LyrArc Article Gist
Washington Post calls a Netherlands unrealized capital gains tax of 36% unfair. The legislation was passed in lower house of parliament. Unrealized capital losses could be used to offset gains in future years under this legislation. The US only taxes capital gains after they are realized and at 15% or 20% for long term gains and a 4% added tax for high income persons. The 36% tax would apply to all who own stocks or bonds not just the wealthy.

In Netherlands the average take of the ogvernment is 3%% compared to 30% in US. Healthcare costs are split 65% 45% between the government and average worker, and mostly all (84% of workers) get additional coverage. The value added tax rate VAT is 21% in Netherlands about 3 times the US sales tax of 6-7%. And the Netherlands is in the EU a relatively moderate tax country compared to France and UK.

LyrArc Article Gist
In a 50-50 Senate to pass president Biden's $3.6 trillion Families and Workers plan requires the vote of Kyrsten Simema, Democrat of Arizona. Simema is the lone holdout in the plan to raise $540 billion by increasing corporate tax rates to pay for part of the plan. Tax rate increases on capital gains would raise nearly $300 billion. A law passed by president Trump lowered corporate tax rates to 21% which would go up to 26.5% under the Biden plan. The top individual rate lowered to 37% would go up to 39.6% and capital gains rate from 23.8% to 28.8% under the Biden plan. Democrats say these new rates are fair considering how much wealth distribution is skewed and how much workers and families have failed to benefit in the policies pursued by different administrations since Reagan, through Bush, Clinton, Obama and Trump.

LyrArc Article Gist
Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan in the U.S. draws support from about 60% of people polled for the New York Times. Over 66% support Warren's 2% wealth tax on people with wealth over $50 million. The support is consistent among all groups, gender and race. Only a group of Republican men with college degrees which is likely to include the bulk of the people with wealth over $50 million oppose the wealth tax and Medicare for All. Over the past year wealth tax and Medicare for All support has grown with about 60% of people supporting Medicare for All, a plan similar to government plans in most of Europe and in Canada which have worked over many years.

Warren's plan wins support by showing how it will be paid for and why most people will pay no more than they are paying today, and overall much less because of unnecessary costs taken out of the system.

LyrArc Article Gist
How much room is there to raise interest rates. Patrick Minford of the University of Cardiff says a lot more. At the rate of 9-10% inflation in Britain more interest rate increases are likely. Minford is advising Liz Truss who is candidate for prime minister. Minford's main ideas are- Get interest rates back up to what was considered normal in previous decades- 5-7% for mortgage rates is what it used to be. At that rate it protects people's savings something that did not happen in the last 2 decades of ultra low rates worsening the wealth gap for Britons in different classes. Cutting taxes is about providing the economy a boost as rates go up. It is not about huge cuts, just modest cuts like the 30 billion pound cuts proposed by Truss. Minford is not talking about low taxes. He is simply talking about having taxes at levels that will promote growth- "the key to growth is not having high taxes. We're not talking about cutting them, just talking about not having them at catastrophic levels." Here is what Liz Truss is proposing- Reverse the recent rise in national insurance. Scrap the increase in corporation tax. About this plan Minford says- "If we raise corporation tax we will kill off growth." Minford dismisses concerns about borrowing. " It's crazy to begin to try to drop the debt to GDP ratio 5 minutes after Covid." With higher rates Minford also think there will be fewer "zombie" companies eating up the nation's capital, while protecting the savings of hard working ordinary people in Britain which hasn't happened in the last two decades of ridiculously low rates, worsening wealth gaps in British society. Minford calls Sunak's policies "puerile" and too much beholden to Treasury thinking. Liz Truss says Sunak's policies are for Brexit in name only, not taking advantage of Brexit to rid Britain of cautious policy that does not capitalize fully on cutting the bureaucratic and regulatory burden to get growth, and trade that favors Britain. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ provides this exceptional report offering readers remarkable clarity on what the Republican Tax Law does- its high and low points.  High Points 1. It reduces the corporate tax rate to bring it in line with other advanced industrialized countries. The corporate tax rate in Germany and Japan is 30%, in the UK it is 19%. For 5 years businesses can write off capital equipment immediately instead of depreciating over a couple of years. This could boost investment and growth. 2.  