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.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Some figures on the foreclosure situation. 2.3 million Americans faced foreclosure proceedings in 2008, 81% increase over 2007. 860,000 properties were repossessed by lenders, more than double the 2007 level, according to RealtyTRac a foreclosure listing firm in Irvine,, California. Moody's Economy.com predicts the numbers to go up 18% in 2009 before slowing through 2011. That is 2.71 million foreclosures in 2009. To prevent the foreclosure levels from getting much worse as unemployment drops, the new administration plans to use upto $100 billion of the remaining $350 billion TARP funds to help homeowners. The 4 states hardest hit are Nevada, Arizona, California and Florida. More than 1.1 million properties there received foreclosure notices, almost half the total nationwide. The hardest hit areas are in California, with the metro areas worst hit in order are Stockton, California, Las Vegas, Nevada, Riverside and Bakersfield, California, and Phoenix. In December more than 303,000 properties nationwide received foreclosure notices, up 40% from year ago month, and 17% above November 2008. At 303,000 the yearly rate is 3.6 million foreclosures or higher for 2009, so the Moody's estimate for 2009 must take into account acceleration of steps to help homeowners with the new administration. Are the rather modest steps taken upto now helping? RealtyTrac analysts estimate that without a state law requiring lenders to give borrowers a 30 day warning before starting the foreclosure process, the foreclosures in California would be 10% higher. There are similiar state laws in Massachusetts and Maryland. Throughout 2008 few steps were taken by the Bush administration to slow foreclosures, even though Republican economists like Martin Feldstein repeatedly advocated this. See links to Feldstein and Sheila Bair of the FDIC who also advocated aggressive action, and providing the numbers to show that it was costlier for lenders to see borrowers go into foreclosure compared to reducing principal and interest payments significantly. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How bankruptcy courts can offer a solution to the foreclosure crisis or at least mitigate its effects on the economy and on people. Senator Durbin of Illinois is expected to introduce legislation to put this into effect. It was adopted as a Chapter 12 provision to save farmowners in distress in Iowa in the 1980's, and helped keep many farming families on the farm in that situation. Not all families would be helped as some will not be able to make even the reduced payments given by a bankruptcy judge. But it gives bankruptcy courts the authority to cut through all the red tape and reluctance of bankers and mortgage securities owners to take the initiative and reduce payments, and in the end may actually generate more money for lenders than foreclosure, which has high costs on several dimensions. One cost and one dimension that is not considered is the cost to the economy and to all businesses, from retail to other products, as foreclosures lead to declines in housing prices. This leads in a downward spiral to more homeowners going under water with their homes being worth less than the mortgage, and this in turn leading to foreclosures that lead to further house price declines. The decline in housing prices adds to the incentive to save and reduce spending, which leads to inventory buildup and layoffs. This is why the situation cannot be seen in isolation, and becomes an area where interests of individual parties like lenders and securities holders tend not to be maximized when they follow their personal interest. And there is no party that can take the collective interest in this case except the federal government. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Elizabeth Warren on the need for a new consumer protection agency as suggested by President Obama in his proposals.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein says that the $700 billion plan to buy impaired assets will not prevent an overshooting downward in house prices, as more people have negative equity in their homes, rising to 40% of all mortgages at some point; and leading to a cycle of foreclosure and further price declines. This will only decrease the value of the mortgage securities that Treasury seeks to take off the hands of banks. And without direct government help in form of lowcost loans, say 2%, the cost of capital for the government, for 20% of the loan upto $80,000; more and more homeowners will have negative equity in their homes. This will lead to more foreclosures as housing loans are not full recourse, so that only the house is lost and the homeowner can move to an apartment and carry on from there. Thw size of this program would be $1 trillion but it gives the government income from the loans made and these would be full recourse loans so the taxpayer is protected. In Feldstein's view the current plan does not address declining house prices which is the root of the problem. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
