LyrArc Article Gist
The new faces in the Biden administration on economic policy are Janet Yellen, as head of the central bank, the Federal Reserve, and Cecilia Rouse, a Princeton labor economist, as head of the Council of Economic Advisors. In this report WSJ looks at the economic policies of the new administration after Mr. Trump rejected globalization and international trade agreements that were not in America's interest or that hurt American workers.  Informal conversations with experts suggest WSJ says, that globalization is now suspect as a way that benefitted China and other countries including Germany, and hurt the U.S. France, Britain and other countries in Europe that were not strong exporters. This hurt their industries which were eroded by imports resulting in the three decades long destruction of communities across these countries that depended on manufacturing. It has also hurt countries like India that let their markets be dominated by Chinese imports, with a reversal of policy in 2020 with self reliant economy under "Atman Nirbhar" policy as the new goal. Mr. Trump's tactic in this trade war was to fight back to regain America's position in manufacturing with tariffs on imports. The trade deficit had to come down with China just as it had done with Japan decades earlier. This was starting to happen. One problem in bringing down the imports was the increase in the value of the dollar, as Janet Yellen has noted. The new policies will look at what the effective policy will be while keeping this goal in mind.  Both Yellen and Ms. Rouse have spent years studying labor markets and Ms. Rouse is quoted here as saying: " With open trade there are winners and losers. The losers are really losing, and we need to take care of them and take on more nuanced models of international trade as a result." Other experts from the earlier Democratic administrations such as Prof. Frankel at Harvard say that there needs to be increased focus on American workers left behind by trade, technology and unequal education, with more spending on preschool, infrastructure and health. All this suggests that there will be a continuation of U.S. policy in challenging Chinese use of globalization to advance its interests, chastening Americans on the use of the very word globalization which can mean different things to different people based on how they can gain advantage. The word may even be entirely dropped in favor of what the policies are and what they do for the American worker, American communities including small towns, and the American people, spelling each of these out every time supply chains and the global economy is mentioned. The new administration will get an opportunity to show that it too can come up with new ideas and action plan to strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. It will also have to show substantial results as people have lost patience with Democrats and Republicans on the lack of progress in rebuilding America's leadership role in the world economy, and in defending American workers and factories. Clinton, Obama and Bush all offered false promises on trade with China ignoring the damage this had done to American leadership in the world economy. Clinton with support for China's entry into the World Trade Organization, Bush with foreign wars and costly diversions and regulatory failures with banks that led to the 2009 deep recession hurting Americans, and Obama with the lack of will and interest in America's leadership role in the world as the dominant nation in manufacturing,   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With the strong positions taken by Clinton and Trump on China in the 2016 election campaign, U.S. relations with China enter a new phase. The strident tone in the campaign on China on trade deficit, women's issues, human rights, comes with the issues relating to China's role in the South China Sea and cyber espionage already in the background.

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip points out in this WSJ analysis that the new NAFTA after negotiations and warnings from Mr. Trump to scrap NAFTA, is not very different from the old NAFTA. Mexico made concessions on auto exports and labor rights, wages. Canada made concessions for the dairy industry. Yet the combined influence of business interests, Canada's lobbying in U.S. Congress and state governments, and the restraint shown by Trump's own advisers prevailed in limiting Mr. Trump's tendencies to go for a "America first" agenda. It shows, says Ip, that there is resilience in the existing order.  It also shows what future trade negotiations with the European Union and Japan over steel and autos could look like. President Trump will continue to face resistance within from his advisers and from exporters, business, Congress, on following an exclusively "America First" agenda. President Trump will need to extol NAFTA in its current version the USMCA, U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement, to get it through the U.S. Congress in 2019.   Mexico's main concessions on autos were to agree to potential tariffs if exports exceed 2.6 million vehicles.  