Global Economy: Central Bankers Are Sick of Rescuing the World Economy Alone - by William Horobin and Simon Kennedy

Global central bankers are again in the driving seat when it comes to propping up the world economy, but many are demanding governments join them in the rescue effort.

Amid slowing global growth, the Federal Reserve, European Central Bank and perhaps even the Bank of Japan are all set to ease monetary policy in coming months. But with less room to act than in the past, their leaders are telling politicians they will need to assist if a downturn takes hold.

The pressure could be applied in person on Wednesday when central bankers and finance ministers from the Group of Seven nations meet for talks north of Paris. They convene at a hazardous juncture for the global economy, as an unpredictable trade war risks precipitating a deeper downturn, and some bond markets hint at a growing possibility of a recession.

G-7 host nation France may even offer a reason to take note. President Emmanuel Macron’s 17 billion euros ($19.2 billion) of support for consumers in response to the Yellow Vests protests may have been contrary to his deficit-reduction mantra, but is proving fortuitous amid a global slowdown. French growth in 2019 is expected to outpace the euro-area average for the first time in six years.

“We are seeing political risks rising everywhere, so addressing the lack of growth that benefits all is quite urgent,” said Laurence Boone, chief economist at the OECD. “That cannot be achieved only through monetary policy.”
 
France’s GDP is expected to be more resilient than peers this year.

While Powell of the US has warned the U.S. fiscal position is unsustainable in the long-run, he said last week it’s “not a good thing to have monetary policy being the main game in town.”

The U.S. got a boost in 2018 from President Donald Trump’s $1.5 trillion tax overhaul, but that effect is fading.

Read more at: Central Bankers Are Sick of Rescuing the World Economy Alone - Bloomberg

The Digest Group
Almere-Digest
EU-Digest
Insure-Digest 
Turkish-Digest 

For additional information, including advertising rates - e-mail:Freeplanet@protonmail.com

US ECONOMY: COULD RECORD US DEFICIT TRIGGER THE NEXT RECESSION: ? "As U.S. trade gap widens to unimaginable hights."

The U.S. trade deficit rose to a seven-month high in September as imports surged to a record high amid strong domestic demand, offsetting a rebound in exports.

The Commerce Department said on Friday the trade gap increased 1.3 percent to $54.0 billion, widening for a fourth straight month. Data for August was revised to show the trade deficit rising to $53.3 billion instead of the previously reported $53.2 billion.

Could the US Economy collapse?

But here's the bigger question that retail investors and Wall Street are currently asking: Is the current stock market correction over? Given the many headwinds facing stocks and the U.S. and/or global economy, the answer may not be what investors want to hear.

Here are 25 reasons and/or scenarios that could cause the stock market to head substantially lower than where it's currently valued.

1. The ongoing trade war with China escalates, raising material costs, curbing consumer spending, and hurting corporate profits.
2. Corporate share buybacks fail to boost per-share profits as much as expected.
3. Democrats win one or both houses of Congress, hurting the chance of Republicans to pass further fiscal stimulus legislation.
4. The federal budget deficit continues to soar, placing added emphasis on our growing national debt, currently at more than $21 trillion.
5. The U.S. dollar keeps strengthening, placing pressure on exports and worsening the U.S. trade deficit with foreign countries.
6. FANG stocks – that's Facebook, Amazon.com, Netflix, and Google (now Alphabet) -- continue to draw the ire of short-sellers.
7. The Federal Reserve gets overly aggressive with interest rate hikes, sapping lending demand.
8. The yield curve flattens, reducing the desire of banks to lend money.
9. Interest rates rise, providing incentive for investors to ditch volatile equities for the safety of bonds and bank CDs.
10. Britain falls into a "hard Brexit." With few or no trade deals in place, the U.K. falls into recession, taking the U.S. and other developed countries with it.
11. China's economy experiences its slowest growth in decades, placing pressure on its ability to import from the U.S. and other key players.
12. The U.S. housing market shows signs of weakening, with important markets like California seeing a steep drop-off in new home sales.
13. Credit-card delinquencies begin to trickle higher, demonstrating the inability of consumers to meet their payment obligations.
14. The subprime auto loan market bubble bursts.
15. The U.S. goes to war, regardless of the reason or the country in question.
16. An errant tweet from President Trump stirs Wall Street and investors.
17. A flash crash caused by computer algorithms results in substantially reduced liquidity and perpetuates a rapid move lower in the stock market.
18. Investor emotions (especially those of day traders) get out of hand and send traders running for the exit.
19. The unemployment rate, which is at a 49-year low, begins to rise, signaling peak employment and the possibility of a weakening economy.
20. Disruption in important oil-producing countries causes crude prices to skyrocket or plunge. Either way, it could create sticker shock or job losses and adversely impact the U.S. economy.
21. U.S. GDP data shows slowing growth, which, in turn, cools investor expectations for stocks, sending them lower.
22. Inflation comes in far lower than expected, signaling that businesses have little pricing power. The prospect of deflation could wreak havoc on corporate earnings, causing the market to fall.
23. The U.S. debt ceiling is hit (yet again), but the political divide in Congress becomes too great for lawmakers to overcome, allowing the shutdown to perpetuate for months.
24. European debt crisis 2.0 hits, with countries like Italy unable to dig their way out of years of loose borrowing.
25. A widely followed pundit, such as Warren Buffett, sounds the cry of the stock market being overvalued.

