LyrArc Article Gist
Subprime also includes high rate loans that higher income borrowers used between 2004 and 2006 to buy homes that had inflated prices. And these loans were heavily marketed by mortgage lenders and in the later stages of the boom by thrifts and banks who got into the act also. As a result every corner of the country and every income bracket borrowers have been caught up in the high rate borrowing most were overstretching themselves to meet the higher prices of homes as prices went up. This is the finding of a research done by the WSJ of 130 million home loans in the past decade with particular focus on the period 2004- 2006 when the worst aspects of this bubble were taking place. Note that about $600 billion in adjustable rate loans will adjust by the end of 2008. And a total of 1.5 trillion dollars of high rate loans were made in 2004-2006 so more ogf these high rate loans will adjust in 2009. Places like Las Vegas, Nevada, Stockton, California, and Fort Myers, Florida and these states may be the hardest hit but the problem is spread nationwide is what the Journal's research suggests and is also not limited to poorer borrowers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A law professor at George Washington University, who also comes from an Sicilian Italian American family, writes about his encounters with Scalia showing passionate opinion and steadfastness. Scalia was educated at Xavier Jesuit high school, and Georgetown University. He remained true to his conservative beliefs about the the law over three decades since his appointment by president Reagan in 1986, and an originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution as the framers in the eighteenth century had intended. He is the first Italian American Supreme Court Justice, a fact that enabled him to win approval in the Senate 98-0.

LyrArc Article Gist
A call for immigrant friendly policies in the Republican party in this WSJ editorial. It shows immigrants are not looking for a handout and immigration today is net zero from Mexico.

LyrArc Article Gist
Julia Preston of the NYT looks at Mr. Trump's speech on August 31, 2016 in Pheonix, Arizona, and compares what one can discern about the Trump policies on immigration with that of president Obama. She points out that it is similar to the deportation that was conducted under president Obama in some ways, but is more extensive in its dimensions. It includes sanctioning sanctuary cities, expanding the deportation law enforcement personnel, and deporting about 2 million people with criminal backgrounds. The estimate under the Obama administration is for about 176,000 people with such backgrounds. The Trump estimate appears to include people with minor offenses says Preston, because it is so much higher. As a result this could also include people who have no criminal background and disrupt families on a large scale, with hundreds of thousands of longtime residents and families deported. Under the sanctuary example of Trump, Denver, New York and counties in California would be places where Trump would cut off federal funding. On the wall itself, Mexico's president Nieto says he told Trump Mexico would not pay for the wall, and Trump says exactly the opposite that Mexico would pay for the wall in his speech to supporters.  A Gallup poll shows that 76% of Republicans, 91% of Democrats favor a path to citizenship for those here in the U.S. illegally. For the whole population only 15% oppose giving illegal immigrants a pathway to citizenship and 84% support doing this. Which suggests that Trump is only appealing to his base of support, not adding to it, as Cillizza points out in the WP fact check.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Lawrence Katz, Harvard labor economist, talks to Friedman about the jobs crisis in the U.S.. Katz identifies three jobs crises occurring at the same time today. One is the drop in the demand for goods and services that resulted from the longer term effects of the financial crisis of 2008, with rising foreclosures, weak housing markets, bad debt on the balance sheets of banks, and interest rates at close to zero reducing the scope of action by the Federal Reserve bank. The second, is the widespread long term unemployment with workers dropping out of the labor market. The third, is the nature of new factories and hiring. Work in new factories is done through increased automation, information technology and fewer workers. As a result job creation is a fraction of what it was in the past. Not mentioned here is the shrinking of the public sector under the strain of budget deficits for local, state and federal government. This leads to the question of how America will create jobs in the future. Katz believes the answer is creating more "hubs," networked urban areas like Austin, Silicon Valley, and Raleigh-Durham, by bringing together universities, high-tech manufacturers, software providers, and startup companies, to cooperate in creating new products that enhance people's lives worldwide. This has to be done by the private sector and government working together to build the infrastructure and make the investments in education, training of workers, and equipment for new job creation....

LyrArc Article Gist
How will countries like India generate jobs when technology enables manufacturing and other activity to do work with fewer and fewer people. Even Hon Hai in China is shifting work to robots. Technological progress is leaving more people unemployed and widening income gaps with the benefits going to a few people, says the Economist in this research based essay. It will require carefully managed governance to invest in infrastructure, raise skills of less skilled workers through education, and wage subsidies for those left behind to ensure our current system works in the future.

