LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the NYT says Bill Clinton moved the Democratic Party to the centre in 1992. In 2016 about 25 years later, after the removal of the Glass Steagall Act led to the 2008 global financial crisis and a deep recession, after the trade relations with China led to loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs over two decades and the hollowing out of industry in the midwest, things have changed. The revolution led by Bernie Sanders, a shrinking middle class, smaller access to college education for the middle and working class, and wide disparities in income, are putting the Democratic Party closer to its roots and the days of FDR. The Democratic Party platform calls for a 21st century Glass Steagall Act to separate normal banking from investment banking, opposes the TPP to prevent any further export of jobs overseas, and goes for a $15 minimum wage. This was also evident at the opening day of the Democratic National Convention when Sanders told the gathering in Philadelphia that even though he was not the candidate, these are the planks of the platform that Hillary Clinton will be pushing for in her presidency. What the editorial does not point out is that the Republican economic platform also calls for reinstatement of Glass Steagall Act, opposes TPP and opposes any loss of American jobs to overseas locations. It differs on the minimum wage leaving it to the states, and it is likely to skew tax cuts towards the wealthy, but also possibly removing the lower income brackets from taxes as Britain has done under the Conservative Party. Both parties today are looking for support from the middle and working class and have directed their appeal to these two groups which are in upheaval. The election of Trudeau in Canada recently also followed this trend, after the hollowing out of Canadian industry in Ontario and Quebec in a similiar pattern as in the midwestern U.S.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Bernie Sanders 2016 U.S. presidential campaign is compared to the Howard Dean 2004 U.S. presidential campaign. Both are from Vermont- Sanders was Mayor of Burlington, Dean was governor of Vermont. Dean and Sanders draw many white, educated, affluent voters to their campaign rallies. Yet the situation in 2015 is different. Dean's major issue was his opposition to the Iraq war started in 2003. Sanders says his position is more class based, and calls for a revolution to help working class Americans gain upward mobility as wages remain stagnant, and educational opportunity restricted. The Democratic Party today is also different, with more ethnic voters, and 40% female.

LyrArc Article Gist
The caretaker government of prime minister Mark Rutte in the Netherlands will commit to following austerity plans in its Stability Program report to the European Union. Elections are now set for September 12, 2012. The government was able to get the support of two smaller left-leaning parties to austerity plans. Opposition parties have questioned the policies and said they will reverse them if elected. Rutte's Liberal party and Jaeger's Christian Democrats, with the help of the Christenunie, D66, and Groenlinks, now hold a slim 2 seat majority in the 150 seat Dutch parliament. The Freedom party that had previously supported Rutte withdrew support for austerity policies that it said would hurt pensioners. The moves help avert a credit ratings drop by the credit ratings agencies leading to a loss of the Dutch triple A credit rating. The measures will increase the sales tax from 19% to 21%, make health care spending cuts and impose a pay freeze on civil servants. Savings achieved will be 11 billion euros. Rutte described his actions as: "the government's respose to the acute crisis in confidence in the financial markets." Earlier in the week Fitch Ratings had threatened to lower the Netherlands credit rating. The measures will reduce the Dutch deficit to 3% in 2013 from 4.5% in 2012 to meet EU fiscal compact rules. The changes to the health system are part of changes advocated by the OECD and the IMF because of surging health care costs for an aging Dutch population. There is concern about the sales tax increase because of its effect on consumer spending, and recent comments by S&P managing directors and others in financial markets emphasize the need for economic growth, as austerity measures by itself are inadequate solutions....

