LyrArc Article Gist
The FDIC acknowledges that it has not been able to get banks interested in a pilot program called the Legacy Loans Program. That program was designed to give the banks an opportunity to sell off $1 billion of troubled mortgages. Since November with the efforts of the Troubled Asset Program under Secretary Paulson to have the banks sell off these assets in an auction or some other way, the whole issue of getting the toxic or troubled assets off the books of the banks has been effectively shelved. The Obama administration's version of this was the Geithner Public Private Partnership program, but this like Paulson's TARP never really got off the ground. Instead several things have happened that have enabled banks to show higher profits and improve stock prices. The period from March 2009 to June 2009, a period of several months has seen bank stock prices recover and banks are now able to raise capital on their own from investors. The government's "stress tests" gave the banks credibility with investors and they were designed not to be so stringent as to affect confidence. The mark to market rule has also been relaxed so that banks are no longer required to show these toxic assets at prices that reflect large losses. Bank executives also are wary of the new executive compensation rules of the government. All of these things have combined to create asituation where some confidence has been restored, but at the same time experts are pointing out that the underlying problems of an estimated $1 trillion in troubled assets remains. Banks are even less likely to want to part with these assets at lower prices now that some semblence of confidence is returning, as they would then have to show large losses. What this implies is that if the economy suffered a setback, these problems would return and be just as intractable as ever....

LyrArc Article Gist
The BBC's Soutik Biswas takes a look at prime minister Modi as he seeks a second term in India's general election in May 2019.  Modi's first term is marked by exceptional development schemes, efforts to provide health insurance to 500 million people who cannot afford health insurance, bringing cooking gas cylinders to hundreds of millions of Indian women especially in rural areas, efforts to jumpstart building of infrastructure projects such as airports and metro subways. A new law for GST brings together the country with one tax instead of a hodge podge of state taxes for interstate commerce, something India needed for a long time but different governments failed to implement. A failed effort to fight corruption by removing from circulation large denomination currency notes reduced economic growth briefly during the first term, though it may have accelerated the shift to formal economy needed in the long run to improve tax revenues for development needs. One of the problems for the Modi government is how do you put a value on something like Swach Bharat Mission, the achievement of the goal of defecation free India in 2019 by 100% on the 150th anniversary of the birth of Mahatma Gandhi, getting rural toilets up from 38% to 100%. Development had to start from the bottom up. Similarly in a country where middle men took up a lot of the transfer to poor families of government assistance- the delivery to hundreds of millions their own bank accounts.- how do you put a value on something like this, but it is essential for development from the ground up. More than missiles or other talk this has got to be the spirit of any development oriented administration in India. Ground up, big goals and rapid delivery and an apology for the difficulties that the people suffered earlier for lack of this infrastructure. For both China and India it is the same - moving quickly to make up for 100 years of colonial rule and stagnation. The Modi government has responded to rural farmer distress with support for guaranteed crop prices. As more young voters vote for the first time an important factor is how the new voters see the years ahead under either a government led by the BJP or by a patchwork of parties as the previous ruling Congress party depends on alliances with other parties with conflicting agendas or lack of rapid development agendas. The Modi government sees itself as setting the stage for the next phase of development that would change the economy through new infrastructure development and create jobs in construction and engineering, and other areas. The criticism is that not enough jobs were created in the first term. Yet bold infrastructure development targets such as transformed the Chinese economy could be the answer for job creation. The question then is who is better qualified to launch that effort based on its track record. The Congress party's main criticism is that it has to make alliances with parties that could stall development with conflicting agendas. The other is that in the the 2 years leading to the election of Mr. Modi the Congress led government of Manmohan Singh was stalled due to corruption charges, leading to a lack of decisionmaking at the highest levels, and stalled efforts for the rapid development that could deliver the kind of jobs India needs.  Young Indians would like to see growth first and foremost, only something rivalling China's transformation over 2 decades can do this. It should be kept in mind that China poured more concrete in the 21st century so far than all the concrete the United States poured in the 20th century, according to The Guardian report. The question then is who is best qualified and in a position to deliver this needed economic miracle.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A behind the scenes account of what happened at JP Morgan Chase after CEO Jamie Dimon discovered the trading losses of the London Whale through the pages of the Wall Street Journal, on April 6, 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard University, expert on debt crises, and author of "This Time is Different," says China is one of the best examples of the idea that this time is different, with the idea created that somehow China was impervious to the massive build up of debt. The debt is now over 250% of GDP, and this was possible for so long because of the high savings rate of 30% of disposable income and the millions of young migrants moving to cities to work in manufacturing. The growth of shadow banking, opaqueness in decisionmaking, unreliable data, use of local government financing vehicles, the bubble in housing with a large portion of loans tied to the real estate market, all combine to create serious problems that will take a long time to sort out. Rogoff says the crisis in Tianjin with the deadly explosions in the port area, and the government's inability to provide answers to questions from a alarmed public, only added to the uncertainty and loss of credibility. Rogoff says he hopes the trillions of dollars in reserves will provide China with the tools adequate to tackle the debt problems before they spread to other countries....

