World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Cerberus will lose control of GMAC, and this may be a good thing, as decisions at Cerberus and GMAC while under its control were made not in the interests of GM and its customers but of Cerberus,s efforts to extricate itself from its troubled investments. One of these decisions was the decision in September 2008 to raise the credit scores for prospective GM customers to 700 before approving credit. Johnson of Barclays Capital says that in November 2008 only 1% of GM's customers used GMAC financing from a figure that was normally at 45%. During September, October, and when the credit crisis hit hardest in November 2008, GM continued to suffer hugely declining sales, and the decision to cut GM's customers off from GMAC credit must have only aggravated a bad situation from GM's concentration in SUV's and trucks and the tight credit conditions. With the November situation worsened by customers simply postponing car purchases due to concerns about job security (as about 586,000 jobs were lost in November), the credit scores decision could only hurt GM badly. Now Treasury is stepping in with $5 billion to GMAC with another $1 billion to GM to invest in GMAC. The result will be reducing Cerberus control of GMAC from 51% to 14.9% of voting shares and 33% of total equity. Cerberus will also stop providing consulting services to GMAC and the 2 companies will no longer share executives. And the GMAC Board will be reconstituted reducing the number of members affiliated to GM and Cerberus, and adding agovernment appointed board member. The government's $5 billion stake will pay an 8% dividend and it will put the government ahead of Cerberus's common equity holdings. Originally Cerberus and dozens of co-investors paid $7.4 billion for the 51% stake in GMAC in 2006. Now Cerberus plans to distribute piev=ces of it current GMAC stake directly to coinvestors. Cerberus has other troubled investments. With its flagship $4 billion fund down 15.8% as of November 30, 2008, and the firm has suspended withdrawal requests from investors after suffering big losses in October and November on a bet in fixed income markets....
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Its going to be very difficult to adopt the bad bank option in current circumstances, where the banks find their situation continually and rapidly deteriorating with renewed loss of public confidence and collapsing share prices. The efforts with the first TARP under Treasury Secretary Paulson to isolate the toxic assets of banks did not take off and had to be diverted to capital injections for precisely this reason. Banks in November and December 2008 went through a continually escalating problem situation, with losses, collapsing share prices and so on, and the government had no breathing room to develop the bad bank solution. In some cases decisions had to be made in a few days to prevent the collapse of some banking institution like Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley or Citicorp. At the same time its very clear that there can be no restoration of confidence in lending, and no recovery, without lending by banks, without a bad bank to separate these toxic assets from the banking system in the USA. The Swedish and American example in the 1990's of a bad bank, was possible because the banks were either gone bust, or under government ownership. With the banks in private hands, it is somewhere between difficult to impossible to value these toxic assets without serious problems. So nationalizing these banks becomes the only serious option, which would become more acceptable as the crisis unfolds in 2010, and it becomes clear that one way or another the government is guaranteeing these assets. Banks are in reality entirely dependent on the US government for capital and support, and it would not be wise to pretend otherwise. The safest and most direct option would be to mitigate the risks of nationalization, with prudent safeguards, and develop the bad bank option with the government in ownership of banks, in which case the bad bank option can proceed quickly. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As exports and manufacturing decline, China is continuing to maintain high rates of fixed asset investment with the focus now away from factory construction to infastructure like roads, bridges and rails. The National BUreau of Statistics reported that urban fixed asset investment expanded 26.5% in Jan-Feb 2009, compared to 26.1% growth rate for 2008. Fixed asset investment was 42% of GDP in 2008, according to JP Morgan strategist Jing Ulrich. Now it could go up higher to 45%. China's growth has been off-balance say experts, now it is becoming even more so. As long as factory construction as fixed asset investment a lot of new jobs were being created in the manufacturing sector, now these jobs are not being created. China's small and mid sized companies that generated about half of the 4.42 trillion GDP, like GenTech of Mr Yu profiled in the other linked article in WSJ, and which created 90% of the new jobs, are now contracting. With smaller private consumption, and the efforts to improve the safety net and provide universal medical care inadequate and coming late, domestic demand will not help balance the economy and boost manufacturing. Private consumption is only 35% of GDP in China, a much lower percentage than India. The comparable figures for the US are 71%, UK 64%, Australia, Canada, France, Germany and Japan 57%. The balance is now heavily skewed towards government spending. Investment spending from HongKong and Taiwan, the home bases of industrialists with made for export industries inceased investment by 1% in Jan-Feb of 2009 from the year earlier, compared to 17% growth in all of 2008. And foriegn funded companies have comparable figures of 2% for Jan-Feb 2009 compared to 15% growth in all of 2008. Real estate investment growth also fell to 1% for Jan-Feb 2009 compared to 21% for all of 2008. In short the other pillars of growth in housing, and investments from Hong Kong, Taiwan and the West are declining. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Consumer spending boom is over and when you look at the detail in the government numbers on spending consumer spending is already declining. So the idea that consumer stocks like P&G, J&J and Coca Cola and Kimberly Clark will hold up better than other stocks is a mirage. Just this week the idea that stocks of companies doing a lot of business overseas and in infrastructure will hold up better turned out to be an illusion as GE fell by 12% in one day, April 11, 2008, because of earnings shortfalls in its finance units as a result of the new climate in the credit and financial markets. Consumers spent heavily. If consumer spending had continued the trends from the 1990's then it would have gone up $3 trillion less today. It would have been 70% ratio of household debt to GDP, right now its close to 97% of GDP. Some of this $3 trillion estimate of Business Week economist Mandel using Fed data will be what the American consumer will be dealing with as he reduces spending in the years ahead. According to OECD data the ratio of household liabilities to disposable income (charts P11 of BW, April 21, 2008) is close to 1.0 in France and Germany which is contrary to what one would expect considering the more conservative spending there especially Germany, exceeds 1.0 in Japan, and far exceeds 1.0 in the US, and in Canada aabout 1.3, with the highest ratio in Britain at a whopping 1.7, using a ballpark view of the charts. This suggests that Britain is way off the charts in spending, see the link to this so expect spending to be hit hardest in Britain and with financial services being a bigger part of the GDP and the economy in Britain expect higher unemployment in Britain than the rest of Europe....
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The best that can be said about all the efforts to stabilize the housing markets is that they help in the context of the credit crisis that hit the economy hard with the Bear Stearns crisis and help to provide an orderly retreat for housing prices and ways to soften the blow to homeowners and lenders caught up in the wave of foreclosures. But housing prices themselves have not declined anywhere near what one would expect. In fact BW, p17, April 7, 2008 shws percentage changes for existing homes from Feb 2007 to Feb 2008 with data from the National Association of Realtors. And they are surprising when you consider sales for the northeast down 26% and prices up slightly 0.4%. Elsewhere the sales are down 29% in the Western states for a 13% price decline, sales down 20% for a 7% price decline in the Midwestern states, and sales are down 22% for a 9% decline in the Southern states. Jobless rates are 3.9% in Austin, Texas and Birmingham, Alabama and only Detroit, St Louis and Cleveland have jobless rates above 6%. What this suggests is that the unemployment situation has not seen the brunt of this credit tightening and drop in capital investment. As house prices have not declined much declines over 10% mostly in the western states and places like Detroit but not in the northeast and across the south, and unemployment still low across many regional communities, consumption spending has not seen the brunt of this credit tightening. Once tightened credit conditions hit payrolls as companies cut their workforce and unemployment moves up then expect to see greater housing price declines as more houses go into foreclosures, and then expect consumption spending to feel the impact which would reduce sales and further trim payrolls as companies run their factories at less and less production capacity. This sequence would continue and bring the economic crisis to more and more parts of the country in a manner that we have hardly see upto this point. What we have seen is the unfolding of a collapse of mortgage securities firms and of mortgage securites insurance providers like ACA, and with it the huge writedowns about $150 billion taken by the investment houses and the banks. And this has happened as a wave of foreclosures took place in 2006. And the collapse of Bear Stearns with the effects felt in global stock markets. In the communities themselves in the areas of consumption spending and in jobs the conditions will only now begin to be felt and the real impact not felt till the end of 2008 and into 2009 with the Fed action to shore up confidence adding several months in slowing the process. See the link to BW, Bernanke the Reluctant Revolutionary, where the BW estimate is that Americans took on about $3 trillion in additional debt between 2000 and 2006 from what they would have taken if they had followed the trajectory of spending patterns that had prevailed upto that point, with their recent free spending ways. It would take abot 3 to 4 years conservatively for Americans to work down all that debt. Another way of saying this is that consumption spending is going to take a big hit and with it sales of companies and consequently higher unemployment and more part time labor force with less benefits, which would tend to depress consumption even more. The winds of housing, credit, consumption and unemployment would all hit the economy in about 12 months time. Credit will further tighten as BW estimates about $130 billion of additional writedowns still expected....

