LyrArc Article Gist
An internal IMF document that estimates Europe's banks are short of capital by $273 billion. IMF managing director, Christine Lagarde, tries to downplay the report by saying this is not from a stress test that the IMF conducts. In August, Lagarde, called for an "urgent recapitalization" of European banks. As France's finance minister, Lagarde, steadfastly insisted French banks were well capitalized. France worked hard to prevent requirements for significant capital reserves under the Basel III rules. The higher capital requirements were supported by the U.S.. Simon Johnson said in his blog, that as long as European banks had inadequate capital to act as a buffer against losses, European countries had no safe route for restructuring their debts.

LyrArc Article Gist
Wagoner became President at age 45, CEO at age 48. So you would think that young blood is coming in to GM, but that does not appear to be the case. At the Board level most of the Board members like George Fisher formerly of Motorola, have been around for a long time, and there does not appear to be new blood that would bring in fresh thinking. And serious decisions about investment in developing new technologies to develop fuel efficient cars, like hybrid technologies, electric and other alternative technologies, diesel technology, have been held up for years at General Motors. The way decisions are made on such issues with Board members voicing their opinions more than wrestling seriously with the issues, shows serious shortcomings of management and the Board. At key points of decision making the CEO and key members of his team had not prepared carefully, and Board members did not come up with serious thinking on the problems facing GM. It, appears that the investment in technologies to develop fuel efficient cars much earlier, long before they were finally being addressed in 2006, was a failure of Wagoner's management and of the Board. Management discussed this but continued to be mired in old ways of thinking that continuing with the status quo- cars with existing low fuel efficiency- would not expose GM to illwinds as preferences changed. Its clear from the description here of discussions within GM that the old thinking is quite entrenched at GM, and Wagoner just was not the kind of person who could vigorously articulate a new vision for GM. A couple of things are noteworthy in this account of management indecision at GM. When fuel prices began hurting sales of SUV's and large vehicles in 2005, efforts to get a decision on investments in new technologies for fuel efficiency for the whole product lineup failed at the Board level in an April 2005 meeting. One Board member saying at that meeting, that" do we want to lose another billion dollars in developing new technology for fuel efficient cars." And no one calling him to account that the remark still did not address the point that GM had to respond to the changing market and world oil dynamics, and not just hope for the best, as GM had aggressive competitors, and faced continually diminishing role in the market place for the entire decade of the 1990's. While April 2005 was already at the tail end of the previous era of gas guzzling cars and a decision then would still not have shown a forward looking vision of things, it was not until 10 months later that a decision was reached. And this almost from necessity, as oil prices jumped in 2006 after hurricane Katrina, and by this time President Bush was also calling for higher mandated fuel efficiency standards. The other noteworthy point here is that by making the changes so late in the game, GM had to compress the development cycle for new and some cases unknown technologies into short time frames. If the ingenuity of its engineers comes to its rescue it still faces another hurdle that of cost, because the technologies have to be perfected and improved, so that the costs are low enough for customers, and importantly comparable with what it is costing competitors to make the same fuel efficient technology engine or other part. Which is why one Honda executive remarked, "GM like everyone else is serious about this, because they have to be, but how many of their hybrids and how many Volts will they sell? Their technology is very expensive." Even if GM develops the Volt electric car by 2010, GM will need a whole range of fuel efficient technolgies to power its large product lineup. Its just to hard to avoid the conclusion that this is going to prove costly. All the dragging of feet and indecision, and failure to prepare GM for a different world in case something drastically different from what was expected happened, will prove very costly especially considering how aggressive and well financed some of the Japanese and German competitors are. It also hard to avoid the conclusion that there is too much bureaucracy at the large auto companies, and getting new blood and new ideas and fresh thinking is tough in a place where everybody agrees with everybody else, and there is uniformity of thinking. This makes it difficult for any original or wayward types to thrive. These bureaucracies look up to the top for direction. Initiative is discouraged on one hand, and at the same time even if a new direction is taken at the top. a lot of resistance can be expected to implementing it throughout the company without persistent persuasion and reminder of new facts and realities. This is true for both Wagoner and Mullaly as they face the skepticism of subordinates to new direction. Mullaly for instance has to remind his managers that large vehicles are only a small percentage of the entire global market, and if Toyota is making money in small cars so can Ford. See the link to this. Is Toyota immune from bureaucracy type behaviour throughout the company? Not really, Toyota's chairman emeritus came out of retirement in fact and went out of the way to caution its CEO and management about their complacency a year or so before. Shoichiro Toyoda personally intervened to caution against too much expansion in the US and climbing wage costs, and other risks they perceived such as the company managers in the USA appearing to be resting on their laurels. See the link to this. A lot of discussion is probably going on within these companies about the present state of affairs, and considerable anxiety for what the future will bring. It may be useful to ask the question is there something that makes it difficult for once successful organizations -now with entrenched bureaucracy and set ways -to put forward leaders with vision and foresight, till it becomes very late? The vision and foresight about where their markets and the world is heading, and the ability to move their organizations in that direction. Or to break out of old patterns of behaviour and thinking....

