LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt points out in the NYT that Hillary Clinton actually won in the popular vote by a substantial margin, by more than 2 million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points. He says that Democrats need to pay more attention to the working class in midwestern states- the job losses, crumbling infrastructure, and the plight of communities such as Detroit, Michigan which suffered through the bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM, and again with the foreclosure crisis, the financial crisis of the City of Detroit. With a similar situation in the neighboring states of Wisconsin and Ohio, in places like Toledo and other parts of communities facing industrial decline. While the Silicon Valley centred region powered the economy in California, and the financial industry and real estate powered New York, older midwestern communities never really recovered from a long decline stretching over 2 decades. The result was the loss of faith in Democrats among union workers and young people, leading to the loss of Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan. For most of its history the Democratic Party was based on its union and working class base including a large number of white voters. Only under Obama because of his unique candidacy was the coalition so dependent on the minorities vote. Before minorities were part of the Democratic coalition, but not in the way under the Obama candidacy. A return to its historic and normal base among whites in unions and working class communities, liberals, minorities, is a way to go back to the historic and natural base of Democratic support. In a sense dependence on tech communities for election funding and the tech booms, globalization, may have distorted Democrats sense of their historic role as champions of the working class and middle class communities throughout the country. There is now an opportunity to restore this lost mission of protecting the interests of the middle and working class who have seen huge drop in net worth as reported by Janet Yellen of the Federal Reserve at the Inequality Conference on October 17, 2014-"62 million households with a net worth of $11,000 for the year 2013." Poorly covered in the media and not made the utmost priority by Democrats (or Republicans). In the words of Janet Yellen, this was in the past several decades "the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality since the Great Depression." She added the shocking words "by some estimates, income and wealth inequality near their highest levels in the past hundred years, and probably much higher than much of American history before then." Even discussion in the media goes back to the Obama coalition and treats it as a way forward for Democrats, when history shows it was different and the situation described by Yellen calls for a serious response. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein points out that Obama economic plans missed the real target, which was on the home front where it came down to addressing the problems of 15 million homeowners under water- with mortgages exceeding the value of their homes- and lack of solutions to deal with the $1.5 trillion in troubled commercial real estate loans. Administration plans really did not help more than a couple of hundred thousand homeowners to reduce their monthly mortgage payments. Getting banks to start lending again by selling impaired loans to nonbank investors, also failed to work, as banks were reluctant to do so and reduce their accounting capital. Health care legislation simply distracted attention from the real problems. See the links to Feldstein's repeated insistence that the new administration (and even during the late stages of the Bush administration) focus on these problems. Health care legislation that passed simply would not control the increase in health care spending, that the public correctly perceived as the real problem if the other health care issues were to be resolved. Instead Obama's health care legislation offered to increase the deficit to unsustainable levels, with no solutions to more pressing home front problems in sight. Feldstein, is one of the most eminent US economists....

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial in September 2014 says many of president Obama's statements and decisions on Obama healthcare legislation and implementation, Syria, NSA and privacy, the Middle East, Russia, showed poor judgement. It refers to a piece by Peter Baker in NYT where it is said that Obama mocked how people see him as too professorial, diffident, in a sarcastic statement. The problem says WSJ is that president Obama has poor judgement. Being academically credentialed and quick grasp of subject matter is not the same as having the ability to discern things, instinct and grasp of the essence of the matter. George Bush senior had a long resume and was academically credentialed. By comparison Truman had a short resume and was not academically credentialed or quick with data and analysis. He had something more essential and important- a discerning mind and grasp of the larger picture, as well as listening abilities for exceptional advisors such as General Marshall and Acheson he gathered around him....

LyrArc Article Gist
David Leonhardt on the policy errors of the Obama administration in managing the economy. Why he asks did the Obama administration not take the risks it took for "undeserving" recipients in the auto industry to provide significant help to GM and Chrysler and at the same not provide large scale and situation changing help to millions of mortgage holders who were under water? The housing crisis with millons of foreclosures depressing home prices has played a significant part in the lagging economic recovery. He points out that Obama economic advisors had read Rogoff and Reinhart's book "This Time Its Different," about the longer times it takes for a economic recovery after a housing bubble, and still made the mistake of believing economists who suggested that the stimulus by itself would be sufficient and that recovery was underway in 2010. Others in the Democratic party had pointed to the lack of focus on unemployment by the Obama administration. Why were such voices not heard?