This keeps Mexico's status as a major auto export hub intact. Auto experts say VW and Mazda may simply pay the tariff of 2.5% for lower priced models assembled in Mexico that do not qualify for duty free entry instead of shifting production to the U.S. Current shipments from Mexico are not affected as U.S. demand is weak. Labor rights and higher wages in Mexico's auto industry are a win-win for Mexico and the U.S.. They are supported by the socialist administration of newly elected Mexican president Obrador. Canada's main concession was to expand U.S. access to Canada's protected dairy industry, with Canada already prepared to make the concession. Mr. Trump had also to consider the possibility that excluding Canada from the USMCA would have not passed Congress, and face even more resistance in a Democratic controlled Congress after 2019 elections.  The support Canada has received in Congress does not extend to China, which gets much less support in Congress, leading to higher uncertainty in the negotiations with China and possibly different outcome with the size of the trade imbalance of $1 billion a day factored in.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Donald Trump, has consistently tried to capitalize on the changing demographics and economic conditions in the country during the primaries by embracing a neglected white working class on issues such as trade, wages and jobs. He now has taken on the issue of law and order. In his acceptance speech Trump once again used a canny ability to sense the public mood, in the summer following the Orlando shootings, the Nice attacks, and the Baton Rouge police shootings, by calling himself "the law and order candidate in this race for the White House." He touched on the police shootings and terrorism by making the centrepiece of his speech- "Our convention occurs at a moment of crisis for our nation. The attacks on our police, and the terrorism in our cities, threaten our way of life."  The speech ended by Trump saying "I am your voice." By embracing the major issues in a way a skilled politician would do using his years of experience on the Apprentice television show with catchy slogans and phrases; long before the other candidates had caught on, and using the language of ordinary people, on trade, wages, jobs, terrorism, Trump has galvanized this portion of voters. He also made an appeal to Bernie Sanders voters. The distance between working class voters and other candidates who feel neglected on issues of wages and jobs, and are also most open to issues of law and order and terrorism, was the story of the Republican primaries. Whether this carries over to the broader electorate- as less than 20% of the eligible voters in the Republican primaries voted to give Trump wins in the primaries- and how well Hillary Clinton has held onto traditionally Democratic white working class voters that Trump is appealing to, will affect the 2016 elections. As this piece in the Guardian points out Trump has it well on touching on all the right buttons for which he has a canny ability, but will the American voters look for more in terms of experience and other factors, and Hillary's own fighting spirit, may affect this unusual election.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Experts say Trump could still walk away from a trade deal with China if the key goals of ending state subsidies that lead to unfair competition, and the enforcement steps if China violates the deal are not met. China has agreed to do this in the past but no mechanism was put in place for resolving this if China violated the agreement.

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Krugman says in this column in the NYT that Biden's policies for trade reflect a stronger conviction for protecting American technologies and building its manufacturing base than previous administrations including the Trump administration. With less rhetoric and with quiet determination Biden has placed American domestic manufacturing as a requirement for renewable subsidies for new electric vehicles manufacturing and sale in the Inflation Reduction Act. In the Chips and Science Act Biden has placed US semiconductor technology promotion and manufacturing at the core of the Act. Krugman says this was the right thing for Biden to do. The renewable subsidy comes from ordinary Americans paying taxes who would benefit most from new jobs created in the electric vehicle industry. China has gained such a big lead in semiconductor chips manufacturing and materials by supporting its industry, that it is the right thing to do to give American manufacturers the same kind of support. Trade rules were about creating a level playing field, yet previous administrations failed to create that level playing field, and the Biden administration has boldly made its point clear. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
