LyrArc Article Gist
How the Australian Central Bank raised rates starting in May 2002, with the key lending rate at 5.5 % in July 2005, compared to 3.25 % in the USA. The idea was to control the housing bubble which has scaled back, with the Australian economy growing at 2% and this growth coming mostly from the commodities demand in global markets. Meanwhile the US central bank under Greenspan is holding onto the view that its hard to tell when a bubble is occurring, and it would hurt a healthy economy to raise rates to cool developing bubbles. Australia's central bank holds onto the other view that it is wiser to act now before the bubble gets out of hand. Governor MacFarlane of the Australian central bank said in aspeech in early 2003 that a "scaling back" of household borrowing and property development would be in "the longer term interest of the Australian economy." And the state of New South Wales, which includes Sydney, instituted a 2.25% tax on the sale of investment properties. This move discouraged speculators who bought and "flipped" properties for quick profits. By early 2004 a glut of downtown apartment units emerged in Melbourne, and the bubble began to scale back. During the height of the boom consumer spending was growing by more than 6% ayear, in 2005 this has slowed to 3.5% a year. Because of commodity demand, Australia was able to see growth at 2%, and still avoid the longterm effects of a bubble in housing markets by scaling them back. Patrick Barta closes with a reference to Texas in the 1980's and early 1990's, and Southeast Asia in 1997, when housing prices and the economy went down in tandem hitting employment in the oil and banking industries in Texas. In the case of Asia hitting the economies of some Asian countries with the fall of their currencies. He refers to the overstretched US consumer with load of debt, and the possibility of housing and the economy going down in tandem in the USA, similiar to what happened in Texas and Southeast Asia....

LyrArc Article Gist
What Krugman makes of the $1.089 trillion dollar U.S. deficit for fiscal year ending in Sept. 2012. He points out that the U.S. can have a stable to declining debt to GDP ratio with $400 billion debt. He cites the Clinton years (1992-2000) when the debt to GDP ratio declined from 49% to 33% with steady growth. What about the remaining $600 billion. He attributes this mostly to temporary factors which are reversible as growth picks up. Of this remaining excess deficit he says $400 billion is from lower tax payments to Treasury because of the 2008 economic crisis and the recession that followed. This includes the payroll tax cut which is also temporary to keep up consumer spending in the recession. The $150 billion is from unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other aid which is also reversed once growth picks up. He places emphasis on restoring economic growth as early as possible and reducing unemployment and using the recession for business to continue to invest in R&D, productivity, and government to preserve the social fabric, invest in education, and provide incentives for growth. S&P Nov. 8 report says the net government debt to GDP ratio is estimated to be over 80% in 2013. It will have to stabilize at current levels for S&P to preserve the U.S. credit rating, says S&P executive Chambers. The higher debt to GDP ratio in 2013 and lower growth rates expected makes the situation different from the lower debt to GDP ratios during the Clinton period. Britain, France and other major industrialized nations with political parties at either end of the political specrum have also chosen to stabilize or reduce debt to GDP ratios rather than take on the risks of them going much higher. The U.S. has the added problem of health care costs out of control with an aging population and about 17.9% of GDP going to healthcare costs in 2010 expected to increase significantly, as Medicare actuaries estimate enrollee numbers jump to 80 million in 2030 from 50 million in 2012. Democrats and Republicans have largely sidestepped this underlying problem in fiscal cliff negotiations....

LyrArc Article Gist
New home sales in the USA rise 4.7% in February 2009 from the previous month, reversing the steady decline in new home sales from August of last year. This puts them at a 337,000 annual rate and this is sharply down from this time last year when sales were in the 500,000-600,000 range. A lot of the activity in housing sales is in foreclosure sales especially in California. Foreclosure sales in California in February 2009 were 58% of total existing home sales compared to 33% in February 2008 according to MDA DataQuick of San Diego, cited in Bloomberg News. The drop in the median home price for a existing single family detached home was sharp from $418,000 in February 2008 to $247,000 in February 2009, a drop of 41%. As aresult sales of existing family homes in California went up by 83% in February from the previous year as reported by the California Association of Realtors, shrinking inventories to about a 6 month supply if the current sales pace holds from the 15 month supply existing in 2008. The government's $8000 tax credit for purchases of homes, the falling prices and lower mortgage rates, are helping to lower inventories of new homes. The number for the US has fallen to 330,000 new homes, as inventories are dropping and new construction is slowing. The housing picture depends also on the number of jobs that are lost during the rest of 2009 and into 2010. And this will play abig part in determining whether housing recovers. The current job losses of 600,000 a month are grounds for caution....

