LyrArc Article Gist
World Bank projections of Indian growth rate are lowered from 6.6% to 5.8% because of DJT US administration's 50% tariff on imports from India. "It is in America’s national interest, then, for South Asia, and especially India, to grow at a rapid clip. That would create a counterweight in Asia to China’s massive economic and military expansion." This is the opinion of the Editorial Board of The Washington Post. It goes on to say that -  "But Trump is determined to negotiate a grand trade bargain with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, so he didn’t impose secondary sanctions on their purchases of Russian crude.Trump wants U.S. trade policy to be more self-interested, but it doesn’t serve America’s strategic interests to strengthen China’s position relative to its neighbors. At some level, the administration surely knows this." The Washington Post has identified a basic flaw in the US policy towards India. Both parties in America have fallen into a trap of believing that first Japan, then China with accelerated economic expansion in the 1920's and 30's and in the 2000's and 2010's  are not going to run into issues with such expansion, this being the military and the separation from US economic cooperation that enabled the economic expansion of both Asian countries. Another aspect is that in 1950 China was similar in size of economy to India at 1.18, in 1903 and in 1962 at 1.18, and the gap between China and India is only a story of the last 2 decades. By 2047 India surely has the potential to close this gap with economic and technological integration with the US and European economies that were the pillars of China's economic expansion in an earlier period.  There are other aspects of culture and size- The Bhagavad Gita and the Bible provided Gandhi with an integrated view of western civilization. With its interactions and adoption of western institutions and government, of law, the new Indian state and its neighbor Indonesia represent 1.7 billion people in Asia, with Japan and the Philippines 2 billion people twice the size of China.   ...

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
This WSJ analysis shows China giving Huawei a total of $75 billion in subsidies through grants, credit facilities, tax breaks, and other forms of financial assistance. It is this state support that enabled a little known vendor of telecom equipment to become the largest telecom company in the world. This also made it possible for Huawei to offer generous financing terms and undercut pricing of competitors by as much as 30%, according to analysts and customers. The WSJ analysis shows loans and credit lines from state lenders of $46 billion, tax breaks of $25 billion from 2008 to 2018 with state incentives to the tech sector, $1.6 billion in grants, and $2 billion in land discounts.  In the developing countries lacking financing the Chinese state lenders and government financed a project and Huawei built it. In competitive bidding Huawei's bids came with financing from state lenders that made Huawei a much stronger bidder than competitors such as Ericsson of Sweden and Nokia of Finland. With this kind of steady support and its own determined founders Huawei changed from a small vendor when 4G was first introduced into a pioneer and leader in 5G networks in 2019. Lacking this kind of support and without clear focus of the American and European governments American and European companies now lag behind in 5G technology.  This has caused tensions in the U.S. and Germany over loss of technological leadership in key areas. The Trump administration in its trade tariffs and other actions against Huawei is responding to the issues of state subsidies in China, intellectual property of American firms, shift of factories to China, and loss of tech leadership, leading to a loss of American jobs, risks to national security. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump's willingness to use U.S. economic strength through tariffs, sanctions and other methods comes from the view that in the decade of the 1990s and 2000s U.S. worker and the U.S. was suckered by others. In this situation it was seen as acceptable to use U.S. tariffs and economic pressure to fix a global trading system and a China trade surplus with the U.S. exceeding $300 billion a year. Mr. Lighthizer it should be remembered, now the top trade negotiator with China was also the trade negotiator with Japan when it enjoyed a similar trade surplus with the U.S. during the Reagan administration. Economic pressure did not have to be ratcheted up to this level with Japan at the time. Japan was an ally at the time in the Cold War, Today China is seen as both a global competitor in world affairs and a technological competitor. Unlike the situation with Japan many Republican and Democratic administrations had failed to tackle the growing trade imbalance with China till it had become unsustainable. The views of Mr. Trump on trade were views articulated by Mr. Lighthizer for the last ten years resulting in a shift in opinion on trade in the U.S. by 2016 where a majority of people in the U.S. felt that globalization and world trade was working against American workers and industry. Mr. Trump as a Republican was both responding to the failure of others to tackle trade issues hurting the U.S. worker and business, as well as rallying support from workers, farmers and business to his party.