World Bank projections of Indian growth rate are lowered from 6.6% to 5.8% because of DJT US administration's 50% tariff on imports from India. "It is in America’s national interest, then, for South Asia, and especially India, to grow at a rapid clip. That would create a counterweight in Asia to China’s massive economic and military expansion." This is the opinion of the Editorial Board of The Washington Post. It goes on to say that -  "But Trump is determined to negotiate a grand trade bargain with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, so he didn’t impose secondary sanctions on their purchases of Russian crude.Trump wants U.S. trade policy to be more self-interested, but it doesn’t serve America’s strategic interests to strengthen China’s position relative to its neighbors. At some level, the administration surely knows this." The Washington Post has identified a basic flaw in the US policy towards India. Both parties in America have fallen into a trap of believing that first Japan, then China with accelerated economic expansion in the 1920's and 30's and in the 2000's and 2010's  are not going to run into issues with such expansion, this being the military and the separation from US economic cooperation that enabled the economic expansion of both Asian countries. Another aspect is that in 1950 China was similar in size of economy to India at 1.18, in 1903 and in 1962 at 1.18, and the gap between China and India is only a story of the last 2 decades. By 2047 India surely has the potential to close this gap with economic and technological integration with the US and European economies that were the pillars of China's economic expansion in an earlier period.  There are other aspects of culture and size- The Bhagavad Gita and the Bible provided Gandhi with an integrated view of western civilization. With its interactions and adoption of western institutions and government, of law, the new Indian state and its neighbor Indonesia represent 1.7 billion people in Asia, with Japan and the Philippines 2 billion people twice the size of China.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What happened on September 10, 2024 in the Harris Trump ABC television debate moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis? It is hard to prepare for a debate, things can go wrong, unanticipated situations may arise. 67 million audience, 51 million for Biden Trump last debate, it can stress you out- UNLESS you Trust your authentic self knowing people can see through you if you are not honest forthright and stating it clearly. Harris could say she did approve fracking now as policy action she cast decisive vote for new oil leases. I am from a family like yours struggled with a single parent mother, ("not $400 million platter")I also support small businesses. If the other side is telling lies prolifically, make it clear vigorously yet with it not changing your demeanor and your focus on housing, cost of living, experience for NATO "from the same old playbook" and a warning about the lies to come to prepare the audience very early. Save the time responding to insult to use every moment constructively to define your message for the question at hand which is in addition to the questions put to you which are merely for organization immigration, crime, economy, cost of living, chips and science competition, Ukraine, Afghanistan. Harris said nothing about "Marxist economic professor father, other personal insults just acknowledged "It is a tragedy," don't you think fellow citizens? What would 4 years be like under Harris? (and 4 years under Trump?) Here's my plan for housing, for not starting trade wars while letting chips and science help competitors as Trump.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's statement calling for a list of goods for tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods leaves China without a clear response and facing new risks. The U.S. exports about $150 billion in goods to China so that China would have to impose penalties to respond at the same level. Placing restrictions on American firms on access to China's market, and imposing other penalties would have the effect of reinforcing the perception of unfair practices targeting American business and lead to hardening of U.S. response.  The U.S. sees itself as being in a better position with the U.S. economy experiencing a growth trend. China with large local government and bank debt faces a difficult situation. President Jinping's policy of reducing the risks of bad debt in the banking system involved sacrificing some growth to stabilize the system. China's GDP growth in 2017 was 6.9%, the target at 6.5%. Future targets and actual growth now look to be much lower.The trade war with the U.S. has the effect of dampening growth leading to calls for the central bank to loosen its monetary stance. In response to Trump's announcement the People's Bank of China pumped $31 billion into the nation's banks. China is studying Japan's response in the 1980's and 1990's when the U.S. took strong action against Japan's growing trade surplus. Japan responded by appreciating its currency and using stimulus to cushion the effect of lower exports on the economy. The stimulus led to the housing bubble and over time a period of low growth and stagnant economy. The large China stimulus in 2008-2009 has compounded the problems in the banking system. Not deleveraging and controlling financial risks in China's banking system because of the trade war would bring a new set of risks. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As Keith Bradsher of the NYT points out in this report too much may be made of the tariffs of 25% imposed by president Trump on steel imports. The effect Bradsher says on China is trivial because China imports make up a fraction of 1% or 0.1% of China's production, and only 2% of American steel imports. Most of China's aluminium is made into products such as auto parts and solar panel frames, and little of it is imported as raw metal. On the day the tariffs were announced, China's top economic official Liu He met with economic officials of the Trump administration and China's reaction was cautious and reflected the fact mentioned b.y Trump about its huge trade surplus with the U.S. of $375 billion in 2017. China's officials stated "that its dialogue with the U.S. was very useful, constructive, and helpful."  