International Women’s Day
Women have seen only “marginal improvements” in the world of work in the past 20 years, according to a global study.
The International Labour Organization (ILO) said the difference in the employment rate between men and women had decreased by 0.6% since 1995.
In countries where women access work more easily, the quality of their jobs “remains a matter of concern”.
The findings come as events take place to mark International Women’s Day.
John Wiliams of the Sa Francisco Federal Reserve comments:The Federal Reserve has a dual mandate: maximum employment and price stability. We want everyone who wants a job to be able to find one and for inflation to average 2% per year.
Unemployment will never be zero, because in any well-functioning economy, people leave jobs and new people enter the workforce. Economists use the term “natural rate of unemployment” to describe the optimal rate for an economy at full health. It’s hard to know exactly what the number is, but I put the natural rate at about 5%.
We dipped just below that, to 4.9%, in January. I expect the unemployment rate to continue to come down a bit further, reaching the mid-4s later this year. This is a reflection of steady improvement in a labor market that has fully recovered from the recession and its aftermath, when we saw a peak of 10%.
A further sign of the health of the labor market is that more people are quitting their jobs – indicating they feel confident that they’ll find another – and they’re probably right: Job vacancies are at the highest levels since they started collecting the data in 2000. We added more than 2½ million jobs in 2015. All in all, we have reached or are close to maximum employment across a broad range of markers.
The Fed sets a target of 2% average inflation. Many people think that Fed policymakers’ concern lies disproportionately with inflation that’s too high. They think we view inflation lower than 2% as sort of “not great,” but see inflation above 2% as catastrophic. That’s not the case. In my view, inflation somewhat above 2% is just as bad as the same amount below.
Despite recent financial volatility, my overall outlook for the U.S. and the global economy remains unchanged. There is plenty of concern about China’s slower pace, but as I said last year, this largely reflects a pivot from a manufacturing-based economy to one driven by domestic consumption and services – the exact engines that are currently powering U.S. growth (Williams 2015).
Despite the Sturm und Drang of international and market developments, the U.S. economy is, all in all, looking pretty good.
The world oil market is complex. Governments and private companies play various roles in moving oil from producers to consumers. Government-owned national oil companies (NOCs) control most of the world’s proved oil reserves (75% in 2014) and oil production (58% in 2014). International oil companies (IOCs), which are often stockholder-owned corporations, make up the balance of global oil reserves and production. Proved oil reserves consist of the amount of oil in a given area, known with reasonable certainty, that current technology can recover cost effectively. Worldwide proved oil reserves in 2014 were almost 1.7 trillion barrels, and global oil production averaged roughly 93.2 million barrels a day.
There are three types of companies that supply crude oil to the global market. Each type of company has different operational strategies and production-related goals:
In 2014, 100 companies produced 82% of the world’s oil. NOCs accounted for 58% of global oil production.
Pass through businesses increase in US.
he importance of pass-through business entities has soared in the past three decades. Over the same period, the amount of pass-through business income flowing to the top 1 percent of income earners has increased sharply. Despite this profound change in the organization of U.S. business activity, we lack clean, clear facts about the consequences of this change for the distribution and taxation of business income.
Pass-through entities — partnerships, tax code subchapter S corporations, and sole proprietorships — are not subject to corporate income tax. Their income passes directly to their owners and is taxed under whatever tax rules those owners face. In contrast, the income of traditional corporations, more specifically subchapter C corporations, is subject to corporate income taxes, and after-tax income distributed from the corporation to its owners is also taxable.
In 1980, pass-through entities accounted for 20.7 percent of U.S. business income; by 2011, they represented 54.2 percent. Many partnerships are opaque. A fifth of partnership income was earned by partners that the study’s authors were not able to classify into one of several categories, such as a domestic individual or a foreign corporation. In addition, some partnerships are circular, in the sense that they are owned by other partnerships, which could in turn be owned by yet other partnerships.
