LyrArc Article Gist
The Public-Private Investment Program of the U.S. Treasury Department has not had a good start. With most banks passing the U.S.government's stress tests and raising $50 billion in the markets, PPIP which was intended to to help resolve the situation of all the toxic securites siting on the bank's books, has gone the way of all the prior efforts to solve this problem. Simply postponed this time hoping that the housing market recovers. With the Rogoff-Reinhardt study showing that it takes about 6 years or longer before housing recovers from such aserious crisis as this one, it would be 2012, before one sees an improvement. See the link to the Business Week analysis that shows housing markets in the USA having some aspect of normalcy in 2012. Yet even this analysis is using an optimistic scenario, because it assumes Moodys Economy.com estimates of economic growth for GDP of 4-5% in 2011- 2012. This assumes the consumer debt that has reached over 100% of GDP will be reversed quickly in 2010, and the the factory capacity utilization currently at 68% and expected to drop further in 2009- with more automobile manufacturing capacity remaining to be scrapped -will recover quickly in 2010-2011. This is unrealistic considering the combination of factors at work. Here Devin Leonard talks to PIMCO chief Bill Gross, who with Warren Buffett and PIMCO CEO Mohammed El-Erian, are key proponents of the PPIP program. Both El-Erian and Warren Buffett say they conceived independently of such a program, in which toxic securties are taken off bank's books with government help. As PIMCO is one of the largest traders of mortgage bonds in the country and has years of successful experience in dealing with mortgage bonds, the New York Fed under Geithner turned to PIMCO for advice in 2008. By this time PIMCO was under ownership of Allianz, a German insurer, which bought PIMCO for $3.3 billion in 2000, with $233 million and a $40 million retention bonus going to Bill Gross. Bill Gross describes how the program would function. PIMCO puts up $500 million, and Treasury matches this with $500 million. Analysts estimate that this partnership would be able to attract as much as $ 4 billion in low interest financing from Treasury and the Fed. Gross says that some of these securities pay as much as 14% interest, and even with a 70% default rate, this partnership could make $250 million a year on the $5 billion partnership, or a 5% return, with PIMCO making a 25% return on its original investment. This isn't exactly pro bono work as Buffett had originally suggested to Bill Gross in the midst of the crisis. But a more fundamental concern is that no one really knows exactly how much of toxic securties the banks have on their books, even though estimates have been made. If this is closer to $1 trillion, PIMCO's expertise and efforts will simply fall short of dealing with a problem of this size, and the window dressing of a problem of this magnitude could only hurt efforts for the eventual resolution of this problem. If housing does not recover as is expected till 2012 at the earliest, and the economy continues to deteriorate in unemployment and factory utilization, then the toxic securities on the bank's balance sheets may pose a bigger problem that will require serious action....

LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Bell at Tsinghua University in Beijing, Andy Xie, economist in Shanghai, Zhang Habin, professor at Peking University, and Michael Meyer, author and hutong expert, talk about what issues are important. Bell says Obama mania is absent among the young in China, though they respect his intellectual abilities, and Chinese are not looking to the USA for ideals. They are looking to Chinese culture and characteristics, and democracy is seen in this light with emphasis on Chinese characteristics. This means the US has to engage at a deeper level with China. Treat China as an equal with something positive to offer, says Bell. Andy Xie is concerned about the US-China relationship, based as it is today on tenuous grounds, where what happens in Florida and California can have a significant and immediate effect on what happens in Guangdong. With 70% of the furniture sold in the US made in China, the effects are immediate when housing slumps. So he says the US lost 3 million jobs since the subprime crisis, and China lost 20 million jobs. And for the 5 million college graduates coming out in 2009, they will be adding to the 5 million college graduates from previous years who are seeking jobs. Ten million unemployed college graduates mean China is seeing whole new conditions as the backdrop of US-China relations. Habin says its important for the US to set an example in climate change and emissions of greenhouse gases. The US should sign an agreement with China with binding targets, make its technology available to China, and provide development aid to make this technology and other assistance accessible to China. Cooperation on this issue is vital to future relations says Habin. Meyer says the hutong, small enclaves of old Beijing with lanes and small homes, that the city officials call neighborhood slums, but actually have a sense of community and a vibrant life, are worth preserving. He questions the Walmart and Pepsi commercial culture, and questions building of the American car culture urban plan that generates pollution, lacks community feeling, and is not energy efficient. In fact he has a point here, because the US is shifting away from its own older urban planning design that encourages urban sprawl, as in California. The new Sacramento urban plan that is being adopted for the future in America has energy efficiency, more community and easy interaction, less urban sprawl in mind. See the link to this. But Meyer says Chinese planners insist on their right to make the same mistakes American urban planners made. And Meyer quotes the head of the first Chinese environmental NGO, who says, "if the Chinese want to live the American way of life we need 7 earths to support them". Which raises a disturbing question of the US postwar way of life with its large SUV's, urban sprawl, and less sense of community. Wouldn't the US have to join India and China in the worldwide scramble for resources to preserve this way of life? Just this week China signed $51 billion of deals for natural resources, see the link. And is the rapid decline of the SUV, just the first sign of changes that are taking place, with the economic changes in coming years leading to grappling with issues of better quality of life, smaller quantity of things, health and obesity and lifestyles, community, all coming to the fore. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Note that Goldman Sach's analysts who first predicted that oil prices could reach $100 are now predicting that the downward momentum is building up. The prediction from them now is that prices may go up further than the $96 right now but should drop to $80 by April. Its not too difficult to see why. First on the supply side the momentum for downward shift is not so significant but still there are signs. The Iraqi oil flow disruption either from a Turkish invasion of norther Iraq or from internal disruption is shrinking as the Turks see this as a small operation at most, and the Iraqi law and order situation is improving. The Iranian situation may be stabilizing without US intervention possibilities shrinking. On the supply side the oil majors except for Total see their output shrinking somewhat, and OPEC has not increased supplies significantly as oil inventories have not built up as they do before winter. But overall the supply situation is stable. On the demand side is where the significant downward momentum exists. With the US economy slowing down amid the buildup of the housing tumble and the credit crunch which looks to get worse in 2008 before stabilizing in 2009 and a stronger euro and other factors affecting Europe's expansion oil consumption by industry in the industrialized countries is slowing. Much of the pressure on oil prices comes from increases in demand each year from China and India. Here gasoline is subsidized by the government and this reduces incenive for conservation. The policy of letting market prices be reflected at the pump to a limited degree so as not to seriously affect people is now taking hold in these countries. In China prices were raised 10% and there is likely to be further increase in the near future. This along with the increasing awarenes of the dependence on foreign oil and the need for conservation in both China and India should build pressures in both countries to make the best use of resoures and have users share some of the burden of higher prices. The American and European gasoline market is driven by a public that has not been too conscious of conservation especially in America. It appears that high oil prices have not encouraged conservation, witness that with rebates for higher oil prices and zero interest rates financing large pickups are still selling at levels of 2005, and there has not been a significant reduction in consumption at the pump. What may shift this equation now is probably government mandated fuel economy standards. Europe already has new standards and the automakers there are racing to meet it with new technologies, in America its now almost certain that public sentiment and congressional sentiment is likely to lead to similiar standards or at least significantly improved standard. Public sentiment is already pushing the automakers in the USA to introduce new models with higher fuel economy and use this as a n advertising and competitive edge. This reduction in gasoline consumption at the pump through new technologies in the industrialized countries and through price increases being allowed to flow through in the developing countries of China and India in a stable supply environment where the downward political risks are stable may be the pivotal turning point for the price of oil. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How ethanol picture as a useful alternative fuel has changed completely in the past year. The economics of ethanol also have changed completedly in the past year, as corn prices have risen to above $3 abushel and stayed there, even with the biggest corn crop since 1945, and prices of ethanol have dropped with huge oversupply of ethanol from $5 a gallon in June 2006 to about $1.85 a gallon today. Global ethanol production has grown from 10.9 billion gallons in 2006 to 13.4 billion gallons in 2007 according to IEA. US's ethanol production is about half of this or 7 billion gallons and is up 80% in 2 years. The production capacity of ethanol with new plants is expected to jump to about 12 billion gallons in 2008 even as demand for ethanol is about 7 billion gallons.This huge oversupply accounts for the drop in prices of ethanol with margins dropping from $2.30 in 2006 to 25 cents in late 2007. Its become less and less attractive as an alternative fuel as more studies appear and more groups cite the different ways in which ethanol has destructive effects on the environment. Corn is in demand by food companies and by livestock companies in the USA and generally across the developing world so raising corn prices is seen very unfavorably around the world. Nation Academy of Sciences study and a National Research Council study says corn based ethanol could strain water supplies and impair water quality. American Lung Assocation worries about the the air pollution from burning ethanol in gasoline. And a EPA Spring 2007 report says ozone levels increase with increased use of ethanol. A study coauthored by Nobel prize winning chemist Paul Crutzen says it might exacerbate climate change because of the added fertilizer used to produce corn raised emissions of nitrous oxide. All this has made people wary of ethanol and much of the early enthusiasm for ethanol has vanished. The lobbying struggle pits the ethanol producers and the farm lobby in the midwest against oil companies which don't like being forced to use a non-petroleum fuel even with a subsidy of 54 cents of gallon for blending ethanol into gasoline, and food and livestock companies which need corn at lower prices. Add to this the weight of environmental organizations and countries across the developing world which simply don't like the idea of using scarce food resources in this manner and find this to be just not a right thing to do for the world's poor which need corn as a basic food source. Consider Mexico where this affects the price of a staple food corn tortillas and China which bans the use of corn for making biofuels, both countries seek to keep food prices low for the country's large numbers of rural and urban poor people and could see the stability of these countries disturbed by huge rise in food or fuel prices. As a result of all this the ethanol lobby is looking to Congress to mandate a certain usage figure of ethanol in gasoline production in the new energy law. This legislation now could become controversial in the future as better ways of solving the energy crisis such as automobile fuel efficiency reducing demand and conservation, as well as other alternative sources that have fewer adverse environmental impact come into play. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein is back after his proposal that the government step in with low cost loans to families thatwould help homeowners reduce what they owed the bank by 20%, for those homeowners who are close to negative equity but not there yet. This is needed to prevent the next big wave of defaults on loans, from homeowners who see that walking away from their loans is a rational solution once they reach the point of negative equity. Feldstein hammers away at some critical points that point out that reducing rates risks more than it accomplishes. Food prices globally do not benefit from lower rates, as governments may have to raise interest rates to cool inflation in their economies. Rising food prices threatens the livelihoods of poor and working classes in the global economy, especially in developing countries of Asia and Africa. It also does little to stimulate the economy in the USA and actually helps increase inflation for commodities like oil and food products. So why is the Fed lowering rates even though the costs are more significant than the benefits. Lowering rates would be counterintuiive in this situation as Feldstein points out. Bernanke's response would be that its a temporary crisis response, lower interest rates helps financial firms restructure their debt and helps them restore health to their balance sheets in the fragile financial markets, where the financial architecture itself is being questioned. And the immediate crisis was in the financial markets, whereas some other solutions could be found for the damage this caused to the overall world economy in terms of inflation. Feldstein quotes estimates of inlation at 4% in the last 12 months and of 4.8% this year. The inflation rate in China is estimated much higher at about 8.5% and has become the focus of government efforts including relaxing the exchange rate, as the rise in prices especially of food affects the large working poor in China. Another aspect of lower interest rates is that lower rates surely would do little when there is such a large inventory of unsold homes. Significant also is the fact that lowering rates for fed funds by 3% from this time last year, has done little to lower mortgage interest rates which have come down only by 0.5%. So it does not give much relief to homeowners either. So is lowering rates a medicine that comes with a lot of side effects that you adminster only because the patient is in a critical condition, as the financial and credit markets appeared to Bernanke and Paulson that weekend only a few weeks ago? Probably so,which takes one back to Feldstein's main point. That main point is that the only way to get to solutions that strike at the core of this crisis is to help homeowners avoid default on their home mortgage loans, by reducing the loan amount by something like 20%, through government loans which can later be recouped to some extent. It cautions the Fed to use the medicine of lower rates sparingly, and urges the market participants and the public that insists that there be no "bailouts" to come to their senses, and accept that their will be tolerable losses for all if there are not to be intolerable losses for all....

