LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ shows in an extraordinary detailed way going back 20 years how under each administration Bush, Obama, Trump in the US and Angela Merkel in Germany, Hollande and Macron in France, the serious differences in the world view and thinking between president Putin of Russia and western leaders were simply ignored or overlooked. Mr. Putin truly believed in Ukraine and Russia as one people, researched history on his own and wrote an essay that made him more convinced than ever about his views that separation of Ukraine from Russia was an artificial construct, more so in the last two years.  By integrating the German and European Union economies with Russia and China without coming to terms with the large separation in views of the world and ignoring Russian views because of its economic size as an economy the size of France, both Merkel and Obama's policies failed to grasp what was happening. This report shows in much detail each event since 2005 that led to increasing distrust by Putin of western leaders.  The integration of the economies of the west and the integration of supply chains with China and Russia continued even after serious concerns had developed during the Trump administration. US and European business was operating on a completely different path not taking this into account in any way. It was only in the Biden administration and after the election of Scholz in Germany in 2021 that the situation was becoming clear. On the other side Ukraine itself and its people had changed in ways that were not anticipated by people in Germany or Russia, much less the leaders in Germany or Russia. There was a genuine sense that Ukraine was a national identity leading to the Ukraine resistance and a prolonged conflict. Brendan Simms, Cambridge historian shows how Europe went through conflicts and wars in its history as each of the major European nations sought advantage from 1453 to the present in his book, "Europe- The Struggle for Supremacy 1453 to the Present." Small gains were made in these wars that dragged on bringing great suffering to ordinary people.These wars involved England, France, Spain, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Russia. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Stewart points out that Japanese government efforts to prop up stock prices by buying stocks in 1992 failed after 2 years when the fundamentals did not support the government effort. Experts say that even if the stock prices recover in China in 2015 after government efforts to prop up prices, this will be temporary if the economic fundamentals do not support such high valuations. The Shanghai Stock Exchange has a P/E ratio of 37 and the Shenzen Stock Exchange has a P/E of 80, very high valuations. Earnings numbers from smaller companies in China are also unreliable increasing investor risk. Additional issues are the timing of the government's effort to promote a surge in the stock market in 2014-2015. It comes as real estate and housing prices are in a bubble and the economy is slowing rapidly.

LyrArc Article Gist
A video view of the damaged oil facilities of Aramco in Saudi Arabia. A proxy war waged between Saudis and Iran with Houthi rebels in Yemen have worsened the situation in the Straits of Hormuz. Tensions were high, an attack on oil facilities was not expected. About half of Saudi oil production was put out of use in the attack by low flying missiles that evaded radar defenses. Saudis plan to meet oil export commitments by importing oil. President Trump imposed sanctions on the Iranian central bank, and at the same time said he would meet with Iran's president Rouhani for talks if arranged.  The European Union called for talks to renegotiate the Iran nuclear deal considering all issues nuclear, oil, and political issues in the region. The effect of Trump administration sanctions on Iran's economy have led to worsening relations. Japan, South Korea, India and China are affected by the U.S. effort to limit imports of Iranian oil. As tensions rose Japan with limited reserves made efforts to reduce tensions and bring the parties together. Mr. Trump fired his National Security Adviser in an effort to open up ideas for a renegotiation of the Iran nuclear deal on a comprehensive basis including oil and political issues in the region. ...

