LyrArc Article Gist
The IMF extends $100 billion in loans to countries that have healthy economies but need temporary help, such as S.Korea, Brazil, Mexco and Singapore. Some of these countries have borrowed heavily in other currencies and the drop in the value of their own currencies makes repayment difficult. No strings such as requirements to raise interest rates and to cut public spending are attached to this program. Under this program countries could borrow five times the amount they are normally entitled to, $25 billion in Brazil's case, without the strict conditions that normally accompany such loans. Nobel Prize winner Stiglitz was chief economist at the World Bank. He said the funds use of the words restore confidence itself could make a lot of countries nervous. That is because in the Asian and Latin American crises in the past, the IMF set strict conditions to increase interest rates and cut public spending and food subsidies at a time when the poor especially and the rest of the people, all needed help, thereby increasing public distress. In the developed countries stimulus packages and infrastructure spending goes up to support employment and incomes, but the IMF has advocated quite the reverse in the case of the developing countries, with the US Treasury a key factor in IMF support and ideology. Which is why countries in Asia like South Korea see a stigma attached to the IMF and are refusing IMF help. In Pakistan also the IMF support is a last resort or Plan C. Iceland for instance raised rates in return for IMF help from 6% to 18% to try to stabilize the currency. The IMF was created as part of the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944 when the Allied Powers USA and Britain and other countries that sent representatives met in New Hampshire for a postwar economic system. Japan, S. Korea, India and China and many other countries were not part of it because of the war or colonial empires....

LyrArc Article Gist
More doubts about the $200 billion program that will lend money to private investors to buy securities backed by student and auto loans, credit card debt and small business loans, called the TALF or Term Asset -Backed Securities Loan Facility. The Fed will provide these loans at attractive interest rates and provide an insurance policy for possible default of some of the securities, as investors stoped buying in October 2008. This is a vitally necessary step to keep consumer lending going as it collapsed in October. Lenders package these loans into securities and sell them so they can make more loans. See the link and graph on this. But will it stimulate purchases of automobiles and other items? It will keep the lending going but the problem lies in that lenders are asking for higher credit scores from consumers to make loans, and banks do not have confidence in consumers just as millions of consumers have damaged their creditworthiness by missing or late payments. And consumers are reluctant to borrow and make purchases. And while this is a necessary move to keep unclogging the credit channels in the system by the Fed and Treasury, it still means in actual practice to be a limited lending and borrowing to make the continuing slide in demand a continuing fact. Small businesses may fare better with credit unions which should pick up their lending. The situation with mortgage lending is again the same with higher credit scores required and millions of homeowners under water not able to take advantage of the lower rates to refinance. Cameron Findlay, the chief economist at Lending Tree says that at the end of the day it is not just about lower rates but also of qualifications with credit scores of 720 required and a down payment of at least 20%, at a time when unemployment is rising and wages declining. So he sees little or no significant meaningful impact....

LyrArc Article Gist
German views on Trump's economic policies are described by DW.com's Jeffrey Michels. German business sees a Trump presidency increasing the uncertainty affecting the global economy, a kind of second hit after the hit from Brexit. There is concern about the $114 billion euros in exports made by Germany to the U.S., because of Trump's increasingly protectionist policies. Trump could move to the centre, but so far these populist policies have helped Trump win in the primaries, and this is unlikely to change in the election campaign,  says DW.com.  Trump opposes the TTIP trade agreement with European Union, and because of opposition in Germany, these negotiations are likely to flounder. Even under a Clinton presidency there is little support for more trade agreements, and economist Krugman points out that most of the gains from free trade have already been made. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Goldstein at the Energy Policy Research Foundation sees a moderation in demand for oil holding the increase to less than 1 million barrels a day. Goldstein sees improvements in crude oil supply, spare refining capacity,and product inventories which should help moderate prices. A lot depends on how the slowdown in the US affects Russia, India, China and Brazil. China's export based economy is likely to be affected and India and Russia to a lesser extent. Already the stock markets worldwide have come down in synchronized fashion in January 2007 leading to action by the Federal Reserve in the USA. There is likely to be a slowing down worldwide with Europe and India and Russia doing better than the USA. The USA may already be in recession. On the supply side the investments in Saudi Arabia and other places in OPEC and production increase in Russia should lead to supply increase of 2.5 million barrels a day according to analysts. At these supply and demand levels prices could range from $65 to $80, with a consensus of $80 under present conditions. There is a possibility of it going down to the $60 range if global economic conditions get worse and consequently demand decreases more. A price in the $60 range will still be needed to increase the incentives of exploration and production of new oil sources and to pay the higher costs of exploration and drilling for oil, especially in remote difficult locations like Russian Siberia and in deep sea offshore locations....