China's principal goals are first to preserve its broader trading relationship with the U.S. which gives it th $375 billion trade surplus for 2017 and creates millions of jobs in China, and to preserve its ability to invest in the U.S.  This has given China access to American technology and manufacturing expertise that would be difficult to develop independently. The Trump administration is meanwhile working with senior members of Congress to come up with new rules for tighter scrutiny of Chinese investments in the U.S. as a new phase of competition in technology takes place between China and the U.S.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president elect Trump meets with the heads of tech businesses on Dec. 14, 2016. CEO's of Amazon, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft were present. Trump was exuberant about the advantages secured by U.S. tech companies in global business, saying- "there's nobody like you in the world. Anything that the government can do to help this go along, we're going to be there for you." The discussions covered need for more vocational education, advantages and disadvantages of trade with China, and immigration. Quarterly meetings of this type are now planned with a smaller group organized by Jared Kushner to cover immigration and education.  Jeff Bezos of Amazon described the meeting as "very productive." Bezos says he told the group that the best way was to use innovation to create jobs outside of tech in agriculture, infrastructure, manufacturing elsewhere, to create large number of jobs. Ginni Rometty, CEO of IBM, and other executives are part of the Strategic and Policy Forum set up to provide business input to the president. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Phillips of the WSJ provides a profile of typical Donald Trump supporters, a couple Joey and Tina Elias, driving from Alabama to Pensacola, Florida to attend a Trump rally. Joey, 46 years old, lost his job in 2010, and has since worked at jobs a little above the minimum wage. Tina, 44 years old, is assistant director of a daycare center. They have worked hard to build a house on a 3 acre plot of land, after living for several years in a mobile home. They have 2 children, and Joey says he has to worry about job security before making any purchases. They are against free trade, as its not seen as favoring working Americans. They favor a strong military, because they see president Obama as defunding the military and weakening America overseas. They say they are not racially motivated, believe in God, but not church going. They don't feel strongly about social cultural issues, believing in live and let live. They say they like Trump not because he is saying anything new, only because he has voiced their concerns, they have felt this way for a long time. They want to see America winning- and to win as the country wins. What is striking is that the couple face some of the same job insecurity, and the paycheck to paycheck job insecurity and fear of losing what they have with job loss, that is being felt by average working Americans after the 2009 economic crisis. On the Democratic side Bernie Sanders is gaining support from white working class people who share the same anxieties about economic insecurity following the 2009 economic crisis....

LyrArc Article Gist
There is a two week period before the 25% tariff on steel coming into the U.S. goes into effect. This gives time for Canada, Mexico, the EU, Japan and other countries to come up with offers to negotiate or as with the EU come up with its own plan to put tariffs on some American goods. An exemption for Canada is supported by the United Steel Workers Union, as many American companies make steel across the borders. Canada sends the most steel and aluminium to the U.S. With the departure of Gary Cohn as economic advisor, Mr. Lighthizer, the U.S. Trade Representative who pushed for the tariff plan becomes a trusted advisor to the President. Lighthizer is to be seen in Lyrarc pages as having consistently supported fair trade and protecting U.S. workers in these situations since his work in the Reagan administration. The other advisors who are ascendent are Peter Navarro, a trade expert, and Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary. Ross is an experienced business veteran in consolidation of steel and auto parts companies, who pushed for a moderate position to renegotiate NAFTA and convinced president Trump to pursue renegotiation instead of rejecting NAFTA following calls from president Nieto of Mexico and Trudeau of Canada. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
"Made in China 2025" is a plan by China to build competitive companies in new technology industries such as advanced microchips, driverless cars, robotics. This is one area in which there is a huge difference in trade matters more than the tariffs issue, because the U.S. sees this as an effort to dominate these industries with state subsidized loans at low interest rates. The Trump administration has threatened to impose 25% tariffs on imports from China in these industries to protect U.S. companies. The U.S. insists there should be a level playing field for U.S. companies.

