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
  “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
It is not clear what this bazooka is. China's leaders are studying the economy carefully. Recent actions for stimulus were designed to offset weak performance of stock markets which have rebounded with Shanghai index up 11% into positive territory. Consumption spending is weak with worries about the safety net and propensity to save so that lower mortgage rates will mean households will pay of their mortgage first before increasing spending. Real estate construction is weak after bankruptcies in this sector. Some suggestions are for China to improve its safety net as in the US for working class people, low income families- to give them better medical insurance. And increase pensions of farmers, migrant workers, and low income families. They may still be inclined to save yet it is a move in the right direction as is happening in the US, and the trend worldwide is to reduce stark social divisions. China just lacks the resources for the kind of revival in the US that Harris has planned. As long as the US was frittering away its resources in foreign wars it had one hand tied behind it's back, as long as it did not invest these dollars going to wars overseas in the domestic economy it would languish and fall behind. It was in this sense Joe Biden who did the hard work that Trump after raising the alarm signals failed to do for lack of focus, and now it is Harris who is building the game plan for the kind of US that led the US into the twentieth century once before- optimism, imagination and hard work. ...

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

LyrArc Article Gist
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
Much of what is written here about Xi Jinping pursuing Chinese socialist vision was known since he became president in 2013 when China's Communist party was losing its appeal, and efforts were made to seize power within the communist party by a leader in the western province of Chongqing. Bo Xi Lai attempted to take advantage of the situation with appeals to the working class and without any genuine commitment beyond a power grab. It was well known that Xi Jinping is a son of one of the veterans of the Communist party under Mao, Xi Zhongxun, unlike leaders who followed premier Deng Xiaoping such as Jiang Zemin. Zemin was a relatively unknown figure who was in university during the crucial period of 1947-49 when Mao came to power in mainland China. It would not be correct to say that little was known about Xi's own ideas about socialism as the long term answer to China's problems. Xi also came in as president at a time when the Communist party was losing its appeal to working class people after three administrations that followed premier Den Xiaoping. These three administrations followed a form of state capitalism that allowed companies to pollute the environment, compete without any regulations, and allowed to operate without any controls as long as they pursued growth aggressively and expanded the economy.There was an effort by Communist party regional leader in western Chinese province of Chongqing, Bo Xi Lai, to use this as an opportunity to grab power in China. During his first year as president Xi had to resolve this issue by having a court trial after revelations of corruption and misuse of power by Bo Xi Lai.  Xi's father Zhongxun's role in the revolutionary movement offers clues to Xi's own convictions and faith in the party. Zhongxun was a communist soldier who set up the revolutionary base areas in Shanxi-Gansu northwest border region of China that provided a refuge for Mao's army following the Long March. Other clues come from Zhongxun's role as head of propaganda during the period after 1944 and in 1952. Xi's family background particularly on his mother's side shows a fervent commitment to Chinese socialist vision during the chaotic years when the Japanese invaded China and Chiang Kai-Shek's nationalist forces failed to defend China's sovereignty. One reason Xi has been less understood is that little attention is paid to Xi's mother, Qi Xin who was highly educated and fervently believed in Chinese socialism and nationalist spirit during the Japanese invasion in 1938. In fact Qi Xin had to leave middle school after the Japanese took over Beijing. She joined the Counter Japanese Political and Military University to continue education and in 1941 attended the Central Party school. She met Xi's father Zhongxun in 1944. In 1953 she enrolled in the Marx School of Communism, and it was her position at the school that offered her husband added protection during the Cultural Revolution that affected Deng Xiaoping and others. With such a history in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's it is likely that Xi was profoundly influenced by his father's role in the revolutionary movement, and his mother's faith in socialism with national spirit as the way to protect against the foreign invasions. It would now appear that by the time Xi joined the Politburo in 2003 there was no question about the future course China would take given the role of his parents, and the events of 1938 the fall of Beijing, his mother having to flee, and the events that followed. Xi showed resilience during the period of the Great Proletarian Revolution when he was sent to the villages at a time when he would be studying in school and college. He was sent to an agricultural commune in largely rural Shanxi province where he worked as a manual laborer alongside other people and developed a relationship with the local farmers. Unlike other leaders during that period which could even be said about premier Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Xi