LyrArc Article Gist
In this interview with Alessandra Galloni of the WSJ following the June 28, 2012 European summit, Monti says Italian spreads with German bonds would be 1200 or something if the Berlusconi government were still in power. Monti later called Berlusconi to say he regretted the extrapolations on spreads mentioned in the intervew that could be seen as banal or abstract. This is taking the phrase out of the context as the comment was made in the context of a question by Galloni asking why Italian spreads were so high even after the actions taken by Monti to improve competitiveness including labor reforms. Monti's answer was that this was because markets are sensing that eurozone governance is weak, that though France has done less reform its spreads are low because people think Germany would never let France go. Monti makes the statement here that the agreement of Europe's political leaders that they would do whatever is necessary to save the euro after the eurozone June 2012 summit, including stabilizing the markets through EFSF/ESM instrument, gives the ECB the political and moral justification to engage in buying Italian and Spanish bonds to stabiize yields at acceptable levels. He just hopes the ECB does not wait till the night before the catastrophe (disintegration of the euro) before it acts, and does this slightly before that time. And his words to Merkel and Germany about the need for ECB interventions to stabilize yields are clearly stated- Merkel risks facing an Italian parliament that rejects Europe and the euro and is not a friend of Germany if the action is not taken.Throughout Monti remains committed to the idea of a economic and monetary union of Europe. To give up on the euro is to give up not just a currency but a civic culture. It is the most forceful statement of any European leader during the eurozone crisis....

LyrArc Article Gist
Russian president Putin tells Russians at an annual news conference on Dec. 17, 2014, that the West wanted to deprive Russia of its natural resources. He says steps taken by the central bank and his administration were proper, including avoiding capital controls, except that the decision to raise interest rates to 17% in mid-Dec. should have been taken earlier. He deflects criticism that the sanctions and the decline in the ruble were "payment for Crimea" (Russia's takeover of the Crimea) by saying it was "payment for our independence, our sovereignty." Putin expressed unease with the expansion of NATO to Russia's borders. He told Russians to expect that the crisis will last for 2 years and during this time the Russian economy will adapt, in particular shifting its heavy dependence on oil exports. During the 10 years of the Putin administration since 2004, Russia has not made a vigorous effort to diversify away from oil dependence. Progress was made primarily in better integrating the economy with the European Union, entry into WTO, building a sovereign reserves fund, until the crisis in Ukraine. The Putin years may be seen in the future as the transition years towards a more diversified economy, and may lead to a shift away from the kind of management of economic and foreign policy by a single leader that may have led to the disruption in relations with Germany, a critical economic partner for Russia. Chancellor Merkel said Germany would continue to support sanctions as long as Russia opposed the right of self- determination of people in Europe and European values. Germany continues even now to maintain dialogue with Russia through Social Democrat Foreign Minister Steinmeier, which is why Putin continues to refer to it as "our partners" and cites the differences with our partners, very different from the Cold War period when no such close relations with Germany existed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A former vice president of the ECB, Lucas Papademos, heads a new Unity government in Greece in November 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
Coordinated action by the governments of France, Britain and Germany each with its own package depending on its own circumstances but committing over a trillion dollars to rescue plans for financial institutions. In Britain the government moved to take majority stakes in 2 of its largest banks, the Royal Bank of Scotland, and the newly combied bank of Lloyds TSB and HBOS in exchange for a $64 billion capital infusion. In Berlin the German government setup a 480 billion euros package consisting mostly of loan guarantees, with 400 billon euros in guarantees for inter-bank loans and another $80 billion euros for direct injections of capital to help weak balance sheets and purchase toxic or illiquid assets of German banks that are at the brink of collapse. The French have setup their own 360 billion euros package. The French government will create a fund to raise money to guarantee debt for upto 5 years in a bid to make cash available to banks. The banks can access these funds in exchange for putting up their own collateral, including debt not currently accepted by the ECB. And a state sponsored company will provide upto 40 billion euros in direct capital injections to banks that request it in exchange for equity stakes. In addition Netherlands made $220 billion euros available for capital injection into banks and other efforts and Spain will insure upto 100 billion euros in bank debt. Britain's step are the boldest ones yet and Britain's crisis is also likely to be one of the worst because of years of leveraging and overborrowing. But the German financial system is also under heavy strain and strong swift action was necessary to keep its banking system functioning. While other countries have setup the funds for capital injection like other European countries and the USA, Britain has also take the lead in taking majority stakes in two of its largest banks by Monday, October 13, with the departure of the executives who got these banks into such a mess. Gordon Brown has shown cosiderable leadership in this crisis and has been at the forefront in proposing and acting on workable solutions and swift response while Germany and the USA lagged behind. France's Sarkozy's contribution has been in the area of global coordination which he has argued and worked for and successfully achieved during the last 2 weeks....

