LyrArc Article Gist
Polls show 83% of the German public support increasing the minimum wage to 8.50 euros an hour. About two thirds of the public support increasing income taxes on high wage earners. The Social Democrats talks with the CDU to form a coalition are likely to lead to CDU accepance of the condition for a minimum wage of 8.50 euros an hour, but not to the condition for raising the taxes on high income earners. The SPD sees the higher taxes as a way to pay for new infrastructure. A survey done for TV broadcaster ZDF shows 61% of Germans favoring a SPD-CDU coalition. In the 2013 elections the SPD gained 25.7% of the vote and the CDU-CSU gained 41.5%. The SPD is pushing for flexible retirement age, equal pay for men and women, a tighter financial regulation, and a growth and employment strategy in the EU.

LyrArc Article Gist
James Pressley, in this review of Joseph Stiglitz's new book- "Freefall: America, Free Markets and the Sinking of the World Economy," says Stiglitz's advice should be taken into account by the new administration. Stiglitz, says, the Obama administration has so far offered no alternative vision of capitalism and is only "mudddling through." It is simply following the course the Bush administration had taken. And has retained as key economic advisors, Geithner, Ben Bernanke and Summers, all from previous administration's economic teams, thus largely removing the possibillity of serious change. And by doing so, says Stiglitz, the Obama administration has "squandered the opportunity," to fix things that needed to be fixed in the economy. Stiglitz, says Pressley, urges Americans to think what kind of America they want to see, what kind of society they want to make, and then what kind of economy will get them there. Stiglitz wants to see banks back to where they they only make loans, and act as an efficient payments system, and not engaged in risk taking. At a meeting of the American Economic Association, Stiglitz, presented a paper that suggested that between globalization for integrating world financial markets and keeping them separate, the latter is the better course. Financial markets he believes, need circuit breakers to not bring down the whole system....

LyrArc Article Gist
As Obama faces the situation FDR faced, between political popularity after election in 1932, and loss of some political capital in the first year by 1933, and a lot depends on political will and courage. He has to execute and implement plans for efficient government spending that builds jobs to replace those lost, and to use the investments in really productive ways including projects that provide returns for years into the future. As David Axelrod points out in the Frank Rich column in the NYT, people sometimes live in a parallel universe, which may be completely at odds with what the rest of the country caught in the economic currents of layoffs and collapsing businesses is thinking.

LyrArc Article Gist
Gillespie lists the myths and describes the reality about Ron Paul. Ron Paul is not a "top tier" candidate- with many Republican candidates assuming top tier status and fizzling out this has become a term that has lost meaning. Paul is a doctrinaire libertarian- he has positions similiar to libertarians but also has his own views on immigration and abortion. His views on the U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, such as "ending the Fed" are crazy- actually Ron Paul's legislation on auditing the Fed is gaining credibility, and Fed policy is viewed skeptically by both the Tea party and Occupy movement, as well as some in the Federal Reserve such as Kansas City Fed chairman, Thomas Hoenig, and respected economists such as Alan Meltzer of Carnegie-Mellon University.Ron Paul is anti-military- Paul has support from servicemen in the military and raised more money from them than any other candidate including Obama. Ron Paul has youth support because he is against the war on drugs- the war on drugs has not worked that well and new approaches are needed. His support among youth comes from a believing that individuals are better at making the right decisions, his idealism, and his faith in making the U.S. a better place. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Drew Western, a professor of psychology at Emory University, asks the question about Obama that is on many people's minds- who is this man who wrote the book "Dreams of My Father." And what happened to him? It is as if he is asking did they conjure up something that didn't exist, was there really too little about the man in a book written when the young Obama was still in law school- about his experience growing up between two races, except a remarkable effort to grapple with that experience. It would say little about the man himself, the choices he would make, the decisions he would face as he entered his thirties, and forties, a period that provides the crucible and the formative experiences in the development of character. It is as if readers had appended their own chapter at the end of the book and conjured up many things that really did not exist. And which would serve as a kind of Rorschach test experience where readers were free to read into the picture whatever they wished to see- and something Obama could use to be all things to all people. Drew Western draws from his knowledge of psychology and his direct or virtual conversations with about 50,000 people to reflect and make some hypotheses about what has happened to Obama, or what Obama was always about. He starts by pointing out what was missing in the inauguration speech and has been missing ever since- a clear sense of narrative and a vision, a story about what had happened and how it could be made different in the midst of the global financial crisis of 2008-2009. Western provides several hypotheses for what has happened. Obama simply lacks the experience to handle the presidency -having been merely a community activist and not run a city, a state or a business, and had accomplished little before becoming president, and had an unremarkable career as a law professor having published nothing during his 12 years at the University of Chicago except an autobiography. And remarkably says Western voted 130 times in the Senate as "present" instead of "yea" or "nay," suggesting a tendency not to take a stand on difficult issues. The auto fuel efficiency standards issue may be the singular exception. The challenges of a presidency are much larger, and the challenges in 2009 were even greater. Obama could not measure upto the task. A related hypothesis is that given the lack of experience and the inability to make the narrative because of an unresolved identity, Obama is willing to do whatever it takes to dial for dollars and get re-elected. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Volcker before the U.S. Senate Banking Committee on May 9, 2012, before the announcement of the $2 billion trading losses by J.P. Morgan Chase. The following day Chase announced the losses from trades made by JP Morgan trader Bruno Iksil- nicknamed the "London Whale"- who made a complex hedge on a group of corporate bonds, betting $100 billion that the bonds would not default. The Volcker rule as it is currently written would not prevent such a transaction. The problem as Volcker pointed out before the Banking Committee is that under "too big to fail," "the losses would be socialized with the potential gains all private."

