World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


Moral outrage

Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Of 21 reader comments to this piece on banker pay, all except for 4-5, were very critical of the bankers behaviour, including many of their colleagues in the financial industry who commented. The lack of any response from the FSA on the grounds that its not the FSA's job, or from the Treasury, is disconcerting. Treasury is said to have not said a word, when RBS hired a head trader for a rumored 7 million pounds. All this coming on the heels of the RBS and Lloyds debacle, makes the Labor government open to attack from the Conservatives under Osborne and Cameron. and from Mervyn King of the Bank of England. They have expressed strong disapproval of the busines as usual attitude of bankers.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Disappointment for those who had high expectations for the Obama Presidency. The slog of daily governance proves too much. Attempting too much in too short a time. Polarization in Congress. And the person Obama is -transformative but cautious.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Turner Adair, head of Britain's Financial Regulatory Authority thinks that banks have assumed an outsize role in the British and world economy, and are coopting their regulators. He sees the need to check many of the excesses. Why not use profits to build up reserves rather than give out huge bonuses and paychecks, he asks. He sees the need to challenge the accepted thinking on Wall Street and in the City of London, where the ideology of efficient markets became embedded, as it did also in the regulatory community. He came in the week Lehman Brothers collapsed as chairman of the FSA. And he wants to shake up the existing thinking. In March, the Turner Review. a 126 page report was published. A lot of attention was paid to his suggesting atax on financial transactions, called the Tobin tax, but its designed more to get people thinking and questionning the existing way of running banking as Turner said in an interview, "we have begun to accept this idea of liquidity as the new God." Can British or American society and the financial industry in both countries work to the benefit of both? Nobel prize winning economists and other experts have advised ashift to productive investments that grow the economy using technology, science and brainpower and new ideas, as opposed to the investment in mortgages and other speculative investments. As the regulators -including former and current heads of the SEC, and other regulatory bodies in the US, Cox, Schapiro and others- once held on to the same theory of uninhibited operation of free markets as best for generating increased wealth for society as the banking community, they tended to get co-opted in letting bad practices flourish. Went to sleep on the job as it were. See the links in Intelilinks. Adair Turner's admonitions are designed to get people thinking. He says, "banks need to be willing, like the regulator, to recognize that there are some profitable activities so unlikely to have a social benefit, direct or indirect, that they should voluntarily walk away from them." Investments in science, technology and new products, as in the 60's that generated a revolution in living standards, than the mortgages and consumer lending of the last decade, is what he may be saying, as do these Nobel prize winning economists....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
All sides had to make concessions to reach a new agreement on a restructuring of Greece's debt, and new terms for loans to Ireland and Portugal. The agreement was reached after negotiations between France, Germany, the ECB, and eurozone countries with a declaration issued on July 21, 2011. The powers and financing of the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) were expanded to be the main mechanism for channeling EU funding to reduce the burden of Greece's debt. Germany will provide new funding and be open to additional commitments, something German chancellor Angela Merkel had resisted since the beginning of the crisis in 2010. Earlier funding had come with high interest rates and only when the situation had reached a crisis, with Germany insisting on the punitive rates and conditions as a way to discourage countries from taking advantage of cheap borrowing. In exchange for commitment of German funds Ms Merkel had insisted