LyrArc Article Gist
A Sept 2012 Census Bureau report shows the median income of a typical U.S. family declined or was flat in almost all states in 2011. Median household income declined in Nevada by 6%, in California by 3.8%. In Arizona and Florida incomes declined by 2.9%. For the U.S. median income declined by 1.3% to $50,502 in 2011. Poverty continues to increase, with California showing 335,760 people falling into annual income levels below $23,021 for a family of four in 2011, giving the state a 16.6% poverty rate.

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial from the Times after the New Hampshire Republican primary- in which rival candidates attacked Bain Capital- says that leveraged buyouts by private equity firms like Bain Capital were only one of the causes of the growing income inequality, and by no means the principal cause. And they had little to do with the subprime mortgage crisis that led to the financial crisis and recession in 2008, which aggravated the income inequality. A serious factor was the lowering of wages in manufacturing in competition with lower wage countries in a globalized economy and the decline of good manufacturing jobs over three decades. The increase in low wage jobs in the retail and service sector with the decline in manufacturing did little to arrest the growing gap in wages.

LyrArc Article Gist
Under the McConnell-Biden fiscal cliff deal of Jan. 1, 2013, $620 billion is raised for deficit reduction over 10 years. This is made up of $395 billion from raising the top marginal income tax rate to 39.6% from 35% for the top 1% of filers who make $450,000 for couples or 400,000 for singles. Raising the top rate on capital gains and dividends to 20% from 15% raises $55 billion. Limiting the personal exemption and itemized deductions on incomes over $250,000 is a key component as it raises $150 billion. This reduction of tax expenditures was recommended by Simpson-Bowles deficit commission and Republican advisor Martin Feldstein, with more money raised under their proposals than the current proposal which follows the Pease format. Under the Pease limits named after a Congressman who proposed this in the 1990's, 3% of the amount above the threshhold income is deducted from the total deductions. Feldstein's proposal limited deductions to 2% of adjusted gross income. Romney offered a plan to limit deductions to $25,000. Finally, increasing the estate tax to 40% from 35% raises $20 billion....