The law takes aim at deductions that led to distortions. It limits the mortgage interest deduction, and caps the deduction for state and local taxes. This removes the incentive to pay more for homes that exacerbated the housing crisis in 2008. The Alternative Minimum Tax is largely removed. The Low Points 1. The biggest drawback is that lawmakers did not properly fund the tax cuts. Of the 10 costliest tax breaks nine were not touched, including employer health insurance, retirement savings, capital gains. Only the state and local taxes deduction was reduced. And a new tax deduction  was created, a 20% tax deduction for small business (proprietors and partnerships) paying taxes on their individual tax returns. Taxes on the wealthy or value added taxes, reducing tax breaks, is how other advanced industrialized countries paid for the corporate tax cuts, but did not happen here. Additional economic growth  to generate added tax revenues is the way Republicans in Congress say this is funded. Yet this is a questionable assumption as Britain reduced the corporate tax rate to 19% without seeing a surge in economic growth, as Greg Ip pointed out in an earlier WSJ article. At best the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates $500 billion over a decade in added revenues from added growth leaving $1 trillion to be added to the deficit. The WhartonPenn Budget Model (WPBM) estimates only $140 to $367 bill from the additional economic growth resulting in added tax revenues. Under this model only 0.03 to 0.08 percent added U.S. economic growth per year is expected from the Republican Tax Cuts. Such a situation would be bad  for the U.S. as the gradual improvement in Debt to GDP ratio to 78% following the financial crisis of 2008 would be sharply reversed taking the ratio to 97% by 2027. An unsustainable trajectory which will require tax increases in a few years and hurt investment in education, health and infrastructure into the future. This is what worries many experts most on both sides of the political spectrum today about what the Republican Congress has pushed through for a legislative "victory." This is why experts believe this is not serious tax reform and will require a new effort after 2019.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The BBC Fact check for crime, cost of living, immigration, world affairs is shown next to this transcript of the former president's speech at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, July 2024. The biggest issue is cost of living, for housing, food and groceries, gas and automobiles new and repairs. "I will end the devastating inflation crisis immediately, bring down interest rates and lower the cost of energy . We will drill, baby, drill. Prices will start to come down." Fact: Gas prices may come down a bit, but it will do little or nothing for the other major components of cost of living - for housing and mortgage rates of 6-7%, for automobile prices and auto repairs, for food and groceries.The problem of job creation will come to the fore because of an inherent contradiction of trying to commit to Republican old platform of tax cuts for the wealthy and efforts to take cost of living action for the now larger lower and middle classes. Without this money that goes to tax cuts for wealthy there is not much to invest in Make at Home, in manufacturing in US the way Biden is doing and plans for next 4 years creating hundreds of thousands of jobs every month and still keeping inflation low at 3% through an investment driven economy. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Altman's proposal for a tax on wealth over $1 million. He makes the case for taxing wealth not incomes to reduce inequality as this is where the situation in terms of inequality has worsened for the U.S. in recent decades. To support this proposal Altman cites the change in the U.S. Ginni coefficient, which measures inequality. The Ginni coefficient is anumber from 0 to 100 which goes up with higher income inequality. From the late 70's to the 1990's, the Cnesus Bureau showed this to be in the low 40's. By 1992 the Ginni coefficient went up to the mid-70's, according to the Federal Reserve data. It increased to about 80 in 2010. In 1992 the top 10% in the U.S. population controlled 20 times the wealth of the bottom 50%. By 2010 this figure triples to 65 times. and the graduated income tax even if it redistributes a small share of the wealth does little to affect the trend of wealth extremes from building up and threatening the social fabric of America, reducing mobility and opportunities for the bottom 50% to unprecedented levels since the 1950's. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jack Horton of BBC Verify screens the former president Trump's speech at the Republican National Convention. “Our crime rate is going up, while crime statistics all over the world are going down".  Fact: FBI data shows crime down 6% and a drop in the murder rate by 13% in 2023. For the First Quarter of 2024 crime down by 15% and recorded murder rate down 26%. "We've had the worst inflation we've ever had under this person [Biden]. I will end the devastating inflation crisis immediately, bring down interest rates and lower the cost of energy . We will drill, baby, drill."  Fact: Inflation went up to 9.1% from 1.4% at the end of the Trump term in the first 2 years of of the Biden Administration by June 2022. Biden and Federal Reserves Powell brought this down to 3%. Explained: This inflation jump to 9% would have happened from supply chain in China for Trump administration as well. Trump's last year was 2019 the Covid pandemic started in January the lockdown by midyear meant sharp drop in demand and little room for inflation. The concentration of supply chain in China was the cause of the surge in inflation as China shut down and restarted late into 2022 causing shortages in factory parts and supplies. Biden focused on vaccination in 2020-2021. This inflation would have happened under Trump- this concentration of supply chain started with Reagan economic philosophy to ship production (and jobs) overseas, Clinton Bush Obama and Trump did little about it. Biden invested heavily in Make in America manufacturing and jobs at home. Biden and Powell did a good job of bringing this inflation down by 2023 to 3% before the European Union and UK. Younger voters don't know this they get their news from the internet and show little interest, see only that the low inflation under Trump and the higher inflation during the pandemic recovery under Biden and blame Biden. will Trump do better on inflation in 2024-2028. The WSJ does not think so its analysis shows inflation higher under Trump than Biden because of a planned 60% tax on imports from China. Trump follows Reagan/Friedman theory of the old Republican party of higher tax cuts for the wealthy, so no money is left for investing in American manufacturing and jobs as Biden free of this theory is able to do, leading to slowing growth with inflation under Trump.        ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ looks at Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan that marks a major shift for the U.S. economy.  Households would see their costs go down by $11 trillion, boosting their ability to spend on other goods and services. Because income and wealth was highly skewed in the past three decades in one direction, the spending capacity of lower and middle income households was pushed down. This and other similar plans would help restore a higher level of spending and with it an essential element of inflation of 2-3% to the U.S. economy which was missing in the last decade. This sets the tone for the kind of broad based recovery that happened after 1950 that strengthened America's middle class and made it the core of the economy, the core of the post World War II recovery in America and Europe. The plan would be paid for by higher taxes on corporations, tax rate of 21% for corporations going back up to 35%, and reverse depreciation schedules in the 2017 Republican tax law. The argument that this would reduce business investment does not hold that much says the WSJ because amid new trade tensions business investment has declined over the last 2 quarters, and has been sluggish overall. The other source for the estimated $13 to $20 trillion cost of Medicare for All plan of Elizabeth Warren is a 6% annual wealth tax on billionaires, in an attempt to have all pay their fair share and reduce wide disparities in wealth. Mark Zandl, chief economist of Moody's Analytics, says his sense is at the end of the day from a macroeconomic view- because $11 trillion in the hands of 80% of households who could boost spending after lagging behind in the last decade- the negative effect on business investment will be cancelled out by the higher consumer spending. The overall effect and today's context is infused in this analysis. Private insurance, premiums for insurance, and out of pocket cost that the public pays would disappear in this new system where all health payments pass through the government. Health insurance premiums paid by employers would convert into a new employer Medicare contribution to the government starting at an amount employers pay now and adjusting gradually toward national averages over time. Smallest businesses are exempted. Mr. Zandl says the most important aspect of this now is that Mrs Warren has shown that her plan's revenue sources match the cost so that the plan would not lead to deficits increasing and pushing interest rates higher, leading to negative effects on the economy. Republicans under Mr. Trump have paid little attention to expanded deficits caused by their tax law, and economists across the landscape have also shown less concern. Still attacks are made if the plans don't add up. For this reason a sound assessment in today's context of depressed consumers and an overall impact becomes essential. The WSJ quotes from a pre- assessment of Warren's plan by Simon Johnson, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who co-wrote it with Mr. Zandl and Betsey Stevenson of the University of Michigan. What they point out is that putting cash in the pockets of the lower and middle class for spending makes a lot of sense today, and taking money out of the pockets at the way upper wealthy end,  does not contract the economy at all. Other effects they say are constructive by letting all workers get health coverage from the government instead of employers, this makes it easier to change jobs increasing labor mobility and productivity. A worker getting a better job and better utilization of skills could then shift without looking at the employer health care plan. Warren says there would be a five year transition so that workers in health care insurance industry can work in other insurance fields and in Medicare, no one would be left behind. The important thing being to build America's middle class again. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt says that there is little reason to think that the flatter rates are better always. With the need to finance Medicare and health care for all, the government can use the extra dollars from taxing the very wealthy, the very rich in different tax brackets. The top bracket in 2008 started at 357,000, and you paid 35% whether you made 400,000, or $4 million, or $40 million. So basically the upper middle class was lumped in with the extremely wealthy. And considering the cost of college tutions for 2 or 3 kids, the upper middle class is only middle class. It makes sense not to lump the two together. Considering that there has been a lot of wealth accumulated at the the very high end, it would also reduce inequality, generate tax revenues for health care, and not have much effect in the incentives for generating economic growth. It is something he says the Obama adminisstration may and should consider.