LyrArc Article Gist
This Wall Street Journal editorial comes out in favor of higher capital reserve requirements similiar to that suggested by Federal Reserve Board governor Daniel Tarullo. The Journal says that if regulators are serious in the U.S. about controlling systemic risk, then the 14% rule or a 15% rule for assets held in reserve by banks should be adopted. Daniel Tarullo had suggested a 14% capital reserve requirement. These requirements would be phased in gradually over several years. Basel III requirements require only a 7% requirement and is phased in over many years. Capital standards are likely to be gamed. For this reason the requirement for only Tier 1 capital to be eligible is essential. What about the Basel III standards and the European banks? Would this put them in a better position to earn higher returns. This should be a problem left for European taxpayers to tackle says the Journal. As long as U.S. taxpayers are supporting U.S. banks with an implicit subsidy to take on larger amounts of risk -because they will be saved in a crisis with taxpayer dollars- the Journal says it makes sense to require 10-14% in capital reserves. It cites the Japanese banks which were highly overleveraged with lower capital reserves compared to American banks, and fared poorly. The Dodd-Frank bill imposes a complicated set of regulatory requirements with regulators required to write new sets of rules. The editorial concludes that it is far better to tackle the problems in the banking system with a sufficiently high requirement for capital reserves to manage risks than to have the detailed rule making on every subject that Dodd-Frank suggests....

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Federal Reserve governor Daniel Tarullo tells the Council on Foreign Relations that so much remains to be done four years after the financial crisis. The law firm of Davis Polk says 67 percent of deadlines were missed for new rules required to be set in place by the Dodd-Frank legislation, including the Volcker Rule. Tarullo said: "It is sobering to recognize that more than four years after the failure of Bear Stearns began the acute phase of the financial crisis, so much remains to be done." Tarullo fears that crucial momentum may be lost because of the long delays stemming from resistance by the banks. Tarullo met with bank CEO's in April 2012. Banks have protested that Fed stress tests have not revealed the parameters for the testing. Tarullo's response given at a recent Fed conference in Chicago were that this would let banks game the exercize by running the Federal Reserve model and not improving risk management and capital planning, making this a mechanical compliance exercize. Banks have particularly opposed a requirement that limits the risk in business between two banks to 10% of their credit risk....

LyrArc Article Gist
Renewed calls for higher capital reserves by banking regulators and Britain's Independent Banking Commission after $2 billion in losses at UBS. The losses were a result of derivatives trades made at UBS's London trading desk.

