LyrArc Article Gist
Bernie Sanders points out in this NYT op-ed the idea that Donald Trump could benefit from the same discontent among working class voters that helped the Leave campaign is a wake up call for the Democratic Party. He calls for global trade and a global economy that works for working class, middle class Americans.  Sanders is pushing for a Democratic Party that embraces the concerns of working class Americans, that understands the impact of factory closings and loss of jobs, of economic uncertainty, of declining incomes and shrinking opportunities.

LyrArc Article Gist
Country Garden is turning into a worse problem than Evergrande. Both housing developer companies are in serious financial problems in China affecting the larger economy. Consider that Country Garden has $286 billion in liabilities and $7 billion in first half losses for 2023. Two years earlier Evergrande went into insolvency over extravagant projects and spending. Country Garden's problems come from a shift away from housing in the country a retreat by investors and buyers. Yet 25% of the economy and the savings of ordinary Chinese are tied up in housing. Local government finances are also strained adding to the debt burden. In the boom years housing created hyper growth, now it is in reverse acting as a drag on the economy.

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. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Mitch McConnell, the U.S. Senate Majority leader, and Speaker Ryan, achieved a win in the U.S. Congress which is expected to set a new trend of bipartisan cooperation, as the House passed the bill in Dec. 2015 for $1.1 trillion spending with a vote of 316 to 113, and the Senate with vote of 65 to 33. The persuasion on the Republican side was based on giving Speaker Ryan a strong hand in negotiations with the White House in 2016. Ryan secured a lifting of the oil export ban for the Republican side in return for flexibility in spending. Ryan deftly sent the issue of Puerto Rico having access to bankruptcy laws to the committe chairmen to come up with a plan in March to get the needed votes. Democrats had pushed for aid to Puerto Rico. Also included in the bill that passed is giving more voice to emerging market countries China and India in the running of the IMF.

LyrArc Article Gist
Italian prime minister, Mario Monti, told the European Parliament in Strasbourg, that he wanted to see more power reside in the European Parliament, that democracy was consistent with integration. German chancellor Merkel says the European Commission should "act more like a government with all the powers," and the European Parliament should become more important than national parliaments. This is the vision of Europe that leaders are supporting in 2012. Monti gave as one major reason for a European governing entity- national governments with their own local interests had created the economic trouble Europe faces today, with Greece being a textbook example of how everything can go wrong. Germany and France, he says relaxed the fiscal discipline rules of the Stability and Growth Pact, and this could happen again.

LyrArc Article Gist
Italy's prime minister, Mario Monti, in an interview with Britain's Guardian newspaper, June 22, 2012, says the detailed blueprint for action will not come out of the meetings in Rome of European leaders at the end of June. But he added: "there will be some strong elements and a short road, I hope, short, a few months, to get from there to the overall project." Separately Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF, said after meeting European financial leaders in Luxembourg: "A determined and forceful move towards complete European monetary union should be reaffirmed in order to restore faith. At the moment, the viability of the European monetary system is questioned." Monti is a former senior EU official, and Christine Lagarde was France's finance minister under president Sarkozy. The difference now compared to meetings in 2010, is the changes in France, Italy, and Spain, and at the IMF, with new leaders Hollande in France, Monti in Italy, and Rajoy in Spain, and Lagarde at the IMF, and a new context in that the austerity policies by themselves are seen as failing to produce the desired results. A further change in the dynamic is the win by Social Democrats in regional elections in Germany and Hollande opening a dialogue with the German Social Democrats. The dialogue with Merkel has been enhanced by appointing seasoned EU officials in key positions in the Hollande administration in anticipation of a tighter fiscal union in the EU....

LyrArc Article Gist
The boost to investor perceptions for India with Modi's election, and to Indonesia with Widodo's election are major changes in the second half of 2014. The first half saw the dented confidence in Argentina, Venezuela, Turkey and South Africa. To this can be added Russia with Putin's response in Ukraine and western sanctions. China with Jinping's response to pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong for restoration of the pledge of free elections by 2017, appears to be losing investor confidence, especially with investors seeing this as adopting the Putin Way. This is happening with a gradual movement towards restoration of trade relations with Iran.