LyrArc Article Gist
A congressional oversight panel reported in October 2009 that fewer than 2000 of 500,000 loan modification applications in progressunder the Making Homes Affordable program of the Obama adminsitration had become permanent. When Treasury reports on the program in December 2009 its expected to report that the number of permanentloan modifications are in the tens of thousands out of 650,000 borrowers in the program. Mortgage companies are collecting lucrative fees on long term delinquencies so there is not enough incentive to make permanent loan modifications according to lawers defending homeowners.

LyrArc Article Gist
Austin Goolsbee says the overvalued currencies of Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal and the lack of growth under austerity plans proposed for these countries create impossible odds for resolution of the financial problems in these countries. The German position is that profligate spending and irresponsible accounting in Greece, and structural issues in Italy ranging from entitlement spending to tax evasion, need to be resolved.

LyrArc Article Gist
A new report, "China: 2030," by the World Bank and the Development Research Center (DRC), has major implications for the course of action taken by new Chinese leaders. The limits to China's economic model with the dominant role of state owned companies has been pointed out in the past. It has now reached a point where China must choose to move to a modified model or face the "middle income trap" of countries like Brazil and Mexico, where income levels and growth reaches a certain level and then decelerates suddenly with little warning. The report makes some major recommendations that would modify the current system. It says the state owned companies should be supervised by asset management firms focussed on commercializing these companies, and not supervised by the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC). The asset management firms would restrict the state owned companies on what areas they participate and sell off businesses to make it possible for private companies to compete. Zoellick says- "China needs to restrict the role of the state-owned companies, break up monopolies, diversify ownership and lower entry barriers to private firms." The state owned companies would be required to pay sharply higher dividends to the government which could then be used for social programs. Currently state owned companies invest in land which is sold by local governments for revenue helping fuel the real estate bubble. Significantly, the report had its origins when it was proposed by Mr. Zoellick, head of the World Bank, during a visit to Beijing in Sept 2010. It was supported by Li Keqiang, then vice premier, and now expected to be the new prime minister of China. The World Bank is widely respected by Chinese leaders because of its assistance during the early stages of reform in the 1980's. The DRC reports to China's State Council, a top governmental institution, and the No. 2 person at DRC, Liu He, is a senior advisor to the Politburo Standing Committee. He helped draft the current five year plan and is close to Li and Xi Jinping, the next president of China. The SASAC has opposed these ideas, especially any shift in its personnel selection of management at the state owned companies, which it shares with the Communist party's personnel department. Respected China economists say China faces large risks of a sudden sharp slowdown because the the state owned companies have largely copied foreign technology and have not generated enough technological advances, which will be needed for the next stage of growth. Lower growth rates could worsen problems in China's banking system leading to a crisis. The Conference Board, estimates China's growth at 8% for 2012, slowing to an average annual growth rate of 6.6% from 2013 to 2016. Barry Eichengreen of UC Berkeley, Donghyun Park of the Asian Development Bank, and Kwanho Shin of Korea University, say the annual growth rate will drop by at least 2 percentage points by 2015....

