LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Harder in this Wilson Center publication of research uses correspondence between Jawaharlal Nehru and his sister Vijaylakshmi Pandit ambassador to the US in 1950, to show that the US made an offer for India to take a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India had supported two resolutions on June 25, and June 27, first condemning the invasion by North Korea and second the organizing of a UN force of 29 countries to push back the North Korean invasion. Even though the US is not seen as actively engaging with India during that period and seeing through British eyes the colonial policies of encouraging  different powers in South Asia, that may not be true.  Who was India's foreign minister in 1950? Jawaharlal Nehru was both prime minister and foreign minister till 1964, which means there was less discussion of foreign policy than happens today during the Ukraine invasion with Jaishankar a career diplomat with 30 years experience, Rajnath Singh, and Mr. Modi, in talks with president Biden recently, and in further discussions Modi had with EU's Von der Leyen and UK's Boris Johnson, Kishida of Japan. Who was India's defense minister in 1950? Baldev Singh, a Sikh independence struggle leader was Minister of Defense for 1947-52 and tackled partition of Punjab and Kashmir issues. The rest of the years to 1957 when India faced the Chinese invasion of Tibet India's defense minister was also for most of the period Mr. Nehru, except Ayynagar in 1953, and Kailash Katju in 1955 and 1956. The controversial V.K. Krishna Menon was Defense Minister from 1957 to 1962, when Indian defenses were further neglected leading to the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, and his replacement by Yashwantrao Chavan. The purpose of this is to look back at what happened in earlier periods to understand where India stands today- and what choices it makes today. Clearly the US was looking for allies then and now. Nehru saw things from his own reading of history seeing China and India as both suffering from western invasion, not realizing that China's experience under Mao was different- that of Japanese invasion and bombing of China's major cities not just colonization of Hong Kong and other ports for trade under British trade based policies in 1850-1900. Thus a Communist Chinese version of China's defense involved taking over border regions such as Tibet putting China in direct and open opposition to India. Nehru never really grasped what was happening in Tibet and the war China fought against the Nationalists. American general Stilwell loved China deeply and had an understanding of its people as shown in Tuchman's account in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945. Stilwell during that war had a better understanding of China, the strengths and weaknesses of Mao's China and of the Nationalists under Chiang, than Nehru. Some of these errors post 1950's and a concentration of foreign, defense and embassy positions in the person of Mr. Nehru and of Nehru family member such as Mrs. Pandit led to the Indian failure to act on Tibet and see it as see it for what it was -facing a Communist Mao led China that had fought the Japanese invasion as different from Bodhidharma's China of the history books. Bodhidharma's China will outlast Mao's China, yet it is Mao's China that India faces today. This also tells us that India has to think in new ways- as Lincoln said during a period when America was also making its own progress as an industrial nation in the 1860's. "The dogmas of the quiet past are not adequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew, we must act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and we shall save our country." India's values are values of democracy heightened not just by Mohandas Gandhi's ideas with Hind Swaraj written in 1910 just as powerful in 2022, but also by the heights of Ladakh where elections are held in remote regions of the Himalayas. India's values are values that are also shared in the best that America has in its values and culture and in the defense of freedom.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Amy Chozick of the NYT describes the puzzling idea of a Methodist do-gooder, with serious concern for injustices in the South, making an effort to accumulate money. Especially considering that Hillary Clinton must have known that speechmaking fees would come up in a presidential election campaign. Chozick describes in some detail the two years Hillary tried to shore up the family's finances after Bill Clinton's defeat in the 1980 election for Governor. Following the defeat Bill Clinton went back all over the state to voters to hear their complaints, sometimes for hours at a time. It was upto Hillary to shore up the family's finances. Hillary had to stretch to buy a $112,000 home in a better residential neighborhood. Family friends say Bill was never that interested in money, and never worried about the family's finances. Things were so bleak according to this account that Hillary worried about how they would pay for daughter Chelsea's college tution, as her own mother's experience has always remained with her of being denied a college education because of lack of money. During the Democratic Convention this comes up in the video introduction, something that most people are unaware of, which must have been difficult for an intensely private person like Hillary. Her mother is described in that video as having to go to the corner grocery store as a child with coupons for food. The income of the Clintons as professors in the years around 1975 was $18,000 each. As governor Mr. Clinton earned $33,519 in 1978 with combined income at $51,173 adding Hillary's work at the Rose law firm. A one time deal in the commodities market made 100,000, and an investment in land in the Ozarks led to losses- all at a time when other highly educated people in Arkansas were doing extremely well, including the Walton family. It wasn't until 1992 when Bill Clinton was running for president did the couple make higher income of $297,177 reported in 1992 tax returns. At this time entering the White House, of recent presidents only Harry Truman had lower net worth. Hillary donated her book proceeds for "It Takes a Village," to charity, and turned down an advance. By the time they left office the couple were faced with legal debts, owing $5 million in legal fees- Hillary Clinton saying they were "Dead broke." The former president now sought help to buy a Dutch Colonial in Chappaqua, New York, for $1.7 million. President Jimmy Carter was also facing large losses in his peanut business in Georgia when he left office, only to turn to writing books to salvage his finances. Hoover, FDR, Kennedy, George Bush, George W. Bush, were from families with great wealth or built their fortunes, including candidate Trump, sometimes using influence or connections or in the case of Kennedy's family gaining from the end of Prohibition. Eisenhower, Reagan, Carter were of more modest wealth. Only Harry Truman remains the awesome exception of dignity with extremely modest wealth, a small house in Independence, Missouri, no presidential pension, only an army pension of $112.56 a month in 1953. Truman's story also offers another aspect of public service of an exceptional kind and its value to the country for people to reflect on. A presidential pension of $25,000 was set up one year after Truman left office.  Experts say Truman's Senate Committee over 8 years 1941-1948, helped save billions of dollars in waste, fraud, and in faulty airplane as well as munitions development during the war effort, including saving thousands of lives.  In his farewell address in January 1953, Truman said he had spent 17 hours a day for eight years with no payment for overtime. In the address he correctly predicts that the Cold War would be won and he set the course. It also happened as predicted in that address with changes in the Kremlin and failure in the satellite states. Hillary Clinton put in these 17 hours and gained unmatched experience as Secretary of State, and is in a positon to set the course ahead in a manner that Truman once did in a complex world where careful policy, good judgement and in some situations strong action is needed. Such invaluable public service has never really been rewarded in the way business leaders are, not by a small fraction - too long simply taken for granted.  Considering her life story Hillary Clinton appears to have struggled with this all her life, to create a safety net that too often cracked, sometimes suddenly and unexpectedly. Has this concern sometimes gone too far, could better judgement be exercized. Perhaps or probably. Should it be seen in the context that Truman's situation reminds us. Probably.         ...

