LyrArc Article Gist
India like China is more interested in modernization that brings equality with Europe and America so that the period of misfortunes that struck India and China- as a result of the vastly superior technology and force of Europe as it found a passage to the East around the Cape of Good Hope- is over.  Think about this. If anything happened to democracy and pluralism in the US Indian democracy and pluralism would still be standing a hundred years down the road or the next hundred years after that. What does that say about India? Why? Because India has learnt its lessons under Vivekananda, Tilak, Gandhiji, Modiji, and understands the need for technology, trade and modernization, which is what Modi as a Gujarati with the trading mentality like the British is really after. The so called Hinduism as it is really about the Upanishads and the Gita and the Buddha, and Communism, are really not the driving force in India or China.The Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita like the Bible offer a way an ethos to resolutely fight the corruption and leakages of funds that take the investments out of modernization leaving everyone poor. And India also benefits when democracy works and acts as an enabling force for a modern economy that creates "a rising tide that lifts all boats" (people). Democracy is the tool for development and to tackle diversity of 1.4 billion people. Adam Smith was right writing then in the 1780's around the French revolutionary period and American independence - "Hereafter perhaps the natives of these countries (India, China, Indonesia) may grow stronger, or those of Europe grow weaker, and the inhabitants of all the different quarters of the world may arrive at the equality of courage and force, which by inspiring mutual fear, can alone overawe the injustice of independent nations into respect for one another." India's leaders fought hard after the 1700's for preserving independence from the Portuguese, the Dutch and the British, only they were divided. Ranjit Singh in the north fought the Mughals and the British in the Punjab. The Marathas on the western front fought the Mughals and the British. The result as Gandhi points out in Hind Swaraj in his question "who made the British Company Bahadur?" It was Indian princely kingdoms vying for support from the armies of the British East India Company interested in profits from seizing Indian princely treasuries and trade. Note that Sri Lanka or Ceylon fell to the Portuguese in 1505. The technology gap between Europe and Asia had opened up even that early by 1500's in ship building, in warships and use of maritime navigation technologies. Consider that in 1534 Jacques Cartier was out on his first trips from St Malo, France across Atlantic to explore past Newfoundland to the mouth of the St Lawrence river. The Portuguese and then the Dutch had already beaten the British and the French by 100 years- Britain's exploration of India through East India settlements in Bengal began much later in the 1600's. India like China built around river based civilizations as Adam Smith points out in his Wealth of Nations, Chapter 7, Part 3, America and East Indies-of the natives of India and China Smith says their struck "a dreadful misfortune" that arisen more by accident, that "the superiority of force seemed to be so great on the side of the Europeans, that they were able to commit with impunity every sort of injustice in these remote countries." Every Indian or Chinese will agree with this so great was the misfortune for India and China from the injustice of European nations in the 19th century so much so that Cordell Hull speaking for Franklin Roosevelt and all Americans broadcast to the world in the throes of World War II in 1942 America's call to the world for a new world order based on freedom and development for all nations of Asia, Africa and Latin America. America's Secretary of State Cordell Hull said: "In this vast struggle, we, Americans, stand united with those who, like ourselves, are fighting for the preservation of their freedom; with those who are fighting to regain the freedom of which they have been brutally deprived; with those who are fighting for the opportunity to achieve freedom."     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Department of Education invites controversy because of diversity programs and "transgender" as culture ignoring health risks. Established by president Jimmy Carter in 1979. Education in the US is run at the state level by each American state administration compared to UK where it is done at the national government level. It has one of the smallest budgets of any agency at 4%, Transportation is 1.7%, Agriculture 3.0%. Most of its work is overseeing $120 billion of federal grants and programs for public education through high school. It supports districts with low income students with $18 billion aid. Head Start program supporting 883,000 low income pre school children in 2022 gets federal aid from Department of Health and Human Services. National School Lunch Act of 1946 by Harry Truman is not affected as it is run by states,  federal aid comes from Department of Agriculture to 20+ million children. Republicans oppose spending about $1 billion to support Diversity program DEI initiatives and support for "cirtical race theory." There is opposition to "transgender." Britain's NHS had a commission look into transgender and says it poses health risks to children and young people. It also adds to anxiety of parents. Republicans are 53 -47 in majority in Senate- to scrap the agency Republicans need 60 votes in the Senate. The likely option is that they will pass a bill putting many of the functions in other agencies reducing its impact- between HHS, Treasury and Interior agencies. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the deadline of July 22 approaches for the 160,000 members of the UK Conservative Party to elect a leader, former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and the current Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt are running for the leadership position. Boris Johnson has 68% member support with Hunt at 23%, according to YouGov survey. Both candidates are in favor of Britain leaving the European Union without an agreement. Hunt has stated he would cancel leave for Britain's 16,000 civil servants in August to prepare for the departure of Britain from the EU by October 31.  