LyrArc Article Gist
Washington Post reporter, Alyssa Rosenberg's intervew with Ken Burns of the documentary "The Civil War." Burns offers his own view of race relations in 2015, 150 years after the emancipation.

LyrArc Article Gist
The implications of the U.S. Federal Reserve's loose monetary policy. Total U.S. debt in 2012 is expected to be $11.58 trillion, with 52% of this in maturities of less than 3 years. The average interest on this is about 2.24% in January 2012, with interest on the debt at about 225 billion in Jan. 2012. If interest rates were to go up in 2014-2017 as forecast by the CBO, an interest rate of 5-6% would result in doubling or tripling the amount of interest on U.S. debt. The U.S. Treasury is financing the huge increase in debt- $5 trillion added in the last four years- through low interest rates and shorter maturities. This stores up large financial risks for the future including calls for tax increases to pay for a sudden rise in the interest on U.S. debt.

LyrArc Article Gist
Results of a CBS New York Times Poll of 1018 adults in the U.S., reported Feb 28, 2006. Results show 55% showed support for gasoline tax if it reduced dependence on foreign oil, 59% showed support if it also reduced global warming. There is additional support if the money is used to fight terrorism, allocated to specific projects such as electric cars, or help low income people with extra gasoline costs. The important distinction in the results is what respondents were asked. When told about their response to a gasoline tax 85% of respondents opposed it, but when told it would reduce dependence on foreign oil 55% support it. Some respondents want to see it earmarked so that its use would reduce dependence on foreign oil through fuel efficiency improvements. The gasoline tax has remained at 18.4 cents a gallon since 1993. Politicians see the 85% and stay away from the issue and at periods of higher oil prices there is more concern about the impact on consumers. Prof. Borenstein, director of an energy institute at the University of California, Berkeley, says his calculations show a 10% increase in gasoline cost would reduces consumption by 6-8%. As the tax is regressive by putting a higher burden on low income consumers, this should be offset by income tax relief that would make middle and lower income people better off , says Prof. Borenstein. Some of the revenues would be used to support projects at automakers and research universities to develop more fuel efficient technologies for automobiles. Shows support is there if the tax and where money is spent is shaped in the right way....

LyrArc Article Gist
A Congressional Oversight Panel said the Obama administration foreclosure plan is not addressing the problems of today. It is borrowers with good credit who ave lost their jobs or those with complex mortgages who are not getting help, and this will add to the higher default rates. THese borrowers because they are jobless are not able to afford even the reduced monthly payments. The HAMP program for reducing payments fails to address these problems.

LyrArc Article Gist
The issue of high youth unemployment. The bulge in demographics and the emphasis on increasing the number of college graduates without increasing the jobs available, or providing apprenticeship type training and degrees in areas where jobs can be created, has created a major problem in the Middle East. High youth unemployment in the US, Spain and the UK also poses serious problems. Former primer Minister Giuliano Amato of Italy recently told Corriere della Serra: "The older generations have eaten the future of the younger ones." Older workers tend to hold onto their jobs as long as possible as retirement ages are being raised, and they have negotiated higher retirement pensions. In Spain the younger part time workers and immigrant workers are the first to be laid off and unemployment is highest in this group, which is also why the high unemployment has not attracted as much attention there. Younger workers will eventually have to support a higher proportion of these workers in retirement because of the demographics. The shift to higher parttime employment and employment at low wages has also created a class of workers who have no future, as their incomes are low, and are easily laid off. This shift has been taking place in the US, Europe and Japan over the last decade. Germany has fared better because of its long tradition of apprenticeship training, and employers working directly with young students at universities to provide on the job training. The financial crisis of 2008 in the US slowed down many industries and created a shift in industries creating jobs, the result was a larger mismatch of skills of job seekers and new jobs created. One way to address this is more on the job training and working directly with employers, and assistance to community colleges to fill education gaps. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
To make custom loan modifications of the type that became necessary overnight on a large scale requires resources, investment in people and technology. On top of this a bank makes about $500 a year on a $200,000 mortgage loan, and if the loan is delinquent the bank may already have lost $2500, say experts, so there is little incentive to do much about custom loan modification. As a result, they used what a former J.P. Morgan executive called "Burger King kids." Or the banks outsourced the operation, some to law firms like David Stern, which in turn used outsourcing firms in Guam or the Philippines. The result is a largely chaotic process according to former mortgage officers of banks, and clerical staff that did not know what they were doing. Now atttorneys general in all 50 states have stated that they will investigate foreclosure practices of banks. It all started with the lone effort of Pine Tree Legal Assistance in Denmark, Maine, in succesfully challenging one of these improperly conducted foreclosures. See the NYT article on Pine Tree. In that case it was about a mother with two children who had her payment go up to $474 after loan modification, who is on food stamps after losing her job as an employment counselor....

