LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The knowledge that the virus  caused human to human transmission and that it spreads to wide parts of the population very quickly were critical pieces of information that remained with Chinese epidemiologists, doctors and medical researchers, and were suppressed by local authorites in Wuhan.  Yet China's version of the U.S. CDC, China's Centre of Disease Control and Prevention, modeled on the U.S. control efforts worked effectively to identify the problem. Virologist Gao Fu, heads China's CDC. This report in Germany's Der Spiegel says Mr. Fu made it a habit to scan China's internet before bedtime for any signs of possible disease outbreaks. On the night of December 30 he came across rumors of an internal memo from the Wuhan Health Commission of an outbreak of a vaguely worded lung disease. When he called the Wuhan health authority he found their answers to be evasive which alarmed him. The next morning December 31 Mr. Fu sent the first of three teams to Wuhan which is how China was able to identify the problem, in the sense that Chinese authorites in Beijing were to rely on Dr Gao Fu to overcome the problem of Wuhan provincial authorites. He informed the World Health Organization Beijing office on that day. The Der Spiegel report says "shortly afterward," the Seattle Times in its report says this was about New Years Day 2020- Mr Fu made a call to Dr. Redfield, head of the U.S. Centre for Disease Control, who was on vacation. Redfield is deeply disturbed on hearing this from Fu and they have conversations over the next few days to the point that Dr. Gao Fu is in tears about what has happened. On January 1 Taiwanese public health authorites shared the information with WHO that the cornonavirus was a human to human transmission, would the Taiwanese authorites not have shared it with the U.S. the same week during calls from the U.S. CDC or other public health authorites alarmed about the situation. (The WHO was proving useless by Jan 14 when it contradicted Taiwan's more reliable assessment  on Jan 14 going by the letter from president Trump to WHO). On January 6 a few days later Dr Redfield and Dr. Azar head of Health and Human Services ask China for permission to send a team of CDC U.S. experts to China. This is cited in the U.S. letter to the World Health organization- the lack of human to human transmission information being given to the U.S. officially early by China. A risk that could have been a topic of conversation between the U.S. and China heads of CDC. That letter from president Trump also points out that the team of experts the U.S. planned to send was not accepted by China till Feb 16, one and half months after that series of conversations between Dr. Gao Fu of China CDC and Dr. Redfield of U.S. CDC in an alert message.  In effect removing one of the key defences for the U.S. and Europe in making their own defensive actions and plans, laying the basis of the worldwide coronavirus pandemic affecting millions of people. Dr Redfield is a AIDS researcher at the University of Maryland who spent most of his life trying to control spread of HIV and was appointed by president Trump to head CDC agency in 2018. He set a goal of eliminating AIDS by 2030 and is more comfortable with aids patients and research than the bureaucratic nature of agencies- CDC has about 11,000 employees. Once it was clear that a team of U.S. experts was not given permission to make its own assessment in Wuhan in the few days after January 6 offer to sent the team to China by Redfield of U.S. CDC and Dr. Azar, would it have alerted the U.S. that something was seriously heading the wrong way for a epidemic risk. That letter of president Trump cites how the head of WHO during the first SARS crisis in 2003, Dr. Harlem Brundtland acted when she faced China's lack of cooperation during that crisis by saying openly that this was a danger to world public health and millions. Could CDC in the U.S. and the other connected health authorites have taken the responsibility and filled Dr Brundtland's role in this crisis, that the WHO failed to perform?    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
NYT fails to see the importance of delivering on infrastructure building in scale, reshoring, wages and jobs for workers, and climate change action that president Biden is achieving to build a better America. NYT looks at the 2023 and the midterm elections and points out a well known fact that women (and men) in the suburbs care about legalized abortion rights for women, and this extends to states that vote Republican in the south. No attention is given to the importance of infrastructure building, increasing wages and jobs for working class and middle class Americans, bringing factories and investment back to the US, three issues that brought Mr. Trump into office in 2016 coming out of nowhere. Mr. Biden is old is the refrain. Yet it is president Biden who has delivered on infrastructure where Mr. Trump merely talked about it -Building America Better- as Biden pointed out in the State of the Union address in 2023. Biden has delivered in support for wage increases for workers, even joining the picket line at the UAW auto workers strike in Detroit. He was able to do this because he has spent more years in Congress than any other senator, and like Lyndon Johnson for the Great Society programs and desegregation in the 1960's was able to win support from moderate Republicans. Being older, having the wisdom and experience was and is indispensable in the American project started by Washington and sustained by Lincoln, who nurtured wisdom, experience, fully comprehending the people's problems, and mindfulness in the way Mr. Biden does. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
PM Modi visits Gandhiji's Sabarmati Ashram in Ahmedabad and inaugurates the $145 million Sabarmati Ashram renovation project. In June 1917 Mohandas Gandhi bought land on the banks of the Sabarmati river to build the Ashram. It was the central location for Gandhiji's struggle with the British for Hind Swaraj, independence from Britain. The ideas in Gandhi's Hind Swaraj written in 1910 during the struggle for South African workers was implemented from here including the Satyagraha struggles, negotiations with the British Raj, Dandi march to the sea in April 1930 to protest the tax on salt. It was originally on 120 acres which by 2020 were reduced to 5 acres. The new project will expand the Ashram to 57 acres into a major worldwide center for learning about Gandhi's life and ideas and the role for gaining Bharat Swaraj or freedom and its role in Bharat's future for a new generation of youth. Leaders including Sardar Vallahbhai Patel and Narendra Modi look to Gandhiji's ideas for inspiration and guidance in the everyday administration of the country. Gandhi's ideas anticipate not just the aspirations for freedom with taking responsibility for one's own actions, but also the movements for respecting nature through climate change action, uplifting of rural areas, and the improvement of the living conditions of working people and families everywhere in the world. The Ashram exhibition shows documents including letters to the Viceroy in the 1920's showing the budget for the Empire in India and asking why so much went to defense and military and so little to uplifting the lives of the people, in education, health and infrastructure. Having seen it at the Ashram one could say such a direct letter to the head of a large nation, as the Viceroy in India was then is unimaginable today. In some ways emails and electronic communication have made contact with officials and government less not more and created a seemingly insurmountable gap today. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Air pollution concerns are leading China's National Development Reform Commission to set a higher goal for cleaner energy. The NDRC plans a 52 gigawatt increase in installed capacity for green energy in 2013, an increase from 36 gigawatts in 2012. This includes 10 gigawatts for solar energy. Clean energy will take up 57% of additions to installed capacity in 2013, compared to 35% in 2010, according to Tian Miao, an energy anayst at NSBO.

