LyrArc Article Gist
David Super, a professor at Georgetown University Law School, says letting the fiscal cliff cuts in spending go into effect is fairer to the poor and middle class than the $1.2 trillion in spending cuts proposed by president Obama and the Democrats. He says the pressure of public opinion would lead to some minideals for the Bush tax cuts to go to lower incomes and for restoring some funds to defense after the fiscal cliff agreement goes into effect, leading to a fairer outcome.

LyrArc Article Gist
James Q. Wilson points to the link between educational levels and inequality. He says the poor face too few skills and too few opportunities. The link with education is critical. He cites information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics which show that between 1979 and 2010, hourly wages for those with a college degree went up 33% for men and 20% for women. For those without a high school diploma wages declined 31% for men and 9% for women. It appears that men have been more adversely affected than women. Minorities have done poorly especially Hispanics and Blacks. Social factors such as unwed mothers aggravate conditions for the bottom fifth in incomes. As the demographics of America shift to higher population of Hispanic immigrants, the situation worsens. High schools in Hispanic areas of New York city with high dropout rates, to take one example, can affect income inequality as more immigrants take jobs at the minimum wage level. The 2008 financial crisis has also taken a higher toll on minorities and people with modest incomes by reducing their savings and through the large number of home foreclosures....

LyrArc Article Gist
A report by two former Census Bureau officials, Gordon Green and John Coder, shows the inflation adjusted median household income in the U.S. declined by 6.7%, to 49,909, between June 2009 and June 2011. From December 2007 to June 2009 household income declined by 3.2%. The forces behind this are the large number of people not working or not looking for work who are outside the labor force, and the hourly pay for workers not keeping up with inflation. Prof Henry Farber at Princeton, says his study shows that people who lost jobs in the recession found work again with an average of 17.5% less income than in their prior jobs. This makes this downturn very different than earlier downturns, and giving credence to the argument "that this time its different." Another statistic from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows why- in the period December 2007 to June 2009 average length of time for a person who lost a job to be unemployed increased from 16.6 weeks to 24.1 weeks, with the same figure up to 40.5 weeks in September 2011. Higher declines for Hispanics and other minorities further increased income inequalities. Coder and Green call the impact a substantial decline in the American standard of living....

LyrArc Article Gist
A Tax Policy Center study (joint project of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Insitute) shows $157 billion would be generated in the first year from an increase in taxes on the top 1% of income earners in the U.S., about 1.13 million households earning average $2.1 million, by increasing the federal tax rate from current 33.4% for this group to 40%. This could pay for a program to provide tution free education in America's colleges and universities. Even increasing the federal tax to 40% on the 115,000 households earning over $9.4 million on average, the top 0.1% of American households, would generate $55 billion in the first year, enough to pay for the $47 billion cost of tution free education at all of America's public colleges and universities, according to the Tax Policy Center. Economists including Stiglitz and others, point to significant impact of revenue generated from such a tax when applied to improving educational opportunity for the middle class and lower income groups. Education is a great leveler of income disparities as seen in the U.S. after World War II. During recent decades the highest income groups weren major beneficiaries of tax and economic policy, at the very time the middle class and factory workers were hit hard by global competition which lowered wages and exported jobs. The interest rate policies of the Fed after boom bust cycles also favored large investors in equity markets over smaller income earners with savings account deposits, whose savings experienced little growth under interest rates close to zero. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A report from the U.S. Federal Reserve on the impact of the financial crisis of 2008-2009 on the wealth of American households. Between 2007 and 2010 says the report the median net worth of American families went down by 39%, from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010. This had the result of putting Americans back to the level of net worth in 1992. Much of the loss in net worth was from asset value reductions. The median value of stock market based retirement accounts decreased by 7% to $44,000. The biggest drop was in housing values- falling by 42% to $55,000 in the three years. Americans are working down their debt- a quarter of families are debt free, credit card balances declined 16% to $2600 from $3100 from the period 2007 to 2010 of the report. Yet the median level of family debt remains the same as more families support their kids education by taking out college loans. Median income fell about 8% to $45,800 in 2010, with income losses especially large in the manufacturing industries as the U.S. manufacturing sector worked to improve competitiveness. Other factors supplement this picture. The burden of college loans increased to over $1 trillion for middle and working class families. With the burden of college debt young people were more likely to delay buying first homes, indefinitely dealying recovery in the housing market. Seniors on retirement see interest income from savings negligible with low interest rates and higher risk in a volatile stock market. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Comments by the banking sector and the central bank of Canada on the Volcker Rule.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial points to the median income levels for 2014 being 6.5% below the level in 2007, median income level declining in 2011 and 2012, stagnant in 2014, according to the Census Bureau, as a reason why there is so much economic anxiety for average Americans. The appeal of Sanders and Trump reflects this anxiety and anti-establishment feeling. The official poverty rate at 14.8%, means 46.7 million Americans are below the poverty line. About 34.5% of the people experienced 2 or more months below the poverty line in 2009-2012, showing how it is hitting the middle class.

