LyrArc Article Gist
The countries that would be affected the most from a slowdown in China are the commodity producer countries- Australia, Brazil, S. Africa, Chile. Other countries include Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam. Currencies such as the Australian dollar, the South African Rand, the Brazilian Real and the Chilean peso would decline in value. South Korea, Taiwan and Japan which supply large machinery for construction and manufacturing would be affected. Oversupply of steel and other products in China would mean higher exports causing a drop in steel prices and prices of other items. There would be a decline in commodity prices. Germany which provides the high tech machinery for China's industrialization will be affected. Exports growth to China from Germany increased by 44% in 2010. It has been pointed out that China is the seventh largest export market for Germany, coming after France, the U.S., the Netherlands, the U.K., Italy and Austria, exports to EU countries being the largest market for Germany. A global economic slowdown, with the Chinese slowdown as a part of this would impact German exports, leading to a slower growth in Germany. The U.S. would be affected also because exports were picking up in 2010-2011, and remain the one bright spot for the U.S. economy's recovery....

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's growth rate for GDP in 2016 was 1.9% compared to 2015. This is the highest growth rate in half a decade, and better than 2015 when the growth in GDP was 1.7%. Fiscal surplus was 0.6% of GDP in 2016. Germany's Economics and Technology Ministry says the economy is improving because of the positive labor situation, rising incomes and consumer spending. Real estate boom is also helping growth, and also the state spending including on refugees accomodation. Exports have surged and the economy has recovered from the Brexit effect. Exports surged to 1.1 trillion euros in 11 months of 2016.

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein wants to see a stronger dollar, that is less inflation eroding the value or purchasing power of the dollar at home. Abroad he wants to see a weaker dollar in relation to Europe, Japan and Canada where about half of US imports originate. And a weaker dollar in relation to lower wage Asian countries to improve America's trade balance. Better to do this now than to wait a few years when the adjustments needed would be greater. America needs to export more and import less to improve the trade balance. A competitive dollar in relation to trading partners in Europe and Asia would provide the improvement in the trade balance that the U.S. needs for keeping economic growth. With the risks to the economy from declining housing prices improving the trade balance becomes important. During the 1985-1988 period the dollar declined in value significantly, falling 37%, but the inflation rate averaged 3.1%,says Feldstein. This is what he means by having astrong dollar at home, which is to say not eroding its purchasing value, while at the same time increasing exports and reducing imports. During this period merchandise exports increased by 40% while imports increased at half that pace. A repeat of that experience is possible and necessary to maintain growth, according to Feldstein. See the link to McKinnon, at Stanford, The Yuan and the Greenback, WSJ, August 29, 2006, which cautions against anything but a very gradual and carefully managed appreciation of the yuan, giving importance to inflation and interest rate differentials between the US and China. One point to note narrowing of interest rate differentials between the US and China is seen as backdrop for dollar weakening on exchange rate basis. McKinnon appears to consider a smaller interest rate differential as a cue for an even lower appreciation of the yuan, see his example of 2% inflation in the US and 3% interest rates. Interestingly the two approaches may complement each other. Offering a perspective of China maintaining its growth and not risking deflation or slowdown, and of the US maintaining its growth and not risking a slowdown from the housing market collapse, by strong domestic investment and exports. How to keep both economies going may be the policymakers challenge for strong global economic growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
