LyrArc Article Gist
The rise of Japan was a major challenge for president Reagan in the 1980's in the way president Trump is confronting the rise of China. The Reagan administration obtained the concessions it needed from Japan. The negotiator for the U.S. side during the Reagan years - Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer is using his experience in winning concessions from Japan in his role as top trade negotiator with China.  As the WSJ points out Japan ceased to be a threat to the U.S. faster than anyone thought possible. 

But there is one problem even if this happens the warning is that the imbalances with Japan simply transferred over time to China. The warning is for America's tendency to spend money it does not have, and for how long.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Vanderhei of Politico leaves to form a rival political coverage site called Axios, which has funding from Comcast Universal. The result of a rift between Mr Albritton, the owner, and the CEO, Mr. Vanderhei, is that many executives are now leaving Politico, putting it into a crisis. 

LyrArc Article Gist
 Donald trumps economic plan would worsen the country's economy through extravagant borrowing and lower economic growth in the long run. Because it lowers taxes by 15 percent without any paired cuts Trump's plan would worsen the deficit, so that large debt would hurt the economy in the long run. Clinton's plan would increase taxes by 4  percent largely on high incomes so as not to hurt consumer spending, with paired spending to help lower income households. Because Trump's tax cuts benefits go disproportionately to higher incomes the benefits in terms of consumer spending are slight or insignificant. In the current state of weak income gains of the last ten years it would take some time for the middle and working class to recover. Clinton's plan carefully nudges that recovery forward without aggravating the debt, so that as incomes and net worth recovers across broad parts of the population, the U.S. is poised to go forward with strong growth as in the postwar years. Trump's plan frontloads tax benefits to higher incomes at the expense of worsening debt and enlarging future debt. In the process it worsens income disparities already aggravated by the 2008 financial crisis. Reducing the chances of a broad based recovery for all parts of the population, necessary for a strong recovery.                       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's effort to tie Vietnam and Malaysia to its economic system- will it work? China has trade worth $982 billion with 10 neighbors in South East Asia compared to trade of $786 billion with EU and $688 billion with US.

Some of that $982 billion is product shipped to Vietnam by China, assembled there and shipped to the US. This is why DJT/USTR put 46% tariff on Vietnam, now reduced to 10% for 90 days till negotiations. President Xi of China visited Hanoi, Vietnam, to sign 45 bilateral cooperation agreements to bind Vietnam closer to China's state run capitalist system. At the same time premier Lam of Vietnam is seeking negotiations with US and has talked to president Trump. What is going on? Vietnam hope to have ties to both US and China. Will it work?

 

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. and China sign Phase 1 of the trade agreement in a sign of reduction of trade tensions between the two countries. Difficult issues of state subsidies under China's state enterprise model of development, and technological competition were put off for the future. China made the deal possible by agreeing to double its purchases of agricultural products, and offering to purchase about $200 billion in American goods and services over the next two years. This gives relief to farmers, a key part of Mr.Trump's support base. This also helps achieve a key Trump and U.S. goal of cutting the U.S. trade deficit with China quickly, just as happened decades ago with Japan.  See the related article and link on how for the first time in decades China's trade surplus with the U.S. is now set on a path for permanent decline. It dropped significantly in 2019 by 12.5% even though China's imports from the U.S. dropped by 21%, based on Chinese customs data released for 2019. With China increasing these imports significantly and the U.S. holding on to tariffs of 25% on $250 billon of China's exports to the U.S. which are outside the Phase 1 agreement, the downward course is set for the next few years for correction of a dangerous trade imbalance. That imbalance was allowed to develop over successive Republican and Democratic administrations. China already has the European Union as its first leading trading partner and south east Asia as its second. China plans to not be so closely intertwined with the U.S. in trade, and yet preserve its state sponsored development model and drive to compete in technology. China's increased purchases from the U.S. of $200 billon are broken down in terms of farm products- $32 billion, manufactured goods- $80 billion, energy products- $50 billion, services $35 billion. In effect the U.S. gets its goal of cutting the unsustainable China trade surplus quickly and with certainty in 3-5 years. China uses the period to transition for less trade linkage with the U.S. yet preserving its state sponsored model of development and drive for technological advancement.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The European Union has a massive surplus of $147 billion with the U.S. President Trump is making this an issue in trade negotiations. A 20% tariff on German cars imported into the U.S. is part of the tariff response from the Trump administration. 

