LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin of NYT provides some counter intuitive ideas on U.S. Fed interest rate policy. He says it can't be take as a given that the Fed will raise rates in 2017-2018. This depends on how much punch there is in the Trump economic policies for stimulus, and for infrastructure spending, tax cuts. He cites Senate Majority Leader McConnell who said he would like to keep "tax reform revenue neutral." Getting large spending and pushing up the deficit is likely to run up against Republicans in Congress who have for 8 years opposed large spending increases and large deficits. Trump has given few details about his stimulus or infrastructure spending plans. He says the scale of the spending might not match the talk. Irwin cites JP Morgan Chase economists who have kept their forecasts for GDP growth just under 2% for 2017 and 2018. And he points out that even Trump appointees at the Fed might act independently. The Fed might look at being cautious considering that increased trade tensions with China, and the unpredictability of a Trump administration could hurt growth. Irwin does not mention the uncertainty in other areas such as policy towards Russia on which the Republican party and Congress have very different views than Trump, tensions over Taiwan, that can also affect growth. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Blanchford of Dartmouth College and Adam Posen of the Peterson Institute of International Economics argue in a recent paper that the true indicator of unemployment in this economy -with a low participation rate and millions dropping out of the labor market unable to find work- is the wage growth. This is particularly true with the U.S. Labor Department report of 288,000 new jobs in 2014 and a 6.3% unemployment rate, yet wages flat for March and April 2014, and no improvement in the participation rate. Blanchford says one should look at the wage growth and consider the rest to be noise. The Yellen Fed is looking closely at the participation rate.

LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Yergin of consultancy firm IHS describes the geopolitical disputes in the Middle East between Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iran that are leading to likely continued oversupply of oil in 2016, keeping prices in the $30-$40 range. Saudi Arabia is not likely to change its policy of going after market share, Venezuela is affected but lacks a voice in OPEC decisions, Russia continues its policies in Syria and Iraq under the Putin government affecting other Sunni states, and Iran following the lifting of sanctions is likely to ramp up supply to make up for its lost market share- all leading to an extended period of low prices. This situation benefits China, the European Union countries, India, Turkey and the U.S. in a period of slow economic growth in 2015-2016. Russia looks to use this period of low oil prices to shift to domestic industry after a period of rising imports when oil prices were high. The Saudis seeing their interests in the region threatened by Iran and Russia, and dissatisfied with the foreign policy of president Obama, see a policy of pushing for market share as appropriate in the current geopolitics of the region....

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. President Obama's 2013 State of the Union address focussed on the problems facing the U.S. middle class, calling it "our generation's task" to tackle this problem. Economic changes have changed the patterns of economic growth and jobs, growth, income growth, that prevailed from the end of the Second World War to about 1989. But he offered few solutions beyond increasing the minimum wage to $9.00 from $7.25 to reduce poverty.

LyrArc Article Gist
The northeastern region of Brazil, the poorest region of Brazil, has benefitted from the economic expansion in Brazil. The region's GDP went up by 4.2% a year for the last ten years compared to 3.6% for Brazil. Bolsa Familia, President Lula's anti-poverty programme has benefitted the northeast, but the Getulio Vargas research institute shows three quarters of growth coming from earnings and expansion of export based agriculture in soyabeans and other products and from mining export industries. Projects in the northeast include development of the port and industrial area around Suape. A petrochemical plant, a shipyard and a Petrobras refinery, are under construction. A new railway will link Suape to the interior. Much of the development is for export industries in soyabeans and iron ore, and for the rail and port infrastructure that supports these exports to China. As a result the development looks similiar to what is happening in Australia with the huge expansion in rail and port infrastructure in that country to support iron ore and other mining exports to China. Any slow down in China will affect Brazil as the IMF has recently warned, because of an overdependence on commodity exports to China. Alexandre Rands of local Datametrica consultancy points to this when he says that infrastructure booms while helpful are not enough to sustain development. Big firms train the workers they need which is how Brazilian companies cope with a weak educational system. Schools in the northeast are however not getting the financial support to improve education, a situation that affects Brazil as a whole, but is even more evident in the northeast....

