LyrArc Article Gist
Bret Stephens on the foreign policy debate about supporting or not supporting dictators. On the big one today of Iraq after the large gains with Maliki in Iraq it could be said that its not an easy path either way with each path fraught with dangers, but in the long run if one perseveres and again in the spirit of democracy and with the people in the region themselves and their leaders having good sense and good judgement and putting the interests of the whole region before their personal interests, given this you are always going to do better by your people and the people in the region affected, by respecting democratic ideals and principles. Pakistan is not a good example because its leaders have put their personal interests before the interests of their people but even there things are changing. Zardari's dirtier and clumsier hands are mentioned by Stephens but even here this time the opposition led by Nawas Sharif decided that its more important to respect the electoral process and democratic ideals and let Zardari run Pakistan. Administrations like the Bhuttos and Zardari's have alway been corrupt so there are no high expectations but even here the people of Pakistan will find a way to make the progress they desperately need and find the leadership that can provide it. The military muffling and jailing dissent and not respecting the independent judiciary may not affect the person on the street in Des Moines or Delaware but for people in Pakistan who have suffered under military rule this may be a different story. And in the Middle East things were not that much better with dictators in power either in Palestine and its an area where the conditional part of leadership in the region having good sense and judgement should be considered as well as history. In Iran its not between the Ayatollah and the Shah, before the Shah an elected government in Iran was overthrown when its anti western oil company stance was seen in the light of the cold war. It was the overthrow of that government that brought the Shah in. Had it continued the internal politics of Iran would have been resolved by the people there. In other words western oil interests and lobbies and the cold war distorted the process there. Without the two Iran's politics would not be of much interest to people in the USA and governments there also would have no reason to be especially friendly or especially hostile to the USA. So once one removes the distorting factors and takes out the countries which cannot be used as good example like Palestine and Iran, on the big one Iraq where the people and the leadership in the region did not fail even in very difficult situation and the US persevered, respecting democratic ideals and principles was the best course with the best results. The improved Libyan relations should not be chalked off as a point in favor of dealing with dictators. With better or worse relations with Libya it made little noticeable difference or probably no difference to the people in Des Moines or Delaware. For Iraq it makes a big difference to get it right by both peoples. Libya which had closed itself off from western technology and ideas now opens itself up because this way it can improve life for people in the region, this may be the only thing that has changed. And Stephens puts it another way its more sustainable. But why is it more sustainable to respect democratic ideals and principles given that the leadership of people in the region affected and the people themselves have good sense and judgement? Because in doing so one is respecting oneself one is more true to one's own people's idea of a good and just society and one is respecting other people....

LyrArc Article Gist
How the Delta Pan Am merger is still a mess at JFK Terminal. Not a good sign for future mergers. Describes the results of prior mergers and shows a rather mixed record at best. Cites difficulties such as meshing computer reservation systems and facilities. Of major importance is the pride in their work and energy of the people involved, and how it be best tapped into, considering the experience of Continental and Gordon Bethune. America West's Doug Parker is trying to do this at US Airways, and Brazilian airline TAM is working with Varig assets.

LyrArc Article Gist
Positions different industries are taking on the energy consumption question.

LyrArc Article Gist
A local government vehicle in China, Sixth Division of XPCC fails to make a bond payment in August 2018. This is the first such instance of failure to make a bond payment for a local government vehicle in 2018. Economists estimate China's total debt at 242% of GDP in 2017, and government efforts to tighten liquidity and reduce support for overextended local government investment vehicles.

