LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts to impeach two previous presidents including Democrat Clinton failed in the Senate where the vote requires a two thirds majority. The first impeachment vote against Mr. Trump failed in the Senate. In the House of Representatives only a simple majority is required. Majority Leader McConnell says he will not reconvene the Senate before president Biden takes office. Vice President Pence has refused to invoke the 25th Amendment. House Democrats have moved ahead to vote for impeachment of president Trump for the storming of the Capitol offices in Washington D.C. Their impeachment statement says president Trump's remarks that his supporters had to fight like hell or they would not have a country, constituted incitement of supporters. President Trump won 74 million votes in the last election more than in the 2016 election and lost with Mr. Biden winning 81 million votes after polarization of the country. With such a large portion of the country voting for Mr. Trump Mr. Biden risks his agenda of fighting the pandemic, and other parts of his program, becoming immersed in partisan infighting. This would also result in continuing the division of the country, and continue polarization.  About 5 House Republicans are expected to support impeachment. In the Senate some Republicans say there are impeachable offenses yet only Mr. McConnell and the senator from Utah, Mr. Mitt Romney, favor impeachment.  Mr. Trump's style of governing was controversial from the beginning of his campaign in 2016, strident and taking on critics. He governed through relative moderation compared to his aggressive posture towards critics. For instance on Mexico his remarks offended critics, yet he negotiated a new trade agreement with Mexico replacing NAFTA to ensure worker protections in Mexico, and worker jobs and wages in the U.S. Negotiations with China on trade were conducted by a seasoned veteran, Mr Lighthizer,  who was deputy Trade Representative under Reagan, and negotiated the trade agreement with Japan that worked to reduce Japanese trade surplus in the eighties. On the economy before the pandemic hit in March president Trump made significant progress reducing unemployment.      ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Economists expect the Japanese economy to grow by 1% for the full year 2008. The 2nd quarter has actually seen a contraction in the GDP with most economists forecasting a drop at an annualized rate of 2-3%. The causes are largely external so no poicy changes are expected. The rise in food and fuel prices and the increase in raw materials prices has led to higher inflation and consumers spending less, companies investing less in new plant and equipment. Next general elections are in September 2009. Prime Minister Fukuda, 72, has seen his approval ratings drop to 20-30%, and he is seen as lacking a clear vision for Japan. This is the worst downturn since 2002 when it was clearing up bad debt in its banking system.

LyrArc Article Gist
Fuel efficiency rules require average fuel efficiency in the U.S. of 35 mpg by 2016. The debate is now on what to do for 2017 to 2025. New technology such as the P2 systems for hybrids already used in VW, Nissan and Hyundai vehicles makes a 20% increase in fuel efficiency possible. Large investments are being made to bring new technology to bear on increasing fuel efficiency significantly. Government agencies are looking at different scenarios by which the new fuel economy standards beyond 2017-2025 could be set between 47 mpg and 62 mpg. An additional factor is the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions- at 47 mpg the reduction would be 3%, at 62 mpg the reduction would be 6%. Another factor is how much the impact is on the cost of vehicles and reduced cost on gasoline. Here there is a wide range in the numbers for average mpg rules at 62 mpg- with EPA estimates at $2800-$3500 increase in vehicle cost and $5000 savings in fuel cost, Centre for Automotive Research estimates at $9790 increase in vehicle cost. The 62 mpg translates into "real world" actual efficiency of 45 mpg. In April 2011, 17 senators put out a letter of support for the 62 mpg proposal. There is a public value involved in this that is also significant- the reduced dependence on foreign oil means savings in defense expenditures in parts of the Middle East, and an economy that is less impacted by volatility in the price of oil. As this aspect of public value or benefits cannot be quantified easily even though they are significant, this may tend to be lost in the debate and the politics of fuel efficiency. For automakers there is significant marketing value in having a visible and strong presence in fuel efficient vehicles because of perception as forward looking- something that hurt Detroit carmakers in the last decade. During periods of gasoline prices at $5 a gallon this provides carmakers with an extra cushion of safety in securing car sales. Carmakers in one country such as the U.S. also have to worry about what carmakers in other countries such as Japan and Germany are doing- if the standards in the U.S. develop a gap compared to other countries developing advanced fuel efficiency technologies this poses significant risks because of the global nature of the automobile marketplace. See the group "Asleep at the Spigot" for more details on this. Many of these less quantifiable factors do not get the attention they deserve because they are significant from experience but not easily quantified. Throw into this the large unknown of what new technologies not yet developed lie ahead with a burst of effort by one country or another, which bring cost reductions at the same time - and the debate requires as much a good sense of what is