LyrArc Article Gist
Rex Tillerson, U.S. Secretary of State takes a strong stand on North Korean missile testing and nuclear program in a visit to Seoul and Beijing. He said the U.S. would be forced to take pre-emptive action "if they elevate their threat of their weapons program"  to an unacceptable level. Continuing a policy of the Obama administration following missile tests by North Korea, the Trump administration has rejected any talks with North Korea. Tillerson said that "the policy of strategic patience has ended." It was also meant to signal U.S. intentions before Tillerson goes to Beijing from Seoul. President Trump commented on Twitter; "North Korea is behaving very badly. They have been "playing" the United States for years. China has done little to help." Because China sees North Korea as a bargaining chip with the U.S., Japan and South Korea, the situation has ended repeatedly in a impasse with the North Korean nuclear and missile program continuing during the Bush and Obama administrations. This has also meant that North Korea was unlikely to collapse on its own, with China pursuing a policy of using North Korea as part of its defense policies in the region, as pointed out by Sanger in this report. As the North's missile program continues the U.S., and with the North seeing the missile program as the only way to ensure the survival of the regime, the U.S. needed to come up with a new way to tackle the situation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Dudley Althaus looks at Mexico's 2018 election from a working class suburb of Mexico City called Valle de Chalco. Once a squatter settlement outside Mexico City this area was courted by the ruling PRI Institutional Revolutionary party for 3 decades with a social investing program building sewers, water and power lines. Today this area like others in the state of Mexico have turned to a new party Morena led by Manuel Lopez Obrador, to find a way out of the corruption, violence and failure of the rule of law under the PRI. Obrador left the socialist PRD party to form Morena in 2014 after running for president on the PRD ticket twice. The thirst for change is widespread inside Mexico giving Obrador a higher vote margin in state of Mexico than the 53% he won overall in Mexico. The PRI won just 16% of the vote. The old politics of piggy bank and patronage of the PRI is now discredited in Mexico.  The reason the old politics does not work anymore is the change in places like this from a shanty town of tin shacks to a bustling city of 400,000. This place has a technical school, a state university branch, rows of well kept cinder  block homes along with malls and wealthier homes. With basic necessities being met Mexican workers are turning to larger issues of national identity and how the next chapter can be written in the social contract. Obrador's nationalist message and criticism of the globalized economy struck workers and middle class as the right direction for Mexico. This came just as president Trump brought new views on immigration and NAFTA on the other side of the border challenging Mexico to find its own direction and independent position in the world economy, even building new links to other countries in Europe and Asia. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It can be a bit overwhelming, time for a pause, to close the Borders in Europe and in US, to do it together as a Nation. Republican Senator Lankford and senior members of Congress   negotiated the legislation to restrict immigration and close the southern border. It would be signed into law in January 2024 by Biden says Lankford in NYT after 30 years of inaction. The negotiated bill came up 2 months later in March by which time it was stopped by Trump Republicans as an issue for the election. Harris promise is to sign it into law, close the Border. Meanwhile in Springfield Ohio, population of 80,000 in 1960 declined to 59,000 in 2020 dropping 25% over the 60 year period with the decline of the Rust belt towns in the midwestern region of the US. A program that protects people from gang related violence in home country legally allowed 15,000 Haitian immigrants to settle in the city, people who now drive Amazon delivery vehicles and work in nursing occupations and in restaurants, in towns that have severe staff shortages. WIth the influx of refugees from Venezuela at the southern border, this has created anti-immigration sentiment in some parts of America, even as some of the refugees work to fill shortages in traditionally Republican states such as Kansas, as shown in the WSJ, that have decline in population and face severe staff shortages for bus drivers, restaurant workers, and hospital workers. Streams of refugees in earlier eras the Irish, followed by the Germans, followed by Blacks from the South, all followed this path, yet it was also a bit overwhelming, and at these times the nation took a pause. Europe is taking a pause- across Denmark, Sweden, France, the UK- and in the US there is sentiment on all sides for a long pause, to regroup, to reflect and focus on the national goals of binging up the middle class, the lower income classes, and the nation as a whole after the distortions from tech and economic theory induced distortions hurt the working people and families, and hurt rural areas. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Manufacturing could be the bright spot for the U.S. in 2021 and the years ahead. The pandemic has hurt industrial production in the U.S. in 2020. This brings manufacturing in the U.S. to a new low. This report in the WSJ says there is hope today because negative trends are about to be reversed. During three decades since the eighties three trends hurt the U.S.- lack of sustained capital investment, noncompetitive labor costs, degrading infrastructure.  To make the reversal of these trends and raise American manufacturing to what it was after World War II attention is being paid to these negative trends. The response- a quick recovery from the recession,  localization of supply chains, technological advancements to close the gap with competitors. By market capitalization on S&P 500 the U.S. manufacturing industrial sector was 15% in 2000, in 2020 it is 9%. Hope today lies in the determination to reverse the trends in this sector and regain leadership. Even in the aerospace sector the determination and legacy of American manufacturing is strong. Recently the WSJ ran a story on how David Farr, the CEO of industrial company Emerson Electric, which makes automation equipment for factories and aerospace parts based in Ferguson, Missouri, managed his company through the pandemic so that it was posed to return quickly to full production. Against all the hurdles he would not give up and fought hard in each battle with suppliers, governments and the pandemic.This bodes well for American manufacturing coming back on quickly even in tough markets such as aerospace and automation. Other factors WSJ mentions are quick reversal in hit to earnings, robust demand. Consumables have sprung back up fastest, but automobiles are also holding up in demand. This leads us to the localization of supply chains. Companies realize the risks of tensions in the South China