LyrArc Article Gist
David Wessel says there are three hypotheses about the slow recovery with growth of 1.9% in the first quarter of 2011, estimated growth of 1.4-1.5% for the second quarter. The first, is that this is transitory, with gas prices, Japan's tsunami disrupting supply chians, and Europe's poor handling of the financial crisis. This he scores as wishful thinking. The second, that the stimulus was too small, the need for a second stimulus, or the related hypothesis of the large uncertainty hanging over business, including the debt ceiling negotiations, deficit etc. This he scores as more convincing, but one is not sure different policies would have led to a different situation. The third hypothesis is that the underlying diagnosis of the economy itself was hopeful but flawed and wrong. Hope about the housing market- which has been proved wrong. The same for exports, or consumer spending. Wessel cites Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhardt's new book on the afterperiod of financial crises and asset bubbles, with data going back to many historical periods showing that the periods following crises are difficult having protracted periods of slow or marginal economic growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
Under the Volcker Rule setup during the global financial crisis of 2008-2009, banks total investments in private equity, hedge funds and similar higher risk funds cannot exceed 3% of high quality capital. During the financial crisis investment banks were highly leveraged leading to the collapse of Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, and the precarious financial condition of other banks. Goldman has pared down about 60% of such investments. Remaining are $4.8 billion in private equity investments, $1.2 billion in real estate, and about $1.1 billion in both credit and hedge funds. Regulators have given the bank till July 2017 to comply. As banks recovered from the impact of the crisis, the tearing of the social fabric that happened with high unemployment in some groups especially older white men, has remained six years after the crisis- as evident in the U.S. election campaigns this year. As a result the mood has shifted for tighter regulation and both party platforms, Republican and Democratic, now call for reinstatement of the Glass Steagall Act, which separated commercial banking from investment banking as part of the lessons learned from the Great Depression. Volcker, was chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve during the Carter administration, known for taking a tough line against inflation. He was the principal driver of the move to restrict banks from risky activity, and faced considerable opposition from banks during the 2009-2013 period when the rule was being formulated.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Galston cites a Federal Reserve Board of Chicago 2014 study showing setbacks for black people in achieving improvement in income status. Even for children born into middle income black families about 55% are expected to fall below middle income status compared to 36% for children of white middle income families. The problem is not just the gap as Galston points out but what it says for the declining income mobility for the white middle class when 36% are likely to see declining status and prospect for the future, and 23% will see no improvement. Overall it shows a lack of income and social mobility for whites and minorities alike compared to the past improvements since the 1960's, not a bright prospect and less hope for the future the way things are, and why so many of the establishment candidates and existing policies are being questioned by voters.

LyrArc Article Gist
BMW holds the lead in premium car market over Mercedes. GM's progress in the European car market including Russian market. 72% growth in the Russian market for GM

LyrArc Article Gist
O'Malley, Sanders, and Clinton emphasize the issue of wages, income disparities, rising inequality, and a shrinking middle class in the first Democratic debate of the U.S. 2016 presidential election. Clinton points out that "at the center of my campaign is how we're going to raise wages." Sanders says that "the middle class of this country for the last 40 years has been disappearing." Clinton points out her opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement because it does not help raise American wages. Clinton calls herself a progressive, but "a progressive who gets things done," and a moderate when it comes to getting things done. Sanders points to the "deep injustice, an economic injustice that threatens to tear our country apart, and it will not solve itself." Sanders points to the wealth concentration in the U.S. "with the top one tenth of 1 percent owning about as much as the bottom 90 percent, and 57% of all new income going to the top 1 percent." Clinton comes to Sanders defense on the issue saying "it's our job to rein in the excesses of capitalism so that it doesn't run amok and doesn't cause the kind of inequities we're seeing in our economic system."...

LyrArc Article Gist
The figures tell the story. One area where Mexico is having success is policy decisions for technical education in the past 10 years and building up enrollment in technical and engineering colleges. This will have a lasting impact on Mexico's future and the attraction of staying in Mexico vs crosssing the border for millions of Mexicans trying to build a better future from humble beginings. BW says 451,000 students are enrolled in fulltime engineering and technical undergraduate programs vs 370,000 in the USA. With the cost being one-third or less than that in the US, the proximity to the U.S., the dedicated hardworking eager workforce and the keen willingness of local authorites to help foreign companies, the future looks bright for Mexican engineers.