LyrArc Article Gist
European banks hold $147 billion of Portugal's assets and $117 billion of Greece's assets. The banking systems of Euopean lending countries are heavily exposed in the event of a sovereign default which is why it is in the self interest of Germany and France to come up with an aid package that restores confidence in financial markets, to avoid a direct hit to their banking system. Because of the ineptitude of Europe's decisionmakers, especially Chancellor Angela Merkel, private investors will not play the role in helping roll over Greek debt at tolerable interest rates that they could have played. With the now larger aid package of $160 billon there are still concerns from other angles. One is that debts of Greece will continue to grow- hence the three year aid plan. Analysis by the Economist suggests that the Greek government debt would rise to 149% of GDP by 2014 even with an aggressive budget deficit reduction of 12 percentage points (excluding interest costs). This assumes an interest cost of 5% in the aid package. In an average year Greece needs to refinance 40 billon euros of its debt and $70 billon is needed to cover cumulative budget deficits till 2014, hence the need for the IMF to step in and the nervousness in financial markets. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Is time slipping away for Russia to restore what it sees as its special relationship with Ukraine, as Ukraine finds its own identity through its language and independent Orthodox Christian Church since 2019. This WSJ podcast report is by James Marson who lived in Kiev from 2007 to 2012, and Ryan Knutson, with the Archbishop of St Michael's cathedral in Kiev, and the editor of Elle magazine edition in Ukraine joining in.  To understand Ukraine one has to know that Russian is the language of the cities, which means people in Kiev speak Russian. People in the countryside Ukrainian. This is very unusual for a nation and it shows the condition of the country for centuries where intellectuals in cities dominated cultural and political life distant from the people in the countryside. For centuries Ukraine was dominated alternately by either Poland and Lithuania or Russia other than a period of 200 years around 1250-1400 when the Mongols were dominant. The peasants and countryside suffered greatly as in India and other parts of central Europe in the long history till the modern period in 1900.  Russians see their origins in the Kyivan Rus, a state bringing together the different ethnicities Ukrainian and Russian in the period 1000-1240 under the Byzantine Church in Constantinople. Kyiv, the modern capital of Ukraine called Kiev today being the capital of this state. This is the cultural connection that president Putin and Russians see as one they do not want to see drift away. After the Russian state drove out the Mongols in 1240 the northern provinces and Kiev became part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the rest became part of a new Russian state. After 1650 Ukraine became part of the Russian Empire and by 1800 with the partition of Poland was fully made part of the Russian Empire. Russian is now after 1800 the language of the intellectual class in Kiev and the cities, and Ukrainian language persists in the countryside. In 1804 Ukrainian is banned as a language and subject of instruction in schools. The end of the Russian Empire under the Tsars in 1917 ended the ban on the Ukrainian language and a period of respect of the cultures of the different soviet republics including Ukraine ensued. Putin has strong feelings on Kyiv, or modern Kiev, as the place where Russia as a country began. He wrote a 7000 word essay says this report in WSJ in 2010 on this relationship as he sees it.  Yet the period of protests in Kiev since 2010 has resulted in Ukraine building  its own identity as a nation. Magazines in the country are required to use Ukrainian for 50% of their circulation. People in Kiev now use Ukrainian instead of Russian as the sense of national identity is being revived. During 1917-1921 Ukraine fought a war with the Bolsheviks after the Russian Empire collapsed. This history is why Russia is acting now to push for Ukraine not drift completely away. It is also what makes Ukraine different from Poland which has cultural ties to Western Europe. It is why the US or Germany is not willing to go to war with Russia over Ukraine, as it would over Poland. It is also why Russia may not see war as the best option as about one third of Ukrainians say they will fight to defend their country, according to this report. The situation is complex and this is why both sides want to negotiate some way out in which Russia wants the US and NATO respecting its sense of connection with Ukraine in its history with Kyiv as the place Russian state started, and Russia not going further. Russia's tangible proposal is for no to Ukraine joining NATO or the European Union. The US and Germany want something else- the right of Eastern European nations that suffered from Tsarist or Soviet domination or German Hapsburg domination to finally be able to assert their own right of self-determination as democratic countries. This would include Finland. And also Sweden. Ukraine is not another small Eastern European country. Population is 44 million and it is the second largest by area in Europe after Russia.  