Sea and technology theft today in a way that they did not before and this is changing the mood resulting in plans to move production onshore. Warnings from the Trump administration played a role with new tariffs on Chinese imports. Shipping products halfway around the world no longer makes sense, especially in losing control of supplies. Emerson depended on production off shore in China and other countries and panic from the pandemic set in quickly that everything would come to a halt as supplies stopped coming and Emerson could do nothing. The economics WSJ points out are also different today with labor cost inflation in China and labor cost deflation in the U.S. which improves U.S. competitiveness. To make U.S. labor cost competitive with China says Scott Davis in WSJ, one has to make the same quantity of product with half the employees, and this is now possible with automation technologies in 2020. The result is that even at this low point in manufacturing one can see the future is bright for the USA as it moves rapidly to rebuild the strength in manufacturing it had for most of the twentieth century. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ report sees Angela Merkel as leaving an international legacy of cooling relations with America. It says Angela Merkel turned down US president Biden's first call after his election as president because she was going to her cottage in the country that weekend. This report says after 4 terms Merkel is to be seen as dramatically increasing her country's economic dependence on China, pushing through a energy deal with Russia, joining France in challenging US political influence in Europe, rejecting American requests on economic policy and setting Berlin's openness to Chinese technology.  What happened with her youthful fascination with America during the years growing up in East Germany asks the WSJ? It also says of the Bush years of unregulated banking leading to the 2009 US banking crisis- that left her with a distaste for Anglo-Saxon banks and Wall Street lobbying. Of the Obama years it says Merkel found Obama unsteady, verbose, and sometimes meddling, with the spying on Merkel's phone also giving her a sense of disrespect to Germany. The result was that Merkel increasingly was fascinated by the Chinese experiment in development, visiting China 13 times while in office, studying Chinese history, politics and economics.  Merkel over this period met with the Dalai Lama and had questions about one party rule by CCP. Yet she became more and more resigned to Germany as a country of 80 million, not the EU and Europe as one group united in vision with a population of about 500 million, larger than America that could be a force for good in its own right. She said "we can be as hardworking, awesome,  as super as we like, but as a country of 80 million we won't be able to prevail if China ever decided that it no longer wants to have good relations with Germany." She ignored the experience of Sweden and Scandinavian countries in their relations with China. In saying this she ignored the potential of India and its neighbors in south-east Asia that make up about 2 billion people or about twice the population of China. She also seemed unaware of the role Woodrow Wilson, FDR, have played in realizing the democratic vision of the German revolutionaries of 1948 who failed to bring democratic government to Germany. And she had forgotten of the role Harry Truman, the commoner president of the US, who played a major role in establishing German democracy and its dignity during the Berlin Crisis after the blockade of Berlin by the Soviets in 1948. The mediocrity of presidents from Bush to Trump has bothered Merkel. Yet it may very well be that there is nothing mediocre about Mr. Biden and America's vision about its future as it grapples with the social and economic problems of the last three decades, as it has done before in its history and come through. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Sabotage of two tankers in the Persian Gulf and reports of activity of Iranian proxy forces in Iraq and Syria have led to an American response with the dispatch of a aircraft carrier and other forces to the region.  This report in the NYT says Defense Secretary Shanahan has prepared plans for deployment of American forces in the region with one plan calling for 120,000 troops to be dispatched to the region. As president Trump is against American involvement in land wars in distant places, the force is designed as a precaution in case of an Iranian attack through proxy forces in Syria or Iraq and not for a land operation. National Security Adviser Bolton has taken a strong position on Iran since the days of the Bush administration. The U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, the sanctions on Iranian oil, are part of a new policy of the Trump administration. The European Union countries have followed a policy of preserving the nuclear deal of 2015, even though the U.S. is pressuring EU countries. The oil sanction have led to a sharp drop in oil exports and is hurting the Iranian economy. President Rouhani of Iran says Iran may withdraw from parts of the Iran nuclear deal and the Iranian response is leading to heightened tensions in the region.  It was only recently that the Democratic party Obama administration pursued the Iranian nuclear deal with opposition from Republicans in Congress and skepticism of Israel. The election of president Trump who says the deal was a bad one has reversed U.S. policy leading to a complete change in policy and a possible confrontation with Iran. U.S. policy can veer back and forth depending on the party or president in power who completely different perceptions of the region. Obama had sharp difference with Israel and Saudi Arabia, and a different perception of Iran. Trump and Bolton see Iran as a threat to the U.S. After Iran shipped most of its nuclear fuel out of the country in 2016 in exchange for lifting of economic sanctions under president Obama's nuclear deal it would take over a year for new uranium enrichment facilities to produce the materials for a nuclear bomb, according to this report in the NYT. When the Obama administration negotiated with Iran the window had shrunk to a few months.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this interview with Der Spiegel Bernie Sanders reflects on the 2016 election. He says that the Democratic Party missed the fact that many people in the midwest, south and other parts of the country, were worse off after president Obama left than when he came in in 2008. He also says Hillary Clinton relied too heavily on speechwriters and advisers upto the point of  having three speechwriters say why she was running for president. He finds the cuts proposed to healthcare, in the budget, and action on climate change, immoral. He also points out about the investigations that Mr. Mueller is someone everybody respects and that it would be wrong to offer a biased opinion, that Trump supporters would see this in the way that he is picked on when he just came in. He also believes Trump supporters are like other voters and are likely to look at the results, how better off they are under the Trump administration.