LyrArc Article Gist
An analysis by Credit Suiss analysts shows that borrowers who have their principal reduced are less likely to default. But mortgage companies have been reluctant to take down loan balances. One study shows that47% of loan modifications completed in November 2009 resulted in higher payments for borrowers, typically because unpaid interest and fees were added to the loan balance. It is critical to make loan payments significantly affordable, as many people have other loans such as credit car loans, home equity loans, car loans, and these obligations make even a lower payment unaffordable.

LyrArc Article Gist
Will the long awaited Obama plan do enough to reduce foreclosures and help the economy? $75 billion will go to help homeowners facing foreclosure. But it continues the earlier course of letting it be voluntary for banks and lending institutions to decide if they in fact want to reduce the mortgage payment to 38% of the borrower's income. If they do the government provides an incentive of $1000 for every loan modified, and more payments if the borrower stays current. If the lender decides that its not in its interest to make concesssions to reduce the payments to 38% of the borrower's income, in exchange for the $1000 incentive, it could well decide to do nothing, and even continue the current practice of adding on interest and penalties that actually increase the mortgage payment in many cases. Is it enough? Clearly no, if Mark Zandl, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com is right, and helps only 1 million of the estimated 14 million people who are under water, and the homes are worth much less than the outstanding mortgage. As Martin Feldstein has pointed out for the last year since early 2008, its these people who are under water that need to be helped, and not in a piecemeal or voluntary way as Obama is suggesting. It only goes to show that after all the rhetoric, Government both Republican and Democratic, differ only in degrees in the way they are responding to the foreclosure crisis, that is at the root of the financial crisis. The tidal wave of foreclosures, the other 13 million borrowers that are not helped by this plan but are under water, with growing numbers because of growing layoffs, suggest a serious failure to tackle the problem, with serious consequences for 2009 and beyond....

