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.


Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute points to trade barriers reducing competition and free trade that should raise an outcry when free trade and competition advocates focus alone on the Trump steel tariffs. He points to estimates that show $90 billion in additional costs to Americans from the barriers that prevent Americans from paying world market prices for surgeries and medical treatment, prices similar to what is paid in advanced countries like Germany, Britain and France. A bigger barrier in pharmaceuticals prices being sheltered from market competition worldwide costs a huge $370 billion in additional costs to Americans. These two costs in healthcare would help Americans by a magnitude compared to tax cuts that do not work for average Americans with the business tax cut going more into share buybacks than into increasing wages or capital investment in 2018.  Bernstein points to Neil Irwin's column in the NYT that flags statements such as Senator Mike Lee, Republican, that the steel tariffs are a huge job killing tax hike, as being misleading. Bernstein says two actions were never taken that would have used benefits of free trade to help affected communities that lost jobs in industries such as steel and textiles, other industries affected by foreign competition.  He lists these steps as sectoral employment training, apprenticeships ,and job creation efforts in the worst affected areas. Basically no one really knows what is good trade policy, the textbook concepts and theories are out of date when countries can subsidize particular industries such as steel and dump products into the American market. At a press conference on CSPAN with the Swedish prime minister Mr. Trump stated that China was exporting more than what is officially shown as there are transshipments from other countries, some of them with no steel mills.  As Mr. Trump stated at that press conference he was elected partly because of the worst affected communities- in places such as Michigan and other states in the midwestern U.S.- that suffered from unfair trade. Bernstein admonishes the economists and politicians, media, for the headlines that are misleading in showing that bad trade policy is being pursued and trade wars are being started. This deserves attention because the Trump administration and advisors such as Lighthizer who served in the Reagan administration seek fair trade, and the Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross successfully pushed for NAFTA trade deal renegotiation not the outright rejection of NAFTA that was mentioned in the election campaign. Ironically no one is helped by this trade rhetoric and misleading headlines. In fact the strengthening of the U.S. currency as the huge trade surplus of China goes into U.S. assets, and with the election of Mr. Trump, gives foreign competitors a continued advantage. And in fact Japan, South Korea, China, had a mild response to the tariffs as reported, because these countries are aware of global overcapacity created especially by China which produces 50% of the world's steel, and as China shifts to higher technologically value added products closing many older steel mills. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Does a 10% reduction in tariffs on China with the October 30 2025 agreement- made in Busan South Korea at APEC meetings- make a difference for companies relocating from China? It only does for smaller companies who are stuck with Chinese sources. Larger American companies prefer to diversify their supply chain and continue to relocate part of their factories to Vietnam, India and other countries knowing that the tariffs game will end up with allies EU, Japan and India in the 10-15% tariff range as a concession to US for putting up with trade disadvantages and job losses 2000-2025. China's will still be at 47% in comparison and the fentanyl issue causing serious questions to be asked by the American people which have not been grasped in China or even in the US by companies and politicians.   Does it affect the urgency and general shift out of China? The fentanyl issue is unlikely to change and it is likely to do lasting damage to China's credibility to a degree that it not clearly understood in China, and even not fully grasped even in the US today because of the sheer size of the number dead- more young Americans dead from fentanyl than in the Korean, Vietnam and First World Wars combined. Other issues are technology that has been transferred without a proper assessment of the importance to national security, the need to shift the manufacturing base back home that US industries have inadvertently and carelessly shifted to China in the disastrous Bush and Obama years 2000-2016, and for the jobs, the wages, and cost of living concerns when supply chains are outside one's control. This article asks the question about tariffs on India and Brazil as being contradictory and showing a lack of consistency in tariffs. India is compared to China with India facing a 50% tariff because of Russian oil purchases, and Brazil a 100% tariff related to treatment of former president Bolsonaro even though US has a trade surplus with Brazil. One expects that at some point India and the US will come to an agreement that lowers the tariffs in a way that was done with the European Union to bring it closer to 10%. China's tariff to be sure is still around 47% dropping from 57% a concession for rare earths and for the upcoming elections and economic concerns not because of policy intent which has not changed on  strong action for fentanyl which is also part of the Appeal to the People in the DJT base.   ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin in the NYT why the U.S. China Phase 1 Trade Agreement is more than a hill of soyabeans as he puts it, more than about all the soyabeans that the U.S. farmers can sell to China. China's economy was seeing the effect of U.S. tariffs. Additional tariffs to cover all imports from China to the U.S. would have worsened this. China avoided this by agreeing to Phase 1. The U.S. had looked for some enforcement mechanism based on China putting this down in a written agreement particularly for avoiding subsidies to state enterprises and improper access to U.S. advanced technologies. China's reluctance to do this led to Mr. Trump saying that China had reversed its position and Trump expanding the tariffs stage by stage. These issues are now set aside for Phase 2 still to be negotiated. Both sides taking what they could get. China relief from the threat of tariffs on all exports. The U.S. under Mr. Lighthizer's negotiating leadership retaining the enforcement idea through the tariffs that are still in place of 25% on half of China's exports to the U.S. The bonus for Mr. Trump is the goodwill China generates by agreeing to buy all the U.S. farmers can produce, farmers having not only stood behind Mr. Trump but also forming a key part of his support base. China will continue to compete in technological areas with the U.S., and the state enterprise model which worked for China as Mr. Xi tells visitors will continue. Phase 2 is just that Phase 2, when and if it can be negotiated between Trump with his negotiator Lighthizer and Xi with his negotiator Liu He. On key points neither side is budging. A key goal for Mr. Trump is to put the trade surplus China enjoys of $300 plus billion a year with the U.S. on a serious downward path, and bring so many of the jobs and manufacturing back home. On this trade data for 2019 and the plan for 2020 of both countries is clear. It should be down each year by 10-20% for the next few years, a major achievement of Mr. Lighthizer, who did the same with  Japan under president Reagan. ...
WSJ Original article ›
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Comments on X that cause difficulty for DJT chief of staff Susie Wiles to keep a clear narrative and the loss in the Wisconsin SC election are leading to a sense that Elon Musk could be a political liability. DJT focus is on the midterms and keeping the majority in the House, which is also why Elise Stefanik was asked to not accept the job of UN Representative and remain in the US Congress. The immediate focus is on tackling the Tariffs Liberation Day action April 2, 2025 so that followup negotiations with about 50 countries including major ones with Japan, Taiwan, Israel, Britain followed by European Union, South Korea and other nations. This would reassure markets as country after country is developing a new trade relationship that respects US manufacturing goals. China could then be tackled as a special case with America limited to loss of $146 billion in energy and grain sales which would be diverted to Europe's energy needs and farmers could be given a $50-100 billion support package. China would then have to find a way to preserve its $1 trillion surplus without the American market  which would require it to find other markets, and create a domestic market, if it chose not to negotiate and accept American manufacturing goals. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
S. Korea and the U.S. propose limiting trade imbalances to 4% of each country's GDP by 2015. S. Korea is the host of the current G-20 meeting. Germany and Japan oppose this move, arguing that their governments cannot engineer such outcomes, as it was determined by economic activity in the private sector. Japan's representative, Finance Minister Yoshihiko Noda, said that while he was dubious about the idea of setting strict numerical goals, it would be acceptable to use them as reference numbers. Germany has traditionally opposed the idea. Germany wants to be counted as part of the European Union, rather than as a single nation, in any such reference goal. China has not commented on the target. S. Korea has presented the idea as a way to use more than currency exchange rates to achieve a global rebalancing. And People's Bank of China Deputy Gov. Yi Gang said Oct 10, that China is planning policies that could result in its surplus falling below 4% of GDP in 3 to 5 years, from about 5.8% in 2009....