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

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip tells India's story, piped water for hundreds of millions of Indians, massive increases in road and rail, rapid development of infrastructure, aviation, ports logistics. WSJ graph shows country growth of economies for Japan, China, India, Germany in 2000 and 2020. By 2000 Japan had grown its economy to become about half the size of the US economy with two decades of rapid growth since 1980. China repeated this process with two decades of hyper growth since 2000 to become about 75% of the US economy by 2020. The graphs also show Japanese growth tailing off so rapidly after 2000 in relation to the US economy that it is now only about 25% of the US economy. China is likely to follow the same path as growth slows and with an aging population to become about 35-40% of the US economy by 2040 from 75%. India following the process that happened in Japan and in China is likely to become close to 35-40% of the US economy by 2040 from about 18% today, with the fastest growth over the next two decades for the most populous country in the world. Greg Ip points out what has been achieved since 2014 with the Modi government. Good governance without leakages of public funds dedicated to infrastructure, ease of living, GST one India one tax so that growing pool of funds from taxes fund rapid development with no leakages to corrupt officials,  Swacch Bharat or Clean India, clean water from taps, electricity and cooking gas for the whole population of India with dates for completion. All this Ip calls removal of the shackles that existed for far too long even past 2000 and 2010 when China had vastly surpassed India from its low point in 1980 after Mao and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. India today is in as much a pace of development as China in the 1990's and Japan in the 1960's, except that it now has the benefit of grasping how development can be done in a way that does not affect climate and health in adverse ways as happened with China's hyper growth -which also led to the tragic loss of manufacturing for workers and communities in the US and Europe due to the economic theories of laissez faire of the Reagan era. Reagan theory for governments not working with industry that were applied indiscriminately during the Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump presidencies for three decades led to shipping manufacturing overseas with no regard for the risks and dangers. What Greg Ip fails to mention is the uniqueness of India that is united by Vedanta, Hinduism and Buddhism for thousands of years, and which keeps the fabric of society together when it is divided by 13 language groups. These 13 language groups are: Hindi 43% of the population, Bengali 8%, Marathi 7%, Telugu 7%, Tamil 6%, Gujarati 5%, Urdu 4%, Kannada 4%, Odia 3%, Malayalam 3%, Punjabi 3%, Assamese 1%, English 1%. It was the vision of the early leaders Vivekananda, Gokhale, Mohandas Gandhi, Nehru, Sardar Patel, that united a diverse country with many languages and cultural variation. And it is this vision of Vivekananda that is creating the Good Governance under Sab ka Vikas, Sab ka Viswas, Sab ke Saath, Sab ka Prayas of today- development for all, with the confidence of all, with the support of all, the efforts of all. Without a disciplined direction based on hard work India could not make it this far or fulfill the aspirations of its youthful population by 2040. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Progressive caucus in the US House of Representatives led by Pramila Jaypal, a first time Indian American Congresswoman defeats an attempt by Josh Gottheimer of the Problem Solvers caucus to separate much of the president Biden's agenda in health, education and social policy and risk it being defeated by Senators Manchin and Sinema in the US Senate. Without the efforts on child care, education and health, climate change and social services part of the Biden Workers and Families Plan much of the Biden agenda would remain unfinished and Democratic party promises not kept. This also means that Manchin a Senator from West Virginia with a population of 1.8 million and Arizona with a population of 7.2 million, both conservative leaning Democrats could sink the entire agenda of president Biden to support American families and workers for a population of 331 million people. That two states with a population of less than 3% of the American population could sink the entire agenda of president Biden shows how fragile a situation has been created within the Democratic party to support workers and families even during the pandemic following the leadership of Carter, Clinton, and Obama Ms. Jaypal, a three term Congresswoman from Seattle, Washington state, was first elected in 2016 with an endorsement from Bernie Sanders who was the Democratic Party's leading candidate for president till the late stages of the 2020 US presidential primaries. Bernie Sanders says of Jaypal- "I think she is doing an extraordinary job. And I think the Progressive Caucus is doing an extraordinary job." Sanders founded the Progressive caucus after getting elected to the Senate from Vermont 30 years ago. Even though it is hard to imagine the Democratic party being the Democratic party without bold policies in climate change, affordable housing, reducing income disparities,  investing big in childcare, education and healthcare, attempts were being made to sink the entire Democratic party and national agenda going back to Franklin Roosevelt. Jaypal is described in the WSJ as diplomatic and firm, saying "I am so proud of our caucus; I have never seen our caucus so strong. And I am a very good vote counter also." Fifty members of the 100 member Progressive Caucus held firm in support of president Biden's original agenda without which the president would have little to show in keeping promises he made to the American people in the election and little to differentiate him from Mr. Trump who also supported infrastructure spending. Separating the infrastructure bill would have risked sinking Mr. Biden's plan for recovery of America from the pandemic and the devastating policies pursued by American presidents in the last two decades. Policies by previous presidents that have impoverished the country, created huge income disparities, weakened America in the world in trade and technological leadership, and wasted resources in foreign wars. There are no centrists or far left- these are just labels. When Ms Japal said "Let's just remember the Speaker (Nancy Pelosi) is a great champion of this agenda. I think she was trying to do as much as she could to get this done," she could have said it is Mr. Biden's own agenda pushed forward with conviction to help workers and families during the pandemic, and build a solid American recovery, restore American leadership in the world. Pramila Japypal is the first Indian American woman in the US Congress, and one of only two dozen naturalized American citizens in the US Congress. That she could play such a critical role for good in the US Congress shows that with the right convictions, determination, experience, much can be done for the common good in America and the world.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
