LyrArc Article Gist
Three regional Fed bank presidents have expressed skepticism of the Fed plan to buy medium to long term Treasury bonds- they are Kocherlakota of Minneapolis Fed, Richard Fisher of the Dallas Fed, and Plosser of the Philadelphia Fed. There are 12 regional Fed banks, and five voting seats on the Federal Open Market Committee rotate for the 12 Fed bank presidents. Opposition to Bernanke will increase as these presidents take voting positions in the Fed Open Market Committee. The Wall Street Journal reports that there is deep skepticism about Bernanke's plan among some of his colleagues. Thomas Hoenig of the Kansas City Fed says that more expansive monetary policy was "a bargain with the devil." The Fed's plan is to take a measured approach with U.S. Treasury bond purchases with maturities between 2 and 10 years. A WSJ survey of private sector economists in October 2010 found that the Fed is expected to purchase about $250 billion of Treasury bonds each quarter, and continue till mid 2011, amounting to $750 billion in all. By pushing down Treasury yields the Fed hopes to have an impact on the federal funds rate of one-half to three-quarter percentage point impact for $500 billon of bond purchases, says Dudley, President of the New York Fed. Treasury yields on the 10 year note have fallen from 4% in April to 2.6% partly in anticipation of Fed's action. The previous Fed intervention in March 2009 was a program to buy $1.75 trillion of Treasury and mortgage bonds over 6-9 months. This time the approach will be careful and measured based on results, according to the Fed. Alan Blinder, former vice chairman of the Fed, says this is the tool less preferred and of unknown effectiveness, as fiscal tools would be the preferred choice. The deficit concerns, he says, have restricted the preferred option....

LyrArc Article Gist
Interesting and quite useful from a sociological and psychological point of view, that people believe what they want to believe. Even today writes Slackman, the Arabs and Muslims from Dubai malls to people one meets in a park in Algiers, cafes in Riyadh, and in shops and places all over Cairo, say the USA organized 9/11 so that they could attack 2 Muslim states, Iraq and Afghanistan. If we changed it a bit and said Rumsfeld and Cheney got the perfect excuse to attack Afghanistan's Taliban government from 9/11. It created the kind of fears in the US public about terrorists, individual, or state sponsored terrorism like Iraq's against the Marsh Shiites after the Kuwait war (which was a personal affront to both Rumsfeld and Cheney as they let it happen right under their eyes), then one can extend that to say Rumsfeld and Cheney felt they now had the opportunity to get Saddam out. So once you have the US even for good moral reason eager to intervene, this eagerness may not require too much of a stretch to be seen as the US administration engineering this atmosphere by organizing 9/11, or by letting it happen. This is true for an Arab public that feels humiliated and sees a loss of respect from all the setbacks they have suffered, including in Egypt where a President has maintained himself in power for thirty long years and has American support. And most of these people haven't left their surroundings, so they haven't seen the world outside. What they beleieve is only what is possible from what they can see possible from their immediate surroundings. From a -sociological and psychological perspective this is certainly possible and even realistic. When Friedman in the New York Times says its shameless that the 2 Republican candidates can speak of being change agents when Republicans have been in power for 8 years, and still the Republican faithful and some independents believe this, they have not lost their wits but may see this in terms of their gut feel and in terms of their own personal experiences and surroundings. Even when Paul Gigot of the Wall Street Journal sees little hope from either candidate when it comes to lobbyists influencing them and proof of this from lobbyists for Fannie and Freddie as their senior advisors. Then its still possible for Republican faithful, however weird it may appear to an informed observer,to see McCain and Palin as agents of change. Same is true for Obama. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As Obama faces the situation FDR faced, between political popularity after election in 1932, and loss of some political capital in the first year by 1933, and a lot depends on political will and courage. He has to execute and implement plans for efficient government spending that builds jobs to replace those lost, and to use the investments in really productive ways including projects that provide returns for years into the future. As David Axelrod points out in the Frank Rich column in the NYT, people sometimes live in a parallel universe, which may be completely at odds with what the rest of the country caught in the economic currents of layoffs and collapsing businesses is thinking.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama's proposal on Dec. 17, 2012, in the fiscal cliff negotiations sets the figure at which Bush era tax cuts are permandently extended at $400,000 instead of the $250,000 in earlier proposals. Speaker Boehner's Republican proposal was for a figure of $1 million. The $400,000 proposal would mean that the top tax bracket of 35% would increase to 39.6%. Currently the tax rate increases to 35% from 33% at the cutoff point of $388,500. The White House plan now cuts spending by $1.22 trillion over 10 years. $800 billion comes from cuts to programs, with half of these cuts in federal health care programs, $200 billion in programs like farm price supports, $100 billion in military spending, and $100 billion in other domestic programs over which Congress has control. The White House proposal also supports additional spending on infrastructure, extension of expiring unemployment benefits, protection of "vulnerable populations" such as the disabled and wounded veterans on Supplemental Social Security benefits in inflation calculations, and permanently stop expansion of the alternative minimum tax affecting the middle class. On business investment the president's proposal would make permanent the credit for corporate research and development....

LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT editorial points to the dangers lurking behid the jobless numbers. The House bill that passed recently for $154 billion to extend unemployment benefits- set to expire in Feb 2010- to June 2010, and increases aid to local and state governments. It also includes infrastructure spending and help for small business. But it does not do enough for young people whose joblesness is at all time high. For instance only 4 in 100 low income black students found work in Fall 2009 This according to a study by the Northeastern University Center for Labor Market Studies. According to the analysis done by this Center the employment rates among teenagers has risen four times faster than the rate among adults since 2000, and todayme over 65 are more likely to find jobs than youth of 16-19 years.

LyrArc Article Gist
Glen Hubbard, who was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President George W. Bush and is now Dean of Columbia University Business School, Hal Scott professor of International Fiancial Systems at Harvard Law School, and Luigi Zingales professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, say a different plan of action is needed from what the Obama administration is doing to tackle the banking crisis. They are really skeptical about the the Public Private Investment Program and other plans put forth upto now for several reasons. First, in every case they say there is a lot of carrot but very little stick, and this won't work. TARP program was mostly carrot, with Treasury getting back securities worth $78 billion less than the $254 billion invested, as pointed out by the Congressional Oversight Panel.The FDIC's guarantee of short term debt was worth $100 billion just for the original nine TARP participating banks, and the mortgage related asset guarantees offered Citibank and Bank of America were worth tens of billions. They see anew round of TARP injections with the conversion of the government's preferred stock into equity after release of the stress test results. Then there is PPIP the Public Private Investment Program, and its plans to subsidize the purchase of bank's"toxic assets" by hedge funds and other investors. They estimate the government will spend $2 for every $1 the private sector puts up. And even with this subsidy their thinking is that the probability of succes is low for the same reason that has prevailed since the earlier efforts by Treasury Secretary Paulson- there is just too big a gap between the bid and ask prices on the toxic assets, and add to that the reluctance of investors to partner with the government. Its time for more stick say these experts as the problem of toxic assets, and of credit and lending in the economy, will hang like a large shadow over the economy, as long as these tough problems are not wrestled with. This is the Hubbard-Scott-Luigi Plan: 1) The FDIC should announce that its guarantees of short term debt set to expire in October will not be renewed. Insolvent banks, defined not by stress tests but as those that cannot fund themselves in the private market, will be taken over by the FDIC under aclear and credible action plan. 2) The FDIC lacks the resources to run several large and complex banks which may become insolvent. And waving the idea of nationalization the creditors may try to get the government to bail them out. The authors of this plan say the FDIC should solit each bank into a "bad bank" and a "good bank." The "bad bank" would carry all the residential and commercial real estate loans and securitized mortgages as assets, and all the long term debt as liabilities. THe "bad bank" would obtain along term laon from the good bank to fund the assets of the bad bank. Al the remaining assets including the derivative contracts and the loan to the bad bank would be assets of the good bank. It would also have all the insured deposits and the FDIC guaranteed short term debt as liabilities. With the split accomplished the good bank can be released from FDIC receivership. 3) The long term debt holders would be compensated by receiving all the equity of the good bank. The old shareholders would get the equity in the bad bank. And in any restructuring bondholders should do better than equity holders. If banks are not really insolvent as some say and just facing temporary dislocations, then the bad bank will eventually surge in value, and the equity holders will do alright, and if not they will receive nothing as they should. 4) For this to work legislation needs to take effect before October for FDIC procedures for handling failed banks to be also applicable to bank holding companies. And this new legislation puts no new cost on the taxpayer....