The Great (Double) Game

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Thomas Friedman sees the WikiLeaks information showing America paying the Pakistan army and intelligence services to be two-faced, to both fight with the Americans and at the same time support the insurgents fighting the Americans. He sees America being made the sucker in this game. And without the resources to change the region and transform it, America needs a better approach that does not waste its resources and energies.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Interview with Levinson of Genentech and answers to a wide range of questions about ther drug discovery process at Genentech, the cost of Avastin to treat cancer, the long years taken to develop the drug, the development and pricing of Lucentis for macular degeneration from the basic process of blocking the VEGF protein that helps the macular degeneration develop. The reasons for the pricing of Avastin- $55,000 for one year. And of Lucentis $2000 for one shot and the possible equivalence of Avastin and Lucentis so that doctors can take a small fractional dose of Avastin and use it in a tiny opthalmic syringe for cost of $50. The research budget of $1.86 billion. And the philosophy of Levinson about attracting the best scientists to Genentech by giving them opportunities as he puts it for "doing great science." And his emphasis on making Genentech a great place to work. Genentech was on Fortune's top twenty list 4 years in a row and No 1 in 2007 and No 2 in 2008 behind Google. Can Roche keep this up without Levinson and his team and the culture they have fostered, and the way they have created a great place to work ? ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Why polluting industries and colluding local government officials who are judged on the rate of economic growth achieved have come together and become entrenched to thepoint where its hard for the central government to implement pollution control measures. Deng's response to a sluggish socialist bureaucracy was to give power to local government officals to promote growth and to be judged on that basis. The environmental ministry and the environmental protection departments are very small and lack the resources to control these industries. And NGO's and the informed public and citizens are powerless to demand change as they are seen by the government as risking social stability by risking growth. After the East Asian crisis China anticipating a slowing down in competition with recovering Asian economies pushed harder for more economic growth. As a result production of steel set new records and the addition of power generating capacity each year surpassed the total power generation of countries like Britain and France.But this power generation does not use the modern technology available as it is costlier and takes longer to build. So a lot of short run decisions are being made in the interests of growth. An effort to introduce Green GDP backed by President Hu Jintao was dropped after it ran into a lot of resistance. Using this about 3 points of GDP were deducted from the 10% growth as environmental cost. This was based on modest environmental costs estimates and did not take into account the entire cost of pollution to health and the environment. China's own environmental experts think that Western estimates of environmental costs are if anything on the conservative side as they are based on models used in the west and conditions in China have little precedent in the scale and range of environmental degradation. Coal is burned to produce two thirds of the energy and uses older technology for power generation, it is a big polluter of the environment. And the modest energy efficiency goals set by the central government are not being met as a result China is already expected to be consuming as much energy in 2010 as it was expected by its own planners to be consuming in 2020. To informed outsiders it appears that the polutting process is systemic in its nature and only political change that allows people who are suffering the worst effects of this pollution to make their voice heard, can lead to reversing the trends that have been set in place from the Deng period of economic change that started in the 80's. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Defense Secretary Panetta says the U.S. will hand over provinces to Afghan government forces and complete the transition to a training role in 2013. This is part of the withdrawal of NATO forces and comes after France's president Sarkozy proposed reducing France's committment in Afghanistan. Panetta said he would tell NATO partners- "We all went in together and we will go out together." This also fits in with the changing picture in the region, poor relations with Pakistan, sentiment in the U.S. and Europe focussed on the economic crisis, and direct talks with the Taliban for a post-NATO settlement of the conflict.