In other words, there is no shortage of reasons the stock market could tumble from its recent all-time highs.

Bottom-line, however -it does not look good for the US Economy as the deficit is coming close to a trillion US dollars.Impossible to pay it back, unless by slashing government spending, and increasing taxes.

Unlike the trillion dollar budget deficits that occurred during the Obama administration that were temporary and largely the result of the Great Recession, the Trump deficits that will soon reach and exceed $1 trillion are permanent and will only get worse in the years ahead.

The Trump deficits are the result of changes in federal spending and revenue that will continue to be in place until some president and Congress decide to reverse them, that is, to increase taxes and make cuts to popular programs.

EU-Digest

Davos: Vision versus Economic Capacity and Power - by RM

Economic Power (USA) Versus Vision (EU)

At the end of the Davos economic gathering, it was interesting to note how much the speeches given by European leaders differed from that of the American President.

When the US President spoke, it was clear that he spoke, knowing that he could say just about anything he wanted, given the economic strength of the US. The fact that he added to his now famous slogan , "America first", the words, "but not alone*, just meant that he will support trade agreements and other multi-lateral deals only if they are based on US terms and conditions, certainly not on a multi-lateral basis.

The Europeans,  including their present champion, Emmanuel Macron, spoke with no exception, not only about the positive values of global trade, but also about major issues confronting the world, such as global warming.

The obvious conclusion one could make from these speeches in Davos, listening to these two different trains of of thought, is that unless the one submits to the others way of thinking - there is no harmony possible - and this, regardless of all the enormous challenges the world is facing today.

Unfortunately for the EU, is the fact that the Union is not unified enough to speak with one voice and put their "money where their mouth is", and consequently can not only offer a carrot as an alternative, but also when needed not use a stick against "Bougie Man" Trump.

The result of all this will be, as the saying goes, "when two dogs fight over a bone, another dog will take it",

That dog, if it has not already taken the bone, will be China.

Bottom line : Europe urgently needs to put its house in order, and those member states which like the status quo, better get out, or get thrown out of the EU.

EU-Digest
 Copy Right EU-Digest

Economic Disparity: The 1% grabbed 82% of all wealth created in 2017

For every $10 worth of wealth created last year, the world's richest 1 percent grabbed $8, according to a new report from Oxfam International.

"The billionaire boom is not a sign of a thriving economy but a symptom of a failing economic system," said Winnie Byanyima, executive director of Oxfam International.

The report also estimated the bottom 50 percent of the world's population saw no increase in wealth.

Note Almere-Digest: This disparity problem could easily be given some relief through the reduction of military budgets around the world, and funneling these funds to less fortunate countries. Looking at the Military Industry world-wide - the US spends $ 611.2 billion  per year on their military complex. This is double the amount of what China and Russia are spending together. Another remarkable fact is that the autocratic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's military budget of $ 89.9 billion is more than that of Russia, which is $65.6 billion. And really, if we think about it,what has all that global military hardware brought us? Even more human misery and disparity. 

Read more: The 1% grabbed 82% of all wealth created in 2017 |

G20: Merkel takes aim at Trump ahead of stormy G20 summit

Merkel said that discussions at the July 7-8 gathering of world leaders in Hamburg would be difficult given Trump's climate scepticism and "America First" stance, but that she was determined to seek a clear commitment for the Paris accord against global warming and a pledge against protectionism.

When Trump announced in early June he would withdraw from the Paris deal, "we knew that we could not expect discussions to be easy" at the G20 summit, 

 

Merkel told the German parliament"The differences are obvious and it would be dishonest to try to cover that up. That I won't do," she said, adding that the US exit from the 2015 Paris pact had made Europe "more determined than ever" to make the accord a success.

Without naming names, she also warned that "those who think that the problems of this world can be solved with isolationism or protectionism are terribly wrong" and pledged to seek a "clear signal for open markets and against sealing off" at the summit.

Read more: Merkel takes aim at Trump ahead of stormy G20 summit | SBS News

Global Economy: Back to the Global Vertical -a politically dangerous development - by Andres Ortega

There are horizontal periods – indeed some people, Thomas Friedman among them, believed some years ago that the world was definitively flat. And then there are periods in which verticality imposes itself again.

In many ways, we are once again moving from the horizontal to the vertical dimension of global affairs.

