LyrArc Article Gist
Castilla-La Mancha includes the region around Toledo, Spain. It has an unemployment rate of 27% for the 1st quarter of 2012, up 5.4% from 2011, faster than the increase of 3.1% to 24.4% for Spain. Estimates from the University Carlos III in Madrid show economic growth contracting with GDP decline at 3.1% annual rate by the end of June 2012 for Castilla La Mancha. Part of the problem was the lack of credible accounts by the previous administration. Unpaid bills to suppliers were not included in the accounts for the region. When Maria Dolores de Cospedal of the Partido Popular became the president in May 2011, these unpaid bills were discovered and led to the doubling of the region's budget deficit to 7.3% for 2011. Cospedal sees the austerity cuts she is making as a long term approach to preserve education and healthcare. In an interview with Sara Schaeffer Munoz of the WSJ she says reducing debt is the first priority, so that interest rate premiums on borrowing can be brought down. Debt for Castilla was 17.2% of GDP in 2011, according to the Bank of Spain, it was 16.6% in the first quarter of 2012, among the highest of Spain's regions Ms. Cospedal says she wants growth too, but insists that Spain cannot get growth as long as it is sinking in debt. Moody's Investors Service says Ms. Cospedal is strict in executing the budget- a new second hospital slated to be built for 150 million euros in Cuenca with population 56,000 was cancelled and other cuts are proceeding- and Moody's did not include Castilla in the downgrades of 7 Spanish regions in June 2012. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Turkey's lira depreciates by 21% in 2013 and an additional 7% by January 24, 2014. The central bank uses up a third of its foreign exchange reserves or $19 billion in intervention to support the lira since June 2013. The intervention on June 24, 2014, did not work and the lira continued its downward slide to 2.30 to the lira. The political protests in Turkey and divisions within factions in the government about corruption probes has led to a political crisis and investors pulling back from Turkey. The central bank failed to increase interest rates as expected by investors and suggested by the IMF. Inflation is running at 7.4% for 2013. In August 2001 a currency crisis caused the banking system to collapse. The financial position is stronger than in that crisis, yet the recent political crisis and the large current account deficit has badly dented investor sentiment.