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bruni on the view that Obama has squandered his advantages of oratorical transcendence, poetry, serious thoughtfulness, in the U.S. presidential election of 2012. He does not mention the lack of a serious plan to turn the economy around, high rate of joblessness and declining incomes that are a basic issue in the 2012 election, and how oratorical transcendence has little correlation with getting the right policies implemented. The Des Moines Register's support in 2008 put Obama on the road to the presidency in 2008 with a victory in the Iowa primary. In 2012 it gave its endorsement to Romney to give him a chance to correct the problems with the economy and to do this with a new effort to forge the bipartisan consensus missing in the Obama first term.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A brief history of Xinjiang which translates as New Frontier in Chinese. Its the western frontier of China and a vast area that comprises the desert region of the Tarim basin. It has 13 sizeable ethnic minority groups and borders eight countries. Because of the lack of irrigation technologies these arid expanses were settled very late in history, says Victor Mair, a Professor of Chinese language and literature at the University of Pennsylvania. Even the Uighurs were tribes from the Mongolian steppes who settled Xinjiang in the 10th century. For China it was mostly aplace for havin border military garrisons. Around the 10th century and the Tang dynasty in China, trade on the Silk Road- with places like Kashgar oasis towns on the fringes of the desert as hubs- was at its height. It was not until 1760 under the Quing dynasty of ethnic Manchus, that this area was annexed by CHina and serious effort made to settle it with demobilized troops. A civil and military administration encouraged immigration, say scholars Millward and Perdue in a 2004 book of essays by 16 scholars, "Xinjiang: China's Muslim Borderland." About 50,000 demobilized troops were offered benefits, seeds and land if they stayed. A similiar situation seems to have been repeated after Mao annexed Xinjiang in 1949. In the early 1950's the Chinese government established the Xinjiang Province Production and COnstruction Corps, which was setup to manage large farms and construction projects called bingtuan and provide jobs for demobilized troops. The bingtuan are profitable enterprises and an estimated one of every six people in Xinjiang are employed in bingtuan, or 1.3 million people. THe HAn who were 6% of the population in 1949, now comprise 40% of the 20 million population of Xinjiang. Another source of employment is in the oil and gas industry, with the Communist party secretary of Xinjiang for the last 15 years being aprotege of President Hu Jintao, from his days in the Communist Youth League, coming from the oil industry province of of Shandong. These jobs are mostly all reserved for Chinese which causes resentment among the local Uighurs. Wong quotes a Uighur university student as saying, who is the foreigner here and whose culture, language and way of life should be protected. This may be the crux of the grievances of the Uighurs, as their use of the language and religious practice is restricted, and they feel they are second class citizens in their own land. Other articles in the NYT and Economist go to point out that the links with international terrrism are not a source of the problem, and the unrest among the Uighurs is more about a feeling of loss of culture, language, religion and identity, and jobs. And the idea that the best way to work with minorities, or regions with different language, religion and culture, just as the British did in South Asia and India is doing now is through tolerance. See the links to NYT and Michael Wines on 7/11/2009 about the Communist party secretary for Xinjiang, Wang Lequang, whose policies in Xinjiang and now in Tibet through a protege, may be worsening this situation. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The World bank president Robert Zoellick in an interview with Sudeep Reddy of the Wall Street Journal. He says its frustrating to see Europe respond to problems in banking, sovereign debt and competitiveness that have a chance to work, but only to find that the action is a bit late and a bit short every time. He says the Germans are right in insisting that credit cannot be given away freely, and that reforms have to be made. Yet these reforms in the case of Spain and Italy to increase competitiveness will take time and in the meantime both countries will need bridge financing. A direct recapitalization of European banks by the European Financial Stability Facility is needed to avoid this slow and continuous decline in confidence from negative news and uncertainty. Because the problem now is of a longer term nature with debt issues that will take time to resolve and energy price volatility, Zoellick says simply doing short term stimulus and monetary will not work, and a longer term plan needs to be implemented. Zoellick supported the China Development Report of the World Bank and China's DRC which called for a shift in the economy away from reliance on state owned companies and heavy infrastructure spending. Here he says the new stimulus plan for China was necessary because of slowing growth. Yet he hopes China's leaders keep this in mind as they develop solutions for the long term that avoid the rampant credit expansion and investment of the 2008 Stimulus, and come up with a new policy mix....