Russia may also see the move to bring this up at this time as a way to unify the country against what it sees as threat from NATO. As Brendan Simms of Cambridge notes in his recent book -Europe, France went through a period after 1600 when it needed external danger as a way to unify the country, as much as unity of the country to fight external danger. The economic costs after building Nordstream II pipeline are to0 great for both Russia and Germany, and for the US and Russia during the pandemic, which means there is a real need to find a way out for all sides.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Recent polls suggest that 4 out of 5 Germans say they are not benefitting from the rebound. Germany has experienced growth with the recovery in export markets in Asia, but the benefits are not being seen at home. Experts at the OECD, and at Duisburg-Essen University's employment institute, say that there has been a downside to the unemployment rate having reached 7.6%; much of this gain has been achieved by expanding the low wage sector. Something like this has not happened in other European countries. The OECD employment outlook report 2010, reveals that 21.5% of Germans were employed in the low-wage sector in 2008, compared to 16% in 1998. The Duisburg-Essen University estimate is that 2.3 million workers were added in this sector from 1998 to 2008, with a total of 6.55 million workers in this sector in 2008. What is happening according to experts is that the Hartz IV labor-market reform is subsidizing the low wages paid by the private sector. And the German government has spent $50 billion in subsidies for people in this sector since 2005. The concern relates to consumer spending which is tight in Germany, even as exports have done well in the recovery from 2008. Average net income has actually fallen since 2004 in Germany, reaching 15,815 euros in 2009 from the figure of 16,471 euros in 2004. Germay has no minimum wage across all sectors. To have a minimum wage comparable to other European countries, hourly pay would have to be between 5.93 euros and 9.18 euros. The DGB group of unions have called for a 8.50 euro minimum wage. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jeanne Whalen on the Two Speed Economy in the US September 2025- diverging paths of low and high income Americans. With the new administration in 2025 priorities shift to immigration and what to do about 14 million illegal migrants from Latin America and other places, war on fentanyl and drug trafficking gangs with hundreds of thousands of lives lost to fentanyl and drugs in the US, crime and safety which includes the unprecedented illegal movement of drug trafficking in the Nation, and to a bold posture on using US advantages of its huge market to get European Union, Japan, South Korea, and China to level the playing field on trade bring jobs home.The Biden administration had already conceded to DJT's approach in its one term presidency by shifting on uncontrolled illegal migration but not fast enough, by not removing DJT's tariffs, and failing to take an aggressive posture on fentanyl and drug trafficking. Of the DJT plan US has tariff based revenues of 10--15% for all countries imports into US can that it redirect to groups to soften any effects of tariffs. DJT administration oil transition policy of stretching out the transition to give middle class and lower classes cost of living relief was also accepted by the Biden administration and is now the policy of Democrat run California state government.  