LyrArc Article Gist
BBC News covers the opposition by business leaders in the U.S. to president Trump's decision to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate change agreement. Elon Musk of Tesla and Robert Iger of Disney say they will quit working on the president's advisory councils. Walmart, Apple, Google and other companies also opposed the move. Energy companies Exxon and Chevron also opposed the move. This reduces the business community's confidence in and support for the Trump administration. Some analysts see the Trump move as a way to satisfy the mood of his own election base of support among people who see the climate change accord as one more aspect of a rigged system of globalization, a theme Trump has used during his campaign in 2016. During the first 100 days many of the decisions Trump made took into account the views of business leaders from Boeing on the Export Import Bank, of Gary Cohn on tax reforms, of Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary on NAFTA trade agreement. With the investigations in Congress underway the analysts see the move as political to shore up support with the Trump base. Yet it also brings with it the cost of losing support in the business community that has traditionally supported Republican presidents. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ looks at the impact of the 2018 Trump tariffs retained by president Biden as the US seeks to reduce its overdependence on Chinese imports and bring back American manufacturing. This followed misguided policies of previous administrations since Clinton that weakened American manufacturing strengths. Have the US tariffs on Chinese goods worked? The WSJ graph with information from US Census Bureau shows that imports from China in 2022 going down to the levels in 2007 of about 16-17% as a share of US imports, down from a high of 21% before the Trump tariffs halted a rapidly rising curve. Imports from Germany, South Korea and Japan in 2022 were down slightly hovering around 4.5%. Imports increased from Canada and Mexico, the US's traditional partners in North America, around 13.5% as a share of US imports for each country. Also increasing were imports from Vietnam. Some of the imports from Vietnam are Chinese products shipped through Vietnam to evade tariffs, and it is not clear whether the figures from Vietnam have been adjusted for this. President Biden is looking at different scenarios in an effort to tackle inflation. One supported by Janet Yellen, an economist at US Treasury is for the US to relax some of the China tariffs. Most economists in previous administrations including Yellen failed to understand what surrendering American manufacturing to China on the scale and speed that happened would do to communities across America that depended on factory jobs. The devastation of these communities has led to increased divisions in America, weakened American manufacturing, and led to outflow of technologies vital for national security and national well being.  Republican senators, US Trade Representative Katherine Tai and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan are opposed to any relaxation of tariffs. Studies show the removal of the tariffs would have only a small impact on the consumer price inflation index reducing inflation by 0.26%. Lifting some tariffs on school supplies and summer bicycles as proposed by the US Chamber of Commerce would have little or no impact on the consumer price index for inflation. This is because the inflation is triggered by oil and gas price increases stemming from the Russian policies and invasion of Ukraine. This has also aggravated food and grocery costs  through blocking of agricultural imports from Ukraine. An additional factor was the increased demand after the pandemic easing in 2022, but that demand is already easing in July with glut in inventories at Walmart and Target, and excess warehouse capacity at Amazon. It would also send the wrong signal to China that the tariffs imposed by president Trump after a Section 301 trade investigation and based on improper loss of technologies to China are not being taken seriously by the US, says Republican Senator Hagerty of Tennessee. The Labor advisory committee to the US Trade Representative Katherine Tai also opposes any such move after the serious damage done to US workers and to US national well being and security. This happened under the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations with failed trade policies that ceded manufacturing to China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Following president Trump's decision to increase tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods on May 9, 2019, the WSJ looks at the mistakes made by both sides in misjudging each other's negotiating position. Mr. Trump says he is willing to increase the pressure on China by imposing tariffs on all Chinese imports into the U.S. after what he sees as China reneging on its commitments on trade by deleting key sections on enforcement provisions and Chinese legislation for enforcement to take place in the 150 page agreement prepared for both presidents to sign.  Early on in the negotiations between Liu He and Mr. Lighthizer, China misread the thinking on the U.S. side. Chinese thinking was that president Trump's urging for the Federal Reserve to lower rates was a perception sign of the weakening U.S. economy. It also may have misread the extent to which Mr. Trump trusts Mr. Robert Lighthizer, who Mr. Trump respects for winning a good deal with the Japanese in similar situation of Japanese rejection of U.S. demands. Mr. Trump also thinks the U.S. has a strong economy, is the largest world producer of oil, strong economic growth in the last quarter of 2018, is also negotiating better deals with other countries including the ones with Mexico, Canada and South Korea. It is also much less dependent on exports to China, giving it a stronger position with more experienced negotiators. China has whole sectors of its economy dependent on exports to the U.S., and crucial numbers of jobs at stake.  