World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Nathaniel Taplin of the WSJ says the tariffs put on $50 billion high tech products by the U.S. and retaliatory tariffs on $50 billion products are not about a trade war but a way both countries will negotiate setting out their two positions.  A look at the role of foreign firms in China shows China has access to new technology using these firms as a conduit and these firms are also generating more jobs, being highly productive. These firms Taplin says will set back their investments if no agreement is reached or if it is harder to bring Chinese made products into the U.S. At this time China badly needs this investment and technology access because of their dynamism compared to inefficient state run firms as it struggles under a massive debt load with very high debt to GDP ratio.  A major issue is job growth as companies getting foreign investment are much more effective in jobs generation, delivering 10% of all urban job growth from 2007 to 2016, using just 5.5% of total investment. Return on assets at 9% compares to 4% at state run firms. If this dynamism is reduced or affected in some way China could have to provide more unproductive debt buildup stimulus.  For these reasons China has good reason to make concessions, says Taplin. Trump administration will ask for greater semiconductor purchases, much looser joint venture or foreign ownership requirements, higher Chinese payment for U.S. intellectual property. For all these reasons this is not about a trade war but about serious negotiations taking place so that there is a level playing field in the next phase of competition in high tech between the U.S., China and the E.U. changing the dynamics of the trade relationship in ways that reverse the trends of the past. ...
WSJ Original article ›
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.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Value added industrial output in China increased by only 4.4% in August, showing deteriorating economy. Fixed asset investment outside rural areas, was up to 5.5% in Jan-August 2019 compared to year earlier period. Premier Li Kequiang says "Against the backdrop of a complicated international situation and given the higher  base of comparison, it is not very easy for China to still sustain a medium to high growth speed of above 6%." 
China's economy expanded at 6.3% in the first half of 2019- the government's target is between 6 and 6.5%.

In the light of this situation in the economy China is taking aflexible approach to trade negotiations with U.S. trying to separate issues of competition and technology of the long run from trade, and seeking areas of agreement after the rhetoric of the past 6 months.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The coronavirus is making implementation of the U.S. China trade deal less likely as Chinese imports from the U.S. decrease and China's exports continue to grow. China's exports to U.S. decreased by $60 billion but increased to other countries by $70 billion in 2019.

As a result the Trump administration is shifting its focus to another approach. The new multilateral approach is to combine the effort with allies Australia, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and France. This would take the shape of a Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership to replace the old Obama period Trans Pacific Partnership which becomes defunct. The goal would be to build new supply chains with allies in Asia outside of China with the help of France and other countries that are wary of excessive dependence on China and have deep reservations of China's handling of the coronavirus outbreak.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Does a 10% reduction in tariffs on China with the October 30 2025 agreement- made in Busan South Korea at APEC meetings- make a difference for companies relocating from China? It only does for smaller companies who are stuck with Chinese sources. Larger American companies prefer to diversify their supply chain and continue to relocate part of their factories to Vietnam, India and other countries knowing that the tariffs game will end up with allies EU, Japan and India in the 10-15% tariff range as a concession to US for putting up with trade disadvantages and job losses 2000-2025. China's will still be at 47% in comparison and the fentanyl issue causing serious questions to be asked by the American people which have not been grasped in China or even in the US by companies and politicians.   Does it affect the urgency and general shift out of China? The fentanyl issue is unlikely to change and it is likely to do lasting damage to China's credibility to a degree that it not clearly understood in China, and even not fully grasped even in the US today because of the sheer size of the number dead- more young Americans dead from fentanyl than in the Korean, Vietnam and First World Wars combined. Other issues are technology that has been transferred without a proper assessment of the importance to national security, the need to shift the manufacturing base back home that US industries have inadvertently and carelessly shifted to China in the disastrous Bush and Obama years 2000-2016, and for the jobs, the wages, and cost of living concerns when supply chains are outside one's control. This article asks the question about tariffs on India and Brazil as being contradictory and showing a lack of consistency in tariffs. India is compared to China with India facing a 50% tariff because of Russian oil purchases, and Brazil a 100% tariff related to treatment of former president Bolsonaro even though US has a trade surplus with Brazil. One expects that at some point India and the US will come to an agreement that lowers the tariffs in a way that was done with the European Union to bring it closer to 10%. China's tariff to be sure is still around 47% dropping from 57% a concession for rare earths and for the upcoming elections and economic concerns not because of policy intent which has not changed on  strong action for fentanyl which is also part of the Appeal to the People in the DJT base.   ...