that banks and private creditors share in the losses. Private bondholders resisted but finally agreed to take a loss of 20% of principal on a small portion of the bonds. Their larger concession was to take lower interest rates and extend the maturities to 15 years and 30 years on new bonds which are guaranteed by the EU. The specific terms of the agreement are as follows: The EFSF and the IMF will lend Greece 109 billion euros over 3 years at 3.5%. Private creditors including German and French banks will "voluntarily" turn in their old bonds for new ones that mature over 15-30 year periods. These new bonds include 15 and 30 year Greek bonds with varying coupons. Some of the bonds would have a 20% discount on principal. EU leaders say the private sector contribution amounts to 37 billion euros through 2014 and 106 billion euros through 2019. Another part of the program is for the EFSF to buy back some of the Greek bonds on the secondary markets, which would mean Greece would now owe a smaller amount to the EFSF on these bonds. The EFSF will now have additional financial support from Germany and other EU countries and be authorized to provide aid to countries before a crisis situation arises. It would also have power to buy Greek bonds at prices on secondary markets to reduce the Greek debt burden. Ireland and Portugal are also assisted in the agreement. The interest rate for EU aid to Ireland and Portugal is taken down to 3.5%. Ireland is paying about 6% on the EU portion of its 67.5 billon euros bailout and efforts to reduce the rate were resisted earlier. The main theme behind these concessions and provisions is to give Greece, (and Ireland and Portugal) a chance to grow. High interest rates came under strong criticism because it only increased the size of the debt burden of these countries with a shrinking economy and high unemployment. The failure to come together behind a broad and sensible agreement with all parties making serious concessions, the EU, the ECB and the political leadership in these countries especially Greece, was undermining confidence in the euro and the eurozone itself. By mid-July Italy and Spain were feeling the effects of contagion in the financial markets, U.S. debt ceiling negotiations were unsettling global financial markets, the pressure was intense to come up with the workable agreement achieved on July 21, 2011. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Portuguese government asked the European Union for bailout loans. The aid the EU is providing to Portugal comes with conditions- asking Portugal to make additional austerity cuts even as new elections loom. The aid is essentially more loans at high interest rates, even if the rates are lower than the steep rates in financial markets for a country with a collapsing credit rating. There is serious concern about whether this formula applied by the EU is going to work because at this rate it may take a decade or more for Portugal to pay off all the loans. The major problem is that with severe spending cuts- a country that lacks competitiveness and cannot devalue its currency because of being the euro zone- it is that much harder to generate growth. Simon Tilford, chief economist for the Center for European Reform in London, says the EU leaders have failed to come to grips with the core of the problem for Ireland, Greece and now Portugal- which is how to restore the finances to some sustainability, and how this could ever be achieved by a policy of deeper and deeper spending cuts. Tilford points out that the other more fundamental problem EU leaders are not tackling, is that the problem is deep down the large amount of Portuguese, Irish and Greek debt held by German, French, British, Spanish and Dutch banks. If these countries default the governments of these countries would have to recapitalize their banks at the expense of the taxpayers of Germany, France, Britain, Netherlands. Political leaders of these countries want to avoid confronting angry taxpayers and lose political support. Germany has called for a bondholder haircut, something that banking interests do not support. Tilford says Portugal is not getting a bailout, because for a bailout there would need to be a default by Portugal. What it is getting along with Ireland and Greece, are loans at high interest rates, and an EU plan that simply stifles the ability to pay back accumulated debt, leaving the situation in limbo for some future resolution....