After a severe financial crisis that could have snowballed into a Depression type situation and the credit rating agencies playing their critic-for-hire role in causing the crisis, there has been very little done to reform or correct the basic way in which credit ratings are made. Other than small patches to the system that failed the country badly by 2008, it has been left alone by Congress, the Obama administration, and regulatory agencies. The Attorney General of Ohio, Richard Cordray, says the "rating agencies total disregard for the life's work of ordinary Ohioans caused the collapse of our housing and credit markets and is at he heart of what's wrong with Wall Street today." Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut's Attorney General says he plans to join the suit against the credit rating agencies, Fitch, Standard and Poors and Moody's. Cordrays suit was filed Nov. 20, on behalf of Ohio's pension funds. It seeks billions of dollars in damages from these ratings agencies and accuses the agencies of negligence and fraud. About the failure of Congress to make even the basic change to the system of ratings, Joseph Grundfest, a professor of securities law at Stanford says ; "What you see in these bills are Botox shots, for a little while everyone is going to be frozen into a grin, and then the shots are going to wear off.'' A deputy dean at Yale Law School, Jonathan Macey, was a member of a bipartisan task force on credit ratings reform and met with lawmakers in Congress on this issue. He says its mortifying to see that this problem which is different from other complicated issues like water shortages around the world has been left unsolved, as it could be easily solved if there was even a basic degree of political will to do so. Congress looked at the option of creating an independent fee financed credit rating agency along the lines of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, established after the Enron, but did nothing with this idea. Rep. Kanjorski and Senator Reed have led the efforts to look at the credit ratings agencies in Congress and have basically decided this to leave the system very much the same as before the crisis, with the conflict of interest problem and incentives to improve profitability at the expense of the integrity of the ratings process still intact. Bills in Congress give more oversight powers to the S.E.C. and require companies to strengthen their compliance teams. In the period leading to the 2008 crisis the internal compliance teams did not get top management support at the credit rating agencies and there is skepticism about the effectiveness of compliance teams. S.E.C. regulatory efforts face push-back from the credit ratings agencies and the effectiveness of S.E.C. regulatory supervision is uncertain given the critical role that is given to credit ratings in bond and securties issuance....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One big concern says Nancy Keates of the WSJ about the National Association of Realtors, is that the organization collects and puts out objective data about home sales, and at the same time provides a commentary on the statistics. It also has a mission to advance the interests of its members. There are 2.6 million licensed real estate agents, and NAR represents about 1.3 million of these real estate agents. Would the real estate agents and the NAR tolerate an economist who raised concerns about the boom in lending? David Lereah, is former chief economist for the NAR ,and worked there from 2000 to April 2007. He remained upbeat throughout these years, even when the market was headed downwards. And the way he sees it he was doing for 7 years everything the NAR wanted him to do, and he was pressured to issue these upbeat reports. Critics called him "Baghdad Dave", after a Iraqi information minister for his false upbeat reports even when the war on the Iraqi side was lost. And a Credit Suisse analyst called him Liar-eah for some of these upbeat assesments, when things were clearly going wrong. The way Nancy Keates sees it this economist was eager to profit himself in the boom years. He was an economics Professor at Rutgers, at the University of Virginia, and later an economist and regulator at the Federal Deposit and Insurance Corporation. He himself bought condos 2 in Washington in 2003 and 2004, and one each in Tampa, Richmond, Va. and Alexandria, Va. and Naples, Florida. Owning by 2006 six condos worth between $150,000 and $400,000 a condo. He had an expensive lifestyle says his wife, with a big house worth $780,000, a country club, sports fishing boat. So in some ways suggests this reporter, he was caught up in the boom himself with his investments and the demands of a expensive lifestyle, with little room left for independent opinion and analysis. This is a striking example of things gone wrong, with all the meticulousness and comprehensiveness with which data is collected having its value destroyed by the lack of strict objectivity in the analysis. And the intrusion of strong personal interest bias in one direction making the destruction of objectivity complete. Looking at the economists at companies and associations, there is a subtle bias in operation that needs to be discounted by CEO's and association heads, a bias for giving the CEO's better and optimistic assessments on a consistent basis. An example is the way a large number of economists see the recovery taking place in 2009. Another related example is the sales forecasts for the Detroit auto companies that continued to assume sales in the 16-17 million a year rate into the latter half of 2008, even after the Bear Stearns collapse in March and the increasing foreclosures suggested something was amiss. All with horrendous consequences for the companies or industries involved, and the US and global economies....