LyrArc Article Gist
Greenspan's legacy is called into question with the bursting of the housing bubble which he had not expected and the growth of subprime which he did little to slowdown. His libertarian spirits took a dogmatic view of free markets that said that the best approach was an handsoff one. This conflicted with the proper monitoring and supervision of rapid growth of subprime and the abuses that went on in the market for mortages and mortgage securities. He was also slow to raise rates after the rate cuts were down to as low as 1% which fueled the housing boom. Greenspan actually felt the borrowing on home equity loans for consumption was a good thing but failed to see the excesses in consumption spending and dangers of a negative savings rate. He felt that it was necessary to keep rates low to keep deflation from happening at that point in time. He was too complacent and in the position for too long to do the job well for so long. He was appointed by Reagan in 1987 and retired in 2005 three years ago in this role for 18 years. Could the Clinton or Bush administrations have chosen a fresh face who could have performed quite well and had to prove himself and not become complacent in a wave of adulation during good times? He argues that is decision making process was sound. This showed in the LTCM crisis and during the 9/11 crisis. But what went wrong were that his assumption about the goodness of human nature inherent in an innocent view of free market innovation where only the best happens ignores the possibilities of bad things happening when this innocent innovation is converted into a negative kind of innovation by human greed as happened in the mortgage securities market. And the lack of transparency that can creep in when a watchful eye is taken off the financial machinery and it is left all to its own devices as when these mortgage securities were made complex and dispersed in protfolios all over the global financial in places like Nordic towns in Arctic Norway as well as in far off places in Asia. So the basics: careful watchdog role, continually reassessing things like the patchwork of regulation that Secretary Paulson criticized recently fit for 10-20 years ago, getting interest rates right etc requires a good mind, some grace and a fresh face and energies that a man close to 80 years in 2005 after 18 years in the position got too complacent, overstayed and in the end made crucial errors of judgement and wisdom that his libertarian logic may have made all too easy. ...

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. ...

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. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The India Pakistan issues have already evolved into India China issues. And the competition between the US and China has consequences for India, the European Union and the rest of the world. As the US seeks to regain its industrial base and reduce overconcentration of manufacturing in China, India is at the stage of a manufacturing effort that is similar to Japan's in the 1920's and 1970's and China's in the 1990's. It will take place over the next two decades. This is the crucial event for Asia that will see the emergence of not two but three nations in Asia- Japan, China and India as modern manufacturing nations.  The talk about military action popular in the media misrepresents the real issues which are economic and ignore the turning point in 2025 with the Ukraine war putting the European Union and Germany's position of concentration of production in China as untenable. For the US DJT represents a second effort to bring serious manufacturing back to the US and allies such as India. This will be the deciding change in Asia and the world by 2030, 2035 and 2040, as India will make the decisive change to a modern nation similar to the US and Europe. This will open up opportunities for 1.4 billion people in India and a related 300 million people in Indonesia. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out the gains on three fronts evident from the Census Bureau report of 5.2% gain in median income of households in the U.S. He says the first is the growth in incomes of ordinary working class and middle class families, second the large decline in the poverty rate, and third the further rise in insurance coverage in 2015 for people without health insurance. He points to the steady efforts of the Obama administration to improve lives of ordinary families as working based on the Census report though results have taken time, and could have been better. The Stimulus, says Krugman could have been larger following the blow of the 2009 financial crisis and increased unemployment at the time. Janet Yellen at the inequality conference of the Boston Fed in 2014 pointed out the problems of 62 million households having net worth of about $10,000, and why this was running against the American idea of a better life for all Americans. In that sense the Census report is a movement in the right direction but a lot remains to be done.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Pressure from the American Bankers Association and Barney Frank, House Finance Committee chairman, to have the uptick rule reinstated. SEC is considering reinstating the uptick rule that would put adamper on the shortselling of stocks.

LyrArc Article Gist
Firms like Goldman Sachs and Vanguard Group are lining up to oppose aproposed reinstatement of the Uptick Rule which would restrict short selling. The short selling that ocurred for companies like Morgan Stanley and others is one of the reasons for the financial crisis that ocurred last year. Rowe Price and Charles Schwab support the reinstatement of the Uptick Rule.

LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts in Congress to get the SEC to restore the Uptick Rule that prevented shortselling of stocks unless the price of a stock in its most recent trade was higher than the previous price. In a short sale investors borrow shares and sell them, hoping for the price to fall. Schumer, Barney Frank support the effort.

LyrArc Article Gist
Citing Alexis de Tocqueville, the Russian President makes a plea for writing a new page in Russian-US relations, by working together, because he says the world expects the two countries to take energetic steps to establish a climate of trust and goodwill, and not to languish in inaction and diengagement. Medvedev says he was greatly impressed with Obama's inaugural address and its unbiassed assessment of America's problems, the need to change together with the rest of the world. Its a kind of call to action, to restart cooperation and working together, building trilateral cooperation between the EU, the USA and Russia.

LyrArc Article Gist
The SEC is conducting an investigation of the rumors that on three separate occasions led to drop in Lehman's share price of 10-21% in one day. This happened also to Bear Stearns and the SEC is cracking down on this practice by short sellers who hope to profit from their actions by driving down the price of Lehman's shares. This should also help to calm the financial markets and hold those responsible as it can have a serious negative impact on the markets.

LyrArc Article Gist
The need for the uptick rule to prevent abuse by short sellers who target certain stocks and can have a destructive effect on market confidence and destroy value in companies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Tom Cotton says in this op-ed article in the NYT that president Obama's inaction in the face of a chemical attack by the Syrian government in 2013 badly damaged American credibility in the world. Failing to act to prevent the extension of the conflict to civilian areas in 2013,  had many adverse consequences- it showed the U.S. lacking the determination to prevent the use of chemical weapons, worsened the refugee crisis in Europe, created the conditions in which the pro Brexit camp could use immigration as a major issue, left the Turkish government without the support it had counted on from NATO allies and facing the brunt of the refugee crisis by itself as it took a downward course. The U.S. has long held the position of being a force that stands up for the basic rights of human beings, alone of all countries it has felt that it had to act when acts of this nature are committed. In this sense more was lost than just the credibility with other countries, in some ways the light shining on the hill could no longer be seen in the world, bringing on a sense that some dark cloud had settled in. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Here are 11 big infrastructure projects that are planned across the country. They are part of the $2.2 trillion of projects to build or repair infrastructure, that is estimated by the American Society of Civil Engineers as needed by America today. But there is only $100 billion for infrastructure spending in the Stimulus Plan, and much of this will go to keeping existing infrastructure, a dilapidated bridge here or road there in repair. Only $50 billion is available for transportation projects. The rapid transit planned for California with trains twice as fast as Acela for a 800 mile track is estimated at $45 billion, but there is only $11 billion in the Stimulus for mass transit aand cities like Washington DC for Dulles airport with its need for a airport train, and other mass transit projects around the country wil compete for the same money. As a result most will go unfunded. The Second Avenue Subway in New York at $4.35 billion, Miami Port Tunnel at $1 billion, Bridge to Canada from Detroit for $1.8 billion, Hudson Rail Tunnel for New York at $8.75 billion, Seattle Highway Tunnel at $4.24 billion, Gulf ports at New Orleans and Gulfport, Mississippi at $2.04 billion, tens of billions for new California aqueduct bypassing the delta around Sacramento to bring water from north to arid Southern part of California, NestGen Air Traffic Control for $15 billion to $22 billion, are the other projects on this list. Many of these are badly needed and have been waiting for years to get the necessary investment. This is only a partial list, and suggests that there are a lot of projects that can productively use government investment, so that wasteful spending does not occur. It appears that the projects are there because these areas were neglected for a long period, more like the situation faced during the post Thatcher period in the UK, where infrastructure and services had been neglected for so long that Labor governments could productively channel new investment in these areas to avoid wasteful spending. And it appears that the situation is very different from Japan where the Liberal Democratic Party had a vested interest in keeping its farm and rural base happy with new projects, like a bridge to nowhere, that