LyrArc Article Gist
The moderate positions of both parties in political life in Australia and New Zealand compared to the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama's speech announcing the details of his executive order on immigration on Nov. 20, 2014, starts by saying he is not bypassing Congress or the Republicans. He says Republicans had the opportunity to pass legislation in the House that passed the Senate, or come up with their own bill. And still have an opportunity to come up with a bill he could sign into law that address the shortcomings of the current immigration system. In selling the bill to Americans he points out that this is not an amnesty, that the current system which allows immigrants here to stay illegally without paying taxes or any accountability is an amnesty. He points to deportation of millions as not an option, an out of the character of America. That deportation of criminals will continue and is up 80% in his administration, without mentioning that deportation under his administration for ordinary undocumented immigrants without any criminal record had reached a high of 400,000 a year under his administration, higher than under the Republican Bush administration. In fact it had reached such levels that Hispanic groups stated they would sit out the midterm 2014 elections and not vote for Democrats or Republicans, after providing a significant part of the winning margin for Obama in the 2012 presidential election. President Obama says he has the legal authority to prevent deportation, and that this is essentially what this executive order does- providing a temporary right to stay and work in this country to undocumented immigrants here living in the shadows who are here for more than 5 years, not a permanent status or citizenship. He cites other presidential decisions of the last 50 years, Republican and Democratic, that have integrated large groups of undocumented immigrants, including an executive order by President Reagan. And he refers to the Bush presidencies 41 and 43, where both father and son, considered Hispanic Americans "a part of American life," as good hard-working people deserving a chance to be Americans. The speech ends with an appeal to the compassion of Americans urging them to look at their own individual stories going back one, two or several generations, or Ellis Island where the early waves of European immigrants entered the country in the 19th century, and to immigrants from the period after the early British settlements in the 18th century. This is typical Obama, as much as the calculated decision to pursue a aggressive deportation policy was for the first 6 years of his administration, including the decision for "Dreamers" or young people before the 2012 election. "Scripture tells us, we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger. we were strangers once, too. And whether our forbears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here because this country welcomed them in." Over 2 million deportations in one of the most aggressive deportation policies of any administration, followed by an effort to stop deportations before the next presidential election, when the NYT had called his deportation policy "infuriating." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Italy's major problem is lack of growth, with growth averaging 0.3% in 2001-2010 compared to 1.1% for the eurozone area. In the 1st quarter of 2011 growth was only 0.1%. Italian bonds yield two percentage points above the yield on German bunds. With growth at the present level, Italy's would see an increase in debt to GDP ratios, according to Barclays Capital. Debt to GDP is currently at 119%.

