LyrArc Article Gist
Experts point out that Saudi oil price policies are set on a technocratic basis by a small group of advisors. An oil industry veteran Naimi, 79, leads this group of advisors. This means the new King Salman is likely to follow the same course as his predecessor King Abdullah. Gulf oil officials were expecting a drop to around $50 to $60 a barrel, the drop below $50 has surprised even the Saudis. NYT cites IMF estimates of a loss of oil revenues for Saudi Arabia and its allies in the Persian Gulf of about $300 billion in 2015. The Economist and WSJ reports say that for the long term shale oil production and advance in technologies are likely to play a lasting role in keeping oil prices low. At a time when Saudi society is changing, population growing, an older generation likely to transition to a younger generation in government, the cost of the social safety net and ample benefits will remain a concern for the Saudis for the long term.

LyrArc Article Gist
It makes for good political rhetoric, but in reality the flow of money goes both ways. A lot of investments are made by American companies overseas. This time the flow of oil money because of high oil prices, from the USA and Europe to the Middle East is being recycled back to the USA in the form of investments in the US through small equity stakes in companies and more so through purchases of capital equipment and services to build Saudi infrastructure projects. The $500 billion investment plan over several years in Saudi Arabia is to build everything from new cities, aluminium plants, electricity generation plants and chemicals and plastics plants. The fears and rhetoric are overblown, as the USA also invests overseas with holdings according to the Treasury department of $6 trillion of foreign stock and debt. The acceleration of foreign investment in the US is to be seen in the numbers, as the dollar gets weaker, and its more advantageous for Canadians and Euuropeans to invest here. Last year $414 billion of foreign investors money went into buying stakes in American companies and building factories and purchasing stock, according to Thomson Financial. Thats up 90% from 2006 and represented one fourth of all announced deals. This year in just 2 weeks foreign investors poured $22.6 billion in just the first 2 weeks of January, and that represents one half of all deals. Shows how quickly the picture is changing. One way of looking at it is that Americans buy a lot of foreign goods and the money Americans use to pay for a lot of imports is now being returned to the USA in the form of foreign investments. Note that foreign investment is desirable because it brings new ideas and technology and new management methods to the host country from other countries. These foreign investors in many cases are able to make these investments overseas because they are good at what they do, having them in the host country benefits the host country and shakes up competition in the particular industry in the host country that is receiving the investment. This is why economies once relatively unfavorable to foreign investors like Japan and S. Korea are now passionately seeking foreign investment to make their economies thrive through the exchange and inflow of new ideas and ways of doing things. The same can be and is true for the USA. The other aspect is that most of the investment is still from countries like Canada, Germany, Japan, S. Korea which are big free trade partners of the USA. Manufacturing investment is heavily skewed to European and Japanese companies. Foreign multinational investment (Sony, Toyota etc) grew to $43.3 billion in 2007 from $39.2 billion in 2006 according to OCO Monitor, and will accelerate significantly as companies like VW and other German companies find it cheaper to build in the USA and shift more manufacturing here. To get an idea why the rhetoric is overblown Canada spent the most in buying American companies, $65 billion in 2007, according to Thomson Financial. Russia spent $572 million and India $3.3 billion. How will this improve the chances of the USA making it out of this recession? Five million American work for foreign companies in the USA. Of these one third are manufacturing jobs. These jobs pay about 30% more than jobs in American owned companies. Figures from Treasury Department. There will be more of these jobs as companies like VW build plants here. Roubini Economics estimates that an infusion of about $300-400 billion is needed for the USA to overcome the effects of the current mortgage and credit crisis. $414 billion was invested in the USA by foreign investors according to Thomson Financial in 2007, going up from something like $200 billion in 2006. If this pace continues becasue of some of the same underlying reasons as the weaker dollar, stronger economies overseas, then $200 billion additional investments this year would add that much to a stimulus package of $150 billion by one estimate, to provide a boost of somewhere around $350 billion. In the range of the needed boost. Companies like IBM and GE which have significant investments in India and China and investments in software or infrastructure industries that are growing rapidly or Caterpillar with growth in construction overseas, may keep growing through this downturn. This recession may hit selectively and differently, not be a complete hit to the USA economy, and could prevent it from going beyond 2009 with recovery in 2010. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Brazil faces a debt crisis in 2015-2016. Between 2010 and 2015 foreign debt of local governments and Brazilian firms increased from $100 billion to $250 billion, and dollar debt in local currency from 210 billion reas to 655 billion reas, according to Bank of International Settlements data. State banking institutions BNDES and Caixa Economica Federal financed 35% of loans in 2010, by 2015 this increased to 55%. Subsidized loans at 5.5% by BNDES to firms make Brazilian banking a fiscal operation, requiring additional funding. Petrobras increased debt issuance enormously during this period, and now needs government support as its debt is now one notch above junk status. Interest payments on Brazil's debt is 6% of GDP in 2014. Public sector debt is 66% of GDP, and credit to the private sector is 55% of GDP up from 25% in 2005. It will take Brazil years to recover from a huge borrowing binge.

