LyrArc Article Gist
A new report, "China: 2030," by the World Bank and the Development Research Center (DRC), has major implications for the course of action taken by new Chinese leaders. The limits to China's economic model with the dominant role of state owned companies has been pointed out in the past. It has now reached a point where China must choose to move to a modified model or face the "middle income trap" of countries like Brazil and Mexico, where income levels and growth reaches a certain level and then decelerates suddenly with little warning. The report makes some major recommendations that would modify the current system. It says the state owned companies should be supervised by asset management firms focussed on commercializing these companies, and not supervised by the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC). The asset management firms would restrict the state owned companies on what areas they participate and sell off businesses to make it possible for private companies to compete. Zoellick says- "China needs to restrict the role of the state-owned companies, break up monopolies, diversify ownership and lower entry barriers to private firms." The state owned companies would be required to pay sharply higher dividends to the government which could then be used for social programs. Currently state owned companies invest in land which is sold by local governments for revenue helping fuel the real estate bubble. Significantly, the report had its origins when it was proposed by Mr. Zoellick, head of the World Bank, during a visit to Beijing in Sept 2010. It was supported by Li Keqiang, then vice premier, and now expected to be the new prime minister of China. The World Bank is widely respected by Chinese leaders because of its assistance during the early stages of reform in the 1980's. The DRC reports to China's State Council, a top governmental institution, and the No. 2 person at DRC, Liu He, is a senior advisor to the Politburo Standing Committee. He helped draft the current five year plan and is close to Li and Xi Jinping, the next president of China. The SASAC has opposed these ideas, especially any shift in its personnel selection of management at the state owned companies, which it shares with the Communist party's personnel department. Respected China economists say China faces large risks of a sudden sharp slowdown because the the state owned companies have largely copied foreign technology and have not generated enough technological advances, which will be needed for the next stage of growth. Lower growth rates could worsen problems in China's banking system leading to a crisis. The Conference Board, estimates China's growth at 8% for 2012, slowing to an average annual growth rate of 6.6% from 2013 to 2016. Barry Eichengreen of UC Berkeley, Donghyun Park of the Asian Development Bank, and Kwanho Shin of Korea University, say the annual growth rate will drop by at least 2 percentage points by 2015....

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
Note this comment by the head of the U.S. National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration in the Bush Administration. NHTSA Administrator Jackie Glassman says the average mileage for the fleet today is 30 miles per gallon and raising the current standard of 27.5 mpg for an automakers passenger fleet by 2.5 mpg won't put much pressure on automakers. The Bush administration- and the prior Clinton administration- has not committed to making major improvements to the national mileage standards, with the current standards of 27.5 mpg not having changed since 1990! Glassman says the NHTSA starts with the manufacturers product plans and then sees whether it can get additional fuel savings with these plans. This suggests an NHTSA that is more follower to the auto industry rather than a leader in setting the standards that the auto industry then tries to achieve to reduce the U.S. dependence on foreign oil. Also note that it takes 2 years for things to change, as it will take months for rule changes, and 18 months have to be given to automakers to implement the new rules. By 2008 the fuel efficiency based on market competition and Toyota focussing on hybrids and higher fuel efficiency across the whole car lines, might well exceed any new standards that are watered down, especially if crude prices hold up. Lawsuits by attorney generals of different states and the Lugar-Obama bipartisan bill pushing the adminsitration to mandate higher standards are intended to put pressure on the Bush administration to come up with new higher standards. The failure of Democrats and Republicans in the Clinton and Bush years to raise standards and require the auto companies to use new technology to meet these standards with government assistance is one of the significant failures. This will affect the prospects for the U.S. economy in the years ahead....

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama's program for education includes promoting charter schools, closing failed schools, making teacher pay reflect the quality of education they can provide, and providing financing to support better education and better classrooms. Here he outlined his plans in a major speech on education to an Hispanic group.