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.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Alluring scenery but hollowing out. Rail station in Dunedin New Zealand looks like it is from the 19th or early 20th century. New Zealand wages are 27% lower than Australian wages in 2025. New Zealand's weak, economy cuts in public services in 2025 affect jobs and employment. New Zealand sees emigration of 69,000 for the year to Feb 2025, highest on record.  Australia has mining and huge demand from China and India for its coal to support it's economy. In a paradox black coal in the interior supports a healthy lifestyle with weather and sports in the coastal belt of Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney, and further up the coastline in Perth and Adelaide. New Zealand life means higher grocery prices and less quality than Australia, it means health services are not as good, and the public services are being cut to reduce the deficit and borrowing. Most migration is to Auckland and towns in the interior look scenic such as Dunedin but are increasingly seeing people leaving for lack of prospects, lack of pay raises and high cost of living, poor public services. This is a cycle that was felt in 2002 and goes back a long way and is unlikely to change. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Yuka Hayashi gives an exceptional account of the rise of nationalism in Japan. This is especially true of the younger generation. As examples of the changing mood, he gives the popularity of Will magazine with circulation of 100,000 among younger readers, including large numbers of women. Other examples are the movie "Eternal Zero" remaining on the top of box office charts for 2 months, neto uyo or right wingers on the internet are popular, and bookstores display titles responding to China and S. Korea's criticism of Japan. Fringe candidates such as Toshio Tamogami have won 24% of the vote in Tokyo's gubernatorial race, with large proportion of younger voters. The younger generation is not accepting quietly the criticism of Japan's prewar record in the same way as the older generation with memories of the war. It sees itself free to respond to what it sees as China and S. Korea's constant criticism of Japan, even when Japan has apologized repeatedly for its aggressor role in Asia. Weekly magazines such as Bunshun and Shincho carry Japanese criticism of China and S. Korea with sensational headlines about lies. Abe's recent visit to the Yasukuni war shrine- the main object of S. Korean and Chinese criticism and America's concern expressed to Japan- is shown in an Asahi Shimbun poll recently to get favorable support from 60% of people in their 30's. Many of the 119 freshmen members of the Liberal Democratic Party of Mr. Abe also provide support, and some even see Japan needing to defend itself with or without the U.S. Is this level of nationalist sentiment similiar to the twenties and thirties, or to periods of tension in the 1990's and other post war periods? Only recently in 2010 the Democratic Party of Japan under a young prime minister Hatoyama and premier Naoto Kan, a civil rights activist, presented another side of Japan seeking closer ties with China- even distancing itself somewhat from the U.S. on the issue of bases in Okinawa. Naoto Kan also enjoyed a 60% level of popularity as premier Abe has in 2014. Which is the real Japan, or is it a reflection of fatigue among younger Japanese with always having to say you are sorry, as has happened to the younger generation in Germany. Hatoyama resembled Obama as a younger politician bringing a new optimism in Japan after years of LDP rule. Unfortunately president Obama distanced himself from Hatoyama on the base issue and failed to support Hatoyama at a time of tensions with N. Korea, leading to his fall in ratings and resignation. This may turn out to be a lost opportunity for the U.S. for building peaceful neighborly relations in Asia. In 2007 Chinese premier Wen Biao a speech to the Japanese parliament, the Diet, saying: "With history as a mirror it does not lead to long-lasting hate, it points to a better future." Japan's premier at the time? Shinzo Abe. What has changed? China's economy has doubled in size, and so have global Japanese corporations such as Toyota with advanced technologies, economic insecurity is unfounded in a globally linked interdependent economic system. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Even China has not campaigned the way Canada, Mexico and British, American media have against DJT Tariffs because China knows it is basically about getting an even playing field when it is the only country with $1 trillion in trade in its favor in 2024, 12 times the Japanese high of $82 billion trade surplus in 2007. But why should China campaign when the American and British, German media are going to do the job for China? A simple quiz to K-12 would ask school children when is the last time a country has a $1 trillion trade surplus? Answer: Never. Greg Ip has written a few years back that the devastation of China outshoring of American factories and jobs was unlike the 1980's Japan trade invasion because of first China's size, second by the speed with which it happened at 10-14% Chinese GDP growth. There is a third Japan was an ally needing US for security and backed down, China's case is different it is challenging the US for control of the world economy and will fight this one over the long haul. Greg Ip of WSJ on the 53 countries asking to negotiate US Liberation Day April 2, 2025 Tariffs. These countries include Allies of the US in full support asking to negotiate Israel, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India Allies of the US in partial support asking to negotiate Britain Allies of the US not in full support asking to negotiate Germany, France Allies of the US in the past campaigning against the US, asking to negotiate Canada, Mexico Not Allies of the US, not in full support, not campaigning against the US China A look at his list tells one only one thing, mostly all trading partners except for the $146 billion exports of the US which represents exports to China are the exports that are at risk if things don't work out on tariffs. This is what the media today WSJ added this last week to the NYT, Wash. Post and the BBC, Guardian of UK, German media will not tell the reader.  The DJT Tariffs and Tariff negotiations are Lighthizer Tariff negotiations which won the fight with Japan in the 1980's over unfair trade and gaining a level playing field. Lighthizer as Deputy US Trade Representative conducted the tough negotiations with Japan. He was USTR in 2016-2020 and his Deputy Jamieson is now USTR in 2025       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The lack of reliable statistics and production information for China's steel industry. The World Steel Association says China's steel production went up by 7.5% in April 2011 over the prior year. In 2010 it says China produced 625 million metric tons. These figures are based on information from the China Iron and Steel Association, which represents 75% of steel producers in the country. Because much of the reporting is voluntary many smaller producers do not report their production figures. MEPS, a steel consulting firm in the U.K. , says there is extensive underreporting because of political pressure on inefficient mills to shut down. These mills continue to operate but fail to report production, as a result production may be understated by 45 million tons, according to MEPS. This becomes important because if the Chinese economy slows down much of the steel warehoused in China because of higher taxes on raw steel exports could end up being exported. Inventory levels are higher in China because of the taxes and the storing of steel by mills slated for closure but still operating. This would cause a drop in steel prices on world markets. Steel is different from other commodities in that it is not traded on the London Metals Exchange or other Exchanges. Sales are privately negotiated sales between steel mills and users such as auto plants....