LyrArc Article Gist
Democrats Reid and Schumer say Eric Cantor is a stumbling block to an agreement on the debt ceiling and deficit reduction. Plan B suggested by Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell, and supported by Senate Majority leader Reid, includes setting up a debt reduction panel of 12 members from both parties to draft a long term framework for reducing the national debt. The new debt committee would have a deadline to make recommendations, probably by the end of 2011. The recommendations would then be fast tracked through the House and the Senate without amendments. The McConnell plan is to separate the task of raising the debt ceiling from talks on deficit reduction.

LyrArc Article Gist
The revolving door at the U.S. financial markets regulator, the S.E.C., and lax enforcement, as S.E.C. officals take up jobs at law firms and financial institutions. Here Inspector General Kotz and Senator Grassley provide many examples of revolving door practices at the S.E.C., with officials taking up positions and bringing their expertise to private firms being regulated in the same fields and specialized areas.

LyrArc Article Gist
Roland Nelles gives 6 reasons why chancellor Merkel is likely to run for chancellor in 2017 and do well. Nelles says the alternative is a Greens, Left party, SPD coalition as in Berlin. But the rest of Germany is too conservative and the very idea of that coalition could bring conservatives together behind Merkel, including the CSU. It would give CDU voters second thoughts about switching to the anti-immigrant AfD party. Also important he says is that the immediacy of the refugee issue could fade as the German government better handles the refugee situation, including security, housing and integration. And as the agreement with Turkey is holding for controlling flow of refugees and turning them back. Also compared to SPD Merkel is still 8-10 points ahead in polls today says Nelles, so that there are still many Merkel supporters. In addition to what Nelles says, Strack in DW.com points out how Merkel's openness even showing emotions sometimes, about how the refugee crisis caught her and the German government unprepared, could help her in coming months. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Which European port is at the center of Europe's wind energy project. Answer: Esbjerg, Denmark. On May 18, 2022 the heads of state of Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, and Belgium came together to sign the Declaration of Esbjerg. Together the countries want to increase wind energy production in the North Sea to 65 gigawatts (GW) by 2030 and rising to 150 GW by 2050. Esbjerg is one of the few ports in Europe and the key port serving the offshore wind industry. Industry leaders Vestas and Siemens Gamesa ship wind turbines from here, and Orsted provides spare parts that weigh several tons.  German ports such as Bremerhaven lack the infrastructure and it is tied up in disputes ending up in court. Dutch port of Eemshaven is much smaller. The harbor was recently expanded in Esbjerg by 0.5 million square metres to 4.5 million square metres or 45 million square feet. Environment groups are also part of this and there is no dissent in the planning. Here are some useful facts on wind power- Environment cost is 70 times less than that of coal fired power according to Germany's Federal Environment Agency. Within 3  to 11 months wind turbines generate the energy required to build them. No CO2 is produced in the electricity generation process but they do alter the landscape. The future of wind power giants is in the sea where the wind is reliable and strong. One such modern turbine can have an output of 10 to 15 thousand kilowatts to provide electricity for 40,000 people. Pioneers in wind energy are Denmark and Germany. Denmark gets 50% of its energy from wind power, for Germany this is 25%. Jobs are generated installing and operating these wind energy turbines. 1.3 million people are employed in it today. With additional wind propulsion energy consumption of freighters carrying most of the world's freight would be reduced by 30%. Wind and photovoltaic solar can combine for providing most of India's energy because of its sea coastline and having a lot of sun. To get an idea of what is doable in India - in Germany 41% of electricity demand is met from renewables mostly solar and wind. German farmers get 25% of their income from solar energy. Where Germany lags is in use of renewables for transport which falls to about 9% and for heating and cooling where it is about 18%, and it is making great strides to correct this. A big change is technology and how people use transport (more train than airline or automobiles), which will change the entire picture of how energy is created and used in the future. Energiewende the  term for this change is only beginning to take place with urgency in Germany in 2022. India needs to work closely with Denmark and Germany to stay in front of these developments.   ...