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As Keith Bradsher of the NYT points out in this report too much may be made of the tariffs of 25% imposed by president Trump on steel imports. The effect Bradsher says on China is trivial because China imports make up a fraction of 1% or 0.1% of China's production, and only 2% of American steel imports. Most of China's aluminium is made into products such as auto parts and solar panel frames, and little of it is imported as raw metal. On the day the tariffs were announced, China's top economic official Liu He met with economic officials of the Trump administration and China's reaction was cautious and reflected the fact mentioned b.y Trump about its huge trade surplus with the U.S. of $375 billion in 2017. China's officials stated "that its dialogue with the U.S. was very useful, constructive, and helpful."  China's principal goals are first to preserve its broader trading relationship with the U.S. which gives it th $375 billion trade surplus for 2017 and creates millions of jobs in China, and to preserve its ability to invest in the U.S.  This has given China access to American technology and manufacturing expertise that would be difficult to develop independently. The Trump administration is meanwhile working with senior members of Congress to come up with new rules for tighter scrutiny of Chinese investments in the U.S. as a new phase of competition in technology takes place between China and the U.S.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
There is a ton of cheese lying in storage -1.4 billion pounds - as Americans shift to foreign varieties and exports to China and Mexico are hurt by the tariffs war.  Americans are becoming more adventurous in their cheese eating habits. Many say they cannot stand eating processed cheese anymore. Processed cheese consumption is going down just as foreign cheese varieties are picking up strongly. Mozzarella cheese is up and cheddar cheeses is down with mozzarella popular in pizzas.   Cheese producers such as Sargento in Wisconsin are shifting to Gouda, a Dutch variety and other European cheeses as they adjust to the changing habits of Americans tired of processed stuff including processed cheeses.  Cheesemakers from Ireland and Quebec and local makers in Wisconsin were ramping up their production of cheese when the trade tariffs with China and Mexico hit dairy products. Cheese exports to China are down 63%. The result is that 1.4 billion pounds of cheese are now in storage in cold storage warehouses. Americans still eat a record 37 pounds of cheese every year, but processed cheese per capita is now half of what it was in 2006. Netherlands based Gouda producer Campina is expanding in the U.S. to meet the demand for gouda and other varieties.  Dairy farmers that supply cheese makers are hurt. Milk prices are down around 40% from a 2014 peak. 600 dairy farms closed in Wisconsin in 2018 alone. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
11 Pacific Rim nations form the Trans-Pacific Partnership in 2018. The Obama administration supported the trade pact alienating supporters in its union base particularly in the midwestern states. Mr. Trump opposed the TPP in his election campaign and made it a significant issue for swing voters in midwestern states after job losses in the auto industry. With the opposition of president Trump the U.S. decided to withdraw from TPP.  The 11 nations agreeing to join a revised agreement are Japan, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. So far six countries have formally approved the deal, Australia, Canada, Mexico, Singapore, New Zealand and Japan, setting the stage for two rounds of tariff reductions starting December 30, 2018. Agricultural products duties will be duty free within 3 to 7 years including for Japan and Mexico. Australia, New Zealand, Canada are major agricultural exporters. Japan supported the deal as a way to counter China's influence in the region. In the U.S. the gains would be in intellectual property rights but losses for workers in the auto and manufacturing industries, a point Mr. Trump recognized in his election campaign as he campaigned in the midwestern states. Mr. Obama pursued TPP over objections of workers organizations and unions including auto workers union, with his advisors suggesting this as a way to counter China's influence in the region. By 2018 the Democratic party support base fractured on this as one of the major issues.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ looks at the result of changes in supply chains away from China, and the new trading relationship with China to 2028. He says the shift to a new global supply chain that diversifies it away from concentration in China is taking place. Would taking the tariffs from 30% to 60% under a new Trump administration be a good idea? Greg Ip thinks it is a bad idea as the change is gradual and is actually taking place. It may have the unintended effect of worsening US China relations essential for global stability when it is coupled with erratic or retaliatory rhetoric. Rhetoric that appears to China that it is being singled out in world trade beyond what are changes that have taken place with Japan in the past in trade. The Biden administration is for good reasons working to restore a balanced yet stable relationship with China. Apple is shifting production of 25% of iPhones to India. Samsung is investing more in Vietnam. The trade deficit with Mexico has reached $151 billion twice as large as in 2017. And $100 billion with Vietnam three times as large as 2017. The US trade deficit with China