LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist cites the Dartmouth Atlas Project which shows differences in cost across the country for health outcomes and spending involving Medicare. It cost $5000 per person in Salem, Oregon in 2006, $8000 in San Francisco, and more than $16,000 in Miami, with outcomes for health tending to be better in places where the costs were lower. This is one of the statistics that Peter Orszag of the Congressional Budget Office uses to come up with his estimate of 30% waste in health care spending in the United States. Prof. Skinner at Dartmouth and Prof. Garber at Stanford point out that of most health systems around the world the American system is "uniquely inefficient" and wasteful. The Economist cites information that the American system is twice as costly per person for healthcare than the Swedish system, and that it costs twice as much in Minnesota as in Miami. A poll done for the Economist shows 52% of the people in the UA are dissatified with the quality of care, 40% think the system needs fundamental change, and 29% think that it should be fundamentally rebuilt. The lack of uniform coverage is also causing turmoil in the system. About 49 million are uninsured, and a quarter or more are able to buy insurance and do not buy it because it is so costly, has exclusions and coverage is inadequate. But these people also end up in the emergency rooms along with the indigent costing the whole system tens of billion of dollars for costly late interventions that could have been avoided with preventive care early on. With the economic crisis and rise in joblessness, the dire condition of state and local budgets, the situation has probably drastically worsened, and the system near breakdown. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The increasing competitiveness of Mexico compared to China and India as an investment destination in 2013. Foreign companies are investing heavily in Mexico because of investment advantages in labor cost, supply of engineering and management talent, and proximity to the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
Chevron CEO John Watson says the U.S. needs more affordable energy, and this means it needs to find more fossil fuels. It needs more oil gas and coal. He says the U.S. should take advantage of its own fossil fuel resources. People want strong environmental standards, but as Watson puts it, their top most priority is affordable energy which creates economic growth and jobs. He criticizes the Obama administration for not pushing ahead with developing of U.S. offshore oil, because BP's problems were not systemic and industry wide. He calls for dramatically increasing U.S. oil production, and doing this immediately. Worldwide Chevron plans to invest $26 billion for its exploration budget, and plans to drill in Australia, Western Africa, Gulf of Thailand and other locations. Watson points out that the dynamics of oil production are affected by two factors, price and technology. With current prices at over $100 a barrel more oil is accessible. At these prices new technologies can make it possible to use existing older wells to increase production. He cites the example of Bakersfield, where steam flooding is helping get 70 to 80 barrels out of every 100 barrels in the ground, when in the past Chevron could only get 10-20 barrels of oil. Another technology he mentions is hydrofracking for producing large and cheap supplies of natural gas. Chevron acquired Atlas Energy for $3.2 billion in 2010 to enter this market. Watson's overall emphasis is on the U.S. going for affordable energy and affordable conservation that will create economic growth and a better future....

LyrArc Article Gist
Obama says oil sand leave a big carbon footprint in his interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, just before his visit for talks with Candian Prime Minister Harper in Ottawa, Canada. The talks will focus on climate change, whether the oil sands can continue to be exempt from regulation, and other issues including a "Buy America" provision.

LyrArc Article Gist
Night trains are making a comeback in Europe. Nostalgic ideas of travel from way back are when trains were the main forms of transportation. In 2017 European transport emissions were 28% above 1990 levels. The European Green Deal sees cutting these emissions as a priority for meeting climate change. Rail is critical for achieving this. For EU CO2 emissions road transport is largest contributor (73%), aviation (13%) and maritime (11%).Austria's OBB rail system is launching night sleeper trains from Vienna to Brussels and Vienna to Amsterdam.  Competition will increase in rail. Italy's Trenitalia  has applied to EU Agency for Railways (ERA) to operate in France. French SNCF and Trenitalia will enter Spain in June 2020. Critical are capital investments in rail per person for each country. Austria and Switzerland lead, and Germany is 140 euros per person target as part of the 86 billion euro plan in capital investments  for rail over the next ten years. Technical standardization is an important goal- as a stop in Aachen for Austrian railways night train from Vienna to Brussels for 30 minutes because of changing a locomotive and the train driver having to be Flemish. Freight movement by rail is another goal as it is stuck at 17% for years.  The Green Deal in transport in Europe is likely to have an impact around the world as rail makes a comeback for sustainable tourism. