LyrArc Article Gist
Tourists from China went up by 20% in 2015, going over 1 million. Foreign enrollment at Australian educational institutions was up significantly in 2015, going up to 645,000, up 25% over 2012 with the weaker Australian dollar. Australia's services sector including inbound education and tourism exceeded in value the minerals and metal ores exports in the last two months of 2015. This enabled the Australian economy to grow by 3% in the 4th quarter of 2015 over the prior year.

LyrArc Article Gist
A major shift in foreign investment may be taking place as the 2014 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum takes place in May 2014. Russian policy in Ukraine and tensions with the U.S. and Germany could lead to a shift in investment to other emerging market countries. China's tensions with Japan could lead to a similiar shift of Japanese foreign investment. At the same time India has elected a new government with an absolute majority and an overwhelming mandate from young people to accelerate development. The new government under the BJP party's Modi has a decade of experience attracting foreign investment in western India. Indonesia, Vietnam, Africa and other emerging market countries, could benefit from the shift in investment. Investment could also return to the home countries with lower labor costs in Southern Europe, lower labor/energy/transport costs in North America. For Russia the debate at the St Petersburg Economic Forum was about pursuing one of three policy paths with some riskier than others, or some combination also risky and uncertain- depending on state banks and oil windfall funds, increasing ties with Asian countries, continuing on the current path with lower foreign investment and continued capital outflows. The failure to use the time wisely to diversify the oil based economy which could have been better accomplished in an economy not overly dependent on crony capitalism and centralized economy, both current characteristics, will affect future progress. A key weakness for Russia compared to China is the centralization under one person Putin, more so in the third term. In China the two man team Keqiang and Jinping is part of a larger team chosen by consensus and negotiation and part of a rotational scheme. It has senior leaders who initiated the changes to a market driven economy in the nineties determined to see China on track....

LyrArc Article Gist
Strikers at a Honda transmission factory in Hoshan, 100 miles northwest of Hong Kong are asking for raises of $117 or 800 renminbi in cash above the $132 a month or 900 renminbi that they are now paid. About 950 of 1900 workers at the plant are trainees, young people from vocational schools or high schools earn $132 a month. Older employees earn upto 1500 renminbi or $220 a month. The significance of this strike is that the Chinese government is tacitly encouraging the strike as it begins making moves to increase domestic consumption and make the economy less dependent on exports. This requires consumer's having larger purchasing power and higher wages. It also means that China will not remain the low cost manufacturer for manufacture goods makers around the world for very long. Consider the size of the increase and the policy change of the government and this implies a significant shift by China.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hernando De Soto, a prominent economist, heads the Institute for Liberty and Democracy. He has an intimate knowledge of the workings of the Egyptian economy, and describes the socio-economic marginalization of large parts of Egyptian society as Economic Apartheid. Simply put Egypt has fallen behind the times, way behind the economic progress in large developing countries.The Institute was hired by the Egyptian government in 1997, with the financial support of the US Agency for International Development, to look into what reforms were needed. It presented its 1000 page report in 2004- after years of work involving 120 Egyptian and Peruvian technicians, participation of 300 local leaders and interviews with thousands of ordinary people- to the Egyptian cabinet. The then Finance Minister Hassanein supported it and the cabinet approved it. What followed was a cabinet shakeup, and blocking of any reforms by hidden interests wanting to protect the status quo. De Soto's objective was to find out how many people were marginalized in Egypt, and how much of the economy operated outside the legal system- small business that did not have the protection of property rights or access to normal business tools and credit, that makes businesses grow. He found that 9.6 million people were employed in this sector operating "extralegally" with no protections. This being the largest sector of employment in Egypt. His action plan was intended to remove the legal impediments to these people and businesses urban and rural, so that they could grow. He says the value of these businesses outside legal protections is $248 billion or 30 times larger than the total value on the Cairo stock exchange, and 55 times greater than all the foreign direct investment in Egypt since 1800 including Suez Canal and Aswan Dam. De Soto says that because of burdensome, discriminatory and bad laws it takes 500 days to open a small bakery, getting a legal title on a vacant piece of land would take 10 years of red tape. This barrier of bad laws, poorly trained bureaucrats, inertia of the status quo, prevents people from legalizing their property and business. As a result whereas one of these types of small businesses is now India's largest company called Reliance Industries, and another Infosys is the second largest software company, most Egyptian enterprises are stuck being small and relatively poor, and do not generate jobs for the demographic surge of young people. De Soto's point is that Egypt will need good leadership to pull off this task of legal reform, and democracy alone will not be enough. Empowering the large majority of the Egyptian people operating outside the legal protections will mean giving property rights for $400 billion of assets, De Soto says. And this would unlock an amount of capital hundreds of times larger than what foreign direct investment and aid has brought to the country....