This “verticality” is making itself especially felt in social terms. Social classes are back on the agenda, although not in the traditional Marxist sense of class struggle.

Rather, we are now coping with the decline of the middle classes and the emergence of a broader “precariat.”

The social escalator is not working as in previous eras, despite renewed growth in many economies following the crisis. Benefits that were taken for granted, such as full-time jobs with social security protections, are disappearing in significant numbers.

Perhaps we are witnessing what Dennis J. Snower calls the “great decoupling,” which he labels “dangerous,” unlike its predecessor, which was “convenient.”

When economic progress is not mirrored or is not linked to social progress, discontent is generated in those left behind. This decoupling ends up manifesting itself in politics.

This is what may be going on in many countries amid the prospect of recovery, an uneven emergence from the crisis and, before that, globalization, which is now generally acknowledged to have produced winners and losers.

The decoupling phenomenon is arising when the advanced economies, both industrial and post-industrial, are recovering from the crisis.

As Marc Fleurbaey of Princeton University argues, we must “prepare people for life and support them in life.”

Central to that is the commitment to education, particularly amid the challenge of technology and its controversial impact on employment and the concept of work.

A smart policy approach in that regard, as Ylva Johansson, the Swedish Employment Minister, points out, is not protecting specific jobs (which may be dying) as protecting workers (which need to be actively equipped and/or a guided toward a new one).

Somehow or other, although no one knows how, remedying the great decoupling will induce the vertical to become more horizontal again. Or so one hopes.

Failing to achieve this will only accentuate more verticality. And vertical moments, as we know, tend to be the more dangerous ones.

Editors note EU-Digest: but the situation is not hopeless. Change is possible. People can and will make the difference. All that is required is for responsible, well educated, socially conscious people, with new ideologies to start speaking out. The outdated, corrupt, political systems in many places of the world must be replaced before it leads to a catasthrophy

If it was possible in France, for a new party to be created within a one year time span prior to their Presidential and parliamentary elections, and for that party to win decisively, in both the Presidential and Parliamentary elections, it can also be done elsewhere. 

The old and established parties have failed the people. The political establishment on both the left and the right have become corrupted by corporate influence and greed. It is high time for change, because the status quo is not acceptable anymore.

Read more: Back to the Global Vertical

Corporate Power: Corporations Running the World Used To Be Science Fiction - Now It's a Reality. - by Aisha Dodwell

Imagine a world in which all of the main functions of society are run for-profit by private companies. Schools are run by multinationals. Private security firms have replaced police forces. And most big infrastructure lies in the hands of a tiny plutocratic elite. Justice, such as it is, is meted out by shady corporate tribunals only accessible to the rich, who can easily escape the reach of limited national judicial systems. The poor, on the other hand, have almost no recourse against the mighty will of the remote corporate elite as they are chased off their land and forced into further penury.

This sounds like a piece of dystopian science fiction. But it’s not. It’s very close to the reality in which we live. The power of corporations has reached a level never before seen in human history, often dwarfing the power of states.

"The problem of unrestrained corporate power is massive, and it requires a massive solution."

Today, of the 100 wealthiest economic entities in the world, 69 are now corporations and only 31 countries*. This is up from 63 to 37 a year ago. At this rate, within a generation we will be living in a world entirely dominated by giant corporations.As multinationals increasingly dominate areas traditionally considered the primary domain of the state, we should be afraid. While they privatise everything from education and health to border controls and prisons, they stash their profits away in secret offshore accounts. And while they have unrivalled access to decision makers they avoid democratic processes by setting up secret courts enabling them to bypass all judicial systems applicable to people. Meanwhile their raison d’etre of perpetual growth in a finite world is causing environmental destruction and driving climate change. From Sports Direct’s slave-like working conditions to BP’s oil spill devastating people’s homes, stories of corporations violating rights are all too often seen in our daily papers.    

Yet the power of corporations is so great within our society that they have undermined the idea that there is any other way to run society. We are all too familiar with hearing about the threat of ‘losing corporate investment’ or companies ‘taking their business somewhere else’ as if the government’s number one task is to attract corporate investment.

It is this corporate agenda that permeates the governing institutions of the global economy, like the World Trade Organisation and the International Monetary Fund, whose policies and operations have given more importance to the ‘rights’ of big business than the rights and needs of people and the environment.

The problem of unrestrained corporate power is massive, and it requires a massive solution. That is why today Global Justice Now is launching a petition to the UK government demanding that it backs the new UN initiative for a legally binding global treaty on transnational corporations and human rights.

This UN treaty is the result of campaigning by countries from across the global south for international laws to regulate the activities of TNCs. In June 2014 they successfully got a resolution passed in the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) establishing the need for such a treaty.