New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks says one of the good things about the ugly election campaign of 2016 and its depletion of moral capital, is the way people are responding to it by finding their voice for something better and uplifting. He cites Michelle Obama as one example of someone who acts not as a politician but as a mother in her behaviour and talk. He praises Hillary Clinton for adopting this Michelle tone and giving 3 answers he calls great in the final debate with Trump. The answers came on the questions about Trump and denigration of women,  on the contrast between the experience gained on a television show "Apprentice," and the experience of Clinton as senator and secretary of state. Brooks says they were given in a gradual understated manner, showing moral sentiment and a quiet contempt, similar to how a mother or parent would respond and not a politician. Another way to look at it is that the contrast was so great between her and her opponent's experience and respect for parenthood, and the campaign so long with so many people who had shown indifference when they should have known and done better, that Hillary Clinton simply stood her own ground based on her own Protestant Methodist faith and conviction.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The first significant action to help homeowners threatened with foreclosure comes from Sheila Bair, Chairman of the Federal Deposit insurance Corporation, one of the few people after Bernanke and Paulson who have shown initiative and foresight in the current crisis. Bernanke and Paulson had the foresight to open the Fed lending window to investment firms like Lehman Brothers and others but little has been done for homeowners to have significant impact. When interviewed on television in the days surrounding the Bear Stearns crisis Sheila has shown a good grasp of the issues and courage to take the initiative. This action is similiar in line to what Martin Feldstein has suggested on the pages of the WSJ for some time now. Martin wanted the Federal government to step in to loan homeowners the 20% of their outstanding loan and work towards bringing the homeowners payment to an affordable sum. According to Feldstein's calculation this would be about the right amount as a percentage of their loan so that homeowners rationally would not be better off walking away from the loan as the best possible decision under the circumstances. If the rational option was taken under a scenario that homeowners would get no direct help here is what would happen even though it may be intuitively read in one's mind. Homeowners would walk away in increasing numbers, it would become the popular option, one that has happened in prior housing crises in Colorado for example but this time it would be spread out across America, making it dangerous. This would launch a downward spiral or cycle in which the more homeowners walk way, or default the more house prices drop, and the more house prices drop a new group of homeowners who previously had enough equity in the house now because of the last price drop enter the category of homeowners who would be better off just walking away as a rational option. During the next wave this gorup would default and set the spiral or cycle moving again to lead to further price declines and another group of homeowners finding not enough equity in their homes to justify making payments and this group would walk away. At each turn of this spiral another cycle would be set in motion which is why it is so dangerous once it gets started, and the need for timely but also well thought out plan and good execution. This cycle is that of the economic system as a whole. As house prices drop at each turn of this cycle, it would have a serious impact on consumption for an already indebted American consumer. A drop in consumption means fewer product purchases by consumers, and the falling demand means factories would close as companies consolidate operations around the remaining factories to keep capacity utilization at reasonable levels, and this would mean layoffs and cuts in investment and other spending. The layoffs in turn would add another layer of homeowners leaving their homes through foreclosures adding to the pool of homeowners who have left their homes, and adding to the downward pressure on house prices. The pickup in inflation would bite at exactly the worst time as this would mean consumers would have to spend even more carefully. The price of oil which normally would respond to changes such as a fleet of cars with higher mileage on American roads would take a longer time to respond as this fleet change would take a few years to occur. It would respond to lower demand for oil in American factories but the considerable demand in Asia and other countries where the economies are likely to slow down but still be growing at rates to accomodate the large number of people who have not benefited from the market economy, would make the price decline in oil a gradual affair. The weaker dollar would add to the price of imports adding to the inflation. This bite from inflation would lower consumption even further in the economic cycle. And this would mean lower production in factories and even more