has dropped from $381 billion to $281 billion in the last 12 months, the Commerce Department reports show. And from $1.1 trillion with the whole world from $1.2 trillion for the last 12 months, 4% of US GDP. Overall the Trump era tariffs of 30% have not reduced the US  trade deficit substantially but has shifted American and European foreign investment to India, Vietnam, Mexico and other countries as well as to the home country. Over time the supply chain would become truly diversified as India makes great strides to become the third largest economy with new infrastructure by 2030. The head emeritus of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, Joerg Wuttke, says the pressure to export will be high for China as its economy shifts more to manufacturing from construction. Most Chinese companies are producing more than internal demand in China, and most companies in solar are losing money, in wind turbines and solar all are losing money, Wuttke says. This means China will double down and increase its investments in Mexico, Vietnam, Morocco and other countries so that it can send its products to the US through third countries that do the final export. One expert even says removing a few screws here and some there, find a different supplier, and shipping to a third party for final export that makes it not 100% Chinese content, the pressure for that is high. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
An assessment of progress in free trade and generating jobs in N. America under the NAFTA agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The agreement was signed under President Clinton in 1994. NAFTA removed existing tariffs on over half of the exports from Mexico to the U.S. and phased out remaining tariffs between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The U.S. had two way trade of $918 billion with Canada and Mexico in 2010, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Canada is the U.S.'s top trading partner, with $462 billion in trade through Sept. 2012, and U.S. trade with Mexico- expected to overtake China- is at $369 billion in the same 9 month period of 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
Years of low prices for soybeans and corn with competition from Russia and Brazil, combined with tariff war with China roiling agricultural markets, are leading to the highest bankruptcies in a decade for farmers in the U.S. in 2019. Dairy farmers are hit too with low milk prices.

LyrArc Article Gist
EIA says half of the benefit of higher fuel efficiency standards for Automobiles 2010-2020 in US was lost because of SUV's and the incentivizing of SUV's in the 2006 CAFE standards have made things worse. The first SUV's came in the 1980's. By 2004 SUV's made up half of car sales and by 2025 outsold cars 2 to 1. What if we took all SUV's and large cars off the roads, or even some of these SUV's by deincentivizing of SUV's in the US CAFE corporate fuel efficiency standards? What would be the savings in crude oil and in carbon footprint? Would it be about the same as releasing an additional 400 million barrels of oil into the markets in addition to the 400 million barrels that are now released through EIA and member countries? This New Yorker essay touches on this idea. During the Iran war the volatile Middle East as a source of oil supplies is a major problem for countries. Some are rationing supplies and in one country 40 million children are not going to school for 2 weeks starting this week because of the sources of oil are so precarious, government offices will only have half of the employees, the rest working from home (almost like Covid pandemic). Many other countries face that situation. The International Energy Agency recently reported that, if “SUVs were an individual country, they would rank sixth in the world for absolute emissions in 2021, emitting over 900 million tonnes of CO2.” The agency says governments must redesign their CAFE standards and their policies so that it would reduce S.U.V. sales, tax gas guzzling vehicles. EIA cites governments in the EU doing this- “Some governments have already started introducing relevant measures, such as France and Germany, which have put a tax on large and high-emissions cars.” Within SUV's also there is an opportunity to reduce the size and make more efficient space utilization designs. Small savings also add up. One has to realize that the current freedom to use energy freely in places like the US with self sufficiency in oil comes with a sense of responsibility for using it wisely so that it can be exported to cut the trade deficit, precisely what the president is doing with India, to cut a trade deficit of $58 billion before it gets to $100 billion. Section 301 is already in place for investigations by the US of 18 countries for a new basis to use tariffs after the Supreme Court decision. A similar approach is taken with EU for hundreds of billions of reductions in trade deficit that will only strengthen the US dollar and the US economy in the long run , and be good for stock markets and jobs as it reduces oil prices and increases the manufacturing capacity/cost for the Nation. Europe, India and China can do the same. Remember that in 2010 SUV's made up 17% of total world sales, and by 2025 SUV's made up 46% of world vehicle sales. This would create another 400 million barrels for the oil markets, which would triple what was released through EIA  this week to 1.2 billion barrels and this would create 120 days of supply replacement for the 10 million b/d lost from Straits of Hormuz, and effectively end the Iran War as it would be clear that prices can be kept low even in the $50's. Essentially buying time till the SU can get more production in Venezuela and other parts of the world to replace much of the Middle Eastern oil that is ending up in a quagmire. This is the best way for the US and Europe, India, China to ensure jobs growth, economic growth with low cost crude oil in the $50 range and ensure much of the poorer countries like Egypt and Indonesia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, have access to oil at prices they can afford and eliminate poverty. ...