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Olivier Blanchard, chief economist of the IMF says that as government borrowing around the world surges, interest rates will go up. Governments borrow by selling bonds to investors, and to attract investors the government competes with stock and corporate bond markets for investor's money, leading to rising yields for investors. As the confidence has returned to corporate bond markets this is already happening. From the end of 2008. the yield on the benchmark 10 year Treasury note has increased by one and ahalf percentage points, rising to 3.54% from 2%, the sharpest upward movement in 15 years. In Germany the yield on German 10 year bonds has also risen, rising to 3.57% from 2.93%. Similiarly British bond yields have risen to 3.78% from 3.41%. Congressional Budget Office estimates are that net government debt for the USA will rise to 65% of GDP at the end of fiscal 2010, from 41% at the end of fiscal 2008. In 2009 and 2010 the US government will sell $5 trillion in new debt, according to Citigroup. A decade from now the government's outstanding debt could equal 82% of GDP, or about $17 trillion. Every one point rise in interest rates costs the Treasury $50 billion annually over a few years, and Kenneth Rogoff estimates that this could reach $170 billion annually if the average yield on 10 year Treasury note goes up to 4.7%, as the Congressional Budget Office estimates. This will dampen the effects of stimulus spending. It is a big issue says Rogoff. A year ago under old policy and assumptions before the financial crisis the Congressional Budget Office projected outstanding debt at $5.3 trillion in 10 years. Now the estimate is $17 trillion, which is triple the old number and an increase of $11 trillion. A recovering economy would make these numbers less relevant. But with struggling industries like autos and banks needing more help from the government, and with consumers having to reduce a mountain of debt, a weak economy for a long time and small growth for a decade would make this a story that won't go away. Rogoff says its like what happened to the subprime borrowers, people assuming that the funding is always going to be there. In 2009 and 2010 Citigroup says, the Euro zone countries will sell nearly 1.6 trillion euros or $2.6 trillion in new debt, and Britain will offer 490 billion pounds or $799 billion in new debt. Over the next decade this would slow Europe's recovery and prolong the downturn. Britain faces a bigger problem in the near term as Britain's governmetn debt equals 55% of GDP, and Standard and Poors estimates it could approach 100% by 2013. South America and Eastern Europe will also face the situation of rising rates. Asian countries like China with lower levels of debt are in a better situation, IMF's Blanchard says....

LyrArc Article Gist
In Europe, France, Spain, Germany and other countries are giving cash subsidies to customers to buy cars when they turn in older cars. These refunds range from 1000 to 2500 euros, and reward the purchase of smaller more fuel efficient vehicles. It has boosted sales in Europe where sales are running at an annual rate of more than 13 million because of the subsidies, according to Credit Suisse analyst, which is well above the 11 million level of last year. The average American car says the analyst has been on the road for 9 years similar to that in Germany, so it makes sense for the USA. He says it could increase sales in the USA to 12 million cars, down from the 16 million sold in 2007 or the 13.4 million rate of 2008, but far higher than the 9.5 million rate in the first few months of 2009. In Europe small cars are dominant and it plays to the markets of large carmakers like Peugeot, VW, FIat, and Renault. But in the US Japanese carmakers are dominant in the small car market. Detroit carmakers make too many large cars and pickup trucks so the impact would be less. But the program could be fashioned in the US on a drop down in size and increase in fuel efficency, so that the clear direction is towards smaller cars. Turning in a pickup truck for a family car like a Malibu or a LaCrosse might promote fuel efficiency, and move things in the right direction. Its useful to note that even in Germany more expensive cars or brands have barely benefitted German car sales jumped 21.5% in February, but mass market manufacturers recorded a 37% surge, while sales of premium cars fell 19%. In Italy which started its program Feb. 6, buyers receive 1500 euros for trading in acar at least 10 years old. Fiat Punto sales have shown a strong increase. Fiat's facory in Melfi, southern Italy, is now running at full capacity after running on areduced scale from October 2008 to February 2009. It makes the Punto. In France 30-40% of car sales are coming from the scrapping deal, according to French Auto Manufacturers Association. Overall sales are running at about 6% below last year's rate, but in the absence of the scrapping deal sales might be off 10-15%. One concern for the French is that sales not drop off after the scrapping deal stops.France saw this happen in 1997and 1998 after ascrapping deal in 1994-1996. However considering that the cost to the German government for scrapping deal was $2 billion, the solution to this would be continue this program till the economy recovers and car sales are strong. Considering the benefits for an important industry and the societal benefit in lower pollution, it would be worth the cost....