LyrArc Article Gist
Most Congressmen are skeptical of Obama's plan to give the Fed new powers to meet the kind of emergency created by the glovabal economic crisis. Their concern is that the Fed may let the property bubble develop wihtout taking any action, and that the Fed failed as abank regulator. Congressman Ron Paul is co-sponsoring abill that would require Congressional audits of the Fed, which has the support of two thirds of the House.

LyrArc Article Gist
Reilly raises the question why asset allocation decisions of the type made by JP Morgan Chase since 2008, does not make it similiar to a mutual fund or a hedge fund, and why this should itself not be considered a form of proprietary trading. JP Morgan Chase had $600 million of corporate debt in its overall debt portfolio or 1% in 4th quarter 2006. By end of 2008 this increased to 5% or $10 billion. By end of 2009, this went up to 17% of the portfolio or $62 billion, and they are at that level today. The holdings of non-U.S. residential mortgage securities was also increased, going up to 20% of holdings or $75 billion at end of 1st quarter 2012, from $2 billion or 1% of the portfolio in 2008. Corporate debt holdings at Bank of America at the end of the 1st quarter of 2012 were about 1% or $2.4 billion, and at Citigroup were about 4.5% or $12 billion. The Chief Investment Office unit of JP Morgan handles this portfolio, which is the result of deposits of $1.12 trillion exceeding loans of $700 billion. The low interest rate environment after 2008 creates incentives for banks to look for ways to improve crimped margins and in the process adding risk....

LyrArc Article Gist
An analysis by Credit Suiss analysts shows that borrowers who have their principal reduced are less likely to default. But mortgage companies have been reluctant to take down loan balances. One study shows that47% of loan modifications completed in November 2009 resulted in higher payments for borrowers, typically because unpaid interest and fees were added to the loan balance. It is critical to make loan payments significantly affordable, as many people have other loans such as credit car loans, home equity loans, car loans, and these obligations make even a lower payment unaffordable.

LyrArc Article Gist
Will the long awaited Obama plan do enough to reduce foreclosures and help the economy? $75 billion will go to help homeowners facing foreclosure. But it continues the earlier course of letting it be voluntary for banks and lending institutions to decide if they in fact want to reduce the mortgage payment to 38% of the borrower's income. If they do the government provides an incentive of $1000 for every loan modified, and more payments if the borrower stays current. If the lender decides that its not in its interest to make concesssions to reduce the payments to 38% of the borrower's income, in exchange for the $1000 incentive, it could well decide to do nothing, and even continue the current practice of adding on interest and penalties that actually increase the mortgage payment in many cases. Is it enough? Clearly no, if Mark Zandl, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com is right, and helps only 1 million of the estimated 14 million people who are under water, and the homes are worth much less than the outstanding mortgage. As Martin Feldstein has pointed out for the last year since early 2008, its these people who are under water that need to be helped, and not in a piecemeal or voluntary way as Obama is suggesting. It only goes to show that after all the rhetoric, Government both Republican and Democratic, differ only in degrees in the way they are responding to the foreclosure crisis, that is at the root of the financial crisis. The tidal wave of foreclosures, the other 13 million borrowers that are not helped by this plan but are under water, with growing numbers because of growing layoffs, suggest a serious failure to tackle the problem, with serious consequences for 2009 and beyond....