took a different lesson from this experience largely because his father and mother were committed to the socialist vision for the long run. His father was still not fully rehabilitated by premier Chou en-lai when Xi was allowed to enter Beijing's Tsinghua University in 1975. He studied chemical engineering at Tsinghua graduating in 1979. Upon graduation he worked as a assistant for 3 years to a vice premier who was minister of defense. He then left Beijing for Hebei province to work as a deputy secretary of the provincial CCP. He was made Mayor of Xiamen, then governor of Fujian province in 1999 where he tackled environmental conservation before moving to Zheziang province. His father passed away in 2002 and it would appear that he was carefully trained in different provinces instead of staying in Beijing, for a position of national leadership. Xi got his break in 2007 when the upper leadership of Shanghai city was tainted in a wide ranging pension fund scheme. He was made party secretary for Shanghai. This was the position Jiang Zemin had held before he succeeded premier Deng Xiaoping. In only a few months in October 2007 Xi was made one of the 8 Politburo members, ready to succeed Hu Jintao as president. Xi's perception of being sent to the villages and making it to university education was that it was part of the long run socialist struggle, with pain that his father had also endured as simply a phase in which things would be right in the end. Xi's mother comes across as a resilient figure and one who had herself gone through the struggles of the 1930's and aided her husband on one occasion. Some of this resilience could have been passed on to the son. Xi's wife is a zealous participant in Chinese dance and music performances that created enthusiasm for the Chinese socialist revolution from the 1930's period. In his conversations  with colleagues in the party, in culture and temperament, Xi has been forthright about this background and his style of work.  Xi is unlike premier Deng and the presidents who succeeded him such as Hu Jintao mentored by a former mayor of Shanghai Jiang Zemin who came to power in 1989. Xi is more in line with the leaders around Mao like his father in his outlook and thinking, with a cautious temperament that comes from years going through ups and downs of political struggles. He is once said to have responded with dismay about being in a top position in the government knowing how precarious this had been for his father. The education at Tsinghua, his engineering background, and his easy familiarity with farmers in the provinces, mean that he understands China and its history well enough to have the confidence to shape Chinese policies in a way that none of his predecessors had except Mao, premier Chou-en-lai, Liu Shao Chi and a few veterans from that time in the 1930's. That Xi waited patiently for so long to gradually assert his ideas about socialist vision for China may be the surprising part of his behaviour till 2021.  It may be that he wanted to make the changes only after he could persuade party leaders and colleagues of his vision and long run goals. And because the Chinese economy had grown so large that it would take time to steer the ship in a different direction for the long term. In most of the negotiations with president Trump he cautiously let trade negotiators handle the situation, all the time learning about how to tackle problems of China's relationship with US and Europe. US president Biden also has a vision that is veering towards a socialist perspective in terms of bringing gains of progress to workers and families. So does Mr. Trump, Mr. Boris Johnson in UK, and Social Democrat's Scholz in Germany. It is both economic and political as Mr. Xi is quoted as saying in this WSJ report. The necessities of such action are both economic, social and politically driven as capitalism has veered way off course.  In this report it is mentioned that Soho China 40% stake was taken by a large capital markets firm in New York in the hope of large gains, as Soho China developer was a tycoon who wanted to leave China. Seeing it as not favorable to his company following events in Hong Kong. This behaviour of capital markets groups in New York and tech companies in Silicon Valley, driven by profits and not aware of the social and economic problems of working class American families is a problem in the US and in Europe. It is also what has driven so many large tech companies to expand manufacturing operations in China, that hurt US manufacturing capabilities and American workers jobs- an issue raised by president Trump and taken up by president Biden. Biden has already moved to make Intel Corporation change its plans and invest in American manufacturing technologies in a quietly implemented U turn. US president Biden is left with the unenviable job of solving this huge problem during the pandemic. He has also committed to a somewhat socialistic vision with a $3.5 trillion plan for workers and families, as has vice chancellor Scholz in Germany with his own version of programs, after the failures of unregulated forms of capitalism. Scholz goes so far as to say his mission is to show that there is really no such thing as a self-made man, that it is help from society, his fellow citizens, and government, that makes it possible for him to do his work. In a sense the world is shifting away from Reagan forms of capitalism without regulation after seeing disastrous results during the pandemic. Not just China. Some form of government guidance and regulations are now seen as essential in China, the US, UK, Germany and India for a better society and a better, healthier life, and for opportunity for all in each country.   ...