LyrArc Article Gist
China limits the activities of the Carter Center. Contacts for village democracy are discontinued. Xi Jinping, China's president tells former U.S. president Carter to limit activities to U.S.-China relations.

LyrArc Article Gist
After increasing the price of subsidized diesel, the Indian government lays out a plan to cut the deficit over five years. The plan sets a goal for the deficit of 5.3% for fiscal year ending March 2013 to come down to 3% by 2017. Earlier India's central bank, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), had said the government needed to take action on the deficit before it reduced interest rates. The RBI faces a difficult task in reducing rates to stimulate the slowing economy because inflation was 7.8% in Sept. 2012. At the same time the sharp decline in growth is a cause for serious concern- the most recent RBI forecast for GDP growth made in July for the current fiscal year through March 2013 is 6.5%. This may not be achieved as other economists have lowered the estimate to as low as 5% because of slow government action in economic reforms, high interest rates, and the uncertain global economc outlook. The last action by the RBI to lower interest rates was a drop of half a percentage point in April 2012. Much of the momentum for the Indian economy was lost in the first half of 2012 with the governments vacillating steps for opening the retail and other sectors to foreign investment. Only in October 2012 has prime minister Manmohan Singh set a clear direction by dropping coalition partners opposed to reforms and announcing new policies for foreign investment....

LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts to bring the textbook industry under state control by selling the firm "Enlightenment," which had a 30% share of the market, to Putin ally Rotenberg. "Enlightenment" has now received further support as other competitor's textbooks were not given approval by the Ministry of Education and Science. Apparently Putin sees western ideas introduced in some textbooks as harmful to the development of Russia's youth. All schools will now be given state inspections, and where textbooks are not on the approved list the schools will see cutoff of state funds. Putin was chairman of the publisher "Enlightenment" when it was under state control, Rotenberg is the new chairman. During Soviet times "Enlightenment" as a state publisher controlled all textbook publication. The industry was opened up after 1990, resulting in a large number of new publishers. Now many small publishers are being pushed out as the industry is being consolidated under the state's private sector allies with an educational agenda being set by Mr. Putin....

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Speaking at a banking conference, advisors including the head of Russia's largest retail bank Sberbank, German Gref, minister of the economy, Aleksei Ulyukayev, and head of the central bank , Elvira Nabiullina, express deep concern about the economic prospects in 2015. Foreign investment is down from about $90 billion in the 1st quarter of 2013 to a negligible amount in the 3rd quarter of 2014. Capital outflows following the Ukraine crisis are estimated at about $110 billion by former finance minister Alexsei Kudrin. The ruble dropped to its lowest level against the dollar since the 1990's. And the sharp decline in oil prices with Brent crude at about $90 is another risk factor as 50% of the budget comes from oil and gas revenues and 60% of exports are still oil and gas, with no serious or effective effort to diversify under the Putin adminstration. Putin told the banking conference that a deficit free budget and reserves of $460 billion are "fundamental factors supporting stability." Advisors and leading bankers remain unconvinced. The problem is that even at the beginning of 2014 before the Ukraine crisis foreign investment had slowed to a trickle, similiar to what India experienced in 2013. The central bank head says her effort to open up the bond markets in Russia to foreign investors is now in vain because there are few foreign investors. Instead of reversing the situation as is happening in India with the new Modi administration, policy under Putin and the Ukraine conflict may have scared investors away with the increasing western sanctions and stagflation (estimated 8% inflation and about 0.5% growth in 2014). The head of Sberbank Mr. Gref told the banking conference- "The Soviet Union broke apart because of the mind boggling incompetence of the Soviet leadership. They did not respect the laws of economic development." The problem with sovereign reserves is that it can protect a sovereign currency such the Russian ruble or the Brazilian cruzeiro to some extent, but today's vibrant economies need foreign investment and foreign technology for growth. Even a country such as China with a trillion dollars in reserves needs the reserves in its special case because of its billion plus aging population, and is no exception to these laws of economic development about the need for foreign technology and foreign investment. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The constructive contribution made by the G-20 meetings of leaders towards building agreement on economic and other policies for peace and progress in the global economy. The meetings were especially useful for coordinating policy and addressing issues arising in the global economy after the 2008 financial crisis. Here Li Baodong, China's vice minister for international organizations and conferences, international economic affairs, describes the path ahead: IMF reforms implementation, better coordination of macroeconomic policies, pursuing the anti-protectionist and free trade policies with further support to the WTO and ministerial MC9 meeting in Bali in Dec. 2013, and infrastructure financing proposals for developing countries on the agenda at the St Petersburg, Russia, G-2- meeting in Sept. 2013. Baodong says the mechanism called the Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth as part of the G-20 meetings is a major achievement. Each G-20 economy submits it macroeconomic policy plan for a Mutual Assessment Process under this arrangement. The progress from the Bretton Woods financial architecture to the new arrangement- from the G-6 to the G-20 to include developing countries from India to Mexico and Brazil- is another major achievement, not fully recognized by the public, says Baodong. Interestingly Baodong makes particular mention to global rebalancing, rather than pushing what he calls the impossible task of increasing demand to get growth. This is a realization coming to China's economic policymakers under the new Jinping-Keqiang administration after the overly aggressive effort to stimulate demand in the 2009-2011 Stimulus, and the ensuing financial problems in the banking and credit system. It is indicative of the policy shift and its implementation underway in China in 2013-2015....