LyrArc Article Gist
Even with the growth strategies of the Abe administration in 2014, projections of the IMF show growth rate for Japan are at 1.0% for 2015, compared to 3% for the U.S., 2.5% for UK, and 1.6% for Germany. The Third Arrow in prime minister Abe's Three Arrows program now follows the implementation of the other two Arrows- monetary easing and public works spending. Abe is faced with the task of convincing foreign and domestic investors that he can implement a winning growth strategy for Japan. The plan announced in June 2014 is an effort to overcome barriers to growth with a strategy that will work. The core of the plan is to cut the corporate tax rate from 35.64% to below 30% in the next couple of years. The corporations are expected to do their part to improve corporate governance and return on equity, so that shareholders, domestic and foreign investors, have more incentives to invest in the Japanese stock market. Analysts and economists say this plan has attractive features. It asks Japanese companies to increase ROE and ROI to global levels through a Tokyo Stock Exchange corporate governance code. Companies listed on TSE and not following the code will have to come up with reasons why they are failing to do so. Some analysts say this would increase the value of companies. Companies are more likely to make investments with cash that is not being invested. The plan includes measures for bringing more women into the workforce, which is seen as a serious committment to women. In addition to increasing the number of child care centers, this plan includes tax revisions that benefit women joining the workforce. Increased representation for women at the executive level is also part of this plan. Hiroshige Seko, a top adviser to Abe, says importance was given to execution for results, so that a score of 80 with definite results was preferred to an uncertain attempt to get a 100. To do this some compromises were made. The plan for special economic zones is still in the drafting stage as discussion is just beginning. A shakeup of the Central Union of Agricultural Cooperatives and more flexible medical care will be taken up gradually. The efforts to increase ROI, ROE, and improve corporate governance were initiated from the time of the Koizumi administration, and the latest plan may bring results after over a decade of effort in this direction....

LyrArc Article Gist
The really small cars like the HOnda FIt and the Toyota Yaris and the GM Aveo are piling up on dealer lots as the price of gasoline drops to $2 a gallon from last summer's $4 a gallon. At February end 2009 Honda had 22191 Fits on dealer lots enough to last 125 days at the current sales rate, and Toyota had enough Yaris subcompacts to last 175 days at the current sales rate, according to Autodata Corp. Chrysler has a 205 day supply of the Dodge Caliber, and GM 427 days of Aveo cars. Honda Civics are also piling up. Price shifts and shifts in consumer attention and buying behaviour makes it difficult to plan ahead. The American carmakers have shifted plants to smaller and midsize cars after seeing the disastrous drop in the sales of larger vehicles in the third and fourth quarters of 2008. Now government policy is to mandate fuel efficiency standards, there is talk of agasoline tax, and even the current numbers shows ashift away from the SUV's and larger vehicles of the past. Ford's sales analyst Pipas says that over the 5 months ending February 2009 sales of small cars totaled 718,000. This was down 28% over the same period in 2008, but small cars grew to 18.4% of the total market, up 2.1 points from the year earlier period. Part of this is that overall the market has declined much more than 28%. This also shows that policy in an industry-government partnership will have to show the way that is best for the US, to ensure that oil prices don't go up the way they did, when consumption at the pump was excesssive and fuel standards lax. This should also be done in a partnership with other countries like China and India to ensure that technologies are available worldwide to reduce fuel consumption and promote fuel efficiency, as keeping consumption per passenger for each mile travelled as low as possible will take pressure off the oil price. It would make automobile transportation feasible for a rapidly urbanizing Asia, and by reducing the pressure on price that urbanization and motorization in Asia would bring, help moderate oil prices for western countries. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How the French health care system works. France comes in first and the USA 37th in aWHO health care ranking. THe difference in deaths from respiratory disease is half that in the USA, and lower rates of death from heart disease and diabetes. IT has more hospital beds and doctors per capita than the USA. 65% of French people are satisfied with their health system compared to 40% in the USA, and yet France spends 10.7% of GDP on health care and the USA spends 16% for poorer results. THe French system is more generous to its seniors. Unlike Medicare there are no deductibles, just modest co-payments that are often dismissed for chronically ill. And diabetes and critical surgeries are covered 100%. French also buy supplemental insurance like Medigap for extra expenses like dental and eyglasses. Cancer patients are treated free of charge. Avastin treatments costing $48,000 a year are provided at no charge. France's PMI or Protection Maternelle et Infantile, is rated highly. It is anetwork of thousands of healthcare facilities, that ensure that every mother and child in the country receives basic preventive care. Mothers even receive afinancial incentive for attending their pre and post natal visits. France makes this care affordable by reibursing doctors at a much lower rate. The average yearly net income for doctors is around $55,000, about athird of what doctors in the USA make. But French doctors don't have to pay back huge student loans as medical school is paid for by the state and malpractice insurance premiums are only a tiny fraction of that in the USA. And again the French government pays two thirds of the social security tax for most French physicians- which is typically 40% of income. So the $55,000, is more like $92,000 taking that into account and more like $110,000 when student loans and malpractice is taken into account at US levels. Specialists who have 4 or more years experience can charge what they want, but as one gastroenterologist says, there in an unspoken and undefined limit to what you can cahrge or what is socially acceptable. Yet even in France there is inflation in health care costs that the government deals with through price controls and more spending. The French national insurance system is running increased deficits each year and this is now $13.5 billion, and it has led to higher taxes for employers and workers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Morgenthau, District Attorney for Manhattan, 1975-2009, says there is more money on deposit in the Cayman Islands, than in all the banks of New York put together, with 19,000 companies listed there. Cayman is one of several tax havens. Apple use Luxembourg for iTunes. Other tax havens are the British Virgin Islands, Gibraltar, Antigua, Bermuda, the Bahamas. He cites the Senate's Permanent Sub-Committee on Investigations in 2008, which gives the estimate of $5 trillion to $7 trillion sheltered in offshore places on this list, by Americans, Chinese, Europeans and others. Morgenthau says these tax havens help American and European companies not only to avoid taxes, but also structure complex international transactions. He estimates these transactions cost the U.S. Treasury about $40 billion from outright tax fraud each year.

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Frank, an economist at Cornell and visiting Professor at the Stern School of Business at NYU, says this deficit increasing our debt burden is entirely different from the way in which the Bush administration increased the national debt. During the last 8 years the Bush deficits increased the national debt by almost $5 trillion. But people went for larger mansions, and consumers went on aconsumption binge, and the Bush tax cuts were skewed to help the wealthy. Now to address the economic crisis a similiar amount of about $5 trillion will be needed but it will be spent quite differently. Money spent on ropads and building infrastructure that is needed is money well spent on any dimension. Especiallyfor America's crumbling roads and bridges and highways. If postponed these would cost more or twice as much to fix. Frank's point is that alot depends on what you do with the money. At recent interest rates servicing $10 trillion in debt costs about $400 billion annually. He says thats quite manageable. Just by instituting agasoline tax of $2 agallon as the Europeans do and are not alot poorer dfor this, the US could generate $100 billion ayear. When Americans are using mass transit in the largest numbers in 50 years, it also makes sense to build better faster transportation systems between major cities, like the high speed trains in Europe....