The US economy was slowing in 2024 under the Biden administration. What has changed in 2025 is that the US stock markets are responding to steps taken by the DJT Republican administration to lower the cost of doing business by softening regulations, and giving US business the upper hand in different industries, and rebuilding the manufacturing sector with calls for EU and Japan/South Korea to invest more in the US as a quid pro quo for market access. This has led to increase in the value of market portfolios of the income earners above 250,000, or 10% of American households. As this happens the process of trade renegotiation has introduced some uncertainty in 2025 and businesses are looking for more clarity before increasing investment and slowing job hiring which hurts younger people entering the job market and lower income Americans. Were things better under Biden? Government Covid assistance and payouts in the early years 2020-2021 helped lower income workers, as this faded and the cost of living autos, housing increased sharply under Biden in 2022-2024 the situation deteriorated. The situation today is similar to the situation in 2024 with the difference in 2025 that inflation is coming down just as government help is receding. And added factor is the DJT administration plan to tackle head on the increasing cost of Medicaid to about $1 trillion by adding new requirements and reducing subsidies. The federal workforce had a disproportionate share of black workers and the policy changes to reduce the federal workforce have increased black unemployment from 6.1% under Biden in August 2024 to 7.5 % a year later. Hispanics have seen slight improvement in unemployment to 5.3% in 2025, and the middle class incomes also have held up and are holding steady. Meantime Bloomberg points out that one third of people in the top 10% are living paycheck by paycheck because of high cost of housing, university education for children, and inflation.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new regulations that Britain's FSA and Germany wish to see implemented. FSA would like to see hedge funds regulated, regulation of credit defalt swaps and other financial instruments not currently regulated, a larger set aside of capital to cushion losses in a downturn, and an active regulator who would probe into the books and capability of staffs at financial institutions. Germany also wants to strengthen the authority of its regulator, and wants to see a bigger set aside amount for losses in a downturn in a countercyclical manner. Britiain's FSA also wants to regulate the local branches of foreign financial insttitutions.

LyrArc Article Gist
A 2004 rule made under SEC Chairman Donaldson and requested by the investment banks one of which Goldman Sachs was headed by Paulson changed the whole playing field and created the dangerous situation of huge leveraging that has led to the collapse of some of these banks. Older regulations limited the amount of debt that these investment banks could take on. With the new rule billions of dollars held in reserve as a cushion against losses could now be used by these banks to invest in mortgage securities and credit derivatives, a form of insurance for bond holders. Others on the SEC who supported it included Goldschmid, an authority on securites law at Columbia who asked relevant questions but relied on the assurance of Annette Nazareth, head of market regulation that under the new rules the investment banks would also be restricted by the commission from risky activity, that under the new rule the SEC would be able to look into the books of the parent companies and subsidiaries of the investment banks. But no detailed and strict oversight methods were laid out, and instead these banks were allowed to go out on their own without any restrictions. The riskiness of investments would be measured by the computer models and brains not of the SEC but of the investment banks themselves. And these banks went on a leveraging binge with 33 to 1 for Bear Stearns which collapsed in 2008. One lone dissenter was a person who wrote the computer models to determine the riskiness of investments which were used by the banks, was at the University of Chicago, and was a risk management expert. He cautioned in a letter that these computer models had failed in the 1997 LTCM collapse and could not be relied on as environments change. At the SEC oversight was handled by 7 people and this was to oversee some $4 trillion in assets, hopelessly understaffed, and most of them believing that the investment banks would self police themselves as they were ideologically believers in deregulation. So no inspections were done for an year and half upto August 2008 even when there were clear signals of trouble according to an Inspector General's report. This group had no director since March 2007. Soon after the rule Donaldson the SEC chairman left and a Congressman from a conservative district in California became Chairman, Christopher Cox. He favored deregulation and may not have even been aware that the 2004 rule had created a new and dangerous environment, so he followed his instincts and even dismantled a risk management unit Donaldson had established. Which is why McCain has called for his firing....