LyrArc Article Gist
An audit of Spain's banking system by the consulting firm Oliver Wyman, shows that Spanish banks would need 53.745 billion euros to be cleaned up if mergers and acquisitions underway are completed.The amount goes up to 59.3 billion euros if this does not happen. Bankia bank will need 24.7 billion euros to meet capital requirements. Three other nationalized banks need 21.5 billion euros, including 3.2 billion euros for Banco Popular. Of the 14 audited banks only 7 need capital infusions. The other banks considered healthy include BBVA, Santander and La Caixa. These findings are similiar to a preliminary finding by Oliver Wyman and estimates provided by Luis de Guindos, Spain's economy minister, that Spanish banks will need 51 billion to 62 billion euros of capital infusion. Spain's secretary of state for the economy, Fernando Jimenez Latorre, says Spain will soon request about 40 billion euros of the 100 billion euro bailout offer for banks negotiated by Spain in June with the EU. It is not clear whether the capital infusion will go directly to Spain's banks as Spain has argued, or go through the Spanish government. The audits were important to provide credibility through independent assessment of losses in Spain's banking system, and remove the fog of uncertainty that is pushing up Spain's borrowing rate in capital markets....

LyrArc Article Gist
The ECB stands ready to act with the unanimous support of its 25 member governing policy, says Mario Draghi, president of the ECB. Draghi said that "if oil feeds into other prices, that could generate exactly what we want to avoid, namely a spiralling downward phenomenon" for wages and prices. Mark Carney of the Bank of England, says he will see "how things evolve." The U.S. Federal Reserve might slow planned rate increases in 2016, if inflation remains well below the target of 2%, and conditions indicate adverse effect on the economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
German perceptions of Mikhail Gorbachev are shown here in DW.com. He is revered in Germany because of Gorbachev's efforts to end Soviet rule in East German state called the GDR, leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Gorbachev supported German reunification but did not do this is in a way that ensured that ordinary Russians and citizens of the GDR could make the transition to democratic processes in a smooth way. He also failed to grasp that economic transition could be difficult and would require extensive aid and grants from the west, and that safeguards and protections for retired pensioners and vulnerable sections of society needed to be in place. The following is a reflection of the background in political government and economy of the events in Europe leading to the war in Ukraine.  As a result Gorbachev's instincts were right by first 1956 as a student, and then 1979 as government official about the need for democratic processes to realize the real potential of Russia, just as has happened in many countries that lacked these processes for change in government- Japan, Germany, South Korea, India, Brazil and many countries in Asia and Latin America. But not realizing that these countries made the transition with considerable American and British assistance. Even where there was no direct assistance indirectly the British setup the first limited Swaraj or free rule in India, with elections and elected assemblies in Indian states in the 1930's, following the pattern in Dominion states Australia and Canada. Mohandas Gandhi negotiated within these processes for rights of South African Indians and Colored people, gaining experience, including study of British law.  A son of poor farmers in the agricultural region of North Caucasus, in Stavropol, it is relevant today that his maternal grand parents were from Chernihiv in Ukraine. He came to power in 1980 after entering the Politburo that year. These were the waning years of Leonid Brezhnev, president of the Soviet Union who followed Nikita Khrushchev (1953- 1964). Khrushchev was from eastern Ukrainian region near Donetsk. Leonid Brezhnev was a protege of Krushchev since 1931, from Kamianske, Ukraine.   Gorbachev was influenced by Khrushchev's speech that denounced Stalin in 1956 in favor of a freer and more open society. Khrushchev, became first secretary of the Communist party in 1953 after the death of Stalin and set the pace of post war Soviet society from 1950 to 1964. He removed the fear of the dictatorship of the proleteriat working class, increasingly dictatorial under Lenin, and blatantly arbitrary under his successor to make Soviet Union a freer society.  Yet his tendency to make decisions on his own without consulting others, and the failure of agriculture in the Soviet Union including food shortages led to his replacement by his protege Brezhnev. Brezhnev's whole career was built under Krushchev in Ukraine, in the army in Ukraine, and as a political leader in the Soviet 18th Army that entered Prague in 1945 defeating the Nazis. Why is this relevant? Gorbachev was educated at Moscow State University when the Soviet Union was in the Sputnik era, and felt at the time that it could reach the 1950's standard of living in the US- very different from the earlier leaders. Yet he may have been too much of an optimist and not hands on in understanding the working of a modern economy as large as Russia and the interests of different groups of society that had to be be balanced and protected. His understanding of the US and of how the US and British economies had evolved was limited or nonexistent. The isolation of the Soviet period may have compounded this. The Russian state in the Soviet Union could not simply unwind the power of the state and its intervention and everything would come out right of its own accord.   