World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

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

All Topics Articles

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

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


FRANCE 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This is a very informative interview with Joe Biden. So far Biden has given few interviews where he talks freely at length about how he plans to run his administration and what is most important to his heart. The title is very misleading in this respect. Unlike the inexperience of Obama with his "we won" we must be doing something right, Biden with his years of experience comes closer to Lyndon Johnson or Truman and the same drive to get things done. He says in this interview "there is no elation." He just wants to get somethings done as quickly as he can and he knows Congress as well as Lyndon Johnson did when he tried to get his vision of "the Great Society." It is almost as if the Biden sequel to the inexperience of Obama, is like the Johnson sequel to the inexperience of Kennedy.   To understand Biden is to know what hurts him most. Biden feels the pain that every rural county in America did not vote for him. He knows something is deeply wrong that this should happen as it has never happened before. It may be time to define diversity differently - people of diverse backgrounds not just ethnic or race but also whether with rural or urban backgrounds as they are today totally different. He also feels the pain that seventy two million Americans voted for Trump. He will judge his success or failure in winning over about half of them to bring this down from 47-48% to 25%. These issues will define and shape the Biden presidency. Can he deliver to the rural counties, health care, education, broad band connectivity, everything that has disrupted life in rural America from the way it was in the Truman and Eisenhower administrations when it comes to the social fabric. The China issue simply fits into this. European societies are feeling the pain of the fragmentation in their social fabric with starkly different opportunities for life in rural vs urban. Respect for fellow Americans comes before respect for China- or Japan, or India, or Europe. Biden understands what three decades of shift of manufacturing jobs to China and other countries have done to American communities, to small towns and the rural areas surrounding them in America. For this reason Biden does not plan to change the Agreement China made with the Trump administration for 25% tariffs on a portion of imports from China and China's written agreement to buy $200 billion of American products. For this reason his response to China's challenge emerging from trade policy set in motion by the Clinton administration, and allowed to continue by the Bush and Obama administrations with the addition of foreign wars that dissipated the country's finances urgently needed for infrastructure building and investments in education and advancing science and technology, is to reverse all the negative trends. Biden plans to make the investment in America that Mr. Trump started but to do this more effectively, he says.   ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Economist points to the improved situation for Mexico after the scare from Trump's plans to build the wall and deport large numbers of immigrants. The peso dropped by 15% between mid November 2016 and January 2017, but has since recovered, and non-oil exports were up 5.5% in February 2017 over prior year with the manufacturing growth in the U.S.  Growth forecasts are now up from about 1% GDP growth previously to 2% for 2017, close to the 2.3% in 2016. Much of the change in mood in Mexico is a result of the failure of the early travel bans being blocked in the courts, the failure to get health care legislation through Congress, and the effort by the trade advisers and economic advisers around Trump to move Trump's positions more to the centre and closer to traditional Republican party positions. Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary, says " a sensible agreement" can be reached with Mexico. Peter Navarro, trade adviser, talks about making "a mutually beneficial regional powerhouse." Robert Lighthizer, a veteran from the Reagan days, is likely to be made the new U.S. Trade representative. Still as the Economist points out the "20% border adjustment tax" continues to be supported by Paul Ryan in Congress to pay for tax cuts. But certainly the mood has lifted in Mexico in the first 100 days. This is true for economic policy in relation to China and Germany, and the close circle of Ross, National Economic Council head Gary Cohn, and Secretary of State Tillerson is moving Trump to the centre in policy statements to get things done. Mexico is faced with internal challenges of reestablishing the rule of law, improving infrastructure, reducing red tape and corruption, addressing problems in the education system, to promote economic growth. These challenges may prove to be as large as the external challenges were once thought to be. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The TPP as negotiated by Nov. 2015 gives biologics drugs 8 years of protection. Senator Hatch of Utah and the pharmaceutical industry seek 12 years of protection to recoup costly investments in these drugs. Japan says the agreement would be difficult to renegotiate. There is opposition to extending it beyond 8 years in many TPP countries.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany is trying not to choose sides in the trade and security disputes between China and the U.S. Yet it owes a lot to the U.S. from the days of the Marshall Plan and U.S. taking on the role of defending Germany after the Berlin Wall. China was then a partner with the Soviet Union in the Cold War.  Today China is Germany's top market for its car industry. Yet the U.S. export market is much larger than China at $119 billion with China's at $96 billion. In Germany 28% of jobs are linked to exports, and in manufacturing this goes up to 56%, according to Germany Ministry of Economic Affairs. Germany supplied much of the factory  equipment from its engineering companies and the infrastructure that powered up the China transformation. A transformation now underway in India.  There are signs of a shift as engineering companies in Germany grew faster in the U.S. than China, increasing by 6-10% a year. India remains a key growth market for Germany over the next 10-15 years as growth in China slows and India accelerates with its younger demographics and investment in infrastructure. Much of the infrastructure in China is built and it is approaching the saturation Japan reached in the 1990's with additional investments adding little in the way of productivity. Longer term Germany has more potential for growth in countries in South and South East Asia  that will need to make huge investments in infrastructure and technology for manufacturing to meet the aspirations of the people there. Other issues related to freedom going back to the Berlin Wall and the rebuilding of Germany after World War II will emerge. German companies are running out of patience says this report in the WSJ with the bureaucratic obstacles, forced technology transfers, subsidies by state model to extinguish competition, and protectionist approach to home markets, even as state funded companies in China put other companies in Europe, Asia and the U.S. at a disadvantage. Germany will need to transition to a shift in its global relations, a process that is only now taking place. Just as with austerity policies in which it has now made the shift from going with the northern European countries (Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Finland) to the Southern European (France, Italy, Spain) in favor of common solidarity even at the short term cost of common debt, Germany now is facing the shift for solidarity with the U.S. for its support of Germany from the period of the Berlin Wall in the 1950's, for the U.S. and European solidarity in the face of the post-coronavirus world. The U.S. showing its generosity and openness to Germany and war torn Europe even as it took on the added responsibilities for creating a new alliance with Europe.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Key points in Putin annexation speech are shown in the Washington Post. Putin presented an anti-western view that went over European history of colonialism in Africa and Asia. It presented a Russian nationalist view oof European powers and the US as trying to diminish Russia throughout history, that refers more to the British than for the country that emerged from British colonies in America with the idea that "all men are created equal." This was similar to a speech made at the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine that stated some of the same points. Putin referred also to the use of total bombing on Dresden, Hamburg and Cologne, by the US and Britain, and the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the US in 1945, the US action in the Vietnam war. Putin's view- "I emphasize that one of the reasons for the centuries old Russophobia, the undisguised malice of these western elites toward Russia is precisely that we did not allow ourselves to be robbed during the period of colonial conquests. We forced the Europeans to trade for mutual benefit." About this version of history of European colonial powers - it is not entirely true, because as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms points out in his  book-  Europe- the Struggle for Supremacy  from 1453 to the Present,  Russia is itself throughout this period one of these European powers. Russia was also one of the powers present in China before the Boxer Rebellion in 1900, and in 1901 when the concessions were drawn from China in that period. Of the military force of 19,000 that entered Beijing in 1900 and crushed the Boxer rebellion of local Chinese calling for ouster of foreigners from China, Britannica.com shows that most of the them came from Russian and Japan, with lesser numbers from Britain, France, the US and Austria Hungary.  