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
Karishma Vaswani of the BBC points out that the Trump administration tariffs and the response from China with tariffs of its own, are not the beginning of a trade war but negotiating tactics of both sides. Behind the scenes and behind the declarations and position statements both sides are talking to each other and considering the options open to each. The U.S. position is that China has emerged with a bigger share of the global economy by dumping products, subsidizing its industries from solar panels to high tech ventures, and stealing American technology by forcing U.S. firms into joint ventures that increase pass through of advanced technology. U.S. firms seeking access to the Chinese market or using China as a manufacturing base such as Boeing, Apple, GE and other high tech companies are in ventures or manufacturing arrangements where China has access to advanced American technology. Nathaniel Taplin in his article in the WSJ also sees this as a negotiating position set out in the U.S. for talks with China. Taplin says the U.S. is in a stronger position in this negotiation because of the huge surplus of about $300 billion that China now has with the U.S., and which is increasing in 2018 with the strength of the dollar. The Trump administration is looking to correct the trade imbalance in the future by focussing on China's access to advanced U.S. technologies in the next phase of competition between the U.S., Europe and China. This limited objective is more likely to lead to concessions by China Taplin argues, because of two reasons. China needs the dynamism of U.S. firms and technology advances because these firms and Chinese firms that are getting foreign investment are the most productive part of the Chinese economy with jobs generated, rate of return about twice that of inefficient state run firms. China also needs access to advanced U.S. and European technologies even in a limited form as it pursues further modernization.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Australian prime minister Scott Morrison says "global health trumps everything else," that " we need to have the information, and we need to have the transparency." Australia is seeking support from other countries in an effort to launch an investigation into missteps early in the crisis that have led to the epidemic spreading to millions of people around the world. China has rejected such an investigation. It has threatened retaliation with a consumer boycott of Australian beef and wine, and tariffs on barley. Australia tightened its laws on foreign interference and counterespionage in 2018. U.S. and European calls for an investigation into coronavirus origins is making Australia reconsider its trading relationship dependence on China. India has stepped up its vigilance of Chinese investment so that state backed entities do not acquire local companies affected by the pandemic. Japan has set aside $2.2 billion of its pandemic support package to help Japanese companies shift their supply chains out of China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Even though volatility is high in stock markets, the U.S. stock market has rebounded to levels in August 2019. The level on March 10, 2020 after effects of the coronavirus on the global economy was for the DJIA average in the U.S. to be at the level it was on August 14, 2019, as shown on the graph in the WSJ, in the neighborhood of 25,000. In the last quarter of 2019 there were steep gains in the Dow Jones averages that could not be fully explained, these gains have disappeared. Considering the suddenness of the crisis from the coronavirus in China, and the double whammy of impact on global manufacturing supply chains of first the tariffs on Chinese exports to the U.S., followed by the coronavirus, the impact on stock markets seen in this overall context is comprehensible. Particularly the sharp gains in the last quarter of 2019 which now appear to be muted. There is also some good news for economies such as China and India, which are large oil importing countries, and the rest of Asia, in the sharp drop in oil prices that helps cushion some of its impact on the global economy. For the U.S. this also happens at a time when the economy is in much stronger shape than at any time in the last ten years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The prospect of improved ties between India and China as president Xi Jinping meets prime minister Modi in an informal summit meeting. China sees India as an important trading partner as its trade relations with the U.S. deteriorate in a trade conflict and higher tariffs on China's exports to the U.S. Mr. Modi of India sees the need to maintain steady economic growth ahead of general elections in 2018 where a good economic record and performance would boost his chances for another term. 

