LyrArc Article Gist
A Peterson Institute of International Economics study on the TPP trade agreement shows it would reduce growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector by a fifth, according to this report in the NYT. Workers incomes and job losses in manufacturing are a key concern for voters and account for the surge in polls for Trump and Sanders in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. All four leading candidates Clinton, Sanders, Trump and Cruz oppose the TPP agreement. Congress will wait till after the election to decide. This is a big issue today because about 5 million jobs have been lost in 1977-2014, according to the Alliance for American Manufacturing. The Peterson study predicts job losses of 50,000 a year, yet another study by Tufts University predicts job losses of 450,000 a year. Another study by the Economic Policy Institute study shows other damaging effects such as labor's share of national income declining from the TPP.

LyrArc Article Gist
Republicans representing poorer rural and working class communities, Democrats wealthy suburban communities 2025. 26 to 56 vs 69 what this means is that Republicans who in 2009 represented 26 of the poorest 100 House of Representatives Districts now represent 56 in 2023. By Contrast Democrats in 2023 represent 69 of the wealthiest House Districts in the Nation. It is a complete reverse, as big as the change that took place under FDR/Truman and LBJ where the South gradually shifted to Democratic from Republican and the North and Northeast Unites States  moved from Republican to Democratic party.

This puts Republicans traditional position to cut Medicaid in a quandary as it may affect their control of the House in future elections. This report in WSJ looks at details by District of what could happen.

LyrArc Article Gist
 Donald trumps economic plan would worsen the country's economy through extravagant borrowing and lower economic growth in the long run. Because it lowers taxes by 15 percent without any paired cuts Trump's plan would worsen the deficit, so that large debt would hurt the economy in the long run. Clinton's plan would increase taxes by 4  percent largely on high incomes so as not to hurt consumer spending, with paired spending to help lower income households. Because Trump's tax cuts benefits go disproportionately to higher incomes the benefits in terms of consumer spending are slight or insignificant. In the current state of weak income gains of the last ten years it would take some time for the middle and working class to recover. Clinton's plan carefully nudges that recovery forward without aggravating the debt, so that as incomes and net worth recovers across broad parts of the population, the U.S. is poised to go forward with strong growth as in the postwar years. Trump's plan frontloads tax benefits to higher incomes at the expense of worsening debt and enlarging future debt. In the process it worsens income disparities already aggravated by the 2008 financial crisis. Reducing the chances of a broad based recovery for all parts of the population, necessary for a strong recovery.                       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Russia is raising taxes on the rich, high earners and companies to keep military spending at levels not seen since the height of the Cold War of 6% of GDP. This is part of effort to keep the economy growing and standards of living stable as it pursues a long term policy of trying to push its borders further to the west in the Ukraine region and confront what it sees as unwarranted NATO expansion to its borders. Russia also with China's support is conducting its policy to show that it is undeterred by Sweden and Finland joining NATO or the early setbacks in its Ukraine war effort. This happens as China is moving to less strident positions in its relations with the EU and the US and working for some level of working relations on trade and economy with EU and the US as its economy slows down.

LyrArc Article Gist
For 51 million seniors over 65 years the $4000 added deduction in the Big Beautiful Bill 2025 would take the standard deduction for married to $40,000 a year in 2025 and $41,100 in 2026.This is in lieu of eliminating the tax on social security benefits entirely which was originally considered but could not be done under the budget reconciliation rules used to pass this DJT budget. For married taxpayers it is phased out after reaching $250,000 of income. What does $4000 provision over 65 years cost? It costs $66 billion over 3 years, and needs renewal in 2028. Eliminating taxes on social security benefits entirely would cost $1.4 trillion over 10 years or over 3 years $420 billion with a lot of it going to income earners with income over $100,000 or $150,000. It makes sense that this was avoided, and the political appeal being still in place for an ideal situation where when it comes to social security where middle class incomes of $200,000 are not taxed-as consider that it costs that much to just have a middle class life in these costly times.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The risks facing the Chinese economy in 2012-2015 from asset bubbles in housing, bad loans in the banking system and slower growth. Expert opinion from Roubini, Shih and others on the risks China faces. Risks include what is called the middle income trap, in which China's GDP per capita gets stuck at a certain middle level as economic growth declines. Economic growth could drop to below 5% in the latter part of this decade according to this scenario.

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in the NYT provides a look at the features of the Republican House Health Care Plan- Both the Affordable Health Care Act and the House Plan provide incentives for buying insurance- the ACA bases these incentives on income levels whereas the House Plan does not provide additional help for low incomes or elderly. Incomes at $20,000 would see a loss greater than  $2000 under the House Plan and as many of the elderly poor living in high cost areas may not have the resources to make up for this loss of subisidies they may forgo buying insurance or have insurance coverage that protects only in a limited way. President Trump has given assurances that all will be covered. For people with incomes of $50,000 or $75000 the loss of $2000 subisidies would also have some impact. At larger incomes or the well to do the subsidies are not handed out under either plan. Under the ACA the emphasis was on income levels and high cost insurance areas the subsidies were greater, under the House Plan the subisidies would be higher for the elderly compared to the young but very low income levels are not given additional help.     ...