After suppressing the Boxers the foreign powers including Russia, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and also the US asked for reparations and concessions on Chinese ports. Tsingtao went to Germany, The British and Russians getting concessions in Tianjin. Only America stated under president Woodrow Wilson that the reparations were excessive. Wilson converted American reparations into funding for Beijing's first modern university Tsinghua University, where  many of China's leaders were educated. During the period 1901 to 1945 the US opposed British colonialism in India and China. The US opposition with its Pacific fleet was strong enough to prevent further division of China among the colonial powers. In the 1940's the US under Franklin Roosevelt and his representative in China General Jospeh Stilwell carried out the campaign against the Japanese invasion of China so that the national integrity of China could be preserved. Stilwell called for reforms of the corrupt Chiang Kai Shek Koumintang government which rejected Stilwell's advice. Leading to its gradual collapse to the Communists under Mao-tse-tung, as the popular support shifted. It is now known what exchanges took place between Franklin Roosevelt and British governments including Churchill and Clement Attlee, and it can be said that the US under FDR was always putting pressure on the British Empire to free India from colonial rule. In 1942 there is the letter from Gandhi at Wardha to Roosevelt asking for help just before the Quit India movement, and Roosevelt's response is clear in the way he told Churchill by 1943 that America would never go along with Britain's unfair and impoverishing rule of India after winning the war. Roosevelt did not need Churchill's "growling" response, he had already put the British as a junior and much diminished partner. American help was crucial in convincing the British to quit India, which is also why it happened so quickly after 1945.  During the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe after defeating Germany in 1945, much of Eastern Europe came under Soviet and Russian domination. Poland was partitioned between Germany then called  Prussia, Austria and Russia, as colonial powers in 1772, followed by further partitions. The roots of the Ukraine crisis in some ways involve Poland and Polish history, as Lviv is only 70 kilometres from Poland. As the view on the Ukrainian side reflects this colonial history of Russia and of Germany in western parts of Ukraine. America under Abraham Lincoln fought a great war of Emancipation to live up to the document of the Declaration of Independence of 1776 that "all men are created equal." The United States of America did not look to colonial possessions for its wealth because of the abundant land in a new continent and the early developments of the Industrial Revolution. Of rail, steamship, of mechanized agriculture and industrial production, in the period after 1850 that made America unrivaled in its industrial strength right upto the 1950's, and  which continues to the present day.  The industrial development of of Japan and South Korea, then of China, and now in India would not be possible without the  hand extended out by America to nations in Asia,  a benevolent hand in creating a tide that lifts all boats. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Don't let the current holiday season retail sales fool you as they have held up reasonably well. The impact of the mortgage and housing crisis will be felt in a delayed manner. It won't be till 2008 that the impact will really be felt. And the impact is expected to be lasting and deep, could take the rest of 2008, 2009 and into 2010 for this protracted tightening of credit. About $300-400 billion contraction in credit is expected when banks tighten their credit lending because of losses they are taking in the mortgage crisis. This will happen in an environment of falling house prices and consumers will not have access to the $340 billion in cash from home and mortgage equity financing that they took out in 2006, estimate of the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Auto, retail, apparel, and luxury items would be hit the most. On the jobs side not all the jobs will be lost in the USA. The USA imports about $740 billion in consumer goods and autos each year, which is one third of consumer spending excluding food and energy. The lower consumption in auto and apparel would affect exporters in Japan and China and South Korea. But Chinese exports have reached a point that they are causing trade tensions and a call for strengthening the yuan. An increase in American exports and lower imports could help bring down America's trade deficit. This could give China an opportunity to build its domestic market and markets in Asia and Europe so that it is not so dependent on the US market. For the US where the savings rate is near zero this is an opportunity for consumers to build their savings and reduce debt. Europe and India and the Middle East are expected to continue growth and China may see slower but continued growth in 2008 and 2009. In the US industries like aircraft and infrastructure promoting companies that sell to countries like Russia, India Brazil, the Middle East, and China will continue to grow. And because rates are still low large nonfinancial companies still have access to funds for expansion and capital investment. In a global economy the US consumer may be one part of a much larger picture. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The trade deficit with China has led to loss of 3.8 million jobs, 75% of them or 2.9 million in manufacturing. Go back to 1990 and Beijing was a city of bicycles not cars. If Beijing shifted to a open economy and simply imported products from the US and Europe as it had done since 1700 it would have remained a backward agricultural economy. It took 20 years of focused effort after 2000 for China with US technological assistance to excel in manufacturing, as the US had done after 1920. Can or cannot the US excel in Manufacturing with its own focused effort and restore jobs and decent wages to the American people, that is the question. That a $1 trillion deficit that has already destroyed the US manufacturing and its capacity to defend itself by rapidly building up the US Navy, is that not an emergency, then what is, is also the question, and the role, the duty, of the president of the US in such a situation. The federal appeals court has allowed the DJT Tariffs to remain in place till it goes to the US Supreme Court. Today May 30 the WSJ in a front page article shown here says the one California shipyard could assemble a supply ship in 5 days in 1942. China's independence in the fight against Imperial Japan and the Kwantung Army's adventures, and the independence of Europe in the 1940's depended on this vital US capacity. Is this forgotten? FDR acted step by step by 1938 to restore the US lost capacity at that time, what is the role of the president today? ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NATO's new guiding document and security concept now includes China for the first time as a shared security challenge. In the past there were concerns about China yet Germany and France continued economic engagement with China as before. The clearly worded statement by Xi Jinping and Putin expressing strong disapproval of a world in which the US and the EU play a prominent leadership role, made just before Russia launched its attack on Ukraine, has changed the sentiment in Europe. It is now becoming clear to Germany that the world has changed.Under Merkel Germany expanded trade ties with Russia on energy and with China as a major trading partner. The first steps are now being taken to decouple the trading relationship with China and restructure Germany's trade away from China towards other parts of the world including India, Vietnam and other Asian countries. Mr Scholz pointed to this needed shift during the Trade Fair in Hannover. As part of this shift NATO now sees cooperation with Indo-Pacific partners Australia, Japan, and South Korea and India essential for meeting the challenge of Russia today and of China over the long term. The NATO document says about China that "its stated ambitions and coercive policies, challenge our interests, security and values." Here are some of the ways the world has changed today. There are new administrations and newly elected leaders in the US, Japan, South Korea, and Germany. The new administrations are led by leaders in Japan and South Korea that are keen on working hand in hand with the US to meet the challenge from China. In the US president Biden seems determined to build up America's strength to meet any challenges China can pose. In Germany the administration is run by the SPD socialists with the Greens and the Free Democrats coalition. The Greens led by Robert Habeck and Annalena Baerbock have taken a strong position to face up to Russia's invasion in Ukraine, and Mr. Scholz is following step by step and has distanced himself from old SPD and CDU policies of  Angela Merkel of close commercial ties with Russia and China.  Indian prime minster Modi was a close partner at the G7 conference in Munich, Germany. The leaders of Japan and South Korea attended the NATO summit in Madrid and met with president Biden as shown here.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Geithner in written testimony to the Senate Finance Committee, stated that "President Obama - backed by the conclusions of a broad range of economists- believes that China is manipulating its currency." What is noteworthy is that experts are generally in agreement that something should be done about this in cooperative fashion, from Obama's economic team, Obama's own views on this, The National Association of Maufacturers, Labor and so on. The trade deficit with China has continued at high levels even with the current economic slowdown, so this issue remains as one that the Bush administration never really addressed. Simon Johnson, a MIT Professor, and former IMF Chief economist says that even the IMF has not addressed it, and that the Obama administration needs to call China to account. He says this could lead to a spat with China, and if the US does not back down to a row. The concern has been that China would not buy up Treasury debt the way it has in the past, at the same time the question is whether there is some point where the