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Compromise reached at the October 2010 G-20 meeting in S. Korea to reduce trade imbalances, and for countries with current account surplus exceeding 4% of GDP (China 4.7% and Germany 6.1%) to bring these balances down by 2015. Countries with large current account deficits, Turkey 5.2% and South Africa 4.3%, were expected to bring their deficits down and increase national savings. The US is at 3.2%. The US proposal for a target was accepted by Japan as long as it was not a fixed target but a reference point. Germany was opposed, saying it was a return to planned economy thinking. China did not comment on the issue. Canada, Australia and the UK supported the US position. The compromise was an effort to continue pressure on China to redirect its policies away from exports to increasing domestic consumption, while still refraining from a fixed target. It also takes some of the pressure off a fast track currency rebalancing, with China expected to increase the value of the yuan, but given more flexibility than the rhetoric would suggest....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ story shows how China started its steel industry from small beginnings when Chinese leader Deng visited a Nippon Steel plant in 1978. He made the decision to go big with Baosteel, with an investment of $6 billion, with the words- "if we do it lets do it big." This was 36 times the Chinese foreign exchange reserves at the time. From 4% of steel production, this went up and up, passing the U.S. in 1993, past Japan in 1996, and in 2018 producing three times the steel of U.S., Russia and China combined, producing 923 million metric tons of steel in 2018, or more than half of world production of steel. With steel China was able to build its automobile industry, shipbuilding, bridges, infrastructure, high speed rail network. This was done using global demand, subsidies from the government, cheap loans and tax breaks. Markets worldwide were affected by substantial excess production in China. From Baosteel the spread of the steel industry to all 23 Chinese provinces led to China accounting for 25% of world exports. By 2016 5 million workers mostly from the agrarian countryside were employed in the steel industry, helping China transform itself into an rapidly urbanizing and modern economy. It was a period when the rail network was tripled between 1975-2017, with shipping companies that ensured access to Australian coal and Brazilian iron ore. From 2011 to 2017 Chinese steel dropped global prices by 57% triggering closure of steel mills in EUrope and the U.S. About a third of trade complaints since 2001 by G20 countries against China are about steel. After entry into the WOrld Trade Organization Chinese steel exports rose to 8% of GDP from 2%. Subsidies, cheap energy, and shift of agrarian workers to cities. U.S. investigations around 2006 showed Chinese steelmakers subsidies covered 30% to 45% of the subsidized value of steel pipes exported overseas. China's steel prices were set 20-40% lower than the U.S. China responded to complaints saying it was trade protectionism. The WTO rules call for full disclosing of all subsidies. This was disclosed 5 years after joining WTO in 2001, and only for central subsidies. Local government subsidies were not disclosed till 2016- the U.S. says 15 years late. Still the Bush and Obama administrations failed to take action. In 2018 Mr. Trump seized on this as a campaign issue that resonated with American workers in manufacturing communities across the U.S. In 2018 November president Trump announced a 25% tariff on imports of Chinese steel. A six month probe by U.S. officials had already shown 40% of sales value came from subsidies for corrosion resistant steel from China. The U.S. Trade Commission imposed tariffs of its own from 39% to 241%, with the Trump tariffs of 25% coming as an additional tariff to tackle the trade surplus with China. Meanwhile in China the government is closing uncompetitive smaller steel mills and in 2016 it combined baosteel with Wuhan Steel to create a larger company, and consolidate remaining companies. Baosteel now provides the steel for CIMC to dominate the steel container business, and to make ship to shore cranes, and make the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.  It also goes to show what can be accomplished from small beginnings for countries in the developing world from Asia to Africa and Latin America, with government and industry focussed on development and growth.   ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a first at Davos World Economic Forum, China's president Xi Jinping uses the 2017 meeting to give a one hour long spirited defense of the world trading system, critical of U.S. president elect Trump's protectionist views without naming him. Xi pointed out that "no one will be winners in a trade war." And went on to add that restricting world trade was like "locking oneself in a dark room, keeping out wind and rain from outside but also light and air." For the first time Jinping stated that China would take the U.S. role of defending the world trading system from attack as needed. On climate change Xi defended the Paris accords, and gave China's commitment to pursue changes regardless of what the U.S. under president Trump does. This follows Chancellor Merkel of Germany's statements on the issue critical of the views of president elect Trump, and taking the lead to defend the world trading system. Xi also pointed out that many of the ills that led to voter discontent in the West were not really from the freeing up of trade but from the pursuit of excessive profit with the financial crisis of 2008.   ...