LyrArc Article Gist
A open conversation with the NYT's Baker, Schmidt and Haberman by president Trump in mid July 2017. This conversation of the president with the NYT is remarkable for its frankness about people close to the president during the election campaign, particularly Jeff Sessions of Alabama. Sessions was the only leading Senator in Congress who supported Mr. Trump from the beginning. Southern states came out heavily for Mr. Trump as part of the traditional Republican base. Trump says of Sessions that had he known Sessions was going to recuse himself from the Russia investigation he would not have appointed Sessions as the new Attorney General. About Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein Trump says he should never have appointed Mueller as Special Counsel. The president also says Mueller should stay only with information related to Russia and not stray from that to delve into Trump's finances. During the election efforts were made to get Mr. Trump to disclose more about his finances as a real estate businessman- most of these efforts failed and not much is known about president Trump's finances. The president says he never said he would order the Justice Department to fire Mr. Mueller, yet he left open this possiblility, according to the NYT, as the president feels it has affected the first 6 months of the Trump presidency. This interview with president Trump was published on July 20, 2017, the day after an editorial in the WSJ by the Editorial Board of the Journal on July 19, 2017, calling for transparency from president Trump on the Russia investigation. This was an exceptional and powerful editorial by its editorial board telling president Trump that he must tell everything he knows now or face the risk of losing public confidence, and risk his presidency. It said that president Trump was wrong to think that his larger than life personality and social media role could insulate him from the effects of this lack of transparency. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Italy's prime minister, Mario Monti put it best when he said in a speech in Brussels in April 2012: "If a country becomes more productive and competitive, but there is no demand for its products domestically or around it, growth will not materialize." There is a new shift in opinion towards a balance of fiscal discipline with growth measures to get Europe back on track. The feeling in different parts of Europe is that the German view of austerity alone will not work for Europe. And the view is coming from the far right to the far left, from Marie Le Pen, far right presidential candidate in France, to the far right leader whose move to withdraw support to the government in Netherlands on the issue of austerity measures led to its collapse. Geert Wilders, leader of the Freedom Party in the Netherlands, said: "we don't want our pensioners to bleed just to meet the dictates from Brussels." The IMF has put out research that questions what is now called "the German hypothesis." The "German hypothesis," is based on the unique experience of Germany with the Hartz reforms under chancellor Schroeder which were based on wage restraint by workers, the German "kurzarbeit" program of government support for retaining workers with lower pay during cyclical downturns, improving competitiveness of German companies, and conservative budget practices. There appear to be two exceptions to this. One is that demand has to be strong outside or domestically for a country to reduce unemployment and improve productive capacity utlilization as it increases competitiveness. This was the case as Germany made the Hartz reforms under Schroeder. Wage restraint acts as a form of devaluing currency for reducing the cost of its products to improve exports. All leading parties and the unions are now in favor of wage restraint and lowering wages to preserve jobs to improve France's competitive position. Germany had the benefit of a decade to implement these reforms to reduce unemployment, because demand was not declining domestically or around it during its reforms. The situation is different in Spain where in all likelihood demand would shrink further with unemployment rising from 25% to higher levels, and higher sales taxes. This is why Francois Heisbourg, special advisor at the Paris based Foundation for Strategic Research, says about the current situation in Europe, that destroyiing Greece with strict austerity alone wasn't something the EU can look back at with the sense of having done the right thing, for Spain it appears misguided and lacking careful thought. The editors of the Wall Street Journal expressed the same sense when they described the March 2012 bailout of Greece as a tragic sideshow, because the main purpose was to buy time and insulate the other larger economies in the EU by giving the French, Spanish and German banks time to improve their financial position. The Journal called it bad for Greece leaving it with debt at 120% of GDP till 2020 and no economic growth, and bad for democracy as it was done against overwhelming Greek public opinion- The Tragic Greek Sideshow, Feb. 22, 2012. Volker Perthes, director of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, a Berlin think tank, says the Germans have always viewed German leadership in Europe with discomfort, and would prefer a leadership where several states, France, Italy, Spain, and other countries in the EU coalesce around consensus positions. This is historically true for the German position since chancellor Adenauer. With the Free Democrats in decline, and the Social Democrats and the Pirate party doing well in recent German elections and favoring consensus in Europe, Merkel's Christian Democrats need to rethink their policy to give greater weight to economic growth for a consensus position in Europe. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor on the dual mandate for inflation and unemployment and discretionary policies by the U.S. Federal Reserve that ended up creating booms and busts in the U.S. economy. He advocates replacing the dual mandate of "maximum employment" and "stable prices," which was inserted into the Federal Reserve Act in the 1970's, with a single mandate for "long-run price stability." Taylor points out that this will still give the Fed flexibility, as it is focussed on long run price stability. The Fed does not have to overreact to short run increases in inflation. And he points out that this actually will work well for unemployment as the booms caused by an overextended period of low interest rates such as that in 2003-2005, have led to booms followed by busts with high unemployment.

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Gordon of Northwestern University describes the problems in American Education and how this is the first generation which will not do better than its parents in educational attainment. The cost says Gordon comes in lower potential economic growth rates.

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
James Pressley reviews Simon Johnson and James Kwak's new book - "13 Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover and the Next Financial Meltdown. " He suggests reading the first and last chapter for what the authors recommend, limiting banks to no more than 4% of GDP in assets or $570 billion maximum, and investment banks to 2% of GDP or $285 billion. Pressley agrees that incremental steps are not going to change the situation. And the authors have thought this thing through, with Simon Johnson, a former chief economist at the IMF and writer of the Economix columns in the New York Times on the current crisis in Greece, Portugal and Spain. Some of their analysis on that crisis has been borne out by developments, as Greece lurched towards default with the slow response of Germany enlarging the dimensions of the crisis, and requiring a larger bailout for Greece of $160 billion in late April.

