World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
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.
United States Department of State Original article ›
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." ...
WSJ Original article ›
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. ...
South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hamburg is the key city in Germany's trade with China. About half of $200 billion in trade between Germany and China passes through the port of Hamburg. The South China Morning Post looks at the dilemma in Hamburg over relations with China in the post Merkel era. Merkel maintained strong and close ties with China signing an agreement with China her last year in office. This was when Mr. Trump was US president. Since then president Biden has changed US policy towards Europe. The South China Morning Post points out that The Greens and the FDP key partners of Scholz in a new coalition government, are critical of Merkel's policy towards China in its overall relationship with the US and the rest of the world. Scholz was mayor of Hamburg, and a partner in Merkel's coalition government in which he was vice chancellor. Scholz has talked very little on what the new German policy would be. China seeks to maintain its economic ties in the next few years with Germany while reducing its dependence on other countries under Xi Jinping's new vision for China that seeks to depend less on trade and real estate for its economy and growth. Yet the pace of change has accelerated during the pandemic with a new global supply chain emerging from the chaotic years of 2020-2021. US policy under president Biden is similar to policies under Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930's during the economic and political crises, and look to be setting a new path to the future for the rest of the world. ...
https://www.hindustantimes.com/ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The prospect of improved ties between India and China as president Xi Jinping meets prime minister Modi in an informal summit meeting. China sees India as an important trading partner as its trade relations with the U.S. deteriorate in a trade conflict and higher tariffs on China's exports to the U.S. Mr. Modi of India sees the need to maintain steady economic growth ahead of general elections in 2018 where a good economic record and performance would boost his chances for another term. 

Both India and China see the potential for a larger global role as the U.S. under president Trump seeks a smaller role than in the past. On issues such as climate change China has taken the lead and India is also an active participant in limiting carbon emissions.

 

BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
After China's economy shrank by 6.8% in the first quarter the outlook is looking increasingly uncertain. Premier Li Keqiang stated at the start of an annual parliament meeting that China will now scrap the annual economic target due to the huge uncertainty from the coronavirus, and the world economic and trading environment. New tensions over Hong Kong's autonomous status are adding to the trade tensions between the U.S. and China, and tensions over early handling of coronavirus by China. China recently announced new national security legislation for Hong Kong, and Mr. Trump says the U.S. would act "very strongly" against any effort to gain more control over Hong Kong.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In making his announcement to run for president in 2024 president Biden told a trade union audience that for Mr. Trump reviving American manufacturing was merely a punchline- not much happened. Krugman in this NYT report shows that Mr. Trump never acted seriously to directly make that happen. President Biden has passed legislation that creates trillions of dollars of investments in infrastructure, renewable energy, chips manufacturing, electric vehicles, and advanced manufacturing technologies. Krugman says in addition to what the government is spending private companies are also planning to invest trillions of dollars. As a result the US is in the process of building its manufacturing base for the first time after decades of neglect under the Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Obama and Trump administrations.  Economists have created a major handicap for investments in manufacturing with theories that are no longer relevant, and by their lack of understanding of the realities of workers and families in the US as manufacturing shriveled. They never figured into their analysis the loss of tax revenue base supported by factories in the US that led to disinvestment in towns and communities across the US. As public services and investment in these communities dwindled without the local revenues to support them. Mr. Krugman lacks the keen grasp of these issues that Biden as the longest serving Senator in the US has. Biden had so much time on the ground observing the situation in Scranton and other parts of Pennsylvania and Delaware, and much of the midwestern US seeing what happens first hand as factories close. Krugman is not able to make the case that manufacturing so truly needs. Yet even Krugman has some sense of the big changes underway in the US that Biden has created that will lead to the renewal of America. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Ryan, speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, wins the Republican primary in his house seat of Janesville, Wisconsin, defeating his challenger Nehlen, by 84% to 16%. The Republican nominee Donald Trump earlier had refused to endorse Ryan, and only reluctantly endorsed Ryan following the vice presidential nominee Mike Spence's endorsement of Ryan. Senator Susan Collins, senior Republican senator from Maine, joined other leading Republicans saying she would not support Trump. Paul Ryan has split with Trump on trade, immigration, Mexico, and other issues. He has insisted on decency and fairness in politics, and has won his seat in a working class town that had a closed GM plant in 2008 after Ryan voted to support rescue of the auto industry and worked hard to keep it open. Even though some of his policies have not directly helped working class families, he has won increasing support from his district as the economy recovered with unemployment down to 4.4% in Janesville, according to BLS for May 2016. Much of that support since 1998 has been based on Ryan's decency, faith and family. He made it a condition that he would go back on weekends to Wisconsin to stay in touch with people, when he accepted the position of Speaker of the House, and he listens to local concerns. Ryan said about the national discourse- "It's simple to prey on people's fears. That stuff sells, but it doesn't stick. It doesn't last. Most of all, it doesn't work." His job in today's deteriorated national discourse is as vital as ever, both for Wisconsin as representing the best in the national spirit, and for the country.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The surge in the value of the dollar is creating turmoil in the world economy. The dollar reached 1.04 to the euro and 118 Japanese yen by Dec. 15, 2016. This means Japanese and European exports will be more competitive and lower U.S corporate earnings.  Emerging market economies hold about $200 billion in dollar denominated debt and this will become harder to repay with the surge in the value of the dollar. China faces larger capital outflows and the Bank of Japan has to navigate a new situation. Some countries such as Mexico are raising interest rates to reduce inflation as the value of the peso drops. The prospect of trade wars is also another aspect of uncertainty with the new Trump administration in the U.S.