China also misread the signals from its stronger than expected economic growth from stimulus efforts in the last quarter, leading to it staking out a tougher position than the U.S. would accept. The U.S. position was set after decades of waiting for China to change and was unlikely to be affected by any temporary considerations.  As a result the U.S. not anticipating the Chinese response of deleting key sections agreed to in advance from the 150 page written agreement gave a strong response. Mr. Mnuchin who accompanied Lighthizer in talks says Mr. Lighthizer "read them the riot act" to the Chinese side. For the Chinese side the effort now shifted to continuing good faith talks without appearing to back down. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Federal Reserve announced on Dec. 13, 2016, that it would increase its benchmark short term interest rate by 0.25 percentage point, to between 0.50% and 0.75%. The increase will also be reflected in business and household borrowing costs. The Fed also announced its intention to make 0.75% percentage point increase in 2017, possibly in 3 quarter percentage point moves. The Fed's forecast is for the fed-funds rate to reach 2.1% at the end of 2018, and 2.9% at the end of 2019. The Fed's policy is based on a sense of strong labor market with unemployment falling, and says it is based on discussion at a 2 day meeting, and "in view of realized and expected labor-market conditions and inflation." This reflects a view that there is now not that much slack in the labor market, that further improvements could trigger higher inflation. Fed forecasts for inflation are for it to increase from 1.5% in 2016 to 1.9% in 2017 and to the target of 2% in 2018. The unemployment rate of 4.6% in 2016 is forecast to go to 4.5% in 2017 and remain at that level till 2019. Economic growth is forecast at a median annual rate of 1.9% in 2016, 2.1% in 2017, only a slight improvement from last forecast in Sept. 2016. Support for chairwoman Yellen's policy decision was unanimous. See the link on views of NYT's Binyamin Applebaum and Neil Irwin on how Fed rate policy and economic growth under the Trump administration is likely to play out, and Ian Talley's report on impact on exports with a stronger dollar in WSJ. These views also are in line with the Fed's forecasts and policy decision as they reflect the concerns of the Fed about inflation, and also reflect the Fed's view that growth will be close to 2% in 2017-2019, and not the 3-4% stated by Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin. Fed rate policies to keep inflation at about 2% tend to counter stimulus spending by the Trump administration and effect of tax cuts. The size of the stimulus and the tax cuts are also likely to be much smaller than stated because of Republican concerns about the deficit in the U.S. Congress, according to these views. The stronger dollar also has the paradoxical effect of making trade gains more difficult while increasing trade friction in tougher bargaining supported by Trump, making the higher growth targets harder to reach.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
During the primaries Trump appealed to blue collar voters of a white working class that felt neglected by leaders and policies of both parties that did not seem to work for ordinary people. Having caught onto this early long before Republican candidates, Trump registered a series of wins in the Republican primaries. He continued this theme in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on July 21, 2016, saying- "The forgotten men and women of our country- people who work but no longer have a voice: I am your voice." The idea was to couple this with the theme of law and order and put perception of Hillary Clinton as part of the rigged system of the past that Trump would change, with Clinton's legacy described in terms of "death, destruction, terrorism and weakness." As a change agent Trump described his entering the political arena in terms of coming into this election only to help blue collar people "so that the powerful can no longer beat up on people that cannot defend themselves." The two themes for the rest of the election season- law and order, and blue collar lives- and who can best defend them a traditional Democratic politician with a fighting spirit for traditional Democratic values, or a blustery newcomer adept with slogans and the public mood and ironically representing the Democratic values of representing the working class to become the  Republican nominee, with the law and order theme thrown in. The voter or independent listening in to all this will hopefully ask what all this means. As the WSJ, July 19, 2016, pointed out in a recent look at economc policies under the two candidates- on Glass Steagall Act being reinstated to increase safety of the banking system that caused many of today's problems through the 2008 financial crisis both Trump and Clinton are similiar, on opposing trade agreements similiar except that Trump's bluster is a riskier approach, on infrastructure building similiar with Clinton's $275 billion plan spelled out out for source of financing and Trump's unclear as to source of financing. On immigration the candidates are different, on the minimum wage which impacts low income people Clinton supports $15 minimum wage and Trump has not taken a stand. On ISIS and the Middle East Clinton is in reality a hawk and not much difference in the candidates, on law and order more chance of divisions in the country with Trump than Clinton. Overall for the working class and blue collar voter his life will take a decade or more to rebuild, with both candidates commiting to go in that direction. And the bluster and ads to come- just that.