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
The New York Times reports that comments from Obama administration officials describe an alarming loss of trust and confidence between China and the USA over the last two years. David Shambaugh, director of the China Policy program at George Washington University, says the administration had hoped to work with China on major challenges like climate change, nuclear nonproliferation, and a new global economic order. China, he says, has failed to step up and play that role. He describes the Chinese as responding as an increasingly narrow-minded, self-interested truculent, hyper-nationalist, and powerful country. Jeffrey Baker, a key China policy adviser in the White House, says China's responses reflected a sense in Beijing that China was a rising power and the USA a declining power, especially after the strong rebound of the Chinese economy after the 2008 crisis. The administration is determined to counteract that impression. Other factors complicate things. China is facing a transition to a new leadership in the next year. There are differences within the Chinese Communist party leadership ranks about the direction China should take. Trade and currency issues have come to the point where American public opinion is shifting greatly, with educated professionals changing their views on trade and currency matters. See the recent WSJ/NBC September 2010 poll on world trade, reported by Murray and Belkin in WSJ, Oct 2, 2010. The Obama administration cannot ignore the deep concerns of the American people on these issues. The House overwhelmingly voted in September to threaten China with tariffs on its exports if the Chinese currency, the renminbi, is not allowed to appreciate significantly enough (experts estimate that it is overvalued by 20%). It is not clear whether the Administration's rhetoric on this issue is to assuage public opinion in a business as usual manner, or expected to achieve substantative results to rebalance world trade. The G-20 summit in S. Korea leaves this change for well into the future- China with current account surplus of 5.8% of GDP in 2009 is expected to lower this to 4% by 2015. With the high jobless rate in the US and the large and rising current account deficit, the United States may have reached a juncture where this cannot be put off well into the future years. Other issues, the different foreign policy objectives, and differing perceptions of China and the US of each other, the relationship with US allies in the region, may create additional tensions. These tensions may be navigated by governments of both countries, but the shift in American public opinion on trade, currency and jobs issues will require tangible and real change. As trade tensions will only increase in the next two years with the lack of fiscal stimulus on the jobs front, and no significant change in jobs expected from the Fed's purchase af additional Treasury debt, and a sense that the mutual benefit in the trade relationship with China has been lost to America's serious detriment. China's position may be perceived as stronger than it really is from the faster rebound from the 2008 crisis, and may in reality not be as Jeffrey Baker sees it. As David Barboza has reported in the New York Times, and experts have pointed out, the huge amount of lending encouraged by the government has accentuated weaknesses in the Chinese economy. A significant amount has gone into real estate speculation and will only increase the bad loans on the books of China's banks. This happens at the very time that growth is expected to slow down and make it harder to absorb the bad loans, as was done in the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Following Brexit on January 31, 2020, Britain's government led by Boris Johnson prepares to negotiate new trade deals with the U.S. and other countries. The freedom to negotiate these trade deals was a key part of the plan of Brexit supporters and Mr. Johnson. The Times, Britain's leading newspaper, looks at the prospects of trade deals with each country- the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, Japan. Facing re-election Mr. Trump is seen as favorably inclined to work out a trade deal that he can show during the campaign. Trade discussions have taken place between the UK and Australia, Japan. Mr. Morrison in Australia and Mr. Shinzo Abe want to see strong trading ties and investment with Britain. Japan or Australia could be the first countries that work out a trade deal with Britain as discussions are at an advanced stage.  Britain has a small deficit with Japan in trade. It has a small dollar surplus in trade with the Australia and New Zealand. With the U.S Britain has a large surplus, it exports 121 billion pounds and imports 76 billion pounds. The prospects of trade deals are enhanced by the similarity in outlook of the governments of the U.S., Australia, and Japan, which share views on jobs expansion, economic growth and are centre right in economic philosophy. They also share a strong connection with working class voters under Johnson,Trump and Morrison. Mr. Trump is seen as a strong deal maker so that any deal would involve some concessions from Britain that increase U.S exports, including farm exports. Difficult issues with the U.S. are -pharmaceutical drug imports that could increase Britain's NHS cost for drugs, the digital services tax from Britain on U.S.  companies such as Google and the Trump retaliatory threat to impose tariffs beyond the current 2.5% on car imports of $11 billion from Britain. On agricultural imports Britain's natural foods preference conflicts with imports of genetically modified (GMO) foods from the U.S. Experts say this could lead to a partial or Phase 1 deal that does not need approval from the U.S. Congress, similar to the Phase 1 trade deal with China which sidestepped the thorny issues on trade. This is something both sides can show their support base as a win. ...