LyrArc Article Gist
Reflecting the volatile nature of the global economy with systemic risks remaining, impact of sharp cuts in spending, and the danger of oil prices exceeding $150 with a mideast crisis, the IMF provided a wide range of possibilities around its basic forecast. The IMF says it expects the global economy to grow 3.5% in 2012, up 0.2% from a Jan. forecast, and a forecast of 4.1% for 2013. But the IMF says this depends on the eurozone crisis, which could take off 2% from global output and 3.5% from output in the eurozone if things went wrong in Europe. Higher oil prices above $165 with supply disruptions after Iranian sanctions are another danger. Its forecast for Europe is 0.3% contraction in 2012 and 0.9% growth in 2013. Because of the risks in the outlook the IMF cautions countries from cutting spending too quickly, and says the best approach is to reduce deficits gradually over the long term and not to move too fast in the short term. This word of caution applies to Spain, the UK, France and Germany. To maintain enough funding in a crisis the IMF plans to increase its lending capacity from $380 billion by an additional $280 billion, with pledges of $60 billion from Japan, $26 billion from the Nordic countries, and $200 from other eurozone countries. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Gillespie lists the myths and describes the reality about Ron Paul. Ron Paul is not a "top tier" candidate- with many Republican candidates assuming top tier status and fizzling out this has become a term that has lost meaning. Paul is a doctrinaire libertarian- he has positions similiar to libertarians but also has his own views on immigration and abortion. His views on the U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, such as "ending the Fed" are crazy- actually Ron Paul's legislation on auditing the Fed is gaining credibility, and Fed policy is viewed skeptically by both the Tea party and Occupy movement, as well as some in the Federal Reserve such as Kansas City Fed chairman, Thomas Hoenig, and respected economists such as Alan Meltzer of Carnegie-Mellon University.Ron Paul is anti-military- Paul has support from servicemen in the military and raised more money from them than any other candidate including Obama. Ron Paul has youth support because he is against the war on drugs- the war on drugs has not worked that well and new approaches are needed. His support among youth comes from a believing that individuals are better at making the right decisions, his idealism, and his faith in making the U.S. a better place. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Proposals from the Vickers Commission on banking reforms in the UK that could be adopted in the U.S. to reduce systemic risks from proprietary trading.

LyrArc Article Gist
Did U.S. Treaury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, ignore a key request by President Obama to present plans for the restructuring of Citigroup after the government bailout of Citigroup? Ron Suskind says this is what happened in his book on the Obama administration and how the White House operated to make key decisions. Ron Suskind, intervewed key members of the Obama White House economic policy team, Lawrence Summers, Christina Romer, Peter Orszag. In all Suskind conducted 700 hours of interviews for his new book in Sept 2011: "Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington and the Education of a President." According to the book, in early 2009 after Obama authorized a series of stress tests for banks he told Geithner to develop a plan for restructuring Citigroup. A month later at a meeting not attended by Geithner Obama raised a question about the status of the plan. He was told by Romer that no restructuring plan had been developed for Citi. Suskind says Geithner disagreed about a plan to restructure Citi and decided to ignore the request. Geithner and the Treasury Department say Obama asked Geithner to develop a backup plan to overhaul banks if the government was forced to keep a big ownership stake in the companies, and "there was fortunately never a need to put them in place." Geithner told Suskind that he doesn't slow-walk the President on any matter. Other aspects of the operation of the economic policy team that Suskind covers are a series of memos from top aide Pete Rouse raising questions that ongoing communication between some members of the economic team and Summers was giving Summers power to shape policy. Summers, Director of the National Economic Council, is shown as trying to keep out the views of Romer and budget director Orszag from reaching the President without going through him. When Orszag gives a private report to the president on the deficit, Summers objects saying that this was immoral. Obama lacked the fresh ideas needed to tackle the problems created by the mortgage and banking crisis of 2008, when he used the Clinton administration economic policy team of the 1990's- Rubin, Bernanke, Summers and Geithner. Fresh approaches were needed two decades after Clinton's election in 1992, and the Bush administration that followed, as many of the problems developed during this period. The similiar embedded thinking was shared during the Clinton and Bush administrations and the economic advisors about dealings with the banking sector, but the situation for deficits, unemployment, housing, and the economy had completely changed requiring fresh approaches. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bank of England Governor warns that British banks are undercapitalized in Nov. 2012 and need to add to reserves for additional losses.