the path offering the greatest advantages in years ahead than a pure exercize in numbers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It makes for good political rhetoric, but in reality the flow of money goes both ways. A lot of investments are made by American companies overseas. This time the flow of oil money because of high oil prices, from the USA and Europe to the Middle East is being recycled back to the USA in the form of investments in the US through small equity stakes in companies and more so through purchases of capital equipment and services to build Saudi infrastructure projects. The $500 billion investment plan over several years in Saudi Arabia is to build everything from new cities, aluminium plants, electricity generation plants and chemicals and plastics plants. The fears and rhetoric are overblown, as the USA also invests overseas with holdings according to the Treasury department of $6 trillion of foreign stock and debt. The acceleration of foreign investment in the US is to be seen in the numbers, as the dollar gets weaker, and its more advantageous for Canadians and Euuropeans to invest here. Last year $414 billion of foreign investors money went into buying stakes in American companies and building factories and purchasing stock, according to Thomson Financial. Thats up 90% from 2006 and represented one fourth of all announced deals. This year in just 2 weeks foreign investors poured $22.6 billion in just the first 2 weeks of January, and that represents one half of all deals. Shows how quickly the picture is changing. One way of looking at it is that Americans buy a lot of foreign goods and the money Americans use to pay for a lot of imports is now being returned to the USA in the form of foreign investments. Note that foreign investment is desirable because it brings new ideas and technology and new management methods to the host country from other countries. These foreign investors in many cases are able to make these investments overseas because they are good at what they do, having them in the host country benefits the host country and shakes up competition in the particular industry in the host country that is receiving the investment. This is why economies once relatively unfavorable to foreign investors like Japan and S. Korea are now passionately seeking foreign investment to make their economies thrive through the exchange and inflow of new ideas and ways of doing things. The same can be and is true for the USA. The other aspect is that most of the investment is still from countries like Canada, Germany, Japan, S. Korea which are big free trade partners of the USA. Manufacturing investment is heavily skewed to European and Japanese companies. Foreign multinational investment (Sony, Toyota etc) grew to $43.3 billion in 2007 from $39.2 billion in 2006 according to OCO Monitor, and will accelerate significantly as companies like VW and other German companies find it cheaper to build in the USA and shift more manufacturing here. To get an idea why the rhetoric is overblown Canada spent the most in buying American companies, $65 billion in 2007, according to Thomson Financial. Russia spent $572 million and India $3.3 billion. How will this improve the chances of the USA making it out of this recession? Five million American work for foreign companies in the USA. Of these one third are manufacturing jobs. These jobs pay about 30% more than jobs in American owned companies. Figures from Treasury Department. There will be more of these jobs as companies like VW build plants here. Roubini Economics estimates that an infusion of about $300-400 billion is needed for the USA to overcome the effects of the current mortgage and credit crisis. $414 billion was invested in the USA by foreign investors according to Thomson Financial in 2007, going up from something like $200 billion in 2006. If this pace continues becasue of some of the same underlying reasons as the weaker dollar, stronger economies overseas, then $200 billion additional investments this year would add that much to a stimulus package of $150 billion by one estimate, to provide a boost of somewhere around $350 billion. In the range of the needed boost. Companies like IBM and GE which have significant investments in India and China and investments in software or infrastructure industries that are growing rapidly or Caterpillar with growth in construction overseas, may keep growing through this downturn. This recession may hit selectively and differently, not be a complete hit to the USA economy, and could prevent it from going beyond 2009 with recovery in 2010. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that the high growth during Jeb Bush's period as governor of Florida was a result of the housing boom years. When that boom collapsed by 2008 the economy slumped badly. Taken as an average for the boom and slump years Florida's growth rate is slightly below the national average, says Krugman. Economists and other experts say productivity is a key factor for increasing wages and growth, which is a result of factors depending on the use of technology, business investment in productivity, human capital. It is stuck at a low level of 0.4% since 2010, according to economists, and not a factor that is dependent on who is president. During the two terms of president Obama growth was 2.1%, George H.W. Bush 2.0%, George W. Bush 1.6%- making the Bush and Obama years in office similiar in terms of growth. Before 2000 we see higher growth rates under a Republican president Reagan 3.4% and a Democratic president Clinton 3.7%. A significant factor since 2008 is the financial crisis and housing bubble which has in many countries such as Japan and Mexico, and to a lesser extent in the U.S., led to a lost decade....

