LyrArc Article Gist
The Labor Department's rate of labor underutilization is 14.8% of thepotential workforce, much higher than the 8.1% unemployment rate. Which means that a lot of workers are not able to make the fullest use of their skills. If unemployment stays high for a very long period some workers lose their skills and become less employable. THat could leave the floor for unemployment at amuch higher level. Something like this is happening now and stay with us as the unemployment rate grows and the underutilization of labor rate with it. Physiscists call it "hysteresis"., a kind of laggard impact of some sustained force. An example is if you squeeze a nerf ball for so long that it doesn't bounce back when you release it. Higher underutilization of labor which could hit 20% by 2010 at the rate at which job losses are ocurring of half a million a month, would mean pressure on wages and fears of deflation, lower tax revenues and fears of persistent deficits, less cash to invest and companies having less capital to invest leading to lower earnings. And falling behind the curve is what Krugman fears could be happening now, even with the large stimulus and budget of the new President, because of a series of problems ocurring at the same time and reinforcing each other. And the efforts of the government still not large or effective to meet the scale of the challenge. See the link to this. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the final Republican tax bill is debated in Congress on December 19, 2017, Senator Bob Casey cited the following points from the Joint Committee on Taxation Report on the floor of the Senate.  1. Americans building their hopes that their pay checks in February 2018 will be increasing are in for a big disappointment said Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, a senior member of the Finance Committee. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimate is that for the 57 million families making less than 100,000 dollars a year the tax cuts in the Republican legislation will either not reduce their taxes or reduce the taxes by about $100 a year. 2. The bill does little for the big tasks facing America of rebuilding failing infrastructure. Senator Casey cited 4500 bridges needing repair or replacement in Pennsylvania alone. It also does little for health care access for middle class families and is likely to lead to 10% increase in health care premiums. Affordability of college and other hurdles of middle class and working class families remain unaddressed.   3. The $9 billion in the estate tax cuts would finance the Children's Health Insurance program which has expired.  4. The $36 billion in tax cuts for corporations comes at a time when corporate profits are at the highest they have been in 15 years, according to Vanguard founder Bogle. He also points out that wages as a percentage of GDP are the lowest in 15 years. The tax cuts in the Republican bill are not likely to correct this imbalance.  5. The share of GDP of people making more than one million dollars in 1980 was 11%, this is up now in 2017 to 20%. This has led to questions about the wisdom of these tax cuts which disproportionately benefit a very small percentage of Americans who do not need these tax cuts, and come with significant sacrifices for the middle class in terms of what is available in public services, and the cost to their children as infrastructure and access to health and education is made more distant because of a growing U.S. debt from this tax cut. The big problem then with this bill is that it further damages intergenerational mobility in the U.S., undermining the foundation of a democratic society. Damage has already happened in the past three decades as Federal Reserve chairman Janet Yellen pointed out at a conference on Economic Opportunity and Inequality on Oct. 17, 2014, saying-"The past several decades have seen the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality following the Great Depression." This is why there is substantial agreement in the media from the Wall Street Journal's Greg Ip to Krugman in the New York Times that the bill fails to correct a harmful trend, and goes further in the wrong direction for a democratic society.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Experts say about 110,000 votes separate Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the three states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania that decided the 2016 presidential election in the U.S. giving Trump the win. Post election reflection in the Democratic party points to a disconnect between the establishment in both parties and the white working class. It is described as something that was not thought enough about even though as pointed out in Lyrarc, and in The Washington Post by columnists, and in news coverage about the inequality movement long before Bernie Sanders appeared in 2015. In the period when banks were favored over millions of homeowners facing foreclosure in 2010-2014, the surging stock market and the zero to to half percent interest on savings that hurt savings of most of the working class and lower middle class without stock investments, and the continuing problems in communities facing job losses from trade for the third decade. The hollowing out of the regions in Ontario from job losses from the Canadian industry helped Justin Trudeau win the Canadian election. In this election it helped Trump in crucial midwestern states, combined with a degree of indifference shown by establishment Democrats. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean is planning to run for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Bernie Sanders says he backs Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison to be the next chair of the DNC. Jeff Weaver, campaign manager for Sanders, says the problem lies in what has been clear for some time now "that the centrist wing of the democratic party has no standing with working class and middle class  voters in this country." In 2016 only 51% of union households supported Clinton the lowest since 1980, 43% supported Trump. Obama won 59% of union households in 2008 and 58% in 2012 to 40% for Republican Romney. Trump picked up 3% of union households, Clinton lost 7% of union households, creating about a 10 point gap that would be magnified in industrial states where union jobs are concentrated, for about 18% of the people who voted in the election, enough to create the shortfall in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsyslvania. Fed chairman Janet Yellen pointed out the problems at an Inequality conference in Boston in 2014, pretty stark in its reminder that inequality had surged to levels not seen since the depression of the thirties, with 62 million households having a net worth of $11,000. Krugman and other economists had pointed this out on the pages of the NYT. Yet the post election reflection in the media is as if this is some special insight when it was clear for all to see, and covered in depth in Lyrarc for years since 2008. There is voter fatigue after 8 years of one party in power as pointed out by Obama campaign strategist, David Axelrod. The loss of union enthusiasm made the task of  a third term for the Democratic party even more difficult.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the Economist points to the long term effects of a crash in China's stock markets. This would reduce access to equity markets for corporate funding. It would pose larger risks because of the increase in total debt in the Chinese economy from 150% in 2008 to more than 250% in 2015. The fallout would not be as large as in the U.S. after a stock market bubble collapsed in the U.S., because market capitalization is about 40% of GDP, and households have put about 10% of their wealth in stock markets. Coming at a time when China's economy is slowing, and it faces other problems such as addressing pollution, healthcare and other issues, this could lead to a further slowdown for a prolonged period. Most economists from Krugman to Summers, say China is no exception to basic rules of finance and economics. The indexes have accelerated in the past year- CSI300 index of China's largest mainland stocks doubling in the past year, and ChiNext market for startups tripling in the past year, and at P/E ratio of 140 times prior year earnings. 4 million new brokerage accounts opened in one week of April 2015, and a study shows about 66% of people buying stocks for the first time have no schooling beyond the age of 15. Margin financing has increased to 2 trillion yuan or $325 billion. Clearly unlike the U.S. investors and stock market authorites have not experienced the collapse of a bubble with all the economic distress for a prolonged period....