There are differences between the governors of 10 worst hit states and the president of the U.S. on when to reopen the economy. The seven on the East Coast including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and three on the West Coast including California and Washington, all but one have Democrat governors and want to wait beyond May 1, till it is believed to be safe to reopen.190,000 of the 592,000 infected cases and over 10,000 of 25,000 cases of deaths are from New York alone. This is as though a third of the problem is in one state. The feeling in New York is that it should be the last to reopen, other states can go first in the middle of the country. The position in the U.S. Constitution is for states to maintain public order and safety. This was the basis of the president's position to work with the governors and continues to be the case, though there is pressure from economic advisers to the president to reopen earlier balanced by the opinion of health experts around the president.  Some states are taking action to reopen because the virus has not severely affected these states. President Trump says it is for governors to decide what is best for each state in consultation with the federal government. The U.S. government would step in if a state is taking risky action with the coronavirus. On the issue of whether the president could have acted quickly in February following his decision to stop flights from China and set up quarantines in January, the BBC has this to say. Dr. Fauci, the president's respected health expert was one of many public officials who did not see the magnitude of the crisis evolving with lack of good information from China. BBC North America Editor Jon Sopel cites Dr. Fauci's comments on February 13- that the coronavirus danger is "just miniscule" compared with the "real and present danger" of flu. As it happened the president acted alone in his sense of the danger from the outbreak in China through incoming flights and not relying on others. Here is what the situation of each country on reopening is- India -  has extended the lockdown to May 3. France - has extended the lockdown till May 11. U.S. - has extended the lockdown to May 1. States are taking the responsibility. UK - continues lockdown restrictions till May. The French president Macron had a simple answer to the question " when will we be able to get back to a normal, prior life?" Macron said "Quite frankly, humbly, I have no definitive answer to that." Some nurseries and schools will reopen May 11. Not restaurants, hotels, museums and theaters. By May 11 France will be able to test and quarantine anyone with symptoms and general public masks will be available to all. This is what Dr. Fauci in the U.S. also wants to see before being able to reopen, that testing and tracing, isolating, procedures be efficient and reliable. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The close alliance between the CDU and the CSU in Bavaria appears to be unraveling. The immigrants at German borders have dwindled down a trickle, about 11,000 immigrants today compared to the wave of immigrants entering Germany in 2015. The CSU's prime minister in Bavaria Mr. Soder and the Federal Interior minister from the CSU Mr. Seehofer, blame the conflict between the two parties on the 2015 decision by Merkel on immigration. The German ARD broadcaster shows 62% of Germans favor stronger action on immigration. The pressure on the CSU comes from the gains by the anti-immigration party AfD in recent national elections. The CSU hopes that by shifting its own position on immigration to a standoff with the CDU and Merkel's position it can hold off the Afd in the elections in Bavaria in October 2018. The pressure on Merkel comes from members in the CDU and from the SPD leadership, which have accomodated some of the criticism of open immigration to reduce the immigrants at German borders, yet now see the need to meet any challenges to Merkel's authority. This is why the head of the SPD, Ms. Nahles called Mr. Soder's push for a confrontation on the immigration issue as acting "like a bonzai Trump." The CDU party leaders in Bavaria call for a "axis of the willing" joining leaders of the governments in Austria and Hungary. and the newly elected government in Italy to impose immediate controls on immigration at the borders. Merkel says she is open to different points of view within the CDU-CSU alliance, but action should be based on keeping the European Union together, and be taken after EU meetings in Brussels. Will this result in a fall of the government? Angela Merkel has adapted to the changing situation on immigration leading to the small trickle in new immigrants at German borders today. Even if the AfD anti immigration party joins the CSU the percentage of the vote for the AfD is mainly in the eastern part of Germany, and CSU in Bavaria, with 12.6% voting AfD in 2017 elections, and about 7% voting CSU mainly in Bavaria. This compares with the Left at 8.9%, Greens at 9.2%, and SPD at 20.5% for a combined 38.6% of the vote that favor Merkel's new coalition policies. This combined with the 25% of the vote gained by Merkel's CSU party gives it about 64% of the vote and about 489 seats in the 709 seat German parliament. A test of Merkel's authority is not likely to be sustained. By making this a pro-European position Merkel has shifted the issue from one of immigration which is now minimal and one on which Merkel has adapted her policies to a stand on Germany as leader with France of the European Union. At this particularly sensitive time when Germany and France are negotiating with the U.S. on trade and Britain on Brexit, German public opinion is likely to consider the impact of new elections and more uncertainty as not good for Germany. With the SPD, Left, Greens and CSU having 64% of the vote, and the anti immigrant parties CSU, AFD about 20% concentrated in the less economically developed eastern part and in Bavaria, the chances that Merkel's position would be weakened or her authority challenged is very unlikely.