LyrArc Article Gist
Fuel efficiency rules require average fuel efficiency in the U.S. of 35 mpg by 2016. The debate is now on what to do for 2017 to 2025. New technology such as the P2 systems for hybrids already used in VW, Nissan and Hyundai vehicles makes a 20% increase in fuel efficiency possible. Large investments are being made to bring new technology to bear on increasing fuel efficiency significantly. Government agencies are looking at different scenarios by which the new fuel economy standards beyond 2017-2025 could be set between 47 mpg and 62 mpg. An additional factor is the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions- at 47 mpg the reduction would be 3%, at 62 mpg the reduction would be 6%. Another factor is how much the impact is on the cost of vehicles and reduced cost on gasoline. Here there is a wide range in the numbers for average mpg rules at 62 mpg- with EPA estimates at $2800-$3500 increase in vehicle cost and $5000 savings in fuel cost, Centre for Automotive Research estimates at $9790 increase in vehicle cost. The 62 mpg translates into "real world" actual efficiency of 45 mpg. In April 2011, 17 senators put out a letter of support for the 62 mpg proposal. There is a public value involved in this that is also significant- the reduced dependence on foreign oil means savings in defense expenditures in parts of the Middle East, and an economy that is less impacted by volatility in the price of oil. As this aspect of public value or benefits cannot be quantified easily even though they are significant, this may tend to be lost in the debate and the politics of fuel efficiency. For automakers there is significant marketing value in having a visible and strong presence in fuel efficient vehicles because of perception as forward looking- something that hurt Detroit carmakers in the last decade. During periods of gasoline prices at $5 a gallon this provides carmakers with an extra cushion of safety in securing car sales. Carmakers in one country such as the U.S. also have to worry about what carmakers in other countries such as Japan and Germany are doing- if the standards in the U.S. develop a gap compared to other countries developing advanced fuel efficiency technologies this poses significant risks because of the global nature of the automobile marketplace. See the group "Asleep at the Spigot" for more details on this. Many of these less quantifiable factors do not get the attention they deserve because they are significant from experience but not easily quantified. Throw into this the large unknown of what new technologies not yet developed lie ahead with a burst of effort by one country or another, which bring cost reductions at the same time - and the debate requires as much a good sense of what is the path offering the greatest advantages in years ahead than a pure exercize in numbers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks says one of the good things about the ugly election campaign of 2016 and its depletion of moral capital, is the way people are responding to it by finding their voice for something better and uplifting. He cites Michelle Obama as one example of someone who acts not as a politician but as a mother in her behaviour and talk. He praises Hillary Clinton for adopting this Michelle tone and giving 3 answers he calls great in the final debate with Trump. The answers came on the questions about Trump and denigration of women,  on the contrast between the experience gained on a television show "Apprentice," and the experience of Clinton as senator and secretary of state. Brooks says they were given in a gradual understated manner, showing moral sentiment and a quiet contempt, similar to how a mother or parent would respond and not a politician. Another way to look at it is that the contrast was so great between her and her opponent's experience and respect for parenthood, and the campaign so long with so many people who had shown indifference when they should have known and done better, that Hillary Clinton simply stood her own ground based on her own Protestant Methodist faith and conviction.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The National Assessment of Educational Progess (NAEP) test scores in the U.S. for K-12 show a lack of progress since 2013. Scores for math and reading dropped for 8th grade students, and scores for reading were stagnant while dropping in math for 4th grade students. The test scores reflect progress in rural, suburban, urban environments, for communities that are affluent, less affluent and poor, different ethnic backgrounds. The test started in 1990 is the only one measuring national progress. The new results of NAEP are on a scale of 0 to 500, and show that in 2015 64 percent of 4th graders and 66 percent of eighth graders were not reading proficient, 60 percent of 4th graders and 67 percent of 8th graders were not math proficient. Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, do much better in the tests than Mississippi and New Mexico. Experts say a state to state comparison should separate the non native English speaking students from native English speaking, especially in states like Texas. With about two thirds of students failing the math and reading proficiency levels, growing proportions of minority Hispanic students in many states, larger proportion of less affluent students, the tests show the challenges facing America's K-12 education even after the changes introduced by Education Secretary Duncan since 2008....