Only 27% of Conservative Party members believe Mr. Hunt can do the preparation needed for an abrupt exit after 45 years of economic integration with the European Union. By contrast 90% of members think Johnson would do the preparation needed. Preparation is needed because of food and medical supplies trucks and in flights awaiting customs at border points. The result could be chaotic without adequate preparation. Under a Johnson government many ministers would leave the government including Mr. Hammond who runs the finance ministry. He is expected to join rebel ranks in the Conservative Party that does not think an abrupt exit like this is good for Britain. If these members in the House of Commons join Labour party members they could vote to block this from happening. Britain's opposition Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn has finally decided to call for a second referendum if Johnson pushes to leave the EU abruptly, and to campaign wholeheartedly this time for staying inside the EU. During the last referendum Labour leaders did not push hard for Remain, and David Cameron as prime minister and head of the Conservatives proved to be a weak and ineffective leader using the promise of a referendum as a ploy to win votes for the Conservatives in an earlier election and then finding himself stuck with promises made in the election with his party's right wing led by Johnson. Years of austerity policies promoted by Germany in the EU after a flawed entry of southern European countries with faulty not transparent finances such as Greece too early  into the eurozone had soured Britons on the EU. The friendly migration policies of German leader Merkel for economic as well as war torn country migrants from North Africa finally not just soured Germans on Merkel policies but also soured British working class families struggling to make ends meet and seeing migration as taking British resources that were needed at home. This has split most of Europe including Britain along lines of the major cities and the rural areas plus smaller towns, and in Eastern Europe, East Germany region along the lines of the old Soviet bloc countries which with deeply conservative thinking do not favor such migration policies. These divisive changes have taken place over along period of decades and will take time to heal through economic recovery and a fairer distribution of wealth, better investment in infrastructure, health, education, public services, neglected during the Tech driven flawed investment diversion of economic resources. Yet the hope of this type of change if grasped by Britons as well as Europeans could bring new life and revive the vision of a Europe with shared benefits for all Europeans, not just a French-German project. For this to happen new leaders have to rise to the challenge inside Britain and the rest of Europe.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As automakers rettol their plants all three GM Ford and Chrysler look for ways to win support at the party conventions in Denver and Minneapolis and in Congress for a bipartisan support to get the $3.75 billion Congress has to appropriate for insurance and other costs to get the $25 billion loan program signed by President Bush in 2007. Debbie Stabenow, a Senator from Michigan backs an increase of this loan program to $50 billion and its presented as a way to help the country become more fuel efficient and develop alternative sources of energy. This loan program could make a critical difference to the cash strapped American companies when credit is hard to get in financial markets or the cost is too high. Note the importance of the states in the midwest like Michigan, Ohio and Indiana to both Presidential candidates make it increasingly likely that both will favor fully funding the automobile companies retooling plants and funding new technologies. These states could decide the election and the weak economy and high unemployment in the midwestern states means the candidates and the political parties will have to support the auto industry's efforts to remake the companies and America's energy future....

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. House of Representatives voted 332 to 94 to approve a budget deal for 2 years negotiated by Rep. Paul Ryan (Republican) and Senator Pat Murray (Democrat). This ends a chapter of 3 years of crisis prone budgeting negotiations and a brief government shutdown from failure to negotiate a deal between the two political parties. Ryan, the vice presidential candidate in the 2012 elections has credibility with all parts of the Republican Party which helped get the deal passed overwhelmingly. On the floor of the House Ryan said about the deal- "This is good government, it's also divided government. And under divided government, we need to take steps in the right direction." Ryan was able to win 169 Republican votes, with 62 against. House Speaker Boehner (Republican) was critical of Tea Party supporters and groups such as Heritage Action, Club for Growth, FreedomWorks and Senate Conservatives Fund opposing the Ryan deal, because he said these groups were pushing the Republican party into places where it did not want to be through "misleading" information and had "lost credibility."...

LyrArc Article Gist
THe Fed is pumping new money into the financial system. $800 billion of new money over the past seven months, since September 2008. Last week it said another trillion dollars or more could be added int he months ahead. The way this works is the Fed purchases securities or other assets from securities dealers in exchangefor electronic credits that amount to cash and are deposited in banks. These cash credits known as bank reserves have jumped from $3 billion in August to $776 billion by mid March 2009. This week it said it would buy $1.25 trillion of mortgage backed securtities backed by Faniie and Freddie, and $200 billion in debt issued by these firms. And also buy upto $300 billion of longterm debt issued by the US Treasury. THe idea is to drive down longterm interest rates. All the while the Fed is not printing money in the old fashioned way- Federal Reserve notes also called dollars only increased to $862 billion from $793 billion. Still it is increasing the banks reserves in this way. And these mountains of cash in reserves are sitting in the banks as there is not much lending, and consumers are reluctant to borrow and to spend, and with all that unused production capacity there is little chance of inflation. When the economy recovers the Fed hopes, if all works out as planned, to pull that extra money out of the system and pushing interest rates higher before inflation settles into the system....

LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the statements on the IMF Blog on Inclusive Growth raises the question-Does the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, as an American institution funding developing countries, and economists, grasp what people find troubling in 2022? One of the lessons of the economic crises for families and workers in the US and other countries is that wisdom, a grasp of the soul of a country and its people through the thinking of its founders, and common sense, should drive managing of economies, with a knowledge of how economies work- not economists. Some of that is already happening. America's central bank is headed by Jerome Powell who has wide experience and has knowledge of how the economy runs, is not an economist. He was chosen by president Trump and continues to have the confidence of president Biden for this very reason. Some of the statements on the IMF economic blog are- "Why jobs are plentiful and workers are scarce" Jan 2022 "In the US and UK recent labor market the puzzle, can be partly explained by mismatch, the pandemic's effect on women and older workers leaving the work force." The Reality Wages for teachers are depressed compared to workers in the financial and economics industries, in a frighteningly disproportionate way. When it comes to logistics, hospitality, leisure and restaurants industries workers were paid poorly for what is hard work and long days. In case the IMF economists, and economists at companies, missed this it was called the Great Resignation, people simply choosing to reject the conditions that were handed down to them by the financial industry and economists who built the economic structures of recent decades. Women leaving the workforce are faced with issues of mental health coping with added responsibilities of children at home for the two years, loss of income and widespread mental health problems. The word mental health may be beyond the grasp of economists and the financial industry, yet it is the one of the biggest problems for people. Another pernicious effect noted on the pages of the WSJ is that young white men are dropping out after school because they cannot afford college in alarming numbers. Leading to the kind of discontent for workers and families that president Biden is struggling to address. On IMF Blog- "IMF Podcasts: The Year in Review" Dec. 2021 "The past year has brought us new challenges even as the old ones persist. If anything, the ongoing pandemic has taught us to think differently abut tackling the challenges and questions when it comes to thinking about big issues such as climate change, gender equality, inflation and economic measurement." The Reality Climate change lumped in with economic measurement and inflation. The floods, fires, river and reservoir water levels affecting access to basic life supporting water, drought, all over the world are of a magnitude that is missed entirely.The response to a challenge of this type requires the kind of leadership that president Biden has provided for the world with his $360 billion climate change bill as just the first step of many, and  comprehensive policies covering all aspects of the climate crisis. ON IMF bog- "How Domestic Violence is a Threat to Economic Development." "Stopping violence against women is not only a moral imperative, new evidence shows it can help the economy." The Reality Domestic violence hurts children growing up in such households. It is not so much a moral imperative as it is bad for men, women and children. So many things are wrong about it and it is made worse in conditions of low wages and poor working conditions in poor neighborhoods lacking education. These neighborhoods are also affected by lack of healthcare and the opioid crisis and mental health issues. Not investing in education and healthcare in these communities is what is simply wrong, and which the founders of America as a nation, particularly Lincoln, would find appalling.   Relationship between Capital (the Financial Industry) and Labor (Workers and Families) On the basic issue of the relationship between capital and labor, the IMF and the financial industry, economists, and the economic structure they built in recent decades, have simply got it wrong. It violates both common sense and wisdom, and violates the spirit of the founders particularly Abraham Lincoln. This is what Abraham Lincoln had to say on Upward Mobility, the ease with which each generation can do better than the one before it, as critical in the fight to save the Union. This is from the Annual Message to Congress Dec. 3, 1861, at the start of the Civil War. That upward mobility has been lost in the US with ideas that "place capital on an equal if not above labor, in the structure of government," for the last three decades in the US after the early post war period of Truman and Eisenhower, Kennedy-Johnson.  And Lincoln says this about a hired laborer being fixed in that condition for life, or of future generations of that hired laborer facing disabilities and burdens, similar to the loss of upward mobility for the people today. "Now there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed, nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false, and all inferences based on them are groundless." "Labor is prior to, and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed, if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are worthy of protection as any other rights." "Again: there is not, of necessity, any such thing as the free hired laborer being fixed to that condition for life. Many independent men everywhere in these states, a few years back in their lives, were hired laborers. The prudent penniless beginner in the world, labors for wages awhile, saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself, then labors on his own account another while, and at length hires another new beginner to help him. This is the just, and generous, and prosperous system, which opens the way to all- gives hope to all, and consequent energy, and progress, and improvement of condition to all." Lincoln even offers this warning- No men living are more worthy to be trusted than those who toil up from poverty- none less inclined to take, or touch, aught which they have not honestly earned. Let them beware of surrendering a political power which they already possess, and which if surrendered, will surely be used to close the door of advancement against such as they, and to fix new disabilities and burdens upon them, till all of liberty shall be lost." US president Biden has these ideas in mind as he struggles with one piece of legislation after another to restore what once was, to open the door of advancement, to remove these disabilities and burdens that Lincoln speaks of, and in so doing restoring liberty.