LyrArc Article Gist
Seantor Dan Sullivan and the WSJ say Alaska's economic potential and its standard of living was ignored with blanket blocking of any development of its resources. WSJ says under the Biden administration the state was turned into a nature museum.  WSJ says the state's leaders know that spoiling the environment would be mistake. Yet developing some of the state's resources would help the US in sourcing natural gas and rare earth minerals for renewable energy products. This would achieve a policy balance. One of the arguments North Dakota Governor Borghum and new US Interior Secretary makes is that China is building a coal plant every 2 weeks with 12 built in the first 6 months of 2024. As of July 2024 Statista shows China with 1161 coal plants operational, 6 times the 204 US coal plants and 4 times the 295 coal plants in India, 89 in Japan- and 90% of new coal power capacity added. This means climate change issues remain no matter what the US does. By using natural gas fired electricity the US gets transition time for the shift to renewables and can attack the cost of living, export to the EU.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Under new proposed changes carbon emissions permits would be sold to industry and heavier polluters would have to pay more. And to make it fair to European companies exporters in other countries like China would have to buy these carbon permits to be able to export to Europe. There is similiar discussion about this in the USA which expects caps on greenhouse gas emissions in a few years. These changes wouldn't go into effect till 2013 at the earliest and industry will be trying to create a level playing field by then. Countries like China and India because they are developing have been exempt from the greenhouse caps under the Kyoto Protocol which expire 2012. Under the Kyoto Protocol which Europe signed and the USA did not sign, European companies are giving carbon permits free to emit a certain amount of greenhouse gas every year, the heavier polluters have to buy the permits from the ones that pollute less creating an incentive for companies to reduce emisssions.

LyrArc Article Gist
Progressive caucus in the US House of Representatives led by Pramila Jaypal, a first time Indian American Congresswoman defeats an attempt by Josh Gottheimer of the Problem Solvers caucus to separate much of the president Biden's agenda in health, education and social policy and risk it being defeated by Senators Manchin and Sinema in the US Senate. Without the efforts on child care, education and health, climate change and social services part of the Biden Workers and Families Plan much of the Biden agenda would remain unfinished and Democratic party promises not kept. This also means that Manchin a Senator from West Virginia with a population of 1.8 million and Arizona with a population of 7.2 million, both conservative leaning Democrats could sink the entire agenda of president Biden to support American families and workers for a population of 331 million people. That two states with a population of less than 3% of the American population could sink the entire agenda of president Biden shows how fragile a situation has been created within the Democratic party to support workers and families even during the pandemic following the leadership of Carter, Clinton, and Obama Ms. Jaypal, a three term Congresswoman from Seattle, Washington state, was first elected in 2016 with an endorsement from Bernie Sanders who was the Democratic Party's leading candidate for president till the late stages of the 2020 US presidential primaries. Bernie Sanders says of Jaypal- "I think she is doing an extraordinary job. And I think the Progressive Caucus is doing an extraordinary job." Sanders founded the Progressive caucus after getting elected to the Senate from Vermont 30 years ago. Even though it is hard to imagine the Democratic party being the Democratic party without bold policies in climate change, affordable housing, reducing income disparities,  investing big in childcare, education and healthcare, attempts were being made to sink the entire Democratic party and national agenda going back to Franklin Roosevelt. Jaypal is described in the WSJ as diplomatic and firm, saying "I am so proud of our caucus; I have never seen our caucus so strong. And I am a very good vote counter also." Fifty members of the 100 member Progressive Caucus held firm in support of president Biden's original agenda without which the president would have little to show in keeping promises he made to the American people in the election and little to differentiate him from Mr. Trump who also supported infrastructure spending. Separating the infrastructure bill would have risked sinking Mr. Biden's plan for recovery of America from the pandemic and the devastating policies pursued by American presidents in the last two decades. Policies by previous presidents that have impoverished the country, created huge income disparities, weakened America in the world in trade and technological leadership, and wasted resources in foreign wars. There are no centrists or far left- these are just labels. When Ms Japal said "Let's just remember the Speaker (Nancy Pelosi) is a great champion of this agenda. I think she was trying to do as much as she could to get this done," she could have said it is Mr. Biden's own agenda pushed forward with conviction to help workers and families during the pandemic, and build a solid American recovery, restore American leadership in the world. Pramila Japypal is the first Indian American woman in the US Congress, and one of only two dozen naturalized American citizens in the US Congress. That she could play such a critical role for good in the US Congress shows that with the right convictions, determination, experience, much can be done for the common good in America and the world.