South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hamburg is the key city in Germany's trade with China. About half of $200 billion in trade between Germany and China passes through the port of Hamburg. The South China Morning Post looks at the dilemma in Hamburg over relations with China in the post Merkel era. Merkel maintained strong and close ties with China signing an agreement with China her last year in office. This was when Mr. Trump was US president. Since then president Biden has changed US policy towards Europe. The South China Morning Post points out that The Greens and the FDP key partners of Scholz in a new coalition government, are critical of Merkel's policy towards China in its overall relationship with the US and the rest of the world. Scholz was mayor of Hamburg, and a partner in Merkel's coalition government in which he was vice chancellor. Scholz has talked very little on what the new German policy would be. China seeks to maintain its economic ties in the next few years with Germany while reducing its dependence on other countries under Xi Jinping's new vision for China that seeks to depend less on trade and real estate for its economy and growth. Yet the pace of change has accelerated during the pandemic with a new global supply chain emerging from the chaotic years of 2020-2021. US policy under president Biden is similar to policies under Franklin Roosevelt in the 1930's during the economic and political crises, and look to be setting a new path to the future for the rest of the world. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump reiterated his threat to place tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese goods in addition to earlier tariffs on $250 billion in goods.  The problem China faces is that it China imports less, far less than the U.S. does. China has only $10 billion in U.S. goods to place tariffs on. This is after placing tariffs on $110 billion in U.S. goods, mostly agricultural products such as soyabeans in retaliation for U.S. tariffs on the $250 billion of Chinese goods. China could place a ban on imports from Boeing or restrict the access for U.S. companies to the Chinese market. U.S. companies have invested billions of dollars in the China and employ about 2 million Chinese in well paying jobs. Concerns about unemployment would be uppermost to prevent these jobs being affected. Other concern for China is the loss of foreign investment as relations deteriorate. Already supply chains in some products such as clothing and consumer products is shifting other countries in Asia. In automobiles the regional hubs are expected to shift with India as a potential hub for Asia, and Mexico preserving its place as a North American hub following renegotiation of NAFTA. In media the dispute is leading to a shift from Chinese consumers buying Adidas instead of Nike and Huawei smartphones instead of Apple.  For an already slowing economy this hurts China more than the U.S. which is why the U.S. is pushing China to settle with an agreement that the U.S. can trust to bring down China's trade surplus. For the U.S. as most of the loss in exports is in agricultural products the solution has been to provide government aid to farmers, and for Mr. Trump to use the issue to point out that he is fighting for U.S. interests and for fairness. This is why the trade dispute poses more problems for China. Because the surplus is so wildly skewed in China's favor after the inaction of many U.S. presidents just as it was for Japan in the eighties, the situation appears to be headed towards a definite reversal of the lopsided trade surplus enjoyed by China. In the process the U.S. plans to build up the competitive edge it has lost to some degree.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this interview with Gerald Seib of the WSJ, U.S. president Obama responds to criticism within his party as he pushes for the Trans Pacific Partnership free trade agreement with Japan and other countries in Latin America and Asia. European nations and India have joined the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank setup by China, creating pressure for the U.S. to respond to China's influence in the region. The interview shows president Obama taking the criticism from inside the Democratic party personally about his lack of concern for middle class and working class families during his six and half years in office.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Following president Trump's decision to increase tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods on May 9, 2019, the WSJ looks at the mistakes made by both sides in misjudging each other's negotiating position. Mr. Trump says he is willing to increase the pressure on China by imposing tariffs on all Chinese imports into the U.S. after what he sees as China reneging on its commitments on trade by deleting key sections on enforcement provisions and Chinese legislation for enforcement to take place in the 150 page agreement prepared for both presidents to sign.  