LyrArc Article Gist
The graph tell the story, in early 2007 there were close to 4 million homes under water, in early 2008 closer to 8 million homes and in early 2009 closer to 16 million homes under water, close to doubling the number of homes under water. This is why more of the morgage securities become bad assets with each passing year, as their underlying assets the mortgages become high risk for default. During the third quarter the number of homeowners under water, or owing more than their homes were worth, were 11.8 million, and by the end of 2008, 13.6 million, according to Moody's Economy.com They are growing at close to 1.8 million every quarter, or at the rate of over 7 million a year. Which at this rate would reach 21 million homes under water by early 2010, if one assumed that government help only worked to offset the impact of further deterioration of housing prices, by lowering payments for some homeowners. A new housing rescue plan was announced March 4, 2009. This will supplement the $75 billion announced earlier. This plan announced March 4, 2009, is expected by the Obama administration to cover 9 million homeowners. Borrowers who face severe financial hardship that may cause them to lose their homes, are required under this plan to sign affidavits attesting to this. They will in then see their loans modified, payment periods lengthened, and interest rates dropped to as low as 2%, to bring the monthly payment down to 31% of income, the number that experts say is appropriate for sustainable payments. Only first lien mortgages, and homeowners who live in these homes and not homeowners who use them as investments, will qualify. The outstanding principal balance cannot be over $729,750. As incentives loan-servicing companies will get upto $3500 from the government, and the government will also match a portion of the ender's costs dollar for dollar. Homeowners get $5000 in government money to reduce their outstanding balances, as an incentive to them to stay current on these modified mortgages. The administration plans to announce plans to those holding second mortgages on their homes, who have difficulty modifying them. The other component of the plan is for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to refinance loans for borrowers who are under water, owing more than their homes are worth, even if they are wealthy enough to afford current payments. There is no income ceiling for this part of the plan. And these mortgages have to be held or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, with homeowners not owing more than 105% of the current value of their homes. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The first significant action to help homeowners threatened with foreclosure comes from Sheila Bair, Chairman of the Federal Deposit insurance Corporation, one of the few people after Bernanke and Paulson who have shown initiative and foresight in the current crisis. Bernanke and Paulson had the foresight to open the Fed lending window to investment firms like Lehman Brothers and others but little has been done for homeowners to have significant impact. When interviewed on television in the days surrounding the Bear Stearns crisis Sheila has shown a good grasp of the issues and courage to take the initiative. This action is similiar in line to what Martin Feldstein has suggested on the pages of the WSJ for some time now. Martin wanted the Federal government to step in to loan homeowners the 20% of their outstanding loan and work towards bringing the homeowners payment to an affordable sum. According to Feldstein's calculation this would be about the right amount as a percentage of their loan so that homeowners rationally would not be better off walking away from the loan as the best possible decision under the circumstances. If the rational option was taken under a scenario that homeowners would get no direct help here is what would happen even though it may be intuitively read in one's mind. Homeowners would walk away in increasing numbers, it would become the popular option, one that has happened in prior housing crises in Colorado for example but this time it would be spread out across America, making it dangerous. This would launch a downward spiral or cycle in which the more homeowners walk way, or default the more house prices drop, and the more house prices drop a new group of homeowners who previously had enough equity in the house now because of the last price drop enter the category of homeowners who would be better off just walking away as a rational option. During the next wave this gorup would default and set the spiral or cycle moving again to lead to further price declines and another group of homeowners finding not enough equity in their homes to justify making payments and this group would walk away. At each turn of this spiral another cycle would be set in motion which is why it is so dangerous once it gets started, and the need for timely but also well thought out plan and good execution. This cycle is that of the economic system as a whole. As house prices drop at each turn of this cycle, it would have a serious impact on consumption for an already indebted American consumer. A drop in consumption means fewer product purchases by consumers, and the falling demand means factories would close as companies consolidate operations around the remaining factories to keep capacity utilization at reasonable levels, and this would mean layoffs and cuts in investment and other spending. The layoffs in turn would add another layer of homeowners leaving their homes through foreclosures adding to the pool of homeowners who have left their homes, and adding to the downward pressure on house prices. The pickup in inflation would bite at exactly the worst time as this would mean consumers would have to spend even more carefully. The price of oil which normally would respond to changes such as a fleet of cars with higher mileage on American roads would take a longer time to respond as this fleet change would take a few years to occur. It would respond to lower demand for oil in American factories but the considerable demand in Asia and other countries where the economies are likely to slow down but still be growing at rates to accomodate the large number of people who have not benefited from the market economy, would make the price decline in oil a gradual affair. The weaker dollar would add to the price of imports adding to the inflation. This bite from inflation would lower consumption even further in the economic cycle. And this would mean lower production in factories and even more layoffs at the next turn of the economic cycle. The Federal Reserve would find itself having difficult choices between maintaining confidence in the dollar, for which Capman and McKinnon argue on the pages of the WSJ recently and lowering rates but not achieving much in terms of stimulating either consumption or investment as this would take time to work itself out and all the Fed could achieve by its interest rate making tool is to buy time to weather these adjustments in an orderly manner. There is almost a consensus among experts that interest rate reductions in the current climate of inflationary movements in prices and the current currency exchange rates moving towards a loss of confidence in the dollar is something to be done very carefully and each action taken only with careful understanding of the possible consequences. A look at the proposal itsel shows that it gets around the whole issue of moral hazard by having the cost paid for in this manner. The mortgage investors will pay for the 5 years of interest on the 20% of the loan the government provides. The homeowner takes over after that. The mortgage investors cannot add deferred interest, prepayment penalties or other ways to make the homeowner pay some of the interest charges. And the homeowners payment has to be afforadable so mortgage investors have to show that the payment is not more than 35% of income of the homeownercalled the debt to income ratio (DTI). And only homeowners with mortgage payments above 40% DTI are eligible. And the government would raise the money needed through a $50 billion offering. To show there is no moral hazard that is the government bailing out any of the parties involved, the government will get back all of its money or intends to do so, the government will have the first rights to the money should a home foreclose and before anybody else is paid. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Bair gets credit for anticipating the banking crisis and gets credit from people in the Bush Administration like Robert Steel Undersecretary at Treasury till recently for a comprehensive approach to the banking and credit and mortgage crisis. Steel says that the Bush administration first relied on a case by case approach and only later came around to Sheila Bair's comprehensive approach which also underpins the recent legislation passed by Congress to tackle the mortgage crisis. She has advocated better terms for borrowers as the best approach for lenders and borrowers and the banks and for the economy which has not been favored by the banking industry and lenders aseach group followed its own vested interest seeing only the immediate short run and failing to grasp the full extent of the crisis. Sheila Bair has taught public policy at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and also worked for the Bush administration at Treasury and in other capacities till her appointment to lead the FDIC. She also oversees the IndyMac bank as the FDIC took over that failed bank recently. She has over 100 banks at risk on her watch list and sees more fialures of banks ahead and the worst of the credit crisis still ahead of us when she says in this interview that " we have not seen the trough of the credit cycle yet", and referring to the hard headed work with a lot of work and not enough staff of examiners that " its going to be a slog to work through this."...