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the flaws in China's development model are shown by the Economist. Over half of the economy is dominatd by state run enterprises. And the remainder is also heavily influenced by local government and officials from the government. Financing goes through state run banks which lend to state run enterprises, and only a small fraction of lending goes to small businesses. These busineses are not actively looking to support innovation and new products. The other weakness that the Economist correctly points out, is that by contrast even in the 1960's, about 10 years into Japan's postwar development, quality control was a big thing with companies in Japan. The Deming Prize was seen as the most prestigious prize for Japanese companies, and Japanese engineers tried to learn everything they could about quality control to make Made in Japan mean high quality. They succeeded by the 1980's in making this happen, with leading global brands like Sony, Matsushita, Panasonic, Toyota, Honda, Canon and a host of other brands. If 1980 in China, is where Japan was in 1950, now about 30 years later there is nothing like what was seen happen in Japan in the area of quality and global brands. The area in which the freewheeling culture of capitalism has been most successful is the economic zone, a 2 hour drive between Guanghou and Shenzen. It manufactures mostly low tech goods like toys and apparel and shoes, and these manufacturing facilities are of low quality, with poor conditions for labor. With the efforts by the government to move to higher value added and high tech products these businesses came under pressure by mid 2007, with new labor laws, more enforcement, pollution control laws and resulting higher costs. As they felt the impact by mid 2008 from the higher costs, some businesses disappeared. Then another and even bigger problem hit these businesses. The global economic crisis, the shortage of credit in western countries to sustain import orders, and the rapid fall off of demand from highly indebted consumers in the USA, has led to closure of most of these businesses. The rapidity with which many of these businesses closed is amazing, as row after row of these buildings are now empty in the Guangzhou-Shenzen area. Another development is happening in Taiwanese firms like Hon Hai, that with little disclosure, make IPods, laptops, PC's, and other electronic products in the same area. At one point this firm employed 250,000 people in a industrial city sized factory campus. Now it is shifting production to places like Vietnam. Now Taiwanese reports say that the workforce of Hon Hai in Shenzen area will drop to 100,000. Other Taiwanese firms are also shifting production to other countries. Climate change and the heavily polluting industries that are widespread in China is one of the other flaws in the Chinese development model. Another is the lack of energy efficiency in these industries. With all these changes exposing the deeper flaws in the model China has used for development for the last 30 years, this a time for change in the way economic development takes place in China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Increasing regional tensions with a more assertive Japan and China. U.S. president Obama's so called "pivot to Asia," appears to have little impact. China has tended to look for its own security architecture in Asia that excludes the U.S. U.S. efforts to reduce tensions are being ignored by China in May-June 2014, as China asserts itself in waters that are in dispute with Vietnam. The lack of U.S. influence compares unfavorably with the situation that prevailed since 1900, when the U.S. had the most significant influence in Asian waters. It has more to do with a policy of withdrawal under the Obama administration than U.S. capabilities. The policy of withdrawal in the Middle East comes after much of the sacrifice had been made and the situation in Iraq changed, so that for a much smaller incremental effort the U.S. could have both lived up to its principles and ideals for democracy and freedom as well as win public opinion in the Arab countries of North Africa and the Middle East. This withdrawal in the Middle East has given Russia and China the wrong signal leading to more assertive stance in Europe and Asia, and creating uncertainty where little uncertainty existed about U.S. determination. Under whatever terms it is wrapped the policy of the Obama administration is one of withdrawal. It is dangerous because it will mean a more costly effort would be needed under a future administration to restore the situation which prevailed earlier- in which the U.S. has helped create a climate in which the entire region including China and Japan have prospered economically, without the region descending into a competition between Russia, China, Japan, South Korea and India. The Obama administration with its muddled policies has inadvertently created this situation....