LyrArc Article Gist
An assessment of Brazil compared to the other leading emergig market countries Russia, China and India, shows that Brazil has a lot going for it. Compared to Russia and China, Brazil has a stable multiparty democracy. And the differences between the countryside and the urban areas is not quite as large as it is in China and India. Surprising as it may appear about 83% of Brazilians now live in cities. And the process of urbanization that is taking place in China and India took place much earlier in Brazil. Between 1940 to 1980 industrialization and a growth rate that averaged 7% for most of that period brough large numbers of people from rural to urban areas. And the problem of inflation which wracked the economy from 1986 to 1994 before being brought under control is now well under control at about 4.7%. Debt problems from the Asian crisis contagion effects are now behind it as Brazil is a big exporter of commodities from coffee, soyabeans, orange juice to iron ore, with the real strengthening from 68 as measured in the currencies of its trading partners in 2001 to 100 today. Brazil's growth rate has reached 5.4%. and has been at an average of 4.5% since 2004. Between 1980 and 2000 Brazil's growth was in a slump so this has been a period of great changes in Brazil. Brazil is importing more plant and equipment with a stronger currency and booming exports. Brazil invests 19% of GDP according to Vale of MB Associados and that number should reach 25% of GDP at which point it would be easier to maintain a growth rate of 5% a year. With consumer credit growing at 25% each year for the last 2 years consumption is growing. And Brazilian companies were the second largest source of foreign direct investment in developing countries after China, according to the Fundacao Dom Cabral, a business school, and Columbia University, with the stronger real helping the balance sheets of Brazilian companies. The big change is that under the Lula government Brazil has done much better for the working classes and the rural poor. The Bolsa Familias is a program of cash transfers to poor people under the poverty line but which has strings attached so that they are required to send their children to school and have them vaccinated. It reaches 11 million families and is considered a major success in reducing poverty and in helping to see that poverty is not passed on from generation to generation. A program that may be copied in India. Acccording to the Observador Brasil/ Ipsos survey 23 million Brazilians have left social classes D and E and joined class C which means that they can have a rented apartment, a car and some gadgets. This give more confidence in Brazilian democracy and capitalism as more of society's diverse groups have a stake in the future....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Treasury and Fed's handling of the financial markets crisis on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday as it unfolded Sept 17, 18, 19 and 20, the worst since the 1930's. With the credit markets battered, the collapse of Lehman Brothers investment bank and the rescue of AIG right on the heels of the rescue of Fannie and Freddie the previous week, and all these moves barely improving the general loss of confidence and increasing fragility of the financial markets worldwide. Steps like the ban on short selling by the SEC to stem two 400 point declines in the last few days, and the Fed setting aside $50 billion to shore up money market funds by making them whole where needed, and providing about $200 billion through the European Central Bank and the central banks of Japan, Britain, Canada and Switzerland, were tactical moves so Paulson and Bernanke had to address the real problem of removing the highly illiquid assets of risky mortgages from the financial markets. This would require working with Congress to put together the necessary legislation which is what Congress, Treasury, the Fed, and others will work on this weekend of September 21, 22, so that the legislation could be drawn up the following week and passes into law creaing some Federal agency that will buy up the illliquid mortgage assets owned by banks, investment banks, and other financial institutions before there is another series of collapses in the financial markets necessitating rescues by the Fed. Meantime Treasury has raised another $200 billion last week through sale of Treasurys and provided this money to the Fed to use as needed. The result of the most recent chaos in the financial markets has resulted finally in agreement among all parties about the need for committing taxpayer money in hundreds of billions of dollars to be used to buy up the risky illiquid mortgage assets at steep discounts to be resold later to bargain seeking companies so that the banking sector can repair their balance sheets and recover, as being much safer and less costly route than the cost of rescuing financial firms with systemic risk on an individual basis after a run on these firms or their imminent collapse. Which is why people like Laurence Meyer of Macroeconomic Advisors himself a former senior Fed official believe that this is the first serious effort to tackle the crisis by getting to the root cause of the problem and removing the illiquid mortgage assets and the Government an taxpayers spending the hundreds of billions of dollars but at the same time finally seriously tackling the crisis in a manner that will restore confidence to the markets and to the industrial economy of the USA. His comment, "the markets voted and they liked the proposal", as the Dow Jones went up 610 points at one point and ended up the day Thursday September 19 at 410 points gain for the day....

LyrArc Article Gist
Had Bear Stearns gone under JP Morgan would have risked large losses as JP Morgan is a counterparty in trades with Bear Stearns and JP Morgan faces large losses in its credit card business and has exposure to the home equity business.