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ms. Annegret Kramp-Krarrenbauer, elected leader of the CDU party in 2018 with the support of Angela Merkel, will not run for chancellor in next years election and will resign from her position by the end of the year. She will continue as Germany's defense minister. After losses for the CDU in recent elections and the embarrassment of local CDU leaders in Thuringia supporting the far right AfD, AKK as she is known decided to step down. Angela Merkel has decided not to run for chancellor again. Germany is set to chair the EU in the second half of 2020, and Merkel is no longer seen as a leader of influence. The Nationalist Alternative for Germany AfD has gained votes in recent elections following the 2015-2016 migrant crisis, with large numbers of refugees from North Africa and Arab world landing in Greece and Turkey and walking to Hungary, Austria and Germany. Merkel's handling of the crisis with acceptance of a million refugees in 2015-2016 unsettled European and German politics. Why? One way of looking at it is that in the same way that the U.S. took in Chinese imported goods ending in the Trump tariffs war, at some point it just becomes too big to handle. That ended up at $1 billion a day in imports from China when president Trump called it off and accused Obama Democrats, Bush Republicans, of betraying the country. Putting it into perspective Germany with one fourth of the population of the U.S. took in about twice the number of refugees in just one year 2015-2016 that the U.S. took in 10 years 2005-2015. The U.S. took in 675,000 immigrants between 2005-2015. This is as if the U.S. took in something like 20 million immigrants in a short period of 1 year on an equivalent basis- though the cultural impact is even greater in a nation like Germany that is like Japan an historically immigrant averse nation. All this happened too quickly for Germany to handle for its fragile cultural fabric. Much of the initial outpouring of support and positive sentiment came from the sense of having gone through World War II and the refugees in that and the early post war period, the need to return in the same spirit support Germany had received. Over time it eroded support for the Christian Democratic Union and Merkel. That Merkel could have done this is itself a small miracle. Now the rebuilding has to begin. Adenauer's CDU and the socialist SPD party of Willy Brandt now have less than 50% support, only with the Greens Party do they make up 50%. The question now is can the CDU, and the SPD which has fallen to 14% in elections, make it back and what kind of future makeup political parties will have in Germany, how the social fabric can be restored. AKK's achievement is to mend relations between the liberal Merkel wing of the CDU and conservatives from Bavaria (CSU) over immigration.  Candidates for CDU leadership are Armin Laschet, Jens Spahn, and Friedrich Merz. Laschet premier of North Rhine-Westphalia has Merkel's support. Looking back too much attention was taken up by the euro crisis, and too little was done in the areas of infrastructure, inequality gaps, education, child care, under Merkel's leadership and of the preceding SPD years, much like what happened under Bush and Obama administrations in the U.S. where wars, economic crises led to neglect on issues that affect lives of ordinary working families. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT editorial says the negative feedback loop of foreclosures begetting falling house prices, which beget more foreclosures, and further weaken banks, is well under way. One way to have broken this, was to enable good types of loan modifications, which reduce the principal for homeowners and reduce payments significantly. Sheila Bair at FDIC says 32% of prior payments is about the right amount. The bad types of loan modifications that lead to no reduction in principal, and put homeowners back in redefault because of large payments that homeowners "under water" or a lost job cannot afford, have so far been the dominant kind of loan modification. At present 14 million homeowners are "under water," in that their homes are worth less than what is owed on the mortgage. One of the crucial measures which would have enabled this, has not been pushed by the Obama administration through Congress. This was to pass an amendment that allowed bankruptcy judges to modify troubled mortgages. Banks which have taken billions of dollars in loans from the federal government were allowed to lobby aggressively to kill this amendment, and the Obama administration did little to push this amendment in Congress. 12 Senate Democrats joined 39 Senate Republicans to block a vote on the amendment. Says the NYT editorial "when the time came to stand up to the banking lobbies and cajole yes votes from reluctant senators-the White House did'nt. When the measure failed there wasn't even a statement of regret." This could turn out to be a major mistake, because as the NYT points out voluntary loan modifications have shown poor results. The administration's plan to provide incentives for loan modification is untried and tested, and may not produce significant results. With 14 million homeowners under water, and spiralling foreclosures, the situation may get out of control and seriously damage the economy. After the moratorium in home foreclosures ended there is expected to be a big surge in foreclosures, with estimates of 290,000 to 341,000 foreclosures in March, 2009. If this is allowed to continue it will undo all the good work in other areas, the stimulus spending, rebuilding the auto industry and other steps. It will also be more difficult to reverse as valuable time passes and the cost of the crisis escalates. A consensus among many experts was that stronger action in connection with the banks was required, and Martin Feldstein has warned about the danger posed by foreclosures since early 2008, see links....

