LyrArc Article Gist
EV makers in US offer about $5000 in discounts to replace $7500 lost in government EV tax credits. The hurdle for electric vehicles is the lack of charging infrastructure and the cost of home chargers, in addition to the limited range in miles. The big jump in inflation centered not just on groceries in 2019-2024, there was a 34% increase in the cost of new cars and 50% increase for used cars, and a jump in maintenance costs. Reducing affordability for young people and making car ownership costlier. This turned into a cost of living crisis with groceries up 31%, that affected people's enthusiasm for climate change action when China was building one coal plant a week (adding 95 GW in 2024)- underlying the need to provide immediate relief to American working families and elderly through tax cuts, benefits and shifting tax dollars from climate change action to working families in the next 4 years. This is the approach taken under the DJT One Big Beautiful Act of 2025. Basically what the DJT side of the story is on emissions- US has only 12% of global greenhouse gas emissions, cut this by half to 6% and assuming the EU which has 6% of gas emissions also cuts by half to 3%, the saving just 9%  while the 82% of emitters China, India, Russia and Brazil etc not making the cuts needed the impact on climate change is not significant. If China and India want relief US working families also need relief.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The first year of the Modi administration in India brings a sense of moderation to high expectations following the election, considering the many problems that need to be tackled. It also brings some help in the form of lower oil prices coming at a critical time for the Indian economy, which is overly dependent on oil imports. This enabled the government to cut fuel subsidies and control its budget deficit. By April 2015 inflation declined to 4.87%. Foreign direct investment increased by 25% to $28.8 billion in 2014-2015 fiscal year. Major steps include deregulating prices of diesel, petroleum and cooking gas, increasing foreign ownership limits for defense and insurance sectors to 47%, and opening 125 million new bank accounts for poor households. Coalfield leases and telecom spectrum allocations which suffered from lack of transparency and sold at low prices under the previous administration were reallocated in a transparent process.

LyrArc Article Gist
Spain's central bank was lauded for macroprudential supervision before the housing bubble burst. Will China's central bank and financial authorites which have managed the housing bubble upto this point face similiar problems? Can China be the sole exception even as housing bubbles burst with wide repercussions in the U.S., UK and Spain? Nicholas Lardy, of the Peterson Institute of international Economics, says urban housing stock makes up 41% of Chinese household wealth in 2011. The same figure for the U.S. is 26%. Chinese buyers invest in homes because low interest rates on savings accounts cannot keep up with inflation. Real estate investment was 13% of GDP in 2011. Home ownership is a recent development in China, only since 1990, Chinese have never experienced large price declines. Household debt as a percentage of disposable income has increased significantly in recent years, up to 53.6% in 2011 from 31.3% in 2008, according to Lardy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
There is strong cirticism from many quarters about low interest rates as a prime culprit in causing the bubble in housing prices. In comments before the American Economic Association, America's Fed Chairman Bernanke defended his role as Fed governor in 2003 when he along with Greenspan was an advocate of the decision to cut the Fed's target interest rate to 1%, and to leave it here for a year and raise it only slowly. Bernanke says countries like Britain, New Zealand, and Sweden had tighter monetary policy but there home prices rose more, and monetary policy explains only 5% of the variation in home prices. Analysis has shown he says that capital inflows such as those the U.S. received from China and other Asian countries explains 31% of the variation in home prices, supporting a contrasting theory that that its these global imbalances that drove the crisis. He also placed the primary fault for the housing bubble on relaxed lending standards and views that housing prices would rise forever. Alongside these comments Fed chairman Bernanke also said that bank supervisors and other financial regulators of which the Fed was one, has a better ability to contain the excesses that led to the economic crisis including housing bubble and other excesses, than the Fed as a monetary policy maker. By saying this Bernanke is acknowledging that the failure of regulation was a key part of what happened in the economic crisis. The failure to fix the regulatory system even now leads Bernanke to say that he is open to using monetary policy as a supplementary tool for addressing risks should another bubble develop, if the regulatory system isn't reformed. Still Bernanke and Greenspan were quite complacent at the time of the low interest rates and did not point out the dangers of global capital imbalances which were evident at the time, preferring to say that the United States could benefit from the inflows of capital from overseas without serious risks. And the Fed did not exercize its role of vigilance in alerting the country to excesses in the way the housing industry operated and in exercizing its own powers to that effect. Instead the Fed as regulator and in role as asafeguard for serious risks let itself become part of the cheering section as the worst excesses in housing were being exposed....