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Applebaum talks to two researchers at the University of Chicago and Princeton, Prof. Sufi and Prof. Mian, on the record of U.S. president Obama and Fed chairman Bernanke in helping homeowners facing foreclosure and underwater borrowers, comparing that record with their record in helping the banks. The issue is relevant as the policy and handling of homeowners had to be part of an overall effective plan for recovery in the U.S. economy, because ultimately without the U.S. consumer any recovery would be weak in the long run- a situation the U.S. faces in early 2014. The response to the issue of irresponsible homeowners borrowing beyond the limit without an equally robust response to irresponsible bank management that allowed wildly excessive leveraging of assets, and successful aggressive lobbying by banks in a shortsighted policy of going through with a wave of foreclosures; besides creating questions of fairness and equitable handling of the problem, also had major ramifications for the future of the U.S. and global economic growth. Here Christina Romer and other administration advisors say Bernanke was right in tackling the problem from the perspective of the banks needing to be recapitalized. Thoughtful advisors looking at the entire problem, Martin Feldstein and Sheila Bair strongly pushed for providing the same help to homeowners without getting caught up in the issue of who was responsible home buyers or the banks, and looking at the interests of the U.S. economy and the U.S. people. Proposals by Feldstein and Bair were equally robust in helping banks as they were in helping homeowners, only the banks understood their interests narrowly and had more access to policymakers in the Bush, as well as the Obama administration, Paulson as well as Geithner. This leaves us with the ultimate irony of the Obama administration pushing for the minimum wage, even to the point of electoral posture, when lasting damage had been inflicted on homeowners from the weaker portions of America's middle class by a policy that went against what two respected financial and economic experts from the Reagan period, Sheila and Bair had strongly advocated. See links and groups on Feldstein and Bair. Applebaum has followed most aspects of this problem closely and continues to provide exceptional reporting including the piece on the thinking of new Fed chairman, Janet Yellen. Private enterprise rules that require management at banks just as for other companies to take responsibility for failures, and be replaced with new management, was largely avoided leading to a fundamental failure in how a free market economy such as the U.S. and western European economies are supposed to function. Rules aggressively pushed by Geithner's mentor Treasury Secretary Rubin for a vigorous cleanup at banks in South Korea during a similiar situation in 1997, were not followed in any way here, also setting wrong precedents for the long run. ...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The economist argues that home ownership is not benficial as social policy as it was made out to be. People in negative equity, or holding subprime mortgages, or people in foreclosure with blighted neighborhoods and acceleration in falling prices, and the lack of mobility that comes with home ownership in states that have high home ownership, and disappearing wealth with falling prices, make it a poor tool of social policy and a failed way of accumulating wealth. Experts say that one in four recesssions are caused by housing market collapse, and these recessions take longer to heal. The heavy borrowing against home equity of $9 trillion between 1997 and 2006- equal to more than 90% of disposable income- also makes this inr reality a way of adding debt not of accumulating wealth, as the wealth has an illusory aspect when prices are pushed up by the constant trading of homes as investments setting up a bubble phenomena, and renters who do not have what it takes to own a home are pushed into home ownership. About 10 million homeowners have negative equity in their homes. The value of American homeowners equity has dropped from the peak of $12.5 trillion in 2005 to just $8.5 trillion at the end of 2008. All that $9 trillion in debt is piled up against illusory gains in wealth based on transitory house price jumps. These numbers suggest that the $9 trillion in debt from borrowing aginst home equity is more than the entire value of homeowner equity in the USA, meaning if Americans had aliquid market and sold all their homes today they could not pay off the debt generated from home equity borrowing during the bubble years. Worse still cutbacks in consumption are severe in such situations, and this situation weakens banks balance sheets as foreclosures increase, creating a vicious cycle and downward trend as investment and employment are also hit hard, one that is hard to break....
