LyrArc Article Gist
This report by Peter Baker shows President Trump only reluctantly agreed to certify the Iran Nuclear Agreement. He opposed it in discussions with the Secretary of State Tillerson. It took the combined effort of Tillerson Dunford of the combined chiefs of staff, Defense Secretary Mattis, and of National Security Adviser McMaster, to get Trump to agree to go ahead with the deal. President Trump wanted a new strategy to counter Iran in the Middle East. The Iranian foreign minister Zarif has not yet met with Tillerson of the U.S. Zarif says Iran may withdraw from the deal if there is significant nonperformance by the U.S. Trump advisers are wary about the influence on Europe as the EU is not interested in taking a new look at the Iran nuclear deal. The EU sees things differently- that the issues of Iranian influence in the war torn Middle East is a separate issue from the nuclear deal, and that in any case a nuclear constrained Iran is better than one with nuclear weapons. Another factor is that the Middle East is now a complicated place with relations crisscrossing in different and even conflicting directions. The U.S. played a part on the Iranian side in the retaking of Mosul in Iraq with U.S. bombing strikes against Islamic State. In Iraq the U.S. is supporting the Abadi government which is mainly Shiite in its structure and is supported by Iran. The Trump position is that president Obama gave away too much in negotiating the deal and was not against the negotiating process.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The language and tone of the leaders says something about what is likely to be the outcome of the G20 summit. Its a first for significant participation, as countries as diverse as Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the Netherlands are represented. The credible positions of both sides, the US, UK and Japan, and the European side of France, Germany and the Czech Republic, well presented, provide for some serious discussion and negotiations. France's Sarkozy and Germany's Merkel want to see a global regulator that would reach inside the borders of the US with stricter regulation. Sarkozy calls this "nonnegotiable." And he said that he would reject an agreement that puts off stringent new regulations on banks, tax havens, and hedge funds. He said "the compromise has to come from all countries around the world." US President Obama said that if there is going to be renewed growth it can't just be the US as the engine, everybody is going to have to pick up the pace," at the same time saying that the US had to be concerned about its own deficits. The fact is that the US stimulus will mostly help a severely impacted domestic economy recover with social safey net payments to local and state governments and unemployment insurance, as well as targeted investments in infrastructure, education, energy and health care. It will not mean anywhere near the kinds of imports the US made from other countries, especially China. And Obama made that clear when he said the US will never return to that situation, where the US had become a "voracious consumer market." For the Germans the major market for their middle companies is China, and China has its own stimulus spending on infrastructure spending, which should provide for continued imports of machinery from Germany at a much lower level. Thus Germany and France see a strong tendency to call the source of the crisis and repeat that call till the US listens, and refer to the failure of free market capitalism in its unregulated form. And to insist on fixing it through a global regulator with strict and systemwide rules. So you hear this in Merkel's words, "the foundation for this finacial architecture must be laid now, that is why we seem to be so tough." While the vivacious Sarkozy talks of compromise, and a US gesture in regulation in return for Franc's gesture of joining NATO, the mild mannered Merkel is clear and focussed about her concern. She rejects the idea of linking stimulus spending demands of the Anglo-Americans with the Franco-German demands for global systemwide regulation. "This is not a bargaining chip," she says. The media may mistakenly report lack of consensus as a failure of the summit. But in the long run in the presence of good positions on both sides, it could lead to some tough negotiations even if continued at another meeting. And result in something serious, credible and lasting in its impact, rather than something that was easy and did not in Andy Grove's useful words involve "constructive confrontation." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Reited Gen Gantz appears to be the likely head of a new government after winning the most seats in parliament. Policy towards Iran is not likely to change. But a Gantz led government is likely to reduce the divisiveness in the country, and provide a more unifying effort in Israeli society. The role of religious groups in daily life would also be held back. Better relations with Jewish people in America would result and peace negotiations with Palestinians would be encouraged. The prime minister would concentrate less power in his hands. By temperament Gantz is a quiet leader who preferred not to engage in the back and forth attacks in the election campaign even when Mr. Netanyahu  did not hesitate to do so. As the head of the military from 2011 to 2015 he also has the confidence of people in Israel looking for a new start after a long period of Netanyahu rule. The current prime minister could be indicted soon after a hearing next month on charges of bribery and fraud. Mr. Trump has said that U.S. relationship is not with any leader but with the country Israel. Gantz makes it clear after Netanyahu's style of politics has rocked Israel for many years- "We will bring about a real change in priorities, and heal Israeli society in all its parts." Mr. Gantz has said that he think the Obama administration could have done more in securing a better nuclear deal with Iran. Yet at an event in 2015 when the deal was being set, Mr Gantz said he also saw "the half full part of the glass." That the deal would keep Iran 10 or 15 years from making a nuclear weapon "with the right price." At this juncture in world affairs this is important because Mr. Trump has shown flexibility in dealing with Iran following the firing of National Security Adviser Bolton. Trump held back on a response at several points during the attacks in the Straits of Hormuz and the taking of ships hostage by Iran and the UK. The attacks on Saudi oil facilities and the difficulty of protecting oil installations in the region, Iran's increasingly difficult position under tight U.S. sanctions and pressure on Asian buyers of Iranian oil to cut back purchases, the efforts of Japan and India dependent on Saudi and Iranian oil to reduce tensions, all point to a new policy in the region with a new Israeli government playing a useful role to keep policy control in the hands of Asian countries dependent on oil supplies for their economies, and in the hands of a U.S. president better informed about a policy course that is in U.S. interests of avoiding unnecessary engagements overseas when there are other pressing priorities. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Everything one needs to know about Brexit. Most questions are answered here during the last minute negotiations on December 14, 2020, in a desperate effort by both sides knowing that no one is going to budge. The effort now is to say look this is going to hurt both sides during a pandemic, the public is going to be angry with the politicians one more time, which will hurt all sides. Britain joined the European Union in 1973 with Ireland and Denmark.