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the New York Times is strongly critical of former president Barack Obama for accepting $400,000 in speaking fees from Wall Street for a single speech. It says the news is causing people to question the ideas and words presented by Obama in his books about the dangers of losing sight of the interests of ordinary people. It gives the impression says the NYT, that Obama is cashing in like everybody else, and that his talk was empty. The editorial says the millions raised by Hillary Clinton led to her defeat in the election. Obama is reported to plan a foundation with the work of training a new generation of political leaders. This NYT editorial says it would be better to stay true to vision and purpose, to walk the talk for president Obama, especially now that a recent poll shows two thirds of voters, including about half of Democrats say that the Democratic Party is out of touch with the interests of the American People. By associating this closely with wealthy donors leading Democrats contributed to this. During a period when some of the remarkable achievements of the last fifty years such as the European Union are being called into question, when ordinary working people, young people and older people are struggling, this is all the more a tone deaf approach by politicians. The idea of helping train a new generation of political leaders through a foundation sounds bizarre in this context, and seems to suggest politicians believe there is always a solution through marketing their audacity and money.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Georgetwon University Center on Education and the Workforce 2015 report shows the different college majors, annual wages and lifetime earnings based on Census Bureau data. Engineering comes first, followed by computers. Advanced graduate degrees make a large difference in earnings in health sciences. A lot depends on the standing in the class with top 25% of the class in finance having much higher earnings. A lot also depends on the individual. Employment opportunities may be lacking even if annual wages are high, as in architecture.

LyrArc Article Gist
The new head of U.S. President Obama's Council of Economic Advisors, is Princeton economics professor, Alan Krueger. Kueger is known as the academic's academic, whose office is located with other labor scholars in the Princeton library. His work has focussed on what he calls "Rockenomics" (research about which bands do well and the reasons for this), on commuting, on studies such as the one with a suggestive title, "Sorting in the Labor Market: Do Gregarious Workers Flock to Interactive Jobs?" His appointment suggests the Obama administration is looking at no new policy initiatives, focussing on an incrementalist approach in policy actions, with the hope that he can get both political parties behind smaller changes. Putting a micro-specialist in charge at a time of huge volatility in financial markets shows an administration that is likely to continue the status quo with small changes till the presidential elections in 2012- the opposite of strong action because the Obama adminstration has no idea how to turn this economy around and only hopes things will change....