The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist magazine says Mr. Trump's claim that he could fix things because he is an outsider is now quickly proving to be false. The lack of experience works against the Trump administration as it stumbles from one crisis to another. The tweets that were used to turn voter sentiment against opponents now work the other way. There are other problems that are noted here but not emphasized to the extent they need to be. Mr. Trump, as Peggy Noonan, a Reagan aide, has pointed out in the WSJ, risks alienating the very blue collar vote, and older voters whose interests he claimed to defend. This happened with the Ryan Republican House health care bill as millions of poor Americans approaching retirement were one of the worst affected groups. The Economist points out that the next project to tackle tax reform has the same possible consequences for the Trump blue collar base, as it says Republican plans for tax reform are seen as regressive. Tax reform has eluded previous administrations, and requires more experience in building coalitions which the Trump administration lacks in its confrontational attitude towards Congressmen on both sides of the aisle who disagree with him. Improving the U.S. trade position, infrastructure investment are other areas that the administration plans to tackle, yet the first 100 days show that the lack of experience and the lack of a calm composed mind is hurting the Trump administration, to the point of policies that hurt the very voters who put their faith in the Trump administration to improve things. A similar process is unfolding in Britain as it faces a Brexit negotiation that the Economist points out has been badly handled by prime minister Theresa May, and could lead to worsening the economy if no deal is reached because the European Union sees that it is not in its interest to do so, and Ms. May realizes only later that she has taken nationalist sentiment a bit too far for a European economic arrangement to work and provide mutual benefit. A continent wide economic arrangement that it was the wisdom of past leaders from Britain, France and Germany to support for over six decades is not easily undone by one vote, or one government. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump has decisively changed the Republican party. Most Republicans support Mr. Trump personally, less the Republican party. Mr. Lindsey Graham, a senator from South Carolina, says of the Republican party before Trump that it had become a bit staid, that we looked like the banker next door who may foreclose on your house. Mr. Romney epitomized that in his view. Gone are the views on deficits, on wars, and on imports and transfer of technology to China as being acceptable.  Five years from 2015 when Mr. Trump came into prominence with his new style taking on the establishments of both parties with a fierce disdain for convention, both the Bushes and the Obamas and Clintons, the Republican party is completely transformed. Registered Republicans are now 60% non college educated in 2020 compared to 50% non college educated in 2016. The Trump policies on trade putting American workers first and America first have a resounding popularity with this audience- this should be no surprise after decades of job losses and factories shipped overseas under the previous administrations for 2 decades. Most of these workers are not college educated and are white and had enjoyed a good standard of living with a high school education in American factories till the shift of American manufacturing to China destroyed good paying jobs and impoverished the American working class.  Only 30% of college educated people are registered Republicans in 2020 compared to 40% in 2016. Overwhelmingly about 90% of registered Republicans are white.  They are majority male and older but there is a significant about 40% female and 40% young population under 40 years of age. This might resemble the party put together by Missouri Congressman Harry Truman as he led the Democratic Party in 1948 with a majority of non college educated Democrats, fighting for American workers and America first in the cold war with Russia. Truman also had a rough Missouri farm language and accent comparable to Mr. Trump's rough style and language disdainful of the old establishment and new tech establishment. Both were heavily disliked by the media and both did not let this bother them in any way. Both liked facing large crowds as Truman showed in campaigning by train across the country and Trump has shown in campaign rallies run in his own way. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist

Greg Ip says inflation will be moderate about 2.3% instead of 2% as tariffs will probably be use as a negotiating method and tariffs at 20% with 60% tariff as a negotiating tactic by Trump.  Greg Ip says as important than inflation and GDP are the workers displaced and with loss of income through surge in imports and loss of manufacturing in the US. 

Robert Lighthizer, who was trade ambassador in Trump’s first term and is likely to return to manage trade says-

“Globalization produces disruption, dislocation, and destruction. Conservatives by contrast seek to defend traditional values and institutions, preserve the social fabric, and ensure the conditions for families and communities to flourish.”

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets U.S. president Donald Trump in June 2017. Trade with India, and the strategic relationship in Asia, will come up in the discussions. This report says the discussions could be sensitive on trade, immigration and climate change. The U.S. provided $2.38 billion in foreign direct investment (FDI) to India in 2016, about 5.5% of the total, and 47% of the U.S. H1-B Visa program for skilled workers benefits Indian companies. The H1-B program will not be discussed, though climate change may come up. Defense collaboration, regional security, energy projects, are likely to be important topics, including transfer of high technology. 

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report  by Joshua Partlow in the Washington Post shows frequent and extensive contacts between Mexican officials and the Trump administration. Skeptical experts say this is mostly damage control. Yet it has helped defuse tensions on NAFTA and other issues, in some situations having president Trump reverse his stance. Mexico sends 80% of exports to the U.S., making this relationship crucial. Yet the scaling down of plans for a border wall, the emergence of a solution to NAFTA through changes without canceling NAFTA with support from Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary, show the dialogue has preserved relations. Uncertainties loom such as the trade stance of president Trump, and the potential of front runner Lopez Obrador from the opposition party to emerge in upcoming elections as the new president of Mexico. Obrador, a former mayor of Mexico who was a close contendor in previous elections, says he will take a different stand than the current government in negotiations. Mexico's Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray made 12 trips to Washington in 2017 as part of the effort by the Mexican government to preserve NAFTA with some changes. He has relationships with John Kelly and Jared Kushner in the Trump administration that have facilitated his efforts.  ...
The New York Times Original article ›
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Oil prices in the U.S. drop to $55 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, and $65 a barrel for Brent crude price. Earlier expectation of the impact of reimposed sanctions on Iranian oil shrinking global oil supplies have been reversed with increased production from Saudi Arabia, Russia and the U.S.

Another new development that caused this reversal in sentiment is that the Trump administration granted waivers to some buyers of Iranian crude oil. The U.S. trade dispute with China has also added to this with lower growth forecasts. Unlike in previous years OPEC or Saudi Arabia cannot by itself shrink global supplies with production cuts. The U.S. and Russian output also plays a significant part.