Tarullo's Capital Idea

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Wall Street Journal editorial comes out in favor of higher capital reserve requirements similiar to that suggested by Federal Reserve Board governor Daniel Tarullo. The Journal says that if regulators are serious in the U.S. about controlling systemic risk, then the 14% rule or a 15% rule for assets held in reserve by banks should be adopted. Daniel Tarullo had suggested a 14% capital reserve requirement. These requirements would be phased in gradually over several years. Basel III requirements require only a 7% requirement and is phased in over many years. Capital standards are likely to be gamed. For this reason the requirement for only Tier 1 capital to be eligible is essential. What about the Basel III standards and the European banks? Would this put them in a better position to earn higher returns. This should be a problem left for European taxpayers to tackle says the Journal. As long as U.S. taxpayers are supporting U.S. banks with an implicit subsidy to take on larger amounts of risk -because they will be saved in a crisis with taxpayer dollars- the Journal says it makes sense to require 10-14% in capital reserves. It cites the Japanese banks which were highly overleveraged with lower capital reserves compared to American banks, and fared poorly. The Dodd-Frank bill imposes a complicated set of regulatory requirements with regulators required to write new sets of rules. The editorial concludes that it is far better to tackle the problems in the banking system with a sufficiently high requirement for capital reserves to manage risks than to have the detailed rule making on every subject that Dodd-Frank suggests....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Anat Admati, is a professor of finance and economics at Stanford University School of Business. He says banks should depend on generating 30% of their assets from equity, something the banking industry of today in the U.S. and Europe considers heretical. More of the bank's assets should come from equity and much less from borrowed funds. Outside of banking healthy corporations in the U.S. carry debt at about 70% of assets and there is no reason banks should not do the same. In 2013 says Admati, the situation is not much different from that after the 2008 global financial crisis- large banks carry liabilities and debt at over 90% of their assets. The $2.2 trillion in debt at JP Morgan Chase bank is about 91% of assets of $2.4 trillion. Basel III regulations allow banks to borrow upto 95% of assets, and proposed banking regulations in the U.S. put this at 95%, with the way this is measured still being debated. At such high levels of debt the margin of error is small, and systemic risk which is high in a globally interconnected banking system means the whole banking system can freeze from one large bank going into failure such as Lehman Brothers. This happened in 2008 and the margin of error is still small, which is why global banking is such a high wire act with the U.S. Federal Reserve, the ECB and other central banks issuing regular warnings and regulators faced with the task of keeping the banking system in check through vigilance and investigations of banks violating laws. How much difference has Dodd-Frank legislation in the U.S. made after 2008? Jason from Atlanta says in response to Admati's article, that the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was 37 pages and the banking system did not freeze up in the way it did in 2008 for the rest of the twentieth century until its repeal. The 879 page Dodd-Frank legislation of 2011 is overly voluminous and still leaves 243 rules to be written by regulators in consultation with the financial industry. Banks are larger now than they were in 2008 and have an outsized influence in shaping the rules, leaving the U.S. Federal Reserve's supervisory committee and Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo with the job of somehow keeping banks out of trouble. JP Morgan Chase, Admati reminds readers, has $2.4 trillion in assets as of June 30, 2013, and debts of $2.2 trillion, with $1.2 trillon in deposits and $ 1 trillion in other debt owed to money market funds, other banks, bondholders and the like. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The truth is very different from the rhetoric coming from the Obama administration about helping Main Street America and ordinary workers against "fat-cat bankers," says Goldfarb. Under the Obama administration banks have grown larger and gained more influence over administration decisions. No conditions were made part of the agreement that would require banks to lend a portion of the money handed out to the banks to ordinary borrowers. And not much of significance was done to help homeowners under water, which would enable a faster recovery. In this respect the policies slanted in favor of banks of the Obama administration worsened the prospects of an economic recovery. Experts from Reagan advisor Martin Feldstein- who as early as 2008 advocated serious help to homeowners under water to reduce principal and interest- to the FDIC's Sheila Bair and Princeton Prof. Krugman, across the ideological spectrum, perceived this being in the national interest. Feldstein's first op-ed on his plan appeared in the Wall Street Journal on 3/7/2008, followed by ones on 4/15/2008, 10/4/2008, 1/20/2010/ 10/12/2011 in WSJ, and a oped on 10/30/2008 in the Washington Post, repeating the call for siginificant debt reduction to homeowners. Banks had extraordinary influence on successive administrations in the U.S., both Republican and Democratic- the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations- so that policy actions could be distorted from what would otherwise take place. A study by two University of Michigan professors shows that banks did not increase lending after receiving government money. Instead taxpayer money was used to invest in risky securities for profits from short term price movements, resulting in gains of about 10% in investment returns. Ran Duchin, one of the two professors, says helping ordinary borrowers was not the most profitable use of capital for banks. Without the necessary conditions from the Obama administration, the banks depolyed capital in ways that did not help the economy. Similiarly when banks needed to be restructured no preparatory action was taken because of resistance within the administration- a request by President Obama to Treasury Secretary Geithner for preparing a plan for the restructuring of Citigroup was ignored, according to a report by Goldfarb and Wallsten on 9/17/2011 in the Washington Post....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