To settle this dispute Germany is making new offers with the visit of European Commission president, Jean Claude Juncker, to Washington. France sees little room for compromise as it sees Trump's efforts designed to break European unity by driving a wedge between France and Germany.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mass firings of government workers and closing of government offices created a sense of upheaval with the style of Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency. Musk says his disinterest in the workings of the government, and effort to do too much too quickly hurt his efforts, and the distraction has cost Tesla with loss of market and loss of loyalty of customers put off by DOGE style actions. Some actions were controversial such as asking federal government workers to list their 5 accomplishments each week or be fired, and are being withdrawn. Overall the media coverage created more miscomprehension for the president's goals and actions. President Trump has now distanced himself from Musk and Musk has withdrawn from the Washington scene. New reports suggest Tesla engineers now working for GM are building new EV battery technologies to drastically reduce the cost of EV's by 2028. One such report came out this week  shown in Lyrarc.com. Tesla imports its electric car batteries from China which could put it at a disadvantage in the current tariffs environment. German EV's market is collapsing in China so that Tesla faces many changes in just 6 months.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The leaders of India and China, Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping will meet at a 2 day summit in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, China, on April 27, 2018.  The meeting is significant because for the first time the 2 leaders will meet on a one on one basis for a significant part of the time without aides to get a better understanding of each other, and a get a sense of how to establish a good relationship between the 2 countries. Ma Jiali of the China Reform Forum, a think tank affiliated with the Communist Party's Central Party School says a better relationship would serve China's interests for regional calm, so that China can focus on internal issues of tackling poverty in the interior of China, tackle economic issues arising from a difficult trading relationship with the U.S. including the tariffs of the Trump administration.  China's leadership have not anticipated the decisions made by president Trump and the Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to take a strong stand on correcting an imbalance in trade that leads to about $1 billion in trade deficit each day for the U.S. with China. Previous administrations in the U.S. have not taken action. Also at issue in the U.S. China relationship is for the first time transfer of technology for "Made in China 2025." China's earlier advances were made with a free flow of technology from the U.S. and Europe.  The last time the two leaders met was in 2014. This time the issues of border relations in the Himalayas, and the relations with China in the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean region, the growing relationship between Australia, U.S., India and Japan, are seen in a different light with the strong disagreements on trade relations with the U.S.  China sees a need for improving relations with India. Prime Minister Modi faces new elections in 2019 and the need to focus on infrastructure and development to win a second term in office for the ruling BJP Party.  A reduction in tensions serves the interest of both countries and leaders.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump escalates the trade battle with China by increasing tariffs on $200 billion Chinese goods from 10% to 25%. The U.S. says China went back on its commitments in a 150 page agreement at the 11th hour or last minute, by deleting these commitments in all 7 chapters of this agreement. These are firm commitments sought by the U.S. in a number of areas of deep concern to the U.S. and the U.S. Trade Representative Mr. Lighthizer had already conveyed the determination of the U.S. to not relent on this. In the past China was seen to go back on its commitments and the U.S. side now wanted to ensure promises were kept. The U.S. concerns cover- theft of intellectual property and trade secrets, forced technology transfers, competition policy, access to financial services and currency manipulation.  The situation has been building up fro a decade with the Trump campaign honing in on this issue of China stealing U.S. jobs, and factory closures in the U.S., because of unfair trading practices. It also led to Mr. Trump's winning election campaign in the American midwestern states. With China seen as gaining an unfair technological advantage over the U.S., most recently over 5G telecom networks, the U.S. is not likely to back down. The U.S. is less dependent on trade with China. China is more dependent on the U.S. and a lot of manufacturing jobs in China are affected by the U.S. tariffs. This is why president Trump has decided to take a strong stand, including putting on tariffs on and additional $300 billion of Chinese goods.