Prime minister Modi's visit to the US comes at a time when US president Biden is eager to show the US is fully engaged in the Indo-Pacific region with its allies in the Quad 4 countries- Australia, Japan and India. The recently announced Aukus defense agreement brought together 2 members of the Quad 4 the US and Australia, plus the UK. Aukus is designed to strengthen US presence as a naval power in the Indo-Pacific region in the Indian and Pacific oceans around India, Southeast Asia, China, and across the Pacific. After a futile engagement in Afghanistan the US is reorganizing its presence where it is strongest- in the oceans. In a way that Britain once did in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, the US is dominant in the high seas. US naval power far exceeds that of all navies in the world combined. This is meant to reassure India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Australia and Japan, which together have close to twice the population of China, that the US has not diminished its presence in any way from that it had in the 1950's following the Second World War. With this new framework India enters discussions that will focus on health to deal with the pandemic and its after effects, with security and rule of law in the Indo-Pacific region, with trade, technology, new supply chain manufacturing structure in which India plays a key role. With this new focus and clearing past engagements made by other US  presidents, including some mistaken policies, the US emerges as a new force in the Indian ocean, China seas and Pacific ocean region.  On September 23 Modi meets Tim Cook for what could be new supply chain arrangements that Apple could be preparing as it and other US corporations build new supply chain structures to rebuild US manufacturing technologies capabilities that were lost to China over the period 2000-2020. During that period manufacturing technology knowhow was shifted out of the US in a mistaken policy that assumed design and invention were sufficient for the US to keep. The first step in this direction was a change of CEO's at Intel Corp with US president Biden pushing for new US technology reclaiming policy. Following that the new CEO at Intel Corp, Patrick Gelsinger, completely reassessed Intel's mistaken policies of ceding its entire semiconductor manufacturing technologies capabilities to Taiwan and China. Intel made a U turn and is now investing all or most of $50 billion in the US instead of in China or Taiwan.  On September 24 Modi meets Mr Biden to discuss trade, investment, defense, and security. On the same day the leaders of Japan, Australia, Mr. Suga and Mr. Morrison join Modi and Biden for the Quad 4 talks. Indian infrastructure capabilities and Indian economic growth would be key goals to strengthen India along its land borders along Tibet occupied region and Himalayas as part of the overall effort to build a new US and allied presence in Asia.  On September 21 Modi attends a Covid Summit that will look at the way forward in the aftermath of the pandemic and ways to vaccinate the remaining unvaccinated population in the world, as well as vaccination passports.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India's Foreign Minister told a conference that China's forward deployments at Galwan in violation of 1993 and 1996 agreements was an attempt to change the Line of Actual Control. China after years of peaceful development under previous administrations, during which China had gained from the trade relationship with the US and foreign investment from the US business community, sought  to put India at a disadvantage using its larger economy and technological assets obtained through American business assistance. This was done by making forward deployments right at the Indian border to change the Line of Actual Control in progressive steps. Jaishankar made it very clear. "It is hard work, very patient work, but we are very clear on one point, which is we will not allow any unilateral attempt by China to change the status quo or alter the LAC. I do not care how long it takes, how many rounds we do, how hard we have to negotiate- this is something we are very clear of." Going back to the period of independence with Nehru in 1947- China's occupation of Tibet was an occupation of a peaceful country that led to the situation that India faces today of a border stretching from east to west on the Himalayas that faces China. Faced with the partition and refugees from that partition India under Nehru was not in a position to respond effectively to that occupation. Does China gain anything from being at that border through the occupation of Tibet is a serious question? Why? Because it faces a Vedanta and Buddha driven culture and people with population of 1.8 billion stretching to the Indonesian islands that were and still are the fundamental source of  China's own Buddhist culture and tradition.  US business has allied with one country after another Japan, China and now India. The US has faced wars with Japan, and sometimes in a failed attempt to understand the aspirations of  Southern Asia allied with British ideas of the region which were based on the policies of British Empire to divide the region on religious and language, caste based barriers. US business also lacked a true perception of the importance of working class and families in the US as it sent factories and surrendered its own manufacturing to China. The world is now changing following the pandemic and new supply chains and manufacturing policies of the US are being structured. It is in this context where India's pace of economic growth and technological advancement will change its capabilities and its capacity to meet the aspirations of 1.8 billion people in Asia with a common tradition and culture. It is in this context that one can ask the question does China have anything to gain from the occupation of Tibet and being on the border with a country and cultural tradition of 1.8 billion people stretching across South and South east Asia?  