LyrArc Article Gist
The failure of Basel 1 and 2 and the effects of the Asian market crisis in 1997 in creating a situation of current account surpluses in Asia and other countries that ended up in extra liquidity in the western countries where debt went out of control. The concerns about negotiations to enhance the role of emerging economies in the IMF, the Financial Stability Forum and other organizations, as these organizations play a larger role and need larger access to funds. The chance that with such a large agenda especially in the area of regulation and enlarged representation of emerging economies in international organizations like the IMF, the leaders of G20 may simply use this meeting and meetings in coming months to forward their own leader and country agendas, leaving these issues unresolved for now.

LyrArc Article Gist
French president Hollande's approval ratings dropped to a new low of 12% in a survey by TNS Sofres. In 2013 Hollande's approval ratings dropped to 26% before increasing to 30% after the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks in Jan. 2015. The recent terrorist attacks, France's high unemployment rate, his appearance of being indecisive, and the new labor law, have increased Hollande's unpopularity. As a result his colleague in the Socialist Party, prime minister Manuel Valls, now plays an important role in the administration. Middle class workers 35-49 years are the group where Hollande does poorly. Former president Sarkozy's rating never dropped below 30%. Compared to Hollande, Merkel of Germany has an approval rating that is far better at 54% and Obama in the U.S. of 56%. Merkel has achieved this following the differences in Germany over letting in large numbers of immigrants, and Obama after 8 years in office and differences in the Democratic Party on trade and economic policy. Trudeau in Canada has an approval rating of 63%. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Zeit Online takes a look at German chancellor Angela Merkel's statement made in a beer tent in the Muich suburb of Trudering- "The times in which we can completely rely on others are somewhat over, as I have experienced in the past few days." Zeit Online says the words "ein Stuck" in German were meant to say a bit or somewhat, but the essence of the statement that the depending on the trans-Atlantic alliance was now over comes right through.

LyrArc Article Gist
The head of the World trade Organization Okonjo-Iweala and the prime minister of Bahamas Mia Mottley say that overconcentration of manufacturing in China creates fewer opportunities for growth for poor countries. The supply chain needs to be redesigned after the pandemic not just because it creates a more dependable supply chain for the US and the European Union. It also  needs to be resdesigned to increase manufacturing in countries such as India and Mexico because this will create more opportunities for growth in other countries. For this to happen the infrastructure has to be made similar to that in China. This program of rapidly building the latest infrastructure and logistics with next generation technologies is underway in India with the Modi administration building new pools of capital, skilled labor, land and logistical infrastructure for the purpose of  rapid export led growth. A target of 2 trillion dollars in exports by 2030 has been set by India. This will affect a broad region from Indonesia to Vietnam in Asia and Mexico, Brazil in Latin America, bringing the benefits of trade to a wider region for the first time and making allies of the US and the European Union true partners in trade and manufacturing for the supply chain. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US Federal Reserve Report on Economic Wellbeing of US Households 2024-May 2025 gives some insights into the well being of American households. It shows food insufficiency households the same in 2023-2025 at 7%. The situation for cost of living remains a concern in 2024 as well as 2025. Retirement savings have improved for many middle class Americans, as confirmed by reports from Fidelity and Vanguard. The people earning less than 25,000 are 19% and about the same in 2024 under Biden as under DJT in 2025. 39% make $100,000 or more and 26% make $50,000 -$100,000. Combining the 19% making less than $25,000 and the 16% making between $25,000 and $50,000 shows about one third of the population under $50,000 living paycheck to paycheck. It would appear that $2000 DJT rebate putting $160 billion out of $550 billion of tariff revenues for 2025-2026  in the hands of 79 million households that make less than $100,000 would go a long way to keep the situation stable with optimism and hope arising from the restructuring of world trade that would bring trillions of dollars of investment into the US from Europe and Asia. A this investment plus domestic investment should bring back jobs and higher incomes to US manufacturing in small towns across America. The rest of $550 billion tariff revenue of $390 billion would go to reducing the deficit which would improve prospects for the economy in 2027 and produce a more resilient economy in 2027-2028. As shown on this page the popular Democratic Governor of Michigan in her op-ed in Washington Post supports strategic tariffs, and supports using the revenue for a check to American workers of $2000 per worker or per worker household and offers to work with the opposite party to get a WIN-WIN for the American People.  