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein's thoughts in April 2009, on Treasury's Public-Private Investment Plan. First, he says this plan will only remove $500 billion of impaired assets. The banks he says now own $3 billion of residential mortgages, $1.5 trillion of corporate real-estate loans, and $1 trillion of consumer debt. Not all of this is impaired but the banks will have to sell much more than $500 billion to regain confidence in their solvency. And with one third of all residential mortgages exceeding the value of the houses, and thie many homeowners under water, likely to default, the negative feedback loop of foreclosures begetting falling prices begetting foreclosures, threatens the whole effort to shore up the defences. If no workable solution is executed quickly to prevent this then even larger pools of mortgage debt will be impaired irretrievably. Feldstein suggests that the Obama administration seriously look at his plan suggested in March 2008 to provide government loans at low rates of interest like 1- 2% for 20% of the principal amount of the mortgage and then reduce the mortgage principal by 20%, thus keeping millions of homeowners above water. But this needs to be done quickly. All voluntary efforts have failed and have become asmokescreen for banks and lobbying groups with support from Congress to make it appear that this problem is being addressed. Thirdly Feldstein says that if banks sell these impaired mortgage assets at a loss- say 40-60 cents on the dollar on the upside with government and the FDIC picking up alot of the risk and financing for private investors under the new plan- they will now have to show the loss whereas they could have previously shown these assets at unrealistic price levels but still not taking losses. This might push banks into insolvency, so banks will need more injection of capital by the government to make this possible. What are the risks in this situation? Without an effective plan to prevent the negative feedback loop of foreclosure waves and falling houseprices, the quantity of impaired assets will simply grow larger. In effect even if some private investors take out some of the impaired assets from the banking system, it is possible that a new set of assets equal to or larger than these assets that are taken out are added to impaired assets in the banking system as house prices fall steeply from new foreclosures. That only means the economy is in the same hole as before, or in a slightly larger one, even with all the well intentioned steps. At some point the private enterprise argument has to be seen in the correct light. It is not that there is any argument that private enterprise can function better or far superior, it is only that the banks as private enterprises are in such an enormously stressed situation that the bank executive's cannot execute a way out of this mess. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jerry Brown is likely to get a fourth term as Governor of California. Brown's focus is on a Water initiative, Proposition 1, and an initiative for a rainy day fund, Proposition 2, for the state. His campaign spending of only $500,000 suggests that he prefers to make his legacy with the right actions for the state. Proposition 1 addresses the water problems in the state which is facing a long drought. It is a water bond that will invest $7.1 billion on water storage and recycling, watershed management and loans to regional water management projects. Proposition 2 addresses the second major problem in the state of California- the failure to build enough reserves to tide over periods of economic downturn. It requires the state to set aside 1.5% of general fund revenue and a larger percentage of capital gains taxes till the rainy day fund reaches 10% of the state general fund or $15 billion for 2014. Brown is unique among the nation's governors for his ability to stay away from politics and ideologies to take a common sense approach to the state's major problems. As a former governor he returned to office decades later with experience that few governors have, enabling him to carry on the legacy of his father, a former governor, to make a huge contribution to the state. Fed chairman Volcker has started an initiative to encourage public service in the U.S., Jerry Brown has shown how it is done. Bringing the experience, the courage for needed action, coupled with the humility of outstanding public servants....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Fiscal Survey of States, a report put out by the National Governor's Association, says that Medicaid will become an increasing burden on state budgets as help from the federal government declines. The report points out that state general fund revenue remains $21 billion below 2008 levels, just as the states prepare for less federal help.

LyrArc Article Gist
Applebaum talks to two researchers at the University of Chicago and Princeton, Prof. Sufi and Prof. Mian, on the record of U.S. president Obama and Fed chairman Bernanke in helping homeowners facing foreclosure and underwater borrowers, comparing that record with their record in helping the banks. The issue is relevant as the policy and handling of homeowners had to be part of an overall effective plan for recovery in the U.S. economy, because ultimately without the U.S. consumer any recovery would be weak in the long run- a situation the U.S. faces in early 2014. The response to the issue of irresponsible homeowners borrowing beyond the limit without an equally robust response to irresponsible bank management that allowed wildly excessive leveraging of assets, and successful aggressive lobbying by banks in a shortsighted policy of going through with a wave of foreclosures; besides creating questions of fairness and equitable handling of the problem, also had major ramifications for the future of the U.S. and global economic growth. Here Christina Romer and other administration advisors say Bernanke was right in tackling the problem from the perspective of the banks needing to be recapitalized. Thoughtful advisors looking at the entire problem, Martin Feldstein and Sheila Bair strongly pushed for providing the same help to homeowners without getting caught up in the issue of who was responsible home buyers or the banks, and looking at the interests of the U.S. economy and the U.S. people. Proposals by Feldstein and Bair were equally robust in helping banks as they were in helping homeowners, only the banks understood their interests narrowly and had more access to policymakers in the Bush, as well as the Obama administration, Paulson as well as Geithner. This leaves us with the ultimate irony of the Obama administration pushing for the minimum wage, even to the point of electoral posture, when lasting damage had been inflicted on homeowners from the weaker portions of America's middle class by a policy that went against what two respected financial and economic experts from the Reagan period, Sheila and Bair had strongly advocated. See links and groups on Feldstein and Bair. Applebaum has followed most aspects of this problem closely and continues to provide exceptional reporting including the piece on the thinking of new Fed chairman, Janet Yellen. Private enterprise rules that require management at banks just as for other companies to take responsibility for failures, and be replaced with new management, was largely avoided leading to a fundamental failure in how a free market economy such as the U.S. and western European economies are supposed to function. Rules aggressively pushed by Geithner's mentor Treasury Secretary Rubin for a vigorous cleanup at banks in South Korea during a similiar situation in 1997, were not followed in any way here, also setting wrong precedents for the long run. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
James Pressley, in this review of Joseph Stiglitz's new book- "Freefall: America, Free Markets and the Sinking of the World Economy," says Stiglitz's advice should be taken into account by the new administration. Stiglitz, says, the Obama administration has so far offered no alternative vision of capitalism and is only "mudddling through." It is simply following the course the Bush administration had taken. And has retained as key economic advisors, Geithner, Ben Bernanke and Summers, all from previous administration's economic teams, thus largely removing the possibillity of serious change. And by doing so, says Stiglitz, the Obama administration has "squandered the opportunity," to fix things that needed to be fixed in the economy. Stiglitz, says Pressley, urges Americans to think what kind of America they want to see, what kind of society they want to make, and then what kind of economy will get them there. Stiglitz wants to see banks back to where they they only make loans, and act as an efficient payments system, and not engaged in risk taking. At a meeting of the American Economic Association, Stiglitz, presented a paper that suggested that between globalization for integrating world financial markets and keeping them separate, the latter is the better course. Financial markets he believes, need circuit breakers to not bring down the whole system....