LyrArc Article Gist
This essay in the Economist magazine points out the special nature of the 2017 presidential election in France with the rejection of establishment candidates- Manuel Valls, Sarkozy, Juppe, and now Fillon. Fillon and Valls were prime ministers under Sarkozy and Hollande, from the Republican and Socialist parties respectively. With unemployment high in the areas outside the major cities their is a surge in support in these areas for the National Front. Emmanuel Macron, former Economy minister in the Hollande government, is the only candidate leading Marie Le Pen at this time. In a second round of voting he has to bring in centre right supporters and centre left voters and moderate voters, and appeal enough to working class voters, young unemployed people, offering hope for a better future to win this election against Le Pen. Economist magazine research shows support highest for Le Pen outside major cities in outlying areas, and for Macron in the major cities. There is also an education divide as seen in the U.S. election and Brexit referendum with less educated voters preferring the nationalist sentiment, church support sentiment fostered by the National Front.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With so much coverage of other aspects of China,  to really understand China and Xi Jinping one has to understand the rural urban situation in China. Xi's long experience as a teenager in the cultural revolution of Mao was in rural areas, the 8 years he spent there till the age of 22, as this report by James Areddy with help of Yijun, Cheng and Qi aptly shows. It traces the shift and mass migration to cities starting with Deng's modernization drive in 1979. This shift of labor to city and town factories as the U.S. and Europe shifted factories and production to China is the story of our times. How it has both helped and hurt China and how it has become the dominant issue of our times, and a lesson for India in the middle of its own modernization and shift of labor to cities. It has helped China modernize with the shift during 1979 to 2016 and run into a road block with president Trump leading a movement in the U.S. of people most hurt by the outsourcing of factories and production to China. It was not meant to be this way. Yet the shift also led to ripping up the fabric of communities and towns with loss of factories across America over three decades. Because China is a large country the impact was huge decade after decade, leading to a backlash against lost jobs in the U.S. and in Europe.  Xi Jinping has romantic view of rural China as he spent 7 years in Shanxi province rural areas during the cultural revolution under Mao. During this period he toiled as part of farm labor alongside villagers which allowed him to get to know villagers and farmers in the countryside well, and formed his view of the world around him. As it is described in a description of the man in Chinese sources- "He arrived at the village as a slightly lost teenager and left as a 22 year old man determined to do something for the people."  China's system separated migrants from city dwellers not  giving same rights to better education, to schools and housing, and official documents separating the two, city dwellers and migrant populations from rural areas. As a result as China modernized and population shifted -shown here in excellent graphic charts over four decades- in 1979 from about 80% in rural areas and 20% in urban the shift goes to 50-50 by 2001. Today it is 40-60 with 60% in rural areas but a population of 40% suffering from severe inequalities and  low incomes. So that GDP per capita of $10,000 for China is deceiving. The real incomes in average disposable income is about $4300 in urban and $1700 in rural area, according to National Bureau of Statistics. High school education is hard enough to get in rural areas, medical care is very basic and the $1700 would hardly get a room in low income housing in a large town in China, says premier Li Keqiang. Keqiang did his masters thesis on urbanization and has studied this shift from his college days. Just as in Gandhi's India, Mao's China is the story of the villages, with 128,000 villages for 600 million people in Mr. Xi Jinping's anti-poverty drive. Hong Kong other issues have to be understood in the context of these concerns of China's leadership today- the sense that strong central leadership alone can keep the country together and bring a decent life to the people in the villages and in the countryside outside the cities.  Modernization of cities still set in the context of China's vast rural population and essential to its full uplift and progress. Xi has allocated $80 billion each year to bring roads, schools, medical facilities, and other amenities including electricity and modern heating. The idea now is to shift people back to the villages, find opportunities for jobs and livelihoods in farming, tourism with guesthouse facilities, and other occupations in the villages. The villages are being turned into attractive places to live one by one in this party drive and providing new enthusiasm and support for the party's efforts. India can learn from this experience in China. The western nations of the U.S. and Europe can no longer and will no longer undertake the wholesale shift of factories with loss of jobs to China or India to offer the prospect of bringing these countries to the kind of urbanization and overall prosperity of small nations like Japan and South Korea, which are a tiny fraction of the population of China and India+ Pakistan + Bangladesh. As a result China is changing strategy now with a return to