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
China's push for globalization is being perceived internationally as an effort to promote its own industries.

Clashes with the U.S. on trade have changed the perception of China in global trade compared to what it was four years ago or in 2008. Tariffs in the U.S. on Chinese imports, slowing foreign investment, inflated property prices, bad debt at banks, and shrinking working age population, are leading to slowing growth which in coming years could drop from 6.1% in 2019. The Belt and Road Initiative is also being perceived differently as it has led to increased in indebtedness of countries in Africa and Asia, debt that cannot be paid back. Much of the ebullient optimism of a few years back is no longer present. The Pew Research Center survey of 34 countries in December 2019 shows about 45% of adults surveyed lacking confidence in China's policy positions in world affairs, according to this report in the WSJ.

LyrArc Article Gist
The accompanying article from Pro Publica about Lighthizer's term at USTR shows the lack of results as China shifted production to Mexico and Vietnam - it shows it was going to be a long struggle, carried over into another 4 DJT years this time in 2025. That article showed tariffs are really not so much a weapon against other countries  as they are a way to signal to America's corporations to invest in supply chains in the US.  In Congressional hearings towards the end of his term at USTR in 2020 Lighthizer said -

“They have a system, and their system is challenging our system.”  Lighthizer told Senators that the U.S. struggle with China is “going to go on for years.”

LyrArc Article Gist
  “And 5 million manufacturing jobs were lost while racking up trade deficits of $19 trillion." The Washington Post does not deny this as false, and this is the crux of the point DJT has made what everyone with eyes to see has seen for 40 years. DJT sometimes exaggerates to make his point. False should mean the meaning is false not that a particular number 70% vs 50% for India's tariff on Harley Davidson motorcycles. It should also consider PM Modi's stand for India- to support the US position when it comes to American factories closing by the thousands and destroying not just it's manufacturing but also it's middle class, just as Gandhi would have done. That close is India's sentiment for the American people and the Republic, and the defense of its recovery as a manufacturing nation for its workers and families. DJT did not say that it is a poor country as the Washington Post says is "Trump's telling." As Greg Ip of the WSJ pointed out in 2024, it is that the US simply cannot sustain the blows to its workers and its manufacturing base from a $1 trillion deficit year after year with China. Before bringing economist's into the picture one has facts of what the devastation to American workers has done to communities across America. DJT said and most workers will stand by his words- "For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped, and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike. American steelworkers, auto workers, farmers, and skilled craftsmen. They really suffered gravely. They watched in anguish as foreign leaders have stolen our jobs, foreign cheaters have ransacked our factories, and foreign scavengers have torn apart our once beautiful American dream." Not a single report in the US and foreign media reports of Liberation Day Rose Garden speech by DJT on April 2, 2025, says that DJT said he would trust what he sees with his own eyes and experience for 40 years, and not economists who have turned their backs on American workers, turned to a UAW worker from Detroit and asked him to tell what he saw for 40 years.  "Brian, I’d like to have you come up here for a second. Okay? I just see him sitting. He’s been a fan of ours, and he understands this business a lot better than the economists, a lot better than anybody. Brian, say a few words, please. Would you?" And this what Brian a retired autoworker from Macomb Conty, Michigan saw for 40 years that economists refused to see in their economic theories- "I have watched my entire life, I have watched plant after plant after plant in Detroit and in the Metro Detroit area close. There are now plants sitting idle. There are now plants that are underutilized, and Donald Trump’s policies are going to bring product back into those underutilized plants. There’s going to be new investment. There’s going to be new plants built."     ...

