scholarly journals Domestic Lending and the Pandemic: How Does Banks' Exposure to Covid-19 Abroad Affect Their Lending in the United States?

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (056r1) ◽  
pp. 1-53
Author(s):  
Judit Temesvary ◽  
◽  
Andrew Wei ◽  

Shortly after the onset of the pandemic, U.S. banks cut their term lending to businesses–but little is known about how much, and why, banks' choice to ration credit contributed to this contraction. Afforded by a unique combination of several highly granular bank regulatory datasets, we identify the role of banks' exposure to Covid-related restrictions abroad – a balance sheet "shock" that affects only banks' credit supply, but not their US borrowers' demand for loans. We find that US banks with higher foreign Covid exposure cut their lending to US firms, and tightened terms on such loans, significantly more. Banks having become less risk tolerant, as well as foreign borrowers defaulting and drawing down on their cross-border credit lines, were potent mechanisms through which foreign Covid exposure reduced banks' domestic lending.

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer M. Miller

This article explores the central role of Japan’s rise to global economic prominence in the evolution of Donald J. Trump’s worldview. It traces how the transformation of the relationship between the United States and Japan during the 1980s informed Trump’s ideas about trade and protectionism, globalization, the international economy, and executive power. Trump, it argues, was a product of U.S.-Japanese relationship; while he began his public career as a prominent critic of Japan, claiming that the country exploited American trade and defense policy, his career in real estate heavily relied on Japanese finance. This contradictory approach continues to shape his understanding of Japan. As president, Trump repeatedly condemns Japan as predatory and protectionist, but also seeks expanded Japanese investment in the United States to revitalize the U.S. economy. Equally important, Trump has expanded criticisms originating with Japan to countries like China and Mexico, international agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the North American Free Trade Agreement, and the World Trade Organization. By tracing Trump’s rhetorical, financial, and diplomatic encounters with Japan over the past thirty years, this article uncovers the sources of Trump’s contradictory attitudes towards trade, globalization, and cross-border investment and his understandings of strong leadership and executive power.


2008 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 97-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Smita C. Banerjee ◽  
Kathryn Greene ◽  
Marina Krcmar ◽  
Zhanna Bagdasarov ◽  
Dovile Ruginyte

This study demonstrates the significance of individual difference factors, particularly gender and sensation seeking, in predicting media choice (examined through hypothetical descriptions of films that participants anticipated they would view). This study used a 2 (Positive mood/negative mood) × 2 (High arousal/low arousal) within-subject design with 544 undergraduate students recruited from a large northeastern university in the United States. Results showed that happy films and high arousal films were preferred over sad films and low-arousal films, respectively. In terms of gender differences, female viewers reported a greater preference than male viewers for happy-mood films. Also, male viewers reported a greater preference for high-arousal films compared to female viewers, and female viewers reported a greater preference for low-arousal films compared to male viewers. Finally, high sensation seekers reported a preference for high-arousal films. Implications for research design and importance of exploring media characteristics are discussed.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Rigoli

Research has shown that stress impacts on people’s religious beliefs. However, several aspects of this effect remain poorly understood, for example regarding the role of prior religiosity and stress-induced anxiety. This paper explores these aspects in the context of the recent coronavirus emergency. The latter has impacted dramatically on many people’s well-being; hence it can be considered a highly stressful event. Through online questionnaires administered to UK and USA citizens professing either Christian faith or no religion, this paper examines the impact of the coronavirus crisis upon common people’s religious beliefs. We found that, following the coronavirus emergency, strong believers reported higher confidence in their religious beliefs while non-believers reported increased scepticism towards religion. Moreover, for strong believers, higher anxiety elicited by the coronavirus threat was associated with increased strengthening of religious beliefs. Conversely, for non-believers, higher anxiety elicited by the coronavirus thereat was associated with increased scepticism towards religious beliefs. These observations are consistent with the notion that stress-induced anxiety enhances support for the ideology already embraced before a stressful event occurs. This study sheds light on the psychological and cultural implications of the coronavirus crisis, which represents one of the most serious health emergencies in recent times.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-91
Author(s):  
Sally Engle Merry

This provocative question became the basis for a spirited discussion at the 2017 meeting of the American Anthropological Association. My first reaction, on hearing the question, was to ask, does anthropology care whether it matters to law? As a discipline, anthropology and the anthropology of law are producing excellent scholarship and have an active scholarly life. But in response to this forum’s provocation article, which clearly outlines the lack of courses on law and anthropology in law schools, I decided that the relevant question was, why doesn’t anthropology matter more to law than it does? The particular, most serious concern appears to be, why are there not more law and anthropology courses being offered in law schools? It is increasingly common for law faculty in the United States to have PhDs as well as JDs, so why are there so few anthropology/law PhD/JD faculty? Moreover, as there is growing consensus that law schools instil a certain way of thinking but lack preparation for the practice of law in reality and there is an explosion of interest in clinical legal training, why does this educational turn fail to provide a new role of legal anthropology, which focuses on the practice of law, in clinical legal training?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document