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan is playing an increasingly positive and significant role in stabilizing the international financial system, and in providing new ideas for solution and proactive measures, some of it based on its own experience with a long sustained economic downturn from which it only recently emerged. It has dedicated $100 billion to the IMF for loans to emerging economies, which will be a significant help in preventing a severe downturn in developing countries. Here Prime Minister Aso outlines ideas that Japan will bring to the global talks this weekend November 15-16, 2008. The significant immediate steps are early and thorough disclosure of nonperforming loans based on valuation and reliable standards, and the removal of these loans from their balance sheets as a top priority. Japan was slow to do this prolonging its downturn into a decade or more of no growth. Other two priorities are injecting capital into banks with government money, and supplying ample liquidity from central banks and US dollar liquidity. After the immediate challenge there lie 7 areas to be addressed in the medium term. Improving savings and reducing consumption in countries dependent on external debt and moving to domestic demand led growth in export dependent economies. Bolstering the resources of the International Monetary Fund and the Asian Development Bank. Changing the governance structures of the IMF and the World Bank and other bodies to give proper representation to emerging economies that play an important role in the world economy. Giving the Financial Stability Forum a status above standard setting institutions like the Basel Committee, the Forum reinforced and reorganized to give membership to emerging economies. International Accounting Standards Board, governments, companies and investors in ajoint effort work to come up with a set of standards that have global application. And tightening standards for credit rating agencies through the International Organization of Securities Commissions. Aso proposes giving various countries legal authority over these agencies and the nurturing of credit rating agencies in each region in addition to global agencies, for the development of regional bond markets. Aso is also pushing for regional cooperation like the initiatives in East Asia such as the foreign exchange swap mechanism. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Even with the growth strategies of the Abe administration in 2014, projections of the IMF show growth rate for Japan are at 1.0% for 2015, compared to 3% for the U.S., 2.5% for UK, and 1.6% for Germany. The Third Arrow in prime minister Abe's Three Arrows program now follows the implementation of the other two Arrows- monetary easing and public works spending. Abe is faced with the task of convincing foreign and domestic investors that he can implement a winning growth strategy for Japan. The plan announced in June 2014 is an effort to overcome barriers to growth with a strategy that will work. The core of the plan is to cut the corporate tax rate from 35.64% to below 30% in the next couple of years. The corporations are expected to do their part to improve corporate governance and return on equity, so that shareholders, domestic and foreign investors, have more incentives to invest in the Japanese stock market. Analysts and economists say this plan has attractive features. It asks Japanese companies to increase ROE and ROI to global levels through a Tokyo Stock Exchange corporate governance code. Companies listed on TSE and not following the code will have to come up with reasons why they are failing to do so. Some analysts say this would increase the value of companies. Companies are more likely to make investments with cash that is not being invested. The plan includes measures for bringing more women into the workforce, which is seen as a serious committment to women. In addition to increasing the number of child care centers, this plan includes tax revisions that benefit women joining the workforce. Increased representation for women at the executive level is also part of this plan. Hiroshige Seko, a top adviser to Abe, says importance was given to execution for results, so that a score of 80 with definite results was preferred to an uncertain attempt to get a 100. To do this some compromises were made. The plan for special economic zones is still in the drafting stage as discussion is just beginning. A shakeup of the Central Union of Agricultural Cooperatives and more flexible medical care will be taken up gradually. The efforts to increase ROI, ROE, and improve corporate governance were initiated from the time of the Koizumi administration, and the latest plan may bring results after over a decade of effort in this direction....

LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Eduardo Porter compares Italy's propensity to collect and invest tax dollars in healthcare and public services to a much greater degree than the U.S. In 2007 he points out Italy spent 25% of its output on social programs such as health, food and housing, compared to 16% in the U.S. He reflects on the possible reasons for this based on research. Italians see the tax dollars at work in a health care system that works for them and their children, as in this example of Eduardo and his child at a health clinic in Liguria, Italy. In the U.S. there is less evidence of this and the sense that government is likely to waste tax dollars, that the individual is better able to make choices. The less homogenous society in the U.S. also means there is less support for public services that might benefit other lingusitic and cultural groups.There is also the feeling that in American society there is greater oportunity for the less well off to join the upper class given the open capitalist framework, as compared to Italy where connections and traditional advantages matter. Some experts attribute this to smaller taxes leading to economic growth, but Porter says the examples of Sweden, Norway, and Japan showed growth was higher or similiar to that in the U.S. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Issues of inequality and lack of upward mobility came up in the last presidential election. A Federal Reserve Survey for 2018 shows the financial fragility facing many Americans. One quarter of working individuals say they do not have any retirement savings. About 17% of households say they cannot pay all their monthly bills. About 40% of Americans say they do not have enough cash to cover an unexpected $400 expense, and would have to rely on credit cards balances or loans from family to make the payment. This survey by the Federal Reserve is done each year since 2013, after the financial crisis hit in 2009 it became more important. Still Americans are showing unusual resilience and upbeat spirit. About 75% say they were doing Ok or living comfortably up from 63% in 2013. And two out of three described lovcal economic conditions as "good" or "excellent."  This shows that the financial vulnerability resulting in the loss of jobs in the U.S. both from jobs lost in manufacturing going overseas,  jobs lost through automation or industrial decline in some sectors, and the hit from job loss during the financial crisis and its aftermath years of 2009-2014 is still leaving a lot of families financially vulnerable. Low interest rates and stagnant wages also meant savings growth for ordinary Americans was less than it should be in a healthy economy without booms and busts. This is also the environment in which the U.S. is tackling challenges to its technological leadership in 5G following a decline in sectors such as autos and electronics, with job losses to Japan and South Korea. New trade agreements are focussed on correcting the imbalance, first with Mexico, South Korea, and now with China. Focus is also on fair wages and labour overseas to raise American wages in key sectors. The damage done by a low interest rate to savings of ordinary Americans outside the stock markets is also being seen as a downside in the boom bust cycle, that includes loss of jobs for vulnerable American families. The rise of the tech sectors has diluted the traditional protections of working class Americans with the shifts and realignment of the major parties. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Keith Bradsher's NYT interview with Raghuram Rajan, Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, comes when Rajan has come under criticism from the business sector and the small business support base of prime minister Modi's party. The criticism centers on the drop in oil prices since Nov. 2014, and Rajan's failure to drop interest rates at the Dec. 2, 2014 central bank meeting. Rajan says it was not clear whether oil prices would remain low for an extended period at the Dec. 2, 2014 meeting. Since then new inventory data, EIA estimates and OPEC policy guidance have confirmed low prices will remain for an extended period. Rajan lowered interest rates on Jan. 14, 2015, by one quarter of a percentage point. Under India's setup the central bank chief makes decisions on interest rates, compared to the decisions made by the Federal Open Market Committee at the U.S. Federal Reserve. Rajan says there is full understanding between the central bank and the Modi government economic team led by finance minister Arun Jaitley, Jayan Sinha, deputy minister of state for finance, and chief economic advisor Arvind Subramanium. Modi and Jaitley prefer to rely on the advice and policy direction of economic policymakers with long experience in the U.S. and international circles. Both Subramanium and Rajan bring this level of experience and expertise. Subramanium brings experience from his years at the GATT which preceded the WTO, the IMF, and the Peterson Institute of International Economics, and Rajan brings experience at the University of Chicago, and as chief economist of the IMF. Modi is a dilgent listener and policymaker giving careful attention to the best advice, making it unlikely that Rajan would be seen as a holdover from the administration of Manmohan Singh. Other criticism that the business sector has made of Rajan are as financial regulator in asking state banks to increase collateral required from large business firms for large bank loans. Rajan points out the need for business to bear the costs as well as the benefits of taking risks. Under previous governments the state banks allowed large firms to keep their holdings at companies even when the risk taking resulted in losses. Rajan has also not tried to reverse the sharp decline in the rupee, which hurts business firms which took on dollar denominated loans. Rajan has instead followed policy of building up the