LyrArc Article Gist
ECB president, Mario Draghi, is interviewed at his office in Frankfurt by the Wall Street Journal's Blackstone, Karnitschnig, and Thomson. Draghi quotes economist Rudi Dornbusch, who told him in the old days that the Europeans were rich enough to afford paying for it if everybody didn't work. Draghi, was head of the Bank of Italy, before becoming president of the ECB. He is acutely aware of the problems faced by Italy and other countries like Spain which have let labor markets become rigid, with extensive job protections and generous benefits for the unemployed. The result is that employers are reluctant to hire and young people face high unemployment rates- as high as 50% in Spain. For this reason Draghi sees the old social model in Europe as obsolete and already out. Draghi's sees austerity measures and spending cuts with the structural changes underway in Spain, Italy and other countries as the only way to generate economic renewal. On the Long Term Financing Operation launched by the ECB in Dec. 2011, Draghi says there was agreement within the ECB and the decision was unanimous. He makes it one of his objectives to achieve as much consensus as he can, to do what is right for Europe and to do it together with his colleagues in the ECB and the EU. That financing operation, and the binding deficit controls achieved at a recent summit of European leaders, he sees as all part of the pathway to fiscal union. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Lee describes the problems the Russian economy faces with the depletion of the Reserve Fund following collapse of oil prices. Finance minister Siluanov says the Reserve Fund could run out by 2017. The National Wealth Fund hols $73 billion and is used for infrastructure projects and bank bailouts, and pensions. The defense budget is expected to decline by 5% in 2016 as the military buildup slows from a slower economy. The World Bank predicts a poverty rate of 14.2%. The 50% decline in the ruble has hurt imports. The lack of access to international capital markets has also hurt growth, even though Russia has only small debt.

LyrArc Article Gist
Individual investors reacted strongly to declining prospects for emerging markets with slowing growth, depreciating currencies, corruption and political uncertainty in 2013. As of the beginning of June, retail investors pulled $18.1 billion from emerging market bond funds, about one third of the amount that went in to emerging markets since the financial crisis in 2007, according to fund tracker EPFR Global. Institutional investors have pulled out less, about $9.3 billion, or 10% of their investments in emerging markets bonds since 2007. A similiar pattern is seen for investment in the stock markets of emerging market countries. The U.S. Federal Reserve's monetary expansion helped pull more money into emerging markets such as India, Indonesia, Brazil and Turkey. As the Fed shifts away from these policies in 2013 emerging market countries have large current account deficits and less money to finance imports and debt.

LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson points out that the golden age of bipartisan harmony never existed. Yet it is true to say that with the constant chatter on cable television and stridently expressed views, the activism of the more extreme wings of both American parties, and the role of money in politics, the partisan nature of politics in America has increased. And this is happening even when the Gallup polls from 1992 and 2010 show similiar numbers for the people who describe themselves as Conservative, Liberal or Moderate, showing that the people themselves haven't changed (42-43% Conservative, 35-36% Moderate, 17-20% Liberal), but activism at the edges of both parties has. In this condition, only 7% of americans have a "very positive view" of the Republican party, only 11% of Americans have a "very positive view" of the Democratic party and only 12% of Americans have a "very positive view" of the Tea party (even though the Tea party is at the height of its mometum). The net impact says Samuelson is that the nation's important problems get neglected. There is little discussion about the expenditure of blood and treasure in Afghanistan, says Tom Brokaw, see his article. There is little discussion of the need to rebuild America's deteriorating infrastructure. Or a serious discussion on deficits or energy. All this is lost in the dysfunctional politics of the moment. This is a significant observation....