LyrArc Article Gist
It is not clear how China's president Jinping's support for the idea of "China Dream," -of China as a world power on a level with the U.S.- should be interpreted. China will increase its defense budget and continue its efforts to be the dominant power in its region, even as the U.S. and Japan begin to build closer ties in the Pacific. Is it simply a new assertiveness for its rights in relation to territorial disputes with Japan, and a continuation of a policy of peaceful development of earlier leaders. The move could also be an effort to build close ties with the military as the new leadership of Jinping-Keqiang prepares to make major changes in the economy. A speech in Dec. 2012 to Communist party officials in Guangdong province by Jinping, on how the lack of unity with the military led to the collapse of the Soviet Union under Gorbachev, could throw light on the thinking. In a few days an old party was gone, as he put it. This also follows the Bo Xilai episode which involved contacts with the military and the risks of division in the military and political leadership....

LyrArc Article Gist
Macron started out in the Socialist Party in Amiens, France. After going to elite schooling he joins the Socialist Party ministry of Francois Hollande. As Minister of the Economy he rises rapidly to replace Hollande with his own party called the Movement that he sets up and within a year wins presidential elections. The rapid rise, the lack of his Movement party having much experience and put together quickly with new younger people, his aloof presidency, and a lack of connection with the problems brought on by the deindustrialisation of France as production shifts to China, the problems of lack of work and cost of living in smaller towns in France, lead to Macron's loss of popularity. His party won only 10% of the vote in EU elections and 20% in the first round of Assembly elections in 2024. He is now allied with Sarkozy's Les Republicains, the very party he sought to replace by calling it old school and no longer relevant.  A small faction of the Les Republicains shifts out to ally with the National Rally of Le Pen and together the 2 parties seek a majority or near majority in the Assembly to take the prime minister position under Macron. The result would be a too young at 28 years Bardella as PM and the Socialist Alliance a close second in the National Assembly. Macron would have to come to terms with the Socialists he had abandoned to run the country and appoint Oliver Faure as prime minister if a second round gives his Movement and the Socialists over 50% of the vote. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Speaking at a banking conference, advisors including the head of Russia's largest retail bank Sberbank, German Gref, minister of the economy, Aleksei Ulyukayev, and head of the central bank , Elvira Nabiullina, express deep concern about the economic prospects in 2015. Foreign investment is down from about $90 billion in the 1st quarter of 2013 to a negligible amount in the 3rd quarter of 2014. Capital outflows following the Ukraine crisis are estimated at about $110 billion by former finance minister Alexsei Kudrin. The ruble dropped to its lowest level against the dollar since the 1990's. And the sharp decline in oil prices with Brent crude at about $90 is another risk factor as 50% of the budget comes from oil and gas revenues and 60% of exports are still oil and gas, with no serious or effective effort to diversify under the Putin adminstration. Putin told the banking conference that a deficit free budget and reserves of $460 billion are "fundamental factors supporting stability." Advisors and leading bankers remain unconvinced. The problem is that even at the beginning of 2014 before the Ukraine crisis foreign investment had slowed to a trickle, similiar to what India experienced in 2013. The central bank head says her effort to open up the bond markets in Russia to foreign investors is now in vain because there are few foreign investors. Instead of reversing the situation as is happening in India with the new Modi administration, policy under Putin and the Ukraine conflict may have scared investors away with the increasing western sanctions and stagflation (estimated 8% inflation and about 0.5% growth in 2014). The head of Sberbank Mr. Gref told the banking conference- "The Soviet Union broke apart because of the mind boggling incompetence of the Soviet leadership. They did not respect the laws of economic development." The problem with sovereign reserves is that it can protect a sovereign currency such the Russian ruble or the Brazilian cruzeiro to some extent, but today's vibrant economies need foreign investment and foreign technology for growth. Even a country such as China with a trillion dollars in reserves needs the reserves in its special case because of its billion plus aging population, and is no exception to these laws of economic development about the need for foreign technology and foreign investment. ...