Pass-through business income faces lower tax rates than traditional corporate income. The tax rate on the income earned by pass-through partnerships is a relatively low 15.9 percent, excluding interest payments and unrepatriated foreign income. That compares with a 31.6 percent rate for C corporations and a 24.9 percent rate for S corporations. Only sole proprietorships have a lower average rate, 13.6 percent. Combining both taxes on corporations and taxes on investors, the researchers calculate that the U.S. business sector as a whole pays an average tax rate of 24.3 percent.
The lower average tax rate for pass-through entities than for traditional corporations translates into reduced federal revenues, the researchers conclude. They estimate that in 2011, if the share of pass-through tax returns had been at its 1980 level, when traditional C corporations and sole proprietorships dominated, the average rate would have been 3.8 percentage points higher and the Treasury would have collected $100 billion more in tax revenue.
One reason partnerships pay such a low average tax rate is that nearly half their income (45 percent) is classified as capital gains and dividend income, which is taxed at preferential rates. Another 15 percent of their income is earned by tax-exempt and foreign entities, for which the effective tax rate is less than five percent. The roughly 30 percent of partnership income that is earned by unidentifiable and circular partnerships is taxed at an estimated 14.7 percent rate.
Does Brexit mean the beginning of the end of the EU?
Since the EU’s conception after World War II, the UK has stood on the sidelines: its attitude towards Brussels standoffish and, at times, downright hostile. From the Schengen project to the Euro, the island nation has negotiated numerous exceptions and opt-outs from joint European endeavours.
Initially the strongest opposition to the EU came from left-wingers. At a 1975 party conference, two thirds of Labour members, including current Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, voted to leave. For them, the EEC was too cosy and too capitalist…a juggernaut that had rolled over Britain’s jobs, welfare state and sovereignty in the name of free trade.
However, those allegiances changed when Margaret Thatcher came to power. European integration was moving beyond economics and dipping its collective toe into the water of political and social issues. For the Iron Lady, Brussels had overstepped its remit.
Today, many of Thatcher’s Conservatives are calling for Britain to wrest back powers from Brussels, or leave the EU altogether. They claim most of Britain’s concerns can be dealt with more efficiently at home, and even believe a “Brexit” would reduce demands on the country’s social security system: despite the fact that most EU migrants living in the UK work, and therefore pay tax. Whatever the arguments for and against, a referendum on EU membership is now a certainty, and will likely take place in the summer of 2016.
How did we get here? It’s been a long time since Charles DeGaulle kept Britain out of the EU. Britain has not joined the Euro and has articulated clear frustration and disappointment in EU leaders. Now is perhaps the time to ask why the EU does not punish Poland for violating its rules? Or to ask why pressure is not brought to bear on Romania and Hungary which are led by dictators? Is it time to ask which nations can form an effective union and perhaps kick some members out? Brexit’s exit would be self-inflicted.
Image by Marian Kaminsky
The head of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde, has said the outlook for China’s economy is not all “doom and gloom”. “I would say that it’s a recovery that is decelerating a bit,”, but it is expected to gain momentum next year. “We are seeing massive transitions at the moment,” she said.
After double-digit growth for decades, China’s economy slowed to 7.4% last year. The government has said it expected growth to slow further to about 7% this year. However, the IMF has forecast growth of just 6.8%. Ms Lagarde said that changes around the world were producing new situations, including emerging market economies having to cope with much lower commodity prices. “Whether you look at China transitioning from one growth model to the other, from one exchange currency method to another, and we have to adjust as a result.
On China’s efforts to shift from an export-led economy to a consumer-led one, Ms Lagarde said the IMF was “very supportive of the transition that is taking place at the moment”.
She noted China’s efforts towards better management of its currency exchange rate and interest rates movements and expected the country’s government to better communicate to the world what was going on in its economy “over the course of time”.
“You don’t move just overnight from being heavily controlled to being market determined, with massive market expectations that suddenly the situation should be the same across the world,” Ms Lagarde said.
“It just doesn’t happen that way.”
Tipping and inequality. Danny Meyer, a premier New York restauranteur is abandoning tipping. He will put a flat 20% on bills.