The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This view in the Economist shows that president Trump actually represented the instincts of the Republican party base by 2018- anti-immigrant, anti-elitist, and to the right on social issues. As a result it says it is no surprise that he has taken over the Republican party. As the elections for Congress get closer most candidates are trying to get Trump's support and many of the older senators and Congressman from the earlier period of the party are retiring. It cites polls showing Trump has support of 85% of the Republican party base. In 2018 Mr. Trump appointed new members of his cabinet who more closely represented his views on China, Iran, NATO, and business issues. Remaining party leaders such as Mr. Romney running for Senate seat from Utah are now seeking and getting Trump's endorsement. The Republican National Committee is also run by Trump supporters. On issues of foreign affairs Trump has combined alternate shifts between demands and pragmatism in relations with China, Iran, and other countries on trade, politics, coming up with a new way international relations are tackled. Part of the reason for their appeal is the nature of the intractable problems such as the imbalances in trade, nuclear weapons, and the idea that an alternative approach might work when other approaches have failed.  On social issues such as issues facing workers in globalization and free trade the parties to the left in the U.S. and countries in western Europe have failed to deliver, leading to the appeal of Mr. Trump, Brexiters, National Front in France.  The immigration issue has also worked against the socialist parties.  In Britain dissatisfaction with Theresa May and hard core Brexiters is growing, leading to Labor Party getting 40% of the vote in the recent election. Suggesting that the changes induced by the Brexiters and the Trump administration may lead to other changes in the future that may shift the focus back to basic issues and delivery on infrastructure, health and education which are fundamental for the future.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a tactical move the Trump administration links a trade deal with South Korea with progress on the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and bringing North Korea to talks on denuclearization. After some offers by the North to open this issue in talks the progress is stalled. The move is an effort to bring more pressure on both Koreas on this issue.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Hindusthan Times on president Trump's 25% steel tariff on steel imports focuses on the trade deficit with China of $375 billion in 2017. It shows the trade deficit for the month of February 2018 citing data from China as growing rapidly in 2018 over the prior year by 45%, even as imports went up only by 6.3%. In looking at coverage in the U.S. on this topic many of the reports in the Washington Post and the New York Times were critical of the tariff without mentioning the size of the trade surplus of China. Hardly any reports mentioned the growth by 45% in the February 2018 trade surplus of China with the U.S. over the prior year.  This report cites a tweet by president Trump that China was asked to come up with a plan to reduce its trade surplus by $1 billion in 2018, only 0.27% of the trade surplus, which looks strange as this would do little to change the trading relationship except that it puts pressure on China to change the direction of the surplus that is growing because of the strengthening dollar and the growth in the U.S.  This suggests that even with the 25% steel tariff America's basic problem of the imbalance in trading relationship with China will continue.  The headlines critical of Trump for starting a trade war therefore look strange in this context and show how little this subject is understood or debated with facts. Even today textbook economics principles are cited after two decades of hollowing out of industry in the midwestern U.S. and in Ontario, Canada. This led to public sentiment shift electing a liberal Justin Trudeau in Canada, and an outsider real estate businessman Donald Trump in the U.S.  For Democrats in the U.S. the support of marginal additional gains in trade with president Obama's push for another free trade agreement in the TPP may have cost them theiir working class base and the election.   ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What were the stories in the Economist magazine that were the most read stories of 2019? Not on president Trump. On Malaysia, China under Jinping, and exodus from San Francisco and Silicon Valley. The most read article was on the newly elected president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro. The mismanagement of the economy particularly extravagant state spending on the Olympics and soccer stadiums for the World Cup at the expense of basic sanitation services, bus and transport services, health services, led to the result of a majority of Brazilians rejecting the Workers Party and its leader former president Lula. Unfortunately most of the media including the Economist did not draw attention to this gap. During a period in which income from mining with export of iron ore, and soyabeans to China, enabled Brazil to live beyond its means, there was no effort to draw attention to glaring gaps in development of public services such as sanitation, bus services and transport, lack of building infrastructure other than to support mining. Glaring gaps in education and health services made the situation worse. The second most read piece in the Economist  was on March 10th- Malaysia's PM is about to steal an election. Here the Economist magazine joined the Wall Street Journal which originally broke the story on the 1MDB fund and irregularities in Malaysia where a development fund was misused by the government. Najib actually lost that election and the WSJ covered the story of the developments that followed in which Malaysia's new governemnt led by a returning former prime minister in his nineties Mahathir Mohammed, ousted his own protege Mr. Najib.  