World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Abut 3 million homeowners are expected to default on their mortgages in the 30 months ending in mid 2009, and two thirds of this or 2 million will go into foreclosure, according to Moody's Economy.com. So what led to all this which eventually hit the financial markets in the U.S., and also to a lesser degree in Europe, through the opacity of the mortgage securities created from bad mortgages with falsely tagged triple AAA ratings that ended up in the assets of banks and investment firms? The motivations of each group were perverted as things unfolded. When the packagers of securties were not responsible for what they were doing they pursued profit before ethical behaviour and all sorts of securities were created. As these packagers were allowed to shop for ratings the ratings companies gradually lowered their standards to attract business. Politicians failed in the free market atmosphere of the Republican Bush administration and Republican led Congress. Senator Bachus and Congressman Frank introduced legislation during the later period of the bubble but failed to draw support to curb the bad lending. Republicans blocked a new antipredatory lending law in North Carolina from being enacted for the country from 1999 onwards. And Bush without realizing the ramifications prodded HUD to push Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to require higher percentage of loans to go to low income borrowers. Fannie and Freddie in turn met this requirement by increasing the demand for these subprime loans by buying the mortgage securities, which the packagers of these securities backed by subprime mortgage loans and incorrectly rated AAA by conniving ratings agencies were happy to supply. It was a sad situation with a happy -everyone could say the were bringing home ownership and the American dream to low income people, and business was signing up for this ride with short term gain in mind. And in all this financial innovation lost its legs as packaging these securities and constructing new investment vehicles like the conduits were being used in perverse ways. The basics of labeling something correctly was torn apart. You could not turn a subprime loan to low income borrowers or a loan without documentation to flippers and speculators into something different by simply labeling it as AAA. What the confidence in financial innovation in the American system did was help spread these securities all over the globe, where they were held with confidence by towns in remote parts of the Scandinavian north country as well as financial centres in Europe and Asia. At the state level politicians in California saw this as one of the state's star industries and protected it from legislation to curb bad lending, as most of the big lenders were based in California. Due to a strange set of affairs the Department of Corporations was left with the tasks of oversight of mortgage lenders in the state. It was concerned more with issues like protecting senior citizens from financial scams and was not staffed to meet the supervisory role of a huge mortgage lending business. When it comes to the Fed's role Greenspan also took the laissez fairre stand of not interfering with free markets, even when a lot of the bad lending was obvious and one Fed Governor Gramlich was pushing for better lending standards. The Fed supervisory role was over banks and banks were required to follow lending standards, but most of this lending had shifted to mortgage brokers and financial companies which were beyond the supervision of the Fed. Had the Fed extended its supervision to mortgage affiliates of the banks this could have increased the level of supervision and made a difference. But state regulation mechanisms in California by Department of Corporations show that the regulatory mechanism did not take into account the realities of mortgage lending and how it had changed. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Fed governor, Daniel Tarullo, said in a recent speech that U.S. financial institutions could be required to meet stronger capital requirements than the Basel international standards. The Fed is considering requiring the riskiest financial institutions to put aside 8.4% to 14% of capital. The Basel standards require institutions to gradually increase the capital cushions to 7% by 2019 from about 2% at this time. Less risky institutions would would have a smaller increase over the Basel standards- about 20% compared to the 100% increase over Basel for the riskiest institutions. Speaking at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Tarullo said- "The regulatory structure ...should discourage systemically consequential growth or mergers unless the benefits to society are clearly significant." Tarullo said no one wants to see another TARP. Banks would have to build up their capital reserves using common equity and not other forms of less reliable capital such as contingent capital, where banks convert debt instruments into equity in an emergency. Tarullo emphasized the need for the U.S. to move beyond the Basel requirements, known as Basel III, because they are narrowly designed for individual institutions and do not adequately address the systemic risk. When there is a high degree of risk correlation among many actors in fast moving markets additional risks are created which require stronger capital standards. Tarullo said systemically important institutions have "no incentive to carry enough capital to reduce the chances of such systemic losses."...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jon Huntsman, Republican candidate for President in 2012, calls for a fee on banks with a size that is above a certain percentage of the GDP. This would cover the cost banks impose on taxpayers when they are bailed out. It would eliminate the advantage banks gain from "too-big-to-fail," a subsidy Huntsman estimates to be one half percentage point in today's market. He points to efforts by the UK and Switzerland for more stringent financial standards than the U.S.