LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin of NYT provides some counter intuitive ideas on U.S. Fed interest rate policy. He says it can't be take as a given that the Fed will raise rates in 2017-2018. This depends on how much punch there is in the Trump economic policies for stimulus, and for infrastructure spending, tax cuts. He cites Senate Majority Leader McConnell who said he would like to keep "tax reform revenue neutral." Getting large spending and pushing up the deficit is likely to run up against Republicans in Congress who have for 8 years opposed large spending increases and large deficits. Trump has given few details about his stimulus or infrastructure spending plans. He says the scale of the spending might not match the talk. Irwin cites JP Morgan Chase economists who have kept their forecasts for GDP growth just under 2% for 2017 and 2018. And he points out that even Trump appointees at the Fed might act independently. The Fed might look at being cautious considering that increased trade tensions with China, and the unpredictability of a Trump administration could hurt growth. Irwin does not mention the uncertainty in other areas such as policy towards Russia on which the Republican party and Congress have very different views than Trump, tensions over Taiwan, that can also affect growth. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The difference between US imports and exports is down from $418 billion in 2018 to $280 billion in last 12 months (August 2024 to July 2025) showing the impact of tariffs and policies of the DJT administration to level the playing field and for getting out of the trade deficits that hurt American jobs, workers, and communities. Tariffs of 20% for fentanyl issue and 125% made it 145% for import tariff on China after Liberation Day. These were lowered to 30% after trade talks. This where it stands today. 

The figure of $280 billion is higher because of transshipping by China through Vietnam- for transshipping the 20% tariff on Vietnam goes up to 40%. Another aspect of the figure of $280 billion is that it is last 12 months which reflects 5 months of the Biden administration, and the surge in imports before deadlines when DJT tariffs would come into place. Battery imports are up, smartphones, toys and apparel is down.

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Lighthizer, was deputy trade representative for the Reagan administration. He says, trade is one area in which the establishment has simply got it wrong. In this area there is little difference between George Bush, Bill Clinton, Obama and Republican politicians. It is one area, he says, where the feeling that elites are thwarting the will of the voters resonates most. He says the talk about America's decline, and the idea that the 21st century belongs to China, leaves voters unconvinced that our trade policy is working for America. For voters who are unconvinced, it makes sense to have a nationalist trade policy that takes on foreign abuses and fights for American interests. He cites 2 statistics that worry these voters. One is the huge trade imbalances that require the USA to sell hundreds of billions of dollars in assets each year. The value of foreign investments in the USA exceeds the value of American investments abroad by $2.74 trillion, and China by itself has $2.5 trillion in foreign currency reserves, mostly in dollars. The other fact is that while the trade deficit for the last decade was about $4.3 trillion for the last decade, America also lost 5.6 millon jobs. And its becoming increasingly clear that as with managed currencies such as the Chinese yuan, and other trade practices, the rest of the world is stacking the free-trade deck against us. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the DW.com says the proposal to impose a 20% border tax on goods from countries with which the U.S. has a trade deficit is bad for Germany and for the U.S.. It is a double edged sword because 1.6 million German jobs would be affected, according to Ifo Institute.  Yet also true is that German companies generate 672,000 jobs in the U.S., and about 600,000 of the 1.6 million jobs affected in Germany are by American companies in Germany, according to industry body BDI. Many of these American companies would be severely affected. So large is the bilateral trade relationship that no one would come out a winner, all would be big losers. Once the process starts it becomes tit for tat, as Germany and the European Union is faced with a dilemma on how to react, says this editorial. Which is why Merkel and Germany, are coming all out to get the trade talks on the right footing with the Trump administration. Economy minister Zypries warned about taking the case to the WTO if the Trump administration follows through on higher tariffs. Merkel has focussed on trade, and other issues have become secondary at this time. Before this meeting Germany's Gabriel met with Treasury Secretary Mnuchin to set the right tone for German- U.S. relations. And the first meeting appears to have been tightly planned so that it goes off with a good start considering what is at stake. Even then this editorial reminds readers that the tone of the tariffs rhetoric from the Trump administration could affect perceptions over the next 4 years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Any hopes that the U.S. would compromise on its position on trade issues were dampened after the G-7 Summit meetings in Canada. Europe and Canada are frustrated at their inability to move Mr. Trump on trade issues. Mr. Trump made jabs on trade, terrorism and immigration during 2 days of meetings. There is also uncertainty about the NAFTA though trade negotiations on NAFTA continue in Quebec. Trump says the negotiations were friendly and moving along until Mr. Trudeau made his own remarks about not being pushed around by its larger neighbor. On some issues there is not even an agreement on facts as president Trump says the U.S. has a trade deficit of $100 billion with Canada, Trudeau says the U.S. has a surplus. Trump says the high cost dairy industry is protected by Canada.