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out the gains on three fronts evident from the Census Bureau report of 5.2% gain in median income of households in the U.S. He says the first is the growth in incomes of ordinary working class and middle class families, second the large decline in the poverty rate, and third the further rise in insurance coverage in 2015 for people without health insurance. He points to the steady efforts of the Obama administration to improve lives of ordinary families as working based on the Census report though results have taken time, and could have been better. The Stimulus, says Krugman could have been larger following the blow of the 2009 financial crisis and increased unemployment at the time. Janet Yellen at the inequality conference of the Boston Fed in 2014 pointed out the problems of 62 million households having net worth of about $10,000, and why this was running against the American idea of a better life for all Americans. In that sense the Census report is a movement in the right direction but a lot remains to be done.   ...

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
A young socialist leader in the Sanders campaign effort asks what it is about aging socialist leaders Jeremy Corbyn, 68 years, in the UK, and Bernie Sanders, 75 years, that makes them popular with young people. She says both leaders stood up consistently for decades on issues important to ordinary working class people, when Labor under Blair and Democrats under Clinton abandoned their base to a point when one political expert could say Democrats  were the "second most enthusiastic capitalist party" in the U.S. She says under Blair Clause IV was rewritten. That clause committed the Labor party in Britain to "common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange." Under Corbyn, with support from young people, Labor received 40% of the vote. The party was reenergized on issues important to students such as making higher education accessible to all. A similar situation happened with Sanders in the U.S., who received more of the young people's vote in 2016 primaries than Trump and Clinton combined. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Most Americans pay less in taxes, including state, local and federal taxes, today than in 1980 in inflation adjusted dollars. The taxes have gone down by 2-3% for incomes in the range of $50,000 to $150,000, and gone down by 3-4% for incomes between $150,000 and $350,000. Taxes have gone down over 7% for incomes above $350,000. The main reason is the decline in federal income taxes.Tax rates increased in the period to 1990 and declined from 1990 to 2010. The Democratic party and president Obama are pushing for increase in taxes for incomes above $250,000. Republicans are resisting the changes citing disincentives to investment and growth for small business which generates a large proportion of new jobs created in the U.S. economy. The New York Times study shows the percent of the U.S. population that makes between $200,000 and $350,000 almost doubling in the period 1980-2010 and at the same time its share of the U.S. income remaining the same - many small business owners who hire employees would fall into this income category. Republican's response is for tax reforms that reduce loopholes, deductions and other tax expeditures that disproportionately help the wealthy. Democrats say this cannot create enough revenues to address the deficit, when mortgage deductions, charitable deductions are excluded. The back and forth is leading to stalemate but also opening up discussion for the first time on whether the mortgage and charitable deductions make sense in today's environment. A significant portion of revenues lost in the mortgage deduction goes to affluent households, subsidizing larger borrowings to build larger homes than otherwise, according to the Brookings Institution. Politicians have resisted changes that would go against powerful lobyying groups in the past, yet the impasse has opened up new thinking outside the box because of the pressing need to come up with a solution....