some aspects of the informal economy in Chengdu with street peddlers and tiny retail, and return of migrants back to better built and improved villages in the countryside. A better life than in cities is possible this view says for people from these rural areas, if the rural areas are given modern facilities and construction and resources are allocated, job creation locally tackled. The villages can offer better air quality, better quality of life where villagers who earlier migrated to cities with ownership of land, when they are modernized with better roads and have better facilities for education, housing and healthcare, better amenities. The new approach is to strike a good balance for urbanization, by modernizing and investing in villages and small towns, so that cities can cope and overall life can be better than with mass migration and wholesale urbanization. It is also a balance that works well for the U.S. and Europe which can redirect manufacturing to their home regions as part of a better distributed and balanced supply chain than the one that was unwittingly built over the last three decades.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Berlin based China studies center MERICS experts say China's weak spot is domestic consumption, as it is too reliant on export demand. These experts say overseas demand from Europe and US has held up in recent months, but where would China pick up manufacturing production when this demand slows down? Stimulus is seen as risky by experts and contradictory to efforts by the Chinese government to reduce debt based financial risks, with the debt built up in hypergrowth of two decades since 2000. Much of this hypergrowth itself has resulted in trade tensions with US and today puts China in what MERICS calls this "tricky situation." This situation resulted from growth since 2000 that was was unleashed from local governments in China with failure to control it from the central government in Beijing to reduce its impact on deindustrialization of towns and communities in the US and Europe. A lesson that China's planners may be looking at as they look to the future for more balance and quality of life,  and dignity of life for rural, town and city communities across China. Politburo CCP's standing committee has put forward the idea of a "dual circulation economy" to reduce dependence on foreign demand, and balance it with growing domestic demand, yet experts at Berlin base MERICS say this has not happened. A report from the Atlantic Council says without domestic demand picking up the pace of China's growth, China would have difficulty growing beyond 3% annually by 2025.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
NYT fails to see the importance of delivering on infrastructure building in scale, reshoring, wages and jobs for workers, and climate change action that president Biden is achieving to build a better America. NYT looks at the 2023 and the midterm elections and points out a well known fact that women (and men) in the suburbs care about legalized abortion rights for women, and this extends to states that vote Republican in the south. No attention is given to the importance of infrastructure building, increasing wages and jobs for working class and middle class Americans, bringing factories and investment back to the US, three issues that brought Mr. Trump into office in 2016 coming out of nowhere. Mr. Biden is old is the refrain. Yet it is president Biden who has delivered on infrastructure where Mr. Trump merely talked about it -Building America Better- as Biden pointed out in the State of the Union address in 2023. Biden has delivered in support for wage increases for workers, even joining the picket line at the UAW auto workers strike in Detroit. He was able to do this because he has spent more years in Congress than any other senator, and like Lyndon Johnson for the Great Society programs and desegregation in the 1960's was able to win support from moderate Republicans. Being older, having the wisdom and experience was and is indispensable in the American project started by Washington and sustained by Lincoln, who nurtured wisdom, experience, fully comprehending the people's problems, and mindfulness in the way Mr. Biden does. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Moody's assigns a junk rating to Portugal's government debt in May 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
Portugal in 2012-2013 stands as a good case study of what is good and what is bad about austerity measures, about what makes sense and is needed and what does not make sense and is bad both in a fiscal sense and for growth. Patricia Knowsmann does a good job of bringing this out, from the hundreds of stories written about austerity vs growth in the media. During 2011-2012, the elected government of Passos Coelho has supported an EU-IMF-ECB program that reduced wages, raised taxes, privatized state owned companies and changed labor laws that reduced hiring by businesses. During this time the Portuguese have patiently accepted the program compared to other countries and the budget deficit is shrinking from 9.8% in 2010 to an expected 5% in 2012. The unemployment rate has gone up to 15%. Now a new plan by prime minister Coelho in September has created an uproar and sparked popular opposition to the austerity measures threatening what has been achieved in deficit reduction, including the credibility of the austerity program. The plan is to reduce the portion of salaries that employers contribute to the social security system from 23.5% to 18%, in the hope that employers would increase hiring. At the same time it increases the