LyrArc Article Gist
According to First American CoreLogic, a real estate information company, 10.7 million households had negative equity in their homes. That is they were under water because they owed more on their mortgages than the properties are worth. The proportion is 23% or one in four homeowners. Mark Fleming CoreLogic's chief economist points out that having negative equity lowers labor mobility and in that way makes it harder to sell the house to look for jobs elsewhere. This is happening in Michigan and other states and is a discouraging sign for improving the job numbers. In this way the poor prospects in housing, banking bad loans in commercial real estate with tight bank lending, and the already high 10.2% umnemployment rate intersect to make 2010 pose significant risks for the economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein says that for the 85% of the people who have healthcare the Obama proposals are not a good deal. The Obama proposals mean higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of healthcare for the uninsured group over 10 years. This lower income group has no coverage despite the $300 billion Medicaid program. Feldstein says there surely must be better and less costly ways of getting this lowincome group healthcare. Raising the top income tax rate to 45% from 35%- as a result of letting the Bush tax cuts expire and adding aproposed health surcharge on higher income individuals- would actually lower revenues for the government, as it would change behavior of high income individuals in ways that lower their taxable inome. The result is higher deficits and higher taxes when even without this large deficits are projected for the future. How to slow the rapid growth in healthcare spending? The Obama plan is to cut spending on Medicare. Feldstein sees the govenment's effort aimed at reducing the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reduced payments to providers. Will this result in enough of acost reduction to make the system work. And if the cost reductions are too heavily weighted towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare, even though it is structured to allow cost escalation. Feldstein offers no solutions to the problems of cost escalation except to suggest that the Obama plan does not really tackle the cost escalation issues directly with providers, and instead burdens the national finances to an extraordinary degree. And the need for apause and reflection....