LyrArc Article Gist
Keith Bradsher's NYT interview with Raghuram Rajan, Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, comes when Rajan has come under criticism from the business sector and the small business support base of prime minister Modi's party. The criticism centers on the drop in oil prices since Nov. 2014, and Rajan's failure to drop interest rates at the Dec. 2, 2014 central bank meeting. Rajan says it was not clear whether oil prices would remain low for an extended period at the Dec. 2, 2014 meeting. Since then new inventory data, EIA estimates and OPEC policy guidance have confirmed low prices will remain for an extended period. Rajan lowered interest rates on Jan. 14, 2015, by one quarter of a percentage point. Under India's setup the central bank chief makes decisions on interest rates, compared to the decisions made by the Federal Open Market Committee at the U.S. Federal Reserve. Rajan says there is full understanding between the central bank and the Modi government economic team led by finance minister Arun Jaitley, Jayan Sinha, deputy minister of state for finance, and chief economic advisor Arvind Subramanium. Modi and Jaitley prefer to rely on the advice and policy direction of economic policymakers with long experience in the U.S. and international circles. Both Subramanium and Rajan bring this level of experience and expertise. Subramanium brings experience from his years at the GATT which preceded the WTO, the IMF, and the Peterson Institute of International Economics, and Rajan brings experience at the University of Chicago, and as chief economist of the IMF. Modi is a dilgent listener and policymaker giving careful attention to the best advice, making it unlikely that Rajan would be seen as a holdover from the administration of Manmohan Singh. Other criticism that the business sector has made of Rajan are as financial regulator in asking state banks to increase collateral required from large business firms for large bank loans. Rajan points out the need for business to bear the costs as well as the benefits of taking risks. Under previous governments the state banks allowed large firms to keep their holdings at companies even when the risk taking resulted in losses. Rajan has also not tried to reverse the sharp decline in the rupee, which hurts business firms which took on dollar denominated loans. Rajan has instead followed policy of building up the reserves by buying dollars. The reserves were depleted in 2013 by a policy of currency interventions to reverse that decline. Inflation in India reached 9.9% in Dec. 2013, with policy of the central bank under Rajan set to bring it down to 8% in 2014, and below 6% in 2015, so that India could get out of the trap of persistently high inflation with slow growth. This is critical for a new Indian success story. A goal set by Rajan in Oct. 2012 when he was appointed as central bank chief, was to increase foreign investment and encourage new business so that India was no longer dependent on large companies for growth. This is also critical for a new Indian success story, as the Modi administration and the central bank are both keenly aware. Just as Bernanke and now Yellen at the U.S. Fed face criticism for quantitative easing monetary policy, focus on the high long term unemployed, and not focussing on inflation- with their focus on the long term economic recovery in an environment of low inflation below 2% in the U.S.- India's Reserve Bank faces a different kind of criticism for careful and prudent policies to ensure long term growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ provides a fact check of Trump statements on crime, debt, and taxes. Trump says he is looking at a new plan for taxes not the $10 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years reducing tax collection by 22%, but something about a third of the size. No details are available on the plan. WSJ disputes Trump's statement that the U.S. is "one of the highest taxed nations in the world." WSJ points out that the U.S. in 2014 for federal, state and local government taxes collected 26% of gross domestic product in taxes, compared to average of 34% for about 30 countries, according to OECD. Debt to GDP ratio is about 75% that is high, but because of low interest rates the budget deficit is less than 3% of GDP, which is close to the long run average. For this reason economists say the government should invest in infrastructure and R&D that supports long run economic growth. On crime the record is mixed with increase in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City, but decreases in Washington D.C. and Baltimore. Police shootings were 67 in 2016 compared to 62 in July 2015, and the high being 280 officers in 1974 when Nixon was President. Crime was an issue in the 1968 Republican National Convention during the Vietnam era protests, police shootings and terror incidents attracted attention in July 2016, yet the situation today is very different from the war protests of the Vietnam era. On terrorism fact checks by the NYT and in Lyrarc shows Clinton at State Department and Panetta at Defense Department taking hawkish stands only to hit a barrier from President Obama for taking action needed in Syria, Iraq and Libya. Panetta's new book calls for robust action where needed. A Clinton administration would take action with allies in the Middle East. Even Hollande and Obama who pulled the U.S. and France out of following up in the French-British Sarkozy-Cameron led intervention in Libya, have changed policy, with Obama calling it his biggest mistake. France under Hollande with the U.S. is now actively engaged in the Middle East, having changed policy. It is highly unlikely that a Trump led policy which alienates most allies in the Middle East- Iran, Iraq and Saudis- is likely to work better than a determined Clinton-Panetta led effort which has support of the local countries on the ground actually currently on both sides because of complexities of Middle Eastern politics.  On trade a new administration will still have to work with China, India, the European Union, and other countries, as global trade supply chains are not likely to evolve overnight. Lessons will have been learned by Clinton about the need to bring back jobs and ensure the strength of U.S. manufacturing. Economic and jobs growth will require prudence in strengthening U.S. manufacturing coupled with global cooperation, which a Trump administration that alienates trading partners without the possibility of making any serious immediate gains in jobs, is highly unlikely to do better.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip in the WSJ says president Biden's popularity has not surged because of lack of results in the fight against inflation. Yet inflation has been cut in half as reported in the WSJ recently, with May inflation of 4% in the US being about half of what it was at its peak of 9% in 2022.  Inflation is much worse in Europe. Biden policies that helped fight inflation included the Inflation Reduction Act to control health costs, the policies to keep Russian oil below a certain level that reduced oil prices to $75 a barrel, and the sequential interest rate increases by Jerome Powell at the Fed. The long term benefits of increased investment in manufacturing in the US for jobs growth, and competitive policy to gain US leadership in many technologies also provide for sound growth in the long term. 