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This article by Horowitz in the NYT shows some of the criticism leveled against the Clintons and how they were out of touch with the white working class voters who have drifted to Mr. Trump.  It may be overdone in that not all white working class voters have drifted to Trump, and a Gallup survey has shown Trump supporters to be some white working class but also many from other groups in society, and many older less educated voters.  Trade Unions have played a large role in this election, and workers in manufacturing have voted Democratic in midwestern states such as Wisconsin, Michigan and Illinois. Horowitz also ignores some points in this campaign such as when Bill Clinton was adept at openly stating that he agreed with people who said Obamacare had increased premiums, and that some of the Obamacare program needed to be fixed. This took some of the criticism of Republicans on Obamacare and turned this around. He also showed a better understanding at times of the plight of working class people just from his habit of listening and thinking about how this affects ordinary people, a skill he has even to this day. A 2014 NBC/WSJ poll showed Bill Clinton with a 56 percent favorability rating, which is higher than president Obama, and exceeded only by Michelle Obama at 64 percent. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China agrees to drop a 40% tariff on American cars after a trade truce is announced following the Xi-Trump meetings at G-20 meeting in Buenos Aires. About $9.5 billion in car exports are made chiefly from Alabama with German plants, and the states of California, Kentucky and South Carolina. For China this is a small concession as this is only 4% of China's car market, or 1.2 million cars, and are aimed at the affluent market.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says Donald Trump's first foreign policy speech is full of contradictions. Mr. Trump says foreign policy should be "unpredictable" yet this also means says the WSJ, that the country should trust his instincts, and everybody else a loser- "I'm the only one-believe me, I know them all- I'm the only one who knows how to fix it." It says the speech gets an "Incomplete" at Trump University. It criticizes Obama, but in failing to stand up for peace through strength that marked the post war peace since 1945, WSJ says that more than people realize Mr. Trump is a continuation of Mr. Obama's policies of withdrawing from global engagement that has ensured that peace. Trade wars with China, Mexico and Japan could lead to a world recession. Though much needs to be done to ensure trade is fair to U.S. workers and business, Trump has no clearly stated path to do this, instead relying on brinksmanship that could end up in trade wars.

LyrArc Article Gist
Marco Rubio speaks for the US with profound convictions and long experience in the Florida legislature and the US Senate, and as akey member of the DJT administration. In his speech in Munich at the MSC he recalls his grandparents being from Piedmeont Sardinia in Italy and from Sevilla in Spain. He talks proudly of his Spanish and Italian heritage, of America founded by European settlers. For Europe this is a speech that shows America is profoundly part of Western Civilization that started in Europe. Here are some parts of the speech and Rubio's call for America and Europe to respond strongly to the mistakes in migration and deindustrialization that have hurt the people of Europe and America, with deeply felt negative consequences. "That infamous wall that had cleaved this nation into two came down, and with it an evil empire, and the East and West became one again.  But the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion:  that we had entered, quote, “the end of history;” that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.  This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history.  And it has cost us dearly.  In this delusion, we embraced a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade, even as some nations protected their economies and subsidized their companies to systematically undercut ours – shuttering our plants, resulting in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.  We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves.  This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests.  To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.  And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people.  We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.  Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past.  And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.  For the United States and Europe, we belong together.  America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before.  The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.  We are part of one civilization – Western civilization.  We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir. And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel.  This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe.  The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply.  We care deeply about your future and ours.  And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected – not just economically, not just militarily.  We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally.  We want Europe to be strong.  We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history’s constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know – (applause) – because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.  National security, which this conference is largely about, is not merely series of technical questions – how much we spend on defense or where, how we deploy it, these are important questions.  They are.  But they are not the fundamental one.  The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions.  Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation.  Armies fight for a way of life.  