layoffs at the next turn of the economic cycle. The Federal Reserve would find itself having difficult choices between maintaining confidence in the dollar, for which Capman and McKinnon argue on the pages of the WSJ recently and lowering rates but not achieving much in terms of stimulating either consumption or investment as this would take time to work itself out and all the Fed could achieve by its interest rate making tool is to buy time to weather these adjustments in an orderly manner. There is almost a consensus among experts that interest rate reductions in the current climate of inflationary movements in prices and the current currency exchange rates moving towards a loss of confidence in the dollar is something to be done very carefully and each action taken only with careful understanding of the possible consequences. A look at the proposal itsel shows that it gets around the whole issue of moral hazard by having the cost paid for in this manner. The mortgage investors will pay for the 5 years of interest on the 20% of the loan the government provides. The homeowner takes over after that. The mortgage investors cannot add deferred interest, prepayment penalties or other ways to make the homeowner pay some of the interest charges. And the homeowners payment has to be afforadable so mortgage investors have to show that the payment is not more than 35% of income of the homeownercalled the debt to income ratio (DTI). And only homeowners with mortgage payments above 40% DTI are eligible. And the government would raise the money needed through a $50 billion offering. To show there is no moral hazard that is the government bailing out any of the parties involved, the government will get back all of its money or intends to do so, the government will have the first rights to the money should a home foreclose and before anybody else is paid. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WikiLeaks leak of information about the Pakistan Intelligence Services's (ISI) long standing collaboration with the insurgents and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The terms of the debt restructuring deal with the bond swap in Greece become clear on March 9, 2012. In the deal with private bondholders -using collective action clauses to force remaining bondholders into the deal- about 96% of the 206 billion euros of Greece's bonds will be exchanged. Private bondholders held out throughout most of 2011, delaying the inevitable as Greece's economic situation became increasingly hopeless. This created a logjam with the German government, which insisted on serious private sector participation and bondholder haircut as the cost of poor lending decisions of the French, German and other European banks that made loans to Greece out of proportion of the ability of Greece to payback loans. Charles Dallara of the Institute of International Finance, negotiating for European banks, offered a 10% average loss on the bonds in July 2009. It was not until German Chancellor Merkel told Dallara at a late night meeting on October 27, 2011: "this is my last offer," for a 50% loss on the face value of the bonds, was agreement reached. The Greek debt swap that now takes place will give private bondholders a loss of 53.5% from the face value of 200 billion euros of bonds that they hold. The new Greek bonds issued in place of the old bonds include short-term bonds issued by the eurozone rescue fund at 15% of the face value of the old bonds, and a series of Greek bonds with maturity ranging from 11-30 years valued at 31.5% of the face value of old bonds. That even this 53.5% bondholder loss will not be adequate, as Greece's economy looks irretrievably damaged as it spirals downwards, is shown by the value of these bonds already trading in a hypothetical "gray market." The new 30 year bond is quoted at 17 cents and the 11 year bond at 22 cents. The questions remain about the stalling by the banks in taking the losses earlier- was this the wisest move considering the losses beyond Greece as the eurozone economy as a whole has suffered from the prolonged negotiations stretching through 2011, lurching from one crisis to the next? Even if the stalling was designed to give time for banks to repair their balance sheets, was this the best strategy, considering the damage inflicted on European economic growth. John Taylor of Stanford points out that the European banks delayed the unavoidable serious debt restructuring for too long, when insolvency was the real issue not illiquidity, and exaggerated the effect of contagion from the beginning- in John Taylor, WSJ, 2/22/2012, A Better Grecian Bailout. And John Cochrane of the University of Chicago, points out that French and German governments if they bailout French and German banks should do so openly and frankly rather than cover this up as bailouts of countries, because this would lead to serious questions about the poor lending decisions of the European banks and government supervision of the banks- in Cochrane, WSJ, 12/2/2010, 'Contagion' and other Euro Myths. As early as Feb. 2010, Cochrane was suggesting the forced exchange of new bonds with long debt maturities for exisiting bonds with short debt maturities, as short term debt was the major issue here. ...