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that the prospects for the economy while improving in 2011, will acutally be worse off in 2012 than in the absence of the the Obama tax cut deal with Republicans. He points to the prospect of another bad deal nearer the elections. His main concern is that the Bush tax cuts will become permanent under this deal because this continues the practice of stringing things along, with the hugely negative impact on the deficit.

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

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman in the NYT describes the dangers of plutocratic power to American democracy. When exercized by the Murdochs, the Elon Musks, the Harlan Crows of this world. He cites presidents who are Republican and broke up the large oil companies in the 1900's, Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909) who warned about "a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power." This is happening with the power of the so called Tech companies today and both parties seeking to break  up the Tech companies.  Then there is a Democratic president from this period Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) who followed Theodore Roosevelt. Wilson says- "If there are men in this country who are big enough to own the government of the United States, they are going to own it." Theodore Roosevelt fought political machines such as Tammany Hall in New York as well as Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company. Wilson, a professor from Princeton, continued this tradition by protecting the working class of that time through his New Freedom campaign in 1913.  As a professor Wilson wrote the textbook The State used in colleges of that period, which set forth for the first time the basic idea of the state that we see today- "that forbids child labor, supervises the sanitary condition of factories, limits employment of women in occupations hurtful to their health, institutes official tests for the purity or quality of goods sold, that limits the hours of work in certain trades, and by a hundred and one limitations the power of unscrupulous or heartless men to outdo the scrupulous or merciful in trade or industry." Both were progressive Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Wilson under his New Freedom platform for the 1913 election, asserted that it was the task of government "to make those adjustments of life that will put every man in a position to claim his rights as a normal human being." What president Biden is doing today is closest to what Wilson and Roosevelt were trying to achieve, and what Modi is doing today in India is also closest to what Wilson and Roosevelt were trying to achieve. In 1913 Wilson won 42% of the vote, Roosevelt 27% because of a split within the Republican party with Robert Taft. Wilson proposed breakup of oil companies to provide a level playing field for all companies. Similar decisions are being considered by president Biden today for Tech Companies. The future of both the US and India is being decided in these difficult times after a pandemic and in the middle of a European war, and a supply chain overconcentrated in one country in Asia. Wilson's idea "to put every man in a position to claim his rights as a normal human being," is being set forth by president Biden through the word "dignity," by Modi in India as "sab ka vikas, sab ke sath" (development for all, with all). The Greens and SPD's Scholz also set forth this idea as "dignity" for the worker for Germany.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Glenn Hubbard, Professor at Columbia University and Bush adviser who helped design the Bush tax cuts, has an uneasy sense about the tax cuts today. He says the tax cuts have been undermined by years of deficit spending. The Bush tax cuts expire Dec 31st 2010 in the USA if Congress does not act. Macroeconomic Advisors estimates that letting the tax cuts expire will take 0.9% off the growth rate. Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman prefers to let the tax cuts expire and provide more help to state and local governments to preserve jobs that are being lost due to budget shortfalls. But becuase of the political climate he prefers to let the tax cuts go on for a limited period. The Obama administration may decide to continue with the tax cuts rather than fight the serious battles for deficit reduction, after spending much of its political capital on health care reform. Hubbard also thinks in the current situation its best to keep the tax cuts even with the concern for the deficits. He says the spending during the Bush administration, especially the Medicare prescription drug benefit, which is estimated to cost $400 billion from 2004-2013, was a major problem. The incentives to business and investors for productive effort in the Bush tax cuts is uncertain, if it becomes clear that the price for these cuts is higher taxes later on to cover growing deficit spending. Hubbard does not see any serious action on the deficit till the next Presidential term and sees it better to keep the tax cuts till then, when some serious discussion can take place....