LyrArc Article Gist
Jose de Cordoba of the WSJ provides this excellent story on the nature of the migration crisis in the U.S. that is creating political divisions in the U.S. What is causing this surge in migration to the U.S.? Cordoba provides some useful insights to understand the nature of this problem. Nine out of ten migrants in Guatemala which sends most of the migrants from Central America are moving north from Guatemala through Mexico to the U.S. for financial reasons, it points out. Only 10% are because of violence in the region, the rest for financial reasons according to the United Nations International Organization for Migration The jump in apprehension of Guatemalans at the American border shows a surge from 15,000 in 2007 to 236,000 in 9 months of 2019, according to U.S. government data. The surge began in 2008 and jumped in 2014 after U.S. court rulings that first required migrant children to be allowed to join relatives in the U.S. followed by a ruling in 2015 that allowed a parent to join the children and allowed court proceedings to take place that takes years. The result was that smugglers advertised on radio and families sold small plots of land to join relatives in the U.S. who had gone before them. The migration is also specific to certain areas hit by damage to crops, including coffee crop from drought, or certain towns that simply sent more people simply for financial reasons advertised openly.  For 8 hours of work a migrant could make at $12 per hour amount of $96 per day, in Guatemala the daily wage would be about $5.  Overwhelmingly it is financial reasons or economic opportunity that sends migrants north. After it became known that kids could help migration the people in family groups apprehended at the border jumped from about 40,000 in 2015 to 390,000 in fiscal 2019. Smugglers charge $8600 per adult and half that for a child and an adult that can be dropped off at a checkpoint. The efforts of president Trump to close the border to this migration include having Mexico sign an agreement to police its southern border with Guatemala using its newly setup National Guard. As a result the migration has actually surged in 2019 with migrants seeing this as their one last opportunity to join relatives in the U.S. or to migrate to the U.S. The Trump administration tried separating families because of the loophole in the law that allows children to be not deported and parents to join their children. But this created a public outcry and the effort now is to close the loophole in the law. It is also strange that as many migrants are coming from one town Joyabaj  with population 100,000 as from Guatemala City the capital population 2.5 million. In fact the economy has grown by 3.4 % a year in Guatemala and efforts have been made to improve conditions with the help of donor countries in the West for several years, though the drought conditions exist. The situation is similar to that in Europe. If one looks at the violence by gangs in central American region after the end of the guerilla wars and compares it to the wars in Syria and Iraq, one can see how humanitarian concerns preceded what eventually turned out tobe a full blown migration for economic reasons. Initially chancellor Merkel adopted a humanitarian stance but failed to recognize that there was another side to his situation that would attract a wave of economic migrants from places as far apart as North Africa to Afghanistan. Poverty has existed in these regions for many many years before the current migration, with drought and lack of economic opportunity going far back in time. Merkel only recently recognized this problem and the new CDU leader Kambrauer has clearly recognized this. CDU policy shifted in 2018-2019 with curbs on economic migration that has reduced it to a trickle. This process is underway in the U.S. at its border with Mexico and for Mexico with its border with Guatemala. In the short run Europe and the U.S. are paying a price. Not just in the way it has divided each country with a far left and a far right eroding the centrist parties that existed before. In some cases centrist parties that were popular on the right and the left now hve leaders from a far right or a far left faction within the centrist ruling parties. Boris Johnson in Britain, Trump in the U.S., leaders in Italy, Austria and Hungary. Or as in Germany and Spain new far left or far right parties causing the centrist parties to dwindle in influence or as in Germany this combined with a shift to the Green Party in Germany and Liberals Party in Britain as a show of disapproval for how the migration issue has been tackled.  The Economist in a July 2019 issue also points out that the country's own citizens have fared worse with migration. It shows how the Conservative Party's austerity cuts for welfare budgets was popular in Britain as long as eastern European migration at high levels in Britain were allowed starting with the Labour party under Blair. This disproportionately hurt the middle class and the poor after the hit already taken from the faulty banking caused recession. With the drop in migration it is now felt by a majority in Britain that the austerity cuts have just gone too far and a mood is set in to restore many of the cuts and fund public services. Meantime some of the damage has been done and will take a decade to correct as the issues that mangled the centrist parties and led to fragmentation on views of what society should look like have taken place with Brexit and high levels of poverty, income inequality in Britain, lack of investment in infrastructure with overallocation to tech with declining productive benefit for every additional dollar spent. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
France's central bank chief Christian Noyer, says public spending to create jobs has the drawback of creating yesterday's jobs, but lasting job creation has to look at today and the future for effective job creation. Once government spending crosses a certain level, about 55% of GDP, a level France has crossed, further spending becomes counterproductive, reducing public confidence in the economy, as higher future taxes are anticipated canceling any benefits.