LyrArc Article Gist
Former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates points out in this intervew with Holman Jenkins of the WSJ, that Iraq's prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, who worsened Shiite-Sunni relations, was the principal cause of the unraveling that happened in Iraq during the first term of U.S. president Obama. He says President Obama failed to do what was done by president Bush to persist and obtain Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq, to maintain a U.S. foce presence in Iraq. Presence of U.S. forces would have prevented the spread of Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. U.S. force presence would have provided a more even handed treatment of Sunnis in the region, creating the conditions for peace by having Sunnis, Kurds and Shiites continue talks about the future of Iraq. Gates grew up in Kansas in the 1950's, attended the College of William and Mary for undergraduate studies, studied Russian and Soviet history in grad school at Indiana University and Georgetown University, before joining the CIA. Gates was selected by Brzezinski to work in the White House, worked under Brent Snowcroft, and as head of the CIA (1991-1993) during the elder Bush administration. He was Secretary of Defense from 2006-2011, under presidents George Bush and Barack Obama, succeeding Donald Rumsfeld. He was succeeded by Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, and Ashton Carter. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The questions about LIBOR rate manipulation were first raised in front page articles in the Wall Street Journal in spring 2008. In 2013 Deutsche Bank's U.S. financial systems were strongly criticized by the U.S. Federal Reserve. In April 2015 Deutsche Bank made a $2.5 billion legal settlement with the U.S. and British regulators for LIBOR rate rigging and admitted wrongdoing. It took BaFin the German regulator a long time to flag these irregularities in a strong manner, in its letter to Deutsche Bank. The comments in the Senior Management Review section of its report for the first time expressed in this level of detail the problems at Deutsche Bank, including problems with 11 current or former executives of Deutsche Bank. The letter and report were sent to the bank's management board May 11, 2015. A month later co-CEO's Anshu Jain and Jurgen Fritschen resigned. Ba Fin's top supervisor of large banks, Frauke Menke sent the letter. By the time BaFin acted many other regulators had already flagged the problems at the bank, and the media including the WSJ had already covered the problems in great detail. Between the first report in the WSJ on Libor rate irregularities and the May 11, 2015 report was a period of 7 years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A look at Department of Transportation data shows a downward trend in airline ticket prices. Average domestic fares in the U.S. declined 16%, adjusted for inflation, compared to 1995. A comparison shows a round trip ticket price of $410 in 2010 dollars in 1995, the same ticket is priced $338 in 2011, including $22 for bags and reservation charges that were added in recent years. Not including the $22 would give a 21% decline in prices in 2010 compared to 1995. Higher labor costs for American which could not shed legacy costs because it did not go into bankruptcy like some of its competitors, combined with higher fuel prices have posed a serious threat to American Airlines. American Airlines (AMR) experienced a 33% drop in share price on Sept. 3, 2011, with a recovery gaining 21% the following day to close at $2.39. UnitedContinental had a 2nd quarter 2011 average fare- revenue divided by number of passengers- excluding taxes, of $273. Southwest had an average one way fare of $143 for the 2nd quarter 2011. According to DOT figures, passenger tickets provide only 71% of total passenger revenues to airlines, compared to 88% in 1990. The remaining 29% comes from reservations charges, standby service, checked luggage, in-flight food service, transporting pets and other charges. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A way of gauging the extent of a bubble in the internet IPO's in 2013, says Hulbert, is the first day return on IPO's in the U.S. of 25% in mid-Aug to mid-Nov 2013 compared to 96% in the first quarter of 2000. He cites a study by finance professors Jerry Wurgler of New York University's Stern School of Business and Malcolm Baker of Harvard Business School, which stresses the need to use objective indicators in assessing the current equity markets and not relying on memories alone. Investor caution after two bubbles since 2000, active regulatory oversight of markets, and legal frameworks updated for changes in financial markets have provided additional safety and stability to markets. The study authors cite evidence for the changes in the way investor sentiment values speculative stocks compared to established stocks. The price/book ratio per share or net worth of established stocks is way higher compared to speculative stocks in 2013 compared to 2000. In 2013 established companies in the S&P 1500 index, according to FactSet, had a 49% higher price/book ratio on average than speculative stocks. Wurgler and Baker used dividend paying stocks as "established" stocks compared to non dividend paying stocks as "speculative." Another piece of evidence that companies are also adjusting to sentiment this time is that less money is coming from stock issuance in 2013 of 11% compared to 20% in 2000. Visible evidence of company behaviour is also telling- banks are changing bahaviour after tougher regulatory oversight and settlements in 2013. GE is planning to shrink GE Capital and put it on sale. Investors have sharply cut back allocations to stocks and are returning to modestly higher allocations from much lower levels and memories of 2000 and 2008 are still present....