A working group of member states has been set up to take the treaty forward, chaired by Ecuador, they have met once already in 2015, and have the next meeting scheduled for October 2016 to discuss the scope and content of the treaty. Meanwhile, civil society groups from across the world have come together and formed the Treaty Alliance movement which aims to make sure the treaty comes in to being with truly meaningful content.

Although it may sound like a boring technical process, this treaty is something we should be excited about because it provides a huge opportunity in the fight to restrain corporate power. It has massive potential to withdraw the privileges that corporations have gained over recent decades and force them to comply with international human rights law, international labour law and international environmental standards. It would oblige governments to take the power of corporations seriously, and hold them to account for the power they wield. This would standardise how different governments relate to multinationals which means that rather than allowing them to play countries off against one another in a race to the bottom, it would force minimum standards.

But the UK government, well known for its cosy relationship with corporations, has so far refused to take part in this UN treaty. And the UK are not alone, most other EU countries are also opposed to the treaty.

We need to make sure our government doesn’t pass up on this rare opportunity to provide genuine protection for the victims of human rights abuses committed by multinational corporations and place binding obligations on all governments to hold their corporations to account for their impacts on people and the planet.

That’s why groups across the continent are joining forces to make sure their leaders participate in the Geneva talks this October. The petition launched today, urging governments across Europe to participate in the Geneva talks will be delivered to national and EU leaders on October 12th.

Of course, the battle against corporate power has many fronts and the UN treaty is only one part of it. At the same time, we need to continue to develop alternative ways to produce and distribute the goods and services we need. We need to undermine the notion that only massive corporations can make the economy and society ‘work’. Food sovereignty and energy democracy are just two examples of how it is possible to build an economy without corporations. But as long as corporations do play a role in our economy, we need to find ways to control their activity and prevent abuses. This is why we need to fight for this UN treaty.

The alternative is that we continue to rush towards the dystopian vision of unchallenged corporate power. We cannot allow this to happen. We must fight back.                

Read more: Corporations Running the World Used To Be Science Fiction - Now It's a Reality. | Common Dreams | Breaking News

EU Economy: To Avoid A 2016 Crash, The Major Powers Need To Pull In The Same Direction - by Anton Muscatelli

It looks already as if 2016 will be a pivotal year for the world economy. RBS has advised investors to “sell everything except for high-quality bonds” as turmoil has returned to stock markets. The Dow Jones and S&Pindices have fallen by more than 6% since the start of the year, which is the worst ever yearly start. There is a similar story in other major markets, with the FTSE leading companies losing some £72bn of value in the same period.

 These declines have come on the back of a major shock to the Chinese stock market. China’s stock exchange is very different from that of other major economies, as Chinese companies don’t rely on it to fund themselves to the same extent, using debt instead. All the same, the repeated suspensions of trading as the Chinese circuit-breakers came into operation (as they do when share prices fall too sharply) spooked investors around the world.

 On top of that we are seeing commodity prices continuing to retreat. Oil prices have dropped towards $30 per barrel and don’t look likely to increase soon, with Iranian and Saudi oil production continuing to sustain supply. We are seeing many emerging economies dependent on petroleum revenues suffering (Brazil, Russia), and there is speculation that many oil producers (and perhaps even Saudi Arabia) are having to abandon their currencies’ link with the US dollar.

 It would be good if, in 2016, we began to see greater macroeconomic cooperation between the G20. In an ideal world, the G20 economies would seek to share out the effort of sustaining world demand through targeted public investments designed to restore business and consumer confidence. We saw this very briefly immediately after the financial crisis. Since 2009 there have been no attempts to act collectively on fiscal policy. Those days seem unfortunately very distant now.

Read more: To Avoid A 2016 Crash, The Major Powers Need To Pull In The Same Direction

Global Economy: The global impact of the US interest rate rise - by Kamal Ahmed

When America stirs, the rest of the world takes notice.

Rising US interest rates could mean higher debt repayments for emerging market governments and businesses - as the amount owed is denominated in dollars.

And with higher interest rates in America, investment capital will be encouraged across the Atlantic and away from Asia in the hunt for better returns.

That could affect Europe as well.

On the upside, the stronger dollar which has followed the rise might be good for European and Asian economies as it means exports to America are cheaper.

Read More: The global impact of the US interest rate rise - BBC News

Global Economy: US and Chinese Economies are in "lockstep" and this could spell major trouble for US

Let no one fool you - specially not the Wall Street "news makers.

Both the US and Chinese Economies are in lockstep and the US economy could get  in big trouble because of that.

The investment relationship that has blossomed between China and the U.S., even though it has benefited both countries, has also made both of their economies very dependent on each other, but the US more so than China.

Chinese companies have started  more companies or joint ventures in the U.S., thereby increasing the number of Americans working for Chinese firms.In a sense China has now also become a supplier of secondary capital to the USA, in addition to the regular  US debt they have been buying up..

Another alarming fact is that based on the present (June 2015 figures) US debt to China stands at $1.272 trillion,.