The Obama Doctrine and Iran

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama invited NYT's columnist Thomas Friedman to the White House for an interview on Saturday afternoon April 4, 2015. Here Friedman gives president Obama's response to his questions, and Obama's concerns about the heated rhetoric in the U.S. and Israel on the negotiations with Iran detracting and distracting from his key goals of protecting U.S. interests and Israel. On the Sunni states, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, Obama points out that there are some tough conversations needed about changes inside their societies which pose a greater threat to the governments than Iran. Obama says he understands perfectly that Israel and the Jewish people after their experience of the last hundred years are determined to not let Iran develop a nuclear weapon, and their right to be concerned that the agreement could let Iran clandestinely develop one. Obama says the verification is extensive and covers any facility in Iran, any suspicion about secret facilities, yet it leaves the subsequent decisions if Iran created difficulties, to a international body over which the U.S., UK, France, have no control. This is a principal issue for critics of the negotiated agreement. No mention is made of why Iran simply discarded the option of sending the atomic material to Russia to be processed into nuclear rods for the Bushehr nuclear plant built by Russia only a few days before the final outline was developed. And why the U.S., with allies Germany, France, UK and Japan, did not offer the Iranians an economic aid package if needed in return for the billions Iranians invested for that atomic material, to ensure that the atomic materials are shipped out of the country- to create a nuclear agreement that would be credible to all parties. The economic aid would benefit Iran modernize its oil industry, including refining operations, meet basic import needs, and provide tangible proof to the Iranian people of our best intentions for the future, that president Obama strongly espouses in the interview. The interview does show the quandary president Obama faces in Iran for strong action, that is a result of failed policies with Iran since the Eisenhower administration's intervention 1953 during the Cold War that displaced the elected government of Mosaddegh in Iran and setup the Shah's regime in 1956, the support of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in the war against Iran, which Obama mentions in this intervew. In the light of the repeated failures of the U.S. policies a Democratic party leader faces increasing reservations for taking strong action against Iran's development of nuclear weapons capabilities, preferring to exhaust every diplomatic channel, and take risks in the hope that time will give the Iranian people an opportunity to to reintegrate in the global community and pursue the peaceful development of nuclear energy. This strain in president Obama's thinking is evident throughout the interview with Friedman. Other aspects of president Obama's policy in the Middle East shared in the interview are about supporting the Sunni states in some areas, and Iran in some areas, at the same time as the nuclear issue is "put in a box" and separated from the regional conflicts. Friedman presents this as the Obama doctrine, yet it appears to be coming after a series of improvisations in foreign policy following a failure to act in 2011-2013, when the "once in a lifetime" opportunities presented by the Arab Spring were not taken up by the Obama administration, leading to the region's current disintegration....
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Reinhart and Rogoff say it takes over 7 years for the economy to recover completely from financial crises. This is the lesson from other financial crises in the last century. Economic contraction lasts about 2 years. Housing prices from peak to trough takes about 6 years. Unemployment takes longer to heal in developed countries. Unemployment goes up by about 7 percentage points, and increasing unemployment lasts an average of 5 years. And the debt that builds up from lower tax revenues and more spending needed in stimulus acts to slow growth. The big message from other crises studied by the two American economists is that debt tends to go up by about 85% in real terms during the first 3 years of a banking crisis. They says this means an additional $8-9 trillion for the U.S. A key point they make is that restructuring is necessary for the financial system, and the U.S. needs to allow financial institutions to be restructured through accelerated bankruptcy, temporary receivership, and only afterwards recapitalizing and reprivatizing....