Britain has left the EU legally and politically. It is in a transition period till Jan 1, 2021 by which time the remaining questions on trade, on economic relations and security need to be resolved. This covers $800 billion in trade between Britain and the EU. If nothing happens to settle these issues Britain after Jan. 1 will no longer be part of the EU single market or its customs union. 

LyrArc Article Gist
A wonderful mindset and and a philosophy of life and the game from Spanish coach Luis de la Fuente. Sid Lowe of The Guardian's interview with Luis de la Fuente, the coach from humble beginnings who has taken the Spanish team to the Nations League title. Spain defends its title this season. La Fuente has watched the young Spanish players come up through the junior leagues, Rodri, Carvajal, Yamal and Olmo, long before anyone heard of them. He is a former full back for Athletic and Sevilla with little coaching experience mostly in 11 third tier games.  Here is what he thinks of coaching today- "Obnoxious, rude, disrespectful, arrogant … it seems like the only way they take you into consideration is this thing they call ‘charisma’,” he says. “I don’t know what that is but if you’re those things they say: ‘He’s got charisma!’ Well, then, I don’t want charisma. We’ve shown that being normal can work, too. You don’t have to be winding people up all day.” Of his young players Olmo, Rodri, Carvajal, Yamal, Nico, Fabian, he says "it is the symbol of a new Spain that strengthens society, culture, and it is the future." Of the style of coaching it is to be simple- "A structure put in place in the late 90s by Iñaki Sáez, and a culture that brought success. “It is not chance but a process going back many years, based around an idea, controlled." “But we’re very simplistic. That phrase people think was invented recently – game by game – is as old as walking forwards and we went one obstacle at a time, in order. We have to take the drama out of the concepts win and lose; sometimes it’s destiny’s whim. But our conviction was we were there to win, to reach our limits.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With about 390 million users smartphone user penetration in India is the second highest after China. WalMart, Amazon are looking for new online customers with large investments. New tech rules from the government require these companies and Google to store data in India. This means companies that store data in servers located all over the world such as Google have to change the way they store Indian data. Under the new regulations in draft form data created by users in India from online sellers, search engines and social media must be stored exclusively in India, with government granted access.