LyrArc Article Gist
Two weeks after his election Donald Trump says the U.S. will not join the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement during his term in office. Barack Obama took seven years to negotiate the trade agreement which was opposed by trade unions, the auto industry and was unpopular in the midwestern U.S. because of the impact of trade in hollowing out the manufacturing sector. Here Frank Sieren of the DW.com points out that the agreement was not really about trade, as most of the gains of trade had already been realized according to experts. It was part of the "pivot to Asia" to maintain American dominance in the region, says Sieren. After China pulled together some Asian and European countries into its trade agreement, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the U.S. pushed for TPP as a counterweight to the China sponsored trade zone. China says it will try to integrate the countries in TPP into the trade zone it has sponsored. President Trump has said that the U.S. is better off negotiating agreements with each country and not getting into multilateral trade agreements. He fought the election campaign on the basis of the opposition to TPP and trade agreements that unfairly hurt American workers. This could have provided the 110,000 margin of victory in the states suffering from the hollowing out in manufacturing such as Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania. A similar hollowing out in Ontario favored Justin Trudeau's Liberals against the Conservatives in Canada's election. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How much is the drop in sales of light trucks, including truck based SUV's? Acttually not much so far, title is misleading! 2004- 55.7% of total vehicle sales 2005- 54.9% of total vehicle sales 2006 1st quarter- 53.8 % of total vehicle sales source: Autodata, NYT cite For GM in April 2006 situation according to GM figures Overall Light Truck sales up 1.5% Escalade up 127% Tahoe up 30% Overall GM down 7.3% in all vehicle sales in April source Ward's AutoInfo Bank But the mix weighted toward the Escalade, Tahoe, and new SUV's which are non-incentive and priced to meet demand, which mean higher profits to make up for lost volume in cars. This is occurring in the middle of bigger changes, and as GM moves to introduction of more fuel efficient cars with better quality and appeal to younger demographics. GM is restructuring to transform itself into a global company with growing Asian sales and shifting volumes overseas. It is shifting employee and capital base to more countries overseas to create new opportunities and make GM a new and different company, a global company. Incentives pay part of the gas price for buyers, and more fuel efficient SUV's also chip in to pay gas costs. Americans are not out to get off the SUV's just yet, as fuel effficiency standards go up.The investments oil companies are making are expected to provide a payoff in increased production by 2008-2009, and the new oil policy of Saudi Arabia kicks in (see Naimi at CSIS 2006 meeting). The situation eases up for families accustomed to carrying kids around or hauling stuff around. See also links to Tradin Frenzy (Mouawad, NYT, 4/29/06) speculators in oil markets cause 10-20% of price rise, could lead to drops later after ethanol part of spike eases, and if global demand drops with economies cooling off a bit. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
According to real estate data firm CoreLogic, 38% of U.S. home owners who took a second mortgage on their homes are under water on their loans. 18% of borrowers who did not take a second mortgage are under water and have negative equity in their homes. Second mortgages are loans taken out on a property that are subordinate to first mortgages, including home equity loans and lines of credit. Borrowers with second mortgages have an average of $83,000 in negative equity compared to $52,000 for borrowers without second mortgages according to CoreLogic. During the boom borrowers took out cash using home equity loans and lines of credit for everything from home renovations and automobiles to tution and other expenses. Federal Reserve Board data show homeowners took out a huge amount, $2.69 trillion, from their homes for 2004-2006. Overall the number of underwater homeowners, or homeowners with negative equity in their homes, remained steady, according to CoreLogic's report- 10.9 million Americans in the first quarter of 2011, compared to 11.1 million for the fourth quarter of 2010, 22.7% of all homeowners nationwide compared to 23.1%. The slight decline reflected completed foreclosures, suggesting that the market conditions have not changed. Roubini and other experts predicted large housing losses in 2011-2012. This also affects America's largest banks. While the large part of the first mortgages were bundled and sold as securities, the home equity loans remain on bank balance sheets. About three fourths of the $950 billion in home equity loans outstanding were held by commercial banks at the end of 2010. Over 40% of this is on the books of Wells Fargo, Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, and Citigroup. A writedown on these loans could use up a significant part of the bank's capital....