LyrArc Article Gist
The enthusiasm for Six Sigma was carried by McInerney from GE to 3M. 3M was sluggish at the time and growing bureaucratic over time so an outsider and the efficiency focus of getting more for every buck spent and focus on quality in all processes and designing for quality and reduced defects may have helped to bring a new dimension to 3M. But as the author reflects and Buckley who stepped into McInerney's shoes says aloud, as well as several B School Professors, this imposed on a culture like 3M's that thrived on innovation, the post it note being a classic example, was not going to produce the best results in the long run. Interestingly GE itself under Immelt has emphasized innovation, research and development in addition to Quality Control. Going back over the years Japanese QC actually was taken from earlier work at GE in the 30's and 40's in Quality Control, so it was natural for GE to return to its own accomplishments in this area after a period when it had lost its leading edge in Quality. But foremost GE was about innovation and creativity and new products, back from its origins with Thomas Edison's company. The other GE person Nardelli at Home Depot also tried to bring a numbers only focus and doing it in a marine corps seargent type of way stumbled badly and resigned. So this piece on McInerney and buckley and 3M reflects a quiet shift to thinking of new ways to approach the complex global markets of today and the global competition of today. And the rapidly changing marketplace where shifts in buyer behaviour and competitor innovation create a constantly changing playing field. Is Tata Motors small car at an incredibly low price going to change the car industry, if the same companies can then make better cars at a much lower cost after developing lowcost high quality technologies? What is happening as Apple and then HP achieve success by selling their brands through stores and Dell starts to slip? Why is P&G and Unilever looking at the prospects in selling to consumers with smaller budgets and shifting its focus to these markets for growth? Doesnt this require one to think on ones feet and listen and observe and reflect on what these changes mean? Roger Martin of the University of Toronto has a piece in BW, May 21, 2007, with a similiar thought. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Republican House health care bill AHCA  keeps some some of the more popular parts of the Affordable Care Act such as not taking pre-existing conditions to deny insurance, keeping children covered on parents insurance till age 26, and increase contributions to Health Savings accounts. It is different in that the expansion of Medicaid at 138% of poverty rate threshold is rolled back. Age is used for tax credits instead of income, hitting those approaching Medicare age harder. The maximum charged to older people is now set at  5 times compared to 3 times what young have to pay. In general the Republican bill is seen as targeting the elderly to keep premiums down. The elderly on low incomes are hit hardest. Fox News O'Reilly Show showed the host questioning House Republicans, citing the CBO estimates that elderly on low incomes may have to pay as much as $14,000 a year for insurance making it basically unaffordable, and 52 million Americans would be affected adversely. Large companies are no longer required to offer mandatory health insurance under the new bill. Conservatives from Freedom Caucus wanted to see the essential areas of benefits covered by the law limited to fewer than the ten areas in the Affordable Care Act. The ACHA Republican bill leaves to states to determine what are required essential benefits. At one point maternity benefits were to be dropped but this was changed to let states decide. As a result the bill is 33 votes short of the number needed for passing the house in March 2017.   Neither the Democrats Affordable Care Act or the Republican House bill of Speaker Ryan do much to tackle the real problem- the absolute amount and increases for health care dollars for treating each disease in the U.S. compared to European and other countries. As a result health care has become more of a partisan struggle between the two parties than a real effort by all to overcome the problems that have to be tackled. Republicans want to see premiums drop and keep the burden on the deficit down- but with the level of U.S. health care costs disproportionately high compared to Europe and the rest of the world the arithmetic is tough and ends up leaving out vulnerable groups such as the elderly on low incomes, thus making the whole proposition prone to fail. For the same reason the Democrats failed to keep premiums down with a wider safety net leading to calls for repeal of their version.   ...

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

LyrArc Article Gist
About 1.17 million jobs were lost in 2008 according to the Labor Department, with half of these job losses in the last 3 months, as unemployment reached 6.5%. Bu the the labor underutilization rate is the one to watch, the measure of total unemployment including parttime workers who seek full time employment but can't get it. This hit 11.8% in October up from 11% a year earlier. This is what happened in Japan where companies began using parttime workers to reduce costs and not to have to pay benefits, a trend that has already started in the US. See link to trend. Over a long period like 5-10 years this can lead to depressed consumer spending as workers see an uncertain future, as ocurred and is still the case in Japan. Also note that the unemployment rate reached 10.8% in the 1981-82 recession and this is shaping up to be something bigger, and half of the 1.2 million job losses ocurring in the last 3 months so this is accelerating. The economy is expected to shrink at an annual rate of 4% in the 4th quarter, and could see these kinds of declines or worse in 2009 and beyond....