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's efforts to rebuild Myanmar's economy and infrastructure after decades of stagnation under a military regime.

LyrArc Article Gist
Doubts about a decoupling of the Asian and European economy from the US economy. Opinion that the US economy could have a stronger impact on the export driven economies of Japan S. Korea and China than is usually thought and differet view from the one given recently in the Oct-Nov. report from the IMF, the OECD forecast and other reports suggesting only a modest impact of the housing crisis in the US and the credit crunch.

LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the flaws in China's development model are shown by the Economist. Over half of the economy is dominatd by state run enterprises. And the remainder is also heavily influenced by local government and officials from the government. Financing goes through state run banks which lend to state run enterprises, and only a small fraction of lending goes to small businesses. These busineses are not actively looking to support innovation and new products. The other weakness that the Economist correctly points out, is that by contrast even in the 1960's, about 10 years into Japan's postwar development, quality control was a big thing with companies in Japan. The Deming Prize was seen as the most prestigious prize for Japanese companies, and Japanese engineers tried to learn everything they could about quality control to make Made in Japan mean high quality. They succeeded by the 1980's in making this happen, with leading global brands like Sony, Matsushita, Panasonic, Toyota, Honda, Canon and a host of other brands. If 1980 in China, is where Japan was in 1950, now about 30 years later there is nothing like what was seen happen in Japan in the area of quality and global brands. The area in which the freewheeling culture of capitalism has been most successful is the economic zone, a 2 hour drive between Guanghou and Shenzen. It manufactures mostly low tech goods like toys and apparel and shoes, and these manufacturing facilities are of low quality, with poor conditions for labor. With the efforts by the government to move to higher value added and high tech products these businesses came under pressure by mid 2007, with new labor laws, more enforcement, pollution control laws and resulting higher costs. As they felt the impact by mid 2008 from the higher costs, some businesses disappeared. Then another and even bigger problem hit these businesses. The global economic crisis, the shortage of credit in western countries to sustain import orders, and the rapid fall off of demand from highly indebted consumers in the USA, has led to closure of most of these businesses. The rapidity with which many of these businesses closed is amazing, as row after row of these buildings are now empty in the Guangzhou-Shenzen area. Another development is happening in Taiwanese firms like Hon Hai, that with little disclosure, make IPods, laptops, PC's, and other electronic products in the same area. At one point this firm employed 250,000 people in a industrial city sized factory campus. Now it is shifting production to places like Vietnam. Now Taiwanese reports say that the workforce of Hon Hai in Shenzen area will drop to 100,000. Other Taiwanese firms are also shifting production to other countries. Climate change and the heavily polluting industries that are widespread in China is one of the other flaws in the Chinese development model. Another is the lack of energy efficiency in these industries. With all these changes exposing the deeper flaws in the model China has used for development for the last 30 years, this a time for change in the way economic development takes place in China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Myanmar's economy shows slower growth in the early period of the Suu Kyi administration. Experts say part of the reason is that the administration has slowed investment in petroleum and mining and pushed it in favor of other areas to diversify the economy. The inexperience of the government is also an issue, as Myanmar needs workplace reforms. The IMF says growth should improve to 7.5% after 6.3% growth in 2016. The government is in office for only about 2 years, and this comes after decades of mismanagement and cronyism under military rule. Another problem is that Suu Kyi is considered a micromanager and is only now delegating matters to experts, some from Australia. In a sign of the sluggish foreign investment the two American companies investing in Burma are Coca Cola and a can making company. The initial enthusiasm for investment has waned. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Major decline in oil prices in Oct. 2014 as prices drop to $81 per barrel and are forecast to reach $70. U.S. oil production increased by about 56% or 3.1 million barrels a day since 2004. U.S. demand for gas and fuel declined 8% compared to 2004. Initially instability and wars in the Middle East sustained high oil prices in 2012-2013. Yet with growing output from shale and other sources in N. America and slowing economies of Europe and China, the situation reached a point in 2014 where supply exceeds demand. This shift more than offsets any instability in trouble spots. The situation affects the U.S. consumer favorably with an estimate of $1 billion in savings for American consumers with every one cent drop in price at the gas pump, by one estimate from Deutsche Bank analysts. Typical American families gained an extra $50 a month from the decline June to October 2014, according to analysts at Gasbuddy.com. The declines are a boost for the slowing economies of