LyrArc Article Gist
With Whitacre in charge at GM there is a change of style and substance that just flows from who the man is. He is a no-nonsense guy, who once told a colleague from his days at Southwestern Bell, that God gave us two eyes and one mouth for the right reason so we should use it in that proportion. He is quite matter of fact about approaching the probems at GM right from the beginning. From those early meetings at the Westin airport hotel in Detroit, where he would tell GM executives and Henderson that if things did not happen the way they should and quickly he would find the right people. After there was a lot of soul searching about Henderson's decision to sell Opel- and three directors with private equity background decided it was bad for GM, that GM needed Opel for its compact and midsize car engineering and sales volume- Henderson was replaced as CEO. The decision was reversed. Within 3 months of Henderson's departure four other executives were let go, 20 more were reassigned and seven outsiders were brought in to fill top jobs. Lutz was marginalized. Reuss in his forties was placed in charge of N. America. The metrics were simplified from Wagoner's days to six: market share, revenue, operating profit, cash flow, quality, and customer satisfaction. His approach to get managers who make decisions fast and correct mistakes speedily. Vice chairman and CFO, Christopher Liddell, is from Microsoft and joined in January. Liddell points out that 12 of the 13 person GM executive committee are either new to the auto industry or outsiders. And the seniormost Whitacre and Liddell, are new to the auto industry and outsiders, so Whitacre can point out that GM has run the business in a more complicated way than it needs to be. The big changes are cultural. And making these changes for a company the size of GM and with the trauma that happened at GM with the speedy decline, required someone with the experience Whitacre gained in tackling the problems he faced at Southwesten Bell and the new AT&T, with its changing culture. The tough down-to-earth nature of the guy, with no affectations or layers to his personality whatsoever, proved an asset at the new AT&T and now at GM. Other decisions he has made at GM, are some strategic ones like bringing down incentives to sell cars, the latest being letting market share drop in March in the face of Toyota's heavy use of incentives to recover from the recall crisis, but sticking to reducing the incentive dollars by $1200 to $3500 per car. This made it possible to achieve sales goals. And some tactical but of great significance, from a common sense approach to GM advertising with his remark "I'm sick of Howie Long." Pitchman Long was a football player, and what Whitacre insisted on was showing off GM's best models and features to blow the competition, like the "May the Best Car Win," campaign. That many of GM's ads didn't focus on the cars and didn't make any sense, like little Cadillacs flying out of a birdhouse, makes this truly incredible to an outsider. Other things Whitacre brings are a change in his expectations, and his overall demeanor. This impatience may be a good thing for GM especially with the capital investment in new models, plant investment and better decisionmaking, and commonsense approach, to back it up. In the car industry it can't hurt for the top guy to look at the car clay models and ask why they can't be brought to market in 12 months. It gets people thinking differently. Asking a Cadillac dealer he knows in San Antonio why they should'nt be selling twice as many Cadillacs if the marketing was better. It helps when the top guy can visit a plant and have "diagonal slice meetigs" with plant staff, workers and UAW people, to talk about things in sweat shirt and jeans with no airs about yourself whatsoever, and to follow this up with a repeat meeting some months later and announce a $136 million investment, as he did with the Fairfax plant in Kansas....