That's roughly one-fifth of the $6.175 trillion held by foreign countries. The rest of the $18 trillion debt is owned by either the American people, or by the U.S. government itself.

The United States has thus allowed China to become one of its biggest bankers, to provide the American people low consumer prices.

This selling of debt to China is mainly used by the US to help the US economy to grow by funding federal government programs. It has also kept  U.S. interests rates artificially low. However, what very people want to talk about, specially the financial world, is that China's increasing ownership of U.S. debt is shifting the economic balance of power in China's favor.

China's position as America's largest banker also gives it considerable political leverage. Consequently every now and then China threatens to sell part of its US debt holdings. It knows that, if it did so, U.S. interest rates would rise, which would slow U.S economic growth to a trickle.

As China grew economically stronger it has also been calling for a new global currency to replace the dollar, which is presently used in most international transactions. China usually makes this call whenever the U.S. lets the value of the US dollar drop, which makes the debt China holds less valuable.

China certainly is not so stupid to call in its US debt all at once. If it did so, the demand for the dollar would plummet like a rock. A dollar collapse would disrupt international markets worse than the 2008 financial crises and China's economy would suffer along with everyone else's.

It's more likely that China will slowly begin selling off its US Treasury holdings.

Bottom line the financial poker game between the two most powerful economic players in the world is certainly not over yet, but China is holding some very powerful cards in its hand.

The financial world better sit up and start smelling the roses.

EU-Digest

Global Economy: Globalisation And Technology Drive Insecurity - by Paul Sweeney

People are insecure. Young people worry about getting a decent job, finding a secure home and having to pay off the vast debts run up in the decade of uber-liberal economic policies of European governments to 2007.

Elderly people worry about their security in old age, access to decent health care, about their children getting jobs or being forced to emigrate.

A recent Eurofound study concluded that 14% of jobs in Europe are high-paid good jobs; 37% are well-balanced good jobs; 29% are poorly balanced jobs; and 20% are poor quality jobs. Thus almost half of all those at work are not in good jobs.

Yet we have never had such high incomes or wealth. This is in spite of the six years of the Great Recession. Total national income is substantially higher than what it was a generation ago. Yet only a generation ago too, jobs and pensions were more secure, homes were easier to find and health care was not such a big worry.

What has led to today’s insecurity? The big drivers of insecurity are globalisation and technology. They have shifted low skilled jobs and now even middle income jobs offshore, created intense competition, change and uncertainty. They give great power to large corporations, while undermining the power of states and of organised labour. Crucially, they have also changed the nature of politics.

Globalisation and technology have been key drivers in the three-decade-long (a generation) decline in the share of national income of workers and the self-employed and its corresponding shift to wealthy people and corporations A few countries like Ireland witnessed the boom of catching up with the rest of Europe for 20 years, when overall earnings rose so the seismic shift in income was not so evident, but thanks to the Great Recession, it now is.

Both globalisation and technology have reduced labour’s bargaining power through offshoring, through sectoral shifts in employment from manufacturing to services, from large units to smaller ones and to autonomous, self-employed working. It has facilitated the massive decline in corporate governance – in the way firms are run and what their objectives are. It boosted the pay of the elite to extraordinary levels that have nothing to do with performance. Both have also facilitated financialisation – where finance rules the real economy.

Globalisation has also reduced financial disclosure, blurring our knowledge of the real ownership and control of business. It has led to the privatisation of swathes of public services, and these privatised public services are increasingly run by big, non-competing oligopolies. It has facilitated increased tax evasion and tax avoidance on unprecedented scales by the wealthy and by large companies. The Luxleaks and HSBC exposures are only the tip of this iceberg of tax cheating on an industrial scale in some countries.

Read more: How Globalisation And Technology Drive Insecurity

Global Economy: The Politics Of Economic Stupidity - by Joseph Stiglitz

In 2014, the world economy remained stuck in the same rut that it has been in since emerging from the 2008 global financial crisis. Despite seemingly strong government action in Europe and the United States, both economies suffered deep and prolonged downturns. 

The gap between where they are and where they most likely would have been had the crisis not erupted is huge. In Europe, it increased over the course of the year.

Developing countries fared better, but even there the news was grim. The most successful of these economies, having based their growth on exports, continued to expand in the wake of the financial crisis, even as their export markets struggled. But their performance, too, began to diminish significantly in 2014.

In 1992, Bill Clinton based his successful campaign for the US presidency on a simple slogan: “It’s the economy, stupid.” From today’s perspective, things then do not seem so bad; the typical American household’s income is now lower. But we can take inspiration from Clinton’s effort. 

The malaise afflicting today’s global economy might be best reflected in two simple slogans: “It’s the politics, stupid” and “Demand, demand, demand.”

