LyrArc Article Gist
Roy Cooper of North Carolina says Kamala Harris has visited the state 15 times and will be there next week. He says North Carolina is the fastest growing state in the country and was lost by 1.3%, that this time it can be won as it was won by Obama in 2008. Cooper,  two term governor of North Carolina says Mark Robinson the Republican candidate for Governor is the most extreme candidate for Governor in the US right now, with open disrespect for women, and it will draw voters to voting booths in large numbers. Cooper's view is that it will help Harris, that "all of the confluence of the issues makes this state a state Kamala Harris can win, and I believe will win." In 2020 Roy Cooper won by 250,000 votes or 5% of the vote margin over  Lt. Governor Dan Forest. The key to North Carolina is in the I-85 corridor, a suburban region with cities and university towns that are home to more than two-thirds of the state's population and casts almost 70% of the state's vote. The state's five largest counties-- Mecklenburg home to Charlotte) Wake (home to Raleigh), Guilford (home to Greensboro), Forsyth (home to Winston Salem) and Durham (home to Durham)--are all located in this area. Making many visits to the state, and strong grassroots effort is essential. Highly affluent and educated migrants from the Northeast, who traditionally tend to vote Democratic; as well as African Americans, Hispanics (an increasing population in the state), and college students are voting blocs that are likely to vote heavily on economic issues, abortion, student debt relief, and issues raised by extreme views of Mark Robinson and the future direction of the Nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's statement calling for a list of goods for tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods leaves China without a clear response and facing new risks. The U.S. exports about $150 billion in goods to China so that China would have to impose penalties to respond at the same level. Placing restrictions on American firms on access to China's market, and imposing other penalties would have the effect of reinforcing the perception of unfair practices targeting American business and lead to hardening of U.S. response.  The U.S. sees itself as being in a better position with the U.S. economy experiencing a growth trend. China with large local government and bank debt faces a difficult situation. President Jinping's policy of reducing the risks of bad debt in the banking system involved sacrificing some growth to stabilize the system. China's GDP growth in 2017 was 6.9%, the target at 6.5%. Future targets and actual growth now look to be much lower.The trade war with the U.S. has the effect of dampening growth leading to calls for the central bank to loosen its monetary stance. In response to Trump's announcement the People's Bank of China pumped $31 billion into the nation's banks. China is studying Japan's response in the 1980's and 1990's when the U.S. took strong action against Japan's growing trade surplus. Japan responded by appreciating its currency and using stimulus to cushion the effect of lower exports on the economy. The stimulus led to the housing bubble and over time a period of low growth and stagnant economy. The large China stimulus in 2008-2009 has compounded the problems in the banking system. Not deleveraging and controlling financial risks in China's banking system because of the trade war would bring a new set of risks. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard University, expert on debt crises, and author of "This Time is Different," says China is one of the best examples of the idea that this time is different, with the idea created that somehow China was impervious to the massive build up of debt. The debt is now over 250% of GDP, and this was possible for so long because of the high savings rate of 30% of disposable income and the millions of young migrants moving to cities to work in manufacturing. The growth of shadow banking, opaqueness in decisionmaking, unreliable data, use of local government financing vehicles, the bubble in housing with a large portion of loans tied to the real estate market, all combine to create serious problems that will take a long time to sort out. Rogoff says the crisis in Tianjin with the deadly explosions in the port area, and the government's inability to provide answers to questions from a alarmed public, only added to the uncertainty and loss of credibility. Rogoff says he hopes the trillions of dollars in reserves will provide China with the tools adequate to tackle the debt problems before they spread to other countries....

LyrArc Article Gist
The IMF's changing views on the value of fiscal austerity. In the current debate about the value of fiscal austerity, there is the IMF view, a German view based on its own experience, and the views of other countries in Europe. The IMF's view has shifted over time. The IMF World Economic Outlook 2010, describes its view of the effects of austerity measures in the form of spending cuts and tax increases- "Fiscal consolidation typically has a contractionary effect on output. A fiscal consolidation equal to 1% of GDP typically reduces GDP by about 0.5% within 2 years and raises the unemployment rate by about 0.3% percentage points." Over the longer term there are benefits as the private sector is not crowded out in the search for captal funding by the excessive government borrowing. The IMF's economic models suggest that it would take 5 years before reaching the breakeven point when the benefits of austerity measures exceed the effects of austerity. The German view held by German central bankers is that the actions stimulate growth in the short term. Manfred Neumann, professor emeritus at the Institute for Economic Policy at the University of Bonn, says this is called the "German hypothesis" as it reflects the experience of Germany from austerity actions taken by Germany. Laurence Ball, professor of Economics at John Hopkins University, is critical of the "German hypothesis" and its application across Europe in different situations. Germany is a large exporting nation and exports helped counterbalance the effects of austerity measures. Within the eurozone with fixed exchange rates the exports of less competitive countries cannot be boosted through devaluing the currency to gain price competitiveness. The other problem is that with interest rates close to zero in the euro zone the central banks cannot cut rates aggressively to counteract the effects of spending cuts. The problem gets compounded when a number of countries are taking austerity measures at the same time accentuating the downturn....

LyrArc Article Gist
Amar Bhide touches on the unpredictable consequences of devaluations while commenting on the supposed benefit of a country having its own currency vs a currency such as the euro. The euro takes away the advatantage of devaluing the national currency as a way to regain competitiveness. Bhide points out that devaluations hurt the elderly on fixed incomes and low wage workers. Protections have to be put in place for the sections of the population that are badly affected. Large union negotiated wage increases can also reduce the benefits of devaluation in terms of regaining competitiveness.

LyrArc Article Gist
The median net worth of Hispanic and Black families has been severely affected by the recession. Because minorities hold a much larger part of their assets in household equity the foreclosure crisis and the recession have had a devastaing impact on both minority groups. The median net worth of Hispanic families dropped by two thirds and black families by half after the 2008 recession from the 2005 figures, and was around $6000 for 2009 for both groups, according to data from the Pew Research Center. The Pew report shows median net worth of a white family is 20 times that of a black family, and 18 times that of a Hispanic family, with the gap between these minorities and whites twice as large in 2009 compared to the period before the recession in 2005. This was even true for Asian American families, whose median net worth dropped by half from 2005 to 2009, to $78,000. The figure for whites dropped much less from $135,000 to $113,000 during the same period. Another significant finding is that within each group the share of the wealthiest 10% of the people increased between 2005 and 2009, for all households this went up from 49% to 56%, for Hispanics from 56% to 72%, for Blacks from 59% to 67%....