LyrArc Article Gist
Father Hesburgh became president of Notre Dame in 1952, at the age of 35, when Notre Dame was a small university known for football and theological studies. He greatly increased the size of the university, hiring new faculty, increasing the endowment fund from $9 million to $350 million, and changed polcies so that women were admitted in 1972. The endowment fund is now $9 billion. Father Hesburgh played a prominent role in the U.S. and was close to presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan, Carter and Clinton. By the time he retired in 1986 after 35 years as president of Notre Dame, he was considered the most effective university president in the country, and the most influential priest in the U.S. He fought for civil rights, for peaceful protest on campus, and brought lay control through a secular board to run Notre Dame. In all these issues he stood up for his progressive views when faced by opposition from the Vatican and the U.S. government. Following the Second Vatican Council of the mid 1960's, Father Hesburgh initiated greater involvement of lay Catholics in the Mass and practices of the Church. At a meeting in Land O'Lakes, Wisconsin, 1967, a group of Catholic educators led by Hesburgh put forward the position that the pursuit of truth should be the ultimate aim of Catholic higher education in the U.S., not religious indoctrination. In this way Father Hesburgh created a new level of credibility and respect for Catholic based education in the U.S. Ironically Father Hesburgh was not a big football fan and refused to pose for a picture of him with a football, insisting that collegiate sports not influence higher education. His passion from his early years was to be a chaplain in the U.S. Navy. In fact he had to be dissuaded from going to the Navy as a chaplain in 1943, to stay on campus at Notre Dame to train naval officers during the war. Hesburgh was born in Syracuse in 1917 to an executive at Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company, and studied at the seminary on Notre Dame campus and in Rome for advanced degrees in philosophy and theology. He died in 2015 at the age of 97, having placed a large imprint on the shape of American higher education in the twentieth century. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
People in Poland, Hungary, and other countries in Central Europe took out mortgages in Swiss Francs. The jump in the value of the Franc means their payments go up increasing economic pain in these countries. In Hungary the government of Viktor Orban has converted most franc loans into local currency forint loans at favorable rates and this will now be seen as a remarkably positive move. Poland has a growing economy compared to Hungary with borrowers in francs with higher incomes than Hungary, yet with 37% of the homeowner loans in Swiss Francs political parties are looking for support before elections offering to shift these loans into the local currency. Banks in Poland are well capitalized and are not likely to be seriously affected.

LyrArc Article Gist
Lt. Gen Trainor and Michael Gordon describe the situation during the last months of U.S. presence in Iraq. President Obama is ambivalent about the size of the military presence he would like to leave, settling for 3000 troops and a few F-16's from a inital figure of 10,000. Obama sees the presidential election approaching and sets an objective of keeping it minimal. The military cooperation treaty with Iraq has to be approved by a Iraqi parliament with different factions in parliament not likely to approve it. Prime Minister Malliki decides not to move ahead. In the end no military cooperation treaty is signed after 8 years of war and a date is set for a complete withdrawal. Iraqi airspace is used by Iran to ship supplies to Syria's Assad regime, and the U.S. has less leverage in the region as the Arab world goes through a transition to popular government and elections. The Obama administration shifts most of its attention to Afghanistan where the U.S. has no vital stake in the long run compared to the Middle East region, with its large population, growing economies, move towards democracy and meeting the aspirations of hundreds of millions of young people. One Middle Eastern leader says the U.S. had no long term policy under the Obama administration for Iraq, and this applies also to the rest of the Middle East region, and mostly reacted to events as they happened. The Obama administration's committment to the war in Afghanistan, just as it focussed on winding down the war in Iraq, responded to the American public's waning support for the war in Iraq. It did not reduce the total cost of the conflicts because of the initial escalation of the war in Afghanistan and later slow progress towards a negoiated settlement to that conflict. A negotiated settlement is the best the U.S. could achieve, and the best desired objective considering the limited interests in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan most of the dynamics would be determined in the long run by the situation in Pakistan, and India-Pakistan relations, which the U.S. could influence constructively only through dialogue, promoting cooperation between the two countries, and economic relations....

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post analysis of the Republican tax bill gives an exceptional view of the bill's impact and provisions. This is the first major change to the tax laws since 1986. The size of the bill is $1.5 trillion, with the Joint Committe on Taxation projection that the bill will increase tax revenues over a decade by $500 billion, meaning that it will cost $1 trillion being added to the deficit. What the bill does: 1. It offers a permanent tax cut to corporations by reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Industries benefiting the most are mining, real estate, technology, manufacturing. 