LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
International issues took on larger significance for the U.S. Federal Reserve in September 2015 as it looked at a small increase in interest rates. Schwartz points to the memories of the 1997 emerging market crisis and how fragile economies like Mexico were adversely impacted by rising rates in the U.S.. Mexico needed a large bank bailout and contagion spread to other countries. Kenneth Rogoff says the risks are real with declining commodity prices and falling currencies of emerging markets such as Brazil, Indonesia and Russia. Ripple effects would carry over to India and other countries. The sharp slowdown in the Chinese economy in the second half of 2015 was too recent for the Fed to take any sort of risk in September 2015.

LyrArc Article Gist
European preparations for an embargo on Iranian oi. Development of technologies to develop nuclear weapons advances in Iran, causing concern that leads to action by the U.S. and the E.U.

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's new LDP government led by Shinzo Abe approved a stimulus plan of 10.3 trillion yen ($115.7 billion) in Jan 2013. This comes as Japan's current account deficit increased for November to $2.5 billion before seasonal adjustment, reflecting a decline in exports. The Abe administration says this will increase GDP by 2 percentage points from the current forecast of 1.7%.

LyrArc Article Gist
The limited options the US has to get China to appreciate the value of its currency, the yuan. Some of the options depend on getting the IMF or the WTO to prod the Chinese, others depend on a Plaza type Accord.

LyrArc Article Gist
Republican congressmen and the preference for earmarks in the budget.

LyrArc Article Gist
Between 2008 and 2009 September the price of polysilicon for solar energy products dropped from $400 per kilogram to $50 per kilogram. This doomed any chances that Solyndra could succeed, yet in 2010 and into 2011 Solyndra executives maintained that the company was in good shape financially.

LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks says the Paul Ryan Budget proposal is a bold step forward that is badly needed in this debate on health care, even though it has some grave weaknesses which need to be corrected. It is a bold step forward because he says Democrats say they want no middle class tax increases, or are not willing to say what kinds of tax increases they support, and yet they believe the Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security programs are worth preserving. This is'nt based on reality. He cites the weaknesses, beginning with the one discussed in David Leonhardt's column in the New York Times on April 7, 2011. Too many Americans pay too little into Medicare taxes and expect to collect several hundred thousand dollars more in Medicare benefits. The example given in Leonhardt's column is from a study that shows 56 year olds with average earnings pay about $140,000 in dedicated Medicare taxes over a lifetime, and then go on to collect $430,000 in benefits. Middle class and affluent boomers can't get off paying their share like everybody else. Its just the right way for their children and the nation's children. Ryan's plan excludes older people reaching retirement in ten years. The other major weakness is that the cuts are too deep. Things like the Pell grants which Ryan proposes to cut back to 2008 levels need to be preserved, and more money has to go into science, education and research and early childhood education for the U.S. to be competitive with China and India. The Ryan proposal places cuts that would be required so that tax revenues need to be at 18% of GDP. The number where a larger consensus exists is for tax revenues at 20% of GDP (also supported by business and the Wall Street Journal's editorial columns). This would preserve programs that are most productive for the economic future of the U.S. Ryan's proposal lets the hope for reducing costs of medical care rest entirely on future retirees deciding how much medical care (tests, procedures etc) they consume through larger cost sharing. Yet a structure and framework is needed to manage these costs effectively, and some combination of incentives to retirees to control costs and an effective structural framework is needed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
By May 2015 the Russsian ruble had recovered to 50 to the dollar from the low of 80 to the dollar in 2014. In August 2015 the ruble declined to 70 to the dollar as oil prices dropped below $40 per barrel. GDP growth showed a decline of 4.6% for the economy in the 2nd quarter of 2015. The ruble has lost close to 50% of its value in 2015 compared to the prior year.