LyrArc Article Gist
Property sales are estimated to fall by 28-33% in China, twice as earlier forecast by S&P Global Ratings. This is a steep decline that will affect the Chinese economy so dependent on construction. This week there were reports of property buyers in 100 cities getting together to withhold payments on unfinished apartments. Property developers depend on these payments as they have severe liquidity problems and need cash for operations.

LyrArc Article Gist
There may be psychological hurdles in China's growth with the effects on mental health from lockdowns in major cities, the revolt in the property sector with home buyers losing confidence in developers, the loss of confidence of foreign investors from US and EU. The dependence on the property sector to carry so large a burden of growth for the last 2 decades in China may now look like an error. The dependence on foreign investment may also be an error as the loss of confidence could mean some withdrawal and a lack of sustained investment.  It could even be said that restraints on both sectors property and foreign investors could have created alternative paths to growth, and reduced the shift of factories from the US and Europe to China that have now caused trade friction and and a reverse shift of investment back to home countries of US and EU. Trade friction has it appears backfired in a way that extends to the overall relationship which could have been prevented by preventing the hyper growth that happened. Greg Ip of the WSJ has argued that compared to Japan's growth in the sixties and seventies from a country of 100 million the hyper growth for a country of 1 billion for 2 decades created a massive impact on communities in US and EU that were dependent on factories that were lost to China. This has alienated large sectors of the public in the US and EU which could have been prevented by restraints on hyper growth in China. Ip says the growth was too large and too fast for the US to cope. It may have permanently damaged the relations between the two countries showing that trade and globalization had unintended effects when left to business and governments staying away from keeping an eye on how it was happening. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ says China's government faces severely strained government finances. Local government entities sale of land financed 40% of local government revenues in China, and most of these have dried up with the very real loss of confidence in property sector. Government now faces $900 billion in shortfall in revenues says this report. There may be psychological hurdles in China's growth with the effects on mental health from lockdowns in major cities, the revolt in the property sector with home buyers losing confidence in developers, the loss of confidence of foreign investors from US and EU. The dependence on the property sector to carry so large a burden of growth for the last 2 decades in China may now look like an error. The dependence on foreign investment may also be an error as the loss of confidence could mean some withdrawal and a lack of sustained investment.  It could even be said that restraints on both sectors property and foreign investors could have created alternative paths to growth, and reduced the shift of factories from the US and Europe to China that have now caused trade friction and and a reverse shift of investment back to home countries of US and EU. Trade friction has it appears backfired in a way that extends to the overall relationship which could have been prevented by preventing the hyper growth that happened. Greg Ip of the WSJ has argued that compared to Japan's growth in the sixties and seventies from a country of 100 million the hyper growth for a country of 1 billion for 2 decades created a massive impact on communities in US and EU that were dependent on factories that were lost to China. This has alienated large sectors of the public in the US and EU which could have been prevented by restraints on hyper growth in China. Ip says the growth was too large and too fast for the US to cope. It may have permanently damaged the relations between the two countries showing that trade and globalization had unintended effects when left to business which has no comprehension of how the macro developments can affect the relations between the peoples if the other effects in the relationship such as community impacts are ignored which business says is not its role,  and governments staying away from keeping an eye on how it was happening and adjusting for ill effects with restraint and redirection of business policies. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's manufacturing sector contracts in June with the PMI index dropping below 50 - to 49.0.  