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
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
Important to distinguish in GNP, GDP and GDP per capita. The official rate of 10-11% growth is questioned by Thurow by noting that 70% of China in the rural area is seeing slow growth and if the urban economy has to grow at 33 % if the whole of China is to grow by 11%. He also brings up electricity consumption historicaly growing much faster than the growth rate of GNP or GDP. At breakneck growth rates gorwth has still been 60% of the gorwth in electricity consumption because some of it is wasted or is not used productively.He does not give his electricity consumption growth for China numbers, but we can extrapolate from the 6% growth in China analogous to Japanese growth rates in the 1970's that he comes up with, to see that electricity growth rates he assumes in his math are 10% a year in China. That is based on 6% growth he gives for China constituting 60% of the growth in electricity consumption for China. Given the validity of this math China and India are growing at much slower rates than official math states. This also means productivity of capital remains a major issue and does not simply go away when seeing the countries as a whole not just coastal and other well developed regions of India and China. So the message that is being projected about Chinese growth may be misleading as urbanization in China will still have to proceed for many decades for the growth to even out geographically. Another fact that immigration has been a source of additional people for the USA and so a significant population increase will be seen in the US in the next few decades even as China's population declines, supporting much larger economic activity in the USA. Europe also is seeing no increase in population. Europe's per capita income fell from 85% of that of the US in 1990, to 66% in 2007 according to the IMF statistics quoted here. Validation of these numbers would provide a different assessment of overenthusiasm for the kind of haphazard growth which also wastes resources and sacrifices the environment and shortchanges health, education and other goals, and instead promotes a different view that constantly looks for better ways of meeting the difficult challenges facing China and India. With these...

LyrArc Article Gist
Making some territorial concessions appears to be the only way for peace talks to succeed. For a long time there was insistence on territorial sovereignty of Ukraine by EU and NATO leaders. This appears to have prolonged the war- with needless loss of life on both sides, and costly damage to Ukraine infrastructure, a population that had to face additional winters and hardship in war ravaged areas. NATO's Stoltenberg from Norway, leaders of northern Nordic and Baltic countries, the UK, could take that position without having to face the hardship of the war. NATO had to be re-formed under a new name and new structure  following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with wariness about the possibility of centuries old since 1700 UK and Nordic historical adversarial relationship with Russia casting a shadow over that organization, and embroiling the US in conflicts not of its own choice or of wise leadership. This is the root cause of the Ukraine war. It would have been best to completely restructure NATO and give it a new name without Northern European nations leading it. Principles matter once soviet communism was no longer there NATO formed for its expansionism in 1950's had served it's purpose. Rasmussen from Denmark and Stoltenberg from Norway led the organization for the last decade and half from 2009-2014 and 2014 to 2025, with backing from Obama/Merkel for most of the period of the war in Ukraine. Also most of the period NATO expanded to Russian borders happened under Northern European leaders from Spain, Britain and Nordics (Solana, Robertson, Scheffer, Rasmussen and Stoltenberg) and the organization NATO getting the northern European slant based on historical adversarial relationship of Britain and Russia since 1700- for no other reason than the British wanting to protect its large Empire and commerce in India which in the 18th and 19th century included most of Asia. Under Robertson the UK Defense Secretary much of this transformation into turning NATO into something anti-Russian happened which was primarily because of British and Nordic perceptions of Russia as an adversary. Robertson added the following countries at the Prague Summit in 2002 to NATO- the Baltics, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Russia faced internal upheaval in those years and Yeltsin in resigned in 1999, Putin was elected in 2000. It is clear that Russia had suffered severe economic hardship in that period and Putin's first goal in 2002 was to stabilize the economy.  