Both India and China see the potential for a larger global role as the U.S. under president Trump seeks a smaller role than in the past. On issues such as climate change China has taken the lead and India is also an active participant in limiting carbon emissions.

 

LyrArc Article Gist
As the trade problems with the U.S. escalate in tit for tat tariffs, China looks back at its history for parallels. The period of the "unequal treaties" imposed by the Western powers on China in the period 1850-1900, the Korean War of the 1950's, and other analogies that come up to people. Yet China's planners and leaders are looking at another situation the Plaza Accord of 1985 in which the western nations pressured Japan into accepting a significantly higher exchange rate to reduce its trade surplus and the Japanese yen appreciated by 50%. Japan cut interest rates from 5% to 2.5%, and introduced huge fiscal stimulus, banks opened up to lend vigorously. The result was a boom by 1990's followed by a bust that led to another decade of lending to loss making firms called "zombie" businesses, that led to a stagnant economy. This has persisted for three decades. This China sees as an unacceptable situation when China has still not achieved developed economy status in terms of per capita incomes. It fears getting into a middle income trap as the economic growth slows and the aging population makes a recovery more difficult.  The difference with Japan in the 1985-1990 period is that Mr. Trump lacks the kind of five nation economic coordination that put pressure on Japan. Today there are differing views on China in Europe and the U.S. and different policies. Mr. Trump is known for his style of deal making and could settle early, as feared by some Republican leaders in Congress who see in China a challenge to America's technological dominance. There are no calls to appreciate China's currency. Only calls for China to change its state subsidies model and put in writing and through laws that change the way of doing business that does not require American companies to hand over advanced technology. This is also a concern for Japan and the European Union countries such as Germany, and is something all nations try to protect in global competition. Japan is still facing the consequences in creating a new competitor in high speed train technology after building the first high speed trains in China and transfer of the high speed train technology by Kawasaki. The Household Survey by the Federal Reserve showing the financial fragility of 40% of American families shown on this page today shows how this situation is likely to evolve as working class families in the U.S. support a trade stance that protects American jobs and technology. Job losses over three decades and a $891 billion trade deficit in 2018 are seen as unacceptable to the U.S. in 2019. A stronger U.S. dollar helped increase the U.S. trade deficit by 10% in 2018, nullifying some benefits of Mr. Trump's trade actions. Mr. Robert Lighthizer was a negotiator in the trade dispute with Japan in 1985, and runs the negotiations with China with support from president Trump. This alone has kept the Japanese situation in 1985 uppermost in the minds of China's leaders as they try to come up with a way to settle the trade dispute with Mr. Trump.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
NYT says DJT would use tariffs "as a economic sledgehammer to nations that refuse to meet his demands" and claims not to know what they are. Saying further that DJT has been far less clear about what those demands were. NYT has clearly not followed what DJT has said time and again. It is OK to use economic power when Canada and Mexico, and China have not taken the action they could have taken a long time back that they are now taking, and will take, after years of acting as if they could not see the fentanyl flows across its borders destroying America. These countries two land neighbors of the US and the last a country which from the open door policy against European colonial Empires and through the Joe Stillwell years in the War against Japanese colonialism in China, and in the years of China's building its economy in the 1990-2010 period, offered a helping hand. It makes the victim -and one that had reversed TR's advice about carrying big stick and speaking softly to its bitter regret- the bully, in the words of the NYT.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
If China reduced its automobile tariffs to 2.5% from current 25% it would help German carmakers such as BMW that export from U.S. plants to China. BMW as a premium brand is better able to absorb the transport costs and does not manufacture cars in China. U.S. makers Ford and GM would benefit less as they already have plants making cars in China. By not making cars in China BMW does not have to transfer technology to a Chinese partner.

