LyrArc Article Gist
In a major policy move India's Modi government makes major changes for foreign investment in India. In different sectors, pharmaceuticals, defense, civil aviation, and retail stores, the move is designed to attract investment and create new jobs. Foreign investors can now take 100 percent ownership in defense, civil aviation, and food products sectors with government approval. In pharmaceuticals foreign investors can take upto 74 percent ownership with no government approval needed. In retail stores, such as for Apple and Ikea, the rules offer new incentives. From now on the requirement that Apple and other companies buy 30% of their supplies locally for single brand retail stores will be relaxed with a 3 year exemption on local sourcing, which can be extended to 5 years if the products sold are "state of the art" and "cutting edge technology," according to a government announcement. The changes were made by executive order. Apple CEO Tim Cook visited India and lobbied for this change recently. In combination with a national GST goods and services tax to be passed in July 2016, which is to be instituted nationally to replace a old set of state by state requirements and taxes, the two changes could have a bigger impact than the 1991 reforms that moved India away from a socialist managed economy. Poor job report numbers may have increased the pressure for taking action. In the defense sector the earlier change to allow 49% ownership had resulted in few new proposals. The changes in foreign investment rules also follows the resignation of the head of the central bank, Raghuram Rajan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor, says Obama and Alan Krueger (Obama's new head of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors), said some of the same things in early September, 2011, that were part of Obama's old plan to revive the U.S. economy. And the old plan has failed to produce results. The part that puts construction crews to work on the roads, railways and airports was tried earlier in the stimulus plan. Because of a lack of showel ready projects, and the state governments putting most of the money in their state coffers, this only increased infrastructure by a miniscule 0.05 percent of GDP, according to research by Taylor and John Cogan. Taylor's sees the moves by the Obama administration and the Bernanke Fed as not only being ineffective, but having the opposite effect of lowering investment and consumption demand through increased concerns about the federal debt, another financial crisis or the risk of inflation or deflation. The U.S. private sector has the money to make the investments that create jobs but their concerns have led to holding back. Taylor points to the need for a comprehensive economic strategy to replace these temporary interventions. The debt limit agreement of 2011 is a part of this strategy, and he agrees with reducing spending in a gradual way in a weak economy. The other parts of this strategy he says are entitlement reform, tax reform, regulatory reform, monetary reform, including a reappraisal of the role of government in the economy. This should lead to a more stable and predictable economic environment and reduced uncertainty about the future, which is critical to improving supply and demand....

LyrArc Article Gist
Professors Cole and Ohanian of the University of Pennsylvania and UCLA, provide a new interpretation of FDR's economic policies during the period 1932-1934 and the period 1937-1941, based on their research. This suggests conclusions different from that of Obama advisor, Christina Romer, and Fed chairman, Bernanke about that period. Changes in economic policies under the Roosevelt administration that helped bring wages in line with productivity, reduced strikes, and gradual elimination of the undistributed profits tax, improved incentives for business investment during 1938-1939. Cole and Ohanian, say that by 1941, before the U.S. entered the war, close to half of the increase in nonmilitary hours worked in the U.S. between 1939 and the peak of the war, had already been achieved. And this was primarily the result of the changes in FDR's policies in 1938. They say a similiar opportunity is presented by the proposals of the Bowles-Simpson commission on deficit reduction, by lowering the corporate income tax through simplification of the tax code and reducing or eliminating most tax expenditures. Improving the incentives for business to hire and invest through this and other steps is likely to do more for the economy than the steps tried so far since 2009....

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany went through a period of stagnant growth and persistently high unemployment leading to reforms of the welfare system and entitlements under the Schroeder administration. The reforms led to lower unemployment benefits and an effort to get the unemployed take up jobs. Instead of unemployment benefits that amounted to half the salary indefinitely, unemployment benefits ended in 12 months under the reforms, and workers were forced to take up jobs or dig into their savings. The cuts to benefits led to more of the unemployed taking jobs that were not their first choice with lower incomes. Unions agreed to defer wage demands and wages remained relatively flat for a long period. The "kurzarbeit" system of government subsidizing employers to retain workers during economic downturns, helped cushion the workforce from ups and downs in the economy. Unemployment which was in double digits a decade ago, is now 6.1%. The system still preserved some other aspects of generous benefits- parental leave of 14 months at two-thirds salary, vacation time and publicly sponsored health insurance. Recent changes include raising the retirement age to 67 from 65. The Organization of Economc Cooperation and Development estimates that the 200,000 jobs saved in Germany during the recession of 2008-2009 cost the government $7 billion. Government funds helped companies retain workers by paying a portion of worker salaries and averting layoffs.This comes to $35,000 per job. Compare this with the $38.9 billion allocated to a loan program at the Energy Department under the U.S. stimulus. 8050 jobs were created under this program according to the Washington Post- for the money spent so far in Sept 2011- 2 years into the loan program, of $19.3 billion. This comes to $2.4 million in government guaranteed loans per job. The Energy Department says that 33,000 jobs were saved under the $5.9 billion that was given to the auto industry under this program for investments in manufacturing to improve fuel efficiency. This comes to $178,000 per job. The Energy Department and Congress estimated a 5%-10% loss on the $38.6 billion loan program for loans that go sour, such as the Solyndra solar company $535 million loan. This comes to $1.9 billion at 5% loss and $3.8 billion for a 10% loss. The purpose of these figures is to show the cost of programs when the programs fail to achieve job goals or produce too little for the investment. The $3.8 billion loss under the program is over half the $7 billon Germany invested for the 200,000 jobs saved as estimated by the OECD. That ranks as a far superior investment than the Energy Department program. For the U.S. there are aspects of German reforms such as "kurzarbeit" that bear emulation, with serious questions about the effective use of the U.S. stimulus funds. For the rest of Europe the stingier unemployment benefits, raising the retirement age to 67, and other reforms send a different message. From the average German the message is: we made the tough changes, the rest of Europe cannot expect Germans to pay higher taxes while they put off similiar changes. Italy needs to change its retirement age, just as the Germans have done. As Chancellor Merkel puts it: "People in countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal shouldn't be able to retire earlier than in Germany. It's important for everybody to put in effort to make it roughly equal. Germany will only help when others really make an effort." Which is why Greece, Spain, Italy, even France are faced with making serious changes. This isn't stalling when it comes to euro bonds, from the German perspective. And it isn't about the lack of committment to the idea of a European Union, as all major political parties in Germany, the CDP, the SDP and the Greens, all strongly support the idea of a European Union. ...