In the whole process of trade tariffs it must be remembered when seeing the inconsistent cases of tariff use by this Republican administration that these were special reason situations not aberrations or whimsical. First, it should be borne in mind that behind the appearance of DJT making tariff decisions is a carefully thought out process that took ten years to form under Reagan era Trade Representative Lighthizer who negotiated with Japan, and his deputy Jamieson for 2016-2024, and the economic and capital markets experience of Scott Bessent as Treasury Secretary. The two cases of inconsistent application of tariffs relate to the 50% tariff on India and the reduction of tariffs on China agreement on rare earths, and the imposition of a large tarif on Japan and the EU. In the first instance with India it was intended to give Ukraine breathing room from Russian attacks as Germany steps up its military preparedness and assistance to Ukraine. With both countries it was about saving face important in Asian or any societies and it has achieved it's purpose. Reports show both Indian and Chinese refiners have quietly cut purchases of oil from Russia leading to Russian oil selling at about $20 discount to Brent crude oil. In the case of Japan the quick action to raise tariffs was intended not to get into long drawn negotiations and show serious intent- Japan is known for dragging out negotiations for years if not decades. The same is true for the European Union. With the Swiss it was about a certain disrespect of the US coming from attitudes that Swiss products were somehow superior. Not just in the long run, in 2026-2028 history will show that the effort done right - and it takes effort to get this right- to restructure world trade so that other nations are not siphoning off the benefits and leaving the US to lose its manufacturing and factories is the right one. And taken with courage and sincere desire to create a fair distribution of the benefits of world trade for too long distorted by egregious practices of competitors. It has nothing to do with 2 senators from the 1930's who were from places like the Mountain West in the US, having no concept of world trade, Smoot and Hawley, who under a irresponsible president Hoover got everything wrong. This is a carefully set out plan to evenly balance the benefits of world trade to all nations.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Sarkozy on what the euro means for France. Sarkozy told employees of the Airbus plant in Toulouse, France, that the euro was good for France. The single currency had protected France during the economic crisis. "Alone, France cannot resist outside pressures. France is going to borrow 180 billion euros in the financial markets this year to finance 35 years of accumulated budget deficits. Thanks to the euro we can borrow at 3% or a bit more; at the beginning of the 1990's we were paying 10%," he said. He added that "dismantling the euro zone would be like dismantling Europe... I will do everything I can to preserve the euro. He also emphasized that "we can't share the same currency and have different economic strategies," and called for macroeconomic and structural convergence in economic policies.

LyrArc Article Gist
The German and French positions on solutions to the eurozone debt crisis are in conflict. As a result the negotiations between France's Sarkozy and Germany's Merkel are deadlocked. The basic differences revolve around three basic issues. Germany wants to see a lasting solution in which Greece debt is restructured so that banks and other creditors that loaned money to Greece voluntarily take losses so that Greece's debt can be reduced to a sustainable level of no more than 50% of what it is now. France, the ECB and the French banks do not want to restructure Greek debt in this manner beyond the 21% reduction in value of debt under the July 2011 agreement. The voluntary reduction in Greek debt by the banks would prevent a default by Greece and unsettling of the financial markets. France fears market contagion from the restructuring of Greece debt that would place pressure on French banks as the value of the Greek, Spanish and Italian sovereign debt French banks hold declines in value. That would require a major recapitalization of French banks and additional cuts to the French budget. Additional twists to the negotiations are that Sarkozy is unpopular in France with elections six months away. For this reason Sarkozy would prefer to recapitalize after 9 months. A way to get around the need for more deficit cutting (austerity measures) in France, is for the European Financial Stability Fund to be able to borrow money from the European Central bank. The ECB can print euros in that situation. Germany's chancellor Merkel has to consider German public opinion and experts from the German central bank, who are adamantly against using the ECB to print money and Germany committing itself to bankrolling most of the effort. Germany wants France to use its own money to recapitalize French banks, with Germany only responsible for recapitalizing its banks. Merkel told her parliamentary caucus in Berlin that "the path is closed for using the European Central Bank to ease liquidity problems." Because of Germany's insistence on financial soundness for any solution, France being in the more difficult financial position and Sarkozy facing elections willing to come up with a short term fix, and the unwillingness of French and German banks to take the losses necessary for a lasting solution, the Germans see a real solution taking a long time. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Netherlands government of prime minister Mark Rutte collapsed on April 22, 2012, after the Freedom party of Geert Wilders said it would not support futher budget cuts. Mr. Wilders said: "We don't want our pensioners to bleed just to meet the dictates coming from Brussels." Government forecasts had predicted the Netherlands deficit at 4.6% of GDP in 2012, above the 3% goal set by the European Union. And negotiations that collapsed were about making $18 billion in budget cuts to help meet the deficit goal. Rutte will now lead a caretaker government till elections in September or October 2012. Credit agencies may lower the Netherlands credit ratings from AAA and this would raise Netherlands borrowing costs in coming months. The result would be to increase the deficit even further. The Netherlands government was a strong supporter of Germany to introduce strict austerity measures and budget cuts in the eurozone during the debt crisis in EU countries in 2010-2011. With the elections in France and the defeat of French president Sarkozy in the first phase of elections by Socialist candidate Francois Hollande, the austerity programs in Europe appear to be unravelling. The deeper Europe goes into a recession in 2012-2013, the more likely new measures will be needed to address competitiveness, growth, interest rates and overvalued currencies as opposed to largely fiscal and budget measures alone....

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip points out in this WSJ analysis that the new NAFTA after negotiations and warnings from Mr. Trump to scrap NAFTA, is not very different from the old NAFTA. Mexico made concessions on auto exports and labor rights, wages. Canada made concessions for the dairy industry. Yet the combined influence of business interests, Canada's lobbying in U.S. Congress and state governments, and the restraint shown by Trump's own advisers prevailed in limiting Mr. Trump's tendencies to go for a "America first" agenda. It shows, says Ip, that there is resilience in the existing order.  It also shows what future trade negotiations with the European Union and Japan over steel and autos could look like. President Trump will continue to face resistance within from his advisers and from exporters, business, Congress, on following an exclusively "America First" agenda. President Trump will need to extol NAFTA in its current version the USMCA, U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement, to get it through the U.S. Congress in 2019.   Mexico's main concessions on autos were to agree to potential tariffs if exports exceed 2.6 million vehicles.  This keeps Mexico's status as a major auto export hub intact. Auto experts say VW and Mazda may simply pay the tariff of 2.5% for lower priced models assembled in Mexico that do not qualify for duty free entry instead of shifting production to the U.S. Current shipments from Mexico are not affected as U.S. demand is weak. Labor rights and higher wages in Mexico's auto industry are a win-win for Mexico and the U.S.. They are supported by the socialist administration of newly elected Mexican president Obrador. Canada's main concession was to expand U.S. access to Canada's protected dairy industry, with Canada already prepared to make the concession. Mr. Trump had also to consider the possibility that excluding Canada from the USMCA would have not passed Congress, and face even more resistance in a Democratic controlled Congress after 2019 elections.  The support Canada has received in Congress does not extend to China, which gets much less support in Congress, leading to higher uncertainty in the negotiations with China and possibly different outcome with the size of the trade imbalance of $1 billion a day factored in.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ provides details on the groundwork that was laid by the Trump administration as it worked to find a solution to the problems facing Venezuela with refugees and economic crisis, and months of protests. The plans were set in the days before Nicholas Maduro took office for the second term as president. The night before Juan Guaido, head of the National Assembly, declared himself president, U.S. vice president Mike Pence stated that the U.S. would support him if he took the reins of government from Maduro by invoking a clause in the Venezuelan Constitution that makes the head of the National Assembly take the office of president if the existing president is declared illegitimate taking office unlawfully. About 60 nations did not recognize the elections that gave Maduro a second