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
Nicolas Tenzer, who teaches at Sciences Po in Paris, says that the new relationship between U.S. president Trump  and the French president Macron, is a result of Macron having the capacity to react quickly and follow his intuition. He says there is even a bit of seduction in this for the younger Macron to bring the older Trump back into the circle, knowing that Europe needed someone who could talk to the American president in a way that others did not choose to or just could not. This includes chancellor Merkel of Germany. The relationship started out awkwardly with Macron expressing some disdain after the Trump decision to withdraw from the Paris climate change agreement. Soon after the initial differences Macron's spokesperson Castaner said that it was an important task, that "of bringing the president of the United States back into the circle." It is an intelligent move and typical of Macron to move quickly and do things that make sense in the interest of the EU and America. On Bastille day the French are also honoring the U.S. for the sacrifices in two wars, and it made sense to bring the U.S. president in so that other differences could be set aside to work together on issues such as terrorism, mutual security, and trade. It is not uncommon to have seen such differences, and they were handled differently in the past. German chancellor Schmidt had a difficult relationship with president Jimmy Carter. Carter with his rural Georgia background as a peanut farmer was seen in the way Trump is seen in many parts of Europe. President Bush was also treated with skepticism in Germany, more for policies of going to war in Iraq.  For Macron it shows his uncanny ability to do things which for other people may not sound convincing. Being critical of the U.S. president may also have set the stage for a real relationship because it may have earned him the respect of being someone who had his views and was not hesitant to express them, just as he was on Algeria and other issues. And yet willing to have a friendly, open conversation with someone from a different background and with different views. At Lyrarc we singled out the Spiegel Macron interview on the fast train to Bordeaux, as something that showed him to be comfortable and calm  in unusual settings, and not affected by the magnitude of the task at hand or people's opinions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With so much coverage of other aspects of China,  to really understand China and Xi Jinping one has to understand the rural urban situation in China. Xi's long experience as a teenager in the cultural revolution of Mao was in rural areas, the 8 years he spent there till the age of 22, as this report by James Areddy with help of Yijun, Cheng and Qi aptly shows. It traces the shift and mass migration to cities starting with Deng's modernization drive in 1979. This shift of labor to city and town factories as the U.S. and Europe shifted factories and production to China is the story of our times. How it has both helped and hurt China and how it has become the dominant issue of our times, and a lesson for India in the middle of its own modernization and shift of labor to cities. It has helped China modernize with the shift during 1979 to 2016 and run into a road block with president Trump leading a movement in the U.S. of people most hurt by the outsourcing of factories and production to China. It was not meant to be this way. Yet the shift also led to ripping up the fabric of communities and towns with loss of factories across America over three decades. Because China is a large country the impact was huge decade after decade, leading to a backlash against lost jobs in the U.S. and in Europe.  Xi Jinping has romantic view of rural China as he spent 7 years in Shanxi province rural areas during the cultural revolution under Mao. During this period he toiled as part of farm labor alongside villagers which allowed him to get to know villagers and farmers in the countryside well, and formed his view of the world around him. As it is described in a description of the man in Chinese sources- "He arrived at the village as a slightly lost teenager and left as a 22 year old man determined to do something for the people."  China's system separated migrants from city dwellers not  giving same rights to better education, to schools and housing, and official documents separating the two, city dwellers and migrant populations from rural areas. As a result as China modernized and population shifted -shown here in excellent graphic charts over four decades- in 1979 from about 80% in rural areas and 20% in urban the shift goes to 50-50 by 2001. Today it is 40-60 with 60% in rural areas but a population of 40% suffering from severe inequalities and  low incomes. So that GDP per capita of $10,000 for China is deceiving. The real incomes in average disposable income is about $4300 in urban and $1700 in rural area, according to National Bureau of Statistics. High school education is hard enough to get in rural areas, medical care is very basic and the $1700 would hardly get a room in low income housing in a large town in China, says premier Li Keqiang. Keqiang did his masters thesis on urbanization and has studied this shift from his college days. Just as in Gandhi's India, Mao's China is the story of the villages, with 128,000 villages for 600 million people in Mr. Xi Jinping's anti-poverty drive. Hong Kong other issues have to be understood in the context of these concerns of China's leadership today- the sense that strong central leadership alone can keep the country together and bring a decent life to the people in the villages and in the countryside outside the cities.  