Leonid Brezhnev, the Ukrainian Russian who succeeded Krushchev from 1964 to 1979 let the system of Soviet rule remain as it was, in the Great Stagnation, leading to lethargy, lack of innovation, and a weak economy with military expansion. Gorbachev tried to regenerate the system by opening it up, but failed to see that there was a risk that it could come apart quickly as it did in just 4 years after he became president in 1985. Only the centralized power of the state had kept the Russian state together from the Tsarist period through the Communist period. The risks of this Gorbachev failed to grasp. What if it happened too quickly without a safety net for the people who could not make the transition. What lawlessness and failure of the rule of law could happen. The US and Britain had evolved their democracies over centuries. Wars were fought in the US and Britain over rights and responsibilities of kings and parliaments. In the US Lincoln fought the civil war not just for emancipation but to ensure safeguards for free white men on the farms so that Labor did not get disabilities placed on them by Capital (entrenched forces of Capital of which the southern plantation economy was only one aspect.)  Japan and Germany were set up as democratic states through American power and constitutional frameworks with Marshall Plans or agreement to take in unlimited imports from Japan. This bad scenario happened in Russia because Gorbachev failed to set the conditions first and work patiently to achieve them including introducing limited  elections and parliamentary processes first in Russia.  Leaders such as Yeltsin who succeeded Gorbachev in 1989, winning the elections that followed, failed to provide a safety net for the vulnerable in the 1980's. Unemployment increased rapidly, life expectancy dropped in Russia, and the economy failed in the early years after 1980. A Marshall Plan like that offered to Germany could have helped but Gorbachev's failure may have been his failure to provide this transition by arranging for West Germany and the US to support a planned transition, a kind of Marshall Plan of Aid, and maintaining a gradual move to democracy as the country was given time to learn institutions of American and British parliamentary democracy. No such Marshall Plan was negotiated for a smooth transition over inevitable obstacles, no safeguards were put in place for illegal efforts to control the state by rogue elements and to seize assets of state companies, no efforts to first introduce limited elections and parliamentary processes for learning democratic process in Russia, and the people of Russia were left with a memory of the this period as a bad lawless period from 1989 to 2005.  Leading to the situation today under Putin of aspiring to the Soviet period as a kind of period that had offered Russia the world recognition it had lost. And this had happened even though the Russian economy had recovered and the standard of living had risen under Putin. Putin's career spanned the period as a Russian official in Dresden, Germany Democratic Republic or Soviet period East Germany to working in the St Petersburg City Council under Yeltsin. He personally witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the German Democratic Republic from Dresden and Gorbachev's refusal to build a transition period for the changes so that it would not be traumatic for the GDR. Even after reunification these traumas remain in some segments of the older population in East Germany that saw themselves as neglected and support extreme right wing parties in eastern German states by 2020- considering the Soviet period as one in which their lives were less neglected.  After three terms as president Putin with his own traumas from that period in Dresden, and with a mother lost in the period after the Nazi invasion of Russia, a father who survived the Battle of Stalingrad, saw the period of lawless behaviour in the collapse of the Soviet Union as the"greatest geopolitical disaster of the century."  Putin and people around him made missteps and miscalculations launching a war in Ukraine, leading to the situation today- jeopardizing hard won gains for the Russian economy. By 2022 Russian standards of living had risen and the economy was in the best shape it had been in the modern period since the Industrial Revolution. Yet largely exposed because of the dependence on oil and gas during a period of climate change and focus on building future economies free of fossil fuels.  Putin in his own peculiar logic may have seen this as the only opportunity in 2022 before deliinking from fossil fuel reduced the importance of the Russian fuel dependent economy to make some territorial readjusments in Ukraine with a quick war taking Kviv. That turned into a massive miscalculation with the emergence of nationalist fervor in western Ukraine spreading to the whole country of 40 million people. In the future to 2030 with phasing out of the fossil fuel economy, Russia without the connections to the US and European Union's technology and resources it had during Putin's three terms, and facing strict sanctions from US and EU, faces a difficult future. This has cautionary lessons for all countries- the US that read too much into the fall of the Berlin wall and indulged in a losing proposition with free markets that damaged its infrastructure and manufacturing with shifts to China, China understanding of how it to was dependent on the world economy for its future development, India that had to navigate a difficult period and what lessons to draw for building a bigger economy, the EU realizing the failure