LyrArc Article Gist
Abut 3 million homeowners are expected to default on their mortgages in the 30 months ending in mid 2009, and two thirds of this or 2 million will go into foreclosure, according to Moody's Economy.com. So what led to all this which eventually hit the financial markets in the U.S., and also to a lesser degree in Europe, through the opacity of the mortgage securities created from bad mortgages with falsely tagged triple AAA ratings that ended up in the assets of banks and investment firms? The motivations of each group were perverted as things unfolded. When the packagers of securties were not responsible for what they were doing they pursued profit before ethical behaviour and all sorts of securities were created. As these packagers were allowed to shop for ratings the ratings companies gradually lowered their standards to attract business. Politicians failed in the free market atmosphere of the Republican Bush administration and Republican led Congress. Senator Bachus and Congressman Frank introduced legislation during the later period of the bubble but failed to draw support to curb the bad lending. Republicans blocked a new antipredatory lending law in North Carolina from being enacted for the country from 1999 onwards. And Bush without realizing the ramifications prodded HUD to push Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to require higher percentage of loans to go to low income borrowers. Fannie and Freddie in turn met this requirement by increasing the demand for these subprime loans by buying the mortgage securities, which the packagers of these securities backed by subprime mortgage loans and incorrectly rated AAA by conniving ratings agencies were happy to supply. It was a sad situation with a happy -everyone could say the were bringing home ownership and the American dream to low income people, and business was signing up for this ride with short term gain in mind. And in all this financial innovation lost its legs as packaging these securities and constructing new investment vehicles like the conduits were being used in perverse ways. The basics of labeling something correctly was torn apart. You could not turn a subprime loan to low income borrowers or a loan without documentation to flippers and speculators into something different by simply labeling it as AAA. What the confidence in financial innovation in the American system did was help spread these securities all over the globe, where they were held with confidence by towns in remote parts of the Scandinavian north country as well as financial centres in Europe and Asia. At the state level politicians in California saw this as one of the state's star industries and protected it from legislation to curb bad lending, as most of the big lenders were based in California. Due to a strange set of affairs the Department of Corporations was left with the tasks of oversight of mortgage lenders in the state. It was concerned more with issues like protecting senior citizens from financial scams and was not staffed to meet the supervisory role of a huge mortgage lending business. When it comes to the Fed's role Greenspan also took the laissez fairre stand of not interfering with free markets, even when a lot of the bad lending was obvious and one Fed Governor Gramlich was pushing for better lending standards. The Fed supervisory role was over banks and banks were required to follow lending standards, but most of this lending had shifted to mortgage brokers and financial companies which were beyond the supervision of the Fed. Had the Fed extended its supervision to mortgage affiliates of the banks this could have increased the level of supervision and made a difference. But state regulation mechanisms in California by Department of Corporations show that the regulatory mechanism did not take into account the realities of mortgage lending and how it had changed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In comments to the Financial Inquiry Commission bankers Blankfein and Dimon show a lack of comprehension of the magnitude of the global financial crisis and their role in it. Blankfein says this kind of crisis was a once in a 100 years event and one should't react. Dimon says such crises happen every 5 to 7 years and is not something to get overly concerned about. And they offer no solutions or problem solving ideas, except to resist any form of regulation that would strictlly limit damage from a future crisis.

LyrArc Article Gist
Dana Milbank of the WP says the views of some Democrats on Trump as a good Republican nominee based on the notion that he has high negative perception with voters is fraught with dangers for U.S. democracy. Milbank points out that this ignores what is good for the country. Having Trump as the nominee of one of the two main parties would create a divisive atmosphere and is not good for the country, says Milbank. In comparing Trump with Cruz, he says Trump is likely to follow his instincts to operate outside the U.S. constitutional system. Cruz as a person believes in the U.S. constitution and would never endorse violence or action against minorities. Cruz has not done enough to come across as a likable person with his persistent focus on conservative or Reagan values to the exclusion of everything else. This is changing in mid-April 2016 following a CNN interview with the Cruz family, a MSNBC town hall answering questions from undecided voters, and NYT coverage of Cruz at a Brooklyn bakery, that shows a different human face that people have never seen about Cruz. Cruz's self-deprecating humor in a NYT article where he talks about voters not liking "a hectoring scold," is part of this needed change that could have happened earlier in the campaign. About Trump Milbank cites Conservative party prime minister Cameron who says Trump would unite all Britons against him if he ever came to Britain....