LyrArc Article Gist
In a shift from statements at earlier summits which focussed on fiscal restraint, the Camp David summit continued the "firm committment to fiscal consolidation," yet emphasized jobs and economic growth as "imperative." There is new flexibility to address needs for economic growth and no specific timetables for fiscal balance as in previous summits. Obama had many one to one encounters with the other leaders. He discussed the euro crisis with Cameron while working out on a treadmill, and watched the Champions League soccer final between Chelsea and Bayern Munich with Merkel and Cameron. Each leader of the G-8, Harper of Canada, Monti of Italy, Hollande of France, Medvedev of Russia, Cameron of Britain, Noda of Japan, Merkel of Germany, was assigned a cabin in the rustic wooded setting of Camp David's mountains. A special effort was made to see that Germany's Merkel did not feel isolated in the setting because of the growing sentiment that austerity policies pushed by Germany are not working. On Iran, Obama stated that he was "hopeful that we can resolve this issue in a peaceful fashion that recognizes their sovereignty, but also recognizes their responsibilities."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Italy's new prime minister Mario Monti, was frank in his views about depending on austerity alone to meet the debt crisis, views also shared by President Sarkozy of France. Monti told an interviewer from the German newspaper Die Welt, before meeting German chancellor Merkel in Berlin: In the absence of specific help "a protest against Europe will develop in Italy, also against Germany, which is viewed as the ringleader of E.U. intolerance, and against the European Central Bank." He went on to say-"I cannot have success with my policies if the E.U.'s policies don't change." He pointed out that economic difficulties could drive Italy to "flee into the arms of populists."

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman says austerity measures alone won't work as the economies in the eurozone shrink in 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman questions whether the assumptions behind the austerity policies are true- that they would inspire confidence in economic recovery, or that in the absence of austerity policies borrowing costs would go through the roof. The recent events in Holland with the collapse of the government in the Netherlands- when a party leader supporting the government said he did not want to hurt pensioners in the Netherlands just to satisfy German opinion- and the mood in France with economic anxiety vote going to Marie Le Pen and Francois Hollande in the first round of presidential elections, shows that very little confidence has been created. High unemployment and economic anxiety are leading to a reappraisal of austerity cuts that depress the economy and reduce tax revenues, but Krugman says no changes are taking place to correct these policies. This is true for Spain with its high unemployment, and Britain which now has two quarters of negative growth.

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
A report released by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows growing income inequality in 34 OECD countries. OECD Secretary General, Angel Gurria says: "The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries. This study dispels the assumptions that the benefits of economic growth will automatically trickle down to the disadvantaged and that the greater inequality fosters greater social mobility. Without a comprehensive strategy for inclusive growth, income inequality will continue to rise." Countries with the largest ratios between incomes at the top and the bottom, are the United States, Turkey and Israel, roughly 14 to 1. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have ratios of 6 to 1, with their ratios up from the 1980's. Gaps in Chile and Mexico are at 25 to 1. The study covers the period from 1980 to 2008. Overall inequality went up by 25% in the U.S. from 1980. In 2008 the top ten percent in the U.S. earned $114,000, 15 times than incomes for the bottom 10%. The top 1% of Americans saw incomes go up from 1980 to 2008, increasing from 8 percent to 18 percent. The richest 1% having $1.3 million in after tax income, and the lowest 20% making $17,700. The trends have accentuated an increase at the highest end- the top 1% and top 10% of the people- and a sharp decrease for the bottom 20%, which can be grasped from the $17,700 and the $1.3 million, both at extreme ends. The study attributes the rise in inequality to a growing gap in wages for highly skilled workers as technology advances, a surge in foreign direct investment and a looser regulatory regime that reduces employee protections leading to wage premiums for financial jobs and smaller incomes for workers at the bottom. Income groups and professions and sectors that had the greatest influence in government were able during this period to get the greatest protection for incomes, and able also to maximize their incomes. Incomes in the financial sector increased dramatically in the last decade, as a result of deregulation leading to higher risk and speculative activities in the financial sector, leading to the financial crisis of 2008-2009. Financial crises further depress incomes at the lower end. Similiar income inequality trends can be seen for India and China. China has a Ginni coefficient of 0.5 according to researchers at Beijing Normal University, up from 0.3 three decades ago- a Ginni Coefficient above 0.4 is considered destabilizing. Another factor that played a part in these countries is corruption and lobbying by special interests for favored treatment of sectors or groups. Austerity measures taken in Europe and in the U.S. are likely to widen income gaps by depressing the lower end income groups, creating social unrest, especially in the absence of efforts to stimulate growth....