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's central bank, the Bank of Japan, is under pressure from the government to do more to address deflation and the appreciation of the yen. The central bank increased purchase of government bonds to 10 trillion yen ($124.7 billion) in February 2012, and set a goal of 1% inflation. A senior cabinet ofice official attending the central bank policy meetings of April 9-10, stated that the government expects the Bank of Japan to "promptly" achieve the inflation rate of 1%.

LyrArc Article Gist
Joe Nocera talks to experts like Simon Johnson at MIT. Johnson says that when he talks to other experts, after a two minute discussion, they say we should just nationalize the banks. Here Christopher Whalen, a veteran bank analyst, of Institutional Risk Analyst, and Joshua Rosner of research firm Graham-Fisher, say the same thing, with the phrases, lets get on with it or just do it. Says Simon Johnson, thats what we told emerging market countries, Thailand in 1997, or Russia in 1998, when he worked at the IMF. He says we told them to close down some of the banks, and take over the others, and inject government capital. He adds its the best practices, and its straightforward. So asks Nocera, is Geithner talking about the stress test banks will be subjected to, as first step preceding nationalization, more of a calculated approach to gradually introduce the idea of nationalization. But he isnt sure, as Geithner also told David Brooks of the NYT, that governments were not so good at managing banks. No one knows for sure. But says Nocera thats exactly what the government did to solve the S&L crisis. And the man who was former chairman of the FDIC, and helped run the program for the Resolution Trust Corporation, says the government did a pretty good job of it, taking over banks, replacing top managers and directors, and stripping out the bad assets and selling off the now healthy banks to private buyers. So can it be done again and will it be that hard? Yes, its been done before, and its not that hard say these experts. Every month that the administration and Geithner procrastinate puts the banks in a deeper hole, and will mean more layoffs and a worse crisis, even years taken to recover. What he has'nt mentioned is that even if after some procrastination the government gets around to doing it to clean up the mess, there is one added complication this time that is different than what happened with the S&L crisis or with the Swedish cleanup, or the Japanese cleanup after 2003, this time the global economy is caught up in the crisis which makes recovery that much tougher....

LyrArc Article Gist
Are high prices for pharmaceutical products and healthcare services putting a severe burden on U.S. finances and defunding education, infrastructure, R&D in new technologies, which provide the underpinnings for future U.S. competitiveness? Yes say experts. In 2009 Americans per person cost of healthcare was $7,960. By comparison Canada was $4,808, Germany $4,218, and France $3,978. And without necessary efforts for educating people about caring for health and preventive care, the health conditions of Americans are no better than these countries, and poorer in some dimensions. Klein says deficits would not be a problem for the U.S. if prices for pharmaceutical products and healthcare services in the U.S. were similiar to that of the largest developing countries. Experts say the Obama healthcare law simply postponed the addressing of this problem.