Read more: The Politics Of Economic Stupidity

Global Economy: Grim global growth outlook says World Bank

The World Bank has cut its global growth forecast. In its bi-annual report, the predicted global growth will be 3 percent for this year and 3.3 for 2016.

The report emphasises that  the economy is “running on a single engine. The American one. This does not make for a rosy outlook.”

In June last year the World Bank stated growth would reach 3.4 percent for 2015 and 3.5 percent next year.

The Bank adds that the low oil prices may help importing countries such as India, which is expected to grow by some 7 percent next year.

On the other hand oil producers like Russia look set to loose out. The Russian economy is on course to contract by 2.9 percent this year.
The recovery, says the report, is at best “sputtering” along in the eurozone and Japan.

 Read more: Grim global growth outlook says World Bank | euronews, economy

Corporate Global Control: The Illusion Of Choice: These 10 Companies Are Responsible For Virtually Everything Around You

A chart via Reddit shows how ten huge corporations control the production of almost everything the average person buys, from food to clothes to hygienic products.

$84 billion-company Proctor & Gamble is the largest advertiser in the U.S. and owns enough brands to serve 4.8 million people around the world, according to LinkedIn.

Nestle is famous for its chocolate, but the $200 billion-corporation is also the biggest food company in the world. It also owns L’Oreal, Gerber, Diesel and even pet food makers Purina and Friskies.
Serving two billion people around the world is renowned soap-maker Unilever, which can attribute the majority of its success to its ownership of Q-tips and Skippy peanut butter.

For the complete report click here: The Illusion Of Choice: These 10 Companies Are Responsible For Virtually Everything Around You

Global Economy: Debt risk, market turmoil threaten financial crisis - David Parkinson

Nagging debt risks, heated currency wars and renewed market turmoil are making the global economy a precarious place, six years after the financial crisis.

On the sixth anniversary of the S&P 500’s biggest one-day drop in history – a 106-point plunge on Sept. 29, 2008, that marked the beginning of one of the worst market collapses of all time – the respected annual Geneva Report on the World Economy is raising concerns about a “poisonous combination” of record and still-rising global debts and chronically slow growth. It warned that this leaves the world exposed to a heightened risk of further economic stagnation and even another potential financial crisis.

Read more: Debt risk, market turmoil threaten financial crisis - The Globe and Mail

Ecology, Ethics, Anarchism seen through the eyes of Noam Chomsky - by Javier Sethness

There can be little doubt about the centrality and severity of the environmental crisis in the present day. Driven by the mindless "grow-or-die" imperative of capitalism, humanity's destruction of the biosphere has reached and even surpassed various critical thresholds, whether in terms of carbon emissions, biodiversity loss, ocean acidification, freshwater depletion, or chemical pollution. Extreme weather events can be seen pummeling the globe, from the Philippines - devastated by Typhoon Haiyan in November of last year - to California, which is presently suffering from the worst drought in centuries.

As Nafeez Ahmed has shown, a recently published study funded in part by NASA warns of impending civilizational collapse without radical changes to address social inequality and overconsumption. Truthout's own Dahr Jamail has written a number of critical pieces lately that have documented the profundity of the current trajectory toward anthropogenic climate disruption (ACD) and global ecocide: In a telling metaphor, he likens the increasingly mad weather patterns brought about by ACD to an electrocardiogram of a "heart in defibrillation."

Rather than conclude that such distressing trends follow intrinsically from an "aggressive" and "sociopathic" human nature, reasonable observers should likely associate the outgrowth of these tendencies with the dominance of the capitalist system, for, as Oxfam noted in a January 2014 report, the richest 85 individuals in the world possess as much wealth as a whole half of humanity - the 3.5 billion poorest people - while just 90 corporations have been responsible for a full two-thirds of the carbon emissions generated since the onset of industrialism.

As these staggering statistics show, then, the ecological and climatic crises correspond to the extreme concentration of power and wealth produced by capitalism and upheld by the world's governments. As a counter-move to these realities, the political philosophy of anarchism - which opposes the rule of both state and capital - may hold a great deal of promise for ameliorating and perhaps even overturning these trends toward destruction. Apropos, I had the great good fortune recently to interview Professor Noam Chomsky, renowned anarcho-syndicalist, to discuss the question of ecological crisis and anarchism as a remedy. Click on the link below for a transcript of our conversation.

Read more: Noam Chomsky: Ecology, Ethics, Anarchism

Global Economy: New doomsday poll: 99.9% risk of 2014 crash - by Paul B. Farrell

Are we reaching the end of the road?

Global risks are accelerating. This is our fourth major poll update of industry leaders: A critical review of their warnings from early last year when we first predicted a 87% risk of a crash: Bernanke’s Fed saw an “unsustainable bubble” ... Gross: “credit supernova” ... Gundlach: “kaboom ahead” ... Ellis: “Don’t own bonds” ... Shilling: “shocker” ... Roubini: “Prepare for perfect storm” ... Shiller: “Irrational exuberance is back” ... Schiff: “Doubling down” on “doomsday” prediction ... InvestmentNews’ warning 90,000 advisers: “tick, tick ... boom!”