Exports were also coming in lower. Experts say the increase in interest rates by the US is reducing imports of Chinese goods into the US. This comes as local governments are strained in their finances by $900 billion, and a budding revolt is taking place from property buyers with developers in financial trouble, as reported in the WSJ. Psychological hurdles now loom in the loss of confidence in the public in the property sector, loss of confidence of foreign investors with many constraints in operating, mental health issues for the population in many cities with the covid lockdowns.   The growth has slowed to 0.4% and there is now a realization dawning that there was overdependence both on property sector and foreign investment that set up new factories offshored from the US and Europe that alienated the public in these countries. Unlike wih the situation of Japan in the sixties and seventies for modernizing its economy growth of the scale China was pushed into by misguided and self interested  business interests in the US including its investment banks and local government officials in China without restraint by the central government in Beijing, ultimately led to trade friction and permanent damage to US China friendly relations. Communities in the US and the EU simply could not cope with the hyper growth from hyper shift of factories from the home countries to China that pushed this hyper growth. The property sector played the same role in the domestic front with too big a burden carried by it resulting in hyper growth. This did not have to happen. It happened because of a lack of understanding that this would have consequences in the longer run which is now showing up. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
XI Jinping tells China's National People's Congress that "western nations- including the US- have implemented all round containment, encirclement and suppression against us, bringing unprecedentedly severe challenges to development." Addressing the private sector Chamber of Commerce representatives which create significant number of jobs in China he said the Communist Party "has always regarded private enterprises and private entrepreneurs as our own people, and will always support them whenever they run into difficulties." Job creation in China is a challenge with high youth unemployment estimated at about 20%. The pandemic worsened the situation for state finances and for unemployment for migrants, the construction slowdown has added to this. The burden of trillions of dollars of local government debt increased during the pandemic with the central government lacking the resources to help, creating problems in the local economies.  This WSJ report says Xi's speech seeks to present his government's performance in the light of these challenges and future challenges as growth slows in China. The trading relationship with US-EU added to employment and income problems for China's economy and people, yet it had one weakness an over concentration in manufacturing in one country that European and US business placed in one country. The building of a  new supply chain that creates manufacturing in other countries to reduce this concentration, and the limits placed on access to western technologies by China to protect US-EU in competition, places new development challenges for China, which Xi alludes to. In the past China was able to use huge stimulus to tackle its debt by creating more growth that supported this debt creation. The pandemic may finally have reversed this as trillions of dollars of debt have built up, and construction of homes and infrastructure has reached a saturation point. This is the kind of situation that Japan entered in the 1990's after three decades of torrid growth and development rates. History is being repeated as China like Japan is entering a new phase of an aging society. In this sense the challenges China is facing are very different from that of Russia. Creating jobs is a perennial problem in India and China with their large populations and rising aspirations of people after centuries of underdevelopment, something that Europe including Russia does not face in anywhere to a similar degree. in this sense there is more in common between the EU and Russia even when they are in a war, than Russia and China, and China has more in common with India. The struggle in Europe as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms has pointed out in his History of Europe, is more about the balance of power which is the story of European history since the 1450's where no one country has been allowed to act with impunity in invading its neighbors and other countries formed a concerted group to prevent this. Be it France, Austria, Britain or Russia that acted seemingly with impunity. China has little to do with it or Europe's history. President Biden is right to say that the US only competes with China in the economic and business fields, and seeks to find common ground on climate change and food insecurity. The US has supported China throughout the twentieth century since the time of Woodrow Wilson in 1913, around the period when Tsinghua University was established with US help. The US helped China during the Japanese invasion and the Cold War period ended with renewed relations.