It could be said that this turning NATO over to UK and Nordics was a huge mistake considering that Russia was still the largest nuclear power after the US, and British policy was now determining US policy. And Britain's Robertson/NATO should not have involved itself in the Afghanistan war using Article 5, as the US could have handled this alone and limited that engagement. It got US involved in another conflict, conflict with Russia that was to come in Ukraine on the side of the Baltics and Ukraine, without US clearly understanding what the roots of that war was about and implied confrontation with Russia 20 years after the Prague Summit in 2002 under George Bush junior. The incompetence of Bush and Obama/Merkel laid the seeds of the Ukraine war in 2022 following Robertson, Rasmussen, Stoltenberg, small Nordic nations and Britain creating a conflict that did not need to happen, with loss of hundreds of thousands of lives of Russian speaking fraternal peoples of both Russia and Ukraine. The Republican sentiment under DJT of the tragedy of such huge losses of young people, and desire to end this loss of life, can nowhere be seen in bellicose talk in northern European nations, that take the US for granted to fight their wars.  The wisdom of Washington, Lincoln and TR/FDR clearly caution in getting involved in European centuries old animosities. For the US it meant in practical terms that it could no longer carry out the Monroe Doctrine essential for peace and good governance in the western hemisphere as only a Russia desperate to make its views known about NATO would interfere in the western hemisphere against US assertion of the Monroe Doctrine with the US Navy. Instead drug trafficking gangs took over Latin American countries and created a flow of fentanyl and millions of people through migrant traffickers across the US southern border. As America has expressed its concern for loss of Russian and Ukrainian men in the war for the first time under DJT Russia has distanced itself from Venezuela, Mexico and Latin America. The loss of hundreds of thousands of young Americans to fentanyl is a shared tragedy with the loss of hundreds of thousands of young Russians and Ukrainians in the last decade. How reliable are Northern European countries when it comes to protecting the eastern seaboard of the US with the acquisition of Greenland? It is a policy pursued by presidents since the Alaska Acquisition from Russia. By Seward, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman and DJT. Denmark the land where NATO secretary general Rasmussen was from followed by Stoltenberg from Norway  (for 15 of the years of the war in Ukraine 2010-2025) the US efforts to protect its eastern seaboard are rebuffed by both Denmark and Norway, and the US presented in a negative light as an imperialist power in the face of Danish East India Company's  colonial attitude since 1700 clearly imitating the colonial British East India company.  It shows Northern European nations looking out for themselves not for the US, and embroiling the US in their wars at the cost of the entire western hemisphere being destabilized. The population of UK, Denmark and Norway, Baltics is far less than the Mumbai, Shanghai, Sao Paulo , Berlin and Tokyo regions. Should the views of a small population in northern Europe of 2% of the total determine the future of US, Europe, China, India, Brazil, and other parts of the world with 5 billion people the 98%, when issues of war and nuclear conflict, nuclear buildup, the western hemisphere destabilized with drug trafficking gangs running rampant in countries, divide the world in opposing blocs, when the wellbeing of most of the world's people in Asia and Latin America, Africa is at stake by establishing a essential degree of cooperation by all sides. The US under DJT has chosen a wise policy of cooperation over conflict -with China, with Russia, with all the major powers, and with smaller powers. Reading the wisdom contained in the writings of Washington, Lincoln, TR/FDR confirms it is clearly the wise choice. ...