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This review of Acemoglu and Robinson in the MIT News is relevant to the situation faced today. The two professors at MIT and University of Chicago, have provided two books relevant to today's crises, the first "When Nations Fail" in 2012 about the need for inclusive nations, and the second "The Narrow Corridor" about the importance of the role of individual and society in sustaining democracy. Their point in the first book "When Nations Fail" in 2012 coming after the financial crisis caused by banking excesses stated that the nations fail when they are not inclusive.  In practice it is about " the system being rigged" to favor some groups as the Republican party and Mr. Trump say has happened. The banks and lobbyists, pharmaceutical industry and lobbyists, tech industry and lobbyists, leading to a system where individual and society are pushed into a corner. Social theorist and economists fail to look at things in practice such as profit seeking behaviours and unethical behaviour that goes unchecked, which continued after the financial crisis into the election of 2016, with charges of rigged systems.  This week Germany's DW.com oped pages covered New York with the statement that treatment in New York costs $15,000 for coronavirus infection illness yet many New York residents in the worst affected neighborhoods would find a $500 expense difficult to bear. Early closing of schools to control infection rate was resisted by Mayor De Blasio of New York because many parents depended on schools for lunches for their kids. The situation had been allowed to deteriorate to that level.  In their second book the MIT authors are saying that the role of the individual and society are important to check that of the state (for example if it is perceived as being rigged by the influence of lobbying of legislators and politicians as the Republican party and Mr. Trump have maintained). It is only when it is checked and there is some tension is there the possibility of democracy and democratic processes, say the two MIT authors. In the absence of this the states and elites of politicians and business interests supporting the leaders and their common behaviours, become a perpetual state, in effect a one party rule of two parties with similar behaviours and interests in the state. A situation that allowed the outshoring of American manufacturing and European manufacturing to China including critical infrastructure, essential infrastructure over 2 decades even over the protests of Mr. Lighthizer since 2010. As the twin crises evolved in Europe of austerity policies after banking excesses in Europe, and the migration crisis of migrants coming from North Africa and the wars in the Middle East, a similar situation began to develop in Europe as the political elites entrenched in Germany, France, and Spain faced new voices. The tensions that arose were constructive bringing in the role of society and individual that the MIT authors say are so necessary for the narrow corridor of democratic process to function. New parties emerged in France with Macron's La Republique En Marche, Podemos and Ciudadanos in Spain, and in Germany with the SPD and CDU shrinking till the revival of Merkel for her handling of the pandemic. Coming from an intuitive way born from experience in East Germany, Germany's recent president Joachim Gauck, civil rights activist  came up with the same ideas. He is a Lutheran pastor in former East Germany who struggled against the government of the German Democratic Republic (former communist East Germany) for a role for individual and society against the state. We profiled and quoted him in "The Way Forward"  column in Lyrarc.com. Gauck's point was that  having diverse groups in the conversation is important, not excluding others from outside in the conversation is important. Gauck called  debate "the oxygen of democracy,"  that needed to be maintained.  Genuine democratic process is hard to sustain, it happens only when the role of individual and society is given prominence, so that only a narrow corridor exists for democracy, a narrow space in which can be sustained only if the effort is there, the goodwill is there, and the grace of Divine Providence.  It is fragile and it is critical to sustain.   In this sense the sometimes heated debate in the U.S. and Europe, Asia and Latin America about words such as- austerity, community, solidarity, migration, New York Mayor De Blasio's choice between school lunches and infections, about infrastructure, pharmaceutical prices, infrastructure, outshoring, jobs sent overseas, manufacturing locally, made in USA or made in India or made in France, Atmannirbhar Bharat, misallocation of capital starving health and public services, are all relevant and essential for democracy. This includes the discussion to avoid use of the military in protests in American cities in the middle of a pandemic which just crossed the 2 million mark in cases in the U.S., that was taken up by Defense Secretary Esper. In it lies the hope for democracy and many voices. Der Spiegel recent look at the pandemic how it happened in China, closes with the line- you need more than one voice in society. A constant reminder that many voices be heard, counseling patience, but also that wise choices be made with divine providence.           ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bernie Sanders points out in this NYT op-ed the idea that Donald Trump could benefit from the same discontent among working class voters that helped the Leave campaign is a wake up call for the Democratic Party. He calls for global trade and a global economy that works for working class, middle class Americans.  Sanders is pushing for a Democratic Party that embraces the concerns of working class Americans, that understands the impact of factory closings and loss of jobs, of economic uncertainty, of declining incomes and shrinking opportunities.