LyrArc Article Gist
Would hedge funds that short Lehman's stock want to create an environment of perceptions of uncertainty around Lehman. ts quite possible. Lehman's CEO Fuld flew back from India over the weekend and went on the offensive to dispel perceptions of weakness. According to this report Bear Stearns had $33 billion in total liquidity compared to $169 billion for lehmans which compares with $169 billion for Goldman Sachs. Of this Lehman has $35 billion in cash and liquid assets and $160 billion in unencumbered assets like loans and securities backed by commercial mortgages that it use as collateral to borrow more. Lehman has the highest percentage of liquidity at 25% of total assets compared to other major brokers according to Buckingham Research Associates the source for these numbers. Its here that the Fed's recent decision to lend to the largest investment firms comes into play. As Mr Fuld stated the Fed's decision to create a lending facility for these primary dealers like Lehmanand permit a broad range of investment grade securities o serve as collateral improves the liquidity picture and in his view takes the liquidity issue for the entire industry off the table. Those looking at the downside point to the Level 3 assets of no observable value of $42 billion and the $37 billion in residential mortgages in Lehman Brothers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Fact checking Apple CEO Tim Cook's statements on the EU Commission ruling for $13 billion in back taxes, shows that CEO Tim Cook's statement that "we never asked for, nor did we receive any special deals," is not true. Ireland let Apple determine what it would pay in tax, and Apple had the benefit of loopholes in Irish tax laws, the fact check by experts shows here. Apple's Cook also says it would hurt investment and jobs in Ireland. Another NYT article showed that the entire healthcare budget of Ireland would be covered by the $13 billion, and 66% of its budget for social support services to the public. Apple has 22,000 employees in Europe and 6000 in Ireland in 2016. Based on the $13 billion owed in taxes, for every job in Ireland the cost to Ireland is 2.17 million euros, and for every job in the EU the cost is 590,000 euros. Apple could turn around and locate in some other place, other than Ireland, in which case Ireland does not get the 6000 jobs. This is Ireland's incentive to give Apple tax benefits. Only if all EU countries had common tax laws would it be possible to avoid this situation, and generate much needed tax revenues at a time of cuts in public spending in healthcare, education, and social services, and invest in infrastructure, worker retraining. The alternative is for the EU to look at other remedies. This is what the EU Commissioner Vestager did when she announced that this was a state subsidy and illegal under EU rules. Because the appeal by Apple goes to the EU Courts the appeal is difficult say legal experts. The EU courts look at the legal aspects of the ruling, was it justified, not at the overall aspect of the ruling by Vestager, as EU Competition Commissioner. This may be why there is so much outcry from Apple, and other digital companies.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT editorial says the negative feedback loop of foreclosures begetting falling house prices, which beget more foreclosures, and further weaken banks, is well under way. One way to have broken this, was to enable good types of loan modifications, which reduce the principal for homeowners and reduce payments significantly. Sheila Bair at FDIC says 32% of prior payments is about the right amount. The bad types of loan modifications that lead to no reduction in principal, and put homeowners back in redefault because of large payments that homeowners "under water" or a lost job cannot afford, have so far been the dominant kind of loan modification. At present 14 million homeowners are "under water," in that their homes are worth less than what is owed on the mortgage. One of the crucial measures which would have enabled this, has not been pushed by the Obama administration through Congress. This was to pass an amendment that allowed bankruptcy judges to modify troubled mortgages. Banks which have taken billions of dollars in loans from the federal government were allowed to lobby aggressively to kill this amendment, and the Obama administration did little to push this amendment in Congress. 12 Senate Democrats joined 39 Senate Republicans to block a vote on the amendment. Says the NYT editorial "when the time came to stand up to the banking lobbies and cajole yes votes from reluctant senators-the White House did'nt. When the measure failed there wasn't even a statement of regret." This could turn out to be a major mistake, because as the NYT points out voluntary loan modifications have shown poor results. The administration's plan to provide incentives for loan modification is untried and tested, and may not produce significant results. With 14 million homeowners under water, and spiralling foreclosures, the situation may get out of control and seriously damage the economy. After the moratorium in home foreclosures ended there is expected to be a big surge in foreclosures, with estimates of 290,000 to 341,000 foreclosures in March, 2009. If this is allowed to continue it will undo all the good work in other areas, the stimulus spending, rebuilding the auto industry and other steps. It will also be more difficult to reverse as valuable time passes and the cost of the crisis escalates. A consensus among many experts was that stronger action in connection with the banks was required, and Martin Feldstein has warned about the danger posed by foreclosures since early 2008, see links....