LyrArc Article Gist
Brazil's GDP increased by 0.34% for the 4th quarter of 2011 from the prior quarter. For the full year GDP increased by 2.7%, with an actual decline in GDP for the third quarter of 0.1%. The GDP growth for 2010 was 7.5%. The slowing economic growth reflects an overvalued currency, weak manufacturing competitiveness, and inflation. Brazil's growth will be lower than potential say analysts, and it will be tough to get to even 3.5% growth in 2012-2013. A similiar process is seen in other emerging markets. China's premier Wen Biao announced lower growth targets of 7.5% and a shift in priorities recently. And India's growth rate for 4th quarter, 2011, was 6.1%.

LyrArc Article Gist
Areas in the "too big to fail" part of Dodd-Frank U.S. financial reform legislation where work remains to be done to prevent a future crisis include: the creation of living wills by the largest banks so that they can be dismantled in an orderly fashion, and the designation of which banks are systemic risks by the Financial Oversight Stability Council. The FDIC and the Federal Reserve have yet to finalize the rules for creating "living wills" for large banks. The rules are expected to be finalized by fall 2011. The FOSC is working on the designations and what criteria to use for selecting the non-bank firms that pose systemic risks. Progress has been made at the FDIC by finishing several rules for implementing a new system to wind down a large failing bank. The FDIC is hiring staff for a new office that focusses specifically on large complex financial firms. Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo has led the effort for higher capital reserve requirements for U.S. banks, requirements that would be closer to 14% for capital reserves. In an editorial on June 16, 2011, the Wall Street Journal said that if the Federal Reserve is serious about controlling systemic risk then it should support capital reserve requirements of 14%....

LyrArc Article Gist
The tough job President Obama faces as he faces opposition from politicians who have interests to protect, and healthcare businesses with interests to protect. The President has to come up with a plan that is deficit neutral, because financial markets could see a healthcare bill that further widens the deficit as a signal for higher interest rates that would deepen the recession. At the same time each of the three sources of revenue puts him at loggerheads with political leaders in Congress or groups with interests to protect. Limiting income tax deductions for high earners could raise $267 billion in 10 years. It would require taxpayers in the top tax brackets deduct their mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable donations, at the 28% tax rate instead of the 33% and 35% tax rates. The opposition is with democratic leaders that it would hurt charities, universities that depend on tax deductible donations, and taxpayers in high tax cities like New York city that are the home base of Democratic leaders. Yet only 1.4% of households would be affected says the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, says charitable giving would decrease by 2%. The other opposition on this comes from the preference of Senators Baucus and Grassley, who head the Senate Finance Committee, for tax increases or cost savings to come from the health sector. Specifically they want to see the value of workers' employer provided health benefits subject to income taxes. It is a situation in which every sensible person admits the need for healthcare reform and would see the current pace of healthcare costs as unsustainable and dangerous; and after that will just go back to his group and try to preserve as much of the status quo as possible, so as not to disturb by much the benefits or compensation they have secured from the system over the years. Then there are political leaders in Congress with their own preferences, and Congressmen who are the subject of heavy lobbying by these interests. The administration and the Presidents job is to navigate this stream with a workable deficit neutral plan, without any requirement for any group to make sacrifices, and in some situations even small sacrifices for the public interest. Would charitable institutions be hurt that much, what if charitable institutions were exempted, why would other interests the try to obtain the same exemption. Its like the unions trying to keep the old unsustainable goldplated healthcare and other benefits at GM even as the ship was going down. Taxing employer provided employee health benefits as income would raise $2.5 trillion over a decade. The opposition here is from unions which are a force in the Democratic party and which count tax free health benefits as a legacy of the labor movement. Employer provided health insurance covers 160 million American employed and their dependents under the age of 65, so it has a wide impact. Yet most economists favor ending the tax break. They say it mainly goes to upper income taxpayers, and discourages cost consciousness among consumers of health care, thus encouraging excessive spending and surging health care costs. Senior Obama advisors, Peter Orszag, the budget director, and economist Jason Furman favor this approach. So do Republicans in Congress. Senators Baucus and Grassley are not asking for the complete removal of the tax break, what they want to see is capping the value of benefits that go untaxed. If the tax-free limit is $13,000, a policy worth $15,000 would pay income taxes on $2000. A third spource is to spend less on Medicare. About two thirds of the $948 billion in savings Mr Obama has proposed over 10 years comes from a number of reductions in Medicare spending. $177 billion comes from insurance companies bidding for government reimbursements for offering private plans to seniors. $106 billion comes from cutting the subsidies to hospitals serving the uninsured as universal coverage should remove this need. And $110 billion in reduced payments to hospitals and doctors because of productivity gains. A range of industries insurance companies, hospitals, doctors drugmakers, nursing homes, home health care companies and medical device makers, all stand to lose from reduced payments from Medicare and Medicaid. And these groups with interests to protect are another factor in this process of working out a healthcare plan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In its May 2011 special report on international banking the Economist points out the need for banking regulators to take stronger action than they have so far. What it calls "pre-emptive insurance" it says is needed - stronger regulation, larger capital cushions, and some form of separation of different kinds of banking. Without this the dangers of excessive risk taking and banks that are "too big to fail" will continue to threaten the world's economy. Banks that are smaller and better capitalized says the Economist can fail more gracefully than the large mega banks that exist at this time. In fact the banks today in the U.S. are larger than at the time of the 2008 crisis. Other analysts also point to the lack of major changes in banking and financial structures today compared to the situation before the 2008 crisis, both in Europe and the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hon Hai, a Chinese company which makes IPads and IPhones for Apple has grown by doing high quality work for lower prices than anyone else. In the process Hon Hai has generated a culture that is tough even by Chinese standards. About 250,000 workers are employed in its factories in Shenzen alone. A series of suicides at the plant has attracted attention to the tough conditions. One worker says conversation on the production line is banned, bathroom breaks are limited to 10 minutes for every 2 hours, and the discipline is strict. Hon Hai won Apple's order says one supply-chain search expert, by pricing low. Its CEO Gou was willing to sell some components at zero profit according to people familiar with his actions. Workers come from rural areas, are very young, the first time they are away from their families, and live in dormitories, eight to ten people to a room. Hon Hai's response is to increase wages 30%. But a report about a college graduate who was asked about conditions reflects the general feeling. This graduate makes twice as much in product development, at 2000 yuan a month, or $293 a month. But the monotonous life and the feeling of no future affects this worker and may be a sign of something changing in China's factories. The unwillingness to accept the conditions that existed in the past....