LyrArc Article Gist
Jon Gertner makes several critical points about the importance of supporting and investing in manufacturing. The U.S. private sector in new industries such as alternative energy, and electric cars is competing not just with the private sector in Germany, S. Korea or Japan. It is competing with the governments of these countries which are investing heavily to build innovation and jobs in their home countries. Innovation, design and manufacturing are woven together in these new industries in a manner that is different from the iPhone/ iPad/ Search algorithms /Facebook software type industries dominated by names such as Apple, Google and Facebook. The software industries are the opposite of jobs intensive industries with Facebook having 2000 employees and Google having 29,000 employees. By comparison the lithium battery industry could generate over 62,000 jobs in the next 10 years, and the electric car industry as a whole with its supplier networks could generate much larger numbers of jobs. Because of the advanced technology involved these are good well paying jobs. The finance industry in the U.S. is attracted to the quick returns in the software related fields, leaving a gap for the American government to fill a role nurturing these industries. This would be similiar to the manner that the German and Japanese governments do working with their own private sector. The private sector in the U.S. needs only the early nurturing and can operate on its own by innovating its way to competitiveness in manufacturing and cost after the early years. Because of missteps in failing to support manufacturing in the U.S., the U.S. may have to import some of the technology from countries such as Japan and S.Korea to make up for these missteps. This is happening in the lithium ion battery manufacturing technology and facilities, which experts say is being successfully imported from these countries to the U.S.. The Obama administration has provided $2.5 billion dollars from the stimulus investments to support projects of 30 companies operating in the advanced battery technology field. This includes companies such as A123 Systems and LG Chem Power in Michigan. As a result of these efforts the Department of Energy estimates that by 2015 the U.S. will have the capacity to manufacture 40% of the world production of lithium batteries for the autombile industry. In 2009 the U.S. had capacity to manufacture 2% of the batteries....

LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Eike Batista's EBX Group companies were one of the prime beneficiaries of huge government investments in mining, oil and other commodities. The fading of the commodities boom is resulting in large losses for these companies. Street protests in Brazilian cities shows the weakness of the Brazilian economic model that neglected public services in transportation, health care and education and concentrated on infrastructure and mining projects.