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ committed to orthodox economic theory thinks of tariffs as tariffs such as Smoot Hawley from the 30's. This is why it is not true- It is about fentanyl flows that have led to 490,000 deaths over 12 years in the US and few in the US like to talk about it. Smoot Hawley had nothing to do with fentanyl, drugs trafficking and migrant trafficking that every nation not only has a right but a No.1 responsibility to its citizens to keep its neighborhoods and its children in neighborhoods safe. Smoot and Hawley were US Senators and US Congress was isolationist in mood. Their grasp of the world trading system was meager and they stepped in at a time when the world had economically not recovered from World War I, and the French against US General Pershing's advice had set the most punitive arrangement in Germany that crushed Germany after an armistice Pershing opposed that left the Kaiser's political structures intact. Tariffs is not DJT's idea. It is the solid experience of Deputy US Trade Representative, Robert Lighthizer under Reagan who conducted negotiations with the Japanese who stalled and stalled Lighthizer says, let negotiations drag on into endless nights, and Lighthizer and his team stood firm. The relentless Japanese relented and Lighthizer secured the agreements that ended this phase of trade relations in the 1980's. Lighthizer was Trade Representative in the DJT first term 2016-2020 and launched the negotiations with China. This is now 8 years since 2016 and 2016 itself was 35 years after Lighthizer negotiated with the Japanese. Today's US Trade Representative is Jamieson who was Deputy Trade Representative under Lighthizer in 2016. Each detail is carefully thought through to bring it to a fair conclusion in the interests of the world and the US. Information traveled slowly GM could not tell at any time how many cars were in inventory on its lots in 1920's. US lacked basic infrastructure for government that FDR and Labor Secretary added firt in New York in the 1930's and which was transferred to 50 states by 1940's. Today information is quickly at fingertips and consultation processes are built in between industry and government at all levels. A lot of information is carefully evaluated. USTR as DJT showed, the major study of USTR Office in the Rose Garden on April 2, 2025, has all trade barriers carefully analyzed in minute details for every country. And is working on this for 40 years. There isn't even a slightest  comparison between this and the Smoot Hawley crowd in the 1920's.  The goal not to beat anybody. Just to set the goal of a level playing field for world trade. That is the foundation of trade that is fair and respected, and is a win-win for all. WTO's basic foundation No. 1 principle is a level playing field. It is just that this was a kind of Marshall Plan for Asia of the US to let poor countries such as Japan war wrecked in 1950, and China colonial power wrecked by first Britain then Japan struggling and poor in 1990's, giving them some time to rebuild by ignoring unfair barriers to trade for 10-15 years 2005 for China. Barriers that never got dismantled and technology that leaked from the US 2005-2016 under the Obama administration. Smoot Hawley was not about the US Navy building its own ships and US shipyards in the 1920's. In 2025 US shipbuilding industry is stolen, this is why the words used "pillaged" "looted" were used in the Rose Garden. Little by little American private enterprise capitalism was superseded by a new form of capitalism in Japan then in China that combined state capitalism with private enterprise capitalism. This then was the threat America faced, and needed to redouble its energies and seek fair play.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The leaders of India and China, Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping will meet at a 2 day summit in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, China, on April 27, 2018.  The meeting is significant because for the first time the 2 leaders will meet on a one on one basis for a significant part of the time without aides to get a better understanding of each other, and a get a sense of how to establish a good relationship between the 2 countries. Ma Jiali of the China Reform Forum, a think tank affiliated with the Communist Party's Central Party School says a better relationship would serve China's interests for regional calm, so that China can focus on internal issues of tackling poverty in the interior of China, tackle economic issues arising from a difficult trading relationship with the U.S. including the tariffs of the Trump administration.  