LyrArc Article Gist
Greek tax evasion is estimated by three economists who studied data from Greek banks at about $11 billion based on a 40% tax rate, a third of the country's annual deficit for 2009. Unreported income is estimated at $28 billion. Doctors, dentists, lawyers, architects, engineers are the biggest groups underreporting income. Greece's parliament took up a bill in 2010 but the bill failed because of oposition from these groups. It remains to be seen if the Samaras government with support of the IMF-EC can take action similiar to that taken by the Monti government in Italy to go after tax evaders. By cutting the minimum wage and incomes of lower income groups disproportionately compared to cracking down on tax evasion and protecting incomes of higher income groups the economic plan for Greece proposed by the IMF-EC and the Greek government becomes unworkable and threatens the social fabric. By not raising this issue Germany's media and government have appeared callous in their pursuit of austerity measures as working class Greeks protested in Athens in 2011-2012, even though some of the issues raised by the Germans are legitimate. France and Italy are imposing a wealth tax to cut the deficit but this is not taking place in Greece. Global financial media has also not reported adequately on these aspects of the problem in Greece and Italy....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Wall Street Journal looks back at president Trump's first year in office from the inauguration speech to the passage of the new tax law. Race and immigration issues form the background of much of the domestic politics as Democrats prepare to shutdown government by December 2017 over a comment by the president. This happens during a meeting between the two parties on the Dreamer legislation to allow children of people illegally in the U.S. to stay in the country, when the president makes a derogatory remark about immigrants from Haiti and says he prefers immigrants from Norway. Efforts to repeal the Obama healthcare legislation fail during the first year. Democrats win a Senate seat in Alabama. A special counsel, Mr. Mueller, is appointed to investigate the Russian meddling in the U.S. presidential election. The tax law is skewed towards more tax cuts for the wealthy than the middle class, with the increase in the deficit not justifying the cut as infrastructure and other needs in health and education require funding. In international affairs Trump recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and takes a strong stand on Iran and North Korea.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Smith, Economics Editor of The Times, says history is repeating itself now that the Labour Party thinks it should not have abolished Clause 4 of its constitution under Tony Blair ( the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange). Now that Labour's policies for renationalisation of water, transport and other basic services are popular, it appears that we are seeing a response from people fed up with market failure and greed in the way the private companies in these services are run.  Profits should go to taxpayers for basic public services and that salaries of management should be moderate, services efficient, and borrowing of capital done at lower rates, is the idea behind this. The Times You.Gov poll on renationalisation for rail shows 56% supporting, only 22% opposing, renationalisation of energy companies supported by 45%, 29% opposed, water companies 50% supporting and 25% opposed. In addition to this other Labour policies of 45% tax rate for incomes above 80,000 pounds, and 50% at 123,000 pounds, as well as wealth tax are also popular. Workers on company boards with ownership of a portion of company equity are also popular. This adds to the mystery about Labour's lack of strong support going into the election. Support for renationalisation comes from the thirst for change, says The Times. Market failures, greed, inequality and poor delivery of essential public services, severe cuts in the last decade, all play a role in the thirst for change. There is also the idea that when it comes to essential services there is no room for profit or owners and managers with huge pay running into millions. When trains are overcrowded or unreliable run by private companies economic arguments remain for the textbooks, its daily experience that counts. Going back to a time in the past when it worked, where economic structures were based on fairness, and people cared, is seen as an alternative to a dysfunctional period.