LyrArc Article Gist
This is an interview with Columbia University economic historian Adam Tooze about the international trade and economic issues brought about by globalization. The rapid emergence of China in manufacturing and overcapacity in steel has led to action on steel tariffs by president Trump. Tooze is typical of opinion that sees action by Trump not as limited action to level the playing field  as proposed by Trade Representative for the U.S., Robert Lighthizer, but as reckless move on trade.  Lyrarc.com shows articles from the WSJ and NYT showing how opinion got to this point in the U.S., on Robert Lighthizer's views that the U.S. was not facing a level playing field, and  on how trade has hurt communities across the U.S. a long distance away from Silicon Valley. President Trump's views reflect a different perspective that says the U.S. has to balance the favorable situation obtained by China and the European Union through moves of its own to protect U.S. interests. Political commentary that the U.S. was starting a trade war is not supported by the facts showing China's response as muted and a willingness by China to negotiate a balanced trading relationship as its trade surplus with the U.S. continues to grow. The trade surplus is so large that the Trump moves do not tell the real story. They are likely to be overshadowed by the increasing value of the U.S. dollar leading to a continued favorable situation for Chinese exports and a larger trade surplus in 2018, regardless of Mr. Trump's action.  Trump's moves are more significant in other areas- limiting China's access to advanced technologies, with the European Union also taking the same action. This is now the new field of competition for the major world economies. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Leaders of North Korea and South Korea, Kim Jong-Un and Moon Jae-in meet on April 27, 2018, at the military demarcation line between North and South Korea.  After handshakes and Mr. Moon stepping onto North Korean soil for a few minutes, Kim Jong-Un visits Seoul for peace talks.  This is a historic moment for the two countries as this is the first time since the Korean War (1950-53) that a North Korean leader has visited the South. No peace treaty was signed after the Korean War. During the period of six decades that followed the Korean War, particularly the period after 1980, the South Korean economy recovered from the war and expanded following the Japanese export model with large conglomerates such as Samsung. The North Korean economy has struggled in the period and North Korea is one of the poorest countries isolated for most of this period like Burma from the rest of the world. The development of nuclear weapons was pursued to prevent any external threats to the government, and decades of sanctions followed with aborted efforts to denuclearize the Korean peninsula. Recent ballistic nuclear tests and the installation of a new anti missile system in South Korea led to tighter sanctions with the cooperation of China. This heightened tensions, followed by the tighter sanctions. Kim Jong Un and the government are looking for ways to win approval in the international community, and find a way out of the tight sanctions. South Korea, Japan and the U.S. government are not sure whether this will lead to any results in denuclearization. The summit with Moon will be followed by a summit between president Trump and Kim Jong Un of North Korea. If a way can be found for the North Korean government and party leaders to transition to acceptance in the international community followed by integration of the North and South's economies over an extended period, there is a possibility that denuclearization could work, because it is to maintain the current government in North Korea that nuclear development was pursued in the North. Ideological conflict is now less of a factor in the conflict between North and South Korea as it was in the early days of the Korean War with the Cold War and Communism's advances in Eastern Europe and Asia the big issue at the time. Today China itself is more of a state run economy under the Communist Party following capitalism with Chinese characteristics than the old Communist model, and ideological conflict is not an issue between the U.S. and Communist run countries. This leaves open the possibility of a solution particularly as at some point just as in the case of Vietnam and the U.S., North Korea could see its future more allied with that of South Korea than with China. That leaves an opening for a timetable of transitional actions plus effective implementation stages, with incentives for the U.S. and Japan to negotiate a settlement. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt points out in the NYT that Hillary Clinton actually won in the popular vote by a substantial margin, by more than 2 million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points. He says that Democrats need to pay more attention to the working class in midwestern states- the job losses, crumbling infrastructure, and the plight of communities such as Detroit, Michigan which suffered through the bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM, and again with the foreclosure crisis, the financial crisis of the City of Detroit. With a similar situation in the neighboring states of Wisconsin and Ohio, in places like Toledo and other parts of communities facing industrial decline. While the Silicon Valley centred region powered the economy in California, and the financial industry and real estate powered New York, older midwestern communities never really recovered from a long decline stretching over 2 decades. The result was the loss of faith in Democrats among union workers and young people, leading to the loss of Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan. For most of its history the Democratic Party was based on its union and working class base including a large number of white voters. Only under Obama because of his unique candidacy was the coalition so dependent on the minorities vote. Before minorities were part of the Democratic coalition, but not in the way under the Obama candidacy. A return to its historic and normal base among whites in unions and working class communities, liberals, minorities, is a way to go back to the historic and natural base of Democratic support. In a sense dependence on tech communities for election funding and the tech booms, globalization, may have distorted Democrats sense of their historic role as champions of the working class and middle class communities throughout the country. There is now an opportunity to restore this lost mission of protecting the interests of the middle and working class who have seen huge drop in net worth as reported by Janet Yellen of the Federal Reserve at the Inequality Conference on October 17, 2014-"62 million households with a net worth of $11,000 for the year 2013." Poorly covered in the media and not made the utmost priority by Democrats (or Republicans). In the words of Janet Yellen, this was in the past several decades "the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality since the Great Depression." She added the shocking words "by some estimates, income and wealth inequality near their highest levels in the past hundred years, and probably much higher than much of American history before then." Even discussion in the media goes back to the Obama coalition and treats it as a way forward for Democrats, when history shows it was different and the situation described by Yellen calls for a serious response. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