LyrArc Article Gist
The graph tell the story, in early 2007 there were close to 4 million homes under water, in early 2008 closer to 8 million homes and in early 2009 closer to 16 million homes under water, close to doubling the number of homes under water. This is why more of the morgage securities become bad assets with each passing year, as their underlying assets the mortgages become high risk for default. During the third quarter the number of homeowners under water, or owing more than their homes were worth, were 11.8 million, and by the end of 2008, 13.6 million, according to Moody's Economy.com They are growing at close to 1.8 million every quarter, or at the rate of over 7 million a year. Which at this rate would reach 21 million homes under water by early 2010, if one assumed that government help only worked to offset the impact of further deterioration of housing prices, by lowering payments for some homeowners. A new housing rescue plan was announced March 4, 2009. This will supplement the $75 billion announced earlier. This plan announced March 4, 2009, is expected by the Obama administration to cover 9 million homeowners. Borrowers who face severe financial hardship that may cause them to lose their homes, are required under this plan to sign affidavits attesting to this. They will in then see their loans modified, payment periods lengthened, and interest rates dropped to as low as 2%, to bring the monthly payment down to 31% of income, the number that experts say is appropriate for sustainable payments. Only first lien mortgages, and homeowners who live in these homes and not homeowners who use them as investments, will qualify. The outstanding principal balance cannot be over $729,750. As incentives loan-servicing companies will get upto $3500 from the government, and the government will also match a portion of the ender's costs dollar for dollar. Homeowners get $5000 in government money to reduce their outstanding balances, as an incentive to them to stay current on these modified mortgages. The administration plans to announce plans to those holding second mortgages on their homes, who have difficulty modifying them. The other component of the plan is for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to refinance loans for borrowers who are under water, owing more than their homes are worth, even if they are wealthy enough to afford current payments. There is no income ceiling for this part of the plan. And these mortgages have to be held or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, with homeowners not owing more than 105% of the current value of their homes. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The first significant action to help homeowners threatened with foreclosure comes from Sheila Bair, Chairman of the Federal Deposit insurance Corporation, one of the few people after Bernanke and Paulson who have shown initiative and foresight in the current crisis. Bernanke and Paulson had the foresight to open the Fed lending window to investment firms like Lehman Brothers and others but little has been done for homeowners to have significant impact. When interviewed on television in the days surrounding the Bear Stearns crisis Sheila has shown a good grasp of the issues and courage to take the initiative. This action is similiar in line to what Martin Feldstein has suggested on the pages of the WSJ for some time now. Martin wanted the Federal government to step in to loan homeowners the 20% of their outstanding loan and work towards bringing the homeowners payment to an affordable sum. According to Feldstein's calculation this would be about the right amount as a percentage of their loan so that homeowners rationally would not be better off walking away from the loan as the best possible decision under the circumstances. If the rational option was taken under a scenario that homeowners would get no direct help here is what would happen even though it may be intuitively read in one's mind. Homeowners would walk away in increasing numbers, it would become the popular option, one that has happened in prior housing crises in Colorado for example but this time it would be spread out across America, making it dangerous. This would launch a downward spiral or cycle in which the more homeowners walk way, or default the more house prices drop, and the more house prices drop a new group of homeowners who previously had enough equity in the house now because of the last price drop enter the category of homeowners who would be better off just walking away as a rational option. During the next wave this gorup would default and set the spiral or cycle moving again to lead to further price declines and another group of homeowners finding not enough equity in their homes to justify making payments and this group would walk away. At each turn of this spiral another cycle would be set in motion which is why it is so dangerous once it gets started, and the need for timely but also well thought out plan and good execution. This cycle is that of the economic system as a whole. As house prices drop at each turn of this cycle, it would have a serious impact on consumption for an already indebted American consumer. A drop in consumption means fewer product purchases by consumers, and the falling demand means factories would close as companies consolidate operations around the remaining factories to keep capacity utilization at reasonable levels, and this would mean layoffs and cuts in investment and other spending. The layoffs in turn would add another layer of homeowners leaving their homes through foreclosures adding to the pool of homeowners who have left their homes, and adding to the downward pressure on house prices. The pickup in inflation would bite at exactly the worst time as this would mean consumers would have to spend even more carefully. The price of oil which normally would respond to changes such as a fleet of cars with higher mileage on American roads would take a longer time to respond as this fleet change would take a few years to occur. It would respond to lower demand for oil in American factories but the considerable demand in Asia and other countries where the economies are likely to slow down but still be growing at rates to accomodate the large number of people who have not benefited from the market economy, would make the price decline in oil a gradual affair. The weaker dollar would add to the price of imports adding to the inflation. This bite from inflation would lower consumption even further in the economic cycle. And this would mean lower production in factories and even more layoffs at the next turn of the economic cycle. The Federal Reserve would find itself having difficult choices between maintaining confidence in the dollar, for which Capman and McKinnon argue on the pages of the WSJ recently and lowering rates but not achieving much in terms of stimulating either consumption or investment as this would take time to work itself out and all the Fed could achieve by its interest rate making tool is to buy time to weather these adjustments in an orderly manner. There is almost a consensus among experts that interest rate reductions in the current climate of inflationary movements in prices and the current currency exchange rates moving towards a loss of confidence in the dollar is something to be done very carefully and each action taken only with careful understanding of the possible consequences. A look at the proposal itsel shows that it gets around the whole issue of moral hazard by having the cost paid for in this manner. The mortgage investors will pay for the 5 years of interest on the 20% of the loan the government provides. The homeowner takes over after that. The mortgage investors cannot add deferred interest, prepayment penalties or other ways to make the homeowner pay some of the interest charges. And the homeowners payment has to be afforadable so mortgage investors have to show that the payment is not more than 35% of income of the homeownercalled the debt to income ratio (DTI). And only homeowners with mortgage payments above 40% DTI are eligible. And the government would raise the money needed through a $50 billion offering. To show there is no moral hazard that is the government bailing out any of the parties involved, the government will get back all of its money or intends to do so, the government will have the first rights to the money should a home foreclose and before anybody else is paid. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Sheila Bair gets credit for anticipating the banking crisis and gets credit from people in the Bush Administration like Robert Steel Undersecretary at Treasury till recently for a comprehensive approach to the banking and credit and mortgage crisis. Steel says that the Bush administration first relied on a case by case approach and only later came around to Sheila Bair's comprehensive approach which also underpins the recent legislation passed by Congress to tackle the mortgage crisis. She has advocated better terms for borrowers as the best approach for lenders and borrowers and the banks and for the economy which has not been favored by the banking industry and lenders aseach group followed its own vested interest seeing only the immediate short run and failing to grasp the full extent of the crisis. Sheila Bair has taught public policy at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and also worked for the Bush administration at Treasury and in other capacities till her appointment to lead the FDIC. She also oversees the IndyMac bank as the FDIC took over that failed bank recently. She has over 100 banks at risk on her watch list and sees more fialures of banks ahead and the worst of the credit crisis still ahead of us when she says in this interview that " we have not seen the trough of the credit cycle yet", and referring to the hard headed work with a lot of work and not enough staff of examiners that " its going to be a slog to work through this."...