LyrArc Article Gist
German perceptions of Mikhail Gorbachev are shown here in DW.com. He is revered in Germany because of Gorbachev's efforts to end Soviet rule in East German state called the GDR, leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Gorbachev supported German reunification but did not do this is in a way that ensured that ordinary Russians and citizens of the GDR could make the transition to democratic processes in a smooth way. He also failed to grasp that economic transition could be difficult and would require extensive aid and grants from the west, and that safeguards and protections for retired pensioners and vulnerable sections of society needed to be in place. The following is a reflection of the background in political government and economy of the events in Europe leading to the war in Ukraine.  As a result Gorbachev's instincts were right by first 1956 as a student, and then 1979 as government official about the need for democratic processes to realize the real potential of Russia, just as has happened in many countries that lacked these processes for change in government- Japan, Germany, South Korea, India, Brazil and many countries in Asia and Latin America. But not realizing that these countries made the transition with considerable American and British assistance. Even where there was no direct assistance indirectly the British setup the first limited Swaraj or free rule in India, with elections and elected assemblies in Indian states in the 1930's, following the pattern in Dominion states Australia and Canada. Mohandas Gandhi negotiated within these processes for rights of South African Indians and Colored people, gaining experience, including study of British law.  A son of poor farmers in the agricultural region of North Caucasus, in Stavropol, it is relevant today that his maternal grand parents were from Chernihiv in Ukraine. He came to power in 1980 after entering the Politburo that year. These were the waning years of Leonid Brezhnev, president of the Soviet Union who followed Nikita Khrushchev (1953- 1964). Khrushchev was from eastern Ukrainian region near Donetsk. Leonid Brezhnev was a protege of Krushchev since 1931, from Kamianske, Ukraine.   Gorbachev was influenced by Khrushchev's speech that denounced Stalin in 1956 in favor of a freer and more open society. Khrushchev, became first secretary of the Communist party in 1953 after the death of Stalin and set the pace of post war Soviet society from 1950 to 1964. He removed the fear of the dictatorship of the proleteriat working class, increasingly dictatorial under Lenin, and blatantly arbitrary under his successor to make Soviet Union a freer society.  Yet his tendency to make decisions on his own without consulting others, and the failure of agriculture in the Soviet Union including food shortages led to his replacement by his protege Brezhnev. Brezhnev's whole career was built under Krushchev in Ukraine, in the army in Ukraine, and as a political leader in the Soviet 18th Army that entered Prague in 1945 defeating the Nazis. Why is this relevant? Gorbachev was educated at Moscow State University when the Soviet Union was in the Sputnik era, and felt at the time that it could reach the 1950's standard of living in the US- very different from the earlier leaders. Yet he may have been too much of an optimist and not hands on in understanding the working of a modern economy as large as Russia and the interests of different groups of society that had to be be balanced and protected. His understanding of the US and of how the US and British economies had evolved was limited or nonexistent. The isolation of the Soviet period may have compounded this. The Russian state in the Soviet Union could not simply unwind the power of the state and its intervention and everything would come out right of its own accord.   Leonid Brezhnev, the Ukrainian Russian who succeeded Krushchev from 1964 to 1979 let the system of Soviet rule remain as it was, in the Great Stagnation, leading to lethargy, lack of innovation, and a weak economy with military expansion. Gorbachev tried to regenerate the system by opening it up, but failed to see that there was a risk that it could come apart quickly as it did in just 4 years after he became president in 1985. Only the centralized power of the state had kept the Russian state together from the Tsarist period through the Communist period. The risks of this Gorbachev failed to grasp. What if it happened too quickly without a safety net for the people who could not make the transition. What lawlessness and failure of the rule of law could happen. The US and Britain had evolved their democracies over centuries. Wars were fought in the US and Britain over rights and responsibilities of kings and parliaments. In the US Lincoln fought the civil war not just for emancipation but to ensure safeguards for free white men on the farms so that Labor did not get disabilities placed on them by Capital (entrenched forces of Capital of which the southern plantation economy was only one aspect.)  Japan and Germany were set up as democratic states through American power and constitutional frameworks with Marshall Plans or agreement to take in unlimited imports from Japan. This bad scenario happened in Russia because Gorbachev failed to set the conditions first and work patiently to achieve them including introducing limited  elections and parliamentary processes first in Russia.  Leaders such as Yeltsin who succeeded Gorbachev in 1989, winning the elections that followed, failed to provide a safety net for the vulnerable in the 1980's. Unemployment increased rapidly, life expectancy dropped in Russia, and the economy failed in the early years after 1980. A Marshall Plan like that offered to Germany could have helped but Gorbachev's failure may have been his failure to provide this transition by arranging for West Germany and the US to support a planned transition, a kind of Marshall Plan of Aid, and maintaining a gradual move to democracy as the country was given time to learn institutions of American and British parliamentary democracy. No such Marshall Plan was negotiated for a smooth transition over inevitable obstacles, no safeguards were put in place for illegal efforts to control the state by rogue elements and to seize assets of state companies, no efforts to first introduce limited elections and parliamentary processes for learning democratic process in Russia, and the people of Russia were left with a memory of the this period as a bad lawless period from 1989 to 2005.  Leading to the situation today under Putin of aspiring to the Soviet period as a kind of period that had offered Russia the world recognition it had lost. And this had happened even though the Russian economy had recovered and the standard of living had risen under Putin. Putin's career spanned the period as a Russian official in Dresden, Germany Democratic Republic or Soviet period East Germany to working in the St Petersburg City Council under Yeltsin. He personally witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the German Democratic Republic from Dresden and Gorbachev's refusal to build a transition period for the changes so that it would not be traumatic for the GDR. Even after reunification these traumas remain in some segments of the older population in East Germany that saw themselves as neglected and support extreme right wing parties in eastern German states by 2020- considering the Soviet period as one in which their lives were less neglected.  After three terms as president Putin with his own traumas from that period in Dresden, and with a mother lost in the period after the Nazi invasion of Russia, a father who survived the Battle of Stalingrad, saw the period of lawless behaviour in the collapse of the Soviet Union as the"greatest geopolitical disaster of the century."  Putin and people around him made missteps and miscalculations launching a war in Ukraine, leading to the situation today- jeopardizing hard won gains for the Russian economy. By 2022 Russian standards of living had risen and the economy was in the best shape it had been in the modern period since the Industrial Revolution. Yet largely exposed because of the dependence on oil and gas during a period of climate change and focus on building future economies free of fossil fuels.  Putin in his own peculiar logic may have seen this as the only opportunity in 2022 before deliinking from fossil fuel reduced the importance of the Russian fuel dependent economy to make some territorial readjusments in Ukraine with a quick war taking Kviv. That turned into a massive miscalculation with the emergence of nationalist fervor in western Ukraine spreading to the whole country of 40 million people. In the future to 2030 with phasing out of the fossil fuel economy, Russia without the connections to the US and European Union's technology and resources it had during Putin's three terms, and facing strict sanctions from US and EU, faces a difficult future. This has cautionary lessons for all countries- the US that read too much into the fall of the Berlin wall and indulged in a losing proposition with free markets that damaged its infrastructure and manufacturing with shifts to China, China understanding of how it to was dependent on the world economy for its future development, India that had to navigate a difficult period and what lessons to draw for building a bigger economy, the EU realizing the failure of its policies of depending on Russia for energy and China for manufacturing with fragile supply chains,  and Russia that there were twists and turns and the need for safeguards and experience building democratic processes before these processes would work for the economy, its people and for Russia as a nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A large increase in fuel efficiency as planned by new EPA rules creates a different environment for electric cars. Current average fuel economy is 26. New rules that raise the average fuel economy to higher than 47 mpg will result in cars that conserve gasoline, reduce emissions, and make these vehicles more attractive to operate than electric cars on a cost basis, without sacrificing too much in conservation and emissions. A new study shows that achieving the increase to 47 mpg with new technologies will cost automakers about $2000 per vehicle. At $4.50 a gallon for gasoline it takes six years for a hybrid to be more cost effective than a 47 mpg car, according to this study. For a plug-in it would take 7 years and a pure electric vehicle 8 years. This suggests gasoline would have to cost more than $4.50 for electric cars to get an economic advantage. Technological breakthroughs and new technologies in electric cars which are a nascent industry at this time are not worked into these calculations. This could result in a different situation and favor the companies doing the pioneering effort to learn these technologies and develop cost effective solutions....