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

LyrArc Article Gist
The Indian Budget speech by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman seeks to keep the fiscal deficit on a downward trajectory from 4.9% fiscal deficit in 2024, lowering it each year 2025-2028. The total expenditures for Indian Budget 2024 are $720 billion and the total government revenues excluding borrowing $480 billion, tax revenues $390 billion. To attract investment by foreign companies in India the corporate tax rate is reduced from 40% to 35%. And abolition of angel tax for startups. capital gains tax reduced to 20% for short term gains and 12.5% for long term gains. Simplification of the Income Tax Act of 1961 within 6 months. Lowering of taxes for personal income taxes to 30% above 15 lakh rupees. Exempt 25 critical minerals from basic customs duties to assist processing in India. Reduce basic customs duties on mobile phones to 15%. Customs duties to support domestic manufacturing, export competitiveness. Simplify and rationalize the hugely beneficial GST Tax, "a success of vast proportions, reducing the compliance burden and logistics cost for trade and industry." "The gross and net market borrowings through dated securities during 2024-25 are estimated at ` 14.01 lakh crore and ` 11.63 lakh crore respectively. Both will be less than that in 2023-24. 114. The fiscal consolidation path announced by me in 2021 has served our economy very well, and we aim to reach a deficit below 4.5 per cent next year. The Government is committed to staying the course. From 2026-27 onwards, our endeavour will be to keep the fiscal deficit each year such that the Central Government debt will be on a declining path as percentage of GDP." For the year 2024-25, the total receipts other than borrowings and the total expenditure are estimated at ` 32.07 lakh crore and ` 48.21 lakh crore respectively. The net tax receipts are estimated at ` 25.83 lakh crore. The fiscal deficit is estimated at 4.9 per cent of GDP. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this thoughtful essay Bob Davis of the WSJ asks whether the decision of the Clinton administration to admit China into the World Trade Organization was a bad one for the U.S.  Mr. Clinton in 2000 tried to persuade Congress citing words of president Woodrow Wilson that of a dream "of a world full of free markets, free elections, and free peoples working together."  Every year China would have its most favored nation status renewed with help from supporters in Congress. After WTO entry this was not necessary. Chinese leaders saw the entry into WTO as a way to knock down trade barriers, to act a wrecking ball for the planned economy, to give the economy a big boost.  In 1994 China was a relatively backward economy with 60% of the population living on less than $1.90 a day. Hard to imagine today.  Not everyone was convinced that it was good for the U.S. This included a trade attorney who had tackled a huge trade deficit with Japan in the Reagan period- Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer was Deputy Trade Representative negotiating with the Japanese. His prediction was that no job in America would be safe once China entered the WTO, that China would become a dominant trading nation.  Robert Cassidy, 73, trade negotiator for president Clinton looks back on that time and says that he regrets what has happened, that all his work night and a day only benefited business and hurt workers. David Autor, MIT economist and his colleagues,  in a later study documented loss of 2.4 million jobs to Chinese competition between 1999 and 2011, in many manufacturing towns dotting the landscape of America, particularly in the midwestern states. And the expectation that the higher economic growth would lead to less political control did not turn out to be true.  In the process multinationals rushed to China after WTO entry and China became the world's manufacturing floor. By 2013 China's per capita income reached $7000, after years of fast GDP growth approaching 10% a year.  About 400 million Chinese were lifted out of poverty from living on less than $1.90 per day from 1999 to 2011, according to the World Bank. A big problem was that the U.S. did not plan for the change from WTO entry. No resources were allocated for the plan to let American workers adjust through worker retraining and special trade handicapped income support, to allow for a slow planned shift. Instead the pace of growth was faster than that which the U.S. faced with the Japanese export offensive in the eighties. China experienced double digit growth after 2000. The irony is that the Republican administrations that followed Clinton followed a policy of free trade to the advantage of China's state run economy when working class Americans voted mostly for the Democratic Party. Little was done and little said in the media from Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the establishment during this time even after Mr. David Autor documented the effects of trade in the U.S.  