China's leadership have not anticipated the decisions made by president Trump and the Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to take a strong stand on correcting an imbalance in trade that leads to about $1 billion in trade deficit each day for the U.S. with China. Previous administrations in the U.S. have not taken action. Also at issue in the U.S. China relationship is for the first time transfer of technology for "Made in China 2025." China's earlier advances were made with a free flow of technology from the U.S. and Europe.  The last time the two leaders met was in 2014. This time the issues of border relations in the Himalayas, and the relations with China in the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean region, the growing relationship between Australia, U.S., India and Japan, are seen in a different light with the strong disagreements on trade relations with the U.S.  China sees a need for improving relations with India. Prime Minister Modi faces new elections in 2019 and the need to focus on infrastructure and development to win a second term in office for the ruling BJP Party.  A reduction in tensions serves the interest of both countries and leaders.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
After all the media talk about tariffs inflation- inflation is at 2.4% in May 2025. Tariffs was part of the toolbox of strategies under Lighthizer and Jamieson on getting fair world trade, and not like Congressman Hawley in the 1920's who understood little about the workings of the US economy. This fact the official media such as the WSJ and NYT, Wash Post, BBC need to get it right about the Hawley Tariffs. Hawley was born in rural Oregon in 1864 went to country schools, and was president of Willamette University in Salem, when it's population was 4258. As House Ways and Means Committee chairman he wrote the failed tariffs bill Hoover signed in 1930. DJT's US Trade Representative Lighthizer in 2016 led the successful negotiations with Japan under Reagan, Scott Bessent who leads negotiations on tariffs with China with USTR Jamieson, has a deep understanding and grasp of today's financial markets. Tariffs is one of the tools in the US toolbox to get Japan, China, South Korea to even the playing field for US companies and bring back manufacturing to the US. Without it China would not budge from its unfair advantage and would not negotiate in fairness. This is proven in the way Japan in the 1980s and China today are responding to the US position preparing their economies for not relying on sudden surges in exports putting whole industries and workers in America and Europe out of work and out of jobs. DJT says- "No we are not going to accept that," the EU is catching on and adopting a similar position, China knows that.  The media is irresponsible in presenting tariffs in a negative way, irresponsible to American workers the 10 million put out of work since 2000, and to American families and the Nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's top trade negotiator is Liu he, Chinese Vice Premier. He is negotiating with Robert Lighthizer, the U.S. Trade Representative who heads the U.S. side in talks. Liu He says China is planning to reduce auto tariffs on U.S. imports to 15%. U.S. exported 266,000 cars to China in 2017. A number of other issues are coming up between the two countries including cyber hacking as federal prosecutors are expected to unseal charges against hackers linked to the Chinese government, according to this report in WSJ. Canada's arrest of Huawei executive was met with China's arrest of a Chinese diplomat.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Commerce Department announced in March 2012 that it would impose tariffs ranging from 2.9% to 4.73% on solar panels imported from China. China has about 47% of the U.S. market for solar panels- with Suntech at 17%, Yingli at 11%, and Trina at 10%. U.S. based companies have 29%, and other including EU countries 24%. The imports of solar panels from China were $2.65 billion in 2011. In the last 4 years Chinese lower priced products have reduced the cost of panels by two thirds. What this does is send a signal to encourage companies to manufacture in the U.S., and show that the U.S. government was taking action against illegal subsidies by China without disrupting the availability of lower cost imports.