LyrArc Article Gist
Allan Meltzer says a Fed QE III woud be bad monetary policy. He puts several questions to Bernanke- how the Fed and Ben Bernanke can know now what is the right interest rate policy in mid 2013, and what reason can the Fed give for adding excess reserves when U.S. banks have $1.6 trillion in idle reserves at the Fed. Meltzer cautions the Fed and other policymakers not to pay attention only to short term forecasts, which can be susceptible to large errors. And calls for attention to the long term consequences of their actions. One point he emphasizes is that the unemployment problem cannot be resolved with short term policy actions nor can it be resolved in a short time. It will take population growth, falling housing prices and rising rents to create opportunities for new construction. Another change is the transition to a less consumption driven and more export oriented economy. This transition which has started will also take time. He urges the Congress and the administration to focus on: reducing corporate tax rates by closing loopholes, long-term reductions in entitlement spending, a 5 year moratatorium on new regulations, and the Fed adopting an explicit inflation target between 0% and 2%....

LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times editorial page on the day following the passage of the second bailout or rescue plan of $700 billion in the Senate after it was voted down in the House of Representatives. It points out that the bailout bill does little to prevent a wave of foreclosures which the NYT estimates at six million people expected to default in the rest of this year and 2009. It faults lenders unwillingness to reduce the loan balances amount. At a Congressional hearing for the Hope for Homeowners program in which the governmet wold insure upto $300 bilonin new affordable loans for troubled borrowers if the lenders voluntarily refinance delinquent mortgages by reducing loan balances to 90% of the homes' current market value, lending banks were lukewarm about taking these losses in exchange for bigger losses in foreclosures. These lenders include Wels Fargo, Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup. The FDIC's Sheila Barr has also advocated reducing loan balances in her proposal for tackling the housing crisis presented after the Bear Stearns crisis. She is taking this approach to banks that like IndyMac were taken over by FDIC. But the numbers are not large letters were sent to 28,000 delinquent borrowers of IndyMac recently to reduce loan balances. This is a serious problem and either Congress and Treasury are leaving this problem to the next administration taking office 3 months from now as there is no real consensus on this issue even today or they are missing the impact this has in dropping home price values even further in neigborhoods across the nation as foreclosures drive prices down even further compounding the problem. For the financial institutions it would appear that they are letting this drag out because their capital is at frighteningly low levels and taking losses at one time is harder than taking the foreclosure losses dragged out over 1-3 years and they are also looking for a way in which they can let the government bear the burden of losses as the crisis intensifies which can make sense from the point of view of each institution. According to a report in the Wall Street Journal on September 29, 2008, Sheila Barr told Congress this month that in recent years troubled loan portfolios have yielded about 32% of book value, compared with more than 87% for loans in which the borrower is current. These are strong statistics in favor of lenders taking an informed decision to lower loan balances voluntarily with some government help along the way but the fact that this is not happening leads one to think that something is falling between the cracks, initial lender reluctance to take losses through voluntary balance reduction at the time of Bear Stearns crisis given taxpayer reluctance and lack of government initiative to help lenders in doing this, sort of what Martin Feldstein suggested in a series of articles during the time before and after the Bear Steans crisis. And then as the credit crisis worsened with collapse of Lehman, WaMu, Freddie, Fannie and Wachovia in September 2008 fear gripping the markets and LIBOR interbank lending rate at close to 8%, banks gripped by the fear prevailing in the market, frozen practically about any steps other than preserving their hammered capital, and reluctant to take losses which would further impair their capital. Also in the WSJ Sept 8, on help for homeowners, Deutsche Bank estimates 40% of homeowners or about 20 million households will owe more than their home is worth by the time the housing market stabilizes. This will lead to some homeowners making the rational decision as Martin Feldstein argued to walk away from their homes, leading to more foreclosure losses for th banks. This article Rescue Includes Steps to Help Borrowers Keep Homes by Ruth Simon also has some information that confirms the NYT editorial. An analysis it says of 144 mortgage modifications by the Massachusetts Attorney General's office found that none reduced