HAPPY THANKSGIVING

Consider this an “Open Thread” for sharing thanks, football, family, and the like.

Let’s stay away from our pet peeves for one day.

I remain thankful that I was born and raised an American, and a Jew in a loving family – the second could not have happened without the first in most places in 1943.  I remain thankful for my family of choice as well as for my family of origin, and for my many friends.  As my grandfather said, “If you don’t have cancer and the Nazis aren’t kicking in your door, quit complaining.”  So I ain’t complaining.

Y’all have a fine holiday today.

 

 

Russia

Russia

A wounded economy

It is closer to crisis than the West or Vladimir Putin realise

Nov 22nd 2014 | From the print edition The Economist

VLADIMIR PUTIN is not short of problems, many of his own creation. There is the carnage in eastern Ukraine, where he is continuing to stir things up. There are his fraught relations with the West, with even Germany turning against him now.  There is an Islamist insurgency on his borders and at home there is grumbling among the growing numbers who doubt the wisdom of his Ukraine policy. But one problem could yet eclipse all these: Russia’s wounded economy could fall into a crisis.

Some of Russia’s ailments are well known. Its oil-fired economy surged upward on rising energy prices; now that oil has tumbled, from an average of almost $110 a barrel in the first half of the year to below $80, Russia is hurting. More than two-thirds of exports come from energy. The rouble has fallen by 23% in three months. Western sanctions have also caused pain, as bankers have applied the restrictions not just to Mr Putin’s cronies, but to a much longer tally of Russian businesses. More generally, years of kleptocracy have had a corrosive effect on the place. Much of the country’s wealth has been divided among Mr. Putin’s friends.

Everybody expects continued stagnation, but the conventional wisdom is that Mr. Putin is strong enough to withstand this. The falling rouble has made some export industries like farming more competitive. These exports combined with Mr. Putin’s import-blocking counter-sanctions mean Russia still has a small trade surplus. It has a stash of foreign-exchange reserves, some $370 billion according to the central bank’s figures. Add in the resilience of the Russian people, who are also inclined to blame deprivation on foreigners, and the view from Moscow is that Mr Putin has time to manoeuvre. People talk loosely about two years or so.

In fact, a crisis could happen a lot sooner. Russia’s defences are weaker than they first appear and they could be tested by any one of a succession of possibilities—another dip in the oil price, a bungled debt rescheduling by Russian firms, further Western sanctions. When economies are on an unsustainable course, international finance often acts as a fast-forward button, pushing countries over the edge more quickly than politicians or investors expect.

Putin a good man down

The immediate worry is the oil price. Mr Putin is confident it will recover. But supply seems set to increase, with OPEC keen to defend its market share.  American government agencies predict oil prices could average $83 a barrel in 2015, well below the $90 level Russia needs to avoid recession (and to keep its budget in balance). If global demand weakens—Japan has slipped into recession since the latest round of forecasts—the oil price could fall further. That would immediately prompt investors to reassess Russia’s prospects.  Then there are the debt repayments. Russia’s firms have over $500 billion in external debt outstanding, with $130 billion of it payable before the end of 2015, at a time when few Western banks want to increase their exposure to Russia.  Even firms that earn dollar revenues may struggle to pay their debts. Rosneft, an oil giant, recently asked the Kremlin to lend it $44 billion. Mr Putin has so far resisted, but he cannot let a company that is 70% state-owned and employs 160,000 people fail. There is a lengthening queue of troubled Russian firms.

Non-performing loans were rising even before interest rates were raised to 9.5% to defend the rouble. Meanwhile Russian banks are reliant on the central bank to replace deposits that their customers are understandably spiriting into dollars.  Directly or indirectly, many of these bills will end up with the Kremlin, which is why its reserves will be vital. They are evaporating: down $100 billion in the past year, following failed attempts to defend the rouble. And the book-keeping is dodgy. Of the reported $370 billion reserve pile, more than $170 billion sits in the country’s two wealth funds. Some of their assets are iffy, including various stakes in Russia’s state-owned banks and debt issued by Ukraine that Mr Putin’s own aggression is fast rendering worthless. One of the funds is earmarked for pensions. In reality, Russia’s government has perhaps $270 billion of hard cash that is accessible and usable without massive cuts elsewhere—less than its external obligations due over the next two years.

All this spells trouble for Russia, but Mr Putin’s marauding foreign policy could accelerate things. This after all is a man who has invaded other countries and lied about it. A deeper foray into Ukraine would lead to stronger sanctions by Western countries. Some of them, such as barring Russia’s banks from the SWIFT international payments system, could halt Russian trade altogether. A partial block on oil exports would fell the economy, as it did Iran’s. And the more trouble he faces, the more likely Mr Putin is to play the nationalist card—and that means more foreign forays, and yet more sanctions.