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jaishankar was asked at the 2021 GLOBSEC conference in Bratislava in 2021 why he thinks anyone will help India in case of a problem with China after it did not help others for Ukraine. Chancellor Scholz of Germany cites Indian Foreign Minister Jasihankar's remarks in Bratislava, Slovakia, in 2021. Jaishankar said- "Europe has to grow out of the mindset that Europe's problems are the world's problems, but the world's problems are not Europe's problems. That is if it is you it's yours, if it is me it is ours. I see reflections of that. There is a linkage today which is being made. A linkage betwen China and India and what's happening in Ukraine. Chia and India happened way before anything happened in Ukraine. The Chinese do not need a precedent somewhere else on how to engage us or not to engage us or be difficult with us or not to be difficult with us." These are Scholz's remarks at the Munich Security Conference. Scholz says Jaishankar has "a point."  "This quote from the Indian Foreign Minister is included in this year's Munich Security Report and he has a point it would't be Europe's problem alone if the law of the strong were to assert itself in international relations." To be credible European or North American in New Delhi or Jakarta, it is not enough to emphasize shared values. "We generally have to address the interests and concerns of these countries as a basic prerequisite for joint action. And that's why it was so important to me to not merely have representatives of Asia, Africa and Latin America at the negotiating table during the G-7 Summit last June. I really wanted to work with these regions to find solutions to the main challenges they face growing poverty and hunger, partly as a consequence of Rusia's war, as well as the impact of climate change or COVID-19. There is another side to this -Scholz and Germany's president Frank Walter-Steinmeier are from the social Democrats party which has sought closer cooperation with Russia, and also carry a great deal of ambivalence for the war. America is not fighting this indirect war in its neighborhood, Germany is. And some of the roots of this conflict go back to the Napoleonic invasion of Russia in the 1800's period and the German invasion in the 1940's. Macron is even more ambivalent in his position and he has remained this way from the beginning- not committed to humiliating Russia. In a way it is the position of the Social Democrats from the historical context of Germany's invasion of Russia, and Christian Democrats eagerness to create a German recovery with low cost Russian energy that created the dependence that Russia sought to use. In what it sees as the unfairness of NATO being allowed to expand right next to its borders. Because of a sense of righteousness on both sides- Russia of the Soviet period failing to see the feelings of a Budapest in 1956, East Berlin in 1953, and Prague in 1968, sees little wrong in an invasion of Kviv. And with it all the biography of Brezhnev the last leader of the Soviet Union, describes that very struggle in the Great Patriotic War the soviets fought against Nazi Germany which was fought by Ukrainians including Leonid Brezhnev with great will and purpose against all odds.  Cambridge historian has written the history of Europe that Scholz is cited to be reading in 2021- Europe The Struggle for Supremacy 1453 to the Present.  It shows Europe since 1453 engaging in balance of power of European powers, Sweden Denmark, Russia, Austria, Germany, France, Britain, Turkey, continually for 500 years. Europe simply forgot its own history. Asia including Japan, China, Indonesia and India, simply emerging from the situation of falling behind in science, technology, and the industrial revolution and building their economies with the help of the US since the Meiji Restoration in Japan in 1868. The Balance of Power Simms says was maintained for 500 years is simply based on no country allowed to act with impunity, no country allowed to do whatever it wanted because of its position of strength at that moment or period of time. In that situation all other powers regrouped to keep the balance from being upset. The war in Ukraine is also likely to end in a way that is consistent with that which Brendan Simms writes about because this has not changed now for over 500 years. Biden knows this and it has fallen on America to shoulder the burden for this in the last 150 years, Scholz is aware of this, Modi in India sees this, and Jinping in China realizes this even with its concerns about Taiwan.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The continued debate about the relevance of a G-8, the need for more countries. OBama sees the G-20 as the really important meeting, and the G-8 meetings as a smaller less significant meeting between the G20 meeting in London and the next one in Pittsburgh. This however leaves the other leaders outside of the G-8 meeting on the sidelines at G-8 meetings, which does not work very well. In this meeting in Italy, Turkey and Egypt were also present, as were leaders from Africa, and from Australia.