A few weeks later the crash risk was up to 98%. Then a dramatic preholiday uptick in investor sentiment. America’s collective unconscious tired of negativity after a Halloween headline: “Economic guillotine dead ahead.” A week later, 2014 became the “Year of the Boom.” Bank of America’s chief strategist screamed: “Bet on the bulls now.” The Great Gatsby spirit was celebrating the holidays“ 

Even old grumpy Dr. Doom, celeb economist Nouriel Roubini, began humming a happy tune all over television: “A global recovery is going to occur, get into equities.” 

What really happened? Fed politics. Short-term, Larry Summers withdrew as a candidate for the Fed chairman’s job. Dark cloud lifted as Janet Yellen become the pick. Wall Street cheered, Bernanke’s easy-money printing presses would not screw up their year-end bonuses. Plus Main Street was mentally exhausted, tired of the bad news, relentless political drama. We needed a holiday break. 

By Thanksgiving, “irrational exuberance” was accelerating in full holiday tilt: Headline: “Shiller’s hot P/Es will power a roaring bull till 2017,” and 2014 got branded the “Katy Perry market!” A week later, a Thanksgiving headline added: “10 reasons to be a bull in 2014.” 

But long term? What’s really ahead for America in 2014? Warning, something bigger is hiding in the deep shadows of our collective brain. At a recent lunch with an old friend, one of the world’s more successful commodities traders, he confirmed that “something” was dead ahead. But not just another brief statistical shift in sentiment. Not a medium-term volatility shift. America, the world, are in a historic transition, a paradigm shift, a mysterious upheaval that few will grasp till it moves further along.

Read more: New doomsday poll: 99.9% risk of 2014 crash - Paul B. Farrell - MarketWatch

Economic Indicators: The Zombie Numbers That Rule the U.S. and Global Economy - by Zachary Karabell

Economic Indicators have outlived their time

This Thursday ( February 21) the Conference Board, a global business association, released its monthly index of “leading economic indicators.”

Like the unemployment and inflation, housing starts, G.D.P. changes and other figures, these numbers arrive in metronomic waves. Financial services like Bloomberg, Dow Jones and Reuters blast them out the moment they’re released. Stock markets will often respond within seconds. Commentators and policy makers attribute to them a near-cosmic significance.

We act as if they are markers from time immemorial, but in fact they were invented for modern industrial nations after the Depression and World War II and are now seriously outdated.

Take gross domestic product. Derived from formulas set down by the economist Simon Kuznets and others in the 1930s, its limitations have long been recognized, none more eloquently than by Robert F. Kennedy in a famous speech in 1968 when he declared that it measured everything except that which is worth measuring.

GDP treats all output as a positive. When you buy LED lights that obviate the need to spend on incandescent bulbs and reduce energy consumption, GDP goes down and what should be an unmitigated good becomes a statistical negative. If a coal company pollutes a river, the cleanup costs are positive for GDP, as are any health care costs for those harmed.

What’s more, we have also come to assume that with output comes more spending and employment, but factories today are powered by robotics and software, and robots don’t buy more lattes and shoes.

GDP is a good number for a nation that produces lots of stuff made by lots of workers, but for an information economy grounded in services and intellectual property and awash in apps that cost nothing yet enable commerce, it is not up to the task. Nor are many of our indicators. Our trade figures treat an iPhone made—more accurately, assembled—in China with no reference to the intellectual property created by Apple in California.

Yes, large corporations have economists who attempt to draw correlations between macro-indicators and business trends, and companies decide on how to much to spend based in part on a read of future interest rates, growth trends, and inflation. But even here, the connection between big numbers and business realities has broken down. If national retail sales that measure big stores in malls are weak, that says nothing about how much e-commerce might be up. If consumer spending writ large sags, that says nothing about higher end spending at mass luxury stores like Michael Kors or lower-end retailers such as Dollar Tree. Making decisions based on what the indicators say is almost certainly a recipe for making the wrong decisions.

Weaning ourselves from our obsession with economic indicators is a vital step to grappling with the world as it is and making decisions that yield positive results. Individuals, companies, and governments will find their interests best served by creative approaches that craft indicators that draw on the wealth of big data information rather than cramming all reality into a few simple averages. The indicators of the 20th did yeoman service in taming the worst extremes of economic cycles. We should thank them, and move on.

Read more: The Zombie Numbers That Rule the U.S. Economy - Zachary Karabell - The Atlantic

Stock Markets Warning: Stocks Will Plunge by 50% this year

t is only a matter of time before the stock market plunges by 50% or more, according to several reputable experts.