LyrArc Article Gist
More revelations such as Pandora papers may not do much because the inertia is institiutionalized and the political system is available for hire, says Prof. Prem Sikka of the University of Sheffield, UK. He says armies of accountants, lawyers and financial experts support this system, the regulatory system in the UK is ineffective, and too many MP's are on the payroll of corporations, says Prof. Sikka in The Guardian. It is the sheer size of the problem that is staggering and could be an indication of how it reduces upward mobility in society, leads to financial crises, and defunds infrastructure, defunds healthcare and housing in US, Europe, Britain and India. The size of illegal money and tax evasion money in the world today is according to this article in The Guardian simply astonishing- $3.6 trillion. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Zombrun describes the effect of low interest rates on savings for the bottom half of households in the U.S., the pressure to invest in stocks without the skills and experience of the better educated part of households in the top 20% of households by wealth and income. This resulted in a negative effect, a depletion of savings compared to an increase under a higher interest rates scenario with less pressure to take risks in a volatile stock market. This is the direct cost of the crises in stock and financial markets of 2000 caused by a internet bubble, and the larger crisis of 2008-2009 caused by the bubble in mortgages and housing. The secondary effects of the mortgage price bubble and faulty mortgage securities was in the millions of homeowners who went into foreclosure in 2009-2013, which further depleted wealth and savings of households in the bottom half lacking the experience and skills to navigate this type of housing market. The failure of the Obama administration to stem the foreclosures with practical steps which would have helped not hurt the banking sector, as suggested by FDIC's Sheila Bair and Harvard economist Martin Feldstein in many WSJ op-eds in 2010-2012, added to the erosion of savings and wealth of the bottom half. Minorities in particular were hit hard. A third effect is of communities across America that are feeling the effects of job migration to emerging markets such as China that has been underway as part of the globalization of the last three decades. A fourth effect in the rising cost of education, particularly since 2000, has reduced the opportunities for struggling working class people to enter the middle class and enjoy the higher incomes in precisely the very period when the divergence of incomes between less educated, less killed people and the more educated and better skilled people was taking place. The last two effects were neutral as part of the overall process of emergence of a globalized economy with a premium on more skills and education, requiring action by the government, universities and business for a concerted effort to mitigate in some places the negative effects and enhance in other places the positive effects. The first two effects were man made crises which required managing in constructive and positive ways for the entire American people, taking risks where necessary such as fears about the financial system if foreclosures did not go through. The risks of a long period of extremely low interest rates for savers and the middle as well as working class were poorly understood by the Fed since 2000. A similiar crisis is being faced in Europe with extremely low interest rates. Janet Yellen was only doing the honest thing by acknowledging how far and how different the situation is now compared to the period of three decades following 1945- a question not just of values cherished in America, also of the need for societies to advance through creation of wealth across all sectors of society or regress, as described by Smith in the Wealth of Nations....