LyrArc Article Gist
Economist Paul Krugman points out the risks of a trade war in the tariffs announced for steel and aluminium by president Trump. Yet he accepts that he advocated stronger action on China's currency in 2009-2010 when the U.S. economy was weaker. In the past on the TPP agreement proposed by president Obama, Krugman said that it would have an insignificant impact as most of the gains on trade were already made. Here Krugman is critical of the language used by president Trump about trade wars being "easy."  This is taken out of context though as president Trump is saying that it is easy in the context of a country enjoying a $100 billion surplus with the U.S., because that country is going to have incentives to maintain a good trading relationship with the U.S. Essentially this means that the steel industry in the U.S. benefits. China also benefits as it closes many of the older steel plants that led to overproduction. This would reduce overcapacity in China's steel industry, a problem China's economic planners see as a priority. China already is making the shift to higher technology products and this process will be accelerated, as it puts less emphasis on steel and metals as it did in its earlier stage of development. As a result contrary to textbook economics this has the potential to be a win-win solution for the U.S. and China in the long run. So little was done under the Bush and Obama administrations to manage trading relationships with other countries so that the interests of small communities across the U.S. were protected from unfair trade- that Reagan administration trade expert Robert Lighthizer took up the cause of the U.S.,workers in these communities. Surveys showed U.S. public opinion also had shifted among educated, professionals and middle class on this issue by 2015, against unfair trade that hurt U.S. interests. Robert Lighthizer is now the Trade Representative for the U.S. in the Trump administration. Reports in the WSJ about the discussion within the Trump economic council, show Gary Cohn favored not imposing the tariffs on steel and aluminum. Lighthizer advocated the tariffs and was able to convince the president.  For Trump this presents a win-win situation, as a mild response by China -and other trading nations that have enjoyed a favorable situation in the past -with its huge surplus and favorable trading relationship with the U.S. would present a win for the president. Economist Krugman accepts this when he says tariffs in the current context of the trading field- that is more favorable to other countries- are not such a big deal, only the use of such policy that is likely to endanger world trade.  As in much of the debate that takes place this adds to the headlines today yet provides delayed and limited relief to communities across the U.S. devastated by world trade as documented by experts who studied trade patterns and their effect on regions across the U.S.  As the WSJ points out in one report the trade deficit itself may continue to grow under president Trump because of other factors. The U.S. dollar surged 8% during the last 2 years of the Obama administration with the economic recovery underway. With Trump's election win the dollar surged another 3%. This may play a bigger role in the direction of the trade deficit than the new steel tariffs announced by president Trump. Workers and unions matter. As TPP pushed by Democratic party president Obama was opposed by the unions, and by the auto industry (workers and auto companies) in the midwestern states which suffered a hollowing out in the last decade. A WSJ survey after the election showed Clinton received 56% support from union workers in 2018 compared to 65% for president Obama in the 2012 election. Some of that erosion in support may come from Obama's TPP stand fervently opposed by the unions and workers in the auto industry. A similar situation took place in Ontario with hollowing out of the auto industry in this large industrial state in Canada and led to the rejection of the Conservative government and election of the Liberal Party under Justin Trudeau. This lesson is so far lost in the Democratic Party's debate.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Shift of Toyota Highlander hybrid production from Japan to the U.S. with a $400 million investment in the Princeton, Indiana manufacturing plant. The Princeton plant will make 50,000 of the Highlander hybrid vehicles a year.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Japanese yen surged in value following the 2008 financial crisis as it was seen as a safe haven. As a result the Korean won declined by 42% against the Japanese yen. This continued till 2012. Japanese companies had to compete overseas at 80 yen to the dollar and shifted operations overseas. Now with the policy of monetary expansion of the Japanese central bank the situation is reversed in December 2014. The Korean won is up 40% against the Japanese yen since 2012. The Japanese yen is now down to 118 to the dollar in Dec. 2014. Abenomics gets a new mandate with the snap election in Dec. 2014. Aaron Back says Samsung may have gained ground in televisions and smartphones but other areas in electronics such as chips, displays and image sensors remain competitive and responsive to price. In autos Hyundai market share has declined to 4.4% by Dec. 2014 from 5.1% in 2011, according to MotorIntelligence.com. So far Japanese companies have used the currency advantage to improve profits and come up with better products. By using profits to invest in new technology and productivity Japanese companies can provide more features at the same price points to gain market share without having to cut price. After years of declining margins in electronics, autos and other markets this appears to be the current strategy. Another reason for this is that Japanese companies have already shifted production overseas, the shift being higher for Honda than for Toyota. Technological improvements from investments in R&D in Japan can be transferred to manufacturing operations overseas just as Apple is doing with smartphones manufacturing in China. The currency shift also improves Japan's position relative to American and European competitors in international markets....