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the true cost of the Obama health care legislation and the assumption that the legislation cuts the deficit by billions of dollars. This WSJ editorial says one has to look at this closely, and not merely look at CBO projections, which may be based in a certain context and not reflect the true costs, especially because many accounting gimmicks and use of numbers to present a particular picture is taking place. The information this editorial cites is that: it uses 10 years of taxes to fund six years of subsidies, Social Security and Medicare revenues are double-counted to the tune of $398 billion, a new program funding long-tem care frontloads taxes but backloads spending, and the assumption of an automatic 25% cut to physician payments that Congress is unwilling to authorize. Rep. Rand Paul has tried to present an alternative view which needs to be studied just as closely, because of the enormous impact of a jump in spending at a time when the public finances are fragile. WSJ also cites the work of Richard Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, as an alternate perspective of how things could turn out, Doug Holtz-Eakin, and Eugene Steuerle. It calls for common sense in evaluating programs, entitlements, defense or other government spending. They not only cost money, but costs escalate over time as history has shown over decades, till they eventually are discovered to be not affordable unless the middle class is willing to dig deeper into its finances to pay for them. Alternate perspectives from a range of informed opinion, Howard Dean, Martin Feldstein, and the head of Harvard's Medical School show that the issue needs to be looked at closely and carefully and cannot be something in which CBO numbers can be trusted to tell the whole story. Especially when common sense, history, and informed opinion across a spectrum of thought advises caution, and fragile public finances also suggest caution. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont, says the health care bill is not real reform, and may do more harm than good. He says in a Washington Post article, December 17, 2009, the Obama health care bill does not insert competition into insurance markets, does not significantly reduce costs, and does not improve the delivery and use of health services. It was he says done with a political calculus and crafted for votes not real reform. Jeffrey S. Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School, gave the Obama health reform bill an "F" grade, saying in a Nov 18, 2009, WSJ article, that it was disingenuous to call this reform, Congress and the White House were simply deceiving the public. He said the bill will accelerate US health care spending, postpone most of the major health care problems, expecially the ones that drive cost, including the "fee for service" system and delivery of health care. He says in his discussions with economists and other health care leaders the opinion was unanimous that the bill will accelerate health care spending. He cites Massachusetts as an example, where access to care was expanded under the same dysfunctional system, and spending went up, and it doesn't work. Feldstein, who in early 2008 suggested proactive solutions to the mortgage debt crisis which were never adopted, says that the Obama health care law means higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of health care for the uninsured group over 10 years. Feldstein says that the Obama plan is to cut Medicare to cut spending, and will reduce the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reducing payments to providers. And he asks if the cost reductions are weighted too heavily towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers ,would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% of the American people who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Wall Street Journal's editorial columns have followed closely the working of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years. Especially during the last decade, when most of the excesses, missteps and failures in the operations of the two companies occurred at huge cost to the US economy and to taxpayers. The Journal quotes from the recent Treasury report on the planned winding down of the two agencies. And focusses attention on the question of what will replace Fannie and Freddie. Only the first of three options looks viable considering the goals of reducing misallocation of national resources, and winding down the federal government's role in housing, says the Journal. With this Option the federal government guarantees are limited to Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans to low income buyers and VA assistance for veterans and farm programs- narrow segments that limits the guarantee strictly to 10-15% of the mortgage market. The Journal says that the conclusions of the Treasury report are what WSJ has been saying for 20 years: " The strength of this option is that it would minimize distortions in capital allocation across sectors, reduce moral hazard in mortgage lending and drastically reduce direct taxpayer exposure to private lender's losses." And the points about the benefits: " With less incentive to invest in housing, more capital will flow into other areas of the economy, potentially leading to more long-run economic growth and reducing the inflationary pressure on housing assets. Risk throughout the system may also be reduced, as private actors will not be as inclined to take on excessive risk without the assurance of a government guarantee behind them. And finally, direct taxpayer risk exposure to private losses in the mortgage market would be limited to the loans guaranteed by FHA and other narrowly targeted government loan programs: no longer would taxpayers be at direct risk for guarantees covering most of the nation's mortgages." This bit of wisdom is especially significant, as misallocation of capital that went on in housing for the better part of the last decade has hurt America and the American people. It makes sense to have explicit money allocated by Congress for housing help to the poor and have no housing guarantees that have hurt the economy....

LyrArc Article Gist
The process leading to the credit rating downgrade for the U.S., including S&P's $2 trillion error in estimating the total U.S. deficit in the next ten years, is causing both Republicans and Democrats to agree on the need for greater public scrutiny of the agencies. Congressmen from both parties in Congress now agree that ratings firms need to play a smaller role in the financial system than they have in the past. It now appears certain that there is no chance that Congress will allow a change in the Dodd-Frank legislation provision that requires regulators to take out references to ratings from their rules. Banking trade groups had been pushing for a change in the provision. Karen Petrou of advisory firm Federal Financial Analytics says this event will also make U.S. regulators look for ways in which changes can be made to international financial agreements that require credit ratings. This includes the capital and liquidity requirements laid out by the Basel Committee. The credit ratings firms say they support efforts to decrease reliance on their ratings in the rules....

LyrArc Article Gist
Local customs, tradition and history of development play a part in each region. This is the message from Islamist politicians who want to bridge the differences with the USA in the northwest frontier province of Pakistan. They want to keep some of their Islamic ways of life and still work with the US. These Islamic organizations are working to reduce the violence in the region and promote democratic discourse and electoral representation. This is happening amid widespread mistrust of the U.S. of all Islamist politicians. There are negative perceptions about things Western which are not automatically accepted in these highly tradition bound areas of Pakistan, especially the Afghanistan border regions. Some kind of rapprocement could bring peace to the region and cool growth of militants. Is there a basic misunderstanding of the area and are their other more gradual ways of bringing these areas into the mainstream. Of modernizing these societies over time so they gradually accept women's rights, education and development as opposed to the sudden onset of change. One sign - these areas need hospitals, they need roads and there is no disagreement about this. Once they see the benefits of development and militancy drops then it s easier for them to understand the benefits of schools for girls, women's rights, and education and all other development. Its like the American South trying to baccept negro rights after years of blatant racism, took some time but now some of the southern states can't even be recognized from what they used to be in their perception of black people....

LyrArc Article Gist
Criticism of the Congress party administration in India led by prime minister Manmohan Singh, for lack of transparency and corruption scandals in the telecom and other fields.