LyrArc Article Gist
Does housing and rising oil prices combine to affect growth and by how much. Note the comments about oil prices. That cost of producing a barrel is only $25 a barrel, thats the average cost according to John Herold Inc. a research company for finding oil, developing the field,pumping it, and delivering it to storage. Oil Analytics president Fingerman thinks prices at $85 are not supported by fundamentals and prices should be $30 to $40 lower. Fadel Gheit of Oppenheimer also thinks industry fundamentals do not support prices above $60. What will this do in the long run? Will China's growth slow after the Olympics? Are alternative fuels and more fuel efficient cars, and a shift to smaller cars, and even electric cars, going to have an impact down the road in gasoline consumption. Geopolitical instability from Nigeria, Iran and most recently Kurish Iraq and Turkey has been part of the runup in oil prices, also insufficient inventory buildup for the winter season, and the generally low rates of replenishment of oil that is being consumed with new exploration. How many of these factors may reverse in the coming years? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How Gazprom and Shell are changing their partnership to develop Sakhalin II: 1. The vanguard in Russian oil projects is Sakhalin II. In 2005 Shell announced the price tag would double to $20 billion. With forbidding terrain and climate and spread over a vast region in Russia's Far East, this is a really big challenge. Who owns what part of this project- Shell has 55% of the partnership in Sakhalin Energy Investment Company, a stake it picked up from Marathon which exited in 2000. Mitsui and Mitsubishi are other partners. Note the arrangement in the original contract which was signed in 1994. Under the 1994 production sharing contract with Shell Russia does not make much money till Sakhalin Energy recovers its costs. Upto that time Sakhalin Energy would pay 6% royalty on revenues. Following this Sakhalin Energy would get 90% of the profits until the project earned a 17.5% return. Taxes are 32%. Because of this arrangement the cost overruns at Sakhalin present a serious problem for the Russian government, as the returns for Russia depend on Sakhalin Energy first recovering the costs. In 2005 Shell agreed to swap 25% of its controlling stake in Sakhalin Energy with Gazprom for 50% of a field in western Siberia. 2. Shell is adapting its strategy in the changing oil picture. Comments by Malcolm Brinded, Shell's executive director for Exploration and Production indicate strategy in the changing global oil picture. Shell sees the importance of engaging with a Russian partner for the long run to make long-term gains with a first-mover advantage. For Shell the real returns would come from other players using Shell's expensive LNG plants and terminals. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
900 million eligible voters in India means this is the largest election ever. The election will take place in 7 phases in April and May from April 11 to May 19. Votes will be counted on May 23. The election is for 543 seats in parliament, the Lok Sabha. Turnouts are high with 66% turning out in the last election that brought Mr. Modi and the BJP to power.  Unlike elections in Britain a lot is spent in each election, about $5 billion in the last election and double that this time. The U.S. elections in 2016 had spending of $6.5 billion as a comparison. Women vote at about the same rate as men and more women than men are expected to vote this time. Prime minister Modi won the last election with promises of development and infrastructure. He is delivering on infrastructure but building manufacturing and generating jobs in the formal sector remains a tougher task for any administration in 4 years. During the first term Mr. Modi made needed changes including introducing the GST tax to integrate India's fragmented market and get rid of a patchwork of regional state taxes. He introduced a whole range of projects and yojanas which are setting the stage for widening the middle class, and improving living conditions. Some of the problems such as the bad loans in the banking system date back to previous administrations and the government has taken steps to clean up this problem by refinancing banks and introducing a bankruptcy law. This has slowed GDP growth to about 7%. However this would have happened under any administration.  The brief war with Pakistan in February 2019 has added another dimension to this election with questions about whether this may help Mr. Modi because of his strong stand against terrorism camps in Pakistan.  In the end it all comes down to whether the public still believes the BJP party under Modi is best qualified to develop the infrastructure to modernize the country and improve services, and whether it can create enough of the manufacturing capabilities to generate jobs needed. It may not be that the BJP under Modi has  not made mistakes in the process of learning how best to tackle development, but whether a patchwork of regional parties led by the opposition Congress party is in a position to provide the strong decisive direction to make quick decisions on development. Getting the agreement of a number of regional parties such as the party in West Bengal state or the Uttar Pradesh state when it was under a previous administration of Mrs Mayawati means an even slower rate of decision making as it leads to lack of speedy decision making. Whether voters have short memories and forget the slow rate of infrastructure development under previous administrations or have a willingness to give the BJP a chance to show what it can do under Modi for development can eventually decide this election. An example of what this means is in how the Mumbai Metro is being pushed through to timely delivery- Metro Rail's head Mrs. Ashwini Bhide simply says she feels for the people of Mumbai who have suffered from delays in development of needed infrastructure for so long, with millions doing appalling rides in a creaky old rail system. In her view it should have been done yesterday. It is this attitude that can make or break the current administration, and whether it can get this message through to voters one more time. Most who have this attitude are aware that China is now laying enough concrete every two years than America did in the whole 20th century, as reported in the Guardian newspaper, and are equally passionate about delivery of services and rapid development of badly needed infrastructure.         ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The return of the old Mubarak regime, with the bureaucracy, military and provincial loyalists supporting Mr. Shafiq as the presidential candidate. Shafiq was former commander of the Egyotian Air Force, the same branch of the military to which Mubarak belonged. The driector of the Carter Center in Egypt, Sanne Van Den Bergh, says the Egyptian military and government had imposed the most severe restrictions on independent election monitors compared to any other election it has monitored. Monitors could not stay at a polling station for more than 30 minutes, were not accredited in advance, and were not allowed to observe the totalling of votes at Cairo headquarters. Levinson describes how the old Mubarak regime loyalists and the military planned the operation. He describes how this has similiarities to what happened earlier, when the Mubarak regime under pressure from the Bush administration made openings by allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to contest elections and then clamping down to maintain control. The entire old system of the Mubarak regime, in business, the military, the bureaucracy, and in the provinces, with all loyalists owing their jobs and economic prospects to the regime, remains intact and has not changed since the democracy protests in 2011 and parliamentary elections. It has not made the transition to a new democratic process in Egyptian life, and has little to lose from making an effort to return to the old regime. With the military remaining above the constitution and run by members of the old Mubarak regime, democratic processes have fragile prospects. With the failure of the old regime to generate the economic opportunites and investments needed in agriculture and industry, the problem is how Egyptians can build an economic future, the alternative being falling further behind each year....

