Posts Tagged ‘United States’

Larry Armstrong: Architecture During a Recession

Monday, June 29th, 2009

The best way to survive a recession is to have a strategic plan firmly in place when the inevitable downturn happens.  That’s the opinion of Larry Armstrong, President of Ware Malcomb, an Irvine, CA-based international architectural firm with ongoing projects in the United States, Latin America, Asia and Europe.

architect_istock5775134In a recent interview for the Alter NOW Podcasts, Armstrong says “There is no question that we learned everything about saving a business and building a business during the 1990s downturn.”  In fact, Armstrong’s firm wrote a recession plan several years ago and determined exactly how they would react.  “You have to look at what revenue can support what level of staff and all the additional expenses and costs which, over time, become discretionary.  You have to look at those and decide what is necessary and what isn’t,” according to Armstrong.

The current environment does not support ego-driven, icon architecture.  Rather, there is a move towards thrift, because corporate users want to be seen as economical and functional — not as extravagant.  The recession also has impacted Corporate America’s attitude towards green design and LEED-certified buildings.  According to Armstrong, “We’re seeing a bit of a retreat – not major – and a vast majority of our projects are still LEED certified”.  Still, if the project is industrial, Armstrong is not hearing a desire for LEED certification anymore.

To listen to Larry Armstrong’s full interview on architecture during a recession, click here for the podcast.

 
icon for podpress  Larry Armstrong on Architecture in a Recession: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

US Bank Bailout vs. UK Bank Bailout: A Comparison

Thursday, December 4th, 2008

Britain’s bailout of its ailing banks reflects a model that some critics characterize as nothing short of socialism, while the $750 billion bailout program in the United States is viewed as corporate welfare with very little oversight. Without supporting one or the other, following is a bare-bones comparison of the two programs:

In the United Kingdom:

  • Bailout cash by written agreement must be infused into the economy to free up tight credit markets.
  • Government representatives now sit on the rescued banks’ boards of directors, and have the right to vote on major decisions.
  • The government will receive a 12 percent return on investment.

In the United States:

  • Banks are not required to use bailout money to free up tight credit markets; in fact, some have used the money to compensate their CEOs and pay dividends to stockholders.
  • The government gains no controlling interest in the banks, and no seats on the board.
  • The government will receive a five percent return on investment.
  • The oversight panel over the U.S. bailout still has not been created six weeks after passage of the bill.

We believe that there are bankers on both sides of the Atlantic who are principled and hold their interests of their stakeholders with the utmost concern.  The question is:  Which plan is more likely to work?

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081117/klein

http://www.annistonstar.com/opinion/2008/as-editorials-1119-editorial-8k18u1219.htm

Paul Volcker: U.S. Is in a Recession

Wednesday, October 22nd, 2008

“It’s not going to be a problem in the short run.  Inflation doesn’t flourish in the face of recession,” said Paul Volcker, who served as chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1979 until 1987.  “It’s something we have to worry about when we get out of this recession.  I have been around for a while.  I have seen a lot of crises, but I have never seen anything quite like this one.  This crisis is an exception.  I don’t think we can escape damage to the real economy.” Volcker believes that the United States is officially in a state of recession.  In a Reuters’ article, Volcker affirms that stabilizing the financial system to ease the credit crisis is a government priority, even if it requires significant intrusion into the private sector.

“The first priority is to stabilize the financial system.  It is necessary, even though the cost is heavy government intrusion in markets that should be private,” Volcker told an audience at a seminar in Singapore.  “Housing prices in the U.S. are still declining.  There are more losses to come.”

Volcker, who is credited with battling the double-digit inflation of the 1970s, believes that the massive infusion of liquidity by the Federal Reserve ultimately could result in inflation or even stagflation.

Volcker is currently chairman of the board of trustees of the Group of 30, an international body composed of central-bank governors, leading economists and private financial-sector experts.  Additionally, the former Federal Reserve chairman is serving as an economic advisor to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.