of its policies of depending on Russia for energy and China for manufacturing with fragile supply chains,  and Russia that there were twists and turns and the need for safeguards and experience building democratic processes before these processes would work for the economy, its people and for Russia as a nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Edmund Phelps, is 2006 Nobel prize winner and director of the Center on Capitalism and Society at Columbia University. Phelps offers a deep reflection on capitalism and what it is as a system and isn't, from the insights gathered and knowledge accumulated about its workings- conditions in which operates best, and conditions under which it is stressed or fails. It is the actors and overseer's, the public's ignorance about how the system works, the insights about its advantages and its serious hazards if neglected, that lead him to say we need deep reform and re-education. Capitalist systems, he says, are mechanisms by which economies may generate growth in knowledge- with much uncertainty in the process owing to the incompleteness of knowledge- with growth in that knowledge leading to income growth and job satisfaction. The uncertainty can be serious and dangerous if not accounted for, and the knowledge offers opportunities for personal growth, problem solving and exploration. There has been an intellectual failure in developing a wide understanding of its benefits as well as its serious costs if not kept in check, costs that arise from uncertainty and moral issues of proper behaviours if not properly guided. This is an admirable and clear expression of what capitalism is and how it should be understood....

LyrArc Article Gist
The truth is very different from the rhetoric coming from the Obama administration about helping Main Street America and ordinary workers against "fat-cat bankers," says Goldfarb. Under the Obama administration banks have grown larger and gained more influence over administration decisions. No conditions were made part of the agreement that would require banks to lend a portion of the money handed out to the banks to ordinary borrowers. And not much of significance was done to help homeowners under water, which would enable a faster recovery. In this respect the policies slanted in favor of banks of the Obama administration worsened the prospects of an economic recovery. Experts from Reagan advisor Martin Feldstein- who as early as 2008 advocated serious help to homeowners under water to reduce principal and interest- to the FDIC's Sheila Bair and Princeton Prof. Krugman, across the ideological spectrum, perceived this being in the national interest. Feldstein's first op-ed on his plan appeared in the Wall Street Journal on 3/7/2008, followed by ones on 4/15/2008, 10/4/2008, 1/20/2010/ 10/12/2011 in WSJ, and a oped on 10/30/2008 in the Washington Post, repeating the call for siginificant debt reduction to homeowners. Banks had extraordinary influence on successive administrations in the U.S., both Republican and Democratic- the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations- so that policy actions could be distorted from what would otherwise take place. A study by two University of Michigan professors shows that banks did not increase lending after receiving government money. Instead taxpayer money was used to invest in risky securities for profits from short term price movements, resulting in gains of about 10% in investment returns. Ran Duchin, one of the two professors, says helping ordinary borrowers was not the most profitable use of capital for banks. Without the necessary conditions from the Obama administration, the banks depolyed capital in ways that did not help the economy. Similiarly when banks needed to be restructured no preparatory action was taken because of resistance within the administration- a request by President Obama to Treasury Secretary Geithner for preparing a plan for the restructuring of Citigroup was ignored, according to a report by Goldfarb and Wallsten on 9/17/2011 in the Washington Post....

LyrArc Article Gist
EU leaders meeting in Brussels agreed on Dec. 12 for a single banking supervisor for large banks in the eurozone. The European Central Bank will act as the supervisor with powers to force banks to raise capital buffers and close banks it considers unsafe. The Federal Reserve, U.S.'s central bank, has similiar powers in the U.S. Germany's finance minister Schauble says the national parliaments would be able to ratify the new supervisor by Feb. 2013, and the new supervisor should be in place by March 2013. Differences between Germany and France on which banks should come under the supervision of the ECB were resolved by giving the ECB resposibility for banks that have over 30 billion euros in assets, are over 20% of a country's GDP, or operate in at least two countries. At least 3 banks in each country in the eurozone would come under ECB supervision. The remaining smaller banks would remain under national supervision as Germany had insisted earlier. The focus now is on coming up with a common resolution authority for winding down failing banks, a function performed by the FDIC in the U.S. These are two of the three major parts of the new European financial architecture to support the euro currency. The third is deposit insurance, which is provided by the FDIC in the U.S. system. It is a major step forward and clears the way for direct recapitalization of banks in Spain and Ireland, two countries affected by having to take on responsibility for failing banks. By breaking the link between sovereign debt and failing banks the new agreements makes it possible for these countries to return to economic growth....