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This story in the WSJ shows how the Phase 1 deal between the U.S. and China was negotiated in November and December 2019. As a bargaining chip for negotiations on a Phase 2 deal the U.S. has preserved tariffs of 25% on $250 billion in imports from China, and the reduced tariff  of 7.5% on $120 billion of imports. In Phase 1 Mr. Trump convinced the Chinese leadership that he was serious about going ahead with further tariffs to cover all of China's exports to the U.S.by a December deadline. This was also Mr. Kushner's message to the Chinese ambassador. In talks China gave easy concessions on agricultural imports and offered to buy twice the amount of soyabeans and other food imports- which helps Mr. Trump with farmers in the U.S. At the same time difficult concessions on enforcement to change subsidies to Chinese state owned companies were put off. China formally says it is an issue of Chinese sovereignty. It is also seen as a part of the Chinese business model that is working and China is in no hurry to change this. It has offered to step back from asking foreign companies to transfer technology in exchange for market access. On technology issues and subsidies the tough negotiating issues on which the U.S. has insisted for changes, China has held back. Phase Two is not likely to happen at least not till after the election, as China wants to be able to develop its own technology rivaling the U.S. and Europe, without the kind of formal enforcement the U.S. is demanding. In the long run it plans a shift to an economy that is less dependent on the U.S. for imports which may be in the interest of both countries, as U.S. manufacturing has shriveled over two decades hurting American jobs as a result.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This is an indepth article on Donald Trump's financial holdings, looking at the debt that Trump has built up in his real estate dealings, by Susanne Craig of the NYT. To get a detailed look of this the NYT inquiry into the holdings engaged RedVision Systems, a national property information firm to search publicly available data. Much of Trump's business is shrouded in mystery. But it is well known that Trump has used debt to build his business in a way that is not considered good practice in business, having led to three bankruptcies. Trump says he "is the king of debt." And "he loves debt." The recovery of real estate values during a rescue effort for the country's financial system also helped Trump tackle debt in a way that was not available to other entrepreneurs who suffered from the oil price collapse- one of them McClendon also used debt aggressively and his business collapsed leading to suicidal car crash. You can love excessive debt only if the government supports you with some sort of financial guarnatee misplaced, or you are lucky to get away with it- just ask McClendon. The irony is that the rescue of the financial system led to the low interest rates that hurt savings of the middle and working class, and the lack of help to Main Street in the home foreclosure crisis also hurt the same people disproportionately. The Obama administration policies in this regard rescued the very same business interests such as the New York real commercial estate symbolized by Trump, that are now appealing to those hurt as president Obama worked to let the financial system recover. The intention was never to support excessively overleveraged banks or overleveraged real estate built on debt, but in reality this is what happened. A nation cannot run its financial affairs in this manner of overleveraging to extract high profits that an investment bank such as Lehman or Goldman Sachs does, or a real estate company such as Trump's does- if regulators let them do this. Normally after the financial crisis of such dimensions that it shook the world economy in 2008-2009 leading to fears of a collapse as happened in the 1930's, the same faces would not still be there. But this is a strange period or a transition period where things are being sorted out, and the same faces Blankfein at Goldman Sachs and Trump in New York commercial real estate are with us.  And though the bashing of Goldman Sachs connection to Clinton is evident in the campaigns of Trump and Sanders, the bashing of Trump real estate and finance companies with its overleveraging and bankruptcies is evident in the campaign of Clinton against one posing as a representative of the working class. John Paulson who benefitted by shorting mortgage securities that caused the financial crisis of 2008 is on Trump's top economic advisory team, including the hedge funds and financial interests on Wall Street that Trump is saying support Clinton. No one, not the NYT or WSJ, can answer this, its just the paradox of today's situation. Hillary Clinton can say she has learned her lesson, with her Methodist upbringing and her own supporters such as Robert Reich and others, and break with the past especially as it in no way contributes to her success as president, not one bit. In fact rebuilding the middle class and infrastructure require entirely different connections and views on life, a different imagination.  Trump has billions of dollars and a real estate business that is so complex that even the NYT and property information firms can only say that in the end it is shrouded in mystery. Companies owned by Trump says the NYT from this inquiry have debt of $650 million. Other Trump business activities through 3 passive partnerships owe an additional $2 billion. It is a lot easier for Hillary Clinton to put the speech fees behind her as they have little to do with what she is as a Methodist and a proponent of improving women's lives, than it is for Donald Trump- for whom his business is everything that he is including his art of the deal- to reject who he is. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Economist article looks at India-China relations and the Wuhan Summit between prime minister Modi and president Xi Jinping. It sees India's reluctance to follow a containment strategy in an historical light from the period in which India followed a non-alignment policy in the early post independence period under prime minister Nehru. During the period of the Eisenhower administration with Secretary of State John Foster Dulles India adhered to a strict nonalignment policy avoiding choosing sides in the Cold War. As a result U.S. policy tilted towards Pakistan during the Eisenhower administration. A balance was restored under president Kennedy, with Adlai Stevenson a close friend of India.  