LyrArc Article Gist
The ECB's annual report for 2012 and the role the ECB under Mario Draghi played in the eurozone crisis in 2011-2012. The gains made in eurozone financial architecture, especially the agreement for the ECB as financial supervisor for European banks. The ECB sees itself as the supervisor for all European banks- the French position in the discussions in Brussels. The agreement of Dec. 12, 2012 only says banks with assets over 30 billion euros, or 20% of GDP of countries, or operations in two or more countries will come under supervision by the ECB.

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
Krugman says the TPP is no big deal because most of the trade in that region is free, protectionism is way down. He cites a recent report on American import restraints by the International Trade Commission putting their total cost at 0.01% of GDP.

LyrArc Article Gist
How the global financial markets are changing. Note foreign exchange reserves of governments around the world are increasing at an accelerated rate. Since 2002 Treasury estimates that they are increasing at the rate of 20% a year compared to the 6% rate from 1997-2001. These reserves total about 7.6 trillion dollars. Some of this will be invested by governments in equity to buy into companies or to obtain higher rates of return. For China Developmet Bank there may be also access to expertise and knowhow in the banking field by becoming the largest shareholder of Barclays with ownership of 8% of the shares after possible acquisition of ABN Amro. Some of the funds will be raised in China's domestic market by issuing debt. See the related article in todays WSJ on the Quatar Investment Authority.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report says fewer jobs alone is not going to reduce inflation, US inflation is propelled by factors beyond economic theory. The Phillip's Curve is a inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation that was a convenient tool for the 1960's to get the economy to do well with low unemployment at 4% with moderate inflation. It was torn apart by high inflationary expectations in the 70's. In today's world Robert Gordon of Northwestern University suggests central banks consider inflationary embedded expectations, supply shocks and cost push as in the pandemic 2021-2022, and demand changes. The job that Mr. Powell at the Fed has is lowering inflationary expectations by reducing private sector investment and job creation by raising the cost of capital through interest rate increases. Yet today the government is a huge partner in capital investment for America in clean energy and infrastructure building which means job creation remains strong as it has in America. President Biden's effort to reduce pharmaceutical costs and for inflation reduction by fighting price increases through stealth fees, has at the same time cut into inflation. So as lower demand and increased supply in 2022 as the government better manages the supplies of energy, including release of oil stocks from the national reserves. Explained- The Phillips curve is an inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation observed by a New Zealand economist William Phillips in a paper in 1958 based on British unemployment and inflation data1861-1957. Economist Robert Samuelson turned it into a textbook concept as a simple tradeoff in 1960 more inflation gets you less unemployment- which fit the period of the 60's- but warned that it could change over time. Milton Friedman and others during the 1970's period of high inflationary expectations setting rejected it. In reality Mr. Phillips never meant for economists like Samuelson to generalize from his statistical observation of data on the British economy before 1958 and apply it to the US for the closing decades of the 20th much less the 21st century. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The practices of Bain Capital under Mitt Romney, as it merged management consulting with private equity to take stake in companies that it would be asked to turnaround. The main focus for this type of investing was to harvest as much capital out of the acquired company as early as possible, leading to management decisions that were driven by this overriding aspect. This meant large layoffs to reduce costs, loading the company with debt which in many cases led the company to bankruptcy yet benefitting the investors. The practices were adverse to the accumulation of human talent.