LyrArc Article Gist
The firing of John Bolton as National Security Adviser opens up the possibility of a meeting of Trump with President Rouhani of Iran. There is a need for both sides to begin talks on a nuclear deal that would replace the one Iran signed with president Obama to address issues raised by Mr. Trump and Republicans. Iran and countries that buy oil from Iran such as India, China and Japan have an interest in relief from sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on imports of Iranian oil. The European Union is keen to preserve aspects of the nuclear deal. Relief from sanctions is critical for Iran to develop its economy. The last two decades have seen Iran struggle to develop its economy with the sanctions imposed by  different U.S. administrations.   President Trump expressed flexibility on sanctions saying "we will see what happens. I think Iran has potential. They are incredible people." President Rouhani urged Mr. Trump "to put warmongers aside." Mr. Trump told reporters that he had resisted Mr. Bolton's opinions on issues and realized he had moderate views when compared to someone like Bolton.  Trump told Iran "We are not looking for regime change. We hope we can make a deal and if we can't make a deal thats fine too. But I think they have to make a deal." Helping the U.S. and Iran come to talks is president Macron of France who hopes to setup a meeting at the UN General Assembly which meets next week following his efforts at the G-7 meeting in France last month. In the past when tensions were high in the Straits of Hormuz President Trump refrained from aggravating this by saying actions that are "disproportionate" should not be taken and respected Iranian intentions. The tone of the conversation between the two sides has moderated to the point where both sides realize the need for coming to some compromise. This is in sharp contrast to the period a few months ago with rising tensions in the Straits of Hormuz and the seizure of an Iranian ship. Bolton's opinions were not the only issue for president Trump. He was also seen as the source of leaks including one that said Mike Pence, the Vice President, had opposed Mr. Trump's plan to bring the Taliban to Camp David. Also contributing to the new climate for talks is Mike Pompeo the Secretary of State, who has promoted the idea of talks with Iran. He told the media about such a meeting at the UN General Assembly in New York- "Sure. The president has made it very clear that he is prepared to meet with no pre-conditions." The willingness to try new ideas even contrary ones to policy pursued only a short while ago as long as the desired goal is reached is a feature of this presidency and key advisers. From the beginning of the Trump administration there is a firm sense of the need to end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. and reduce foreign entanglements that have dragged on wasting resources and destroying priorities. With a willingness to try all sorts of approaches even ones that appear to be contradictory always keeping the end goal in sight. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How will posterity view Angela Merkel. As she ends a fourth term this BBC News report says it will remain a contested legacy. Much of what went right has already been written. A woman, a pragmatic scientist who hewed to the center not just as a scientist but with a knack for politics. Much of her early period in office was one in which she had to tackle the eurozone crisis. The euro's weakness had its roots in the way Mr Kohl allowed eurozone membership for countries such as Greece without adequate entry requirements. Some of the other problems were also left behind by an overzealous mentor Helmut Kohl who pushed for German reunification that never really happened in terms of bringing all east Germans into the idea of the Federal Republic. These problems in a neglected eastern part of Germany around Dresden were never tackled by Merkel. They were social issues that Merkel's pragmatic thinking failed to grasp. Letting in migrants from Arab and African countries was a move that Merkel made without realizing the full implications. This policy was reversed but led to the emergence of extreme right wing sentiment in parts of the country. It is left to a future German leader to tackle the social and economic disparities that affect Germany today. As time passes people reflect and a more careful view prevails. Dr Rudiger Schmitt-Beck reflects this when he says that the Merkel years were about  a bizarre mix of modernization and backwardness. Merkel rejected nuclear energy after the events at Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. As a scientist she was able to tackle such issues. Yet on the major social issues of the day Prof. Schmitt-Beck of the University of Mannheim, says she left Germany "grotesquely behind"- on child care, climate policy, digitization, infrastructure building, on demographic change. These are the issues that the Social Democrats and the Greens are standing up for today. Ironically Merkel may be remembered more for something that is not even mentioned in this BBC report. This is the European solidarity shown by action to financially support all EU countries including Italy with EU funding during the coronavirus pandemic.  This may be her biggest achievement because it will be lasting. Without it Europe would not be the better place it is today, resilient in the face of the pandemic.  Seen from outside Merkel will be seen as a German leader who failed to see the potential for India and other Asian countries with almost twice the population of China. Fascinated with 13 visits to China she studied Chinese history, politics and economics, says the WSJ. And did too little to balance Germany's close business and trade ties with China, with efforts in India and other countries. Seen from America as pointed out in the WSJ front page on September 23, Merkel made no effort to rebuild US relations with the Biden administration after the tumultuous period under presidents Obama with spying on her phone and with Mr. Trump over the EU's participation in NATO defense. She seemed resigned to a view that America had seen her best years, a belief that today does not exist anywhere in America. US president Biden's first phone call to Merkel was put off for a few days says the WSJ, and Merkel continued to build close ties with China, ignoring the fact that this was a new administration closer to that of presidents FDR and Harry Truman who did so much for Germany. And a president very different than any of Biden's five predecessors. ...