Europe, Japan, China, S, Korea and India. China's imports for 2015 are estimated at 61% of oil consumption, using official estimates. In the current slowdown the lower prices offer relief. India which imports 75% of its energy benefits signficantly, as this helps lower inflation and reduces cost of fuel subsidies for state run companies. Russia is adversely affected by the declines as it depends on oil and gas exports for 50% of the nation's budget. Estimates by AFK Sistema economists show the Russian economy contracting in 2015 with oil at near $90 per barrel (Brent crude is at about $85, and WTI at $81 in early Oct. 2014). Russia's former Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin reflects opinion among Russian executives and politicians, when he told state television that Saudi Arabia may be pushing prices lower to target Russia's oil resource based economy and Mr. Putin, in an effort to broaden the effect of sanctions. (The Saudis have strongly protested the Putin intervention in Syria.) Venezuela has used $120 per barrel and Angola $98 for its budget, leading to a strong hit for the economy. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ Lingling Wei's interview with Ding Xuedong, chairman of China Investment Corporation on its plans and strategies for 2015-2016, and future years. China's government formed CIC in 2007 to improve the returns on its foreign exchange reserves, estimated at $3.8 trillion in 2015. China Investment Corporation had largely stayed with low yields on U.S. Treasury debt till 2007. CIC has about $650 billion in assets in 2015. Its strategies provide insights into how China sees the outlook for the global economy. Ding sees opportunities in real estate and infrastructure, with a focus on the U.S. and Europe for steady cash flows. He singles out the U.S. as of particular interest as its economy rebounds. Strategies also include paring down of energy holdings. Foreign holdings are now $220 billion and have increased by 16.6% since 2009. A special unit CIC Capital was formed recently to more directly participate in managing foreign holdings with a long term view. Earlier focus of CIC on natural resources and commodities is now shifting as the commodities crisis has reduced long term prospects in that sector. The plan for the future is to shift to an allocation where financial products such as stocks and bonds are about 50%, and long term assets such as infrastructure investments, real estate and other investment take up the other 50%. At the end of 2013 equities and fixed income represented 57.4% of CIC global assets, and 28.2% were in long term assets. Ding wants to see China as the No. 2 engine for the global economy after the U.S. as No. 1. He sees the prospects for Brazil, Russia and South Africa as poor, and is optimistic about good performance from India, Mexico and Nigeria. On Japan Ding is skeptical of prime minister Abe's plans because he sees the lack of structural reforms in the efforts leading to a kind of lazy effort in his view. CIC is learning from the experience of other national investment funds and improving its in-house investment and management capabilities. Ding has many years of experience with China's Finance Ministry, the Cabinet, and the State Council. ...

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
Crude oil or crude world. This book by Peter Maas "Crude World: The Violent Twilight of Oil," shows how places like Nigeria and Equatorial Guinea suffer from the lack of infrastructure and jobs, as the oil industry does not create many jobs and the companies and the ruling classes in these countries are the main beneficiaries. Nigeria's anticorruption official, Nuh Ribadu, is cited in the WSJ, with an estimate of $380 billion of $400 billion in oil revenues in Nigeria over 3 decades being wasted through corruption and misuse of funds, with little money going into infrastructure and jobs. Manufacturing in China, Vietnam, and Malaysia for basic consumer products from textiles to shoes, creates jobs even at low wages, making the people in these countries better off as wages rise. Oil on the other hand creates few jobs and companies do not move upscale manufacturing tech products in the next stage of manufacturing, leaving the people as worse off as before. The margins are thin in manufacturing, whereas much of the oil revenue can be deposited in accounts of influential individuals. Mouwad in the NYT points out 93% of profits go to the government in Nigeria, only 7% to western oil companies. Even in countries which have tried to root out corruption through socialist experiments such as Venezuela and religious parties such as in Iran, the failure to integrate with the globalized economy and extremist policies leads to lack of development and backwardness. This shows that the best way to develop is through emphasis on education, science and technology, building a culture that thrives on modernization and technological advancement over several decades, even if this means starting with basics and continually moving forwards into higher technologies. Japan, South Korea and China moved from shoes and textiles to iPads and smartphones, Japan starting in the 60's, S. Korea in the 80's and China in the 90's. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman puts it best when he says in the NYT that he's got a sick feeling in the pit of his stomach. Its just that the Republican challenge of not a single vote in the House for the $789 billion Stimulus bill just makes it harder to go back for more money which most definitely will be needed. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that over the next 3 years there will be a $2.9 trillion gap between what the economy could produce and will actually produce. $789 billion won't be enough, and more so because the weightage shifted in the direction of tax cuts from the original version. And considering the accelerating nature of the crisis on the housing front and in layoffs and consumption, the absence of a clear action plan with specifics to deal with the bad debt in the banking system, is what gives this sick feeling in the stomach. Because as is stated on these same pages by experts from Japan on February 12, NYT, see the link, Japan went through this same soul searching, public anger, controversy, and political leaders were afraid to take strong action for years from the mid 1990's till 2003 after Koizumi's election. Each action or set of actions each year during that period before 2003 was behind the curve, and did not match what was needed. For the USA this has happened already for 2007, 2008 and is heading in that direction for 2009, with a lack of consensus for the strong action needed. Would 4 million new jobs be generated by the current stimulus if that is a measure of success, as Obama indicated at his first press conference? With less going into spending for education, infrastructure, energy and other green projects, in favor of tax cuts and the AMT, and the feeling that going to Congress for more money will be harder and a partisan affair, will this become difficult to achieve? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The firing of John Bolton as National Security Adviser opens up the possibility of a meeting of Trump with President Rouhani of Iran. There is a need for both sides to begin talks on a nuclear deal that would replace the one Iran signed with president Obama to address issues raised by Mr. Trump and Republicans. Iran and countries that buy oil from Iran such as India, China and Japan have an interest in relief from sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on imports of Iranian oil. The European Union is keen to preserve aspects of the nuclear deal. Relief from sanctions is critical for Iran to develop its economy. The last two decades have seen Iran struggle to develop its economy with the sanctions imposed by  different U.S. administrations.   President Trump expressed flexibility on sanctions saying "we will see what happens. I think Iran has potential. They are incredible people." President Rouhani urged Mr. Trump "to put warmongers aside." Mr. Trump told reporters that he had resisted Mr. Bolton's opinions on issues and realized he had moderate views when compared to someone like Bolton.  Trump told Iran "We are not looking for regime change. We hope we can make a deal and if we can't make a deal thats fine too. But I think they have to make a deal." Helping the U.S. and Iran come to talks is president Macron of France who hopes to setup a meeting at the UN General Assembly which meets next week following his efforts at the G-7 meeting in France last month. In the past when tensions were high in the Straits of Hormuz President Trump refrained from aggravating this by saying actions that are "disproportionate" should not be taken and respected Iranian intentions. The tone of the conversation between the two sides has moderated to the point where both sides realize the need for coming to some compromise. This is in sharp contrast to the period a few months ago with rising tensions in the Straits of Hormuz and the seizure of an Iranian ship. Bolton's opinions were not the only issue for president Trump. He was also seen as the source of leaks including one that said Mike Pence, the Vice President, had opposed Mr. Trump's plan to bring the Taliban to Camp David. Also contributing to the new climate for talks is Mike Pompeo the Secretary of State, who has promoted the idea of talks with Iran. He told the media about such a meeting at the UN General Assembly in New York- "Sure. The president has made it very clear that he is prepared to meet with no pre-conditions." The willingness to try new ideas even contrary ones to policy pursued only a short while ago as long as the desired goal is reached is a feature of this presidency and key advisers. From the beginning of the Trump administration there is a firm sense of the need to end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. and reduce foreign entanglements that have dragged on wasting resources and destroying priorities. With a willingness to try all sorts of approaches even ones that appear to be contradictory always keeping the end goal in sight. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin in the NYT why the U.S. China Phase 1 Trade Agreement is more than a hill of soyabeans as he puts it, more than about all the soyabeans that the U.S. farmers can sell to China. China's economy was seeing the effect of U.S. tariffs. Additional tariffs to cover all imports from China to the U.S. would have worsened this. China avoided this by agreeing to Phase 1. The U.S. had looked for some enforcement mechanism based on China putting this down in a written agreement particularly for avoiding subsidies to state enterprises and improper access to U.S. advanced technologies. China's reluctance to do this led to Mr. Trump saying that China had reversed its position and Trump expanding the tariffs stage by stage. These issues are now set aside for Phase 2 still to be negotiated. Both sides taking what they could get. China relief from the threat of tariffs on all exports. The U.S. under Mr. Lighthizer's negotiating leadership retaining the enforcement idea through the tariffs that are still in place of 25% on half of China's exports to the U.S. The bonus for Mr. Trump is the goodwill China generates by agreeing to buy all the