reserves by buying dollars. The reserves were depleted in 2013 by a policy of currency interventions to reverse that decline. Inflation in India reached 9.9% in Dec. 2013, with policy of the central bank under Rajan set to bring it down to 8% in 2014, and below 6% in 2015, so that India could get out of the trap of persistently high inflation with slow growth. This is critical for a new Indian success story. A goal set by Rajan in Oct. 2012 when he was appointed as central bank chief, was to increase foreign investment and encourage new business so that India was no longer dependent on large companies for growth. This is also critical for a new Indian success story, as the Modi administration and the central bank are both keenly aware. Just as Bernanke and now Yellen at the U.S. Fed face criticism for quantitative easing monetary policy, focus on the high long term unemployed, and not focussing on inflation- with their focus on the long term economic recovery in an environment of low inflation below 2% in the U.S.- India's Reserve Bank faces a different kind of criticism for careful and prudent policies to ensure long term growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
Problems facing India as it searches for a way to modernize the country, build infrastructure, and create strong jobs growth. Glaring weaknesses are evident in a number of areas which have not been addressed: a weak public education system, food poverty for people at the lower end worsening with today's 10% food inflation, child malnutrition, weak infrastructure building capabilities, growth in services but not enough in manufacturing to create jobs, a growing black economy, and a general acceptance of illegal behaviour that has increased with the increase in opportunities for corruption and bribes in a growing economy. The political governance is weak. The dependence on smaller regional parties in ruling coalition governments weakens initiative at the federal government level. The general lack of new political leadership, and the failure to develop new leaders in the Congress party because of the six decades long presence of the Nehru family. Some striking facts- the role of the black or underground economy has actually increased over the years. Arun Kumar, chairman of the Center for Economc Studies and Planning at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi, says his estimates show it was 40% of GDP by 1996, and 50% by 2006. This means more business activity evades direct taxes, and less money is available for investments in education, infrastructure and healthcare. It also indicates a widespread tolerance of illegal activity and corruption. The other striking facts are that the calorie consumption by the bottom of the 50% of the population has been declining since 1987, according to a 2009-10 economic survey by India's Ministry of Finance. The modernization of the country appears not to be following the path taken in East Asia- by Japan, S. Korea and now China- where people moved in large migrations from farms and rural areas to cities and manufacturing jobs, resulting in gradual urbanization. Manufacturing in India is only 16% of GDP in 2009, the same as in 1991, according to the World Bank. Certain regions are doing better than others- Gujarat and the Punjab in the north, Tamilnadu, Karnataka in the south- with large population areas in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar lagging behind badly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman says the fairly obvious that Democrats in the US and Social Democrats in Europe readily grasp. That unrestricted immigration on the southern border in the US or in the southern border of Europe actually does little to improve the situation for people in the US and Europe or the people in the countries migrants are leaving because of unsettled conditions. Germany has shifted to a policy of becoming involved in development in Africa. Japan's International Cooperation Agency has worked for many years in African countries. The US has its own efforts to assist Mexico through trade and manufacturing. It is working with Central American countries that are a major source of migrants on the southern border at different times. Mette Frederiksen, head of the Danish Social Democrats government, has put it very well when she said that the only people who are getting hurt by open border policies are the working class families in Denmark. This is true also of other parts of the EU and the US. Simply by letting in migrants, a policy that is harmful to workers and families. Conservatives are looking to make political gains and further their own interests, indifferent to social divisions and increasing lack of upward mobility in society. Immigration has become the tool for many of the conservative parties that have used it in ways harmful to interests of workers and families, in Britain, in the US, and in the EU. One has only to see the large delegation that Mette Frederiksen led to India for discussions with prime minister Modi, the economic ministries, and business, to see how she did the right thing on a huge scale. Denmark is the world leader in logistics with Maersk, and in renewable energy. Denmark and the Nordic countries are working closely with a country of 1.4 billion people to improve the logistics to make India comparable to China in manufacturing for export. And similarly in renewable energy technologies. The Nordic countries and the EU have simply by these actions done more to uplift hundreds of millions of people in Asia than anything that ever happened in the history of the world. And the US is also working with India in the same way. India acts as a stable source of growth and model for a whole stretch of Asia from Indonesia to Vietnam. The population lifted out of poverty - 2 billion people. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Ethics Commission appointed by Chancellor Merkel following the nuclear disaster in Japan has recommended that the German government close all of its nuclear plants by 2021. Merkel said that Germany will end its dependence on nuclear energy and use nuclear as a bridge technology till other sorces are developed. Germany gets 22.6% of its electricity from nuclear energy, according to the Energy Ministry. It has 17 reactors, six of the boiling water type, a design used at Fukushima, and 11 using pressurized water. A former Environment minister, Klaus Topfer, heads the panel, with the other 22 panel members draw from the energy industry and nongovernmental organizations. While recommending closing the plants "to eliminate risks," the panel said it would also boost the German economy. It said "a withdrawal from nuclear power will spur growth, offer enormous technical, economic and social opportunities to position Germany even further as an exporter of sustainable products and services." Germany has already moved ahead in developing wind and solar energy sources, and is developing leading edge technologies and capabilities in the area of environment friendly alternative energies. Wind and solar energy and renewable sources already meet 16.5% of Germany's needs. Italy and Switzerland said they would not develop new reactors after the Fukushima nuclear reactor meltdown. Only Germany with its strong environmental consciousness across all parties is making a decisive break with nuclear energy. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson points to the risks to the American economic growth from excessive health care costs. This is hurting take home pay and shows up in consumer spending. It is hurting government spending in other areas such as needed infrastructure spending and efforts to reduce the deficit. This hurts private capital investment to create jobs because of lower demand from constricted consumer spending. The U.S. budget has as its largest single expense 27% on health care compared to 20% on defense the next largest expense, with growth in health care spending taking this to one third of the budget in coming years. Without addressing health care, says Samuelson, the Supercommitte in Congress even if successful at deficit reduction will basically have failed to do its job, and it did not have the time, resources or conviction to do this. According to a new study from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), U.S. healthcare spending per person is $7,960 per person in 2009. This compares with Norway $5,352, Britain $3,487, France $3, 978, an OECD average of $3,233. Life expectancy in the U.S. is 78.2 years, compared to Japan 83 years, OECD average of 79.5 years. Chile and the Czech Republic have life expectancy equal to the U.S. Except for cancer care where the five year survival rate is 89.3% in the U.S. and the OECD average is 83.5%, the U.S. lags far behind in much needed critical areas such as diabetes and asthma. Rates of emergency hospitalization for asthma are 3 times that in France and 6 times that in Germany and Italy. The U.S. has fewer doctors per thousand population and higher cost per medical procedure- with more frequent use of the costliest procedures- creating a supply shortage that induces higher prices, and less preventive and early action care through physician visits. The number of practicing U.S. doctors is 2.4 per thousand population in the U.S. compared to 3.1 per thousand for the OECD average; and number of annual doctor consultations 3.9 per capita in the U.S. versus 6.5 for the OECD average. Appendectomy cost $7,962 in the U.S., $5,004 in Canada and $2,943 in Germany. Coronary angioplasty cost $14,378 in the U.S., compared to $9,296 in Sweden, and $7,027 in France. Knee replacement cost $14,946 in the U.S., $12,424 in France, and $9,910 in Canada. Knee replacements, angioplasties and MRI exams are twice as common in the U.S. compared to the OECD countries. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Economists at the IMF estimate that the public debt of the leading 10 industrialized countries would reach 114% of GDP by 2014, from 78% today. The governments then owe about $50,000 for each person in the country. Unlike World War II this situation is not temporary, because of the pension and health care costs of a population that is getting older. So what is to be done? Without the stimulus, the deep and prolonged recession would lead to greater damage to the finances of these countries. But continued in this manner the government would crowd out private investment and lead to lower economic growth. In some countries, Greece, Ireland, Italy Portugal and Spain it might lead to default, in other countries the real cost of the debt may be reduced through inflation. In the USA yields on 10 year Treasuries reached about 4% on June 10th, in December it was about 2%, a consequence of the economic recovery. If interest rates are allowed to rise too fast, it might abort the economic recovery. A rise in taxes is also not the answer, because in Europe the taxes are already at 40%, in America they are around 30%. But raising consumption taxes at the time when the economy was fragile, aborted a recovery in Japan during Japan's earlier crisis decade. A caution signal that says fiscal tightening can backfire, especially some years after a banking crisis when things are still in a weak condition. Some steps that can be taken are raising the retirement age, which would cut pension costs as people work longer and would boost tax revenues, and eliminating the tax deduction for home mortgage payments in the US. Its important to build credibility that the government and the legislative bodies are serious about controlling the finances and acting with prudence. In America wasteful health care spending is a priority, as this would reduce the burden on public finances considerably , and should be as much of a priority for the new Obama administration, as providing universal health care. With today's finances its not something that can be put off....