Till Mr. Trump recognizing the alienation in communities hit by job losses from trade upended American politics, shifted this part of the electorate to the Republican base. Mr. Lighthizer's view is that complaints about China should be left out of WTO because it is naive to tackle it that way. With a $375 billion China trade deficit for 2017 the challenge has to be met in a different way, and the U.S. has to rely on regaining its economic strength within a fair trading framework. Having negotiated with the Japanese Mr. Lighthizer sees the approach adopted then as the one right for today. During the long negotiations Lighthizer is said to have received many negotiating positions of the Japanese signifying no change in long sessions. He once simply made a paper plane and sent it right back, in one of these sessions. He meant that the U.S. was serious about reversing the imbalance in trade. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Next five year plan for China calls for more concentration on industry, dominance in key sectors identified by China such as rare earths, and more exports- not less in each of these areas. Chinese Communist Party is very conservative and once this has worked for China it is not going to change its reliance on exports even at the risk of leaving goods unsold in China or oversupply. The result is that the US effort to reduce the trade deficit, trying every tool in the book does not work, leading to an effort to resort to tariffs as a last resort to cut the unhealthy and risky $1 trillion trade deficit China has with the world. Has it worked? WSJ and other reports show that large companies are diversifying their supply channels, only smaller companies without the resources are sticking with China dependence for supplies. The tariffs themselves make headlines yet the US has made careful calculations not to upset relationships with key partners Britain, European Union, and Japan, keeping tariffs low at 10% with EU, and 15% with Japan which exports automobiles to the US to recover some of the years US made concessions to Japan. There are also loopholes on certain products where it is in the US interest to do so. As a result the effective tariff is 10-12.5% not 17-20% shown in reports. Of this 10% what is passed on to consumers is small- as in autos 80% of tariffs are not passed on by auto importers such as Toyota and Subaru because of the higher margins postpandemic. In retail only 30% is passed on again because of the post pandemic higher margins. The administration of DJT has also carefully worked with world oil suppliers to keep oil prices low, lower than in 2023-2024. The result is that inflation is at about 3% in September 2025. The idea that a capricious DJT is doing the tariffs is a myth as careful economic planners including Bessent, Jamieson, Lighthizer, and Luttnick, economic advisors in the Republican party, are carefully articulating the policy with room for DJT's political talk and appeal to public sentiment. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India's foreign exchange reserves of $295 billion cover about 7 months of imports. This is not enough in currency reserves for India's central bank to take actions to prevent a depreciation of the Indian currency, the rupee. The central bank, RBI, has taken other actions including giving local exporters 15 days to convert half their estimated $7 billion foreign exchange holdings into rupees. Analysts say the RBI is running out of policy options and is down to micromanaging the currency. India's trade deficit was at $13.4 billion in March 2012 with rising cost of importing oil and lower exports. The rupee is close to 54 rupees to the dollar.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Trump administration released its framework for NAFTA negotiations. The framework is designed to reduce the U.S. trade deficit and promote "Buy America" provisions. It will challenge Mexico on labor and environmental matters, which is likely to win the support of Democrats. A mechanism for preventing countries from getting unfair advantage through currency manipulation is part of the framework, yet less of an issue with Mexico and Canada. It will also work to protect U.S. trade interests in an effort to appeal to workers who supported Trump in the 2016 election. Overall it does not deviate much from established U.S. trade policy, according to the WSJ. For this reason the new guidelines were welcomed by the Mexican and Canadian governments. Mexico and Canada also see this as an effort to modernize the agreement to reflect changes in technology and commerce since NAFTA was signed. Under fast track trade promotion authority the president's Trade Representative Mr. Lighthizer can start negotiations in 30 days. One of the matters up for change is the Chapter 19 dispute settlement mechanism which makes it easier for Canada and Mexico to avert trade sanctions. Mexico's economic prospects have improved as the NAFTA renegotiation avoids the sharp rhetoric of the election campaign. The Mexican peso which traded at 22 to the dollar in January 2017 following the U.S. election, is now trading in July 2017 at 18 to the dollar.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US and China agree on the first step to a broader trade deal. US offers to take in Chinese students at American Universities, something DJT says he was good with.  “Chinese students using our college and universities,” adding that such attendance has “always been good with me.”  