LyrArc Article Gist
On October 30, Sheila Bair heading the FDIC, the main advocate for reducing foreclosures by reducing the mortgage payments is in discussions with Treasury officials for a plan whose details are still being worked out. A key part of it is for the government to assume half of the losses on home loans that are incurred if mortgage companies agree to lower monthly payments for at least 5 years. The cost to the government is about $50 billion that would come from the $700 billion bailout fund. Right now loan companies are reluctant to reduce monthly payments because homeowners might defaul again or the owners of mortgage securities might file law suits. The funds would go to shoulder half of any future losses on default. For example if under a loan modification program 40% redefault and losses on loans are 55%, and $500 billion in loans are modified under the program, the total losses government would bear are $55 billion. This scenario is possible in a deep and prolonged housing and economic slump. This would be a gradual program if mortgage companies or companies with home loans or servicers of loans have to decide if they want to take advantage of this program, and time is critical as the foreclosures are accelerating and thisputs downward pressure on prices....

LyrArc Article Gist
It took a long time for the banks to understand what is in their best interests is in the best interests of the country's economy and homeowners, something Sheila Bair has been saying since the beginning of this year and implementing at IndyMac. Its just too costly for banks to use the foreclosure process to recover their money and it makes much better financial sense on the bottomline of banks and for the economy to make home payments affordable. Because the worse home prices get the worse the economy and banks do and nothing drives home prices down like foreclosures. The Bank of America settlement for Countrywide with state attorney generals to modify loans for 400,000 homeowners because of predatory lending practices also set the direction. Chase Bank is now using the Bair template to get the monthly payments down to an affordable level which is about 40% of the current payment by reducing interest rates and using a smaller loan balance and keep homeowners in their homes. Chase's plan will help 400,000 homeowners and will also help homeowners who are having difficulty making payments. It will put a 90 day hold on foreclosures till the program is put in place. Yet there is one problem. Only $350 billion of the 1.5 trillion in home mortgage it services are owned by Chase, the rest are owned by investors in the form of mortgage securities. It can do little for homeowners covered by these securites that are owned by hedge funds and other funds as a few of these funds oblivious of the overall interest including their own have threated to sue if loans are modified, and it would take some time to figure out who owns each security and what the terms are for modifying loans for that security. Its this part of mortgage securitiization that has slowed down a rational process of unwinding this problem throughout housing by making homeowners monthly payments affordable. And Fed's Bernanke did not come to grips with this point in his talk about mortgage securitization to UC Berkeley on October 31,2008, that mortgage securitization done in a way that make loan modification difficult is dangerous as it is today, and makes a crisis bigger than it otherwise would be, and turn a USA crisis into a global crisis through ricotcheting effects and a series of bad decisons....

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. government sold its last remaining shares in auto company GM booking a loss of $10.5 billion- a recovery of $39 billion dollars of the $49.5 billon dollars given to GM. The Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., points out that the cost of bailing out GM and Chrysler was about $13.7 billion. The benefits were 1.2 million jobs protected in 2009 during the depths of the financial crisis. It also preserved $39.4 billion in personal and social insurance tax collections in 2009 and 2010. The Treasury Department estimate of the cost is about $15 billon, including money invested in GM's former finance arm Ally Financial Inc. President Obama says the effort helped create 372,000 new jobs in five years. Treasury Secretary Lew summed it up by saying "it helped stabilize the auto industry and prevent another Great Depression." Other intangible but larger benefits in the long run were building up the companies anew with new pay structures the auto companies could support in a globalized economy, bringing in new management and discarding of old mindsets and culture, new relationships with unions and customers, committment to achieving fuel efficiency targets with new technologies in cooperation with the U.S. government guidelines, and renewed confidence of millions of employees in the U.S. auto sector. It is also the one area in which the Obama administration scores a clear win, and in which president Obama took the greatest interest as senator. That the public did not fully appreciate the significance of the step is more a reflecion of public frustration with how the companies were run by the old management, and a continual reminder of the importance of good management for the U.S. industry and economy....

LyrArc Article Gist
Gretchen Morgenson describes the issues of regulatory capture for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner during the 2008 financial crisis and the first term of the Obama administration, which affected how Geithner treated homeowners and banks. Morgenson describes close ties to Citicorp.