portion of salaries employees pay from 11% to 18%. Coelho was looking at Germany and Slovenia where employees pay more than 20% of salaries to Social Security. What he failed to look at was the situation in Portugal where workers and pensioners have lost about 24% of their income through wage cuts and tax increases. The new plan would reduce incomes even further. Portugal's small business owners expressed strong disapproval for the plan because it would mean a drastic drop in consumer spending. The president of a Portuguese shoe maker, Kyaia, with 600 employees, says it makes no sense to reduce companies contribution if the company can't sell enough shoes to keep its workers. Kyaia has already experienced a 25% decline in demand and its CEO Fortunato Frederico, says he cannot understand how a company can hire workers if demand declines. This impact on consumer demand and sentiment is a fact that policymakers cannot ignore throughout the eurozone as austerity measures are implemented, especially when demand has already declined to an unacceptable point. The move by Coelho ignored a study by Portugal's finance ministry and central bank that showed export businesses may be induced to hire from the savings in contributions, but the businesses serving the domestic market would simply take in the savings. The EU-IMF-ECB recognized this and suggested increasing taxes to pay for the reduction in employer contributions, which would also depress demand by reducing incomes further. Portugal's economy and business is not focussed on exports, small business makes up 97% of Portugal's companies and most of them do not export. The introduction of such a plan gives credibility to the idea that there is a transfer of wealth from workers to business under the austerity programs, which affects the credibility of the entire deficit reduction and competitiveness improvement programs. For Coelho it also means the strong opposition of a minority party in his coalition government and from members of his Social Democratic Party. Large demonstrations were held on Sept 15 in 40 cities in Portugal in the first large scale opposition to further austerity measures and the Coelho social security contribution plan. Capital markets in Europe also see a problem with such plans because it removes the essential element of popular acceptance of deficit reduction plans jeopardizing the entire program. After the failure to win popular acceptance in Greece capital markets see additional risks and failures as one too many for the eurozone. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's new prime minister told the Japanese Parliament in a policy speech, that a crisis like that in Greece was possible in Japan, if trust in national bonds was lost and the policy of public spending to lift the economy was not reversed. This speech followed the resignation of Shizuka Kamei, as banking minister. Kamei was seen as an advocate of continued public spending. He cautioned that a policy of relying heavily on issuing debt could not be sustained for long. Japan has government debt of $9.7 trillion, which is close to twice its gross national product in 2009. Much of this debt is held by the public in Japan, but analysts have cautioned that with the aging population, it is possible that people who retire will need the cash from bonds, requiring the government to turn to the debt markets for financing. Among the proposals Kan suggested is raising the 5% sales tax to pay for rising social welfare costs for an aging population. Satoshi Arai, the new national strategy minister, says the government will draft a plan by June 22 to address the public debt. He said the government would not exceed $500 billion in bond issuance for fiscal year ending March 2012....

LyrArc Article Gist
The language and tone of the leaders says something about what is likely to be the outcome of the G20 summit. Its a first for significant participation, as countries as diverse as Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the Netherlands are represented. The credible positions of both sides, the US, UK and Japan, and the European side of France, Germany and the Czech Republic, well presented, provide for some serious discussion and negotiations. France's Sarkozy and Germany's Merkel want to see a global regulator that would reach inside the borders of the US with stricter regulation. Sarkozy calls this "nonnegotiable." And he said that he would reject an agreement that puts off stringent new regulations on banks, tax havens, and hedge funds. He said "the compromise has to come from all countries around the world." US President Obama said that if there is going to be renewed growth it can't just be the US as the engine, everybody is going to have to pick up the pace," at the same time saying that the US had to be concerned about its own deficits. The fact is that the US stimulus will mostly help a severely impacted domestic economy recover with social safey net payments to local and state governments and unemployment insurance, as well as targeted investments in infrastructure, education, energy and health care. It will not mean anywhere near the kinds of imports the US made from other countries, especially China. And Obama made that clear when he said the US will never return to that situation, where the US had become a "voracious consumer market." For the Germans the major market for their middle companies is China, and China has its own stimulus spending on infrastructure spending, which should provide for continued imports of machinery from Germany at a much lower level. Thus Germany and France see a strong tendency to call the source