LyrArc Article Gist
Pakistan has always suffered from tax collection that is some of the poorest in the world. This leaves little money for badly needed infrastructure and roads. At a time when countries such as Indonesia and India are rapidly building roads and infrastructure, Pakistan depends on projects and financing almost entirely from China.  This means dependence on foreign debt financing such as that of the $2 billion Orange Line, Pakistan's first Metro line in Lahore. This is one of the first projects one of $16 billion in projects started from a planned $62 billion under China's Belt and Road Initiative. The problem is that taking on so much debt leaves Pakistan dependent on Chinese financing, with increased debt payments leading to a debt crisis. External debt will double to over $100 billion from a little over $50 billion in 2013, according to the IMF, reaching 30% of GDP. External financing needs have doubled from 4% of GDP or about $10 billion in 2013-2015 period doubling to over $20 billion and 8% of GDP. A steep increase in debt in a space of only 3 years. Pakistan faces problems similar to that faced by other countries including Ceylon, Burma. Pakistan has fallen behind on debt payments for electricity projects, because of problems getting Pakistanis to pay electric bills. Other problems are that the projects use Chinese workers and Chinese contractors so that they do not generate jobs the way projects would normally generate domestic jobs and growth including pushing domestic firms up the experience and knowledge curve in construction and technology. The opaqueness of the deals lead to a lack of required transparency. The projects also lack the almost zero interest financing from Japan of projects such as the first bullet train in India on Mumbai-Ahmedabad corridor because of the lack of negotiating leverage and other problems.  By early fall 2018 Pakistan is expected to seek IMF financing, which would lead to conditions set by the IMF on how much it can borrow and spend under the Belt and Road Initiative, known as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor or CPEC. This means effectively that the Wst will bail out a country after investments under the Belt and Road Initiative. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Anecdotal evidence such as huge jewelry sales in Hong Kong and smaller repatriation of funds earned overseas by Chinese companies suggests outflow of funds from China is picking up. Also the quarterly pace of accumulation in foreign exchange reserves dropped by 74% over the course of 2008. In he 4th quarter 2008 it reached $40.45 billion, lowest point since 2004. Chinese government may be slowing its purchase of Treasuries. And policy may be shifting away from letting the yuan to appreciate as export industries are hit hard by lower foreign demand.

LyrArc Article Gist
MacKinnon argues that (while correcting the trade imbalance by American consumers increasing savings over time and becoming frugal), the stable exchange rate for the yuan and the dollar helps global economic growth by making it possible for China to engage in fiscal stimulus beyond the half trillion dollars it plans for 2009. From the Chinese point of view anchoring the yuan to the dollar at a stable exchange rate help China's internal price level. After the inflation rate exploded to 20% in 1993-95, the fixed rate anchor helped China regain price stability. The China stimulus in his words is most effective with a stable exchange rate.

LyrArc Article Gist
Global imbalances in savings had alot to do with the current economic crisis, says Prof. Richard Portes of the London Business School, and president of the Centre for Economic Policy Research. See graph that shows net cross border flows doubled from 1997 the year ogf the Asian financial crisis to 2008. By 2008 these cross border flows from Asia to the West reached 3% of global GDP. This says Portes was what was ultimately the cause of the crisis, as it enabled bankers to be reckless and mortgage lenders to be reckless with all the extra money in the American banking system.