LyrArc Article Gist
In 2010 Chicago Federal Reserve president Charles Evans sugggested the Fed adopt a "7-3 rule"- the Fed would keep interest rates low and credit flowing till unemployment dropped below 7%, and inflation was below 2.5% and not taking off. He modified this to keeping rates low till unemployment reaches 6.5%, as long as inflation remained below 2.5%, on Nov. 27, 2012. In Fed meetings Evans was supported by vice chairman Janet Yellen, with Minneapolis Fed president Kocherlakota and Boston Fed president Rosengren offering similiar proposals. On Dec. 12, 2012, Fed chairman Bernanke announced a position very close to what Evans has suggested. Charles Evans, worked on the staff of the Chicago Fed for 20 years before being appointed president of the Chicago Fed in 2007, at the beginning of the financial crisis.

LyrArc Article Gist
BHP Billiton was known as Broken Hill Proprietary in the 1990's. The largest Australian mining company, it was based in Melbourne and simply known as the Big Australian. It had huge losses in that period - $3 billion in 1998-1999. The turnaround at BHP Billiton comes as a remarkable turnaround for the whole mining sector. BHP made $6.5 billion in profit in the year ending June 2005. Its not just rising Chinese demand that has made this possible. Billiton has taken steps to avoid past boom bust cycles in mining by taking a conservative approach to investing in new mines that might create an oversupply in the market. The company is run buy a banker. CEO Charles Goodyear avoids taking on large risky projects and has announced plans to return $2 billion to shareholders in stock buybacks. Even with this discipline compared to the past, some mining analysts believe the boom bust cycle will occur over time. HP has $10 billion worth of projects in different stages of development. One advantage the mining companies enjoy is the concentration of mining in a few companies- BHP, Rio Tinto, Xstrata PLC. This makes it possible to price aggressively for the nickel, copper, iron ore, and other metals. A 72% price increase was negotiated with steelmakers in 2005. Another part of the transformation is the use of risk-analysis tools. BHP uses "Monte Carlo analysis" to check all potential outcomes once a range of parameters- commodity prices, currency vales, interest rate scenarios- are entered that affect financial performance of a new mine or a new investment. Goodyear came in as CFO under a new team led by Paul Anderson, a former executive of Duke Energy Corporation, after the huge losses in failed copper mining investments in the late 1990's. Even with the recent success and the careful investing discipline there is a sense that things could change quickly if rising demand slows in China and other developing countries. And in that situation this discipline may prove insufficient and the models may only be good as the assumptions and information entered....

LyrArc Article Gist
Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry tells an audience in Cedar Rapids, Iowa: Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost treacherous- or treasonous, in my opinion." He was referring to Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke when he said: "I know there's a lot of talk and what have you about if this guy prints more money between now and the election... I don't know what y'all would do to him in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas." Perry's spokesman said Perry feels strongly about printing money, and "got passionate" in his comments.

LyrArc Article Gist
David Blanchford of Dartmouth College and Adam Posen of the Peterson Institute of International Economics argue in a recent paper that the true indicator of unemployment in this economy -with a low participation rate and millions dropping out of the labor market unable to find work- is the wage growth. This is particularly true with the U.S. Labor Department report of 288,000 new jobs in 2014 and a 6.3% unemployment rate, yet wages flat for March and April 2014, and no improvement in the participation rate. Blanchford says one should look at the wage growth and consider the rest to be noise. The Yellen Fed is looking closely at the participation rate.

