over 600,000 and jumping each month....

LyrArc Article Gist
People with doubts about Obama and McCain being agents of change or just bearers of the latest popular slogan for electioneering, would benefit from looking at the details gathered by the New York Times about the two candidates ties to lobbyists. Obama is second only to Senator Dodd in the amount of donations received from employees and PAC's of the 2 companies Fannie and Freddie. Mr McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis, is a longtme lobbyist, and previously was head of Homeownership Alliance. Homeownership Alliance is a coalition of banks and housing industry interests led by Fannie and Freddie to counter another organization FM Watch, which was an alliance of financial institutions and lobbying associations that wanted to even the playing field against Freddie and Fannie by challenging the implicit government guarantee that allowed them to borrow funds at lower rates. And both candidate's vetters for vice Presidential picks have links to Fannie. Its former chairman, James Johnson, initially led Obama's search committee and Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., McCain's vetter was a Fannie Mae lobbyist. For McCain, confidant and adviser, Charlie Black, and deputy Finance Chairman, Wayne L. Berman, lobbied for the 2 companies. For Obama, Robert Tsien, Freddie Mac VP, and directors. William Lewis , Brenda Gaines, a Chicago businesswoman, come up as names of contributors. There are so many such names right at the top of these two candidates advisors, that it makes one wonder seriously who are these people fooling when they make statements about Fannie and Freddie- like the one made recently by McCain about Fannie and Freddie enriching their executives by millions of dollars while things were going downhill, and the picturesque phrase "going to hell in a handbasket". And did he talk to Rick Davis about this. And Obama did he talk to James Johnson about this, and Brenda Gaines? One, McCain is a maverick yes, meaning he is independent, and the other can talk intellectually and excite young people about the future, but its a thin veneer, when all is said and done both promote their careers above anything else, and the difference is in degrees with one perhaps more than the other. And people have short memories. The Times reminds us that McCain was one of the "Keating Five" senators investigated by the Senate, accused of interceding with federal regulators for the operator of a failing thrift and received a rebuke. This is what Paul Gigot, who as editorial page editor of the Wall Street Journal has directed the investigative reporting on Fannie and Freddie for years, says in his recent column about all the dishonesty and failure and efforts to corrupt the whole political system across the political spectrum with lobbying and donations and tactics. In a note of pessimism he says "not that either presidential candidate is interested." Quite a comment on the political system. Which is also why Vincent Reinhart, who headed the Monetary affairs section at the Federal Reserve, when asked about the bailouts of Bear Stearns and of Fannie and Freddie, and the help Detroit auto companies are seeking, on Bloomberg News on September 8, 2008, said that "free markets is a thin veneer" when things really get rough. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Barboza of NYT describes the hidden subsidies China gives to Foxconn for its plant in Zhengzhou, in a poor region of China. The factory there makes about half a million iPhones a day. These subsidies include incentive packages, infrastructure building, local government help of about $1.5 billion. As a result Apple has high margins. For a 32 gigabyte iPhone 7 that costs $400 to make, the retail price is about $649 in the U.S.  The hidden subsidies is why Apple can maintain dominance as profits are reinvested. And the result is that with only 12% of the smartphone market Apple can take in 90% of the profit, according to Strategy Analytics. Barboza looks back at Apple before co-founder Steve Jobs left in 1985 as focussing on manufacturing at plants in Colorado and California. By 2001 with iPod sales soaring the move to China under Cook, who previously worked for Compaq, was underway. With the introduction of the iPhone in 2007, the move to China for manufacturing accelerated. The reason: only China offered the kind of subsidies, the speed of approval and building of infrastructure facilities, the local government support, the hundreds of thousands of workers, and the best tooling engineers, to produce in huge volumes with speed, and maintaining quality levels. Earlier plants including one in Colorado Springs that this Lyrarc editor was invited to visit just prior to Jobs rejoining Apple had many quality problems, so much so that Apple had a large part of the manufactured personal computers set aside for rework. The quality levels were dismal, defects were unbelievably high. This is the Apple manufacturing process and plant that Jobs must have seen when he returned, and which he hired Cook to fix. Not only were costs higher in the U.S., (subsidies in China came later) when Jobs looked at the manufacturing quality and the inability to get the quality he needed from American workers and engineers at that time in the 1990's, only then did he turn to China- and the more he saw what was possible to accomplish there he sensed an unusual opportunity to finally put the ghosts of memories from competition with Microsoft at rest, and to surpass everything that had been done in Silicon Valley. The result one of the most ingenious and large manufacturing networks in the world, huge profits for an American company, except for one thing- it would not do much for American workers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The toal loans held by the 15 largest banks declined by 2.8% in the second quarter, 2009. More than half of the new loans in April and Maycame from refinancing mortgages and renewing credt to businesses, not new loans, acording to an analysis by the WSJ.

LyrArc Article Gist
Apartment rents went up by 5% in the 12 months through April 2011, according to Axiometrics. Senior economists at Capital Economics say rental yields (the rent divided by the property price) is expected to go up in 2011 to the highest level in more than 20 years.

LyrArc Article Gist
Jim Lehrer of PBS deserves a lot of credit for the remarkable way in which he handled the new format of 15 minute segments designed to draw out the distinctions between the candidates in the first 2012 U.S. presidential television debate.