LyrArc Article Gist
A bipartisan compromise in the U.S. Senate provides for a 30 day review of the Iran nuclear deal by Congress. The White House accepted this after enough Democrats favored the idea for the 67 votes to override a presidential veto.

LyrArc Article Gist
A look at the history of the founding of Pakistan and the 60 years since, looking all the way back to Muslim League's activities in the 1930's under Jinnah, and the failure of politicians and the military to help build Pakistan and improve the lives of its people. One by one the generals and the politicians, including Ms Bhutto and Sharif, have all failed and the dim prospects that it would be different this time with a new elected government.

LyrArc Article Gist
On Monday August 8, 2010, the Dow Jones Industrial Averages went down by 634 points and closed below 11,000 points. This is not far from the 10,165 level of the DJIA on August 27, 2010. It was on August 27, 2010 that Fed chairman Ben Bernanke made the speech at the Kansas City Fed's Jackson Hole conference about the strategy for a QE II. Its about the time for this years Jackson Hole conference and the gains in the stock market are melting away. The DJIA closed at 12810 by April 29, 2011, then went below 11,000 by August 8, 2011. With higher inflation the Fed's options are limited.

LyrArc Article Gist
A new study by the Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation shows partisan politics will affect the new president in the U.S. in 2013, to the point of making it difficult to govern.

LyrArc Article Gist
Matthew Slaughter of the Tuck School, Dartmouth, says that the principle of comparitive advantage should determine what America exports and imports. Under comparitive advantage each country concentrates its energies on the particular goods and services that it does better than other countries. Free trade operates under the idea of comparitive advantage, but in practice it is quite different than its textbook economic counterpart. It is constantly changing as new countries or industries in different countries try to upset the existing pattern. Under a textbook example Airbus should not exist because Boeing was the most efficient manufacturer upto that time, and new entrants in a industry are nurtured for years with support from the governments of their countries. And in some situations the governments may exclude certain companies or industries from support such as Komatsu and construction equipment in postwar Japan, and Infosys and software outsourcing in India, and still survive and grow. Under comparitive advantage Japan should still be importing construction equipment from Caterpillar in the US, and there would be no serious competition in that industry. This would work to the detriment of the principle of competition in free trade which is just as important to free trade as the idea of comparitive advantage, with new entrants in an industry upsetting the old way of doing things and creating price/quality improvements. Slaughter simply pulls back off the shelf the old idea of comparitive advantage without seriously considering its real life aspects. Without dealing with trade distortion from currency manipulation, from the impact on jobs, without considering the continuing critical role of manufacturing in developed economies to provide the standards of living for a large middle class, and creating the kind of society that people of developed countries aspire to. He mentions GE's Immelt and the President's Council on Jobs, but makes no effort to engage Immelt 's statement in his recent op-ed article in the Washington Post, that the concept of transitioning from a export-oriented economic powerhouse to a services led consumption based economy could be done without loss of jobs, prosperity and prestige, was fundamentally wrong. He has only one line for manufacturing's role in America's economy. This line says knowledge intensive industries such as education and software are just as important as manufacturing, but fails to mention that manufacturing has received less attention in recent decades. In so doing he is discounting his own profession of concern for the high rate of joblessness in the U.S., and the need for a new focus on manufacturing in the U.S. to reverse that trend. By saying that imports are not a sign of failure but can raise standards of living, and leaving it at that, Slaughter does not acknowledge that consumer debt that US consumers have taken on in the process certainly affects future prospects for the US economy. And he makes no mention of the need for rebalancing the world economy, which is exactly how free trade should work ideally. Countries that have high imports export more to rebalance the world trading system, as currency valuations are allowed to adjust makig their exports more attractive. By not taking into account the realities of free trade, and the need for practical measures to rebalance without policy induced distortions by state run economies, Slaughter ignores the idea of free trade that works as it should and for all countries. The irony is that Immelt's own committment to jobs and competitiveness has been questioned in online blogs and most recently by an editorial in the Wall Street Journal on January 26, 2011, titled "The Misallocators." That editorial refers to the outsize role of GE Capital in GE's earnings during the past decade, and the lack of credibility of a focus on competitiveness and jobs that this creates for GE. It mentions the loss of 34,000 GE jobs in the US during the last decade. ...