led to wasteful spending for a decade or more, leading to rising deficits and investments that did not create productive returns in terms of economic growth. By contrast these projects have potential to generate productive returns for years into the future and also are large enough to create jobs and be spread out over a number of years. This could end up being a real bright spot in the current situation. Felix Rohatyn, who helped New York rebuild its finances afte a crisis, has a new book "Bold Endeavors: How our Government Built America, and Why It Must Rebuild Now", using examples like the rebuilding of the Erie Canal, the transcontinental railroad, and the Interstate Highway System, and says the US needs to build for the future with more ambitious, better planned projects today. He says, that infrastructure is not an expense, it has to be seen as a vitally needed and productive investment. People like Rohatyn and others see the Stimlulus plan as a missed opportunity because a lot of these projects mentioned here and the numerous others not shown here will simply not see much money from the government to support them and get them off the ground. The idea that this is wasteful government spending that is spreading, may be a danger to this vision and opportunity. At the same time the reality is that if all this was happening during the time of the Erie Canal or the postwar period of the Interstate Highway System it would have been much easier to support. The banking crisis fix is taking away so many of the dollars that could have gone here, that this may be the missed opportunity, the lack of room for visionary investments because of the danger of pushing the government deficit to 60% of GDP with the current spending plans. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hubbard and Erdbrink report on U.S. president Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia to begin a new chapter in relations with the Gulf nations and the Saudis. Under president Obama the U.S. distanced itself from the Saudis and the Gulf nations, preferring to pursue a policy of closer relations with Iran and signing the Iran nuclear deal. This included a policy of staying out of Syria to the point of turning down a decision to deploy U.S. airpower to maintain no-fly zones to protect refugees. Syrian government forces fighting rebels were supported by Iran. The new policy is dictated by the new conditions in the Middle East. The U.S. has sought since the presidency of Reagan to balance the power relations in the region. With the nuclear deal signed and Iran respecting the deal according to independent reports, the U.S. allied with Iran in the battle against Islamic State in Iraq,  a shift was needed to balance the support provided to Iran by Russia which worsened the refugee crisis in Syria. The Republican party and Mr. Trump were critical of the Obama Iran policy during the nuclear deal negotiations. The safety of Israel is also a factor as non-state actors were supported by Iran threatening Israeli security. For these reasons the shift is an effort to rebalance the relations in the region. The arms deal in its size and president Trump's statement that Iran had "fueled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror," can be seen as this rebalancing. A business aspect of the large arms deal is that it will promote job growth in the defense industry in the U.S.. Other countries including Germany have seen growth in their defense industry. This is not the best way forward for the Middle East, yet it is a way the U.S. and nations in the region are adjusting to realities- the collapse of the Arab Spring from within and without the help from outside, the sectarian conflict arising from the Shiite pushback from Iran following the Baathist and Sunni control of Iraq which collapsed with the U.S.invasion, where the majority of people are Shiite yet with a strong Sunni presence. Elections brought Shiites in power, leading to a Sunni response in the form of Islami State caliphate move into Mosul, Iraq's second largest city after Baghdad. A decade of conflict and the efforts by the Bush administration ended in failure and sectarian conflict, resulting in the U.S. policy of rebalancing in favor of Iran to negotiate the nuclear deal. In this sense the arms deal does not solve anything. A similar rebalancing under Reagan by arming one side, followed by arming the other, led to involvement with ground forces under president Bush. It only leaves the region poor after years of sanctions against Iran to the point where a NYT reporter was not sure whether it was safe to fly from Tehran to Mashad with Iran Air because of the lack of spare parts for the airline. War torn, with millions of refugees in Syria and Iraq, the region remains broken in many ways, waiting for a sensible non sectarian view to prevail in the interest of the people in the region. The election of Rouhani in Iran by 57% of the vote is only a sign that young people in the region given a chance would opt for a different course in future. The rest of Asia has moved forward and shows a path that can be followed. ...