LyrArc Article Gist
Chile, Mexico and the U.S. rank high in the diabetes rate for top soda consuming countries. In the U.S. the diabetes rate is at 7.7% of the population, in Chile 9.6% and Mexico 9%. Soda consumption per capita was at 165 litres in the U.S., 146 litres in Mexico and 134 litres in Chile, and 145 litres in Argentina where the diabetes rate is at 3.9%, for 2012. A new public service ad in Mexico City subway stations says it all, showing an ad with a soda bottle and the words- "Would you take 12 teaspoonfuls of sugar? Soda is sweet, diabetes isn't." The new Pacto de Mexico agreed to by all major political parties includes the soaring diabetes rate in Mexico as a problem to be tackled, including lunches at public schools and the consumption of coke and sodas by children. A particular acute problem in Mexico is the lack of clean drinking water in many areas and the dependence on coke and sodas for liquids. But bottled water could be used in its place if available at lower prices. One proposal is for a soda tax which could generate $2 billion and be used for setting up clean drinking water fountains in schools and other places. Elected officals in Mexico are firm about the need for action, as Mexico recently became the first country over 100 million inhabitants with the highest obesity rates at 7 adults out of 10 over the age of 20 obese or overweight, and the consequently high diabetes rate. Diabetes is the No. 2 killer in Mexico, and a serious health danger. Coca Cola gets its second highest revenues from Mexico after Europe, and the situation has evolved after years of heavy coke advertising to the point where Coca Cola is taken at every meal by some Mexican families, and is a sign of prestige. The company's response is to fight the public service ads with ads showing people burning off 149 calories by walking. The country now faces a long and uphill fight. Russia is one of the countries which is also conducting a similiar fight against soda drinks. The Bloomberg Philanthropy is financing efforts against soda drinks in Mexico, as part of its campaign against smoking and sodas as health hazards, and this maybe Bloomberg's bigger contribution to society than his service to New York City. Developing middle income countries such as Mexico, Chile, India, China, Brazil, are the hardest hit by soaring diabetes. And the costs to their health systems in 10-20 years from uncontrolled obesity and diabetes will be enormous. The U.S. is a developed country with similiar high rates of obesity and diabetes, with soaring medical costs, and serious problems that strangely have not received the public awareness and efforts that one should expect. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Matthew Slaughter of the Tuck School, Dartmouth, says that the principle of comparitive advantage should determine what America exports and imports. Under comparitive advantage each country concentrates its energies on the particular goods and services that it does better than other countries. Free trade operates under the idea of comparitive advantage, but in practice it is quite different than its textbook economic counterpart. It is constantly changing as new countries or industries in different countries try to upset the existing pattern. Under a textbook example Airbus should not exist because Boeing was the most efficient manufacturer upto that time, and new entrants in a industry are nurtured for years with support from the governments of their countries. And in some situations the governments may exclude certain companies or industries from support such as Komatsu and construction equipment in postwar Japan, and Infosys and software outsourcing in India, and still survive and grow. Under comparitive advantage Japan should still be importing construction equipment from Caterpillar in the US, and there would be no serious competition in that industry. This would work to the detriment of the principle of competition in free trade which is just as important to free trade as the idea of comparitive advantage, with new entrants in an industry upsetting the old way of doing things and creating price/quality improvements. Slaughter simply pulls back off the shelf the old idea of comparitive advantage without seriously considering its real life aspects. Without dealing with trade distortion from currency manipulation, from the impact on jobs, without considering the continuing critical role of manufacturing in developed economies to provide the standards of living for a large middle class, and creating the kind of society that people of developed countries aspire to. He mentions GE's Immelt and the President's Council on Jobs, but makes no effort to engage Immelt 's statement in his recent op-ed article in the Washington Post, that the concept of transitioning from a export-oriented economic powerhouse to a services led consumption based economy could be done without loss of jobs, prosperity and prestige, was fundamentally wrong. He has only one line for manufacturing's role in America's economy. This line says knowledge intensive industries such as education and software are just as important as manufacturing, but fails to mention that manufacturing has received less attention in recent decades. In so doing he is discounting his own profession of concern for the high rate of joblessness in the U.S., and the need for a new focus on manufacturing in the U.S. to reverse that trend. By saying that imports are not a sign of failure but can raise standards of living, and leaving it at that, Slaughter does not acknowledge that consumer debt that US consumers have taken on in the process certainly affects future prospects for the US economy. And he makes no mention of the need for rebalancing the world economy, which is exactly how free trade should work ideally. Countries that have high imports export more to rebalance the world trading system, as currency valuations are allowed to adjust makig their exports more attractive. By not taking into account the realities of free trade, and the need for practical measures to rebalance without policy induced distortions by state run economies, Slaughter ignores the idea of free trade that works as it should and for all countries. The irony is that Immelt's own committment to jobs and competitiveness has been questioned in online blogs and most recently by an editorial in the Wall Street Journal on January 26, 2011, titled "The Misallocators." That editorial refers to the outsize role of GE Capital in GE's earnings during the past decade, and the lack of credibility of a focus on competitiveness and jobs that this creates for GE. It mentions the loss of 34,000 GE jobs in the US during the last decade. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Changes to China's five year plan to include critical social goals, reduce income inequality, and provide a social safety net. The influence of local governments in distorting central government policy.

LyrArc Article Gist
The action taken by local and government officials to address the high PM 2.5 pollutant levels and smog in Harbin, China, in October 2013. For the first time the Ministry of Environmental Protection has powers to take serious action. It is sending out inspection teams to cities across China for the winter to make sure environmental regulations are enforced. One big change is that cities now report in real time the change in pollutant levels for PM 2.5, the worst pollutant. By Oct. 2013 113 cities in China carried the live reports on websites. The Ministry has published a list of the 4189 factories in China that create 65% of total industrial air pollutants in China. The Jinping-Li Keqiang administration supports the stronger enforcement and has set a goal of reducing PM 2.5 levels by 15- 25% each year for Tianjin, Beijin and Hebi province in northern China, compared to 2012 levels. These three regions have been given the target of reducing coal use by 80 million tons a year.

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Gordon of Northwestern University describes the problems in American Education and how this is the first generation which will not do better than its parents in educational attainment. The cost says Gordon comes in lower potential economic growth rates.