LyrArc Article Gist
On October 30, Sheila Bair heading the FDIC, the main advocate for reducing foreclosures by reducing the mortgage payments is in discussions with Treasury officials for a plan whose details are still being worked out. A key part of it is for the government to assume half of the losses on home loans that are incurred if mortgage companies agree to lower monthly payments for at least 5 years. The cost to the government is about $50 billion that would come from the $700 billion bailout fund. Right now loan companies are reluctant to reduce monthly payments because homeowners might defaul again or the owners of mortgage securities might file law suits. The funds would go to shoulder half of any future losses on default. For example if under a loan modification program 40% redefault and losses on loans are 55%, and $500 billion in loans are modified under the program, the total losses government would bear are $55 billion. This scenario is possible in a deep and prolonged housing and economic slump. This would be a gradual program if mortgage companies or companies with home loans or servicers of loans have to decide if they want to take advantage of this program, and time is critical as the foreclosures are accelerating and thisputs downward pressure on prices....

LyrArc Article Gist
It took a long time for the banks to understand what is in their best interests is in the best interests of the country's economy and homeowners, something Sheila Bair has been saying since the beginning of this year and implementing at IndyMac. Its just too costly for banks to use the foreclosure process to recover their money and it makes much better financial sense on the bottomline of banks and for the economy to make home payments affordable. Because the worse home prices get the worse the economy and banks do and nothing drives home prices down like foreclosures. The Bank of America settlement for Countrywide with state attorney generals to modify loans for 400,000 homeowners because of predatory lending practices also set the direction. Chase Bank is now using the Bair template to get the monthly payments down to an affordable level which is about 40% of the current payment by reducing interest rates and using a smaller loan balance and keep homeowners in their homes. Chase's plan will help 400,000 homeowners and will also help homeowners who are having difficulty making payments. It will put a 90 day hold on foreclosures till the program is put in place. Yet there is one problem. Only $350 billion of the 1.5 trillion in home mortgage it services are owned by Chase, the rest are owned by investors in the form of mortgage securities. It can do little for homeowners covered by these securites that are owned by hedge funds and other funds as a few of these funds oblivious of the overall interest including their own have threated to sue if loans are modified, and it would take some time to figure out who owns each security and what the terms are for modifying loans for that security. Its this part of mortgage securitiization that has slowed down a rational process of unwinding this problem throughout housing by making homeowners monthly payments affordable. And Fed's Bernanke did not come to grips with this point in his talk about mortgage securitization to UC Berkeley on October 31,2008, that mortgage securitization done in a way that make loan modification difficult is dangerous as it is today, and makes a crisis bigger than it otherwise would be, and turn a USA crisis into a global crisis through ricotcheting effects and a series of bad decisons....