Early on in the negotiations between Liu He and Mr. Lighthizer, China misread the thinking on the U.S. side. Chinese thinking was that president Trump's urging for the Federal Reserve to lower rates was a perception sign of the weakening U.S. economy. It also may have misread the extent to which Mr. Trump trusts Mr. Robert Lighthizer, who Mr. Trump respects for winning a good deal with the Japanese in similar situation of Japanese rejection of U.S. demands. Mr. Trump also thinks the U.S. has a strong economy, is the largest world producer of oil, strong economic growth in the last quarter of 2018, is also negotiating better deals with other countries including the ones with Mexico, Canada and South Korea. It is also much less dependent on exports to China, giving it a stronger position with more experienced negotiators. China has whole sectors of its economy dependent on exports to the U.S., and crucial numbers of jobs at stake.  China also misread the signals from its stronger than expected economic growth from stimulus efforts in the last quarter, leading to it staking out a tougher position than the U.S. would accept. The U.S. position was set after decades of waiting for China to change and was unlikely to be affected by any temporary considerations.  As a result the U.S. not anticipating the Chinese response of deleting key sections agreed to in advance from the 150 page written agreement gave a strong response. Mr. Mnuchin who accompanied Lighthizer in talks says Mr. Lighthizer "read them the riot act" to the Chinese side. For the Chinese side the effort now shifted to continuing good faith talks without appearing to back down. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It is important to know the cause of 0.3% contraction in first quarter 2025 for US economy. It is says WSJ because of a 5% hit from net exports, the difference between exports and imports, as importers rushed to import more before a tariff deadline. Imports by the US increased by 42% in first quarter 2025. Some include MIchigan Governor Whitmer who supports the tariffs as a way to take back America's industrial base, build factories in the US, say the uncertainty of the way tariffs were implemented is damaging confidence in the economy. For instance could the US have excluded the EU, Japan, UK, India as allies, and focused on China.  The problem with that approach is that it would single out China. It means other nations Japan, South Korea, Germany are not investing in the US, also have used trade for unfair advantage, are not called out. This would put China in an odd position. It is better to call out all who benefited from unfair advantage including China, Germany, Japan South Korea, Taiwan, because this has more credibility, giving all a honest and fair picture that they could then look at themselves in the mirror and correct. In the short run it looks messy, the tariff methods look erratic and back and forth increasing tariffs is also messy and unruy. Yet when every major trading nation knows deep inside that US is only saying it like it is asking only for fairness in trade, it will lead it to negotiate a fair trade agreement with US. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. trade agreement with Mexico is for 16 years, to provide business with a stable rules environment to operate in. It includes a clause for review after 6 years. The content made in the U.S. is increased to 70% from 62.5%. This has to be made by workers earning at least $16  an hour. Aluminium and steel going into the cars has to come from the U.S. helping push U.S. steel plant capacity utilization to 80%. Labor collective bargaining is strengthened in Mexico through new provisions, a provision supported by new Mexican socialist president Obrador. Free trade in agricultural products is maintained. $4.7 billion was added in help to U.S. farmers as aid for the effects of China's tariff retaliation. New rules are set for textiles, chemicals, and steel intensive products that set requirements to qualify for tariff free import into the U.S. This is intended to help bring more jobs and investment in these industries in the U.S.     ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Global supply chains in industries such as clothing and other consumer items, in autos, and in tech products are changing as the shift away from China continues with the Trump administration's tariffs war. The clothing and other consumer products manufacturing is shifting away from China. Auto production is centred on regional hubs for manufacturing under renegotiated trade agreements such as the one that replaced NAFTA in North America, correcting imbalances in wages and U.S. content. Mexico gets to stay as a auto hub with exports of $50 billion in 2018 but under new rules that the Trump administration sees as fair. India is being considered as an auto production hub in Asia. In tech products China continues to have an edge but this is changing gradually. Samsung has built a huge smartphone manufacturing complex in Vietnam. South east Asia is a beneficiary, so is Mexico. In the future India stands to gain as its manufacturing base expands and infrastructure develops. In this changed scenario China will be moving to produce more advanced technological products, as it shifts away from lower end products. This will also correct some of the grossly unfavorable trade imbalances that have developed with the U.S. ...