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Except for a couple of investment banks at the top which are also taking on high levels of trading risk, the test of the pyramid of American banks is shaky says the Economist. The banks at the bottom, the smaller banks are in deep deep trouble, with CreditSights estimating that upto 1100 of 8200 of these smaller banks needing help from the FDIC to wind down. And the other banks like Citigroupa and BofA with some state ownership in amessy situation with bad loans.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gretchen Morgenson cites two views on the newly approved Volcker Rule in December 2013. Prof. Richard Sylla of New York University sees the rule as going part way in the direction of the Glass-Steagall Act, which gave the financial markets five or six decades of financial stability. Just the fact that the rule is on the books should give the bank officers pause before engaging in questionable financial activities, is his view. Prof. David Skeel of the University of Pennsylvania Law School, believes only aggressive enforcement can make the law work because of the way it is written. He says regulators have fallen short in enforcement in the past and have not been held accountable. Only by making regulators accountable, including penalties for regulators failing to do their job, would this work says Skeel. By not imposing penalties for regulatory failures in the last crisis there is more likelihood for this sort of behaviour to continue. Instead the same regulators are now given greater powers after an earlier failure. Considering the Skeel view, the importance of the attestation- that is now required from bank senior executives that the Volcker Rule's provisions are being followed- take on an important role in ensuring enforcement. This also coincides with Mr. Volcker's view that the bank officers should have to take on the responsibility for making sure that they are doing it the right way....
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Collapse of the easten european economies says the Economist would raise questions about the idea of a united Europe, the idea of the EU itself, and destabilize the euro - as countries in the EU like Ireland and Greece are in just as bad a shape. And in talk of enlargement of the EU will be doomed, and this is true of the western Balkans, TUrkey, and some countries int he former Soviet Union. Politically letting these countries derift could mean they fall for populists and nationalists of the bad type. And there is the serious economic consideration for banks in Austria, Italy and Sweden, which are heavily involved in lending to Eastern Europe. They could see catastrophic losses and put the banking systems of these countries at risk. Sweden has already chosen to help the Baltic Countries, and sees it has its political responsibility, and the whole Baltic region as its home, see link. The Economist suggests a differentiated approach depending on which group of countries in Eastern and Central Europe something that Angela Merkel of Germany also supports. For Ukraine the Economist says its best to let the IMF provide assistance. For the Baltic countries, plus Bulgaria, the Economist advocates an accelerated path to the euro, on the grounds that they are tiny and shouln't affect confidence in the euro. The Baltic countries have a population of 7 million. This approach is not supported by the European Commission or the European Central Bank. For the 4 larger countries, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Romania, the Economist says the priority should be to prevent further currency collapse, and to rescue the banks responsible for the foreign currency loans that are going bad, with the pain being shared between debtors and the banks, governments of lending and borrowing countries. Financial institutions like the ECB, the IMF, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Developemnt, and the European Investment Bank should help support the rescue effort. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
William Daley, the head of Washington lobbying for JPMorgan Chase, is appointed Chief of Staff to President Obama. He also serves on the board of directors of Boeing and Abbott Labs, companies which a strong interest in Washington lobbying. William Daley is with Chase since 2004, and was hired primarily to strengthen Chase's Chicago connections. In the past he has served as the main liasion with the White House. In 2007 he joined the bank's senior leadership as head of its new Office of Corporate Social Responsibility, which oversees the company's global lobbying efforts.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Former Fed chairman sees the "resolution agency" as a key feature of new financial reform legislation in Congress. This agency would have the power to takeover a large troubled financial institution. It would have the authority to quickly shut it down and this would make it less likely for large financial institutions to take risks knowing the federal government would rescue them.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