LyrArc Article Gist
A black supporter of Obama, Ms. Hart, tells him- " I'm exhausted of defending you, defending your administration. I've been told that I voted for a man who was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class." This encounter happened at an hour long town hall meeting on CNBC, which John Harwood moderated. Harwood asked Obama whether he was having difficulty connecting with average Americans because of attending Ivy League schools and spending part of his youth overseas. The incident reflects the frustration and disappointment felt by average Americans with the Obama administration and with Obama.

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Tough's detailed and vivid account of the problems in Chicago's South Side in 1987 when Obama worked there as acommunity activist, in 2007 when Obama visited the area and expressed his vision about what was needed for the Roseland section, and in 2012 when Tough visits Roseland to document life today in this part of Chicago. He sees the same problems and a need for an all round approach to help kids of parents without work living below the poverty line to provide not just financial help but the kind of support and institutional help that would help them overcome the disabling effects of growing up in broken homes and counteract the destructive effects of a poor environment surrounding them. He left Roseland with a feeling that the President has not pushed hard to accomplish much of what he started out to do and let opportunities slip by.

LyrArc Article Gist
A Peterson Institute of International Economics study on the TPP trade agreement shows it would reduce growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector by a fifth, according to this report in the NYT. Workers incomes and job losses in manufacturing are a key concern for voters and account for the surge in polls for Trump and Sanders in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. All four leading candidates Clinton, Sanders, Trump and Cruz oppose the TPP agreement. Congress will wait till after the election to decide. This is a big issue today because about 5 million jobs have been lost in 1977-2014, according to the Alliance for American Manufacturing. The Peterson study predicts job losses of 50,000 a year, yet another study by Tufts University predicts job losses of 450,000 a year. Another study by the Economic Policy Institute study shows other damaging effects such as labor's share of national income declining from the TPP.

LyrArc Article Gist
Frederick Harris of Columbia University says there is a price to be paid for a black president and it may just be too much for the average black person. There is a difference betwen symbols and substance, betwen a role model and accountability in a representative democracy, which is sadly lacking when the black elites, clergy and politicians fail to debate the issues about the problems facing the black community. Problems related to the increasing poverty among black Americans, and the 14% unemployment for black people. There is he says a strange reticience among the black elite to hold the president accountable on these issues just as they would have done for any Democratic president, even one who was as popular with blacks as Mr. Clinton. He says the experience with Obama is not even remotely comparable to the transformative nature of the work of Rev. Martin Luther King in the black community. It may stem from Obama's multiracial background, growing up in many countries, his elite education and being part of a liberal elite more than of the black community. The price is too high in economic and social terms for the poor or average black person and it has created a divide between the average black person and the black elite, with different concerns and different priorities. Harris points out that poor and poverty are words not mentioned often by Obama. Related to this is the foreclosure crisis in which ordinary black people were hardest hit with no effective help from the president to homeowners badly needing relief. Sheila Bair of the FDIC and Martin Feldstein advocated aggressive help for homeowners under water which did not come from the president. Showing not just the limits of a black presidency, but false hopes, inexperience and lack of leadership in issues that mattered to all Americans in the housing and foreclosure crisis. A populist from Kansas, as Sheila Bair describes herself, had the right instincts and courage of convictions which the president lacked and the entire country needed....

LyrArc Article Gist
Drew Western, a professor of psychology at Emory University, asks the question about Obama that is on many people's minds- who is this man who wrote the book "Dreams of My Father." And what happened to him? It is as if he is asking did they conjure up something that didn't exist, was there really too little about the man in a book written when the young Obama was still in law school- about his experience growing up between two races, except a remarkable effort to grapple with that experience. It would say little about the man himself, the choices he would make, the decisions he would face as he entered his thirties, and forties, a period that provides the crucible and the formative experiences in the development of character. It is as if readers had appended their own chapter at the end of the book and conjured up many things that really did not exist. And which would serve as a kind of Rorschach test experience where readers were free to read into the picture whatever they wished to see- and something Obama could use to be all things to all people. Drew Western draws from his knowledge of psychology and his direct or virtual conversations with about 50,000 people to reflect and make some hypotheses about what has happened to Obama, or what Obama was always about. He starts by pointing out what was missing in the inauguration speech and has been missing ever since- a clear sense of narrative and a vision, a story about what had happened and how it could be made different in the midst of the global financial crisis of 2008-2009. Western provides several hypotheses for what has happened. Obama simply lacks the experience to handle the presidency -having been merely a community activist and not run a city, a state or a business, and had accomplished little before becoming president, and had an unremarkable career as a law professor having published nothing during his 12 years at the University of Chicago except an autobiography. And remarkably says Western voted 130 times in the Senate as "present" instead of "yea" or "nay," suggesting a tendency not to take a stand on difficult issues. The auto fuel efficiency standards issue may be the singular exception. The challenges of a presidency are much larger, and the challenges in 2009 were even greater. Obama could not measure upto the task. A related hypothesis is that given the lack of experience and the inability to make the narrative because of an unresolved identity, Obama is willing to do whatever it takes to dial for dollars and get re-elected. ...