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street Journal report -after interviews with former TEPCO engineers and executives- throws more light on the failure of power and cooling at certain reactors in Fukushima Daiichi that led to the nuclear meltdown. The difference not grasped at the time turned out to be the critical difference between the reactors where electricity to cool the reactors worked and where the the electricity failed. Of the 10 nuclear reactors at Fukushima, only the 4 with the earlier Mark 1 design failed. These reactors were the earliest reactors installed by G.E. beginning in the 1970's. The Mark 1 reactors were serviced by an American engineering firm called Ebasco. Ebasco designed the reactor buildings really small so that they would be compact and economical. Because of the small size of the reactor buildings the generators providing the electricity supplies to the Mark 1 reactors could not be installed inside the reactor buildings made of fortified concrete and were installed in buildings outside lacking similiar protection. These outhoused generator buildings could not withstand the tsunami, resulting in the loss of power and cooling for these reactors, and leading eventually to the meltdown. The reactors with the Mark II and later designs were installed along with the generators in the same fortified concrete buildings, and these survived the tsunami without disruption in power supplies and cooling. This critical difference was noted by older TEPCO executives who were intervewed, but nothing was done about this because of the added cost of making the major modifications that would be needed. The regulatory system also failed to catch the problems with the original blueprints and design for housing the reactors and generators for cooling reactors. In 2001 the original 30 year operating permit for the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor was renewed, and again in 2011 for another ten year period. Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency is part of the industry ministry, and not kept separate and independent from the nuclear industry, a structural flaw. The ministry considered its job to be promoting nuclear power, and increasing nuclear power from 30% in 2010 to 50% of Japan's electricity output. One inspection official says fundamental design and construction of the reactors from a 30-40 year old design were never looked at in safety reviews by regulators approving the extensions. He even goes to the point of saying that the reviews focussed on things like pipes and fittings, missing entirely the safety of the outhouse buildings housing the generators. One of the top TEPCO engineers says this difference stood out like a sore thumb when did a walk through during inspections. He failed to get the support from fellow engineers and Tepco executives for changes that would add to the cost....

LyrArc Article Gist
In Europe, France, Spain, Germany and other countries are giving cash subsidies to customers to buy cars when they turn in older cars. These refunds range from 1000 to 2500 euros, and reward the purchase of smaller more fuel efficient vehicles. It has boosted sales in Europe where sales are running at an annual rate of more than 13 million because of the subsidies, according to Credit Suisse analyst, which is well above the 11 million level of last year. The average American car says the analyst has been on the road for 9 years similar to that in Germany, so it makes sense for the USA. He says it could increase sales in the USA to 12 million cars, down from the 16 million sold in 2007 or the 13.4 million rate of 2008, but far higher than the 9.5 million rate in the first few months of 2009. In Europe small cars are dominant and it plays to the markets of large carmakers like Peugeot, VW, FIat, and Renault. But in the US Japanese carmakers are dominant in the small car market. Detroit carmakers make too many large cars and pickup trucks so the impact would be less. But the program could be fashioned in the US on a drop down in size and increase in fuel efficency, so that the clear direction is towards smaller cars. Turning in a pickup truck for a family car like a Malibu or a LaCrosse might promote fuel efficiency, and move things in the right direction. Its useful to note that even in Germany more expensive cars or brands have barely benefitted German car sales jumped 21.5% in February, but mass market manufacturers recorded a 37% surge, while sales of premium cars fell 19%. In Italy which started its program Feb. 6, buyers receive 1500 euros for trading in acar at least 10 years old. Fiat Punto sales have shown a strong increase. Fiat's facory in Melfi, southern Italy, is now running at full capacity after running on areduced scale from October 2008 to February 2009. It makes the Punto. In France 30-40% of car sales are coming from the scrapping deal, according to French Auto Manufacturers Association. Overall sales are running at about 6% below last year's rate, but in the absence of the scrapping deal sales might be off 10-15%. One concern for the French is that sales not drop off after the scrapping deal stops.France saw this happen in 1997and 1998 after ascrapping deal in 1994-1996. However considering that the cost to the German government for scrapping deal was $2 billion, the solution to this would be continue this program till the economy recovers and car sales are strong. Considering the benefits for an important industry and the societal benefit in lower pollution, it would be worth the cost....