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
Immigration and drug flows became an explosive issue in the US by 2016, yet between 2016-2024 Venezuelan people outflows added up to 7.1 million migrants including about 1 million to the US, as Venezuela collapsed and Russia intervened to keep the regime.   None of this could have happened with major powers US Russian cooperation. The Monroe Doctrine of president Monroe, 1824, warned European powers to not restore colonial influence in the Americas. By 2024 Syria sent 14 million of its population to Europe, and Venezuela sent 7.7 million migrants to Colombia, Brazil, and the US, as their economies and democratic institutions collapsed. Missing was working cooperation with another military power Russia. Clinton, Bush, Obama, Western financial interests, failed to grasp the importance of US Russia cooperation and mutual respect. Obama denigrated Russia as insignificant because of its GDP.   Russia intervened in failing states but gained little, straining the good relations mutual respect from earlier periods of its history and interactions with the US.  DJT tariff on all importers of Venezuelan oil affect China to which Venezuela sent 55% of its oil exports over half a million barrels a day. It also affects India and other importers. These importers say experts, will shift to Russian crude preferring it to heavy oil from Venezuela. This is a sore point for Americans affected by violent crime from Venezuelan gang members reflected in recent election results. This also affects the sense of safety in American neighborhoods and in towns across America. The Linken Riley Act was passed in the US Congress as action on this issue. People in China, India, and in Europe, and some even in Silicon Valley in the US fail to grasp the way this has affected communities across the US when after decades of deindustrialization and shipping jobs overseas by American business, these communities are affected by a sense of lack of safety in their neighborhoods. There is also a failure to grasp the harm done by migration of 7.7 million people from Venezuela, almost a fourth of the country's population, because of mismanagement of the economy and crippling inflation, and the failure of democratic institutions to function effectively. A failure to grasp the extent of the economic and human disaster in Venezuela. DJT says- "Venezuela has been very hostile to the US and the Freedoms which we espouse...Venezuela has "purposefully and deceitfully sent to the United States, undercover, tens of thousands of high level, and other, criminals".    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT report looks at the 20 counties within 5 battleground states in the midwestern states of Wisconsin, Michigan, eastern state of Pennsylvania, southern state of North Carolina and western state of Arizona. It shows the percentage of votes gained by the Republican and Democratic parties in the last 3 presidential elections. A look at the trend and direction of vote percentages gained by each party in each of the 20 counties in different states may be a better indication of the final result than polls alone as both parties are pushing hard in the 2020 election down to the last day. The Republicans strong in the ground game and organized effort, and Democrats in television advertising outspending the Republicans. Because of the clearly delineated positions the Democrats and Republicans stand in sharp contrast to each other both in image and substance.  Because of the Electoral College and states assigned electoral votes based on size the U.S. system is not based on the total vote count in the country. Who wins each state by vote count and gets the assigned electoral college votes assigned to that state, an builds up more than 270 Electoral College votes wins the election for president of the USA.  In Michigan there is the impact of the resurgence of the auto industry, with president Trump pulling out of TPP agreement and renegotiating NAFTA in favor of the U.S. auto industry bringing back jobs from Mexico. This puts the union vote in the auto industry- with Ford, GM and Chrysler located in Michigan- favoring these auto friendly policies from the current administration. The resilience of the auto industry sales during coronavirus is part of the economic story in Michigan. The renegotiated NAFTA treaty also helped dairy farmers of Wisconsin increase sales to Canada. In Pennsylvania the coronavirus and economic impact has hit harder than in Michigan with the decline in oil prices and effect on fracking industry. Closure of coal plants is also having a negative impact on the state. Tariffs on Chinese steel by the administration are helping the steel industry. Offsetting these economic stories is perception of how the coronavirus pandemic has been tackled by the administration. Added to this is the suburban women's vote and the shift of out of state liberal voters to suburbs in North Carolina (Wake county), and in Arizona (Maricopa county and Tucson area). States not covered here but also relevant are Minnesota which could be a battleground state in the midwest and Iowa. Racial protests in Minneapolis add another dimension with controversies about the policing in cities such as Minneapolis and recently Philadelphia. The sharp contrasts in image as well as policy, the coronavirus pandemic and the handling of the pandemic as well as the way rallies are being conducted differently by both candidates, and the economic stories, present an election like no other since the 1960's. The contrast is as sharp as between Gen. Dwight Eisenhower of the wartime allied effort and Adlai Stevenson a liberal and humanist in the 1952 election. That election saw some of the highest turnouts since the second world war, and this is now happening today. That election also determined the direction of postwar growth and dominance of American industry, the setting up of the National Highway system and important changes that were later continued under the Kennedy administration. It also marked the beginning of the Cold War following the Korean War under the Truman administration, a situation that is emerging in a different way today with the free world and the tension from relations with China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Apple shares are down 25% says this WSJ article and asks the question whether Apple's best days are past. In the fastest growing markets in Asia and Africa, Apple iPhones are beyond the reach of about 95% of the population. The number of Apple iPhones sold in India have dropped 40% in 2018 compared to 2017. Apple's market share in India has fallen from 2% to 1%, according to Canalys research firm. The $1.8 billion in Indian sales is about half of what Apple executives had hoped for when Tim Cook visited India in 2016. Some call it a rout. Tim Cook seldom mentions India now. At the center of this is Apple's reluctance to change its business model of getting the highest margins, making not a range of handsets, but a few models selling at high prices. This is the strategy that Apple has used to revive the company from near bankruptcy in 1997. Competitors including Xiaomi, the Apple for China and India, tweak their phones constantly to address local concerns for battery life, and lower prices to get market penetration. Only 24% of Indians have a smartphone and India is fastest growing market. Friction with the Modi government which cannot be favorable to Apple's plans to push a high  margin product when competitors have similar but better value packages.   In price sensitive markets of Africa and Asia most people buy phones outright and use pay as you go plans, Apple is not popular. Even in China Apple's market share is down from 12.5% in 2015 to 8% in 2017, according to Canalys. Apple is reluctant to make many models offering lower prices and to address concerns such as battery life in India. In India 39 million people will add smartphones in 2018 with 75% costing less than $250, 95% costing less than $500. In Apple's lineup the iPhone 7 costs around $550. Competitors such as Xiaomi, OnePlus, Oppo, and Vivo flooded India with smartphones costing less than $200. Unlike Apple which spurns market research these companies do extensive research work on local situation. OnePlus has focussed on battery life and gained 30% share of the premium segment to Apple's 25%. By making the devices in India these companies avoid having to pay the 20% tariff. Apple has so far not put up a new plant with the restriction that India places of single brand retailers over 51% foreign owned to buy locally 30% of manufacturing materials. The Modi government felt Apple was not focussed enough on bringing high tech jobs to India and helping local manufacturing, a perception not conducive to expansion in India where "Made in India" is the government plan. This means opening Apple stores in India is less likely now.  The turnover of Apple India executives is also increasing with 3 new CEO's 2017- 2019. Apple's strategy of targeting wealthier Indians makes it not even a fringe player in the Indian market down to 1% of the market. Just as it shrinks in the Chinese market where most customers are price sensitive and the economy is slowing.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What is the role of a small wine importer of European wines who supplies local stores in NY city, and other similar business, in a issue of $1 trillion trade imbalances that destroyed American manufacturing and millions of jobs as large US business corporations shipped manufacturing to China? 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? ...