From Russia to Rio, without much love

Russia’s biggest recent economic crisis, in 1998, led to a government default.  This time a string of bank failures, corporate defaults and a deep recession look likelier. Even so the pain from these could spread abroad quickly, both to countries that rely on Russian trade (exports to Russia account for fully 5% of GDP in the Baltics and Belarus) and through financial ripple effects. Banks in both Austria and Sweden are exposed. And if firms in one badly run commodity-driven country start to default on their dollar debts, then investors will worry about others—such as Brazil.

If Russia’s economy looks likely to collapse, there will be inevitable calls in the West for sanctions to be cut back. This week Mr Putin pointed out that 300,000 German jobs depend on trade with his country. But Angela Merkel rightly stood firm. Actions, Mr Putin must finally learn, have consequences. Invade another country, and the world will act against you. And the same goes for the economy, too. Had Mr Putin spent more of his time strengthening Russia’s economy than enriching his friends, he would not find himself so vulnerable now.

24 Hours of UK Air Traffic

COLLEGE

Veterans’ Day

Traditionally, a moment of silence is observed at 11 AM.

ACA Report Card from The Economist

A mixed report, of course, but as a summary in one place I thought it was useful.  I have read The Economist’s copyright policy and am not reprinting anything from that mag here.  However, I am linking:

http://www.economist.com/node/21618904/print

I Blame NoVA

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2014/09/15/how-states-have-gamed-medicaid-for-hundreds-of-millions/?wpisrc=nl_fed&wpmm=1

 

You healthcare lobbyists should have written a law without loopholes to begin with.

 

I am curious as to what is the net effect of revenue matching laws.  It seems to me that revenue match for a particular program that bypasses the state’s general coffers might achieve the supposed result of more program funding, but considering how it is normally done, I think it is simply a transfer of deficit raised federal dollars to state general revenues.

 

We have so many revenue matching programs.  I assume that Highway funding is the largest one, followed by Medicaid.  Or perhaps vice versa.  I believe that in TX all fed revenues into both are used however the Lege desires.

 

Should a federal/state joint venture like highway construction even have a feature like “revenue matching”?  What purpose does it actually serve?  Assume with me that interstate highways are basically federal responsibilities.  Nevertheless, the R.O.W. impacts are all local, and state and local input are critical to managing the minimum damage to a community.  So cooperation is a legitimate goal, but does revenue matching have anything to do with that?  Is it possible states or localities were blackmailed into supporting the interstate system financially, or else the feds would have drawn the roadway to kill commerce in a town?

 

The article calls the gaming of Medicaid by the states “waste”.  But it seems to me the structure was established as a “game”.  If you see revenue matching as other than an invitation to increase the federal deficit in order to permit states to have the pleasure of spending money they did not have the pain of raising, explain it to me.

 

 

 

Cinema

Rosanne and I try to take in a movie every Saturday night.  We don’t do pure adventure or pure chick flick together and we scour reviews for suitable dramas and comedies that leave chickflicks to her and my adult daughters and leave adventure, scifi, and mysteries to me and my male friends or me and my son.

 

Our last three weeks of flicks: Boyhood, A Most Wanted Man, and The Hundred Foot Journey.

The presence of Phillip Seymour Hoffmann in his last film aroused enough curiousity in Rosanne that she readily agreed to watch that spy movie.  Predictably, it was my hands down favorite of the three and her least favorite.  I had read the novel.  PSH was so good in the role that he changed my imaginary perception of the character for the better.  I wonder if LeCarre himself had that impression?

The other two movies were entertaining and by no means a waste of money.  Boyhood leaves you with enough to talk about over drinks afterward and the sense that the movie captured a slice of life very well, but it neither leaves a lasting impression nor requires revisiting.  However, because it was actually filmed over 12 years with the same actors naturally aging it will be a film school subject, I am sure.

The Hundred Foot Journey, like Chef, is at its heart a celebration of food.  A feel good movie, dressed up as a dramady, with terrific actors.  Chef, btw, was a feel good movie dressed up as a travelogue with good standup comics.

You may have noticed I am not, here, a harsh critic.  I could be.  I am capable of pointing out the flaws in three of the four movies I have mentioned so far, and if I did you would think I did not like them.  Let it be said that the best movies I ever saw were not coextensive with my favorite movies, and I am not writing here to prove my chops as a critic, if indeed I have any.

Finally, my first cousin’s daughter just starred in this Grade B horror flick.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/come_back_to_me/

I am required to watch it, probably today.  Wish me luck.

 

 

 

Non Delegation

Scott, QB, I, and probably JNC, are interested in the doctrine of non delegation.  QB directly referred to it in discussing the rise of the bureaucracy and I avoided it in that discussion because I had no idea where it stood after 78 years or so of disuse.  I did allude to “limits” of delegation, not specifically, but in general, that arise in federal cases.  So without doing any research of my own, one of JNC’s many cool links brought up a reference to this:

http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1335&context=law_and_economics

I think it is very interesting.  Hope you read it too!

Morning Report 8/4/14

PLACEHOLDER FOR BRENT.  BRENT, PLEASE EDIT.

 

The rest of you can use it as an open thread, or not.