The short Sino-Indian war of 1962 led to a situation in which the U.S. backed India and improvement of relations. A semblance of non-alignment in foreign relations continued under Nehru's daughter Indira Gandhi. By 1990 with the opening of the Indian economy to foreign investment, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the integration of China into the global economy, a new period of good bilateral relations with the U.S. and Europe was maintained. In 2017 the potential for a conflict in Doklam, Bhutan revived fears from 1962 in India. In 2018 After the U.S. administration of Donald Trump and Trade Representative Lighthizer imposed trade tariffs on China and restrictions on export of advanced technologies China pursued a policy of conciliatory relations with India. China's relations also improved with Japan and South Korea as the U.S. policy was unanticipated and seen as a significant change that would seriously affect China's economy. India's response was to pursue a policy of good relations with China and the U.S., even as the economies of the U.S. and India were drawn closer in India's pursuit of modernization.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new faces in the Biden administration on economic policy are Janet Yellen, as head of the central bank, the Federal Reserve, and Cecilia Rouse, a Princeton labor economist, as head of the Council of Economic Advisors. In this report WSJ looks at the economic policies of the new administration after Mr. Trump rejected globalization and international trade agreements that were not in America's interest or that hurt American workers.  Informal conversations with experts suggest WSJ says, that globalization is now suspect as a way that benefitted China and other countries including Germany, and hurt the U.S. France, Britain and other countries in Europe that were not strong exporters. This hurt their industries which were eroded by imports resulting in the three decades long destruction of communities across these countries that depended on manufacturing. It has also hurt countries like India that let their markets be dominated by Chinese imports, with a reversal of policy in 2020 with self reliant economy under "Atman Nirbhar" policy as the new goal. Mr. Trump's tactic in this trade war was to fight back to regain America's position in manufacturing with tariffs on imports. The trade deficit had to come down with China just as it had done with Japan decades earlier. This was starting to happen. One problem in bringing down the imports was the increase in the value of the dollar, as Janet Yellen has noted. The new policies will look at what the effective policy will be while keeping this goal in mind.  Both Yellen and Ms. Rouse have spent years studying labor markets and Ms. Rouse is quoted here as saying: " With open trade there are winners and losers. The losers are really losing, and we need to take care of them and take on more nuanced models of international trade as a result." Other experts from the earlier Democratic administrations such as Prof. Frankel at Harvard say that there needs to be increased focus on American workers left behind by trade, technology and unequal education, with more spending on preschool, infrastructure and health. All this suggests that there will be a continuation of U.S. policy in challenging Chinese use of globalization to advance its interests, chastening Americans on the use of the very word globalization which can mean different things to different people based on how they can gain advantage. The word may even be entirely dropped in favor of what the policies are and what they do for the American worker, American communities including small towns, and the American people, spelling each of these out every time supply chains and the global economy is mentioned. The new administration will get an opportunity to show that it too can come up with new ideas and action plan to strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. It will also have to show substantial results as people have lost patience with Democrats and Republicans on the lack of progress in rebuilding America's leadership role in the world economy, and in defending American workers and factories. Clinton, Obama and Bush all offered false promises on trade with China ignoring the damage this had done to American leadership in the world economy. Clinton with support for China's entry into the World Trade Organization, Bush with foreign wars and costly diversions and regulatory failures with banks that led to the 2009 deep recession hurting Americans, and Obama with the lack of will and interest in America's leadership role in the world as the dominant nation in manufacturing,   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