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This is an interview with Columbia University economic historian Adam Tooze about the international trade and economic issues brought about by globalization. The rapid emergence of China in manufacturing and overcapacity in steel has led to action on steel tariffs by president Trump. Tooze is typical of opinion that sees action by Trump not as limited action to level the playing field  as proposed by Trade Representative for the U.S., Robert Lighthizer, but as reckless move on trade.  Lyrarc.com shows articles from the WSJ and NYT showing how opinion got to this point in the U.S., on Robert Lighthizer's views that the U.S. was not facing a level playing field, and  on how trade has hurt communities across the U.S. a long distance away from Silicon Valley. President Trump's views reflect a different perspective that says the U.S. has to balance the favorable situation obtained by China and the European Union through moves of its own to protect U.S. interests. Political commentary that the U.S. was starting a trade war is not supported by the facts showing China's response as muted and a willingness by China to negotiate a balanced trading relationship as its trade surplus with the U.S. continues to grow. The trade surplus is so large that the Trump moves do not tell the real story. They are likely to be overshadowed by the increasing value of the U.S. dollar leading to a continued favorable situation for Chinese exports and a larger trade surplus in 2018, regardless of Mr. Trump's action.  Trump's moves are more significant in other areas- limiting China's access to advanced technologies, with the European Union also taking the same action. This is now the new field of competition for the major world economies. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
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. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Actually some of this is a healthy development as more nations and people have a stake in the world economy. Take the Brazil situation for example . Clearly the Brazilian people are more favorable to globalization and its benefits than they were a decade ago at the height of the Asian crisis and the contagion effect on Brazil. Actually the advantages of free trade and a global trading system that benefits Brazil as well as China and India and other countries that buy its commodities such as iron ore is more now than ever because these nationas are benefitting from this trade. Because of the high prices of commodities and the agricultural products of Brazil, it has a currrent account surplus and its currency is strengthening. Instead of having to go to the IMF for assistance Brazil has large foreign exchange reserves that support its currency and which help it push up its investments as a share of GDP from 19% to closer to 25%, which should enable it to sustain about 5% growth year after year., according to Sergio Vale of MB Associados. A strong real, lower interest rates, and consumer credit have boosted the purchasing power of the middle class and the antipoverty programs of the Lula government have helped the poorer classes have a stake in the development. According to a recent Observador/Ipsos survey 23 million Brazilians have left social classes D and E and joined class C whose distinctive markings are a rented apartment, a car and some new gadgets. Actually quite to the contrary of the impression created by this article Brazil according to a former central bank governor is now showing a new enthusiasm for this kind of development which encompasses free trade and markets, a feeling that the stockmarket is not a casino and being part of the world economy is a good thing. The big discoveries of oil at Tupi and Carioca-Sugar Loaf in Atlantic offshore waters by Petrobras even though they are in miles deep waters and require special expertise must only have reinforced this mood. The danger to Brazil's enthusiasm comes not from nationalism of different countries trying to find better ways of meeting the aspirations of their people but from the risks in a global slowdown that started with the US subprime and mortgage crisis, the resulting credit tightening, and fall in consumption thats expected after years of overspending by the American consumer. Its now upto these individual countries, like Brazil, China, India and Russia, Japan as well as Germany France and other countries that are not directly part of the housing bubble and subprime and mortgage securitization mess affecting the USA, and the UK and Ireland and Spain to a lesser extent, to find ways of maintaining more modest but still substantial growth to meet the growing aspirations of people in these countries. In this sense the policy errors and regulatory errors made during this last decade in the US will actually have hurt the world economy and markets in a serious manner, and it is this that has now to be managed in a better way by these countries with the close cooperation between them and the USA. The situation in Brazil is repeated in the experience of India, China and Russia where for the first time there is enthusiasm for being part of the world economy. In the light of this development there is more reason for hope and more need for careful navigation mechanisms for these and other countries to weather the difficulties from a global slowdown and still sustain development that itself could help the USA work its way out of the current crisis through its exports....