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's new LDP government will follow France and the U.S. by increasing the tax rate on top income tax brackets from 40% to 45%. Currently the top rate applies to those making above $200,00. The U.S. top rate of 40% applies at $450,000. It is hoped that this will make the increase in the sales tax to 10% more acceptable to the public and keep a sense of fairness in tax policies. Tax exemptions on estates will also be reduced with the figure at 30 million yen ($340,000) instead of 50 million yen. The U.S. has a figure of $5 million per individual. Tax increases on the wealthy will bring in about $2.3 billion a year. Japan is a more egalitarian society than the U.S. and is closer to Europe in this respect. Higher taxes are supported by the conservative LDP party compared to the Republican party's strong opposition to tax increases in the U.S. It is also a more homogenous society with fewer immigrants and closer to Europe in this respect than the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration's proposed budget for fiscal 2013- for the year beginning Oct. 1, 2012- shows the budget deficit for the year at over $1 trillion. It shows new revenue of $1.7 trillion over 10 years mostly from ending the Bush period tax cuts on families earning more than $250,000 a year, restoring the estate tax to the 2009 level and limiting subsidies for oil and gas companies. It proposes raising the tax rate on dividends from 15% to as much as 39.6%, for households earning more than $250,000 a year. This measure is expected to generate $206 billion over 10 years. The budget also offers "principles" for future tax reform by proposing the Buffett rule replace the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The AMT was not indexed for inflation so it has the weakness of putting more middle class taxpayers into AMT, leading to temporary solutions by Congress. The Buffett rule would have people earning more than $1 million pay a tax rate of at least 30%. Many wealthy Americans like Mitt Romney paid lower taxes using deductions to lower tax rates- Romney's tax disclosures show he paid effective tax rate of 14%. The White House says the budget will reduce the deficit by $3 trillion over 10 years through the new taxes, and small changes to Medicare and Medicaid and other spending cuts. This is in addition to the $1 trillion in spending cuts agreed to in a deficit reduction agreement in 2011 between Democrats and Republicans in Congress. The budget proposal proposes investment in education and transportation projects of $137 billion, and continuing through Dec. 2012, a tax break for businesses to increase investment. It includes mandatory spending of $2.7 billion for new community college programs, $6 billion to modernize schools, and $1.8 billion to make homes more energy efficient. It also increases the resources of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the CFTC (two agencies overseeing the banks), $26 million for a new Interagency Trade Enforcement Center to counter unfair trade practices, and cuts U.S. postal delivery to 5 days a week. The result is a program designed to be balanced in terms of economic fairness, making modest investments in the future for education and energy, continuing policies to stimulate growth, and extending the date for bringing the deficit under control to 2018 instead of 2014 as planned earlier....

LyrArc Article Gist
Most Americans pay less in taxes, including state, local and federal taxes, today than in 1980 in inflation adjusted dollars. The taxes have gone down by 2-3% for incomes in the range of $50,000 to $150,000, and gone down by 3-4% for incomes between $150,000 and $350,000. Taxes have gone down over 7% for incomes above $350,000. The main reason is the decline in federal income taxes.Tax rates increased in the period to 1990 and declined from 1990 to 2010. The Democratic party and president Obama are pushing for increase in taxes for incomes above $250,000. Republicans are resisting the changes citing disincentives to investment and growth for small business which generates a large proportion of new jobs created in the U.S. economy. The New York Times study shows the percent of the U.S. population that makes between $200,000 and $350,000 almost doubling in the period 1980-2010 and at the same time its share of the U.S. income remaining the same - many small business owners who hire employees would fall into this income category. Republican's response is for tax reforms that reduce loopholes, deductions and other tax expeditures that disproportionately help the wealthy. Democrats say this cannot create enough revenues to address the deficit, when mortgage deductions, charitable deductions are excluded. The back and forth is leading to stalemate but also opening up discussion for the first time on whether the mortgage and charitable deductions make sense in today's environment. A significant portion of revenues lost in the mortgage deduction goes to affluent households, subsidizing larger borrowings to build larger homes than otherwise, according to the Brookings Institution. Politicians have resisted changes that would go against powerful lobyying groups in the past, yet the impasse has opened up new thinking outside the box because of the pressing need to come up with a solution....