LyrArc Article Gist
The National Assessment of Education Progress, NAEP, which is a report card of educational levels in the U.S. secondary school system shows 36% of fourth graders in the U.S. are proficient in reading for 2017. For eighth graders this drops to 34% in 2017. This shows that a little over a third of fourth and eight graders are achieving proficiency in reading, a glaring sign of failure leaving about two thirds of young people behind. With declining level of reading proficiency and proliferation of social media, the bottom 25% are faring much worse than even this dismal result.

Between 2015 and 2017 there was no improvement in NAEP scores.

LyrArc Article Gist
The IEA which is the energy agency of the OECD has updated its demand estimates for oil based on the updated estimates of growth in the US and Europe of the IMF and the OECD. The IEA reports have been behind the curve like the IMF estimates and more after the fact revisions. Their current forecast of world demand growth drops their January estimate of demand by 35% to 1.3 million barrels a day from 2 million barrels a day in 2008 vs 2007. This reflects the one percentage point drop in growth in the USA from 1.5% to 0.5% in the recently revised IMF estimate. This should lead to drop in oil prices from the high of $110 currently. But the IEA is leery of predicting this because of what it sees as robust growth in India and China. Partly IEA is caught between different views of world economic growth, one view holds that Europe will see some impact from the US slowdown but Asia will see less of an impact, another view sees this as a global economic slowdown. More likely considering the extent of the bubbles and the excesses in different countries its likely that whats happening in the US will see effects worldwide and lead to a global slowdown. So look for a further downward revision of numbers for oil demand growth as well as estimates that suggest lower oil prices once the effects are felt on the ground in factories, plants and industry worldwide....

LyrArc Article Gist
By September 2009, says the NYT based on a state by state analysis of Labor Department numbers, 1 out of 4 persons in California will either be out of work or just working part time. At this time in July 2009, 1 in 5 persons in California are in this situation. This would mean a 25% unemployment/underemployment rate in California, and the rate in Florida, North Carolina and Washington could reach 20%, by September 2009. This spring the unemployment/underemployment rate reached 23.5% in Oregon, 21.5% in Michigan and Rhode Island, and 20.3% in California. In Tennessee, Nevada and some other states that rely heavily on manfacturing or housing, the rate was just under 20% this spring, and may have since passed that number. And so far only $90 billion of the stimulus has made it out the door according to Moody's Economy.com. From now until the end of 2010, an additional $25 billion or thereabouts will be spent every month. In most of the Great Plains States and the Mountain West the unemployment/underemployment rate was still below 12% in spring 2009, and in North Dakota as low as7.8%. But these states are getting adisproportionate share of the stimulus fund, which shows that the allocation of stimulus funds needs to be adjusted. Who are these parttime workers and how many are there? Take Richard Smith and his wife Lyn. They left Michigan where he worked for GM and Ford in white collar jobs till he was laid off. Mr Smith moved to Charlotte, N. Carolina last summer. He hasn't found full time work after sending in hundreds of applications. He now works a few days aweek at agolf shop, repairing clubs and making $9.50 an hour. With the help of that money he has bought abargain-basement foreclosed house. Part time workers like the Smiths comprise about one third of the 20% unemployment/underemployment rates in states like Michigan and Oregon, so the rate for those who are completely out of work is around 13% in these 2 states....

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman sees Japanese style deflation as a plausible threat in 2011. He says that there is a very real possibility that the US would be seeing deflation in 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. experienced a net increase in jobs of 69,000 in May. The average for the March-May 2012 period is 96,000 jobs, which is down from the figure of 245,000 net jobs added in the previous three months December- February 2012. Increasing auto sales did not increase jobs by much- only 12,000. Job gains were in health care, transportation and warehousing, with cutbacks in construction and at the local government level.

LyrArc Article Gist
The asset bubble may be due to the huge infusion of liquidity in the economy. This inflates the value of financial wealth in stocks relative to real wealth in goods and services and businesses that produce them. Industrial production is down but stock prices are up. This leads to distortions that can show up elsewhere such as in the currency markets with depreciating dollar or in the stimulus being withdrawn too early.

LyrArc Article Gist
On one hand the issue of the $165 million in bonuses going out to employees in the 370 person Financial Products Group, and oth the other the need to wind up the complex derivative contracts that are causing these huge losses at AIG. But are such huge payouts needed for these employees to do their job? Isn't this aprofessional responsibility of these employees? And AIG's retention-payment program was disclosed a year ago and the amount of the bonuses $400 million, says the Washington Post, had been widely reported. The company is set to pay according to the WPost $600 million in retention awards to about 4700 people throughout the global insurance units. WHat happens to the $600 million, as no opinion has been voiced on these upcoming payments. The whole idea of retention payment raises another question. Will the skills of these employees be needed in a long drawn out economic downturn spread over several years or longer. And will thefailure of such things as derivatives, and the tighter regulation, mean that they will play amuch smaller role in the future. And even in the insurance units will these skills draw a premium in a market where the supply of new talent is larger than the job market ? One expert has sugggested that even if some of them left, there would be younger people to replace them who might bring an even better set of qualifications, with amix of skills, caution and prudence. So is there something self-interested and spurious in the retention argument itself and shouldn't this bluff be called? ...