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Pearlstein points to the need for the structural changes in the U.S., Europe and China to address the serious imbalances that are at the root of the problem. This process will be painful and mean a short term drag on the economy even if the right actions are taken. The process of unwinding the imbalances will take time. Lower growth in China will be good for the bubble in real estate markets and the reduction in the trade surplus, even though this will reduce imports of European and U.S. machinery. Higher savings in the U.S. and reduction of consumer debt will slow retail sales but this is healthy for longer term growth. The same is true for savings in deficit reduction that will result in more layoffs at the local level. The government needs to have similiar action take place at the banks to end their "extend and pretend" practices and finally write off bad loans in residential and commercial real estate. There is no easy way out, no solutions that can be made without a sharing of the pain. Policy makers around the world have tried to look for painless solutions for years and this may be the end of the road. There is some action that the governments and central banks can take. Pearlstein suggests that the European Central Bank buy up some of the sovereign bonds being dumped on the market even if it means printing money. The Fed, the Bank of Japan and the central bank of China can also swap some of the Treasuries they own for European sovereign bonds. This would give time for the EU leaders to give the European Financial Stability Facility the resources and powers to replace the sovereign bonds with more reliable European bonds. The Fed can take this opportunity to sell some of its huge pile of Treasury bills into the market so that it has more room for action in future years. The U.S. government can move up the spending for infrastructure in years 8, 9, and 10 to the next 2-3 years to give some support to the economy as these changes take place. The spending decisions should be left to an independent Infrastructure Bank. See the related article by Krauthammer in the Washington Post, August 5, 2011, which provides a companion policy prescription for U.S. deficit reduction based on the work done by the Bowles-Simpson Commission and by preserving efficiency and fairness....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tourists from China went up by 20% in 2015, going over 1 million. Foreign enrollment at Australian educational institutions was up significantly in 2015, going up to 645,000, up 25% over 2012 with the weaker Australian dollar. Australia's services sector including inbound education and tourism exceeded in value the minerals and metal ores exports in the last two months of 2015. This enabled the Australian economy to grow by 3% in the 4th quarter of 2015 over the prior year.
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The dollar is not expected to suffer asharp drop even though problems of increasing debt, and China's pegging of the yuan to the dollar remain for the future.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman says China's inflation is raising labor costs in China, and in this way gradually reducing the undervaluation of the yuan vs the dollar. But he cautions this would take a long time, 4-5 years. The U.S. faces the costs of high unemployment close to 10% today, and this requires serious efforts now to reduce the undervaluation. It alone will not solve America's problems. It is one of a number of actions that need to be taken and not put off again.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Senate voted 79-19 to go forward with a bill on sanctions against China for undervaluation of the yuan. The IMF says China's currency is "substantially undervalued."
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson says the bill in the U.S. Senate is symbolic because it allows companies to cite the undervalued renminbi as an illegal subsidy and have the Commerce Department impose duties on Chinese products. This would have to be done on a case by case basis, making it largely ineffective in dealing with the large trade deficit with China. He also cites the differences among economists that show a range between 1 million and 2.8 million jobs lost. The 2.8 million jobs estimate is from the Economic Policy Institute for the period 2001-2010. The 1 million is an estimate for 1990-2007, which estimates a loss of quarter of all manufacturing jobs. By WTO rules subsidies that are not targeted at specific industries or firms are allowed, according to lawyers. Which means China could appeal to the WTO, and impose retaliatory duties. In the meantime the trade deficit with China, with imports of $364 billion in 2010, and $86 billion in exports, would remain largely unaffected. This is the reason some Senators, including Republican Orrin Hatch (Utah), see this move as political posturing by President Obama and the Democrats, because the administration has no new proposals to address the trade deficit and the gradual erosion of America's manufacturing base. Samuelson cites Arvind Subramanium of the Peterson Institute, and his book "Eclipse: Living in the Shadow of China's Economic Dominance." Subramanium says what is at stake is not a temporary imbalance in world trade a happened with Japan in the 1980's, but a gradual shift to a system of trade in which China has preferential access to raw materials (oil, grain, minerals), subsidizes exports in new industries as it moves upscale from shoes and textiles to automobiles, aircraft and alternative energy, and changes the very nature of the global trading system as it becomes the dominant trading nation in the world. By Subramanium's estimate China's share of global trade increased from 1.6% to 9.8% in the 2 decades from 1990 to 2010. In two more decades he estimates China could increase this to 15% of global trade, significantly larger than the U.S. In a response to Congressmen, businessmen and policymakers wary of starting a trade war, Samuelson says there already is a trade war as a "fixed" system of trade undermines America's manufacturing and industrial base. The only difference being that today only one side is fighting that war, and America is slow to grasp the implications or its policymakers are clueless how to respond....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The yuan is up 5.5% since the peg to the dollar ended in 2010, reaching 6.469 to the dollar. But this is not helping the U.S. trade deficit. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the price of imports from China are up 2.8% in May over the same month prior year. And the trade surplus for China in the first four months of 2011 is higher than the same period in 2010. What is happening? The improvements in productivity of Chinese manufacturers and the acceptance of lower margins is reducing the effects on trade balance of a small appreciation of the yuan, so that only a fraction of that appreciation is showing up in higher prices for Chinese goods. Also significant is that the yuan's small appreciation against the dollar is not enough to make up for the dollar's fall against other currencies. The yuan is down 8.3% against the euro and has actually declined 3.7% on a trade weighted basis in the last year.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Inflation in China and rising wages are pushing up costs for American manufacturers. The pressure on China, most recently in Congress, is helping to push up the value of the yuan. This combined trend is making it attractive for some manufacturers to bring factories home to the U.S. A trend in the U.S. towards non-unionized labor and the new trend to a two-tier wage level- with lower wages for entry level workers- and the shedding of legacy health care costs, is creating a more cost competitive labor force in the U.S. This extends from older industries such as furniture and auto components to newer industries and technology. The new factories setup in the U.S. use technologies that require a smaller number of workers, in most cases less than half the number of workers that were employed earlier. This adds another element in cost efficiency, though it means fewer jobs are created with new plants.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Journal editorial which advises patience, comes on the day after the U.S. Senate voted 79-19 to move forward with a bill on sanctions against China for undervaluation of the yuan. The editorial says the Chinese currency has come down 30% since 2005, and inflation in China is reducing the advantage China gains by keeping its currency valuation low. Over time the editorial suggests China will see a decline in trade surpluses similiar to the experience with Japan, and emphasizes the importance of the two leading trading nations U.S. and Britain not repeating the experience of the 1930's with the Smoot-Hawley retaliatory tariffs legislation. The Journal quotes American economic historian Charles Kindleberger: "When every country turned to protect its national private interest, the world public interest went down the drain, and with it the private interests of all."
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Researchers David Autor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Gordon Hanson of the University of California, San Diego, and David Dorn of the Center for Monetary and Fiscal Studies in Madrid, in independent research, studied the impact of trade on 722 clusters of interrelated counties in the U.S. They focussed on the surge in Chinese imports and found a pattern. Counties with higher exposure to Chinese import growth showed higher unemployment and higher expenditures by the government for unemployment benefits, food stamps and disability benefits. Their calculations show the increased government payments amount to one to two thirds of the gains from trade with China. This does not include the losses suffered by people losing jobs who deplete savings as they look for new jobs. Hanson studied the effects of trade and Chinese imports in the 1990's and found the effects were relatively small. This time the effects are large and show counties that lacked local investments in industrial machinery and technologies in which China was still playing catchup such as Caterpillar in Peoria, Illinois, and Boeing in Everett, Washington, were most susceptible to higher jobless rates and in need of government support payments. Autor and Hanson found that from 2000-2007, communities in the 75th percentile- ones with greater exposure to Chinese import growth than 75% of all communities- saw a manufacturing jobless rate of about one-third more than communities in the 25th percentile. The government payments mean higher taxes or larger deficits are needed to support these communities, and long periods of unemployment reduce the incentive to work. Michael Spence, a Nobel prize winning economist from New York University, says the world has never seen such a rapid pace of growth as China experienced between 2000-2011, with rates approaching 12% in some years, making past experience and prevailing theories on trade an insufficient guide to what is happening....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A recent study by the IMF shows that China has accumulated foreign exchange reserves that are twice what would be needed for traditional purposes such as supporting the economy in a financial crisis. China is still very much a developing country with per capita annual income of $3000, low consumer spending, and rising inflation. This makes the policy of accumulating reserves and preserving an undervalued exchange rate to support export companies counterproductive. There is growing debate about this as inflation is becoming difficult to control. Yu Yongding, an advisor to the PBOC monetary policy committee says China as a developing country should not be exporting capital, which should be used to raise living standards. A rising exchange rate would increase spending power of people throughout China. Fan Gang, head of China's National Economic Research Institute, was a member of the central bank monetary policy committee. He wrote in a recent essay arguing for a higher exchange rate, and societal, tax and other changes that help increase China's household spending. Central Bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan said recently that China's foreign exchange reserves have exceeded reasonable levels that the country needs, adding to inflation risks and making it difficult to conduct monetary policy. The reserves are now over $3 trillion, pasing that mark in March 2011 after increasing 25% in the last year....

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