LyrArc Article Gist
Analysts fear an oil shock in 2012 similiar to that in 2008. There is similiarity in the situation now and in 2008- as in 2008, the surge in oil prices comes at a time of higher tensions with Iran and shrinking spare capacity. Spare capacity is at 2.5 million barrels a day on average for January and February 2012, according to the Energy Information Administration. This compares with 3.7 millon barrels a day for the same period in 2011. Part of the reason is that global oil demand is increasing in 2012 by 1 million barrels a day, to 89 million barrels a day. Technical and political problems have shutdown another 750,000 barrels a day. The problems begin to kick in during the second half of 2012. The U.S. ban on dealing with the Iranian central bank for oil trades starts in June 2012. According to the International Energy Agency, the EU embargo and U.S. sanctions will take 1 million barrels a day of Iranian crude out of the market. The result will be that demand exceeds supply by the third quarter by 1.1 million barrels a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Use of existing reserves in Europe, the U.S. and other countries will make up the gap. The effect will be to put pressure on oil prices. May Brent crude on the ICE Futures Europe exchange was up to $125.81 a barrel, on March 16, 2012, and prices for April delivery were at $107.06 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange....

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
Brazil's economy is forecast to contract by 2% in 2015, the currency has lost about one third its value and the stock market is down 22% in the last year. This follows the decline in demand for Brazil's commodities exports as China growth slows down. Experts say Brazil is now seeing another boom bust cycle similiar to boom-bust cycles in the past, such as the 1966-73 boom followed by years of hyperinflation and stagnation. Brazil's exports to China declined 17% in the first 7 months of 2015. The crisis is in many ways similiar to crises in other emerging markets dependent on commodities exports. The resources boom leads to overvaluation of the currency, and decline in development of manufacturing away from dependence on commodities exports. Other errors rise from complacency and politics prevalent in such periods. These errors include mismanagement of resources with poor resource allocation decisions such as spending on soccer stadiums in cities in the northeast while basic bus services remained underfinanced in large urban areas, large overspending by the government using state owned bank BNDES to offer rates at below market rates, a credit fueled boom and credit card binge for households, and a reversal of capital flows from the U.S. and Europe with the sharp decline in investment climate. There is a severe loss of confidence in the government of Dilma Rousseff with her approval rating as low as 8%. Corruption scandals at Petrobras show close links between the Workers Party of Rousseff and executives, with about $2 billion in misused funds. Brazil, like other emerging markets such as Russia and India, have taken some lessons from the 1997 financial crisis by setting aside large foreign exchange reserves for a crisis. Brazil's reserves of $397 billion help it cushion the effects with funding of the safety net and support to industries to avoid large layoffs. Other problems not tackled as in Mexico, India, and other emerging markets, are the weak educational system, and poor infrastructure, that create bottlenecks for growth. Brazil could face a lost decade after the debt overhang, decline in foreign investment and commodity export generated revenues. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The commodities boom allowed Brazil under president Lula to commit to heavy state spending, subisidies, protection of favored sectors with large tariffs, that led to inefficiency and high debt. The policies continued under president Rousseff. Corruption scandals in the latter part of the Lula administration led to more populist policies for the Workers Party to stay in power, says Porter. Compared to Mexico and Chile, Brazil and Argentina under presidents Lula and Kirchner moved in the direction to closing up their economies to trade and foreign investment that would make corporate sectors more competitive and less dependent on the state for subsidies and favors. Mexico's economy other than the automobile sector is struggling, as mismanagement also plays a part as with the handling of Pemex and huge capital injections needed. Mindfulness and thoughtfulness is needed in setting policy direction, aware of the risks free of illusions about rosy scenarios, knowing that ideology plays less of a part than exercizing good judgement....