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
Duke Energy's CEO, Jim Rogers, talks to Charlie Rose about the U.S. nuclear industry and the future for nuclear energy in the aftermath of the nuclear disaster in Japan.

LyrArc Article Gist
Biden sees his plan for American workers and families put together in the $3.5 trillion spending package that covers child care, education, healthcare, services, climate change proposals, infrastructure building, as a way to show that democratic governments can work for the people. After two decades when American workers and families were largely put aside in the nation's priorities during a tech driven and capital markets driven expansion that benefited large corporations, America is returning to its core concept of government by the people, for the people, of the people. White House officials say this is to be seen even in the program he put forward in his upset victory many years ago for the US Senate from Delaware. Because economic strength of America depends on a strong middle class, and strong working class, strong families, and underpins the world leadership role of America, even Republicans and hesitant Democrats, cannot give in to the current situation of doing nothing or too little for workers and families which weakens America. And at a time when its leadership role in Asia and Latin America, Africa is sorely needed. The size of the package in $3.5 trillion is because too little was done in the past in the mistaken acceptance of Reagan policies of no government role in the economy- surrendering this role of guidance entirely to the capital markets driven from New York, London, and Silicon Valley. The rise of China today, and also of Japan and South Korea, and of India as it plans for 2030 shows that government guidance of the economy is needed in global competition. Trade entirely driven by capital markets, without a role for government to emphasize national priorities in spending can lead to disastrous results such as we see today where manufacturing even in critical fields such as healthcare, semiconductor driven technology, entire parts of the economic structure are ceded to China and supply chains outside the US. German elections are also leading in the same direction with Social Democrats emphasizing national priorities in child care, education, healthcare, and delivery of social services, building of infrastructure. And the Greens emphasizing climate change. Merkel in Germany and in the European Union, her predecessor Schroeder, pursued policies of no government role in emphasizing and articulating national priorities, in a way that past US presidents have done, resulting in the CDU falling to 20% support in the September German elections. Across all parts of the world, from India, China, to Europe and the US, the focus is on government voicing the national priorities  and allocating funding instead of capital markets driven from London, New York and Silicon Valley, or capital markets in Shanghai or Mumbai, as the pandemic runs into its second year. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Country Garden is turning into a worse problem than Evergrande. Both housing developer companies are in serious financial problems in China affecting the larger economy. Consider that Country Garden has $286 billion in liabilities and $7 billion in first half losses for 2023. Two years earlier Evergrande went into insolvency over extravagant projects and spending. Country Garden's problems come from a shift away from housing in the country a retreat by investors and buyers. Yet 25% of the economy and the savings of ordinary Chinese are tied up in housing. Local government finances are also strained adding to the debt burden. In the boom years housing created hyper growth, now it is in reverse acting as a drag on the economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
As Japanese prime minister Noda prepares to restart the Oi nuclear plant in June 2012, former prime minister Naoto Kan, who was premier during the Fukushima nuclear disaster, answers questions in a parliamentary inquiry. He says he realized how dangerous nuclear power can be when it got to the point where the evalcuation of Tokyo was being considered, Japan was then on "the verge of national collapse." His fears were that a number of meltdowns could together " release into the air and sea many times, no, many dozens of times, many hundreds of times the radiation released by Chernobyl." The Japanese public has focussed on the parliamentary hearings because the previous inquiry is thought to have been perfunctory, and not really examined in depth all the issues the Fukushima disaster had raised, and the general feeling is that a proper public dialogue had not taken place. In contrast in Germany the issues had been discussed openly, and the Angela Merkel government which had been receptive to nuclear power reversed its stand on nuclear power. Germany is phasing out dependence on nuclear energy. Kan pointed out that the "nuclear village," the network of nuclear power companies, bureaucrats, and researchers, had hijacked national nuclear policy and was putting Japan back on the same path. He went so far as to compare it with the situation facing Gorbachev in Russia after Chernobyl: "Gorbachev said in his memoirs that the Chernobyl accident exposed the sickness of the Soviet system. The Fukushima accident did the same for Japan." In his assessment of what happened Kan said: "It is impossible to ensure safety sufficiently to prevent the risk of a national collapse. Experiencing the accident convinced me that the best way to make nuclear plants safe is not to rely on them, but rather to get rid of them."...