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Krugman describes the situation of slowing inflation in America and the prospects for president Biden in 2024. In just a few months since the midterms inflation is receding. Shoppers are showing resistance to price increases in retail stores. The Fed under Jay Powell has taken a resolute stand against inflation slowing inflation in house sales and rental, in automobile pricing and other sectors of the US economy. New investments under the climate change bill passed in Congress and the CHIPS and Science Act, Inflation Reduction Bill, mean more factory openings and jobs in America. A milder winter in Europe is helping it tackle an energy shortage and bringing oil prices under control.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Finance Ministers of Germany and France, Wolgang Schauble and Christine Lagarde, support a reprofiling of Greece's debt. This is a form of restructuring of Greek debt under which Greece's private creditors would be expected to take repayment over a longer period. This would help Greece cover its fiscal gaps in 2012 and 2013. Luxembourg premier Jean-Claude Juncker, head of the group of 17 finance ministers of the EU also supports this move. This is opposed by the ECB Executive Board member Jurgen Stark of Germany, Jens Weidmann, Bundesbank President, and Christine Noyer, head of the French central bank. The ECB's view is that there would be contagion effects from a restructuring which would affect Ireland, Portugal and Spain. Creditors such as Societe General bank support this view. The finance ministers have a political constituency and recent elections in Finland and Germany show lack of public support for additional financial support to Greece, Ireland and Portugal. The ECB is pushing for Greece to exhaust all options include privatization and further spending cuts, and for European governments to come up with the money. The ECB position including a threat by ECB officials to stop accepting Greek bonds as collateral for loans is coming under criticism. Sony Kapoor of Brussels think tank Re-Define, says the ECB is following anarrow interest and considering the political opposition has an untenable position- forcing Greeks and the people of the eurozone countries to bear the entire burden of the crisis with no contribution whatsoever from the banks that made the decisions to make these loans. Not even to the point of a milder form of restructuring that reprofiling would accomplish, that extends debt repayments to creditors over a longer period. Krugman and and an editorial this week in the Wall Street Journal also take this view....

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman puts it best when he says in the NYT that he's got a sick feeling in the pit of his stomach. Its just that the Republican challenge of not a single vote in the House for the $789 billion Stimulus bill just makes it harder to go back for more money which most definitely will be needed. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that over the next 3 years there will be a $2.9 trillion gap between what the economy could produce and will actually produce. $789 billion won't be enough, and more so because the weightage shifted in the direction of tax cuts from the original version. And considering the accelerating nature of the crisis on the housing front and in layoffs and consumption, the absence of a clear action plan with specifics to deal with the bad debt in the banking system, is what gives this sick feeling in the stomach. Because as is stated on these same pages by experts from Japan on February 12, NYT, see the link, Japan went through this same soul searching, public anger, controversy, and political leaders were afraid to take strong action for years from the mid 1990's till 2003 after Koizumi's election. Each action or set of actions each year during that period before 2003 was behind the curve, and did not match what was needed. For the USA this has happened already for 2007, 2008 and is heading in that direction for 2009, with a lack of consensus for the strong action needed. Would 4 million new jobs be generated by the current stimulus if that is a measure of success, as Obama indicated at his first press conference? With less going into spending for education, infrastructure, energy and other green projects, in favor of tax cuts and the AMT, and the feeling that going to Congress for more money will be harder and a partisan affair, will this become difficult to achieve? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
German views on Trump's economic policies are described by DW.com's Jeffrey Michels. German business sees a Trump presidency increasing the uncertainty affecting the global economy, a kind of second hit after the hit from Brexit. There is concern about the $114 billion euros in exports made by Germany to the U.S., because of Trump's increasingly protectionist policies. Trump could move to the centre, but so far these populist policies have helped Trump win in the primaries, and this is unlikely to change in the election campaign,  says DW.com.  Trump opposes the TTIP trade agreement with European Union, and because of opposition in Germany, these negotiations are likely to flounder. Even under a Clinton presidency there is little support for more trade agreements, and economist Krugman points out that most of the gains from free trade have already been made. 