LyrArc Article Gist
Upward mobility in China was weak and income growth for average workers sluggish during the years before the coronavirus outbreak. In this sense China is similar to the U.S. and Europe where upward mobility gains after the second world war were lost in the last 30 years partly from the loss of manufacturing to China. It is much worse now as the effects of the coronavirus lead to drops of as much as a third in income for ordinary workers. Lower income workers, the vast majority of Chinese numbering hundreds of millions now suffer from lost work or diminished wages. Small businesses cannot afford to pay the salaries paid before and as workers dip into savings or increase borrowing the retail spending is taking a hit. As a result economists see a vicious cycle of lower spending and lower incomes for the hundreds of millions of ordinary workers in construction and smaller businesses. Some small businesses could just close down because of weak demand affecting the economy over the long term. Before the coronavirus China went over three decades from being a Communist country with relatively equal distribution of wealth but lack of growth and technological development to a capitalist country with the structure of state control of the economy from the Communist period. The result is that 1% of the people control 33% of the wealth and the bottom 25% having 1% of the wealth, according to a 2015 Peking University study. China's president Xi Jinping, head of the Communist party, tried to reverse some of these trends by attacking corruption and making changes that began the task of reversing decades of unequal distribution of wealth under state sponsored capitalist growth. Investments were made in rural medical care, infrastructure and basic services. This did not have much impact because much of the pattern of growth over three decades continues including the housing bubble.  With coronavirus the trend is set for even more unequal distribution of wealth as many workers at the bottom half of the population in incomes either lose work, or see drop in incomes as businesses that hire them struggle from shoe factories to other retail business. Reports of informal economy and street markets in Chengdu in western China and bringing this part of the economy back by the state are effort to get people work in other ways. Researchers estimate that China's bottom 60% of household in incomes lost about $200 billion in income in the first half of 2020. In May premier Li Keqiang said 600 million people in China earn only about $140 a month. Many who lost income or jobs do not have support from the government as China lacks a program of comprehensive unemployment insurance as in Europe and the U.S. to help people get over bad times. 300 million migrant workers are particularly vulnerable to loss of income and dipping into savings.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Luhnow and Jose de Cordoba interview Luis Videgaray, close economic advisor for Mexico's leading presidential candidate, Enrique Pena Nieto. Elections will be held in July, 2012. Videgaray answers question about the policy agenda if Nieto is elected, covering changes in the oil industry, education, social security, the fight against organized crime.

LyrArc Article Gist
The shadow economy is about 24% of Greece's economy, according to a study at the University of Chicago. Unreported income is $28 billion or 15% of GDP. The Greek government of Antonis Samaras is taking new steps to tackle this problem. New regulations allow customers to go without paying if service providers refuse to give a receipt for the transaction. Restaurants will be required to post the regulation in their menus. Doctors, lawyers and other service providers will have to follow the new rules.

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ provides a fact check of Trump statements on crime, debt, and taxes. Trump says he is looking at a new plan for taxes not the $10 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years reducing tax collection by 22%, but something about a third of the size. No details are available on the plan. WSJ disputes Trump's statement that the U.S. is "one of the highest taxed nations in the world." WSJ points out that the U.S. in 2014 for federal, state and local government taxes collected 26% of gross domestic product in taxes, compared to average of 34% for about 30 countries, according to OECD. Debt to GDP ratio is about 75% that is high, but because of low interest rates the budget deficit is less than 3% of GDP, which is close to the long run average. For this reason economists say the government should invest in infrastructure and R&D that supports long run economic growth. On crime the record is mixed with increase in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City, but decreases in Washington D.C. and Baltimore. Police shootings were 67 in 2016 compared to 62 in July 2015, and the high being 280 officers in 1974 when Nixon was President. Crime was an issue in the 1968 Republican National Convention during the Vietnam era protests, police shootings and terror incidents attracted attention in July 2016, yet the situation today is very different from the war protests of the Vietnam era. On terrorism fact checks by the NYT and in Lyrarc shows Clinton at State Department and Panetta at Defense Department taking hawkish stands only to hit a barrier from President Obama for taking action needed in Syria, Iraq and Libya. Panetta's new book calls for robust action where needed. A Clinton administration would take action with allies in the Middle East. Even Hollande and Obama who pulled the U.S. and France out of following up in the French-British Sarkozy-Cameron led intervention in Libya, have changed policy, with Obama calling it his biggest mistake. France under Hollande with the U.S. is now actively engaged in the Middle East, having changed policy. It is highly unlikely that a Trump led policy which alienates most allies in the Middle East- Iran, Iraq and Saudis- is likely to work better than a determined Clinton-Panetta led effort which has support of the local countries on the ground actually currently on both sides because of complexities of Middle Eastern politics.  On trade a new administration will still have to work with China, India, the European Union, and other countries, as global trade supply chains are not likely to evolve overnight. Lessons will have been learned by Clinton about the need to bring back jobs and ensure the strength of U.S. manufacturing. Economic and jobs growth will require prudence in strengthening U.S. manufacturing coupled with global cooperation, which a Trump administration that alienates trading partners without the possibility of making any serious immediate gains in jobs, is highly unlikely to do better.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The MIT Economics Department helped shape the thinking of influential central bank governors, Mervyn King of the Bank of England, Ben Bernanke of the U.S. Federal Reserve, and Mario Draghi of the European Central Bank. Bernanke (1979) and Draghi (1977) received their Ph.D.s in economics from MIT in the late 1970's, with Prof. Stanley Fischer (1973-94) as their advisor. Charles Bean, deputy governor of the Bank of England followed them a few years later. Mervyn King was a visiting professor at MIT (1983-84). King and Bernanke shared an office as professors at MIT. The MIT school came up with a pragmatic and activist approach which argued there was a role for government when markets and the economy stumbled. This followed a period when economists from the universities at Chicago, Minnesota and Rochester were influential, making the case for efficient markets and businesses holding rational future expectations which were ahead of government planners; saying government should play a minimal role. The MIT trained central bankers have made shaping public and market expectations an important part of policy actions. Draghi's July 23, 2012 remark- "Believe me this will be enough," was an effort to shape expectations after the European Central Bank's July 2012 bond buying actions in the eurozone. Germany has a competing version based in Bonn. Germany's former Bundesbank president, Axel Weber, was the tutor at Bonn University for current Bundesbank president, Jens Weidmann. Both Weber and Weidmann supported austerity measures, inflation fighting efforts of former ECB head Claude Trichet, and opposed Draghi's monetary easing and bond buying efforts to reduce excessive yields of Italy and Spain....