No country benefited more than first Japan and then South Korea till 2000, and now China till 2022 from the trade and sharing of industrial technology enabled by the American backed system of trade and industry. Walter Russell Mead says in WSJ that China has chosen to challenge the system through which it developed into an industrialized nation with the US running huge trade deficits, sharing its technology and letting Chinese manufacturing displace American local manufacturing. China is seen as challenging the system. Yet what has happened is that this process of displacing American manufacturing and industry was not sustainable anyway and continued for a decade longer than it would otherwise have lasted because American industry could not easily reverse a course it had set of setting up manufacturing in China, once that manufacturing base had already been transferred from the US to China and American companies had grown accustomed to a new state of affairs of making overseas in China. Not much thought was given to how American workers would react to that situation as companies and industries making that transfer made independent decisions. This led to the election of Trump with wins in midwestern states that had suffered from loss of manufacturing communities.  The Trump tariffs on Chinese goods and the Biden administration lining up completely behind American workers and families for the first time for Democrats has sent the signal to China that it finds the situation of China's dominance in the trade system unacceptable. The document of "China 2030" of the Chinese Government with planned dominance in key sectors and industries was met with alarm across America in all parties. The paradox of Apple as a key sector in Chinese manufacturing and the largest American company is the result of policies pursued by America without realizing the true cost of shipping manufacturing out of the country. That process is now being reversed with change of management starting at Intel Corp. and other companies to bring the manufacturing base back to the US. This policy is being resolutely pursued by the US and will speed up following the pandemic which has further demonstrated how much of a mistake the policy of sending out manufacturing in critical areas such as health could be. This is the reality behind the rhetoric and verbal exchange between China and the US. With the rapid growth of Chinese manufacturing countries such as India were put in a difficult situation  as this was preventing the local industrial base developing in India with Chinese imports in the same way as it had damaged that of the US and the EU. Worse it led to the use of US and European technology in China's defense industrial base including aviation and other sectors that threatened India's borders with repeated Chinese incursions in the Himalayas, from the Pakistan western Himalayas to Ladakh and the eastern Himalayan mountains. That situation existed long before the Trump and Biden administration and the Modi administration called for a return to America of its industrial manufacturing base and its technological leadership. Both the Bush and Obama administrations and the Indian Congress administrations failed to realize the dangers of letting the US, European and Indian industrial base wither. India is not just a country but a culture that extends from the Himalayas all the way across Bangladesh to the Indonesian islands which shares a common cultural history of Buddhism and the Vedanta. This is a region that has a population of about 2 billion people. In a larger sense the cultural history extends to  Vietnam and Japan with its Buddhist culture whose origins go back to India, and also of China itself. In the larger sense this is a population of close to 3 billion people. The economic development of this region and learning from the parliamentary traditions and scientific discoveries of the modern period since 1700 is a task for both the US, Europe and the people of the region.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
One negative effect of the trade war with the U.S. is an increased emphasis on energy security and increased use of coal in China. After China committed to goals for climate change coal use declined in 2014, after reaching a high in 2013. The attack on Saudi oil facilities showed risk in its reliance on Saudi oil. China's import dependency for oil reached an all time high of 72% in 2018, according to BP 2019 Statistical Review. Gradually the commitment to climate change and lower use of coal has changed since 2016 with the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Initially after the U.S. withdrawal under president Trump China made bold commitment to lead the fight against climate change but has since wavered. In an October 2019 speech Premier Li Kequiang called for the development of the coal industry to ensure energy security.  As China's economy slowed in 2019 in the face of U.S. tariffs and a trade war with the U.S. efforts are being made to increase infrastructure investment which has driven coal use higher. China's steel output reached a record of 750 million metric tons in 2019. The amount of coal fired capacity under construction in China now exceeds the rest of the world combined, much of it from plants permitted before 2017, according to Global Energy Monitor. China is also expected to become the world's largest importer of natural gas by 2020. Even the Russian gas fields from Siberia supply only a fifth of China's energy demands in 2020.  China has made large strides in renewable energy helping it meet its Paris Agreement targets. Renewable energy is about 10% of China's energy mix, but its use showed growth of 29% in 2018, making up half of the world's growth. China's use of coal in the energy mix has dropped to 58% in 2018 from 72% in 2008, according to BP 2019 Statistical Review, as a result of renewable energy investments. At the Madrid Climate Conference China renewed its commitment to the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Now it is a balancing act keeping in mind energy security and economic growth along with the need for clear skies and better air quality. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jim Vandehei, Politico founder, is from two small towns, Oshkosh, Wisconsin, and Lincoln, Maine, and understands what it is like for ordinary Americans struggling to make it. Sanders and Trump are riding an anti-establishment wave, says Vandehei, but do not have programs that would lead to growth and jobs. Something better is needed, he says, to tackle today's problems- poverty, trade, wages, and jobs for working class families.