of the crisis and repeat that call till the US listens, and refer to the failure of free market capitalism in its unregulated form. And to insist on fixing it through a global regulator with strict and systemwide rules. So you hear this in Merkel's words, "the foundation for this finacial architecture must be laid now, that is why we seem to be so tough." While the vivacious Sarkozy talks of compromise, and a US gesture in regulation in return for Franc's gesture of joining NATO, the mild mannered Merkel is clear and focussed about her concern. She rejects the idea of linking stimulus spending demands of the Anglo-Americans with the Franco-German demands for global systemwide regulation. "This is not a bargaining chip," she says. The media may mistakenly report lack of consensus as a failure of the summit. But in the long run in the presence of good positions on both sides, it could lead to some tough negotiations even if continued at another meeting. And result in something serious, credible and lasting in its impact, rather than something that was easy and did not in Andy Grove's useful words involve "constructive confrontation." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The campaign rhetoric for renegotiating NAFTA and building a wall at the border has had a sharply negative effect on growth in Mexico. Growth slowed in 2016 and is expected to be close to zero in 2017 with declining foreign investment in the economy. The uncertainty is leading to sharp decline in foreign direct investment of 24% in the first 9 months of 2016, according to the Bank of Mexico. Further declines can be expected in 2017. The decline in the value of the peso of 16% since May 2016 has led to 6 interest rate increases in the past year. Inflation on annual basis was at 4.72% in Jan. 2017 and is rising. As Mexico depends on exports for one third of its output growth, and 80% is sent to the U.S., there is a need to diversify with trade agreements made with the European Union and other countries. Mexicans now question the value of NAFTA trade agreement as average growth of 2.6 since NAFTA was signed is below the 4.6% in the 2 decades prior to that. And poverty level is the same with about 60% of people in the underground economy. In addition crime, drug trade, a weak education system, weak rule of law, political corruption, show that Mexico has not made the progress since NAFTA that it should have made. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Venezuelan government provides gasoline to people in the country at a few cents a gallon- almost free. Even Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and Kuwait which have way better financial balances and dollar reserves do not provide gasoline at such prices. The result is chronic shortages of basic parts and other imports because the government does not have enough dollar reserves for imports. Venezuela devalued its currency by 32% recently, making imports more expensive and pushing inflation up even higher to 28%. The problems it creates are excessive and wasteful use of gasoline, and free gasoline that then provides consumers money to pay for surging cost of everyday imported products. Nullifying any real benefits when shortages, inflation, dilapidated infrastructure and lack of development and jobs, are taken into account. The lack of capital to invest in the oil industry has led to declining production making the situation unsustainable. Yet neither party of Maduro or Capriles in the upcoming April 14, 2013 election, following the death of Chavez, supports ending this subsidy. Efforts to end the subsidy by president Carlos Andres Perez in 1986 led to riots and about hundred deaths in police response, and a coup by Chavez, then a military officer, a few years later. Under Chavez the subsidy was extended to the level at which gasoline is about 4 cents a gallon. Compare this with the price in neighboring Colombia at $4.72 a gallon, and Brazil at $5.40 per gallon. Consumption per capita in Venezuela is excessively high, about seven times per capita than neighboring Columbia. The investment in infrastucture is hobbled by lack of capital, the capital Caracas dilapidated, and no major infrastructure projects taken up by the government. It costs Venezuela 8.6% of GDP or $27 billion to pay for the excessively high subsidy, compared to 3.2% of GDP going to healthcare spending and 5.1% for education. In comparison Indonesia, another developing country, uses 2.5% of GDP or 21 billion for its subsidy for a population of over 200 million. It is not that a fuel subsidy is provided, but the entitlement to free gasoline that makes Venezuela the lone exception. There is a reason why prices in Brazil and China, large developing countries, price gasoline to motorists at over $4 a gallon- to discourage excessive and wasteful use, and release scarce capital for infrastructure development, building dollar reserves for imports of machinery and equipment, and other uses in industrializing economies. Compare Venezuela with Bolivia under the socialist government of Evo Morales. In 2010 Bolivia increased its price of gasoline by 80%. The price in 2013 is about $2.00 per gallon. Morales cushioned the increase by increasing salaries in the health and education sectors, armed forces and police by 20%, and increasing prices of locally produced wheat, corn and rice by 10%. Morales said he did this to reduce state subsidies of $380 million for $660 million in gasoline imports, of which $150 million was siphoned off by smuggling gasoline to neigboring countries. Incentives were provided to oil companies to produce gasoline in Bolivia to reduce imports. ...