ProPublica Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in ProPublica on October 13, 2020, by Lydia DePillis was written near the end of Robert Lighhizer's term as US Trade Representative.  Bottom Line: It is human behaviour that no country, no kingdom or group will give up its money advantages secured when the opposition was weak or disorganized till the last fight is fought. The British were not giving up India, a source of financing the war against Napoleon in 1800's and then the Industrial Revolution in 1850's, the Dutch were not giving up the financial advantages of their Spices Empire in Batavia (Indonesia). History has shown this. Once gained under a state capitalism Japan was not going to give up its financial advantages gained by the 1980's when the US was weak or disorganized, till the last battle was fought.  Lighthizer who for the relentless Japanese was equally relentless till the goal of fair and level playing field for America was secured. This is true for China today on Liberation Day. This entire report by De Pillis in 2020 shows the Chinese would be relentless in 2020 like the Japanese in the 1980's, the Dutch in Indonesia  in the 18th and 19th century and the British in India in the 19th century and 20th century. China turned Mexico and Vietnam into supply routes into the US market. It continued its efforts to gain US technology in other ways. USTR older officials from the Bush Obama years of failed negotiations with China and endless hours putting together minute details of agreements including the TransPacific Agreement of Obama were not going to like the new approach of Lighthizer so stuck were they with the old approach of no clear goal and not getting an even playing field from China. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Brazil's ever increasing production of soyabeans and investments in Brazil by China and US's Cargill ADM result in a oversupply of soyabeans in world's markets leading to lower prices for American farmers. 70% of soyabeans imports by China were from Brazil in 2024 and Cofco state owned agricultural company in China is building a large port terminal on Brazil's coast to handle soyabeans and other exports. Trade tensions with the US mean there are no written agreements farmers can count on for soyabean exports to China. China purchased 13 million metric tons from Argentina last month and committed to buying 25 million metric tons in 2026-2028. Argentina lifted its 26% export tax for the first $7 billion in agricultural exports to bolster it's peso recently. US is turning to other markets in Turkey, Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Thailand and Europe to make up for volume lost to Brazil. For September and October there is a 45% increase in US exports in 2025 resulting from these non-Chinese buyers. No mention is made of India, yet India could in future be a significant buyer of soyabeans because of thenutritional value of soyabeans in an anti-cancer diet and the high protein content which would make Indian diets healthier. In agriculture farmers are not the ones who develop new tastes and new trends in new markets, yet this effort should be part of farmer's outreach to other nations and other cultural food habits with shifts to healthy nutrition. ...
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Original article ›
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.   ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Canadian steel and lumber industries get government aid, as talks to end US tariffs are halted over an ad on Reagan misrepresenting him on tariffs by Ontario state.  Canada's steel and lumber industries will get the aid in the form of railway costs cut in half with rail subsidies, and tariffs on US steel imports into Canada to reduce domestic steel costs for other industries. Stellantis shifts car production for a new Jeep from suburban Toronto to Illinois, GM cut a shift at a pickup plant and closed a electric van plant in Ontario. Not all imports to the US from Canada face tariffs. Other products enter the US from Canada under a free trade agreement USMCA that went into effect July 1 2020. Canada is also shifting policy under Carney's Liberals on climate change, as it seeks to reorient its economy to export oil to China and India- a new pipeline is now approved for oil and gas to be shipped across the country from Alberta. Since it's independence with Dominion status in 1867 Canada's economy has struggled with the idea of building a economy separate from the US so that trade between the northeastern Canada and Northeastern US which is next to each other is foregone for trade with distant provinces in the western states such as Alberta and British Columbia. In Brazil Lula's Worker's Party is also slowing efforts on climate change for the economy as it approves oil and gas projects in the Amazon, at the same time as it holds COP30 at Belem port in the Amazon. Even Biden had shown flexibility on the economy to support cost of living measures that are in conflict with climate change action. In DJT's second term climate change action has taken a back seat to cost of living concerns when a large majority of people are living paycheck to paycheck. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Indian exports to US drop from $8.8 to $5.5 billion May to September drop of 37%. A trade agreement is likely and should be similar to Japan's or EU where with Japan it is now 15% and with EU it is 10%, both key allies of the US. India is also a key ally in Asia requiring the DJT administration -once it gets over Modi-DJT differences on the nuclear aspect of the India-Pakistan 48 hour conflict in 2025, and India reverts to getting oil and energy from non Russian sources as it did in 2019, and issues of agricultural exports to India- to drop this tariff of additional 25% for Russian oil and drop the basic tariff of 25% to 15% as the US did with Japan. At 15% Japan and India will still be able to compete with China's 47% (dropped from 57%) to export to the US.  The result can be positive for India as it improves it's cost effectiveness to export to the US and EU, with rapid investment to improve logistics, and streamlining import of technologies and machinery to rapidly cut costs of production. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This opinion in DW.com says Donald Trump has done exactly the opposite of what he said during the election campaign when he was severely critical of China on trade issues. This report cites the many statements in some detail made by Trump about China. During a recent visit to China he says president Trump seemed to go out of his way to show agreement with president Jinping, quite the reverse of what he said he would do during the election campaign. U.S. influence and prestige is seen as declining as a result of president Trump's policies.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump pushes forward with a deal with Mexico so that it can be signed before the new Mexican administration of Lopez Obrador takes over. This means leaving Canada out and having a separate deal with Canada later on. Mr. Trump sees negative connotations in the term NAFTA and would like to call it the "United States - Mexico Trade Agreement." Terms for Canada to join the agreement would be tougher and the pressure on Canada to strike a separate deal was increased with Mr. Trump saying there could be tariffs on imported Canadian made cars. Mexico has accepted revisions to NAFTA that make it harder for Mexico to challenge U.S. trade penalties. Mr. Trump's negotiating position is based on his conviction that the eagerness of other nations to sell in the U.S. market gives the U.S. a lot of clout. Mr. Trump also faces pressure from within the Republican Party to show results not just by imposing tariffs and playing hardball on trade but to come up with new trade deals. Steps taken by Mr. Trump were to impose tariffs of 25% on imports of aluminium and steel, and 25% tariffs on a list of imports from China including solar panels. President Trump hopes to get support from Democrats by including provisions that support trade unions in Mexico and higher wages in Mexico. The provisions also require higher wage labor in the U.S. to build the required U.S. content and are designed to support American jobs and wages in the auto industry.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jacobs and Richtel of the NYT give this exceptional story of how Mexico changed between 1980 and 2016. Following the joining of NAFTA free trade zone the Mexican diet and food ecosystem began to more closely resemble the food diet system in the U.S. bringing with it severe health consequences. Soda and coke are now more entrenched in Mexico, as are fast food outlets. In 1980 only 7% of Mexicans were obese, compared to 20% in 2016, according to Institute for Health Metrics at the University of Washington. And diabetes kills 80,000 people a year, becoming the top killer according to the World Health Organization. A trade expert at Tufts University, Timothy Wise, says Mexico took on the worst aspects of a first world country like the U.S., with few protections. A similar problem is taking place in India and China as obesity grows, according to the T.H. Chan School of Public Health at Harvard, as low nutrient highly processed foods of large food companies with huge advertising budgets take a prominent place in diets. This is a growing problem for countries from Colombia to Ghana and Nigeria. ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US/Israel Iran ceasefire also allows the DJT administration and its supporters to focus on the goals of reaching new agreements on world trade to return manufacturing to the US, and tackle the issue of massive illegal migraton of estimated 10-15 million during the last administration. The limited goal of removing Iran's nuclear weapons by direct action being achieved, the US steps back to work with China and Russia on other issues of trade agreements to rebuild world trade and US manufacturing, and to take corrective action on illegal migration, and efforts to reduce cost of living, improve working people's lives and communities, health of the American people. It also gives China, India, Russia and the US to reflect on how they can improve the economic conditions of their own people and the people of the world.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts to impeach two previous presidents including Democrat Clinton failed in the Senate where the vote requires a two thirds majority. The first impeachment vote against Mr. Trump failed in the Senate. In the House of Representatives only a simple majority is required. Majority Leader McConnell says he will not reconvene the Senate before president Biden takes office. Vice President Pence has refused to invoke the 25th Amendment. House Democrats have moved ahead to vote for impeachment of president Trump for the storming of the Capitol offices in Washington D.C. Their impeachment statement says president Trump's remarks that his supporters had to fight like hell or they would not have a country, constituted incitement of supporters. President Trump won 74 million votes in the last election more than in the 2016 election and lost with Mr. Biden winning 81 million votes after polarization of the country. With such a large portion of the country voting for Mr. Trump Mr. Biden risks his agenda of fighting the pandemic, and other parts of his program, becoming immersed in partisan infighting. This would also result in continuing the division of the country, and continue polarization.  