2. The individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They are skewed to disproportionately help highest income Americans, much less lower income Americans and much more highest income Americans compared to high income Americans. In this sense it is skewed in a an unusual way to the highest earning Americans- a sort of Trump effect in place. The top 1% get a tax break of $51,140 in 2019, middle income people earning about $100,000 get about $1000 a year in 2019, tax payers earning around $50,000 about $380, and those earning less than $25,000 about $60 a year in 2019. Taxpayers earning about 150,000 get about $2000 a year tax cut. (Tax Policy Center) 3. The basic assumption is that tax cuts are revenue neutral if there is economic growth and most of that growth comes from corporations investing in growth. The problem as Greg Ip points out in the Wall Street Journal is that countries trying thsi approach in the past such as Britain have not seen such growth materialize. Corporate profits are the highest in 15 years as percentage of GDP, according to Vanguard founder Bogle, and are now 20% of GDP compared 11% in 1980. If corporations did not invest with this level of profits how much additional investment is going to happen, ask critics, especially as demand drives growth and wages are not boosted under this plan.  4.  Because the bill's changes to current law makes it likely that 13 million less Americans will be insured over a decade- from fewer people signing up for Medicaid and on exchanges for Affordable Care Act- it will hurt lower income Americans. Skewing at both ends of the income spectrum of this type is rare in American history particularly in the twentieth century after the Depression of the 1930's, and poses risks for social cohesion, making it unpopular with most Americans. A CBS News poll taken Dec 3-5 shows 53% of all Americans opposed, only 35% support the tax bill just passed in Congress.  5. Then why did Republicans do this? Republicans needed a legislative success after failure to repeal the Obama Affordable Care law. This pressure led to passage with Republicans probably aware that this is temporary tax reform requiring a real effort by both parties working together after the midterm elections in 2018 and as the presidential election approaches in 2019.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Product obsolescence in a matter of weeks- the situation with the HP Touchpad. The Touchpad tablet is introduced at a retail price of $399 for 16GB and $499 for 32GB versions on July 1, 2011. The product is scrapped by CEO Apotheker after disappointing sales within weeks of introduction. It is now sold at a sale price of $99 in the last week of August 2011. This shows the astounding rate at which things change in the high tech product markets. Nokia, Nintendo, and now HP have seen their fortunes change quickly in 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
A whole range of issues can be seen in the debt crises in developing countries. The margin for error shrinks with poor governance, lack of honest assessment and transparency for finances, wars and conflicts within or outside the countries, living beyond their means, lack of focus on development, infrastructure that is unproductive or unaffordable including some Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure at higher interest rates. Countries that are dependent on overseas remittances, tourism, that were hit hard by the pandemic have seen their finances further weakened reducing the margin for error even more to the point that the smallest tipping point can lead to huge crises. Once the finances are weak all it takes is an external tipping point that creates serious crisis. The war in Ukraine with shortages of wheat, fertilizer and skyrocketing oil prices acted as that tipping point. Because this was a major blow the crises have a level of magnitude that is more than a payments crisis. One sees this in South Asia in Sri Lanka and Pakistan, and in the Middle East for countries such as Egypt and Tunisia shown in this WSJ report. It is now not simply a crisis but a crisis of great magnitude because in the case of Sri Lanka and Pakistan this WSJ report says that both countries foreign exchange reserves have dwindled to the point where they can pay for only one or two months of imports according to central bank data, analysts and IMF. This crisis has affected countries that were seeing steady foreign investment such as Turkey for decades, then a sharp falloff in foreign investment with a change in the climate for foreign investment. The crisis has taken the form of high inflation, significant depreciation of currency that makes imports costlier so that shrinking revenues from loss of remittances, tourism, or other sources will now have less value in supporting import needs. Lack of a credible path can delay setting a path out of the crisis. The $1.5 billion fuel and electricity subsidy made by the prime minister of Pakistan in late February was done without IMF approval leading to the IMF program having to be renegotiated. Lack of national political and cultural consensus on a solution simply makes it that much more difficult to find the way through it. In this regard South Korea was able to tackle the 1997 financial payments crisis effectively because of a national consensus. The situation in Egypt- Egypt has borrowed $20 billion from the IMF since 2016., placing it second to Argentina in aid from IMF since 1980's.  In 2020 and 2021 Egypt' government spent more than 40% of its revenue servicing its debt, and is forecast to do the same in 2022. The situation in Tunisia- A shortage of sugar, flour, and other critical supplies, and government delaying wage payments to civil servants. The government got $400 million in financing last month from the World Bank and hopes to secure a lifeline from the IMF. Compared to the period between the 2 World Wars the two bright spots are China and India where lessons of the past of civil wars, religious or political conflict, and poor governance, lack of knowledge of how the western countries industrialized and modernized, was replaced with the conviction that drives patient effort, courage in the face of adversity, honesty, and humility to learn including from western countries that have forged their own path through the same difficult road. The most difficult experiences have offered lessons which were learned- for South Korea the Korean War and invasion from the north, China the civil war and Japanese invasion, for India the partition of India and million of refugees. Stagnation from stumbled efforts also taught lessons, the Great Leap Forward in China, the License Raj with corruption in India.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
NYT reporters Lyman and Eddy show how the city of Weimar in Germany is coping with the arrival of about 900 refugees, and how well the integration efforts are working.