deficit is so large and the US so dependent on foreign buyers of Treasury debt, that it needs to be addressed on a number of levels. Including addressing currency and fair trade issues, a more rational balanced consumption of everything from oil to goods from lowcost Asian countries, to reduce the toll on the overextended American consumer and on the extent of US borrowing needed. From China's perspective there may also be the same concern about export led growth, which may come to be seen as undependable anyway, because with or without some currency advantage the overextended US consumer is not buying anyway, holding off on purchases of everying from cars to flatscreen televisions. With growth at 6.8% in 4th quarter 2008, according to the Chinese Government Statistics Bureau, and expected to drop to 5% in 2009, the export growth model is no longer the panacea for China's unemployed as it once was at 12-13% growth rates in 2006-2007. In fact it may now look to be a better wiser policy if China had increased the value of its currency even more than its slow gradual approach to slow the growth rate from 12-13% to a more sustainable 9-10%, and lower American imports and lower the American trade deficit. Part of the problem in China was the difficulty of applying any sort of brakes once the local governments were set free to expand as much as they could, and prevented any controls from being effective. Steel production continued to grow even after there was evidence of large overcapacity, and government direction failed. Buy some time to shift to domestic consumption based recovery, is what the Chinese policy may be now. Indications of this are evident with its grappling at the issues it has not tackled like giving ownership of land to farmers in rural areas, and to building a healthcare system for the country, both of which are part of a host of issues to shift to domestic consumption based recovery. So unlike the way the media and some experts portray it its not a tough line that the US is taking against Chinese unwillingness. China may want to cooperate.That may be true if China was missing out on 10-13% growth rates, but these were unsustainable anyway and bad policy. At growth rates below 5% as projected by analysts China may want to jettison the export model of growth and build an alternative one. In that case as China shifts to domestic consumption, currency adjustments may be seen quite differently than they were in the past....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The South China Morning Post provides this view of China on the day of the 70th anniversary of the Communist Party of China, on the long road from the founding of the government in 1949 under Mao, the Cultural Revolution, and the shift to a state sponsored market economy under premier Deng in the 1980's.  From being at early stages of industrialization to a fully developed modern and industrialized country over three decades.  The challenges China faces are whether its growth will slow with a high debt situation, trade war with the U.S., aging population and the housing bubble that has created problems in Hong Kong. This could lead to a situation where its per capita income stays in the middle range at around $12,000 per capita, referred to as a middle income economy by the World Bank. Some experts believe that the factors that propelled China since 1990- a youthful labor force, globalization reducing tariffs and benefitting from entry into WTO, easy access to western technology, land sales for local governments to finance industrial development, rapid urbanization, and infrastructure investment in electricity rail and highways, are now reaching their limits with smaller incremental steps and growth in the future. The big gains made in the last three decades could be limited by other factors also such as the high debt economy, build up of industrial overcapacity, limited domestic consumption to take the place of exports facing high tariffs. Countries normally face some slowdown in such situation after a period of rapid growth, Japan and South Korea being recent examples. During the transition period to a new kind of economy from the manufacturing export push Asian model many unseen social and other problems emerge. The situation in Hong Kong shows how the housing bubble can also lead to problems that require resources and attention.  There are other social problems that continue to remain hidden. It does not take long for hidden problems to emerge as the situation in Brazil for lack of sanitation and epidemic prevention shows. In China the cost of too rapid development has led to pollution of rivers and land that will need to be cleaned up. The effect of contamination of food supply is an ever present risk with the contamination of land and water. Little attention is paid to prevalence of smoking and its damaging effects on health. The one child policy also brings with it cultural issues of how a whole new generation of children without siblings. Many other social problems that affect the quality of life become evident as growth slows and addressing these problems can actually benefit the country and its people. ...