LyrArc Article Gist
As the Obama administration plans a large stimulus spending plan that may approach $1 trillion over several years, considering also the second phase of the $800 billion first phase stimulus, there is a concern that there may be wasteful spending and social costs of borrowing and spending by the government of such proportions. In economics jargon this hinges on whether there is amultiplier effect of spending, higher if its efficiently and well spent with less impact on private consumption and investment, and lower if the opposite were true. The assumption behind amultiplier of 1.0 for an additional bridge or road is that resources like manpower and capital that would be otherwise idle are deployed to produce something useful. An increase in one unit of government purchases increases by one unit the real gross domestic product. The government has effectively created the additional bridge or road without a cut in anybody's consumption or a businesses investment. The other contrasting approaches are to say there is a multiplier of zero, meaning there is a social cost in two ways. One the reduction of consumption and the crowding out of businesses investing in new products and technologies for example, and second in the inefficent use of resources if a government bureaucracy is put to work allocating money and the additional dangers of favoritism and corruption. To say that there is a multipier of 1.5 would mean that the government figures out a way to get private investment through conversion of plants for automotive parts say to make wind turbine blades by giving incentives, tax benefits and grants, spends on a dilapidated road and public transportation infrastructure that may provide benefits in increased growth capacity over future years. The limits of a government bureaucracy and inefficiency of government would in this case be addressed by transparency rules adopted and measures that track progress that are freely available to all citizens say on a website on the internet, and by bringing in fresh management talent from the private sector. There appears to be no generalization that can be applied for one multiplier for all projects. It may be that the multiplier will vary with the project. Some projects like the conversion of a factory making unneeded auto parts to a badly needed wind energy part, to change the dynamics of energy market pricing, to meet energy needs and cut emissions, may end up having a multiplier much above 1.0. A redundant or less needed bridge has a lower multiplier than a bridge rebuilt before it leads to breakdown. And also the complication that too large a movement in one direction say of stimulus spending, might result in a shift of the curve towards a smaller multiplier and diminishing returns, as the resources to track such a large expenditure and the talent to adminster are overextended. The social cost of private investment not making that investment in new technology, new product or improved product has to be figured into all this, both at the conceptual level as all costs and benefits may not be picked up in the analysis, and at the macro level keeping in mind that the animal spirits, as they were once described, may just not be there to absorb the huge outlays which a government can make. These do not come without an opportunity cost and borrowing costs. All this leads one to to conclude that spending has to be carefully evaluated and projects assessed on a case by case basis for costs and benefits. The spending has to be balanced to provide just as many incentives for private investment to invest in new products and technologies. One way the Obama team is attempting to address this is to include a $300 billion tax cut for businesses and individuals. The business tax cuts are aimed at helping small business with losses, and for future investments and making hires and forgoing layoffs. The other part relates to careful evaluation of spending projects and transparency so the people can see if they are effective. See the link to this....

LyrArc Article Gist
Reinhart and Rogoff, 2 eminent economists who worked together on a book on financial crises since 1300, think that the current crisis has much deeeper to go, and the slight recovery in financial markets does not suggest that the imbalances in the economy are corrected. They point to economic weakness as a mechanism by which these imbalances are corrected. For example the economic weakness may be corrected by the weakening dollar resulting in accelerating exports from the U.S. The 1987 crisis had overvalued stock markets relative to earnings as an imbalance, and the 1998 LTCM crisis excessive hedge fund borrowing. Once these underlying imbalances were corrected the economic recovery was back on track. But the Fed's bailout of Bear Stearns has only put the financial markets on a safer footing. It has done little to correct the basic imbalances in the economy of over indebted consumers, and of lost wealth in housing, at the very moment that there is restricted access to credit. The financial market crisis only opened up the weakness from the extremely high leveraging used by the investment firms something like 1:30 by firms from M. Lynch to Goldman Sachs. The Fed's actions gave them time to shore up their finances and recover and the interest rate cuts and government checks help the economy, but not significantly enough to promote investment or increase consumption. The government checks would be used experts estimate for paying down debt and in this way it helps indebtedness a little, but does little to support consumption or promote investment, This the Fed's action also fails to do. The economy contracts and exports help the economy in recovering. The contraction itself say these economists is a necessary mechanism to make the adjustment in every crisis, until something else like exports helps create a recovery. Take December 1997, the Korean crisis. In this crisis the Korean companies invested heavily and were overextended , they borrowed heavily from the banks which in turn borrowed from overseas in dollars. When the Korean currency hit a record low against the dollar it became difficult for Korean companies to pay the increased cost of the dollar loans and many companies failed. As investment was slashed unemployment went up from 3% to 7.9%. Ted Truman, who worked on the Korean rescue effort as a Fed official, is now a scholar at the Peterson Institute of International Economics. He sees as similar to the overexpansion of housing and consumption in the U.S., the overexpansion and excessive borrowing in Korea's corporate sector in the years preceding 1997. After the rescue in Jan 1998, the Korean currency recovered by rising 63% in that year. Did this mean the crisis was over, just as the Bear Stearns bailout leads to gradually settling markets this year? During 1998 the Korean economy sank into a deep recession, the economy shrank 6% in 1998 when it was used to growing at 8%. Nouriel Roubini, another economist, who heads RGE Monitor, a financial and economic forecasting service, sees it this way. First, the mortgage loan imbalances are set into correction mode mechanism, then second, the economy contracts from housing and consumer debt going in reverse mode, then the third effects come into place as this feeds back into the financial system in the form of defaults on industrial loans, municipal bonds, and consumer credit. Additional sequences are in finacial system distress and government and Fed response to set the corrective mechanisms in place, but to also reduce the distress to the financial system and ensure that it is safe. We are where the first effects have ocurred, but before the second and third effects which should take place sometime in 2008 and 2009. The importance of understanding this cannot be overstated for business, planners, and investors because conducting business in this environment or planning or investing will require special skills and temperament which are different from the skills and temperament required in the expansion mode if one is to produce good results....