Modernization of cities still set in the context of China's vast rural population and essential to its full uplift and progress. Xi has allocated $80 billion each year to bring roads, schools, medical facilities, and other amenities including electricity and modern heating. The idea now is to shift people back to the villages, find opportunities for jobs and livelihoods in farming, tourism with guesthouse facilities, and other occupations in the villages. The villages are being turned into attractive places to live one by one in this party drive and providing new enthusiasm and support for the party's efforts. India can learn from this experience in China. The western nations of the U.S. and Europe can no longer and will no longer undertake the wholesale shift of factories with loss of jobs to China or India to offer the prospect of bringing these countries to the kind of urbanization and overall prosperity of small nations like Japan and South Korea, which are a tiny fraction of the population of China and India+ Pakistan + Bangladesh. As a result China is changing strategy now with a return to some aspects of the informal economy in Chengdu with street peddlers and tiny retail, and return of migrants back to better built and improved villages in the countryside. A better life than in cities is possible this view says for people from these rural areas, if the rural areas are given modern facilities and construction and resources are allocated, job creation locally tackled. The villages can offer better air quality, better quality of life where villagers who earlier migrated to cities with ownership of land, when they are modernized with better roads and have better facilities for education, housing and healthcare, better amenities. The new approach is to strike a good balance for urbanization, by modernizing and investing in villages and small towns, so that cities can cope and overall life can be better than with mass migration and wholesale urbanization. It is also a balance that works well for the U.S. and Europe which can redirect manufacturing to their home regions as part of a better distributed and balanced supply chain than the one that was unwittingly built over the last three decades.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bill Clinton, says about his foundation, in talking to voters in Detroit- " all we have done is save lives. If creating jobs and saving lives is bad, I guess you can zing me with it." He told another crowd in Durham, N.C, that he was tickled by Trump's comment that the Clinton Foundation was a "criminal enterprise." The criticism of the foundation hurts Mr. Clinton because of the lifesaving work it has done for AIDS, malaria and saving lives. The Clinton Foundation made the error of taking donations from overseas in the zeal for donations, which gave some critics an opportunity to smear the foundation. Another error was not to strictly separate the work of Bill Clinton from Hillary's work at the State Department. Even though in its activities it has been exceptional in its work. In poor countries like Haiti it has helped people overcome poverty. On one achievement alone the Foundation's work is exceptional- bringing HIV/AIDS medication at affordable prices to 11.5 million people in 70 countries. It has also worked to reduce obesity among American school children, and improved lives through its health initiative, including lives of farmers in African countries. George W. Bush did exceptional work in Africa for AIDS/HIV. Clinton's activities continue an American tradition of helping people in Africa's poorest regions.  In this case the funds raised aggressively by Bill Clinton during speeches, were used to save lives or improve lives. This has been lost in the criticism of the Clinton foundation, as if the good work done by George W. Bush for AIDS in Africa can ever be fairly diminished in the slightest way by criticism of the Bush family. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new 600 page book by Attorney General William Barr in the outgoing Trump Administration is titled "One Damn Thing After Another" published by Harper Collins of News Corporation. The WSJ provides early details of the book including a meeting on Dec. 1 with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office, and the words exchanged as Trump insisted there was massive vote fraud and Barr replied there wasn't anything the Justice Department could find. Trump told Barr- "Leave and don't go back to your office. You are done right now, go Home," says this WSJ report. 

Barr now urges Republicans to look at an impressive list of younger candidates for the future of the party.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's statement calling for a list of goods for tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods leaves China without a clear response and facing new risks. The U.S. exports about $150 billion in goods to China so that China would have to impose penalties to respond at the same level. Placing restrictions on American firms on access to China's market, and imposing other penalties would have the effect of reinforcing the perception of unfair practices targeting American business and lead to hardening of U.S. response.  The U.S. sees itself as being in a better position with the U.S. economy experiencing a growth trend. China with large local government and bank debt faces a difficult situation. President Jinping's policy of reducing the risks of bad debt in the banking system involved sacrificing some growth to stabilize the system. China's GDP growth in 2017 was 6.9%, the target at 6.5%. Future targets and actual growth now look to be much lower.The trade war with the U.S. has the effect of dampening growth leading to calls for the central bank to loosen its monetary stance. In response to Trump's announcement the People's Bank of China pumped $31 billion into the nation's banks. China is studying Japan's response in the 1980's and 1990's when the U.S. took strong action against Japan's growing trade surplus. Japan responded by appreciating its currency and using stimulus to cushion the effect of lower exports on the economy. The stimulus led to the housing bubble and over time a period of low growth and stagnant economy. The large China stimulus in 2008-2009 has compounded the problems in the banking system. Not deleveraging and controlling financial risks in China's banking system because of the trade war would bring a new set of risks. ...