China for its part will not slow move export of magnets and rare earth minerals on which it has established a near monopoly of the supplies. These rare earth minerals are needed for technology products made in the US. US tariffs of 55% will still say in place as "deterrance" that the other side keeps its promises and to cut the trade deficit with China not simply talk about it has has happened for a decade of Bush, Obama, Biden. Treasury Secretary Bessent and Jamieson Greer US Trade Representative were at London talks with Commerce Secretary Howard Luttnick to find ways to get an impasse resolved. Both sides lack confidence in what the other is doing so that theis the first step to clarify the direction of talks for achieving a broader deal.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The title is misleading as it does not day that the the drop in the trade deficit is largely because of the steep climb in the trade deficit in March so that the April numbers decline was made that much larger. Importers tried to beat the DJT tariffs by importing ahead of the tariffs date. For the trade deficit to truly turn around Make in the USA has to go into effect over the next 5 years reducing imports and rebuilding American manufacturing, and the tariffs should be seen in that context as a way to do this. Tariffs only reduce the overconcentration of manufacturing in one country which poses serious risks as well as leaves American workers at the mercy of other countries.Imports were still $351 billion in April and the deficit at $62 billion.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump's focus in the State of the Union message in 2020 in the U.S. Congress was on what he had done for U.S. prestige and perception- "In three short years, we have shattered the mentality of American decline and we have rejected the downsizing of America's destiny. We have totally rejected the downsizing." "We are moving forward at a pace that was unimaginable just a short time ago, and we are never going back." The theme of the speech- "The Great American Comeback." No longer were other nations be allowed to take advantage of America, American interests would come first, and this also meant blue collar working families and middle class. Trade deals with Mexico and Canada, trade deal with China, reversing of the trade deficit, bringing back about 12,000 of the 60,000 thousand factories lost over two administrations Democratic and Republican of the last 16 years with many more factories in the pipeline, increasing jobs and incomes in an unprecedented way, were all the focus of the speech. The president basically sidestepped the impeachment for Ukraine policy and implementation, and focussed on the optimism from reversing American decline in trade, jobs, and manufacturing under past Republican and Democratic administrations.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A sharp increase in imports leads to a growing trade deficit affecting the outlook for the Pakistan rupee. The central bank allowed the currency to devalue by 3% in the last week. The IMF has called for a weaker Pakistan rupee to narrow the trade deficit. The Pakistan rupee stands at about 109 rupees to 1 U.S. dollar, according to Thomson Reuters data. Experts say it is overvalued by about 25%. Pakistan gets about $20 billion in remittances from overseas for 2016, about 7% of GDP, and the central bank has now reversed an earlier policy of intervening in currency markets to prop up the rupee. A lower value for the rupee is now seen as good for economic growth.

LyrArc Article Gist
If the trade war escalates to the point at which president Trump imposes tariffs on all Chinese goods imported into the U.S. on Jan. 1, 2019, China could retaliate with its own tariffs and this might affect Boeing aircraft as well. The results would be to tip the economies of both countries into a recession, and affect Mr. Trump's best chances for reelection in 2020. This can happen as Mr. Trump has a great deal of confidence in his negotiating style. The negotiations so far have shown China misread the U.S. and Mr. Trump leading to a strong U.S. response.  There is also the importance of not losing face, Mr. Xi's domestic audience, Chinese industry that sees a fundamental change from state subsidies model as eroding its position and offering resistance, patriotic sentiment making it harder to meet U.S. demands. Fundamentally for Mr. Trump it is about U.S. trade deficit and changing the huge trade surplus of almost $1 trillion that China enjoys each year with the U.S. which has been and is no longer sustainable. Mr. Trump also has the backing of Republicans on this issue and Democrats cannot afford to be soft on this issue as it involves American workers and jobs are at stake. Both sides could be in for a protracted negotiation as Mr. Trump feels it is right for Americans to expect fair trade and technology transfer that respects American concerns. In addition the U.S. could sense that it exports less to China, is less dependent on exports than China, and as the party that is hurt by unfair practices insist on its position. After Japan agreed to U.S. demands that it reverse a huge trade surplus in the seventies in which Mr. Lighthizer was the negotiator its growth declined sharply and is economy stagnated. China may sense inside that this could happen to its economy. Today Lighthizer the U.S. negotiator and Trade Representative could also push hard because of he was able to convince Japan to change its course. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Indian exports to China declined in the covid pandemic years when China experienced little or no growth. This has worsened the trade deficit, yet this is temporary. Imports have worsened with Chinese dumping of products into the country. This should not alter India's policy of building close trade and investment relations with the US and the European Union as its main partners. This is also consistent with the prime minister's Atman Nirbhar Bharat policy. The author of this report in Hindustan Times says policy should integrate India with China and Factory Asia, yet this ignores India's growth trajectory as it is only now building up momentum and will for the next decade see the kind of growth Japan and China made in their peak growth period, even as China slows down and forms a smaller part of the global supply chain. US policy is for India to form the major part of the supply chain replacing China at some point as the leading supplier, even though it is moving gradually to get there. India should make policy as Modi has done for 2030, then 2047, and reach its own potential acting in concert with US and EU. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Navarro points out the problem with textbook economics and concepts such as comparitive advantage. Many economists from elite universities ignored for a long time the distortions in world trade arising from state subsidies as they used textbook economics without looking at what was happening in practice. Even as the U.S. runs a trade deficit of $ 1 billion a day with China such text book economists ignored for too long the advantages of state directed industries and state directed investments in creating distortions in trade patterns, and not creating a level playing field for the U.S. Here Peter Navarro desceibes what he calls afaux comparitive advantage built on high nontariff and other barriers. Auto tariffs of China are 10 times that of the U.S. Other barriers are intrusive licensing requirements and foreign ownership restrictions. With subsidized land and capital, export subsidies, and tax preferences, unfair trade advantages can be gaine d in many industries leaving the U.S. in a disadvantaged position. Mr. Navarro is assistant to the U.S. president on trade and manufacturing policy, and director of the White House National Trade Council. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
All about fair trade with no deficits where possible.

LyrArc Article Gist
With the strong positions taken by Clinton and Trump on China in the 2016 election campaign, U.S. relations with China enter a new phase. The strident tone in the campaign on China on trade deficit, women's issues, human rights, comes with the issues relating to China's role in the South China Sea and cyber espionage already in the background.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump meets with president Moon of South Korea in June 2017 at the White House. South Korea's new leader president Moon tells congressional leaders that he will not reverse the deployment of the THADD missile defense system aimed at blocking a threat from North Korean missiles. President Trump says the renegotiation of the trade treaty with South Korea is taking place, with discussions on South Korean steel exports "dumped" in the U.S. and barriers in the auto exports from the U.S. The U.S. trade deficit with South Korea jumped from $13 billion in 2011 to $27 billion in 2016, leading to charges of unfair trade. 

LyrArc Article Gist
S&P said it will maintain India's credit rating of triple B minus, the lowest investment grade rating, yet it may downgrade it to "junk status" in the next 2 years. S&P said this could happen "if the external position continues to deteriorate, growth prospects diminish, or progress on fiscal reforms remains slow in a weakened political setting. India's growth rate declined to 6.9% in the year ending March 31, 2012, down from 8.4% the prior year. The problem is that India's current account deficit is growing rapidly with the high import bill for energy supplies. The current account deficit is now at 4% of GDP. The trade deficit increased to $185 billion in this fiscal year, up 56% over the prior year. Additional problems are finding ways to finance the deficit with foreign capital, as European banks are pulling back during the current eurozone crisis. Commerce Secretary Rahul Khullar says this could be a big problem. Net foreign capital investment is declining rapidly from $72 billion in February 2012 to $387 million in March, with a net outflow of $27 million in the April 1-25 period. The budget deficit, which has drawn the attention of the RBI, India's central bank, and of S&P, is at 5.9% of GDP for fiscal year ending March 31, 2012. This is larger than the government target of 4.6%. The government has set a deficit target of 5.1% of GDP for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2013....