"To Invest (at home), To Align (with allies), To Compete (with the world)" sums up the approach of president Biden with China. It also sums up the approach at home and overseas. Biden senior adviser, Jake Sullivan at Council of Foreign Relations sets out the framework and path for managing US-China relations into the future for many decades. Here at the Council of Foreign Relations he shows how- through careful study of the relationship's history, the changes in the relationship, and where it is today in 2024. Having participated in previous administrations Jake understood how it has evolved, where mistakes were made by both China and the US, where misperceptions took hold and need for clarification, for action. The old Strategic Dialogue followed by Paulsen under Bush 2000-2008 allowed the relationship to be guided by business interests, -without any clear strategy or idea where it was going except maximizing interests of business on both sides- was continued by Kerry under Obama 2008-2016. Sullivan, Blinken and Biden have built a Strategic Economic Cooperation Framework that has clear goals on the American side and goals on the Chinese side, and work between the two presidents and their cabinet ministers. Trump 2016-2020 rejected the earlier Strategic Dialogue but was not able to set up a sound framework that would guide future relations for decades. Sullivan helped set up a new framework around three principles- To Invest, To Align, and To Compete.   Here he describes how the plan to invest trillions in infrastructure in the US was part of this plan's principle To Invest. On Align it was to derisk not decouple by reducing the excessive concentration of supply chains in China, that was revealed as a problem in the pandemic years. Building up manufacturing at home and in India, Vietnam and Japan. Align also was to have allies Japan, South Korea and India to be aligned with the US policy. It also meant that all three countries would follow the same framework for their economies To Invest, To Align, To Compete.  By combining the strengths of the 2 largest economic centers Seoul/Tokyo with New Delhi/Sydney in Indo-Pacific the leveraging effect of US strength could be felt to support its position. And third to compete on level field so that America retained control of its technologies and implementing exports controls. And sharing this in  open communication with China that the US was protecting its technology and interests the way China has done in the past for its interests. The benefit of open communication even where there are differences had the advantage of not turning this into open rhetoric that damaged relations as had happened under previous administrations. Wang Yi on China's side having seen and approached it with careful study and reflection had similar goals to stabilize and put the relationship on a sound footing. Sullivan met extensively with Wang Yi in meetings in several locations around the world. Ministers Yellen, Raimondo, Blinken, Kerry, were sent to China for extensive discussions as part of this strategy in 2023 leading to remarkable change in the mood and confidence in US- China relations after tumult in 2016-2020 and uncertainty in previous administrations. Much credit goes to president Biden and Jake Sullivan, Anthony Blinken, and also to Wang Yi and Jinping in no way diminishing their own initiative, so that for the first time in decades the US China relationship is now on a stable footing. Both countries faced common challenges around counter narcotics, around climate change, and other issues. These are being addressed. Competition is managed carefully and no rhetoric is taking place so that the largest two economies and about 1.7 billion in US and China and 2 billion people who are allies in India/Indonesia/Vietnam/ Korea/Japan living on the same planet earth can have economic and other cooperation  with different cultures, economic structures and systems of government. The result of such a framework also gives the basis for cooperation with America's allies to invest in Africa and Latin America and in the people of these two continents as another level of alignment and investment for a safer better world. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Fareed Zakaria points out that the primary elections of the Republican and Democratic parties can pose a danger to democracy because of demagogic politicians who can appeal to popular passions to bring a fringe group or individual to the presidency. Primaries for both parties became important after 1968. Eisenhower and Lincoln won the nomination after the person nominated on the first ballot failed to win the necessary votes. Another serious problem is that the turnout in the primaries is low, so low that a 15% turnout is considered high turnout. The media attention is so great that it creates the impression that a real election has taken place when in reality about 85% of the people have not voted- as the Economist magazine points out a representative turnout would change the outcome significantly so it is not clear how much this promotes democratic process.

LyrArc Article Gist
During the presidential debates Donald Trump was asked about his proposal for a 45% tariff on imports from China to the U.S.. Trump's response was "if they don't behave." he would use this as a negotiating tactic against China. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas responded by reminding viewers of the high tariffs under Smoot-Hawley legislation that were one of the factors that created the Great Depression in the 1930's. Economist and former Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke is a student of the Great Depression, and says "it was highly counterproductive, it lengthened and deepened the Great Depression." Economist Peter Petri of Brandeis University in his study cited in this article, says that the tit for tat that starts with such a move could eventually cost the U.S. 1 million jobs. It might fix one problem the one of imbalanced trade with China his figures show, and create another huge problem the loss of markets for U.S. goods all over the world. Overall a 45% tariff would reduce U.S. merchandise imports by $383 billion and reduce U.S. merchandise exports by $658 billion, says Petri. Gordon Hanson, economist at the University of California, San Diego, who has actually shown how trade has affected different counties in the U.S., leaving some dependent on government assistance. Hanson sees this tariff as counterproductive, it makes the U.S. more self-sufficient but hurts U.S. exporters, would significantly hurt the tech boom, and reduce America's standard of living. The problem is that everybody can get into this in a tit for tat. France did this even before the Smoot Harley Act of 1938 was passed in 1930 with 60% increase in tariff on individual items, by higher tariff legislation in 1928. Close allies Canada followed quickly after Smoot Hawley increasing its tariffs, so did Great Britain. Unemployment went up significantly after 1931, worsened by weak banks and lack of support from the Federal Reserve. Trade with Mexico would come to a halt Petri shows, and the result would be more Mexicans trying to cross the border turning a relatively non existent problem of immigration in 2015 -with Mexicans preferring to remain home and net immigration dropping significantly following