LyrArc Article Gist
China faces three main challenges and how well it handles them will determine if China does well in the future because the things that helped China in the last 30 years of development are now gradually coming to a close. The three main challenges are a changing work force and the gradual phasing out of the demographic dividend thats responsible according to some experts for a third of the progress this far, the gap between the rich and the poor, and severely constrained resources and supplies of energy and environmental resources. On the first its not something China can do to much about, on the second its going to have to have a more balanced development and repair the network of social services and redirect resources to the poorer sections (see the link to the conference at Lindau, Germany and Nobel Prize Winning economists opinions on this issue). This will bring more discussion and challenges about how to proceed as a lot of actions to build new infrastructure and new construction has been done by taking over land where needed. And on the third challenge has not been done so well so far as the amount of energy required to each yuan of economic output has not changed much, seeing a 3.7% improvement over 2006 in 2007 and only a 2.9% improvement in the first half of 2008 over 2007. All this is why Secretary Paulson cautions that many American might be worrying about the wrong thing, China overtaking the USA, what really is the worry he says is whether serious troubles in China will affect the stability of the USA and global economies....

LyrArc Article Gist
Chinese banks have 20% of total loans as receivable in 2016, up from 6% at the end of 2011, according to WSJ analysis. Many banks disguise loans as receivables. The government regulators have warned about this, but are hesitant to take strong action so that there is no shock to the system. This has created a parallel buildup of debt next to official debt of over 250% of GDP. These are seen as "hidden credit risks" by Shang Fulin, top banking regulator. As a result about $2 trillion is missing from broad measures of credit reported by the central bank, according to economists at UBS, using shadow lenders to mask loans as investments.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. "quit rate" reflecting job churn in the economy with workers leaving for better job opportunities increased to 1.8% in Nov. 2013, increasing from 1.2% low in Sept. 2009, according to the Labor Department. 2.4 million workers resigned in Nov. 2013. This includes workers retiring and choosing not to work. The quit rate was about 2.1% betwen 2000 and 2006. About 20% of the churn is from the lower paying hotel and restaurant sector. As the U.S. population ages and workers look for more stable jobs the number of workers leaving jobs is declining since the 1990's.

LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Decades of investment in infrastructure and manufacturing have given China a strong grip on manufacturing. China's economy depends on exports with sluggish domestic demand. One economist in Hong Kong says Vietnam is the key, if tariffs are placed on Vietnam it will be tough he says, because Chinese goods enter the US from third countries.

In 2025 China's world trade is imbalanced to an extraordinarily large degree, hurting thriving manufacturing communities around the world, and depends on a concentration of port logistics, manufacturing and lack of fair trade practices, that allow $3.5 trillion in exports while taking in only $2.5 trillion in imports. By 2008 America was waking up to this, DJT actually flagged it a decade later, Biden realized this, in the second term what appears like a whirlwind 100 days is really action on many fronts that is coming one to two decades late. 