LyrArc Article Gist
Researchers David Autor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Gordon Hanson of the University of California, San Diego, and David Dorn of the Center for Monetary and Fiscal Studies in Madrid, in independent research, studied the impact of trade on 722 clusters of interrelated counties in the U.S. They focussed on the surge in Chinese imports and found a pattern. Counties with higher exposure to Chinese import growth showed higher unemployment and higher expenditures by the government for unemployment benefits, food stamps and disability benefits. Their calculations show the increased government payments amount to one to two thirds of the gains from trade with China. This does not include the losses suffered by people losing jobs who deplete savings as they look for new jobs. Hanson studied the effects of trade and Chinese imports in the 1990's and found the effects were relatively small. This time the effects are large and show counties that lacked local investments in industrial machinery and technologies in which China was still playing catchup such as Caterpillar in Peoria, Illinois, and Boeing in Everett, Washington, were most susceptible to higher jobless rates and in need of government support payments. Autor and Hanson found that from 2000-2007, communities in the 75th percentile- ones with greater exposure to Chinese import growth than 75% of all communities- saw a manufacturing jobless rate of about one-third more than communities in the 25th percentile. The government payments mean higher taxes or larger deficits are needed to support these communities, and long periods of unemployment reduce the incentive to work. Michael Spence, a Nobel prize winning economist from New York University, says the world has never seen such a rapid pace of growth as China experienced between 2000-2011, with rates approaching 12% in some years, making past experience and prevailing theories on trade an insufficient guide to what is happening....

LyrArc Article Gist
Trade in services is not enough. Services won't build ships for the US Navy. Services don't provide jobs for factory workers. Trade in services won't rebuild the US manufacturing base. It won't rebuild the middle class. Trade in services won't make pharmaceuticals Made in America that are available always, including in times of war, pandemics and disruptions. Bottom line as DJT pointed out in a Cabinet meeting on April 10 is that the US could no longer be a world power without its industrial base, it's manufacturing base. Americans companies doing the outshoring are really the targets of the Tariffs because they are at the heart of the mechanisms causing the destruction of the industrial and manufacturing base of America, vital for it's security and for it's leadership of the free world and western civilization. It started with Apple in 1998 and I witnessed this as a consultant seeing the production line at the Apple Colorado Springs plant in 1997 with rework and defective product before Steve Jobs returned to Apple. By 1998 Apple started shipping it's entire production base to China. DJT told the Cabinet meeting on April 10, 2025, all previous presidents had to tell companies firing all their workers and outshoring their machines was- "there will be a tariff of 50 or 100% on your products imported into the US."  And these companies would never have fired all their workers and sent their factories to China or some other country. Economists and experts who have turned their backs on American workers see the $1 trillion deficit countries have with China and the loss of their industrial and manufcturing base with one excuse or another. Trade in Services in which the USA has an advantage does not do much for American workers, or for the 5 million manufacturing jobs lost and tens of thousands of factories that have been outshored.  National Security and Jobs, the Middle Class, factory communities across all 51 states are all at stake. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This is an highly important interview by the BBC with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. We have followed the path breaking work of Mr. Lighthizer at Lyrarc.com over 10 years, and have great respect for his effort on behalf of the American people and American workers. Here are some of the remarks he made at the end of the term of the Trump administration. Lighthizer says the objective of trade is not just efficiency, it must be working men and women. This is the shift that Mr. Trump has made. It will be a lasting change as leaders in both parties see this as important, says Lighthizer. There are companies that immediately want to go back to the way things were but Lighthizer says members of both parties will prevent this. This will be a lasting change. Democrats in particular could soon face strident criticism that they have let down the working class from within their party, increasing the risks of the party to represent large parts of the American population. Lighthizer says its not accurate that we started a lot of trade wars, we have simply enforced our laws and insisted on fairness for American workers. There was really no trade war in the improved NAFTA deal in the interests of American workers, which also enhanced worker protections in Mexico, for a win-win on both sides of two neighbors. "We want strong communities in the U.S. and if that means T-shirts will cost another nickel, they will cost another nickel," sums up the way Lighthizer sees it, and the way all of America would see it if one regained the idea of government for the people, of the people and with the people. "We are proud of what we have done to reorient American trade towards working people in the U.S. and less towards outsourcing and corporations," says Lighthizer. And he says that was important to do. Lighthizer only highly underestimates what he has done for America and American workers.  A lot remains to be done. The about $800 billion in overall trade deficit the U.S. has with China, Germany and the rest of the world is not sustainable, he says. The job only gets harder now that the direction is clear.    ...