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
Foreign demand for US manufacturing exports especially in emerging market economies such as China, India, Mexico, the Middle East and South America, will help cushion the US economy from the effects of the housing market deterioration and the credit squeeze. Some of the figures point to a vigorous demand for US exports that will sustain the US economy in the years ahead as poorer countries around the world industrialize, urbanize, build infrastructure, and improve the living standards of people in their countries. First the world is less sensitive to US slowdown. Cooper cites numbers to show that the US contributionto world growth has declined from 19% to 12%. And in the past 10 years USA growth declined from 3% to 2.6% annually but the global economy accelerated from 3.2% to 4.4%. (Statistics from IMF?) IMF in World Economic Outlook estimates global economic growth in 2008 to slow from 5.2% to 4.8%, and the US in 2008 to be 1.9% same as 2007. Excluding the US, growth in the world economy would be 5.5%. China's imports of US goods is up 25% annually over the past 5 years. The proportion of US goods going to emerging markets is up to 45% from 38% in the past 2 years. And economies of countries like India and Mexico are sustained by internal consumer demand so they are stronger than before. Another way to see this happening is the US corporate earnings from overseas being up 22% from last year, and domestic profits up only 1%. Over the past year profits from foreign sales have accounted for 80% of increase in overall profits. So foreign trade and its continued expansion will act as a stabilizing effect on the US economy and US products especially in infrastructure development and related areas will help the developing countries make major improvements to living standards and infrastructure. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the euphoria for US stock market performance in 2011. Negative impact of housing market, rise in food and fuel prices, and the precarious condition of state and local government finances, raise concerns about the economy and stock markets for 2011-2012. John Makin sees a one third chance of sovereign debt crisis in the eurozone, and a 40% chance of China not making a soft landing, in a video interview with Wessel of the WSJ, December 30, 2010. This would impact stock markets in the US. WSJ's Brett Arends column also expresses similiar skepticism. Robini sees housing losses in 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
A milder than usual winter can reduce consumption by a large enough amount to affect oil prices significantly. The IEA estimates that last years mild winter cut oil consumption by as much as 900,000 barrels a day globally. Something like this could erase expected deficits andpush oil prices lower as they currently reflect lower inventories as winter approaches. UBS expects lower prices whereas Goldman Sachs believes there is lower risk of slowdown in the global economy, that is India, China and Europe will continue to grow even as US growth moderates, and Goldman's estimates shows even higher prices approaching $90 a barrel.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ analysis shows that in the counties that flipped to Biden in the U.S. election about 40% of the people had white collar jobs and were better educated and in metropolitan regions. Of the counties that flipped to Trump about 20% had white collar jobs with only 1.4% jobs growth whereas the improvement in the counties that flipped to Biden had much higher jobs growth of 5.3%. Where Biden prevailed 70% of America's GDP is generated, where Trump prevailed 30% is generated. One is white collar in metropolitan regions, in cities and suburbs, better educated. The other is blue collar, less educated. One blue collar is hit hard by the pandemic, the other is white collar but also includes some of the people hardest hit in the pandemic of minorities in the cities and suburbs. In truth none can benefit without bringing all along. And loyalties shift as most of the professional class was once with Republicans who were the party of business. The sending out of American manufacturing to China has not only affected the economy, it has also changed the parties as the Republicans took up the cause of American manufacturing workers changing the two parties. For most of the twentieth century this was not the case as FDR, Truman and Kennedy-Johnson, were Democratic presidents supported by blue collar workers.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The global financial crisis is expected to reshape the direction of globalization. Western finance will be re-regulated. Second as concerns about food security take prominence in countries like India and China inflation and how it affects food prices will result in governments taking an active role in this area. Thirs America will lose economic clout and intellectual authority. Emerging economies like Inida, China, Brazil and Russia and other countries are having a large influence on the direction of global trade now this will also extend to global finance. But even after the re-regulation of finance in western countries and changes also in emerging countries that are seen as necessary in the light of the global crisis, the global economy will still find the model of markets if carefully done and respect for individual initiative with a proper role of government but limited role, he attractive model to follow. Easterly comments on this for developing countries. See the link.

