LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Gerson offers his assessment of president Obama's 7 years in office, saying that after this period the public has lost faith in American liberalism, that Obama held it all together through a self-centredness that is now replaced by public rage that has brought out other self-centred politicians in the Republican party, such as Donald Trump. Deutsche Welle summed up its view from Europe of the Obama presidency as a period that was little more than a transitional presidency. Gero Schliess writing in DW.com, says one of the tragedies of this presidency is that the much talked about change would come about only under a successor, in a best case scenario under a Democratic successor. Yet if Gerson is right Americans are losing faith in American liberalism after the Obama years, with the setbacks suffered by the white working class and the middle class in these years, and the political deadlock that has prevented action to help them. Speaker Paul Ryan recently convened a conference on this subject. In October 2014 Fed chairwoman Janet Yellen described the problem at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston conference on economic opportunity and inequality, questioning whether the trends were "compatible with the values rooted in our nation's history, and the high value Americans tend to place on equality of opportunity."...

LyrArc Article Gist
This piece by Jonathan Martin in the NYT says some Republican party establishment donors and leaders now agree with Ted Cruz's assessment of the 2016 U.S. presidential election- the critical element will be rallying the Republican base to win in 2016. As Tom Hamburger points out in the Washington Post, Cruz is using technology to advantage in the campaign effort to rally evangelical base support, and working to build support from the ground up.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's executive order reversing parts of the Clean Power Plan of president Obama may extend the life of older coal powered plants, but overall it is unlikely to change the shift away from coal for the U.S. utility industry. It will do little to reverse the market forces that are leading to a shift to natural gas for the utility industry with the increasing availability of natural gas. In this WSJ report Cassandra Sweet cites Duke Energy Corp. CEO Lynn Good, who says natural gas for Duke will be the leading fuel followed by coal by 2026, and natural gas now makes up 28% of its mix with coal at 34%. He says a $11 billion ten year investment in natural gas and renewable energy will go through regardless of what the Trump administration does because of the economics- the declining price of renewables, the competitive price of natural gas. Companies are loath to base their long term plans on changes in administration as they see the economics dictated by advances in technology, and the general sense that cleaner energy is here to stay for the long run. Already in the U.S. 34% of total power supplies are from natural gas and 30% from coal for 2016, according to the U.S. Energy Department. This may change slightly as coal is used where it is economical and makes sense without the carbon rules, yet the long term trend is clearly towards natural gas. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The stark differences in the policy positions of the two major parties in the U.S. seen emerging in the television debates. Trump vocal on immigration calling for large deportations. Sanders and Clinton vocal on the struggles of the middle class and white working class.

LyrArc Article Gist
Harris was asked a question about immigration at the Oprah Winfrey event, how she would secure the Border. Harris said- "So it’s a wonderful and important question. You know, my background was as a prosecutor and I was also the elected attorney general for two terms of a border state. So this is not a theoretical issue for me. This is something I’ve actually worked on. I have prosecuted transnational criminal organizations for the trafficking of guns, drugs and human beings. I take very seriously the importance of having a secure border and ensuring the safety of the American people. Sadly, where we are now can be traced most recently back to the fact that when the United States Congress, members of Congress, including some of the most conservative Republicans, came up with a border security bill. And here’s what that border security bill would have done. It would have put 1,500 more border agents at the border. Let me tell you, those border agents are working around the clock. It would have just been about giving them some support and relief, which is probably why the border agents actually endorsed the bill. It would have allowed us to stem the flow of fentanyl. And I’m looking at people from all over the country here. So I don’t need to tell the folks who are watching this what fentanyl has done to families, to kids in our country, and the need to take seriously stemming the flow coming into our country and addressing that extraordinary and tragic issue in terms of its effect. The bill would have allowed us to have more resources to prosecute transnational criminal organizations. And it would have been part of the solution. And Donald Trump called up those folks and said, don’t put that bill on the floor for a vote. He blocked the bill. And you know why? Because he preferred to run on a problem instead of fixing a problem. And he has put his personal political security before border security. Because understand, even in the intervening months, what that bill would have done to give support to folks who care about this issue. And this, again, gets to the point about what does leadership really look like? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Republican presidential debate with Chris Christie former governor of New Jersey, Nikki Haley former governor of North Carolina and UN Representative, Senator Rick Scott, Ron DeSantis governor of Florida. Mr. Trump with his lead in the polls chose not to participate. Nikki Haley comes out on top with her experience at the UN and in foreign policy.  Absent in the debate discussion of cost of living issues or issues about wages of workers, climate change, reshoring, or any of the major issues confronting the American people today.

LyrArc Article Gist
The situation for the day before the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 1, 2016, with voter turnout playing a key part in the election primary.

LyrArc Article Gist
Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post says the Republican candidates Rubio and Kasich have the best chance in the 2016 presidential election because they are seen as truly concerned about the problems of working class Americans. Coming from aspiring working class families they are familiar with the problems of working class whites and minorities, and understand the significance of upward mobility in America's future.

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...