General Electric, GE, experienced a steep decline in the last decade. The worst news came in 2018 with the loss of half its share price and market value. One story tells about an employee who was forced out of retirement back to work seeing the loss of value in GE shares in 2018. Rarely has a company of this size seen a fall in stock price this steep, for a stock that was once seen as safe for widows. About 60% of GE business comes from jet engines, electric power generators and wind turbines. GE now plans to sell its health care business and other business that do not relate to core infrastructure in energy, aerospace, and other markets. Under Jack Welch a faulty model of adding diverse businesses that had nothing to do with its core business and expertise in infrastructure were added. A home mortgage lending business was added and GE Capital expanded. NBC Universal was added with little justification in a period when CEO's acted without much consultation. The home mortgage lending unit collapsed with large losses during the 2008 financial crisis and GE's share price dropped drastically to $6.00. Under Welch's successor Mr. Immelt the GE Capital unit was shrunk in size, but losses continued to mount. An oil field service unit was added which also sustained losses.  Immelt's successor Flannery faced a loss of $15 billion from the financial lending unit. Sale of some businesses was not sufficient to meet the loss. Flannery is now taking GE out of all the businesses which were not core business. The NBC Universal television business was sold to Comcast in 2013. GE Healthcare is next. This closes a bad chapter in GE's story under Welch and Immelt. GE's dividend was cut for the second time since the Great Depression. The story of GE is also the story of American business during the last two decades, with icons such as GM, Ford and GE suffering decline, businesses that operated like little fiefdoms of old nobility in Europe, with CEO's operating in a CEO centric culture, not tolerating contrary opinion for informed debate on issues facing the business. Alfred Sloan founder of Genral Motors called constructive debate central to good management. Later Intel CEO Andy Grove coined the phrase constructive confrontation as a way of constructive debate, and the CEO was shown as the first of equals. The CEO centric management ignored these warnings and admonitions in running their fiefdoms.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This analysis in the South China Morning Post shows that some of the nuclear options China has in a trade war with the U.S. are not as effective as they appear. Selling off China's huge Treasury holdings would lead to a situation where there are no buyers on the other side. It says private sector bond buyers would run a mile, and the lack of buyers, actions by the U.S. government freezing these assets could render them effectively worthless. The bond yields would jump but only for a short period as the Federal Reserve would step in to buy bonds, and yields would stabilize with the actions of central banks of U.S., Europe and Japan. A dent in the dollar would only make Chinese goods more costly in the U.S. exactly what U.S. tariffs are trying to achieve. A 10% devaluation of the yuan would have the effect of creating expectation of further devaluation, and lead to capital outflows from China on a large scale. A small devaluation in 2015 led to a large outflow. This would lead to a significant loss in foreign exchange reserves for China.  In this way China's deterrent would be less effective than it appears. ...
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
For the first time since the 2008 global financial crisis a initiative has been put to voters for tackling executive pay and bonus. A large majority of 68% of Swiss voters supported the 24 item Minder Initiative which restricts executive pay and bonuses. The Minder Initiative sends a signal to the rest of the world, says Christa Markwalder, a legislator for the pro-business Free Democratic Party. It provides other countries with a distinct approach to corporate governance and executive compensation. The EU decision to impose strict limits on executive pay and bonuses influenced Swiss voters. The EU decision bans bankers bonuses from exceeding fixed salary without shareholder approval, and limits flexible pay to twice the salary. The 24 item Minder measure gives shareholders the right to block proposed executive pay and bonuses. It also has penalties for violators of 6 times annual salary or imprisonment of upto 3 years. Businessmen and politician Thomas Minder has worked for three years promoting his Initiative and it was finally put to voters in 2013. For the first time since the 2008 global financial crisis, serious action is being taken to limit excessive executive compensation and bonuses in banking and other industries. It comes as austerity measures and high unemployment are influencing public opinion in Spain, UK, Italy and other European countries which have suffered banking crises....