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.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Trump administration's early proposal for NAFTA moves away from campaign pledges to completely renegotiate the treaty, instead taking the approach of working to improve the U.S. trade position in relation to Mexico and Canada. It includes seven objectives for tougher rules for labor and the environment favored by Democrats in Congress, and it also has support from Republicans with its effort to update NAFTA for changes in technology and in other areas since the accord was signed during the Clinton administration. The area in which U.S. and Mexican business are wary is one in which the Trump administration still seeks to keep the option of imposing protective tariffs, and a border-adjusted tax to level playing field for differences in taxes, as well as other measures to protect American jobs and interests. Because any renegotiated NAFTA also has to pass both houses of Congress this proposal took into account the different constituencies and interests for this issue. Robert Lighthizer, trade representative under president Reagan is likely to become the next U.S. Trade Representative and lead negotiator. We first profiled Lighthizer in a group in Lyrarc for pointing to the need for a level playing field in trade. As early as 2010 Lighthizer argued in op-ed articles that globalization and trade practices should ensure a level playing field for the U.S., and was covered in Lyrarc. ...

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. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hillary Clinton attacks Trump's policies in an address in Warren, Michigan, saying this was another version of failed trickle down economics. She called Trump's idea of taxing pass through entities such as small business reporting business income on individual tax returns at 15%, as a "Trump loophole." On trade policy Hillary Clinton said she would oppose the TPP or Trans- Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement that president Obama has supported. She put it flatly- " I oppose it now. I'll oppose it after the election, and I'll oppose it as president." And pointed out that too many companies have moved jobs overseas and "moved operations overseas and sold back into the U.S." after pushing for trade deals. The answer she said 'is not to rant and rave- or to cut us off from the world," in reference to protectionist policies Trump has supported.