The third most read piece in the Economist magazine was - How the West got China Wrong.  Unfortunately the Economist magazine and most of the media covered China in the two decade long boom years without covering the other emerging story as well in which Mr. Lighthizer (now president Trump's top trade adviser) and others questioned the huge unsustainable trade surpluses in U.S. trade with China. With the economy facing huge downside risks and rising trade tensions with the U.S. Chinese president Jinping's move to remove the limit on terms in office in the Constitution was considered a shift from the notion that China was likely to turn into a democracy. Mr. Jinping had already completed his first term in office and the anti-corruption campaign, managing the economic boom for a soft landing, was carried out with the central leadership of the party, after the destabilization evident in the early part of Xi Jinping's first term. Much of China's path was predictable and rational behaviour in its national interest, what was not clearly defined or defended was the way the U.S. could sustain the trade deficits that had reached a billion dollars a day. Leading to Mr. Trump seizing on this as an election issue to form a bloc of voters separate from the two main parties, the Republicans and the Democrats. The fifth most read piece was on Oct 11, 2018- the next recession. It pointed out that with low interest rates central banks in the U.S. and Europe and America could not cope effectively with a recession. The sixth most read piece was on June 29, 2018- Bullshit jobs and the yoke of managerial feudalism. It cited Prof. David Graeber of the London School of Economics, who wrote a short essay that went viral on the prevalence of work that had no social or economic reason to exist, work he called "bullshit jobs". Graeber said people want to feel they are transforming the world around them in a way that is leading to a positive difference. No. 7, 8, 9, were on Bitcoin, Netflix and programming language Python. No. 10 most read was on Aug. 30, 2018- Why startups are leaving Silicon Valley. It showed that in 2017 more people left the county of San Francisco than entered. The main reason the cost of living was burdensome and out of control. As Amazon shifts attention to India and Brazil, and Apple pulls back from India, social media companies coming under fire for disinformation, this period of Tech is making way for a shift in a new direction. A direction that focuses on people's lives, wages, spending on much needed infrastructure and services. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan, wins by 84% to his challenger's 16% of the vote in the Republican primary for his House seat of Janesville, Wisconsin. The challenger Nehlen, an executive at a water filtration company, adopted many of Trump's positions including building a wall and had the support of the group Tea Party Patriots. Trump lost to Ted Cruz in Wisconsin and lost in the 1st congressional district covering Janesville by 19 percentage points. Janesville, is a former industrial working class town that has lost many factory jobs over the years, and this election shows the trade issue is not the only issue on people's minds when they vote. That it is easy for a candidate to use it as wedge even when they do not mean what they say by outsourcing themselves, or have few real solutions- especially as public opinion in both parties is opposed to a shift of jobs overseas for the last decade. Ryan said about his win- "I'm a local guy, people know who I am, they know what I believe in and they know I mean what I say and I say what I mean and I don't do it in a mean way." Some Republican experts say Ryan's job of winning his seat very easily, protecting the congressional majority of Republicans, and dealing with Trump as the nominee, is the hardest job in politics. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Sebarros of the WSJ takes a closer look at the key words used by U.S. president Trump in rallies in city after city during the 2016 election campaign and in the months before the Congressional elections in 2018. Analysis by the WSJ counted the unique two word phrases, how often Trump highlighted topics, the content of audience respones in 48 post election rally speeches through Oct 27.  