U.S. farmers can produce, farmers having not only stood behind Mr. Trump but also forming a key part of his support base. China will continue to compete in technological areas with the U.S., and the state enterprise model which worked for China as Mr. Xi tells visitors will continue. Phase 2 is just that Phase 2, when and if it can be negotiated between Trump with his negotiator Lighthizer and Xi with his negotiator Liu He. On key points neither side is budging. A key goal for Mr. Trump is to put the trade surplus China enjoys of $300 plus billion a year with the U.S. on a serious downward path, and bring so many of the jobs and manufacturing back home. On this trade data for 2019 and the plan for 2020 of both countries is clear. It should be down each year by 10-20% for the next few years, a major achievement of Mr. Lighthizer, who did the same with  Japan under president Reagan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
G-7 nations reach agreement for a global minimum tax of 15% a floor for taxes that the Biden administration finds acceptable. This agreement was reached at a meeting of the Treasury chiefs of the 7 G-7 countries in London on June 5, 2021. The G-7 countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, and US. Next agreement from Russia, China, India and Brazil in the G-20 nations would establish new ground rules for the major economies. The G-20 meeting is in Venice July 9-10. The OECD is steering the international efforts to achieve that goal. For the agreement to be effective a number of small nations that use tax rates of below 15% to attract business have to be part of the new rules. One of these countries is Ireland with a tax rate of 12.5%. For the Biden administration in the US the goal is a significant one as president Biden seeks business to pay its fair share so that long neglected priorities for education, healthcare, infrastructure, post pandemic improvements can be met. France and other nations in the EU face similar needs in the post pandemic environment. By setting a floor the Biden administration is both creating a new cultural concept of fairness in taxation and making it possible to finance the $2 trillion spending programs for these priorities of president Biden. Behind this are important facts that have left the large tech businesses paying little or no tax depriving governments of the very revenues that are needed for infrastructure and services for a modern well run state. The Biden administration seeks to include the tech businesses as well as all businesses in the new tax rules so that a uniform idea of fair taxation applies across the whole economy for the first time in two decades. In this way it makes up for the missed opportunities in the OBC administrations of Obama, Bush, Clinton that have led to loss of faith in the state and institutions in the US. A similar situation prevails in the UK,  France and Germany where previous administrations failed to address this important issue of fair taxation and financing infrastructure and priorities in health, education, and critical needs of the people.   ...

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.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's total public debt was 95% of GDP in 2022, Japan's was 62% in 1991. It's population aging faster than Japan's with population declining in 2022, Japan's declining in 2008 twenty years after its bubble burst. China's per capita income at $12,850 in 2022, compared to Japan's at $29,000 in 1991. China is facing more difficult headwinds than Japan in many ways. There is also higher tension in trade relations with US and EU limiting export growth. There is also the policy stance of the Communist Party that sees rural areas left behind with about 35% people in rural areas and Xi is slowing growth to reduce disparities and housing construction led speculative growth. In Japan urbanization was 77% in 1991, compared to 65% in China today. 

LyrArc Article Gist
China's Producer prices declined by 3%, Consumer prices flatlined, and imports and exports are both down 6.2% in September 2023. Growth is expected not to exceed 5% in forecasts by IMF and others.

LyrArc Article Gist
A sense that the dollar's weakness has peaked and its drop in value has already taken place. And with the weakness in the global economy including Japan and Europe, exports from the US will grow but not as rapidly as one might expect.

LyrArc Article Gist
A "Best Countries" ranking was announced in Davos forum by U.S. News and World Report and its editor-in-chief, Mortimer B. Zuckerman, in Jan. 2016. This is the first time this rating is being done. It gives top spots to countries based on surveys of 16,000 people, 8000 from informed elites of better educated people, the rest from the public. The rankings are in many categories including quality of life, cultural influence, heritage, entrepreneurship, citizenship, raising kids, green living. Canada takes the top spot for quality of life, followed by Sweden, Denmark, Australia and Netherlands. France takes top spot for cultural influence, Italy for heritage, Germany for entrepreneurship, and second spot for forward looking, Sweden takes top spot for citizenship, raising kids and green living. Japan takes the second spot for green living, Canada takes the fourth spot, with Germany in the third spot, the U.S. and the UK in the top ten for green living. India takes top spot for movers with its rising economy. The U.S. suffers because of its obesity levels in some groups. Overall Germany comes first, Canada second, UK third and U.S. fourth. Overall ratings included correlation with per capita GDP purchasing power parity level figures from the IMF....