the 2008 financial crisis and the strict Obama policy of deporting illegal immigrants- into a real one. Trump says its just a threat, but it is likely to lead to a tit for tat response by China, then by U.S. allies, other trading partners. Consider that president Herbert Hoover opposed the Smoot Hawley bill for raising tariffs on industrial goods, and only proposed adifferent legislation reducing tariffs on industrial goods and increasing the tariffs on agricultural goods to give relief to American farmers. Politics intervened as Smoot from Utah and Hawley from Oregon, from mountain and agricultural states with a lack of understanding of how the international trading system works but as heads of two influential commmittes, the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, let politics overrride and pushed their legislation through Congress. In 1932 Smoot and Hawley were defeated for reelection, but the damage had been done, and promises of better conditions for workers and farmers never kept. A significant reason for the U.S. standard of living is that it is a leader in the global trading system. Even in 1945 and the years following the end of the war tariffs were higher in Britain and other countries. In return for this leadership the U.S. enjoys the advantages of the dollar being the main global currency, and the advantages of a world leading technological sector that has large global markets. Hanson and Autor have pointed out how imbalanced trade has hurt some counties in the U.S. This is a very real problem for workers in the manufacturing sector, as shown by elections in the midwestern states, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and other parts of the country. The problem is compounded by the tech sector looking out for itself, the financial sector looking out for itself, and forgetting that we are all in the same boat. And that includes the Chinese who are in the same boat. China is doing a major shift in policy towards a consumer driven economy, and this needs to be accelerated for the benefit of ordinary Chinese. This makes the policy of a 45% tariff by the U.S. doubly unproductive because it hopes to add urgency to the problem of the U.S. trade deficit and manufacturing workers, but takes an approach that risks ending up damaging the global trading system by setting in motion a process that no one controls or can foresee the destination....

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ looks at Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan that marks a major shift for the U.S. economy.  Households would see their costs go down by $11 trillion, boosting their ability to spend on other goods and services. Because income and wealth was highly skewed in the past three decades in one direction, the spending capacity of lower and middle income households was pushed down. This and other similar plans would help restore a higher level of spending and with it an essential element of inflation of 2-3% to the U.S. economy which was missing in the last decade. This sets the tone for the kind of broad based recovery that happened after 1950 that strengthened America's middle class and made it the core of the economy, the core of the post World War II recovery in America and Europe. The plan would be paid for by higher taxes on corporations, tax rate of 21% for corporations going back up to 35%, and reverse depreciation schedules in the 2017 Republican tax law. The argument that this would reduce business investment does not hold that much says the WSJ because amid new trade tensions business investment has declined over the last 2 quarters, and has been sluggish overall. The other source for the estimated $13 to $20 trillion cost of Medicare for All plan of Elizabeth Warren is a 6% annual wealth tax on billionaires, in an attempt to have all pay their fair share and reduce wide disparities in wealth. Mark Zandl, chief economist of Moody's Analytics, says his sense is at the end of the day from a macroeconomic view- because $11 trillion in the hands of 80% of households who could boost spending after lagging behind in the last decade- the negative effect on business investment will be cancelled out by the higher consumer spending. The overall effect and today's context is infused in this analysis. Private insurance, premiums for insurance, and out of pocket cost that the public pays would disappear in this new system where all health payments pass through the government. Health insurance premiums paid by employers would convert into a new employer Medicare contribution to the government starting at an amount employers pay now and adjusting gradually toward national averages over time. Smallest businesses are exempted. Mr. Zandl says the most important aspect of this now is that Mrs Warren has shown that her plan's revenue sources match the cost so that the plan would not lead to deficits increasing and pushing interest rates higher, leading to negative effects on the economy. Republicans under Mr. Trump have paid little attention to expanded deficits caused by their tax law, and economists across the landscape have also shown less concern. Still attacks are made if the plans don't add up. For this reason a sound assessment in today's context of depressed consumers and an overall impact becomes essential. The WSJ quotes from a pre- assessment of Warren's plan by Simon Johnson, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who co-wrote it with Mr. Zandl and Betsey Stevenson of the University of Michigan. What they point out is that putting cash in the pockets of the lower and middle class for spending makes a lot of sense today, and taking money out of the pockets at the way upper wealthy end,  does not contract the economy at all. Other effects they say are constructive by letting all workers get health coverage from the government instead of employers, this makes it easier to change jobs increasing labor mobility and productivity. A worker getting a better job and better utilization of skills could then shift without looking at the employer health care plan. Warren says there would be a five year transition so that workers in health care insurance industry can work in other insurance fields and in Medicare, no one would be left behind. The important thing being to build America's middle class again. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the crude rhetoric at Donald Trump rallies, and use of coarse language, according to the NYT. Working class and older Americans show their anger at a system that appears to have left them behind with slogans, stickers, T-Shirts. The idea of the wall figures in much of this and shows that the wall has become not jut about Mexico but a metaphor that captures this anger, that reflects this anger. Another aspect of the 2016 campaign is that those most vulnerable and most in need of help have not sought the comfort of knowing about programs to improve middle class and working class wages, incomes, to build infrastructure, create jobs, stop companies from shifting jobs overseas, plans for improving accesss to health care and education, to ask for specifics and delivery. This is the supreme irony of the 2016 election campaign that not enough attention is going to what will be done for the middle and working class, and what specifics will be delivered, in what time frame- which is essential for restoring the condition of the American middle and working class to where it was in the 2 decades after the Second World War. ...