LyrArc Article Gist
Economist Paul Krugman points out the risks of a trade war in the tariffs announced for steel and aluminium by president Trump. Yet he accepts that he advocated stronger action on China's currency in 2009-2010 when the U.S. economy was weaker. In the past on the TPP agreement proposed by president Obama, Krugman said that it would have an insignificant impact as most of the gains on trade were already made. Here Krugman is critical of the language used by president Trump about trade wars being "easy."  This is taken out of context though as president Trump is saying that it is easy in the context of a country enjoying a $100 billion surplus with the U.S., because that country is going to have incentives to maintain a good trading relationship with the U.S. Essentially this means that the steel industry in the U.S. benefits. China also benefits as it closes many of the older steel plants that led to overproduction. This would reduce overcapacity in China's steel industry, a problem China's economic planners see as a priority. China already is making the shift to higher technology products and this process will be accelerated, as it puts less emphasis on steel and metals as it did in its earlier stage of development. As a result contrary to textbook economics this has the potential to be a win-win solution for the U.S. and China in the long run. So little was done under the Bush and Obama administrations to manage trading relationships with other countries so that the interests of small communities across the U.S. were protected from unfair trade- that Reagan administration trade expert Robert Lighthizer took up the cause of the U.S.,workers in these communities. Surveys showed U.S. public opinion also had shifted among educated, professionals and middle class on this issue by 2015, against unfair trade that hurt U.S. interests. Robert Lighthizer is now the Trade Representative for the U.S. in the Trump administration. Reports in the WSJ about the discussion within the Trump economic council, show Gary Cohn favored not imposing the tariffs on steel and aluminum. Lighthizer advocated the tariffs and was able to convince the president.  For Trump this presents a win-win situation, as a mild response by China -and other trading nations that have enjoyed a favorable situation in the past -with its huge surplus and favorable trading relationship with the U.S. would present a win for the president. Economist Krugman accepts this when he says tariffs in the current context of the trading field- that is more favorable to other countries- are not such a big deal, only the use of such policy that is likely to endanger world trade.  As in much of the debate that takes place this adds to the headlines today yet provides delayed and limited relief to communities across the U.S. devastated by world trade as documented by experts who studied trade patterns and their effect on regions across the U.S.  As the WSJ points out in one report the trade deficit itself may continue to grow under president Trump because of other factors. The U.S. dollar surged 8% during the last 2 years of the Obama administration with the economic recovery underway. With Trump's election win the dollar surged another 3%. This may play a bigger role in the direction of the trade deficit than the new steel tariffs announced by president Trump. Workers and unions matter. As TPP pushed by Democratic party president Obama was opposed by the unions, and by the auto industry (workers and auto companies) in the midwestern states which suffered a hollowing out in the last decade. A WSJ survey after the election showed Clinton received 56% support from union workers in 2018 compared to 65% for president Obama in the 2012 election. Some of that erosion in support may come from Obama's TPP stand fervently opposed by the unions and workers in the auto industry. A similar situation took place in Ontario with hollowing out of the auto industry in this large industrial state in Canada and led to the rejection of the Conservative government and election of the Liberal Party under Justin Trudeau. This lesson is so far lost in the Democratic Party's debate.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama is critical of the role played by the media in the 2016 election campaign in a keynote speech at a journalism dinner for the Toner Prize for Excellence in Political Reporting. Obama said lately " I spend a lot of time reflecting on how this system- how this crazy system of self-government works. How we can make it work. And this is as important to making it work as anything. People getting information they can trust and that has substance and truth and facts behind it." He added that "what we are seeing right now does corrode our democracy and our society. When our elected officials and political campaigns become entirely untethered to reason and facts and analysis, when it doesn't matter what is true or not, that makes it impossible for us to make decisions on behalf of future generations." On the way Donald Trump's campaign has lowered the level of public debate Obama had this to say- referring indirectly to the NYT report of over $1.9 billion of free television coverage given to Donald Trump by the media- the country, "would be better servedif billions of dollars in free media came with serious accountability, especially when the politicians issue unworkable plans or make promises they can't keep.. and there are reporters here who know they can't keep them." The wall between the U.S. and Mexico to be built with Mexico's financing, the deportation of millions of illegal immigrants, the 45% tariff on imports from China, reducing support for NATO, are some of the campaign themes used to appeal to disaffected voters by Mr. Trump in the election, which are some of the puzzling ways in which the election campaign for 2016 has evolved- without proper media scrutiny, and what some critics say panders to ratings at a time of shrinking television staffs and budgets. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