LyrArc Article Gist
Most Americans pay less in taxes, including state, local and federal taxes, today than in 1980 in inflation adjusted dollars. The taxes have gone down by 2-3% for incomes in the range of $50,000 to $150,000, and gone down by 3-4% for incomes between $150,000 and $350,000. Taxes have gone down over 7% for incomes above $350,000. The main reason is the decline in federal income taxes.Tax rates increased in the period to 1990 and declined from 1990 to 2010. The Democratic party and president Obama are pushing for increase in taxes for incomes above $250,000. Republicans are resisting the changes citing disincentives to investment and growth for small business which generates a large proportion of new jobs created in the U.S. economy. The New York Times study shows the percent of the U.S. population that makes between $200,000 and $350,000 almost doubling in the period 1980-2010 and at the same time its share of the U.S. income remaining the same - many small business owners who hire employees would fall into this income category. Republican's response is for tax reforms that reduce loopholes, deductions and other tax expeditures that disproportionately help the wealthy. Democrats say this cannot create enough revenues to address the deficit, when mortgage deductions, charitable deductions are excluded. The back and forth is leading to stalemate but also opening up discussion for the first time on whether the mortgage and charitable deductions make sense in today's environment. A significant portion of revenues lost in the mortgage deduction goes to affluent households, subsidizing larger borrowings to build larger homes than otherwise, according to the Brookings Institution. Politicians have resisted changes that would go against powerful lobyying groups in the past, yet the impasse has opened up new thinking outside the box because of the pressing need to come up with a solution....

LyrArc Article Gist
Total household debt, including mortgages and credit cards, as a percentage of disposable income, has declined from 130% in 2007 to 116% in 2010. The Federal Reserve reported this data recently. Much of the reduction in debt was done through defaulting or walking away from mortgage loans, and some of it by reducing expenses. Commercial banks wrote off $118 billion in mortgage, credit card and other consumer debt in 2010, according to the Fed data. This amounts to half of the total $209 billion in debt reduction for household debt, which includes new mortgages and credit card debt. Economists say the level of household debt is still high because household debt at a level lower than 100% of disposable income is where it should be. Many consumers are still in a weak condition because of the weak job market, which has resulted in their using up some of their retirement savings till a job at a lower pay is found. Job cuts at the state and local level are still looming as state governors reduce their deficits. Total U.S. nonfinancial debt went up by 4.8% to $36.3 trillion, with a 20% increase in federal debt. Higher gasoline and food prices also act as a tax on households in 2011....