And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny. It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born.  It was here in Europe where the world – which gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution.  It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.  And this is the place where the vaulted ceilings of the Sistine Chapel and the towering spires of the great cathedral in Cologne, they testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels.  They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future.  But only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance can we together begin the work of envisioning and shaping our economic and our political future. Deindustrialization was not inevitable.  It was a conscious policy choice, a decades-long economic undertaking that stripped our nations of their wealth, of their productive capacity, and of their independence.  And the loss of our supply chain sovereignty was not a function of a prosperous and healthy system of global trade.  It was foolish.  It was a foolish but voluntary transformation of our economy that left us dependent on others for our needs and dangerously vulnerable to crisis. Mass migration is not, was not, isn’t some fringe concern of little consequence.  It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilizing societies all across the West.  Together we can reindustrialize our economies and rebuild our capacity to defend our people.  But the work of this new alliance should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past.  It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century.  Commercial space travel and cutting-edge artificial intelligence; industrial automation and flex manufacturing; creating a Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers; and a unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South.  Together we can not only take back control of our own industries and supply chains – we can prosper in the areas that will define the 21st century." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this thoughtful essay Bob Davis of the WSJ asks whether the decision of the Clinton administration to admit China into the World Trade Organization was a bad one for the U.S.  Mr. Clinton in 2000 tried to persuade Congress citing words of president Woodrow Wilson that of a dream "of a world full of free markets, free elections, and free peoples working together."  Every year China would have its most favored nation status renewed with help from supporters in Congress. After WTO entry this was not necessary. Chinese leaders saw the entry into WTO as a way to knock down trade barriers, to act a wrecking ball for the planned economy, to give the economy a big boost.  In 1994 China was a relatively backward economy with 60% of the population living on less than $1.90 a day. Hard to imagine today.  Not everyone was convinced that it was good for the U.S. This included a trade attorney who had tackled a huge trade deficit with Japan in the Reagan period- Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer was Deputy Trade Representative negotiating with the Japanese. His prediction was that no job in America would be safe once China entered the WTO, that China would become a dominant trading nation.  Robert Cassidy, 73, trade negotiator for president Clinton looks back on that time and says that he regrets what has happened, that all his work night and a day only benefited business and hurt workers. David Autor, MIT economist and his colleagues,  in a later study documented loss of 2.4 million jobs to Chinese competition between 1999 and 2011, in many manufacturing towns dotting the landscape of America, particularly in the midwestern states. And the expectation that the higher economic growth would lead to less political control did not turn out to be true.  In the process multinationals rushed to China after WTO entry and China became the world's manufacturing floor. By 2013 China's per capita income reached $7000, after years of fast GDP growth approaching 10% a year.  About 400 million Chinese were lifted out of poverty from living on less than $1.90 per day from 1999 to 2011, according to the World Bank. A big problem was that the U.S. did not plan for the change from WTO entry. No resources were allocated for the plan to let American workers adjust through worker retraining and special trade handicapped income support, to allow for a slow planned shift. Instead the pace of growth was faster than that which the U.S. faced with the Japanese export offensive in the eighties. China experienced double digit growth after 2000. The irony is that the Republican administrations that followed Clinton followed a policy of free trade to the advantage of China's state run economy when working class Americans voted mostly for the Democratic Party. Little was done and little said in the media from Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the establishment during this time even after Mr. David Autor documented the effects of trade in the U.S.  Till Mr. Trump recognizing the alienation in communities hit by job losses from trade upended American politics, shifted this part of the electorate to the Republican base. Mr. Lighthizer's view is that complaints about China should be left out of WTO because it is naive to tackle it that way. With a $375 billion China trade deficit for 2017 the challenge has to be met in a different way, and the U.S. has to rely on regaining its economic strength within a fair trading framework. Having negotiated with the Japanese Mr. Lighthizer sees the approach adopted then as the one right for today. During the long negotiations Lighthizer is said to have received many negotiating positions of the Japanese signifying no change in long sessions. He once simply made a paper plane and sent it right back, in one of these sessions. He meant that the U.S. was serious about reversing the imbalance in trade. ...