LyrArc Article Gist
A German reporter questions the value of the G20 meetings following the violence on streets at the last Hamburg meeting. He says the first G20 during the global financial crisis was useful but later meetings have not lived up to the hope for discussion and search for solutions to world problems. Global trade is at the top of the agenda following the tariffs dispute between China and the U.S. Divergent interests of participants are a problem. Would going back to G-7 in private meetings be a solution asks this reporter.

LyrArc Article Gist
An intimate biographical account of new Chinese leader Xi Jinping and his connections with Muscatine Iowa, where he visited as a head of a Chinese farm delegation in 1985. Xi Jinping remembers the trip vivdly and plans to spend time with friends from that visit during a visit to the U.S. in 2012. He spent two nights during that visit in the bedroom of two college age boys of the Dvorchak family. This revealing account of Jinping's life shows that the actual story of his life is quite different from the title of "princelings" or privileged sons of former communist leaders that is suggested by this reference in the media. Because of the volatile nature of Chinese politics, his father Xi Zhongxun, who led communist partisans in the struggle of the pre World War II years, was rehabilitated twice after falling out of favor. The first period was in 1962 and it was not till 1979 when he was fully rehabilitated. During this period which coincides with the growing up period of Xi from 9-26 years of age, Xi experienced many hardships. During the years of the Cultural revoultion Xi was sent at age 15 to Shanxi province where his father had led partisans. He lived there for 7 years in a traditional cave dwelling in the village of Liangjahe doing farm work. He was denied admission to Tsinghua University twice before being accepted in 1974. There he graduated with a degree in organic chemistry. This was followed by three years working as an assistant to Geng Biao, defense minister and a partisan who was a colleague of his father. The next job was deputy Communist party chief of Zhengding county in Hebei province. Iowa Governor Branstad visited Hebei in 1984, and Branstad played host to a animal-feed delegation led by Jinping in 1985- the visit to Muscatine was part of this trip and which Jinping has told others he enjoyed more than his visits to Oregon or California that year. The second time Xinping's father went out of favor was after his criticism of the crackdown of protests at Tienanmen Square. These experiences have given Xinping a confidence and experience in different situations that other Chinese leaders including the current leaders lacked. If Jinping has inherited some characteristics from his father he may also have the courage to take China in a new direction, and make the kind of changes China needs as it shifts away from an export based economy. At the same time rule in China is by consensus of leaders on the communist party's standing committee. His father helped initiate the special economic zone in Guangdong province in 1978, and Xi Xinping held senior posts in the provinces of Fujian and Zhejiang and in Shanghai, giving him close ties with industry and local government in areas that led the export based economy. Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore puts Jinping in the" class of Nelson Mandela type leaders, who has great emotional stability to not let his personal misfortunes and sufferings cloud his personal judgement." Of political positions Jinping has a certain wariness. He once responded to mention of him as the potential leader with the words: "Are you trying to give me a fright."...