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Volcker says that even with all the fuss about the length of the Volcker Rule, its important to remember that the regulation itself is only 35 pages. And he says that lawyers for the banks are not honest when it comes to this, because they spent a lot of time finding holes in the rule and were working to add complications to it, and now they are turning around and saying that the Volcker Rule is too complicated. Asked about Dodd-Frank, Volcker says that it does make the U.S safer in a financial crisis because of the crisis resolution process set up under Dodd-Frank legislation. A bank fails and the resolution is clearly laid out- the government takes over and liquidates it, or merges it or sells it. Stockholders don't get a bail out, management is fired, and creditors have to take losses. A lot still depends on having vigorous and alert regulators. He sees two large problems, the Euro crisis and the U.S. deficit, which need strong action. Volcker remains perplexed by why the situation of huge disparities in income growth has not been expressed to a greater extent- on one side the lack of growth in income for the average family in 10-15 years and the other side having the huge increase in incomes at the top end. He does not know of any years when this was as big as it is now- except 1928, 1929....

LyrArc Article Gist
Administrative costs are one of the key reasons tution costs have increased to excessive proportions in the U.S., putting a heavy burden on the middle class, reducing social mobility that is an important aspect of postwar progress in Europe and the U.S. by putting college out of reach for millions of young people. This also creates a heavy debt burden for young people- U.S. student loan debt passed $1 trillion in 2012- who are less likely to buy a first home because of years needed to repay student loans. The market pressures to control costs do not exist in the same way as industries such as automobiles, because of the demand for college education in a modern globalized economy. Douglas Belkin and Scott Thurm have provided an indepth look at the University of Minnesota to show the spending surge and internal tendencies for faculty and bureaucracy to increase spending on hiring, building expansion to compete with other schools, and salaries to support their own within the college and university system, with a passive student community, and passive parent community, and lack of other outside pressures. Tution and fees for state residents doubled in the last decade at the University of Minnesota to $13,524. The figures tell the story- total debt with borrowing for building construction at U.S. 4 year public colleges tripled to $88 billion between 2002 and 2011, according to the Department of Education. Debt servicing costs doubled at the University of Minnesota to $106 million in that period. Minnesota's government provided $570 million for university operations in 2011, same as 2003-2004 school year even with inflation and 10% higher student enrollment. Yet analysis by the Department of Education and the Wall Street Journal shows in that period the spending increased disproportionately compared to inflation, student enrollment and teaching activity, with little restraint. WSJ analysis showed the University of Minnesota system added 1000 administrators between 2001-2011, with administration hires increasing 37%, double the increase in the students and double that of teachers. During that period the number of employees to manage people, programs and regulations went up 50% faster than the number of instructors, according to the Department of Education. Bureau of Labor Statistics cites this as the reason tution costs went up faster than health care costs. The 19,000 employee payroll at the University of Minnesota means one employee for three and half students. The new university president in 2011, Eric Kaler, interviewed by WSJ's Belkin and Thurm, says no one knew what it cost to run the school when he started....