LyrArc Article Gist
The current economic expansion in the U.S. in April 2014 is at 58 months from the beginning of recovery in 2009. In this exceptional account Josh Zombrun of WSJ compares the current expansion to previous expansions since 1950, with the views of experts such as Stan Hall of the NBER committee, which studies turning points. This expansion is forecast to go for 90 months into 2016 by the U.S. Federal Reserve, and 102 months into 2017 by the CBO. Sooner or later, says Stan Hall, some adverse unpredictable event takes place that ends the expansion. So far the expansion has been slow and protracted, as predicted by economists Reinhart and Rogoff from previous financial crises in the last century, giving it room to grow as corporate earnings continue to improve. Fed chairwoman's sense of slack in the economy also provides room for employment and incomes to grow in the later stages of the expansion. This is good news for the emerging market economies such as India and China, and for the European Union, faced with slowing growth. So how does this expansion compare with earlier ones. The expansion of the 1991-2001 of the tech boom was 120 months, 1961-1969 of the Sixties 106 months, 1982-1990 of the Reagan era 92 months. The controversial one on shaky foundations is the recent housing boom 2001-2007 of 73 months ending in a huge bust with the 2008 financial crisis. The shorter expansions are the 1975-1980 Post-Vietnam one for 58 months, and the 1970-1973 spurt before the OPEC price surge. Figures are from the NBER, CBO and the Federal Reserve's Summary of Economic Projections....

LyrArc Article Gist
McInerney takes personal responsibility and puts top priority on the Dreamliner. He says we will be defined by the 787, though not at this moment. This means he is personally walking through Boeing's and Boeing supplier's plants to see things first hand, and have the daily progress reports coming directly to him. This means closer supervision and taking steps to get things right. One step was to get some managers from its Defense unit into the 787 program management to correct things, buying Dallas based Vought Aircraft out of a joint venture with Italy's Alenia Aeronautica in South Carolina where sections ofthe 787 are being joined. He also stepped in taking control of key parts of the 787 program, and insisted on Boeing mangers closely monitoring and getting involved with first hand knowledge on supplier's sites and getting action where needed, and stationing Boeing people at each supplier's plant. His earlier style was a bit hands off in comparison. The 15 month delay in the 787 launch and the rather ill timed gala in Seattle for a plane that was hollow inside, and with managers having no idea that supplier's were already behind in their part of the program or not doing anything about it, may have suggested to investors that Boeing's McInerney and his key people were really not at grips with what was going on in their own company. From its July high of $107 Boeing stock has dropped 27% to $78 and recovered only slightly to $83 still 23% below the highs. Experts feel that McInerney will either lose big or win big. He wasn't there when the 787 program was started. Now he has to show he can get things right. His initial moves look like the right ones, taking personal responsibility, making decisions to fix things, and not hesitant to take corrective action in the midst of difficulties such as getting into suppliers factories first hand to see things on the inside. And gettiing his best people from other parts of the company into a team and putting them on the 787, and so on. See the link to the Airbus experience with their jumbo jet A380 which ran into similiar problems in the WSJ. There the French teams who were the better able to solve the problems were brought into the German plants to help get things right, even though there were cultural issues to be overcome. McInerney has process based experience at GE where quality and manufacturing were important, and he has delivered good results with an 84% increase in income to $4.07 billion, on an 8% increase in revenue to $66.4 billion in 2007. This comes just 2 to 3 years since joining Boeing in July 2005. Boeing may have to pay $4 billion in concessions and penalty payments for late deliveries, and Boeing is going to set aside this cost by booking the first 25 delieveries at zero-profit margin....

LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin of NYT provides some counter intuitive ideas on U.S. Fed interest rate policy. He says it can't be take as a given that the Fed will raise rates in 2017-2018. This depends on how much punch there is in the Trump economic policies for stimulus, and for infrastructure spending, tax cuts. He cites Senate Majority Leader McConnell who said he would like to keep "tax reform revenue neutral." Getting large spending and pushing up the deficit is likely to run up against Republicans in Congress who have for 8 years opposed large spending increases and large deficits. Trump has given few details about his stimulus or infrastructure spending plans. He says the scale of the spending might not match the talk. Irwin cites JP Morgan Chase economists who have kept their forecasts for GDP growth just under 2% for 2017 and 2018. And he points out that even Trump appointees at the Fed might act independently. The Fed might look at being cautious considering that increased trade tensions with China, and the unpredictability of a Trump administration could hurt growth. Irwin does not mention the uncertainty in other areas such as policy towards Russia on which the Republican party and Congress have very different views than Trump, tensions over Taiwan, that can also affect growth. ...