LyrArc Article Gist
Zombrun describes the effect of low interest rates on savings for the bottom half of households in the U.S., the pressure to invest in stocks without the skills and experience of the better educated part of households in the top 20% of households by wealth and income. This resulted in a negative effect, a depletion of savings compared to an increase under a higher interest rates scenario with less pressure to take risks in a volatile stock market. This is the direct cost of the crises in stock and financial markets of 2000 caused by a internet bubble, and the larger crisis of 2008-2009 caused by the bubble in mortgages and housing. The secondary effects of the mortgage price bubble and faulty mortgage securities was in the millions of homeowners who went into foreclosure in 2009-2013, which further depleted wealth and savings of households in the bottom half lacking the experience and skills to navigate this type of housing market. The failure of the Obama administration to stem the foreclosures with practical steps which would have helped not hurt the banking sector, as suggested by FDIC's Sheila Bair and Harvard economist Martin Feldstein in many WSJ op-eds in 2010-2012, added to the erosion of savings and wealth of the bottom half. Minorities in particular were hit hard. A third effect is of communities across America that are feeling the effects of job migration to emerging markets such as China that has been underway as part of the globalization of the last three decades. A fourth effect in the rising cost of education, particularly since 2000, has reduced the opportunities for struggling working class people to enter the middle class and enjoy the higher incomes in precisely the very period when the divergence of incomes between less educated, less killed people and the more educated and better skilled people was taking place. The last two effects were neutral as part of the overall process of emergence of a globalized economy with a premium on more skills and education, requiring action by the government, universities and business for a concerted effort to mitigate in some places the negative effects and enhance in other places the positive effects. The first two effects were man made crises which required managing in constructive and positive ways for the entire American people, taking risks where necessary such as fears about the financial system if foreclosures did not go through. The risks of a long period of extremely low interest rates for savers and the middle as well as working class were poorly understood by the Fed since 2000. A similiar crisis is being faced in Europe with extremely low interest rates. Janet Yellen was only doing the honest thing by acknowledging how far and how different the situation is now compared to the period of three decades following 1945- a question not just of values cherished in America, also of the need for societies to advance through creation of wealth across all sectors of society or regress, as described by Smith in the Wealth of Nations....

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
Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University economist, author of the well researched book on the 2008 financial crisis, "This Time Is Different," gives his thoughts on the economic prospects for the U.S under the new Trump administration. He says 4% GDP growth and 3% inflation is possible temporarily for a while with stimulus policies, less regulation, and increased private investment. After 8 years of not investing in much needed infrastructure because of concerns about the deficit, the timing is right for such investments, especially as the economic effects of the crisis of 2008 gradually fade.  This is about taking advantage of ultra low interest rates to invest in infrastructure. He says it helps that Trump policies are pro-business. He sees drawbacks as the stimulus program adds a 25% increase with extra debt, adding $5 trillion over 10 years, but adds that for many years Nobel prize winning economist Krugman and others have said that there is good reason to increase borrowing to invest, and this is now being tried. Inflation remains an uncertainty- if there are large quantities of underutilized and unemployed resources it would raise prices less than its effect to increase output. The reverse would apply if the U.S. economy is closer to full capacity. One factor that would help- increasing confidence for business and increasing investment. Against this what he calls optimistic view or spin, is the idea of mistakes under a Trump administration, errors made and a degree of incompetence which he says is a real possibility. Overall his view is that some risks are appropriate now, and from his deep study of financial crises sees the slow growth of the last 8 years a result of a financial crisis that now begins to fade, creating the possibility of higher growth under prudent policies.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Olivier Blanchard, chief economist of the IMF says that as government borrowing around the world surges, interest rates will go up. Governments borrow by selling bonds to investors, and to attract investors the government competes with stock and corporate bond markets for investor's money, leading to rising yields for investors. As the confidence has returned to corporate bond markets this is already happening. From the end of 2008. the yield on the benchmark 10 year Treasury note has increased by one and ahalf percentage points, rising to 3.54% from 2%, the sharpest upward movement in 15 years. In Germany the yield on German 10 year bonds has also risen, rising to 3.57% from 2.93%. Similiarly British bond yields have risen to 3.78% from 3.41%. Congressional Budget Office estimates are that net government debt for the USA will rise to 65% of GDP at the end of fiscal 2010, from 41% at the end of fiscal 2008. In 2009 and 2010 the US government will sell $5 trillion in new debt, according to Citigroup. A decade from now the government's outstanding debt could equal 82% of GDP, or about $17 trillion. Every one point rise in interest rates costs the Treasury $50 billion annually over a few years, and Kenneth Rogoff estimates that this could reach $170 billion annually if the average yield on 10 year Treasury note goes up to 4.7%, as the Congressional Budget Office estimates. This will dampen the effects of stimulus spending. It is a big issue says Rogoff. A year ago under old policy and assumptions before the financial crisis the Congressional Budget Office projected outstanding debt at $5.3 trillion in 10 years. Now the estimate is $17 trillion, which is triple the old number and an increase of $11 trillion. A recovering economy would make these numbers less relevant. But with struggling industries like autos and banks needing more help from the government, and with consumers having to reduce a mountain of debt, a weak economy for a long time and small growth for a decade would make this a story that won't go away. Rogoff says its like what happened to the subprime borrowers, people assuming that the funding is always going to be there. In 2009 and 2010 Citigroup says, the Euro zone countries will sell nearly 1.6 trillion euros or $2.6 trillion in new debt, and Britain will offer 490 billion pounds or $799 billion in new debt. Over the next decade this would slow Europe's recovery and prolong the downturn. Britain faces a bigger problem in the near term as Britain's governmetn debt equals 55% of GDP, and Standard and Poors estimates it could approach 100% by 2013. South America and Eastern Europe will also face the situation of rising rates. Asian countries like China with lower levels of debt are in a better situation, IMF's Blanchard says....

LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor on the dangers of a loose U.S. monetary policy and the effects this had in fueling a housing bubble in Spain, Ireland and other EU countries. Taylor points to the bubble ocurring in emerging market economies from low interest rates. Taylor says the ECB's interest rate moves in 2003-2005 were affected by the Fed's low interest rates. He estimates the ECB set rates about two percentage points too low leading to housing bubbles in EU countries. A similiar process is taking place today with the Fed's near zero interest rate policy. Taylor points to interest rates in a group of 18 emerging market economies- including Brazil, China, India, Mexico and Turkey, which have held interest rates on average about 5 percentage points below widely used benchmarks fueling a doubling of global commodity prices between 2009-2011. The U.S. Fed's policies make it harder for central banks in emerging market economies to take aggresssive action against bubbles developing in these countries. Taylor says his does not mean that the Fed should not pay attention to the U.S. unemployment rate and long term unemployed, but should keep in mind the negative effects of slowing demand in emerging market economies and in the EU as a result of its monetary policy of keeping rates at near zero for long periods of time. This feeds back to the U.S. economy at a critical time....

LyrArc Article Gist
Transcripts from U.S. Federal Reserve meetings in 2006 that show Bernanke, as Fed chairman, and Geithner, as head of the New York Fed, ignored the risks of a collapsing bubble in housing and mortgages.

LyrArc Article Gist
There is strong cirticism from many quarters about low interest rates as a prime culprit in causing the bubble in housing prices. In comments before the American Economic Association, America's Fed Chairman Bernanke defended his role as Fed governor in 2003 when he along with Greenspan was an advocate of the decision to cut the Fed's target interest rate to 1%, and to leave it here for a year and raise it only slowly. Bernanke says countries like Britain, New Zealand, and Sweden had tighter monetary policy but there home prices rose more, and monetary policy explains only 5% of the variation in home prices. Analysis has shown he says that capital inflows such as those the U.S. received from China and other Asian countries explains 31% of the variation in home prices, supporting a contrasting theory that that its these global imbalances that drove the crisis. He also placed the primary fault for the housing bubble on relaxed lending standards and views that housing prices would rise forever. Alongside these comments Fed chairman Bernanke also said that bank supervisors and other financial regulators of which the Fed was one, has a better ability to contain the excesses that led to the economic crisis including housing bubble and other excesses, than the Fed as a monetary policy maker. By saying this Bernanke is acknowledging that the failure of regulation was a key part of what happened in the economic crisis. The failure to fix the regulatory system even now leads Bernanke to say that he is open to using monetary policy as a supplementary tool for addressing risks should another bubble develop, if the regulatory system isn't reformed. Still Bernanke and Greenspan were quite complacent at the time of the low interest rates and did not point out the dangers of global capital imbalances which were evident at the time, preferring to say that the United States could benefit from the inflows of capital from overseas without serious risks. And the Fed did not exercize its role of vigilance in alerting the country to excesses in the way the housing industry operated and in exercizing its own powers to that effect. Instead the Fed as regulator and in role as asafeguard for serious risks let itself become part of the cheering section as the worst excesses in housing were being exposed....