LyrArc Article Gist
Supply chains are unraveling in many industries with the tariffs imposed by president Trump on imports from China, and renegotiated trade deals with South Korea and other countries. The growth in the value of foreign value added was possible with cuts in tariffs in the period after 1990 and the emergence of China as a low cost manufacturer with cheap labor. Foreign value added increased from 20% in 1990 to 30% in 2011. The impact on factory towns and communities in the U.S. of trade in which the U.S. manufacturing declined as it shifted to China resulted in the surge in support for president Trump. The tariffs war with China is an effort to correct this imbalance. The result is a shift in supply chains away from China in some industries and gradual shift in others. Rising wages in China had already resulted in early shifts and the the environmental costs adding to this trend. President Trump temporarily suspended a threatened imposition of duties of 25% on $325 billion of Chinese imports. A renegotiated Nafta agreement with Mexico for automobile production and determination of U.S. based content and wages was designed to reset the relationship with Mexico and the auto supply chain for production in Mexico. A threat of tariffs on European auto imports to the U.S. is set for a decision in November. The trade dispute between Japan and South Korea and threat of tariffs also shows the effect this is having in other countries. With the U.S. looking at its own interest in the global supply chain and its advantage or disadvantage, industries and companies are not free to make decisions based on which country offers the best arrangement and deal for manufacturing. Notions of competitive advantage in the tech race with China are affecting the way the U.S. and European nations are acting. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US Federal Reserve Report on Economic Wellbeing of US Households 2024-May 2025 gives some insights into the well being of American households. It shows food insufficiency households the same in 2023-2025 at 7%. The situation for cost of living remains a concern in 2024 as well as 2025. Retirement savings have improved for many middle class Americans, as confirmed by reports from Fidelity and Vanguard. The people earning less than 25,000 are 19% and about the same in 2024 under Biden as under DJT in 2025. 39% make $100,000 or more and 26% make $50,000 -$100,000. Combining the 19% making less than $25,000 and the 16% making between $25,000 and $50,000 shows about one third of the population under $50,000 living paycheck to paycheck. It would appear that $2000 DJT rebate putting $160 billion out of $550 billion of tariff revenues for 2025-2026  in the hands of 79 million households that make less than $100,000 would go a long way to keep the situation stable with optimism and hope arising from the restructuring of world trade that would bring trillions of dollars of investment into the US from Europe and Asia. A this investment plus domestic investment should bring back jobs and higher incomes to US manufacturing in small towns across America. The rest of $550 billion tariff revenue of $390 billion would go to reducing the deficit which would improve prospects for the economy in 2027 and produce a more resilient economy in 2027-2028. As shown on this page the popular Democratic Governor of Michigan in her op-ed in Washington Post supports strategic tariffs, and supports using the revenue for a check to American workers of $2000 per worker or per worker household and offers to work with the opposite party to get a WIN-WIN for the American People.  In the whole process of trade tariffs it must be remembered when seeing the inconsistent cases of tariff use by this Republican administration that these were special reason situations not aberrations or whimsical. First, it should be borne in mind that behind the appearance of DJT making tariff decisions is a carefully thought out process that took ten years to form under Reagan era Trade Representative Lighthizer who negotiated with Japan, and his deputy Jamieson for 2016-2024, and the economic and capital markets experience of Scott Bessent as Treasury Secretary. The two cases of inconsistent application of tariffs relate to the 50% tariff on India and the reduction of tariffs on China agreement on rare earths, and the imposition of a large tarif on Japan and the EU. In the first instance with India it was intended to give Ukraine breathing room from Russian attacks as Germany steps up its military preparedness and assistance to Ukraine. With both countries it was about saving face important in Asian or any societies and it has achieved it's purpose. Reports show both Indian and Chinese refiners have quietly cut purchases of oil from Russia leading to Russian oil selling at about $20 discount to Brent crude oil. In the case of Japan the quick action to raise tariffs was intended not to get into long drawn negotiations and show serious intent- Japan is known for dragging out negotiations for years if not decades. The same is true for the European Union. With the Swiss it was about a certain disrespect of the US coming from attitudes that Swiss products were somehow superior. Not just in the long run, in 2026-2028 history will show that the effort done right - and it takes effort to get this right- to restructure world trade so that other nations are not siphoning off the benefits and leaving the US to lose its manufacturing and factories is the right one. And taken with courage and sincere desire to create a fair distribution of the benefits of world trade for too long distorted by egregious practices of competitors. It has nothing to do with 2 senators from the 1930's who were from places like the Mountain West in the US, having no concept of world trade, Smoot and Hawley, who under a irresponsible president Hoover got everything wrong. This is a carefully set out plan to evenly balance the benefits of world trade to all nations.   ...