LyrArc Article Gist
Americans Save Early and set aside for savings 10% of your pre-tax income, is the advice to ensure a safe and healthy savings retirement. This is absolutely critical. What the government can do is to ensure that incomes keep uo with inflation with fair wages in industry. It also can and should protect Americans from unexpected medical costs by ensuring that all Americans are covered by health care and for catastrophic situations. Then it is the task of Americans to build a culture of careful saving that their ancestors had and considered a essential part of virtue. For this to help build savings for retirement the government and the Federal Reserve together- as Biden and Powell have shown one with capital investments to build a strong economy and the other by protecting savings and cost of living action- must ensure that no financial crises take interest rates to zero or 1-2%. At interest rates of 5-6% for returns this helps build savings for retirement. For this to happen banks have to go back to their traditional work in the economy and no speculation risk, and Silicon Valley go back to inventing and not a culture of capturing capital allocation in capital markets and paying little in taxes. A new culture would put government in its right place to ensure that it plays a significant role in building manufacturing and science and technology in the US as president Biden has done through government investing in infrastructure and renewable energy, chips and science, and in education, healthcare.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
While Italy's budget deficit of 5.3% of GDP in 2009 is relatively healthy, its public debt as a percentage of GDP is rising and forecast to be 118%. The growth in tax revenues is negligible because Italy has seen only 0.54% annual average growth in GDP in the past decade, so its much harder to manage the debt. As the interest on debt exceeds the rate of growth, debt keeps rising all the time, say experts. This makes it harder for Italy to borrow in capital markets, a 9.5 billion bond offer in April 2010 drew onlly 9.78 billion euros in bids. The debt financing is helped by the Italian households having a high savings rate of 15%, and holding 25% of Italy's bonds.

LyrArc Article Gist
Who is Nandalal Weerasinghe? This report in The Daily News gives some idea about the man chosen to help Sri Lanka negotiate a deal with the IMF.  Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe was an alternate executive director at the International Monetary Fund before being appointed deputy governor of the Ceylon Central Bank in 2012. Before this he managed several macroeconomic departments at the central bank and was assistant governor of the central bank from 2007 to 2009, He has spent the large part of his career in economic positions at the Central Bank of Ceylon after getting his PhD in economics from the Australian National University. Weerasinghe is the leading expert in macroeconomics from Sri Lanka who has IMF experience. He says "things will get worse before they get better." He retired early from the central bank with a change in government in 2019. He was reappointed as Sri Lanka faced a debt crisis in March 2022 following the two year long pandemic, and the Ukraine war in 2022 that was bad for emerging market economies. Weerasinghe says about the crisis facing Sri Lanka- Recent decisons followed Modern Monetary Theory. This has dire consequences. In recent times the savings brought about by the low tax and interest rate regime passed savings on to the corporate sector and took away spending power from savers and pensioners. Surging inflation made things even worse for the lower income middle class and older parts of society. Years of accumulated debt have brought Ceylon to this point. In Ceylon one is seeing the effects of savings being passed on to the corporate sector in an economy dependent on tourism and remittances from overseas workers, both hit by the two year long pandemic. This is part of  a trend that has hurt emerging market economies from Argentina and Pakistan which also turned to the IMF to Turkey.  In other countries in the European Union savings also passed on to the corporate sector with low tax and low interest rate regime. With high inflation resulting in the cost of living crisis seen today in France and Germany. This type of policy that Weerasinghe calls 'Modern Monetary Theory' is not healthy for the European Union and the US, as these policies led to the neglect of much needed and vital investments in infrastructure, health and education. Only now are these effects being corrected by new administrations of Biden in the US and Scholz in Germany, with Biden's 2 trillion plan for workers and families, and a similar plan from chancellor Scholz. With this come needed investments to tackle climate change, all of which was neglected before. India has taken a different approach. By following good governance, managing vaccination effectively during the pandemic, social emphasis for food, water, electricity, cooking gas, medicine for the vast population of 1.2 billion, and a Master plan for building Made in India manufacturing,  India has avoided such crises and maintained strong economic growth. In this sense it is a model for South Asian, South East Asian, African, and Latin American emerging market economies that face a difficult situation today. Good governance is critical.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