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. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the NYT says Bill Clinton moved the Democratic Party to the centre in 1992. In 2016 about 25 years later, after the removal of the Glass Steagall Act led to the 2008 global financial crisis and a deep recession, after the trade relations with China led to loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs over two decades and the hollowing out of industry in the midwest, things have changed. The revolution led by Bernie Sanders, a shrinking middle class, smaller access to college education for the middle and working class, and wide disparities in income, are putting the Democratic Party closer to its roots and the days of FDR. The Democratic Party platform calls for a 21st century Glass Steagall Act to separate normal banking from investment banking, opposes the TPP to prevent any further export of jobs overseas, and goes for a $15 minimum wage. This was also evident at the opening day of the Democratic National Convention when Sanders told the gathering in Philadelphia that even though he was not the candidate, these are the planks of the platform that Hillary Clinton will be pushing for in her presidency. What the editorial does not point out is that the Republican economic platform also calls for reinstatement of Glass Steagall Act, opposes TPP and opposes any loss of American jobs to overseas locations. It differs on the minimum wage leaving it to the states, and it is likely to skew tax cuts towards the wealthy, but also possibly removing the lower income brackets from taxes as Britain has done under the Conservative Party. Both parties today are looking for support from the middle and working class and have directed their appeal to these two groups which are in upheaval. The election of Trudeau in Canada recently also followed this trend, after the hollowing out of Canadian industry in Ontario and Quebec in a similiar pattern as in the midwestern U.S.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The S.E.C.'s failure to build a deterrent against future reckless financial activities- that damages the financial system and hurts the public interest- through effective enforcement. Efforts to rebuild its reputation under S.E.C. chief Mary Jo White.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The SEC requirement that companies disclose the ratio between median worker pay and the pay of senior executives. The SEC says it is putting out the rule as part of implementing Dodd-Frank legislation to control excessive executive pay. Companies will be allowed to survey a fraction of their workforce as appropriate for companies with global operations. Executive pay will include pension benefits and stock options under the new rule. A WSJ chart using information from the University of Southern California and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, shows the ratio between what CEO's on average make and rank and file workers make remained at about 30 times in the post war period till about 1970, a period of rapid growth in the U.S. economy. By 1980 this climbed to about 60 times and exceeded 100 times by 1990. The period of stratospheric growth for CEO pay and extreme widening of the gap then occurs between 1990 and 2000. By 2000 the dot com boom- telecom boom and the internet- creates a surge in executive pay reaching over 500 times. This drops to about 280 times in 2008 and picks up again to reach about 320 times in 2011. Many of the poor business practices, the excessive leveraging and risktaking in the financial industry, take place against this background of excessive pay for senior executives. Some of that risk was passed on to others through such methods as securitization in the period leading to the 2008 financial crisis, so that executives were compensated with higher pay for taking excessive risk that they personally or their companies did not assume. Dodd-Frank legislation following the 2008 financial crisis sought to correct this imbalance by having pay information disclosed. The excessive pay has also coincided with an increase in the frequency of boom-bust cycles in the economy. The busts prompted the needs for intervention by the U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, to drop interest rates more than would otherwise have happened during this decade, culminating in the huge bond purchases and monetary easing by the Bernanke Fed. The SEC under Mary Jo White is mindful of these distortions in the economy as a result of misallocation of resources based on excessive executive pay, and the need to take action before the next crisis. ...

Moral outrage

Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Of 21 reader comments to this piece on banker pay, all except for 4-5, were very critical of the bankers behaviour, including many of their colleagues in the financial industry who commented. The lack of any response from the FSA on the grounds that its not the FSA's job, or from the Treasury, is disconcerting. Treasury is said to have not said a word, when RBS hired a head trader for a rumored 7 million pounds. All this coming on the heels of the RBS and Lloyds debacle, makes the Labor government open to attack from the Conservatives under Osborne and Cameron. and from Mervyn King of the Bank of England. They have expressed strong disapproval of the busines as usual attitude of bankers.
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mary Schapiro, head of the U.S. S.E.C., joins Promontory Financial, a consulting firm set up by former Comptroller of the Currency managers to act as a "bank doctor" for banks that expect to face regulatory scrutiny from government regulatory agencies. In one settlement for mortgage debt which banks settled for $9.3 billion, Promontory Financial was paid $2 billion, according to this WSJ report.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Fed gets tougher on "too big to fail" but how tough? Does it have the guts to go after this problem asks Peter Eavis. If he does Bernake would go down in history as a hero says Eavis. Meanwhile Fed Governor Tarullo clearly point to the utterly inconceivable fact that after a crisis of these proportions with large banks being bailed out, the remaining banks and financial institutions are larger than before the crisis. And the banking lobby has stalled regulation to control the problems in derivatives trading and other areas. Splitting up or downsizing the banks and separating their social function as deposit takers in the economy from their trading desks and investment activity, is being advocated by central bankers from Volcker to Mervyn King. See links.

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us