LyrArc Article Gist
A slight shift in American opinion favoring a deal with Iran is shown in a WSJ/NBC poll in July 2015 compared to the poll in April 2015. Support for reaching a nuclear deal with Iran remains stable at 36% in both polls, the opposed drops by 6 percentage points to 17% from 23%, and the percentage of people who say they do not know enough to formulate an opinion goes up to 46% from 40%. The intricacies of a nuclear technology deal and the sites involved lead to a high percentage of don't know enough to give an opinion. Factors hindering a deal include inspection of military sites, and Iranian intentions. Factors favoring reaching a deal now is the risk that this would mean Iran would go back into isolation and the opportunity to work with moderates might be lost. The Rouhani administration was an effort by voters to elect a government that could ease or remove sanctions to improve the economy and living conditions- its failure would lead to Iran losing an opportunity to open up to the world. The pressure from the U.S. Congress and Israel served to push for a verifiable and effective agreement to control development of nuclear technology for weapons systems. Behavioural factors involved are the very young population in Iran which has no memories about the period before the revolution in 1979- 70% of the population of 74 million are people under the age of 35. This group is eager for ties to the outside and could change Iran's outlook and policies int the future towards moderation. Risks in not reaching a deal also include the possibility of the Saudis developing nuclear technology and nuclear proliferation. Winners from a deal because of the flow of Iranian oil to world markets and a period of extended low oil prices are the U.S., Europe, China and India. Germany gains new markets to replace the growth in the Russian market after sanctions. Lifting of an arms embargo, an added risk in the last days of the talks, would be mitigated by making the lifting of that embargo very gradual....

LyrArc Article Gist
David Stockman was Budget Director under President Reagan and known for his prodigous grasp of statistics in the national budget. Here he takes on what he describes as disproportionately large and destructive banking system for the U.S. economy, which he says the nation desperately needs less of. He supports the small tax of 0.15% of the debts other than deposits of financial conglomerates. His words are some of the strongest yet to come from one of the most prominent people on Reagan's economic team about how the nation's banking system has beome unproductive in supporting economic activity which is its reason for existence. The destructive effects on social cohesion and the middle class is emphasized. He says for years the Fed has run an insanely loose monetary policy that has encouraged this behaviour and socially detrimental profit seeking by the banks and other companies. He sees the big banks as dangerous institutions in today's economy engaged in a bull market culture which believes in entitlement and profitseeking behaviours regardless of its detrimental nature for the national economy. The recent profits of the banks in 2009 and the resulting bonuses are a result of the Fed's easy money policy and bank's gambling at the Fed's monetary casino as he puts it, with money obtained at little cost from Fed-controlled money markets. This article helps to eliminate the distorted perspective in today's climate that paints criticism of splitting up the banks, or otherwise restricting banks in engaging in proprietary trading and risky behaviours, as government interference. As Stockman puts it these banks are already in some sense wards of the state and not private enterprises and this issue is not relevant. The question now is how to set things right and this involves possible solutions such splitting up banks that are too big to fail, restricting risky behaviours and preventing proprietary trading, and other actions as unusual steps for unusual times to get things working back to normal. In other times Stockman would not have said this in an op-ed piece if this were not so....

LyrArc Article Gist
The CEO of the New York Times and the former director general of the BBC, takes a look at the public discourse in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and in the Brexit campaign, and finds some troubling changes. The use of words that can eaily be picked up by Twitter and social media to attack opponents, the complete disregard for facts, and outright attempts to denigrate and destroy using rhetorical tactics, and a section of the public that has turned away from the facts or is disinterested in facts, is deeply troubling for Mark Thompson. When the public discourse fails, then the politics as a whole starts to collapse, says Thompson. We are children of the enlightenment, says Thompson, and were taught to look underneath statements to discern the truth. This is a crisis in public discourse. Worse it is one in which truth telling by people who say they are outsiders and tell it like it is, is not about telling the truth. Which is what makes it so dangerous. Thompson cites the statement by Michael Gove that "people in this country have had enough of experts," as another dangerous sign. He says it is time that experts make themselves understandable and talk in a way the public can understand. The media needs to explain issues in clear ways, and professional policymakers language of discourse needs to be conveyed in better ways that the public can grasp, in which the Brexit Remain campaign failed, says Thompson. Its important to acknowledge the problem, as the health of our democracies depends on finding solutions to what has happened in 2015-2016 to change the public discourse and let it deteriorate to unimaginable levels.  ...