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Bell at Tsinghua University in Beijing, Andy Xie, economist in Shanghai, Zhang Habin, professor at Peking University, and Michael Meyer, author and hutong expert, talk about what issues are important. Bell says Obama mania is absent among the young in China, though they respect his intellectual abilities, and Chinese are not looking to the USA for ideals. They are looking to Chinese culture and characteristics, and democracy is seen in this light with emphasis on Chinese characteristics. This means the US has to engage at a deeper level with China. Treat China as an equal with something positive to offer, says Bell. Andy Xie is concerned about the US-China relationship, based as it is today on tenuous grounds, where what happens in Florida and California can have a significant and immediate effect on what happens in Guangdong. With 70% of the furniture sold in the US made in China, the effects are immediate when housing slumps. So he says the US lost 3 million jobs since the subprime crisis, and China lost 20 million jobs. And for the 5 million college graduates coming out in 2009, they will be adding to the 5 million college graduates from previous years who are seeking jobs. Ten million unemployed college graduates mean China is seeing whole new conditions as the backdrop of US-China relations. Habin says its important for the US to set an example in climate change and emissions of greenhouse gases. The US should sign an agreement with China with binding targets, make its technology available to China, and provide development aid to make this technology and other assistance accessible to China. Cooperation on this issue is vital to future relations says Habin. Meyer says the hutong, small enclaves of old Beijing with lanes and small homes, that the city officials call neighborhood slums, but actually have a sense of community and a vibrant life, are worth preserving. He questions the Walmart and Pepsi commercial culture, and questions building of the American car culture urban plan that generates pollution, lacks community feeling, and is not energy efficient. In fact he has a point here, because the US is shifting away from its own older urban planning design that encourages urban sprawl, as in California. The new Sacramento urban plan that is being adopted for the future in America has energy efficiency, more community and easy interaction, less urban sprawl in mind. See the link to this. But Meyer says Chinese planners insist on their right to make the same mistakes American urban planners made. And Meyer quotes the head of the first Chinese environmental NGO, who says, "if the Chinese want to live the American way of life we need 7 earths to support them". Which raises a disturbing question of the US postwar way of life with its large SUV's, urban sprawl, and less sense of community. Wouldn't the US have to join India and China in the worldwide scramble for resources to preserve this way of life? Just this week China signed $51 billion of deals for natural resources, see the link. And is the rapid decline of the SUV, just the first sign of changes that are taking place, with the economic changes in coming years leading to grappling with issues of better quality of life, smaller quantity of things, health and obesity and lifestyles, community, all coming to the fore. ...
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›

Show Us the Hope

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times editorial page on the day following the passage of the second bailout or rescue plan of $700 billion in the Senate after it was voted down in the House of Representatives. It points out that the bailout bill does little to prevent a wave of foreclosures which the NYT estimates at six million people expected to default in the rest of this year and 2009. It faults lenders unwillingness to reduce the loan balances amount. At a Congressional hearing for the Hope for Homeowners program in which the governmet wold insure upto $300 bilonin new affordable loans for troubled borrowers if the lenders voluntarily refinance delinquent mortgages by reducing loan balances to 90% of the homes' current market value, lending banks were lukewarm about taking these losses in exchange for bigger losses in foreclosures. These lenders include Wels Fargo, Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup. The FDIC's Sheila Barr has also advocated reducing loan balances in her proposal for tackling the housing crisis presented after the Bear Stearns crisis. She is taking this approach to banks that like IndyMac were taken over by FDIC. But the numbers are not large letters were sent to 28,000 delinquent borrowers of IndyMac recently to reduce loan balances. This is a serious problem and either Congress and Treasury are leaving this problem to the next administration taking office 3 months from now as there is no real consensus on this issue even today or they are missing the impact this has in dropping home price values even further in neigborhoods across the nation as foreclosures drive prices down even further compounding the problem. For the financial institutions it would appear that they are letting this drag out because their capital is at frighteningly low levels and taking losses at one time is harder than taking the foreclosure losses dragged out over 1-3 years and they are also looking for a way in which they can let the government bear the burden of losses as the crisis intensifies which can make sense from the point of view of each institution. According to a report in the Wall Street Journal on September 29, 2008, Sheila Barr told Congress this month that in recent years troubled loan portfolios have yielded about 32% of book value, compared with more than 87% for loans in which the borrower is current. These are strong statistics in favor of lenders taking an informed decision to lower loan balances voluntarily with some government help along the way but the fact that this is not happening leads one to think that something is falling between the cracks, initial lender reluctance to take losses through voluntary balance reduction at the time of Bear Stearns crisis given taxpayer reluctance and lack of government initiative to help lenders in