Rule of Four

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Carmen Reinhart formerly at the Federal Reserve, says after a severe banking crisis it takes about 4 years to see a return to normal growth. With the current crisis having other facets like the overextended consumer intertwined with banking crisis, it is likely that it would take this long. He cautions business not to be overoptimistic.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration was slow to respond to the democracy movement in Libya. France's Sarkozy and Britain's Cameron led the effort to support the Libyan rebels with airpower, no -fly-zones, and military assistance. As the Assad regime uses fighter planes, helicopter gunships and artillery against its own people and heavily populated areas, the Europeans distracted by the economic crisis, and the Obama administration following its earlier pattern of slow response in supporting democracy efforts, have failed to take an active role in helping the democracy movement in Syria.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. unemployment rate drops from 5.8% in Nov. 2014 to 5.6% in Dec. 2014, according to the Labor Department. But hourly earnings failed to register growth. Average hourly earnings declined in Dec. 2014 from the prior month, and increased by only 1.7% over the prior year, just a little bit above the inflation rate of 1.3%. Overall 2.95 million jobs were created in 2014. Yet 8.7 million Americans looking for a job could not find one. The U.S. Federal Reserve officials see tepid wage growth as a sign of slack in the labor market. The Dec. 16-17 Fed meeting minutes show that "most participants saw no clear evidence of a broad based acceleration in wages." The labor force participation rate is also stuck at a low level- 62.7% in Dec. 2014. The U-unemployment rate that includes involuntary part time workers and workers marginally attached to the labor force was at 11.2% in Dec. 2014. This includes workers too discouraged to look for work and people working parttime because they could not get full time work. It is steadily dropping from 16.6% in 2010 to 14.4% by 2012, 13.1% by 2013, and now 11.2% in 2014, showing steady improvement but still high....
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A study by the Pew Research center shows minorities are the ones hardest hit in the millions of foreclosures taking place in the US. Counties with black or Latino majorites and the New York region are hit severely. What appeared to be a boon five years ago as black home ownership rose sharply after decades of discriminatory lending and zoning practices, has now turned into a curse with families losing homes to foreclosure, neighborhoods seeing increasing crime and declining house values, and renters being evicted. Lenders like Mozilo's Countrywide and other similiar lenders simply used the idea of home ownership as a flag to get political support for a wild west in lending practices, which allowed predatory lending to take place in the deregulatory atmosphere of the time. See the link to the impact on minorities. Nowhere has it been shown more pointedly that prudence and character in leaders in all areas is the essential conditon for progress, making free enterprise a necessary condition but subject to this essential condition, than in the way the housing and foreclosure crisis is hitting the American and the world economy in so many ways. This is evident in neighborhoods like this one on 145th st. in Jamaica, Queens, whaere black households making more than $68,000 a year are five times as likely to hold high interest subprime mortgages as whites of similiar incomes. Defaults occur three times as often in minority census tracts as mostly white ones. And 85% of the worst hit neighborhoods have majority of black and Latino homeowners. Which may also explain why there is not agroundswell of support for serious government foreclosure prevention measures like bankruptcy legislation and other legislation such as that suggested by Martin Feldstein and others for homeowners nearly or already under water, when faced with fierce lobbying by the banks and financial institutions. Consumer advocates say years ago many banks drew red lines around black neighborhoods and refused to lend, then as deregulation became the rage five years ago, these banks under unscruplous leaders targeted these neighborhoods for subprime lending. A dozen banks and lending companioes that made big profits from subprime loans accounted for half the loans given to the New York region'sblack middle -income borrowers in 2005 and 2006, a case of reverse redlining that the N.A.A.C.P. says in its lawsuit against these lenders. Housing and Urban Development Sec. Shaun Donovan, in aspeech to New York University said that 33% of the subprime mortgages given out in New York City in 2007, went to borrowers with credit scoresthat should have qualitifed them for conventional prevailing-rate loans. For anyone taking out a $350,000 mortgage, says the NYT, a difference of three percentage points - a typical spread between conventional and subprime loans- tacks on $272,000 in additional interest over the life of a 30 year loan. ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us