ProPublica Report that shows taxes paid by Warren Buffett of Berkshire, Jeff Bezos of Amazon, Michael Bloomberg of Bloomberg, Soros of financial business, and Elon Musk of Tesla. This report put out by Americans for Tax Fairness shows tax rates of a group of 25 such business persons at 3.4% on wealth growth between 2014-2018 of $401 billion. This is not to say that Democrats or Republicans can be elected to solve this, which is basically a problem not of fairness but of how it enables underfunding of America's basic infrastructure of health, education, transportation, and public services such as parks, clean air, and renewable energy, energy grids, water supplies, heating infrastructure, on and on on the list. Why because the difference between a modern industrial base country and a backward, lack of industrial base country is just this list. When the companies also unfund maufacturing in the US as Apple does by making almost  all products overseas it means lossof manufacturing knowhow and loss of leadership of the free world which simply means chaos without America's leadership based on its founder's values.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Frank, an economist at Cornell and visiting Professor at the Stern School of Business at NYU, says this deficit increasing our debt burden is entirely different from the way in which the Bush administration increased the national debt. During the last 8 years the Bush deficits increased the national debt by almost $5 trillion. But people went for larger mansions, and consumers went on aconsumption binge, and the Bush tax cuts were skewed to help the wealthy. Now to address the economic crisis a similiar amount of about $5 trillion will be needed but it will be spent quite differently. Money spent on ropads and building infrastructure that is needed is money well spent on any dimension. Especiallyfor America's crumbling roads and bridges and highways. If postponed these would cost more or twice as much to fix. Frank's point is that alot depends on what you do with the money. At recent interest rates servicing $10 trillion in debt costs about $400 billion annually. He says thats quite manageable. Just by instituting agasoline tax of $2 agallon as the Europeans do and are not alot poorer dfor this, the US could generate $100 billion ayear. When Americans are using mass transit in the largest numbers in 50 years, it also makes sense to build better faster transportation systems between major cities, like the high speed trains in Europe....

LyrArc Article Gist
Xi Jinping's effort to shift the economy of China more towards serving the interests of Chinese who were left behind in the boom years includes a shift away from coal, away from real estate for speculation, and away from reliance on trade with the US and Europe as a driver for growth. This is proving to be difficult as the pandemic has increased demand for Chinese exports making trade a bigger driver for growth than before the pandemic. Introduction of a property tax to cut into real estate speculation has been scaled down to trials in 10 cities.  China did not put stimulus checks in the accounts of its people the way the US did which has led to Chinese domestic consumption not rebounding the way it has done in the US. Figures for consumer spending in China for September show an increase of 4.4% from the year earlier far below the pace of 8% set for 2019. The lack of social security and other safety nets in China makes people to save even more today. Chinese savings rate was 40% in 2019, today it is 45.2% for May 2021, according to one survey. Personal consumption makes up 38% of China's GDP in 2020, it was 39% in 2019. In the US it went up in 2021 June to 69% compared to 67% by the end of 2020. Infrastructure and construction deepened debt problems in China, and expanding exports created trade tensions. Both these problems have deepened with the pandemic. As this report says Chinese exports have gone gangbusters. Problems in production in Vietnam and Malaysia have added to export surge from China. China's trade surplus with the world is now at $535 billion in 2020, and surplus with US increased by 7% to $317 billion in 2020 from 2019.  Chinese government policy is now for "common prosperity" to reduce inequality and spread wealth and income more evenly for all the Chinese people. This is taking time and Chinese government policy is now set for the long run with these short run problems. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How the Australian Central Bank raised rates starting in May 2002, with the key lending rate at 5.5 % in July 2005, compared to 3.25 % in the USA. The idea was to control the housing bubble which has scaled back, with the Australian economy growing at 2% and this growth coming mostly from the commodities demand in global markets. Meanwhile the US central bank under Greenspan is holding onto the view that its hard to tell when a bubble is occurring, and it would hurt a healthy economy to raise rates to cool developing bubbles. Australia's central bank holds onto the other view that it is wiser to act now before the bubble gets out of hand. Governor MacFarlane of the Australian central bank said in aspeech in early 2003 that a "scaling back" of household borrowing and property development would be in "the longer term interest of the Australian economy." And the state of New South Wales, which includes Sydney, instituted a 2.25% tax on the sale of investment properties. This move discouraged speculators who bought and "flipped" properties for quick profits. By early 2004 a glut of downtown apartment units emerged in Melbourne, and the bubble began to scale back. During the height of the boom consumer spending was growing by more than 6% ayear, in 2005 this has slowed to 3.5% a year. Because of commodity demand, Australia was able to see growth at 2%, and still avoid the longterm effects of a bubble in housing markets by scaling them back. Patrick Barta closes with a reference to Texas in the 1980's and early 1990's, and Southeast Asia in 1997, when housing prices and the economy went down in tandem hitting employment in the oil and banking industries in Texas. In the case of Asia hitting the economies of some Asian countries with the fall of their currencies. He refers to the overstretched US consumer with load of debt, and the possibility of housing and the economy going down in tandem in the USA, similiar to what happened in Texas and Southeast Asia....

LyrArc Article Gist
Seen in a larger context, the Biden tax pledge seen from the southern and midwestern and less well off states is not about taxes, it is about federal revenues that build the infrastructure and services in these states that increase the standard of living. This happened in the 1930's and 1940's under FDR and Truman, in the 1950's under Eisenhower, in the 1960's under Kennedy/LBJ. And is happening again under Biden today. Lets not forget that president John F. Kennedy says in his speeches that these regions in America in the 1860's under Lincoln were in development close to what prevailed in the 1960's in India, Ceylon, Chile, Turkey or China. The Biden pledge not to increase taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 is significant because it grasps the situation in America where extraordinary gains in wealth since 1980 have gone only some of it to the top 1-2% in midwestern states and southern states, and most of it to the top 3-5% in coastal states population in the east and west, New York and California, where the finance and tech industry are based. In Michigan and Wisconsin only 2% of households make more than $400,000, in Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona and Florida 3%. WSJ shows a map of the US showing this for individual states. The core southern states have 2% of households with incomes over $400,000- including Arkansas, Tennessee, South Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana, Oklahoma, with Mississippi less than 1%. It is only segregation in the late 1960's and culture issues such as abortion that have turned them from Democratic states to Republican states as they were the largest beneficiaries of taxes diverted into investment in these places since FDR/Truman and John Kennedy/LBJ. It was JFK who came up with the phrase "a rising tide lifts all boats" when he opened federally funded projects in Arkansas. Seen objectively the large investments made under Lincoln, FDR/Truman, Kennedy/LBJ from tax revenues are what changed this region from conditions that prevailed in less developed countries that John Kennedy points out in his speeches, true for the midwest, parts of the west, and the southern states alike.  President Kennedy said on Feb. 25, 1963 to the American Bankers Association Symposium on Economic Growth: "Today, many Americans tend to think of developing underdeveloped countries in terms only of faraway nations. But in 1863, even measured by 1963 dollars, our own per capita income--and this should be a source of encouragement to many who are laboring with the problem of underdevelopment in far-off countries--our own per capita income was less than $1 a day, approximately the same as Chile's. Nearly 60 percent of our labor force was engaged in agriculture, the same percentage as is today engaged in the Philippines. An estimated 20 percent of our population was illiterate, the same percentage of the population of Ceylon. Only one-fifth of our 34 million people lived in towns or cities of over 5,000 in population, as is roughly true now of Turkey. In 1863, this Nation had fewer railroad tracks laid than India has today, and its children had a shorter life expectancy than a child born this year in Thailand or Zanzibar."   ...