LyrArc Article Gist
The impact on ASEAN countries of the monetary expansion policy of the Bank of Japan, Japan's central bank, and the policies of the Abe administration. Infusion of new liquidity into Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam.

LyrArc Article Gist
In 2018 China, India, and America are Africa's largest trading partners. India is building 18 new embassies in African countries. Greater openness to trade and investment is leading to GDP growth in Africa, 40% higher than in 2000, which is still low by comparison with Asian countries. The Economist says African countries can benefit by drawing investment from all sides and all countries, so that Africa benefits the most. Chinese investment, and Indian investment can happen side by side with investment from America, Britain and France.

LyrArc Article Gist
France is moving quickly with spending on the $37 billion stimulus. Public buildings, museums, cathedrals and historical sites are being renovated in 2009. About 50 chateaus, and 75 cathedrals are part of 100 million euros for cultural centres. About 75% of France's stimulus money will be spent in 2009, in contrast to the slow work in the USA.

LyrArc Article Gist
Vladimir Putin presents his views on democracy in Russia, on prevalent corruption, and ways to introduce democratic processes through internet referendums on legislative initiatives, the election of governors and local officials. He says democracy cannot be built overnight, that sovereignty of the people of Russia is the true basis of democracy and this was achieved through the fight with the oligrachy and anarchy of the 1990's. Rights that Russians want to see democracy ensure are: right to work, free medical care and education for children. In addition with the development of civil society and the advance of the middle class in Russia democratic processes have to keep pace. But he doesn't see democratic processes working with what he calls " a circus of candidates making unrealistic promises" with "spin doctors and image makers controlling politicians." And he does not see modern democracy limited to casting votes, and calls for internet based democracy and referendum based democracy to be integrated into the overall development of institutions, particularly at municipal and regional levels. He calls for a change in the mindset of Russians away from corruption in public service, saying that as long as the mindset is there one set of thieves are unmasked only to be replaced by another set of thieves. And cites polls that show teenagers aspire to be public servants because of the easy money to be made in public service. To correct this he proposes salaries that are high enough and at the same time have absolute transparency, declaration of expenses and family purchases, residences, vacations etc. Other steps include separating executive power and property and separating executive power from the system of checks over it....