LyrArc Article Gist
Britain's Tax Service reports the number of taxpayers reporting incomes of 1 million pounds a year declined by over 60% in fiscal 2010-2011 from the prior year. In 2010 the Labor government of Gordon Brown introduced a 50% income tax rate for this income group, up from 40%. The number of million dollar incomes filed declined to 6000 from 16000 in 2009-2010, and revenues declined from 13.4 billion pounds or 9% of total taxes from taxpayers to 6.5 billion pounds or 4.4% or about half. The Labor government had hoped for additional 2.5 billion pounds in revenue, showig unintended consequences and surprises in economic policies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Puerto Rico has issued $72 billion in debt, about 70% of its GDP, by offering tax breaks to wealthy investors. It is now faced with a declining population, a shrinking tax base and a large public sector. Puerto Rico's inability to pay its debt will affect hedge funds which hold its distressed debt. Mutual funds have reduced holdings of Puerto Rican debt as its debt was reduced to junk status. Commercial banks hold insignificant amount of Puerto Rican debt. Municipalities in the U.S. have improved their financial situation by cutting spending and increasing taxes in recent years, reducing any contagion effects. Only 13% of Greece's debt or about $47 billion is held by private banks. Over 80% of the debt is held by the European Central Bank, the European Financial Stability Facility, the IMF and European governments. The ECB's quantitative easing program will support countries such as Spain, Portugal, and Italy, and other countries during the now likely default of Greece in 2015. This will limit the contagion from Greece. China's debt situation and excessive rise in stock market and housing prices poses more risks because of the size of the Chinese economy, and through the effects on commodity exporting countries such as Canada, China and Australia, and the economy of Hong Kong. China has large reserves which it could use to bailout banks if the situation were to arise, and could cut interest rates. China's financial system is relatively closed reducing direct effects of contagion. Ip says outsiders have placed too much confidence in China's leaders to manage a crisis, and in the condition of the financial system, because it is opaque, lacks transparency, statistics are not reliable, and not enough is known about the true condition of the economy....

LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the concern about the economy comes from the economic damage done by the coronavirus. The longer the shutdowns continue the more the damage. About 17 million have filed claims for unemployment benefits. The WSJ consensus of 57 economists is that 14.4 million jobs will be lost in coming months, and the unemployment rate will rise to a record 13% in June, from a 50 year low of 3.5% in February. The earliest the economy could go back to the level in February 2020 is 27 months says the WSJ economist survey. The brighter side of this comes in two aspects of this pandemic recovery curve. By flattening the curve and strict testing, contact tracing and isolation till the vaccine is developed about half the jobs lost can be recovered by the end of summer, says Moody's Analytics. The vaccine a year from now or in 9 months by November 2020 would allow the economy to recover faster. A more optimistic view comes from Daiwa Capital Markets which predicts many of people laid off will be recalled quickly allowing the labor market to recover in 6 months by September or October 2020. Only finance and real estate might take longer but most of the industries where the vast majority of jobs are could be back on their feet. The credible evidence supporting this perspective of a rebound comes from Colorado and Washington which require large employers to specify whether layoffs are temporary or permanent, 70% this year are temporary. Compare this to the prior 2009 recession where this figure was less than 1%- as reported by WSJ. The big push in this direction will be the $2 trillion that the Trump administration and U.S. Congress have committed to this task. Even more so is the determination of president Trump to protect American workers at all costs, that every job counts, and that businesses without exception to get the money have to show that workers are retained. The very success of the aid is being judged by how quickly people are back to work. Now for a look at where the situation is today- Oxford Economics, a UK based forecasting and consulting firm, projects 27.9 million jobs lost with industries other than those ordered to close making up 8 to 10 million of that number. It projects April's report will will capture late March layoffs. It will show cuts to 3.4 million business services workers, including lawyers, software groups, architects and consultants, advertising professionals, in addition to 1.5 million non-essential healthcare workers, 100,000 information workers. One conclusion of this report is that the virus does not discriminate across business groups and business service workers are also affected. Many companies that were hiring will cancel that move and many will cut hours worked. Many of these business services are not a priority. Hospitals are affected too, as they cut elective surgical procedures and routine care that are major revenue sources. Some are now charging for telemedicine visits to maintain some revenue stream. State and local governments employ 20 million workers. As tax receipts decline these local governments will face choices of cutting payrolls and services without enough federal government relief. In a way laying off workers and having them take unemployment benefits shifts that burden to the federal government so that services for overtime to police and paramedics, retention and deployment of nurses in schools.