LyrArc Article Gist
The React-1 study from the Imperial College of London acts as an early warning system for the UK on coronavirus. The latest study has raised alarm about spread of the virus that is not related to testing and is across all age groups leading to the new rule of six by prime minister Johnson. This bans gatherings of more than six as Christmas approaches. During the  period in July to August the virus was taking 17 days to double now this is at 7 days.  The React-1 study for Aug 22 to Sept 2 shows 13 per ten thousand being infected and compares to 4 per ten thousand July 24 to Aug 11. It is a robust study with swabs sent in for tests from 300,000 volunteers in Britiain. Prof. Eliott the director of the study at Imperial College, London, says that "there is an epidemic in the community and there is no room for complacency." The R rate is measured at 1.7 in this study which is taken seriously by the government as an early warning of what could happen. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Journal editorial on Oct 5, 2012, says that by not offering leadership in the Syrian conflict beause it would lead to a wider conflict the U.S. and the European Union face a wider conflict. The current crossborder shelling between Syria and Turkey is the latest evidence of this. Turkey and the Saudis cannot handle this on their own. Without U.S. leadership the costs of this conflict will be even greater, and even poses risks for the Turkish economy if handled badly.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama campaign together in swing states such as North Carolina. Hillary Clinton capitalizes on the surging popularity of Michelle Obama, who has a 64%  approval rating, according to Gallup, 10 points more than president Obama, and above Hillary's 43 percent. Both women show a mutual admiration and sisterhood as they campaign together with rising crowd enthusiasm. For Michelle her unprecedented effort as First Lady is a result of the dirty campaign fought by Donald Trump to turn off voters to the political process, and her effort is meant to counter this. She says about this demeaning of women, "Enough is enough." Both women are drawn together with a campaign for a woman as president. And the slogan coined by Michelle has taken off  "When they go low, we go high." It has energized the very African American and millenial voters that have played an effective role in previous Democratic campaigns.

LyrArc Article Gist
Matthew Slaughter of the Tuck School, Dartmouth, says that the principle of comparitive advantage should determine what America exports and imports. Under comparitive advantage each country concentrates its energies on the particular goods and services that it does better than other countries. Free trade operates under the idea of comparitive advantage, but in practice it is quite different than its textbook economic counterpart. It is constantly changing as new countries or industries in different countries try to upset the existing pattern. Under a textbook example Airbus should not exist because Boeing was the most efficient manufacturer upto that time, and new entrants in a industry are nurtured for years with support from the governments of their countries. And in some situations the governments may exclude certain companies or industries from support such as Komatsu and construction equipment in postwar Japan, and Infosys and software outsourcing in India, and still survive and grow. Under comparitive advantage Japan should still be importing construction equipment from Caterpillar in the US, and there would be no serious competition in that industry. This would work to the detriment of the principle of competition in free trade which is just as important to free trade as the idea of comparitive advantage, with new entrants in an industry upsetting the old way of doing things and creating price/quality improvements. Slaughter simply pulls back off the shelf the old idea of comparitive advantage without seriously considering its real life aspects. Without dealing with trade distortion from currency manipulation, from the impact on jobs, without considering the continuing critical role of manufacturing in developed economies to provide the standards of living for a large middle class, and creating the kind of society that people of developed countries aspire to. He mentions GE's Immelt and the President's Council on Jobs, but makes no effort to engage Immelt 's statement in his recent op-ed article in the Washington Post, that the concept of transitioning from a export-oriented economic powerhouse to a services led consumption based economy could be done without loss of jobs, prosperity and prestige, was fundamentally wrong. He has only one line for manufacturing's role in America's economy. This line says knowledge intensive industries such as education and software are just as important as manufacturing, but fails to mention that manufacturing has received less attention in recent decades. In so doing he is discounting his own profession of concern for the high rate of joblessness in the U.S., and the need for a new focus on manufacturing in the U.S. to reverse that trend. By saying that imports are not a sign of failure but can raise standards of living, and leaving it at that, Slaughter does not acknowledge that consumer debt that US consumers have taken on in the process certainly affects future prospects for the US economy. And he makes no mention of the need for rebalancing the world economy, which is exactly how free trade should work ideally. Countries that have high imports export more to rebalance the world trading system, as currency valuations are allowed to adjust makig their exports more attractive. By not taking into account the realities of free trade, and the need for practical measures to rebalance without policy induced distortions by state run economies, Slaughter ignores the idea of free trade that works as it should and for all countries. The irony is that Immelt's own committment to jobs and competitiveness has been questioned in online blogs and most recently by an editorial in the Wall Street Journal on January 26, 2011, titled "The Misallocators." That editorial refers to the outsize role of GE Capital in GE's earnings during the past decade, and the lack of credibility of a focus on competitiveness and jobs that this creates for GE. It mentions the loss of 34,000 GE jobs in the US during the last decade. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A WSJ/NBC poll in Oct 2013 shows U.S. Congressional leaders Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid have some of the highest negative ratings ever. U.S. president Obama has high disapproval ratings. Close to 35% of men voters would go with a alternative candidate. This is the highest disaffection level in two decades. Voters prefer someone who is populist, pragmatic and non-ideological.