In 2018 the words "tax cuts,"fake news," and "health care," appeared more often than in 2017 after the Republican party's win in passing a tax cut. Other phrases used frequently were "law enforcement," "North Korea," and "Supreme Court" after the win in nominating Judge Kavanaugh. The use of the 2 word phrases are carefully done. The words "fake news" were not used during sensitive periods such as when pipe bombs were mailed to government offices, yet resumed few weeks later. His own name is the seventh most used word, even for someone such as Mr. Trump, showing that behind the impromptu remarks there is a carefully worded effort to steer voters in a particular direction with carefully developed appeals. Another example is when the Dow Jones averages were reaching new highs in September and October Mr. Trump highlighted the stock market growth, and then when volatility increased by November said much less on this topic. Graphs by Jessica Wang provide a good look at how frequently and in what manner Mr. Trump has continued his unique campaigning style before the 2018 Congressional elections, with two word appeals to already receptive audiences. The audience participation is a singular feature and the words "U.S.A." were used in 85% of the rallies with "Build that Wall" at 65% as the next most frequent.  Much of it is repetitive in city after city and the WSJ analysis shows that the major television networks including Fox News are not covering the speeches from beginning to end as they did before, only C-Span public network does. To receptive audiences in carefully scripted surroundings, including larger ones such as the Toyota Center Houston, where larger numbers of supporters worried about immigration, health care, trade, and other issues can come together, president Trump has rallied core supporters with this kind of appeal. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Nathaniel Taplin of the WSJ says the tariffs put on $50 billion high tech products by the U.S. and retaliatory tariffs on $50 billion products are not about a trade war but a way both countries will negotiate setting out their two positions.  A look at the role of foreign firms in China shows China has access to new technology using these firms as a conduit and these firms are also generating more jobs, being highly productive. These firms Taplin says will set back their investments if no agreement is reached or if it is harder to bring Chinese made products into the U.S. At this time China badly needs this investment and technology access because of their dynamism compared to inefficient state run firms as it struggles under a massive debt load with very high debt to GDP ratio.  A major issue is job growth as companies getting foreign investment are much more effective in jobs generation, delivering 10% of all urban job growth from 2007 to 2016, using just 5.5% of total investment. Return on assets at 9% compares to 4% at state run firms. If this dynamism is reduced or affected in some way China could have to provide more unproductive debt buildup stimulus.  For these reasons China has good reason to make concessions, says Taplin. Trump administration will ask for greater semiconductor purchases, much looser joint venture or foreign ownership requirements, higher Chinese payment for U.S. intellectual property. For all these reasons this is not about a trade war but about serious negotiations taking place so that there is a level playing field in the next phase of competition in high tech between the U.S., China and the E.U. changing the dynamics of the trade relationship in ways that reverse the trends of the past. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump reiterated his threat to place tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese goods in addition to earlier tariffs on $250 billion in goods.  The problem China faces is that it China imports less, far less than the U.S. does. China has only $10 billion in U.S. goods to place tariffs on. This is after placing tariffs on $110 billion in U.S. goods, mostly agricultural products such as soyabeans in retaliation for U.S. tariffs on the $250 billion of Chinese goods. China could place a ban on imports from Boeing or restrict the access for U.S. companies to the Chinese market. U.S. companies have invested billions of dollars in the China and employ about 2 million Chinese in well paying jobs. Concerns about unemployment would be uppermost to prevent these jobs being affected. Other concern for China is the loss of foreign investment as relations deteriorate. Already supply chains in some products such as clothing and consumer products is shifting other countries in Asia. In automobiles the regional hubs are expected to shift with India as a potential hub for Asia, and Mexico preserving its place as a North American hub following renegotiation of NAFTA. In media the dispute is leading to a shift from Chinese consumers buying Adidas instead of Nike and Huawei smartphones instead of Apple.  For an already slowing economy this hurts China more than the U.S. which is why the U.S. is pushing China to settle with an agreement that the U.S. can trust to bring down China's trade surplus. For the U.S. as most of the loss in exports is in agricultural products the solution has been to provide government aid to farmers, and for Mr. Trump to use the issue to point out that he is fighting for U.S. interests and for fairness. This is why the trade dispute poses more problems for China. Because the surplus is so wildly skewed in China's favor after the inaction of many U.S. presidents just as it was for Japan in the eighties, the situation appears to be headed towards a definite reversal of the lopsided trade surplus enjoyed by China. In the process the U.S. plans to build up the competitive edge it has lost to some degree.  ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us