LyrArc Article Gist
"There is'nt another planet to export to," is what Paul Krugman of the New York Times says, when referring to the impossibility of all countries keeping up exports and reducing imports at the same time. In crises similiar to what the US faces today, countries have increased exports as a way to stage an economic recovery. But this time countries are depressing their currencies to gain or preserve a large share of global demand achieved through high exports. China has resisted demands for a significant revaluation of the yuan, and persists in efforts in currrency markets to keep the value of the yuan low. This cuts off one avenue of recovery. Bloomberg Business Week and Bloomberg News interviewed Edmund Phelps, Jan Hatzius, Krugman, and other economists, with the idea of figuring out how the US could stage an economic recovery. Krugman is not optimistic, considering the effects of the financial crisis being really protracted. Krugman points out that when comparing the US currently to the eaarly stages of Japan's lost decade, the US is doing worse. Unemployment is worse, and overall he says, a weaker policy response. And he says Japan is still a depressed fragile economy 18 years after its financial crisis. Jan Hatzius of Goldman Sachs, predicts that the unemployment rate will rise back to 10% in early 2011, with a 30% chance that the economy will fall back into a recession. He says that in the postwar economy, there has never been an increase in the unemployment rate of one third of one percentage point that did not result in a recession. Phelps and Hatzius see one way the US could stage a recovery is with replacement old structures and equipmet as wear and tear and obsolescence takes place. Phelps sees the possibility of technological innovation resultig in a new burst of activity. Robert Gordon of Northwestern University, is less optimistic about this, and predicts a lower growth rate of 1.5% over the next 20 years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
DJT 1.0 was led on the tariffs policy by USTR Robert Lighthizer, who had experience negotiating with the Japanese negotiators in the Reagan era. He is today respected by  Republicans, is seen in an important role in economic policy and to prepare the tariff policy actions of the new DJT administration. Lighthizer prefers to get Congress to take action with legislation. He also believes that domestic manufacturing will make gains with new and higher tariffs on Chinese imports. Lighthizer policy is falsely compared with Hoover Tariffs Act of 1930 when world trade was 9% of world GDP, today it is 63% of world GDP, and where under Hoover in 1930 the tariffs were across the board all countries 20,000 goods. Under Lighthizer on specific products where dumping is happening -steel, aluminium, autos, with Japan in 1960-70 or China 2000-2020 targeting American industries + technologies for takeover. And falsely when it comes to raising costs to each American family on average by $4000 a year by economists. The conventional view for business for 2000-2016 through Bush and Obama favoring free trade did not take into account the unusual experience of China which entered WTO in 1990, then expanded in a way unprecedented in history at 10-12% growth rates for 15 years destroying American manufacturing with dumping, having support of outshoring by companies in the US, and not giving reciprocal treatment for exports from the US to China. China also had unrestricted access to US technologies in this type of trade. Lighthizer's approach was to specifically address this problem not a general across the board tariffs on all goods (20,000 goods) on all countries as with the Hoover Tariffs Act in 1930. Lighthizer's approach adopted by DJT called for reciprocal trade response with China as the US had already done with Japan, not unilateral across the board tariffs, and when world trade had advanced to about zero tariff rates. And falsely compared to Hoover 1930 Act because under Hoover tariffs were 29-40%. raised to 60% when world trade was small, was 9% of GDP. The Biden administration has tacitly agreed with Lighthizer's vision by not reversing DJT tariffs. A new higher tariff will probably be selective based on the industry, country and what goals the US has set under the new administration for that industry. Some of the tariffs revenue may also be used for tax cuts. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Coorodination, forbearance and multilateralism are three ways to keep economic nationalism from disrupting a global trading system that has benefitted all countries. Even the small moves to help home countries like the the move for US steel in the American stimulus projects, and the demonstrations supporting "British jobs for British workers", and other steps that quietly find their way into individual countries efforts to protect their home industries and jobs, can over time build up into something that would exaggerate the size and extent of this economic downturn. Forbearance and leadership from the US government on this issue and by leading developed countries is vital. So is the effort to develop a coordinated effort through close consultation and joint monitoring of progress. And equally important is multilateralism which works to help emerging countries hit hardest, and help prevent millions from sinking back into poverty, thereby destroying the hope and aspirations that had propelled the global progress in improving living standards....