“We have no right to be surprised by a severe and imminent stock market crash,” explains Mark Spitznagel, a hedge fund manager who is notorious for his hugely profitable billion-dollar bet on the 2008 crisis. “In fact, we must absolutely expect it."

Unfortunately Spitznagel isn’t alone.

“We are in a gigantic financial asset bubble,” warns Swiss adviser and fund manager Marc Faber. “It could burst any day.”

Faber doesn’t hesitate to put the blame squarely on President Obama’s big government policies and the Federal Reserve’s risky low-rate policies, which, he says, “penalize the income earners, the savers who save, your parents — why should your parents be forced to speculate in stocks and in real estate and everything under the sun?”

Billion-dollar investor Warren Buffett is rumored to be preparing for a crash as well. The “Warren Buffett Indicator,” also known as the “Total-Market-Cap to GDP Ratio,” is breaching sell-alert status and a collapse may happen at any moment.

So with an inevitable crash looming, what are Main Street investors to do?

One option is to sell all your stocks and stuff your money under the mattress, and another option is to risk everything and ride out the storm.

But according to Sean Hyman, founder of Absolute Profits, there is a third option.

“There are specific sectors of the market that are all but guaranteed to perform well during the next few months,” Hyman explains. “Getting out of stocks now could be costly.”

Read more: Warning: Stocks Will Collapse by 50

Corruption - Banking Industry: U.S. banks can match China’s for corruption any day - by David Weidner

Banking Industry, Favoritism and Corruption

"Tian xià wu ya yi yàng hei." I may not have the translation exactly correct, but in Mandarin, loosely, the expression means “in the whole world, all crows are black.”

The proverb isn’t about crows. Crows are a metaphor for bad guys. And the upshot is this: we may judge different cultures for their failings, but we have failings too. We all have our crows. Everywhere they are black. 

This idea of equanimity in how we are all flawed came to mind as the scandal escalates over banks hiring people connected to China’s political and powerful elite. We tend to look at these transgressions — if they can be called that — and pass judgment. Perhaps we say “look at the awful Chinese political system,” or “look at the terrible behavior of U.S. banks.”

In case you missed it, or are a little fuzzy on the details, several foreign banks are being investigated for hiring well-connected Chinese, or “princelings.” They may be the son, daughter cousin of an official or the official him- or herself. 

On Monday, UBS AG  suspended two executives, including its top IPO banker in Asia, in an internal probe into the hiring of an employee related to the head of a Chinese listing hopeful, according to the Wall Street Journal, which cited anonymous sources. UBS declined comment. 

And the same day came revelations that the family friend of an important Chinese regulator — who had say over the bank’s ability to pursue insurance business in the country — was given an audience with J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. CEO Jamie Dimon in June 2012. The friend reportedly received a special internship with the bank and then became a full-time employee. 

“Our CEO played no role in the hiring decision, did not weigh in, and did not follow up,” Joseph Evangelisti, a bank spokesman, said in a statement. “It is his normal practice to pass on referrals without advice to those involved in hiring.” 

The dust-ups at UBS and J.P. Morgan were just the latest in the saga where U.S. financial firms may or may not have used hiring friends or relatives of powerful officials as a way of influencing business decisions in the banks favor. 

OK. Let’s assume they did. So what? This is how business is done in China. And it’s not that different from how it’s done here, even though many of us believe our way is the superior way. 

China is struggling with corruption. It ranks 80th out of 178 countries in Transparency International’s Corruptions Perceptions Index . It is, perhaps, the country’s most pressing problem as it seeks to become the leading global economic power. 

In the same index the U.S. rank is 19th. Maybe it shouldn’t be. After all, this is a perception index. People think the US  is more on the up and up.

In the United States, financial firms use an equally questionable practice of hiring regulators or losing top executives to regulatory roles. 

Consider also that 127 current or former members of the health, education and labor committees in Congress either have worked, or are now working, in the industries they were overseeing as lawmakers, according to OpenSecrets.org. 

The SEC and Congress aren’t the only places where the revolving door swings. Robert Rubin, the former U.S. Treasury Secretary, joined Citigroup Inc.  in 2000 and collected $115 million as the bank took $45 billion in taxpayer-funded bailouts and $300 billion in guarantees on assets. The most recent former Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, left to join the private equity firm Warburg Pincus. as new rules were being crafted on the industry. 

At least China and Europe are doing something about their issues. A report in 2010 by the Anti-Corruption and Governance Research Center at Tsinghua University found that in just 11 months of that year the government’s anti-corruption division investigated 119,000 graft cases, resulting in 113,000 people being punished. 

 Recently the EU Commission  came out with an "Anti-Corruption Report", which showed that corruption is widespread in the EU and costs the taxpayer there around 120 billion euros ($160 billion) per year.

Just because US crows are ours, doesn’t mean they’re not black, just as they are all around the world. 

Read more: U.S. banks can match China’s for corruption any day - David Weidner's Writing on the Wall - MarketWatch