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Like Japan China is looking to wean its exporters away from dependence in the export markets- one of the steps agreed on at G-2- in Pittsburgh- and increase spending by Chinese consumers to buy more of the same products at home. Bicycle manufacturer Tandem has lost 40% of the American sales, now it is looking to the Chinese market as incomes are rising in China. As Tandem's general manager puts it in the US the shift is now to buying cheap things. Chinese exports after rising 20% each year for years, recorded a drop in August 2009 of 23% down over August 2008. In China urban household spending was up 9.2%. THe savings by American households jumped to an annualized $566 billion in the second quarter of 2009, quadruple the rate at the start of 2008. Batson gives this account from Shunde in Chinawhere Tandem has it head offices. He talks with managers at Tandem and sees the struggle within the company to some up with anew mindset, and organization, to sell bicycles in the domestic market where other bicycle manufaturers like Giant Manufacturing Company of Taiwan already have a large share in the high end market. Mr Tseng had to convince his fellow managers and the board that it was a good idea, as the domestic market is tough to pentetrate, kickoffs are common, and competition is intense. Tseng says Tandem will approach first the children's market where competitors haven't focussed, and treat as atoy for kids. Tandem will bring higher quality better built bikes into this market. And this is similiar to what it sells to American kids with lots of colors and funny names. Tandem managers aren't sure Chinese distributors or retailers will pay enough attention to their bicycles so they decided to open astore in Shunde and start small and scale up. Tseng says that Tandem will have to pay its tution first and learn about the market. This means it will still continue selling to America and Europe. Chinea's government is now encouraging these efforts to target the domestic market with tax breaks and coupons. But as China and Japn also become more inward looking economies and trade inside Asia increases, the domestic demand is not enough to make up for the loss in the American and European markets. The US and Europe each put in $9.5 trillion into the global economy, even at their current recession diminished pace, compared to the $1.5 trillion spent by Chinese households. Per capita incomes tell the story. In the US $35,486 and in China $2,270. T...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Pew Research Center Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tariffs policy is part of a renegotiation the US is conducting with China similar to that started with Japan by Lighthizer in the Reagan era as Deputy Trade Representative. It does not in any way have anything to do with the tariffs of Herbert Hoover in 1930 that gave tariffs a bad meaning. This is because tariffs were reduced since Harry Truman's efforts in 1945 by 2017 to 1.47% on average on total imported goods into the US and world trade makes up 63% of world GDP, so large is world trade today. What are Lighthizer- DJT tariffs trying to accomplish? As with Japan in the 1960-1970's it is intended to reverse the trends for China in 2000-2017 that allowed it to game the world trading system to gain an unfair advantage by dumping specific products into the US destroying American manufacturing and communities dependent on it. The US tariffs on Chinese goods proposed in 2024 by former USTR Robert Lighthizer come at a time when US tariffs are in 2023 only about 2.2% of all imported goods, $33 billion on 2333 billion of imported goods. In 2023 the total import duties or tariffs as a percentage of US total imported goods is about 2%, with total imported goods into the US from European Union 3%. and with total imported goods into the US from China about 19% matching China's about 19% on American imports into China. By the time the first tariffs were taken up by the DJT administration in 2017 the total tariffs the US had imposed on imported goods were down to an all time low of 1.47% of imported goods value, $33 billion out of $2333 billion in total imported goods. Compared to the 29-40% under Hoover Act of 1930 raised to 60%.  Today world trade makes up 62% of world GDP, in 1930 it made up 9% of World GDP.  In 2023 the total import duties or tariffs as a percentage of US total imported goods is about 2%, with total imported goods into the US from European Union 3%. and with total imported goods into the US from China about 19% matching China's about 19% on American imports into China.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US share of Japanese exporting companies went down from 20% to 16% in the 2007-2010 period, while the exports from Japan to China, India, and Brazil have gone up by 25% in the same period. Korean companies like Hyundai and Samsung plunged early into the Indian market. LG and Samsung have a significant share in the electronics and consumer appliance markets in India. By comparison Sony's share is about 5% according to Euromonitor research. Now Japanese compaies are putting a new focus on India. In food products Nissin is expanding aggressively by doubling its noodle making capacity, and making its Ramen brand available in smaller packages costing 10 cents each. The idea is to customize the effort to the unique nature of the Indian market.

Support LyrArc

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

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


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