LyrArc Article Gist
A report released by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows growing income inequality in 34 OECD countries. OECD Secretary General, Angel Gurria says: "The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries. This study dispels the assumptions that the benefits of economic growth will automatically trickle down to the disadvantaged and that the greater inequality fosters greater social mobility. Without a comprehensive strategy for inclusive growth, income inequality will continue to rise." Countries with the largest ratios between incomes at the top and the bottom, are the United States, Turkey and Israel, roughly 14 to 1. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have ratios of 6 to 1, with their ratios up from the 1980's. Gaps in Chile and Mexico are at 25 to 1. The study covers the period from 1980 to 2008. Overall inequality went up by 25% in the U.S. from 1980. In 2008 the top ten percent in the U.S. earned $114,000, 15 times than incomes for the bottom 10%. The top 1% of Americans saw incomes go up from 1980 to 2008, increasing from 8 percent to 18 percent. The richest 1% having $1.3 million in after tax income, and the lowest 20% making $17,700. The trends have accentuated an increase at the highest end- the top 1% and top 10% of the people- and a sharp decrease for the bottom 20%, which can be grasped from the $17,700 and the $1.3 million, both at extreme ends. The study attributes the rise in inequality to a growing gap in wages for highly skilled workers as technology advances, a surge in foreign direct investment and a looser regulatory regime that reduces employee protections leading to wage premiums for financial jobs and smaller incomes for workers at the bottom. Income groups and professions and sectors that had the greatest influence in government were able during this period to get the greatest protection for incomes, and able also to maximize their incomes. Incomes in the financial sector increased dramatically in the last decade, as a result of deregulation leading to higher risk and speculative activities in the financial sector, leading to the financial crisis of 2008-2009. Financial crises further depress incomes at the lower end. Similiar income inequality trends can be seen for India and China. China has a Ginni coefficient of 0.5 according to researchers at Beijing Normal University, up from 0.3 three decades ago- a Ginni Coefficient above 0.4 is considered destabilizing. Another factor that played a part in these countries is corruption and lobbying by special interests for favored treatment of sectors or groups. Austerity measures taken in Europe and in the U.S. are likely to widen income gaps by depressing the lower end income groups, creating social unrest, especially in the absence of efforts to stimulate growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
The St. Louis Fed President, James Bullard, argues in a paper, that the keeping of target interest rates near zero as promised by Ben Bernanke at the Federal Reserve, sets up a situation similiar to Japan of a "deflation trap." He said that core annual inflation of only 0.9% in May 2010 suggests that there is a risk that the nominal inerest rate and inflation end up being at an unintended steady state which is dangerously low. He also said that the market's interpretation of the Fed's extended period of low interests language had a perverse effect of stretching out the period before things normalize. He suggests as an appropriate step "quantitative easing"- a policy of buying monetary debt with longer dates. But for this to be effective, the action has to be credible.

LyrArc Article Gist
After 13 years of Labor government, the new Liberal-Conservative coalition is seen as good for both the parties and good for Britain A good deal of optimism about the prospects for this government. The optimism rests on the pragmatic sensible nature of Cameron and Clegg, on the fact that the 2 parties combined have 59% of the vote in the elections for making some tough decisions- on spending cuts, a sensible fiscal program to generate $9 billion in savings through spending cuts in 2010, and generally agreement between the two parties on the significant issues of state finances. The Tories holding to their position on immigration but giving in on the idea of proportional representation. The election changes would have Parliament members in office for 5 years and the manner of election changed to remove a growing distortion of the popular vote. Labor and Conservatives share of the vote has dropped from 81% in 1979 to 65% in 2010, and still Tory and Labor MP's have 565 of the 650 seats in Parliament or 87%....