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Seen in a larger context, the Biden tax pledge seen from the southern and midwestern and less well off states is not about taxes, it is about federal revenues that build the infrastructure and services in these states that increase the standard of living. This happened in the 1930's and 1940's under FDR and Truman, in the 1950's under Eisenhower, in the 1960's under Kennedy/LBJ. And is happening again under Biden today. Lets not forget that president John F. Kennedy says in his speeches that these regions in America in the 1860's under Lincoln were in development close to what prevailed in the 1960's in India, Ceylon, Chile, Turkey or China. The Biden pledge not to increase taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 is significant because it grasps the situation in America where extraordinary gains in wealth since 1980 have gone only some of it to the top 1-2% in midwestern states and southern states, and most of it to the top 3-5% in coastal states population in the east and west, New York and California, where the finance and tech industry are based. In Michigan and Wisconsin only 2% of households make more than $400,000, in Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona and Florida 3%. WSJ shows a map of the US showing this for individual states. The core southern states have 2% of households with incomes over $400,000- including Arkansas, Tennessee, South Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana, Oklahoma, with Mississippi less than 1%. It is only segregation in the late 1960's and culture issues such as abortion that have turned them from Democratic states to Republican states as they were the largest beneficiaries of taxes diverted into investment in these places since FDR/Truman and John Kennedy/LBJ. It was JFK who came up with the phrase "a rising tide lifts all boats" when he opened federally funded projects in Arkansas. Seen objectively the large investments made under Lincoln, FDR/Truman, Kennedy/LBJ from tax revenues are what changed this region from conditions that prevailed in less developed countries that John Kennedy points out in his speeches, true for the midwest, parts of the west, and the southern states alike.  President Kennedy said on Feb. 25, 1963 to the American Bankers Association Symposium on Economic Growth: "Today, many Americans tend to think of developing underdeveloped countries in terms only of faraway nations. But in 1863, even measured by 1963 dollars, our own per capita income--and this should be a source of encouragement to many who are laboring with the problem of underdevelopment in far-off countries--our own per capita income was less than $1 a day, approximately the same as Chile's. Nearly 60 percent of our labor force was engaged in agriculture, the same percentage as is today engaged in the Philippines. An estimated 20 percent of our population was illiterate, the same percentage of the population of Ceylon. Only one-fifth of our 34 million people lived in towns or cities of over 5,000 in population, as is roughly true now of Turkey. In 1863, this Nation had fewer railroad tracks laid than India has today, and its children had a shorter life expectancy than a child born this year in Thailand or Zanzibar."   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The supporters of free university education bring up some practical and important points. Not providing free university education at a time of rising inequality after a severe financial crisis that worsened inequality and led to a lost decade for middle class families in the U.S. leads to a situation in university attendance is restricted to people from wealthier backgrounds. Studies in Britain show this says the Economist magazine.  A report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, a think tank, showed an increase in tution fees paid out of pocket of 1000 pounds ($1243) is associated with adecline of 3 to 9 percentage points in university attendance. Work by Thomas Kane at Harvard University confirms this. Other studies in the U.S. show attendance and completion rates higher for university education with  education being more affordable. Results of studies also show that the tangle of application processes and eligibility rules can reduce the benefits of tackling this by the current approach of financial aid. For this reason free tution which is easy to adminster and easy to understand for all is the real option for today's situation. Wealthy students can pay for it later in life with the progressive taxation. Warren proposes higher taxes on multimillionaires, and Sanders would tax financial transactions such as on stock and capital markets, as ways to address this and bring back free university. As the Economist magazine for the first time  puts this in its Free Exchange column the real support for free university comes not from economic efficiency, or even the way it benefits all in a free, open and equal opportunities society, but from the values that society believes in. There are broad social benefits to a well educated citizenry. The nation is stronger economically, more open to new ideas and more open to technological change to be able to grow when it has promoted to the fullest extent the education of all its citizens. This is especially true in today's world where more than 12 years of education are needed to build a strong base for a country to grow its economy and industry. A warning is presented by the Economist magazine that as the rich pull away from the rest of society they can actually undercut the very values based solutions that are needed today. Their increased political power can restrict the tax increases needed to fund the higher education the nation deserves, that the people deserve.  Social safety nets are also reinforced and societal harmony is strengthened when everyone cooperates to help everyone.  ...

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
A decade after a precipitious decline in its stock price during the global financial crisis of 2008 stemming from its GE Capital unit, GE struggles with faltering stock price and poor performance stemming from other strategy errors in its core infrastructure business.  GE Capital is being shut down. Now one of its subprime lending units is likely to be put into bankruptcy protection. WMC Mortgage had losses under its GE Capital parent  of $1 billion during the financial crisis in one year alone. It has since faced a series of legal settlements and investigations. GE Capital has turned out to be a poor investment and a huge distraction for management for a company which considered its core business as infrastructure related.