term. On Jan 2 Mr Trump who feels deeply about the collapse of the Venezuelan economy and rising poverty, the suffering of the Venezuelan people, met with presidents of Brazil and Colombia. Colombian president Ivan Duque and Trump hinted at a plan to cooperate to help people fleeing Venezuela and respecting its democratic heritage. Mr Pompeo spoke to allies of the U.S. The National Assembly laid out its plans on Jan 15, for using a constitutional mechanism that allows the head of the Assembly to lead an interim government till new elections are held if the existing president is declared illegitimate. A leading Republican senator of Cuban origin Mr. Rubio supported the move. On the eve of protests in Venezuela Rubio and two other senators from Florida met Mr. Trump and Pence at the White House. Also present were Bolton, Pompeo, Ross and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin. Mr. Trump then decided to do it. He placed a call to Mr. Guiado  to tell him that if the National Assembly invoked Article 233 the U.S. president would back him.  The U.S. believes the rank and file in the military are with the opposition even though its leaders back Maduro. After the U.S. action, the governments of Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Colombia, backed the move for an interim government. The European Union called for free and credible elections. Russia and Mexico supported Maduro.  The State Department instructed the U.S. Federal Reserve about Guiado government as the sole representative for Venezuelan assets in banks. Sanctions could be placed on Venezuelan oil exports as backup efforts proceed to support the interim government. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Contrast the slow US vaccine export response with that of India, Russia, EU and China. Only in May 2021 after India's daily Covid cases were close to 400,000 a day did the US make a serious offer of vaccines to other countries in need of assistance. U.S. president Biden says that 80 million vaccine doses would be exported by the end of June 2021. The WSJ says citing Airfinity, a London research firm, as of May 10 more than 333 million doses of vaccine were produced by the US and only 3 million vaccine doses were exported. Contrast that with the European Union which has shipped 111 million doses overseas one third of its total production, Russia which has exported 27 million doses.  India has exported 66 million doses according to the Ministry of External Affairs website as of May 17, 2021. This includes 4 million doses to Brazil, 4 million to Nigeria. Within its own region Bangladesh received 10 million and Sri Lanka 1.2 million doses, Afghanistan 1 million. Mexico received about 1 million doses. In Africa the Democratic Republic of the Congo which has suffered from many epidemics including Ebola virus received 1.7 million doses, Nigeria 4 million doses, Kenya 1 million, Uganda 1 million. Of the 66 million about half of it is a direct grant assistance and Brazil, Mexico, Morocco received all vaccine as grant assistance, 70% of Bangladesh's is grant assistance. The list on the Ministry of External Affairs site of the Government of India shows 95 countries including many of the most struggling nations of Latin America and Africa, bringing hope to countries which are struggling to hold onto hope for a better life beyond the pandemic. Sending help overseas through vaccine supplies is suspended for the moment but will resume in July after India has pulled in all of its pharmaceutical manufacturing industry under a government guided effort to go all out. Never has so much help bringing much needed hope gone to so many countries of the world in the twentieth or twenty first century from a nation that is struggling to meet its own needs. The US in pursuing a US first policy of vaccinating all its citizens has not taken into account the need to bring this evolving vaccine technology into the hands of as many qualified pharmaceutical manufacturers as possible. This in a rapid response to expand manufacturing capabilities to meet world wide demand. The risks of not doing so were not taken on early- the very same way the virus spread in January to March of 2020 can be repeated as people travel around the world particularly for tourism, business family reasons. This risk takes on anew dimension of contagious mutations of the virus which are 50% more- the Indian variant being 50% more contagious by some estimates than the UK variant, which itself was estimated to be 50% more contagious than the original one.  The result a pandemic that stretches out indefinitely unless billions of doses are made in a short timetable to beat the timetable of Nature through the coronavirus. India is doing this for the first time with plans to produce billions of doses by engaging the whole of the Indian pharmaceutical manufacturing industry in the effort in a rapid response so that July to December would see 1.2 billion people vaccinated. The US effort, the European effort is left to the individual effort of pharmaceutical makers in the US and Europe, not a government guided effort to engage the entire pharmaceutical industry of the US and Europe in a rapid response timetable of 2-6 months.  ...