Danny Meyee owns 13 restaurants including The Modern, said the tipping system was unfair as it only benefited a few restaurant workers.
Waiting staff in the US typically receive most of their wages in tips, but cooks and other workers do not.
Mr Meyer plans to start the policy at four of his restaurants next month.
“We believe hospitality is a team sport, and that it takes an entire team to provide you with the experiences you have come to expect from us,” Mr Meyer said in a statement.
Menu prices will increase 25% to 35% to account for the changes.
Restaurants in the US are rethinking how they compensate their employees for a number of reasons.
In major US cities like New York, Chicago and San Francisco, restaurants are finding it hard to retain kitchen staff as the cost of living in those areas increases.
Because of tips (typically 20% of each bill), servers sometimes end up earning much more than highly skilled cooks.
Restaurant workers across the US have also been lobbying for better wages in recent years. New York City and other cities and states have increased their minimum wage in response.
Some high-end restaurants in the US have already stopped accepting tips, but Mr Meyer’s empire is the most prominent restaurant group to date to embrace the move.
Melissa Fleischut, president and CEO of the New York State Restaurant Association, said Mr Meyer’s decision could have a ripple effect in the industry.
“I think that because it is Danny Meyer and he is considered a leader in the restaurant industry, that a lot of people are going to look at this move,” she said.
Preetinder Singh “Preet” Bharara is an Indian American attorney and the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. His office has prosecuted people worldwide and has prosecuted nearly 100 Wall Street executives.
Bharara has won nine out of 10 cases against a parade of disgraced Albany lawmakers since taking the helm of the Southern District of New York in 2009, prevailing in three trials and garnering six guilty pleas. In his crosshairs were two of New York’s biggest political animals: former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and former Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos. He has won convictions against both of them.
Mr. Bharara may also be hunting the biggest game of all in New York: Gov. Andrew Cuomo, whom he has criticized for disbanding the Moreland Commission on public corruption. Last week, word broke that Mr. Bharara is investigating $1 billion in funding provided by the governor to help revive Buffalo. Mr. Cuomo said over the weekend that he had no role in awarding the so-called “Buffalo billion” to bidders.
Aggressive and media-savvy, Mr. Bharara portrays himself as the white knight cleaning up the “cauldron of corruption” in Albany. Even in the case he lost, the defendant ended up behind bars. In 2011, a federal jury found William Boyland not guilty, but the Democratic assemblyman was convicted three years later, courtesy of Mr. Bharara’s Eastern District counterpart Loretta Lynch, who is now U.S. attorney general.
“Bharara is on the warpath,” said James Cohen, a criminal-defense professor at Fordham University Law School. “He thinks the whole thing is a sewer, and he’s in a position to make some change.”
To do it, the prosecutor has used techniques perfected in fighting terrorists and organized crime, employing stings, wiretaps, video surveillance and undercover FBI agents to catch politicians in the act.
He then uses his perch to wage a media campaign that generates momentum and sets the stage for a trial or, in the majority of cases, a guilty plea. He has used similar tactics to snare miscreants on Wall Street, where his track record is even more impressive, winning more than 80 convictions and guilty pleas, although one of his insider-trading victories was thrown out on appeal last year.
Bharara has won 11 corruption cases against state legislators by following the money.
In the NY Assembly the Chairman of the Ethics committee has never been allowed to hold a hearing. If you are allowed to have outside income, you can hide it as a bribe. If you oppose one of the leaders you are banished.
But you can not trade in exchange for getting something to line the pockets of yourself or a family member. You take an oath of office to serve the public. You are guilty of public corruption. Bharara is making sure these laws stick.
Over two hundred countries gathered for a conference on global warming in Paris. Earlier in the week 50 countries and the EU countries made a preliminary agreement.
Now all the participating nations agreed to an ambitious goal of halting average global warming at no more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial temperatures — and of striving for a limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius if possible.
The agreement still faces hurdles. It will go into effect only if 55 countries that account for 55% of total global greenhouse gas emissions ratify it. A giant step forward for mankind and womankind.
Not a Drop to Drink
Susan Rennie