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ on John Kasich, points to Ohio Governor Kasich's strong record of growth in Ohio and low unemployment, surpassing all other midwestern states, as a reason for voters to consider Kasich for president. It points to Kasich's re-election win by 31 points in 2014, carrying 86 of 88 Ohio counties as another reason to consider Kasich, as Ohio is the key swing state in a U.S. presidential election. Kasich also has the unique combination of having worked in Congress helping develop a balanced budget in the Clinton presidency, and in balancing the budget in Ohio leaving a $2 billion surplus after he found only 89 cents in the rainy day fund when he became governor. Jeb Bush and Walker lack experience in Congress.

LyrArc Article Gist
Economist Paul Krugman points out the risks of a trade war in the tariffs announced for steel and aluminium by president Trump. Yet he accepts that he advocated stronger action on China's currency in 2009-2010 when the U.S. economy was weaker. In the past on the TPP agreement proposed by president Obama, Krugman said that it would have an insignificant impact as most of the gains on trade were already made. Here Krugman is critical of the language used by president Trump about trade wars being "easy."  This is taken out of context though as president Trump is saying that it is easy in the context of a country enjoying a $100 billion surplus with the U.S., because that country is going to have incentives to maintain a good trading relationship with the U.S. Essentially this means that the steel industry in the U.S. benefits. China also benefits as it closes many of the older steel plants that led to overproduction. This would reduce overcapacity in China's steel industry, a problem China's economic planners see as a priority. China already is making the shift to higher technology products and this process will be accelerated, as it puts less emphasis on steel and metals as it did in its earlier stage of development. As a result contrary to textbook economics this has the potential to be a win-win solution for the U.S. and China in the long run. So little was done under the Bush and Obama administrations to manage trading relationships with other countries so that the interests of small communities across the U.S. were protected from unfair trade- that Reagan administration trade expert Robert Lighthizer took up the cause of the U.S.,workers in these communities. Surveys showed U.S. public opinion also had shifted among educated, professionals and middle class on this issue by 2015, against unfair trade that hurt U.S. interests. Robert Lighthizer is now the Trade Representative for the U.S. in the Trump administration. Reports in the WSJ about the discussion within the Trump economic council, show Gary Cohn favored not imposing the tariffs on steel and aluminum. Lighthizer advocated the tariffs and was able to convince the president.  For Trump this presents a win-win situation, as a mild response by China -and other trading nations that have enjoyed a favorable situation in the past -with its huge surplus and favorable trading relationship with the U.S. would present a win for the president. Economist Krugman accepts this when he says tariffs in the current context of the trading field- that is more favorable to other countries- are not such a big deal, only the use of such policy that is likely to endanger world trade.  As in much of the debate that takes place this adds to the headlines today yet provides delayed and limited relief to communities across the U.S. devastated by world trade as documented by experts who studied trade patterns and their effect on regions across the U.S.  As the WSJ points out in one report the trade deficit itself may continue to grow under president Trump because of other factors. The U.S. dollar surged 8% during the last 2 years of the Obama administration with the economic recovery underway. With Trump's election win the dollar surged another 3%. This may play a bigger role in the direction of the trade deficit than the new steel tariffs announced by president Trump. Workers and unions matter. As TPP pushed by Democratic party president Obama was opposed by the unions, and by the auto industry (workers and auto companies) in the midwestern states which suffered a hollowing out in the last decade. A WSJ survey after the election showed Clinton received 56% support from union workers in 2018 compared to 65% for president Obama in the 2012 election. Some of that erosion in support may come from Obama's TPP stand fervently opposed by the unions and workers in the auto industry. A similar situation took place in Ontario with hollowing out of the auto industry in this large industrial state in Canada and led to the rejection of the Conservative government and election of the Liberal Party under Justin Trudeau. This lesson is so far lost in the Democratic Party's debate.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks looks at the traits and skills of national leaders Washington, Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, F.D.R., Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Reagan, and compares that with the skills needed in a business environment. He does not find much relevance for the traits and skills learned in business by Corzine, Rumsfeld, Regan, Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina in leading a state or a country. He finds traits in political leaders in government to be emotional security, political judgement, a sense of humility as being part of a larger purpose in God's world, and the ability to overcome major setbacks. He sees today's claims of candidates to being outsiders or having business experience as a spurious and false story line.