After the Phase 1 trade deal with China led to cancellation of new tariffs on computers, mobile phones and the remaining products imported from China, tariffs are still in place on $370 billion of imports from China. President Trump says China agreed to import $32 billion of agricultural goods, with the figures reaching $50 billion in 2020. The prior high was $26 billion in 2012. This comes as a big relief for the agricultural farm sector which had 24% more bankruptcies in 2019. Farmers are now more likely to vote for president Trump as they did in the last election. In addition China agreed to buy $200 billion more of American goods over the next 2 years. This combined with the USMCA agreement to replace NAFTA, for North American trade, is good news for president Trump and for the U.S. economy for 2% annual growth. The S&P stock index went up by 29% in 2019. The big concession by China is its agreement to agree to penalties if it does not keep up its part of the bargain.  Intellectual property protection remains a challenge and Mr. Trump may have decided to take a tactical success and shore up his base of farmers and small business people before taking up these issues in the future. China for its part may have decided to make a tactical move of its own as it has nothing to lose in importing more farm products from the U.S. in exchange for being able to continue to make the computers, iPhones and tech products it manufactures, just like before. China has not conceded much in terms of its goals set  in "Made in China 2025." Both sides are taking a much needed pause to consolidate their positions, as the fundamental differences remain to be tackled. Huawei and Chinese technology issue remains as before with the U.S. wary of China's technological gains in 5G telecom equipment and keen on building and protecting America's technological advantage in future trade relations. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A NYT report on Donald Trump's long standing relationship with his lawyer Roy Cohn,  who was also an advisor to Senator Joseph McCarthy. The report says Roy Cohn used aggressive legal tactics in lawsuits and influenced Trump's style of doing business in his real estate dealings. It is a detailed report of Roy Cohn's influence on Trump, which the reporters say has influenced the way  Trump ran his 2016 election campaign. It shows Cohn as protecting Trump in lawsuits, and Cohn's sense that Trump would someday play a big role in New York's real estate business, as Cohn's first meeting with Trump started when Trump was beginning his career in the early 70's. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Ms. Annegret Kramp-Krarrenbauer, elected leader of the CDU party in 2018 with the support of Angela Merkel, will not run for chancellor in next years election and will resign from her position by the end of the year. She will continue as Germany's defense minister. After losses for the CDU in recent elections and the embarrassment of local CDU leaders in Thuringia supporting the far right AfD, AKK as she is known decided to step down. Angela Merkel has decided not to run for chancellor again. Germany is set to chair the EU in the second half of 2020, and Merkel is no longer seen as a leader of influence. The Nationalist Alternative for Germany AfD has gained votes in recent elections following the 2015-2016 migrant crisis, with large numbers of refugees from North Africa and Arab world landing in Greece and Turkey and walking to Hungary, Austria and Germany. Merkel's handling of the crisis with acceptance of a million refugees in 2015-2016 unsettled European and German politics. Why? One way of looking at it is that in the same way that the U.S. took in Chinese imported goods ending in the Trump tariffs war, at some point it just becomes too big to handle. That ended up at $1 billion a day in imports from China when president Trump called it off and accused Obama Democrats, Bush Republicans, of betraying the country. Putting it into perspective Germany with one fourth of the population of the U.S. took in about twice the number of refugees in just one year 2015-2016 that the U.S. took in 10 years 2005-2015. The U.S. took in 675,000 immigrants between 2005-2015. This is as if the U.S. took in something like 20 million immigrants in a short period of 1 year on an equivalent basis- though the cultural impact is even greater in a nation like Germany that is like Japan an historically immigrant averse nation. All this happened too quickly for Germany to handle for its fragile cultural fabric. Much of the initial outpouring of support and positive sentiment came from the sense of having gone through World War II and the refugees in that and the early post war period, the need to return in the same spirit support Germany had received. Over time it eroded support for the Christian Democratic Union and Merkel. That Merkel could have done this is itself a small miracle. Now the rebuilding has to begin. Adenauer's CDU and the socialist SPD party of Willy Brandt now have less than 50% support, only with the Greens Party do they make up 50%. The question now is can the CDU, and the SPD which has fallen to 14% in elections, make it back and what kind of future makeup political parties will have in Germany, how the social fabric can be restored. AKK's achievement is to mend relations between the liberal Merkel wing of the CDU and conservatives from Bavaria (CSU) over immigration.  Candidates for CDU leadership are Armin Laschet, Jens Spahn, and Friedrich Merz. Laschet premier of North Rhine-Westphalia has Merkel's support. Looking back too much attention was taken up by the euro crisis, and too little was done in the areas of infrastructure, inequality gaps, education, child care, under Merkel's leadership and of the preceding SPD years, much like what happened under Bush and Obama administrations in the U.S. where wars, economic crises led to neglect on issues that affect lives of ordinary working families. ...