LyrArc Article Gist
Some insights into the thinking of Robert Rubin from an interview by Ken Brown and David Enrich with the former Treasury Secretary in the Clinton administration about the 2008 financial crisis. As Justice John Paul Stevens. the longest serving Supreme Court justice on the bench once said, those who administer the judicial system form the backbone of the law. In a like manner those who administer the financial and economic system form its backbone, which is why Rubin faces some tough questions in this interview. At the time he was Treasury Secretary, the NYT magazine ran a story on Robert Rubin, as the kind of person who liked to put things down rationally on a note pad, and think things through on the basis of this rational analysis. This is how he approached the Mexican financial crisis of 1994 and the 1997 Asian financial crisis. Here is some of that note pad Rubin, in the context of CDO's and risk taking, with something gone awry. Risks that according to this NYT report Rubin encouraged at Citigroup in 2004 and 2005, on the basis of the idea that Citi's competitors were taking on more risk and making bigger profits. His note pad approach appears to have led to conclusions by Rubin that considering the additional profits that could be made by Citi by ramping up the risk taking in 2004 and 2005 and afterwards like its competitors, it could lead to losses if things went wrong, but these losses would'nt come close to wiping out the profits made during the good times. The cyclical downturn he expected to see in 2004 and 2005 when he is reported to have added his voice to others that the bank take on more risk, was a cyclical downturn of the type he had seen during the 1994 Mexican devaluation and the 1997 Asian financial crisis. He had no idea that it would be a cyclical undervaluing of risk added on to a housing bubble, and to a triple A ratings issuance that was misguided. Rubin says here that there was hardly anyone who saw that low-probability event as a possibility. Was the housing bubble a low probability event, and were the issuance of ratings by the credit ratings agencies compromised by the drive for more business a normal pattern, or would some digging up of facts and some innate skepticism of the prevailing current in favor of one's own instincts that something was overdone missed in the notepad analysis of a supposedly rational approach? Or was there a feeling that somehow the U.S. with its long tradition of technology, its work ethic and sophisticated financial system was somehow immune to something as severe as what the Asian countries were experiencing in 1997, or what happened in the 1930's. Asked about his view of what happened Rubin says that looking back there was an enormous amount that needs to be learned. Rubin is also in a quandary when he has to respond to the public concerns about excessive executive compensation. Rubin made $115 million in pay since 1999, excluding stock options, while under his purview as the highest ranking board member Citigroup let some of the problems that it faces now accumulate. As Citigroup faces $20 billion in losses in 2008, a bear raid on its stock by short sellers who ironically were able to do this because of some of the lax regulation set in motion in the Rubin Greenspan years leading to the suspension of the Uptick rule, and the $45 billion government bailout last week. Rubin may have helped Citi but in a different sort of way. He was able to persuade Treasury- Treasury Secretary Paulson was a fellow executive at former employer Goldman Sachs- through the days before the bailout, ensuring government help was on its way. Citigroup shares had dropped to $3.77 a share in the third week of November 2008, losing 50% of their value in one week, as the discussions took place. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This opinion piece in DW.com says India's prime minister should not isolate prime minister Sharif of Pakistan, as he had no part in the escalation of tensions in Kashmir. Foreign and military affairs are now run by the Pakistan Army, and isolating Sharif only entrenches the Army it says, which has kept up tensions similar to the situation in 1999 with the Kargil crisis when the Pakistan Army initiated a conflict in Kargil region. At that time Indian premier Vajpayee and Pakistan premier Sharif were improving relations.