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Guerrera describes the vital role that FDIC chairman Gruenberg's plan for unwinding failing financial institutions will play in tackling the "too-big-to-fail" problem facing the U.S. He points to the increasing importance of this after the failure of risk management systems at JP Morgan Chase bank.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The S.E.C. and the Justice Department end two investigations into the actions of Goldman Sachs during the financial crisis.
Washington Post Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. House of Representatives votes 285-144 to suspend the debt ceiling till Feb. 7, 2014. The deal forged in the Senate by Democrat Reid and Republican McConnell passed in th Senate by 81-18. The U.S. stock markets closed with the DJIA at 15374, up 1.6% compared to Sept 30 when the government shutdown began. The Republicans opposing the passage outnumbered those supporting it 144 to 87 in the House of Representatives. Because this was a repeat of similiar failure to reach agreement and last minute deals in 2012 and 2011 the equity markets appear to have taken the conflict between the two parties in stride.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Cochrane of the University of Chicago goes over the Federal Reserve's new "Enhanced Prudential Standards and Early Remediation Requirements" for big banks. He finds serious shortcomings in the Fed's proposals to regulate the largest banks. He points to the proposal that puts less than one dollar at risk for every 10 borrowed dollars as ridiculously low, and says the Fed is admitting it really does not know how to correctly measure and regulate credit exposure in today's banking system. The Fed's remediation requirements are basically ways to get regulators to take action early with "triggers," because regulators were slow to act in the last crisis. This is down to regulating the Fed, not the banks. As stated in recent editorials in the Journal, and supported by Daniel Tarullo at the Fed, the best way to protect the financial system is in having capital reserve requirements that are high enough and reliable enough for a crisis.
Economist Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ's Juan Montes, in an exceptional report from Mexico City, tells the story behind a landmark achievement for Mexico- Pacto Por Mexico of Dec. 2, 2012. The major political parties of the right, centre and left forge an agreement for the way forward for Mexico- beyond monopolistic pricing and industry structures in Mexico that hurt consumers, to increase foreign investment and new technlogies to modernize the national oil company Pemex operations, change labor laws, and create a climate for higher growth. The pact is broad ranging, shows a grasp of the problems facing modern Mexico, and ranges from anti-monopoly laws to getting junk food out of schools considering Mexico's high obesity and diabetes rate. It covers 95 goals. It is hard to overstate the significance of this achievement for modern Mexico. Montes describes the initiative of the PRD leader Zambrones in rebranding his PRD party as a moderate left wing party open to new ideas. This happened after the departure of Lopez Obrador from the PRD to form his own party in September. Zambrano and PRD moderates brought up the idea based on what happened in a landmark deal in Spain in 1977, that helped transform Spain after decades of stagnation under the Franco dictatorship. Around July after the presidential election, PRD president Zambrano, and the PRD's Jesus Ortega, held meetings in Mexico City with Jose Murat, a senior PRI politician, and PRI president elect Nieto's top advisor, economist Luis Videgaray. The decision was made by president Nieto and economist Luis Videgaray to pursue the discussions for joint agreement on vital issues facing Mexico. The PAN party was brought into the discussions. By mid-September nine people from the PRD, PRI and PAN started work on a draft agreement at Murat's home. The ground rules were set for discussions to be private, to have agreement on all points or assume nothing had been agreed, and not let current events disturb the talks. The nine participants set up the broad principles, and then a group of three, one from each party was given the task of coming up with the right language for the pact. By the end of November a 34 page draft was put together. A night of intense work to 2 a.m. followed the inauguaration of president Nieto on Dec. 1, with the Pact ready for announcement on Dec. 2, 2012. The Pact is a landmark achievement in its potential for changing Mexico and creating decades of economic progress similiar to that envisioned by the Spanish parties for Spain in 1977. ...
New York Times Original article ›

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us