About 5 House Republicans are expected to support impeachment. In the Senate some Republicans say there are impeachable offenses yet only Mr. McConnell and the senator from Utah, Mr. Mitt Romney, favor impeachment.  Mr. Trump's style of governing was controversial from the beginning of his campaign in 2016, strident and taking on critics. He governed through relative moderation compared to his aggressive posture towards critics. For instance on Mexico his remarks offended critics, yet he negotiated a new trade agreement with Mexico replacing NAFTA to ensure worker protections in Mexico, and worker jobs and wages in the U.S. Negotiations with China on trade were conducted by a seasoned veteran, Mr Lighthizer,  who was deputy Trade Representative under Reagan, and negotiated the trade agreement with Japan that worked to reduce Japanese trade surplus in the eighties. On the economy before the pandemic hit in March president Trump made significant progress reducing unemployment.      ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Under new US trade agreement with Vietnam tariffs are cut 46% to 20%. The  transhipments will still face tariffs of 40% to prevent shipping by China through Vietnam to the US to circumvent US tariffs. 

WSJ Original article ›
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.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The new faces in the Biden administration on economic policy are Janet Yellen, as head of the central bank, the Federal Reserve, and Cecilia Rouse, a Princeton labor economist, as head of the Council of Economic Advisors. In this report WSJ looks at the economic policies of the new administration after Mr. Trump rejected globalization and international trade agreements that were not in America's interest or that hurt American workers.  Informal conversations with experts suggest WSJ says, that globalization is now suspect as a way that benefitted China and other countries including Germany, and hurt the U.S. France, Britain and other countries in Europe that were not strong exporters. This hurt their industries which were eroded by imports resulting in the three decades long destruction of communities across these countries that depended on manufacturing. It has also hurt countries like India that let their markets be dominated by Chinese imports, with a reversal of policy in 2020 with self reliant economy under "Atman Nirbhar" policy as the new goal. Mr. Trump's tactic in this trade war was to fight back to regain America's position in manufacturing with tariffs on imports. The trade deficit had to come down with China just as it had done with Japan decades earlier. This was starting to happen. One problem in bringing down the imports was the increase in the value of the dollar, as Janet Yellen has noted. The new policies will look at what the effective policy will be while keeping this goal in mind.  Both Yellen and Ms. Rouse have spent years studying labor markets and Ms. Rouse is quoted here as saying: " With open trade there are winners and losers. The losers are really losing, and we need to take care of them and take on more nuanced models of international trade as a result." Other experts from the earlier Democratic administrations such as Prof. Frankel at Harvard say that there needs to be increased focus on American workers left behind by trade, technology and unequal education, with more spending on preschool, infrastructure and health. All this suggests that there will be a continuation of U.S. policy in challenging Chinese use of globalization to advance its interests, chastening Americans on the use of the very word globalization which can mean different things to different people based on how they can gain advantage. The word may even be entirely dropped in favor of what the policies are and what they do for the American worker, American communities including small towns, and the American people, spelling each of these out every time supply chains and the global economy is mentioned. The new administration will get an opportunity to show that it too can come up with new ideas and action plan to strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. It will also have to show substantial results as people have lost patience with Democrats and Republicans on the lack of progress in rebuilding America's leadership role in the world economy, and in defending American workers and factories. Clinton, Obama and Bush all offered false promises on trade with China ignoring the damage this had done to American leadership in the world economy. Clinton with support for China's entry into the World Trade Organization, Bush with foreign wars and costly diversions and regulatory failures with banks that led to the 2009 deep recession hurting Americans, and Obama with the lack of will and interest in America's leadership role in the world as the dominant nation in manufacturing,   ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us