LyrArc Article Gist
The majority report of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commisssion says Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke, regulators, and several financial institutions were responsible for what was an "avoidable disaster." The report criticizes Mr Greenspan for advocating deregulation and considers the failure to stem the flow of toxic mortgages under his leadership at the central bank as a "prime example" of negligence. The report also says that the New York Fed under Timothy Geithner, now Treasury Secretary, also missed signs of trouble at Citigroup and Lehman. There are 6 Democrats and 4 Republicans on the Commission. The fourth Republican has his dissent, calling policies to promote home ownership, the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a major cause. The panel was hobbled by internal divisions and staff turnover, which have made what should have been a report of major significance into one marred by partisan differences. The majority report itself was heavily shaped by Phil Angelides, the committee's chairman, and it has many literary phrases. Overleveraging was a critical factor in the crisis. For every $40 in assets, the US's 5 largest investment banks had only $1 in capital to cover losses. The banks hid their leveraging with derivatives, off-balance sheet entities and other devices. The banks relied heavily on short-term debt which worsened the crisis. The report also said the Clinton adminstration's decision to exempt over-the counter derivatives from regulation- made in the last year of Clinton's term- also helped set up the ground for later events leading to the crisis....

LyrArc Article Gist
Elizabeth Rosenthal looks at Obamacare's contribution to cost containment in 2013-2014. Rosenthal says its is a kind of delicate maneuvring at the edges, because serious work needs to be done. The fee-for-service and many of the drivers for increases in medical costs, the old system of pricing, are still in place. In 20 years at the current rate and after Obamacare health care will still take 25% of the U.S. budget if nothing is done. Healthcare costs are about half that of the U.S. in some of the advanced European countries. She calls Obamacare a trickle down theory of cost containment becaue it leaves most of the drivers for cost increase in place and works at the margins. Princeton economist Uwe Reinhardt calls it an ugly patch on a somewhat ugly system. Rosenthal cites the armies of consultants anticipating every move to reduce prices, and working on "strategic billing'' to increase revenues for hospitals and doctors. For those who say the prices are now up more slowly than in the past, Michael Chernew of the Harvard Medical School, has this to say- its like a diet, reminding us that that we haven't even lost weight, just gaining weight slower than before. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Fareed Zakaria points out that the primary elections of the Republican and Democratic parties can pose a danger to democracy because of demagogic politicians who can appeal to popular passions to bring a fringe group or individual to the presidency. Primaries for both parties became important after 1968. Eisenhower and Lincoln won the nomination after the person nominated on the first ballot failed to win the necessary votes. Another serious problem is that the turnout in the primaries is low, so low that a 15% turnout is considered high turnout. The media attention is so great that it creates the impression that a real election has taken place when in reality about 85% of the people have not voted- as the Economist magazine points out a representative turnout would change the outcome significantly so it is not clear how much this promotes democratic process.

LyrArc Article Gist
David Stockman was Budget Director under President Reagan and known for his prodigous grasp of statistics in the national budget. Here he takes on what he describes as disproportionately large and destructive banking system for the U.S. economy, which he says the nation desperately needs less of. He supports the small tax of 0.15% of the debts other than deposits of financial conglomerates. His words are some of the strongest yet to come from one of the most prominent people on Reagan's economic team about how the nation's banking system has beome unproductive in supporting economic activity which is its reason for existence. The destructive effects on social cohesion and the middle class is emphasized. He says for years the Fed has run an insanely loose monetary policy that has encouraged this behaviour and socially detrimental profit seeking by the banks and other companies. He sees the big banks as dangerous institutions in today's economy engaged in a bull market culture which believes in entitlement and profitseeking behaviours regardless of its detrimental nature for the national economy. The recent profits of the banks in 2009 and the resulting bonuses are a result of the Fed's easy money policy and bank's gambling at the Fed's monetary casino as he puts it, with money obtained at little cost from Fed-controlled money markets. This article helps to eliminate the distorted perspective in today's climate that paints criticism of splitting up the banks, or otherwise restricting banks in engaging in proprietary trading and risky behaviours, as government interference. As Stockman puts it these banks are already in some sense wards of the state and not private enterprises and this issue is not relevant. The question now is how to set things right and this involves possible solutions such splitting up banks that are too big to fail, restricting risky behaviours and preventing proprietary trading, and other actions as unusual steps for unusual times to get things working back to normal. In other times Stockman would not have said this in an op-ed piece if this were not so....