LyrArc Article Gist
Even if a automobile part for assembly is manufactured in the U.S., the subparts may be sourced overseas. This makes it extremely difficult to pinpoint the country of manufacture. Toyota Siena is 90% sourced with US and Canadian parts according to the U.S. National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration. The Ford Mustang 2005 by contrast uses 65 %US and Canadian parts according to NHTSA. There is a publicity war between the US makers and the Japanese with commercials arguing about who is more American. According to the Japanese Automobile Manufacturers Association $28 billion is the amount of cumulative investment in N. America and $45 billion is the amount of annual purchases of parts, so that 67% of the Japanese brand cars sold in N. America are made there. A graph from National HighwayTraffic Safety Association shows the Average percentage of auto parts made in the US and Canada for cars sold in N. America. It shows 2 interesting things. 1. That the US makers GM and Ford are closer to 80% and the Japanese makers Toyota and Honda are about 70%. So American makers still have more American content. Note though that Nissan is only around 54 % domestic content, significantly lower. Its always been a much weaker competitor than Toyota, and its sales recently have been sluggish in the US. The Koreans are not shown here but its quite possible that their content is closer to Nissans than to Toyota or lower than Nissans. So all foreign plants may not be the same. Notice the change in Toyota from 52% domestic content to 70% domestic content, from 2000 to 2005,an 18% jump which could only result from a deliberate strategy anticipating the controversy of who is truly American and who isn't. 2. In contrast GM has definitely shifted from 92% to 80% and rapidly moving in the opposite direction than Toyota. The sea change currently underway in the American auto parts industry is in the background, with Delphi looking to increasing manufacture and sourcing overseas particularly Asia (China, India etc), to bring down costs and be competitive in a globalizing auto parts industry. In the future as Delphi shifts overseas and GM procures from China and India one could see a continuing rapid shift to higher overseas content to add the cost savings directly to GM and Ford's bottom line. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Michelin has come up with a tire that improves braking distance and reduces rolling resistance on the tire. This "green" tire is now on the Peugeot 308 model car. It brakes 10 feet shorter than the previous generation tire and cuts carbondioxide emissions by 4 grams per kilometer, equal to a reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide during the life of the car. Michelin charges 10% more for this tire. All this is happening while tiremakers in the US which hasn't signed the Kyoto Protocol like the Europeans have, are trying to dissuade Congress and the states from passing new legislation or adding to the current energy legislation to mandate fuel efficiency standards for tires. One of the US tiremakers arguments is that it would create safety problems by increasing braking distance. Which can't be very convincing if Michelin already has the technology. The Japanese tiremakers like Bridgestone also are trying to develop new technologies to come up with better more fuel efficient tires. As this happens will this put US tiremakers behind and give a competitive advantage to the European and Japanese tiremakers? Note that a study in 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences in the USA estimated that about 2 billion gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel could be saved each year in the US by reducing rolling resistance of the tires by 10%. This was estimated to be the equivalent of taking 4 million cars and light trucks off the road. Other studies on the cost side show that the increase in production costs in Europe for reducing rolling resistance of tires comes to about 20 to 30 euros. Add to the 2 billion gallons of gasoline saved in the US the amount saved in Europe and Asia and you have a substantial saving. Add increases in air conditioning efficiency, increases in fuel efficiency of automobiles, and you have significant reductions in demand over the next 5 years and even more over next 10 years. How will this affect gasoline demand and prices? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Arvind Subramanium, outgoing Chief Economic Adviser to the prime minister in an interview with the Hindu newspaper, shares some of the knowledge he gained from failures and successes. The key lesson he gained is that it is important to have independent advisers in government who can speak their mind. Finance minister Jaitley has embraced this point, that such an adviser is not just one more part in the technocratic machinery of government. The success in getting GST he says shows that cooperative federalism is needed going forward as a kind of technology for many changes, including agriculture, DBT.  Subramanium calls the Economic Survey a success with 350,000 unique visitors. He likes the independence and distance of the CEA job to propagate the big ideas combined with closeness to decisionmakers. He counts as a failure not being able to create an office of CEA to the states, a request from 7 chief ministers and state finance ministers. Subramanium sees the need for more people in government with specific expertise in different areas as opposed to generalists as the work of government is becoming much more sophisticated. There is much need for talent and the flow of lateral talent into government.  Responding to economic issues such as the impact of oil prices on the economy Subramanium sees CAD at 2%, inflation at 4.5% much better compared to 2013 levels of double digits and not in unhealthy territory and very manageable. He sees risks in the impact of a combination of oil prices, dollar appreciation, and currency trade wars that are happening. On Iranian oil imports and strict U.S. sanctions on importers Subramanium sees the cost of not complying as stiff once you are in the dollar trading system. On demonetisation he sees there are short term costs and potential long term gains that requires an assessment every 2-3 years provisionally, what happened to tax and formalization, and the costs. Including costs in inconvenience and hardship for informal cash intensive sectors noted in the Economic Survey. For GST he says the revenue growth rate is 16-17% in aggregate for next year, growing 12% in the first year after a difficult implementation. The poorer states have seen an expansion of tax base and revenue performance is unprecedented.    ...