mortgage balances and onoly a handful reduced monthly payments. Even with interest rate reductions, the study showed borrrowers wound up paying more because of missed paymmets penalties and fees. Another study by Credit Suisse mentioned in the same article points out that the percentage of borrowers who were behind 6 months after loan modifications dropped to 17% when lenders reduced the loan balances and 13% when mortgage companies froze the interest rate of adjustable rate mortgages. A bigger problem is the effect on consumption, if 40% of homeowners end up owing more to the bank than their home is worth as Deutsche Bank estimates, combined with higher unemployment and higher parttime employment, by the time things stabilize. And this is the big looming problem for a new administration in January even if the bailout plan passes Congress this week after revisions and eases the crisis in the credit markets. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Federal Reserve's actions in 2013 to counter the growing size and complexity of large banks. JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo assets have grown by 75% and 275% betwen 4th quarter of 2006 and 4th quarter 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
Syriza party's young leader Alexis Tsipras retains popularity even as Greece accepts the third bailout program from the EU with conditions for pension reform and tax changes. He now says some of the pension reforms were necessary even in the absence of the bailout conditions, saying it is not normal for someone to retire at age 45 or 50. He also says that he is fighting tax evasion so that the rich pay their share of taxes. The mainstream parties have lost confidence because the programs did not ensure a equitable sharing of tax and other measures, and more of the burden falling on the poor. In contrast to Portugal where the tax burden is shared more equitably, more of the burden in Greece has fallen on the poor and less affluent.

LyrArc Article Gist
Brooks points out that the best way to arrive at workable solutions is to take the best ideas from all sides of the political spectrum. The Republicans and the Democrats are too ideologically and politically driven and lack the imagination to come up with good solutions.

LyrArc Article Gist
This issue of the Economist magazine looks at Saudi oil price cuts and the future for shale oil in the world's energy mix. In the short run overleveraged companies in the shale oil business in the U.S. will be affected by oil prices below $50 a barrel. The Economist points out that shale oil deposits are extensive in the U.S. and other parts of the world. The upfront costs are as little as $1.5 million for drilling a well. As a result the economics of shale will depend on new advances in technology and efficiency to bring costs down below existing costs averaging of about $57 a barrel, with some producers at costs of $35 a barrel. Because of technology advances anticipated in the field it points to shale oil as a reliable source of low cost oil supplies in the future, keeping oil prices lower than in the past and much less subject to manipulation by cartel pricing or oil price shocks. The lower volatility and lower level of oil prices will be good for the rapidly growing economies in Asia and the developed economies of Europe and the U.S., and for countries in Latin America such as Argentina with large shale deposits....

LyrArc Article Gist
Thomas Frank writing about the public outrage about executive compensation quotes Bill Black, a Professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, who makes an important point. Beyond the size of this compensation there was something else happening that was perverse in its design and in its effects. Black says that at each point in the development of the disaster of mortgage securitization, it was the pay for performance systems that sent the wrong signals to loan officers, real estate appraisers, accountants, and bond rating agencies. The compensation or reward systems actually encouraged wrong, unethical and ultimately disastrous behaviours for the companies and the economy. Another way to look at it, the way it happened on Wall Street- especially at Merrill Lynch and some other financial institutions- the bonuses and other compensation was a way for executives to recklessly milk (loot is the other word) the companies for all they could yield regardless of the results afterwards. And as Black says, to do this through normal corporate mechanisms. A whole range of behaviours of this type took place in the final years of the boom. See other articles by Thomas Frank. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Lahart says adjusting for inflation the DJIA average in early March 2013 would be about 12,900 instead of 14,254, much less than it was in Oct 9, 2007 peak. If dividends are reinvested the Dow would be at 16,600. With inflation and dividends taken together the Dow would be around 15,000. Lahart does not cite his source. Browning in a separate piece says the DJIA adjusted for dividends, inflation and taxes, according to Bespoke Investment calculations is still below the 2000 level in 1994 dollars, and provides a different view.