LyrArc Article Gist
One of the quirks of the unemployment rate released by the Labor Department is that it is declining- declined to 8.1% from 8.2%, from March to April 2012- even though the number of unemployed may be increasing. When adjusted for the discouraged workers who would be working today in a more normal environment the unemployment rate today would be around 11%. Crucial in grasping unemployment numbers is the labor force participation rate- showing the number of working age Americans with jobs or looking for jobs- which is affected by the number of baby boomers retiring and leaving the work force, and by the number of workers who are too discouraged to look for work. The long term unemployed currently form about 40% of people unemployed in the U.S., which is quite high and cause for concern for Fed chairman Bernanke. Many of these long term unemployed it is feared will permanently drop out of the workforce, causing a drop in the productive potential of the economy and lowering economic growth. Already many have dropped out of the workforce, causing the labor force participation rate to decline faster than the gradual decline seen in the last decade as baby boomers retire. Between 2009 and 2012, a three year period, the labor force participation rate dropped about 2% to 63.6%, compared to the normal drop of 1.3% over a seven year period from 2000 to 2007. Combining the impact of the two trends, one demographic and the other a result of the 2008 global financial crisis and excessive risks in the U.S. banking system, leads analysts to to lower the longer term economic growth forecast for the U.S. to 2%, compared to the U.S. Fed's forecast for 2.3-2.6% growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
Arvind Panagriya, Prof. of Economics at Columbia University, points out the key initiatives of the Modi government in its first four years which will show results in future years for development of the country.  He mentions the Swachh Bharat Mission and cites results that show rural households with toilets are now 84% up from 38%.  By 2019 the whole country will be defecation zone free on the 100th anniversary of the birth of Mahatma Gandhi. The Dhan Jan Yojana DJY accounts opened for rural households are up to 316 million. Aadhar cards for identification are up from 650 million to 1.2 billion. The Aadhar and DJY work together to enable direct transfer of benefits to poor households, eliminating the leaks in benefits transfer and ghost accounts of the period since independence in 1947. Not mentioned by Panagriya is the Health Insurance scheme for lower income households that enable families to survive a sudden medical expense that could put them in dire straits.  These efforts work in a way to change India from the ground up from its villages and rural areas as envisioned by Mahatma Gandhi in the struggle for independence. The land acquisition law amendments were put on hold till farmers concerns could be better accomodated, an area of concern for industrial development cited in an editorial in the Hindu newspaper. Fiscal consolidation and inflation targeting have resulted in an average inflation rate of 4.3% for the 4 years of the Modi government. Inflation was over 9% in the last 2 years of the previous Congress UPA government with GDP growth dropping to 5.9% for the last two years. Average GDP growth for four years for the Modi government is 7.3%, even after the changes to implement GST taxation for one national tax eliminating state barriers in interstate commerce and demonetization to fight corruption and black money. Rate of GDP growth should be higher after the gains from the initiatives and the new GST integration of the country are felt, with increase in investment and FDI, after infrastructure improvements and land acquisition arrangements are made. Transportation infrastructure modernization initiative pushes ahead with the first bullet train in the pilot project for Ahmedabad- Mumbai set to start in 2022. This is a $17 billion project financed for $13 billion by the Japanese government at 0.1% loan for 50 years, moratorium on repayments for 20 years, using E5 Shinkansen series technology. Implementation of this project on a sound financial basis should lead to transformation of the Indian rail network, raising the level of technology implementation across the entire Indian rail system. Such an achievement would rival the first introduction of railways into India in the nineteenth century under the British. A new bankruptcy law is intended to free up capital for investment by putting behind the large number of non performing loans in the Indian banking system. Changes made by the central bank RBI are designed to speed up this process so that loss making enterprises are absorbed, consolidated or shut down, a legacy from the earlier period.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The problems with a second phase of quantitative easing, go back to asking why the first phase hasn't worked to prevent the economy from sliding back. So far the Fed has engaged in buying $1.7 trillion in bonds in that first phase. This shows the limitations of this approach. A lot of money was injected into banks. And the banks have $1 trillion on their books that is not being used for lending. The reason being its hard to find borrowers, as borrowers are cautious and concerned about the economic future. The Quantitative Easing in this second phase is supported by the reasoning that deflation risks remain. But this raises another question, what level of quantitiative easing would work, and would such enormous levels itself cause bigger problems.

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ says Obama's silence when it comes to the jailed opposition leader in Malaysia is one more silence when it comes to issues related to suppression of democratic freedoms. When this issue was raised in June the WSJ reports it drew the Obama comment: "democracy is hard." This is all the more astounding now says the Journal, after the WSJ report about corruption in the Najib Razak government related to the $700 million from a state owned investment bank. This editorial says about the record of the Obama administration on going silent when issues of freedom and suppression have come up from Iran in 2009 to many other events and Malaysia today- that this is one of the most puzzling aspects of the Obama presidency. It also points out this is is one of the most discouraging aspects of how the U.S. is seen in the world under the Obama presidency, when it comes to protecting freedom and freedom of speech and expression.