LyrArc Article Gist
David Leonhardt talks to Raghuram Rajan, Mr Obama, and other experts on how the government should act after the stress test results are announced. Has the government toned down the results of the stress tests, and is it paying too much deference to Wall Street. Leonhardt put this question to Obama, why he asked his advisers were key figures of Mr Rubin's inner circle, Mr Geithner and Mr Summers, who like Rubin are inclined to have too much deference to Wall Street. Obama's answer was that he had other advisers outside of Summers and Geithner. Which wasn not convincing for Leonhardt considering the key positions Geithner and Summers hold. Rajan of the University of Chicago who anticipated the crisis, was not too reticent to criticize Greenspan policies and was in turn criticized for that by Summers, told Leonhardt that certain things may be presented as holy cows not to be touched for fear of something bad happening, but until you find out you cannot be sure. This applies to the bank rescue plans. Should the creditors of banks be asked to take haircuts or swap debt for equity. This may be necessary as there just isn't enough money in TARP - $130 billion left in TARP funds versus the $1 trillion that the IMF thinks American banks may need for solvency in the next 2 years- to do the bank rescue operations. Should the administration consider this a holy cow as Wall Street is suggesting, or come to its own conclusions independently of what Wall Street is saying. Wall Street has to look at it from its vantage point out of sheer necessity, not from what is the best option for someone in the administration's position, considering all the facts without any preconceived ideas or notions....

LyrArc Article Gist
Rep. Frank is saying he will move slowly on the bill that gives government the powers to put bankholding comapnies, insurance companies, and other large financial comapnies, into receivership. Now he wnats to put in the same bill the creation of a body that would act as systemic risk regulator. So instead of next month, this may take several months. Senators Dodd and Shelby on the Senate banking committe are also inclined to move slowly. Its hard to say why, because the government has been doing this on an adhoc basis for Lehman and AIG, and it ends up costing the economy even more, and creates more uncertainty. Congress would also need to provide funds for this.

LyrArc Article Gist
The NYTimes asks whether the administration has the will to take the tough actions necessary for an effective action plan for the banks, including ownership by the government of insolvent banks, new management, haircuts for bondholders.

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ's different take on the bank rescue plans, raising the issues related to Bank of America's "forced" acquisition of Merrill by Paulson and Bernanke.

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about how Mr Geithner has handled his job at the New York Fed and at Treasury during the bailouts of financial firms. Were there close relationships with bankers, hedge fund managers, and others that compromised the Fed's ability to regulate the financial industry? Why was Geithner advocating loosening standards for the reserves financial institutions have to hold to insure against potential future losses, as late as 2007? Inherent in the design of the job of New York Fed President was a conflict of interest, as the institution is supposed to be a watchdog over the financial industry, but the President of the NY Fed reports to a board that is comprised of the heads of banks and financial instituitons. These financial leaders also participate in the selection of the new President. Geithner was a quick learner and a listener, who asked questions, but he was an outsider coming from work at AID, the IMF and Treasury. He is described by one bank executive Sanford Weill as "a baby face," and lacked experience in dealing with the financial industry. He was brought in by Rubin and Summers, two mentors at Treasury. These two had close ties to the financial industry, and did not question practices of overleveraging and risk taking in the financial industry. Was it too much to ask of Geithner, under the circumstances, that he would rock the boat and ask the tough questions about risk and leveraging. On the other hand did he miss things completely when he was asking for even looser capital standards for banks in 2007, less than a year before the crisis hit, which were never adopted. And was he too close to the financial industry and aggressive in the wrong sort of way when advocating in a meeting as President of the New York Fed, that the government back up all the debt in the financial system. Did he too casually overlook the conditions that could easily be put in place for the government to be able to recover some of the money put into the bailouts. And was he too close to Goldman Sachs, that he brought Goldman in for advice in the AIG bailout, even though there were conflicts of interest and money that would never be recovered from the $182 billion bailout of AIG, some of which went to banks including Goldman. If Geithner had seen some of the problems in risk taking why had he not supported FDIC's Bair in her opposing view for capital reserves, and government conditions on bailouts that enabled some recovery of capital put into failing financial institutions. And did he get too close to Citi, that at one point Sanford Weill tried to bring him in as CEO even when he was already President of the New York Fed. Does it go to show that -the very idea that this was even possible- the design of the New York Fed with the President reporting to the Board of the very same bank presidents that he was supposed keep in check, makes for an incomprehensible position of regulation at odds with the structure of reporting and selection....