doing this, sort of what Martin Feldstein suggested in a series of articles during the time before and after the Bear Steans crisis. And then as the credit crisis worsened with collapse of Lehman, WaMu, Freddie, Fannie and Wachovia in September 2008 fear gripping the markets and LIBOR interbank lending rate at close to 8%, banks gripped by the fear prevailing in the market, frozen practically about any steps other than preserving their hammered capital, and reluctant to take losses which would further impair their capital. Also in the WSJ Sept 8, on help for homeowners, Deutsche Bank estimates 40% of homeowners or about 20 million households will owe more than their home is worth by the time the housing market stabilizes. This will lead to some homeowners making the rational decision as Martin Feldstein argued to walk away from their homes, leading to more foreclosure losses for th banks. This article Rescue Includes Steps to Help Borrowers Keep Homes by Ruth Simon also has some information that confirms the NYT editorial. An analysis it says of 144 mortgage modifications by the Massachusetts Attorney General's office found that none reduced mortgage balances and onoly a handful reduced monthly payments. Even with interest rate reductions, the study showed borrrowers wound up paying more because of missed paymmets penalties and fees. Another study by Credit Suisse mentioned in the same article points out that the percentage of borrowers who were behind 6 months after loan modifications dropped to 17% when lenders reduced the loan balances and 13% when mortgage companies froze the interest rate of adjustable rate mortgages. A bigger problem is the effect on consumption, if 40% of homeowners end up owing more to the bank than their home is worth as Deutsche Bank estimates, combined with higher unemployment and higher parttime employment, by the time things stabilize. And this is the big looming problem for a new administration in January even if the bailout plan passes Congress this week after revisions and eases the crisis in the credit markets. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Incentives for automobile sales are increasing back up to about $3000 a year from $2000, as auto sales reach a level of 16.3 million annual sales in month of October 2014, according to KBB analysts.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. auto sales including cars and light trucks reached 17.5 million in 2015, a 5.7% increase over 2014. Larger vehicles including pickup tucks and SUV's account for about half of all auto sales in 2015, with gas prices below $2.00 a gallon in Jan 2016 in most parts of the U.S. The average transaction price was up to $34,428, according to Kelley Blue Book. Auto incentives were up to $3063 per vehicle compared to $2809 ten years earlier, according to Kelley Blue Book. Analysts say automakers will reduce margins to subsidize zero interest loans in 2016 to increase sales. Lower sales are forecast after 2017 as the market will have caught up with much of the pent up demand by then. A plus for the automakers is the lower cost of steel and other material costs, and the better cost structures after bankruptcy, and renegotiated lower union pay scales. Additional plus is new management at U.S. automakers and at Toyota, and the technological advances this management is pushing, including fuel efficiency. Ride sharing, and other services developed by Google, are seen as disrupting the traditional car model to a limited extent. Countering this new development are millenials who are accounting for a quarter of Toyota sales in the last quarter of 2015, according to a Toyota executive....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
BusinessWeek Original article ›
Detroit Free Press Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Subprime also includes high rate loans that higher income borrowers used between 2004 and 2006 to buy homes that had inflated prices. And these loans were heavily marketed by mortgage lenders and in the later stages of the boom by thrifts and banks who got into the act also. As a result every corner of the country and every income bracket borrowers have been caught up in the high rate borrowing most were overstretching themselves to meet the higher prices of homes as prices went up. This is the finding of a research done by the WSJ of 130 million home loans in the past decade with particular focus on the period 2004- 2006 when the worst aspects of this bubble were taking place. Note that about $600 billion in adjustable rate loans will adjust by the end of 2008. And a total of 1.5 trillion dollars of high rate loans were made in 2004-2006 so more ogf these high rate loans will adjust in 2009. Places like Las Vegas, Nevada, Stockton, California, and Fort Myers, Florida and these states may be the hardest hit but the problem is spread nationwide is what the Journal's research suggests and is also not limited to poorer borrowers. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The House bill just passed will only help 500,000 homeowners avoid foreclosure, when foreclosures this year are expected to be more than 2.4 million and much higher next year, as its estimated that 9 million homeowners have negative equity in their homes already. It doesn't do enough to prevent a downward spiral in house prices that will be difficult to control once it picks up speed. So while Congress is only doing too little, Bush administration is doing nothing. Here a NYT editorial points to Mr Bush's worthy efforts as having negligible impact. Hope Now after 5 months has barely dented the problem, Project Lifeline hasn't produced results, and FHA Secure has helped fewer than 2000 homeowners facing foreclosure. This is a shame because Mr Bush has praised FHA Secure. Doubts expressed that Mr Bush is sincere about his intentions or efforts, that the Republican's free market biases may be behind this, that bold action would not let the market offer a necessary correction in their view. Also possible is that like the Council of Economic Advisors chairman Lazear, Bush feels optimistic that the economic situation is not as bad as its made out to be and will respond to the stimulus package of government checks....

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