LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ shows how European countries are maintaining salaries of employees who would otherwise be laid off. Governments have setup programs in France, Britain, Germany and other countries to provide employers with the money for 80-84% of salaries up to 2500 pounds ($3165) in Britain and 5330 euros a month in France. As a result 1 worker out of three in the private sector in France for subsidy applications for 6.9 million workers are already received. For the German program 2.4 million workers will get this benefit. About 1 million companies in Europe retain employees with this program of governments simply sending out the salaries with funds directly to households. This helps to keep out the stress for families, particularly families with children. It is as if the employees are not really laid off but asked to stay at home for manufacturing facilities and work from home in shorter hours where work can be done remotely.  Money is quickly deposited into the bank account of employees in these countries, though it is slower in Italy and Spain. It is as if the European approach is put the whole economy on pause for 2 months and restart it almost like before with only a small dent in employment once the coronavirus is pushed out with lockdowns and strict control actions. This will cap German unemployment at 5.9% compared with 5% last year, only a modest increase. The cost is not that much considering what it accomplishes. 10 billion euros is the cost in Germany where the state fund for this has 26 billion euros. 10 billion pounds in Britain. And 20 billion euros in France.  The U.S. adopts a similar approach also through its $349 billion program which provides loans to companies with less than 500 employees to meet payroll for 8 weeks and pay some overhead. Loans are forgiven based on job retention and employees on the payroll and only if the employees are retained. Another program is for companies larger than this. And a third program targets entire industries such as airlines, aerospace, and companies in other industries so that they do not have to layoff employees. U.S. unemployment insurance is modified to work along similar lines maintaining incomes of employees laid off because of the pandemic. Another program sends checks directly of $1200 to households with lower incomes to help them and to help people at poverty level or without jobs. The thrust of both the European and American efforts is the same, lose as few jobs as possible, keep people's incomes steady, and do this in a way that the economy can pick up quickly to the former level in as short a time as possible. Compared to Europe U.S. unemployment will be higher predicted at 9.8% with the expected rebound lowering the unemployment in 2021. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT report says there is scandal fatigue among Republicans and a sense about Mr. Trump that his time has passed. Much of the political gains made by Mr. Trump in 2017 were a result of the failures of president Bush within the Republican party wasting national resources on 2 remote wars while infrastructure was neglected, and the neglect of manufacturing communities in the US with jobs outsourced to China that presidents Bush and Obama failed to stop. With president Biden ending these wars period. And with Mr. Biden getting the legislation passed to put workers and families, American manufacturing, American infrastructure to the top of the agenda, the focus has shifted to China and Russia two countries that gained during the largely failed Clinton, Bush and Obama presidencies. The Ukraine war and China's belligerence over Taiwan remain an ever present risk. President Biden has articulated American resolve in this situation in a way that matches another president Harry Truman when he addressed the Soviet expansion in Berlin, then Greece, then across Eastern Europe, not seeking conflict yet not shirking responsibility for the free world. It is this new context in which the sordid affairs of a political outsider are presented to the ordinary American struggling to make a living during a cost of living crisis in 2023. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's carefully planned stimulus in April 2014. It is designed to balance goals of not letting credit growth lead to a bubble and preserving a high enough growth rate of 7% to create 10 million new jobs each year. The smaller stimulus will be financed by the federal government which has more leeway than local governments burdened with debt. The stimulus is focussed on low income housing and railways. Pension funds, banks and other financial institutions will be encouraged to invest in shantytowns to create low income housing. Railways construction is focussed on southern and western China. Part of the rail construction is designed with the goal of creating export based industry in the interor of the country. IMF reports say this may not work out as planned as businesses may prefer to remain in the coastal or eastern part of the country.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bill Gates resigned his seat on Microsoft Board on March 13, 2020. This report in the WSJ looks at the situation at Microsoft in late 2019 when members of the Microsoft Board hired a law firm to conduct an investigation in late 2019 after a Microsoft female engineer's letter. This was a company that Gates founded and which expanded through acquisitions of other smaller companies.  The same day he resigned his seat on Berkshire's Board led by Warren Buffett. Mr. Gates started Microsoft in 1975, was CEO till 2000, and chairman till 2014. He then turned to work with his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.   Microsoft has market value of $1.8 trillion, Apple a value of $2.1 trillion.  The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has assets of $37 billion income of $53 billion, and the personal assets of Bill and Melinda Gates have an estimated value of $130 billion. One of the mistaken assumptions is that any one foundation such as the Bill Gates foundation has the resources, knowledge, technologies, expertise and leadership to tackle problems that confront large countries such as the US, India, or a bloc such as European Union. Imagine some billionaire taking on the role of a Franklin Delano Roosevelt in tackling the Depression or a billionaire tackling the problem India faces today in public health. It is only governments of the US, India and large nations such as the UK that can pull together the resources needed and the cooperation needed between its industrial base companies to achieve goals for public health. This type of effort can pull together resources of trillions of dollars that no one company or billionaire or group of billionaires can put together, and pull together massive resources of engineers, scientists, and other people across hundreds of companies that cannot even be measured. This is one of the lessons of this pandemic because the WHO was left with the job of handling the pandemic and governments of US, France, UK, Germany, India, Russia and leading nations had retreated from their essential role as guardians of the public interest in people's health and left much of the task to others. As they reassume this role this needs to be given a firm and solid footing and lessons learned. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ report shows that on the morning of the 90 Day Pause in Tariffs announcement discussions took place with the Swiss prime minister, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and watching Fox News interview of JP Morgan Chase's Jamie Dimon. Seeing the turmoil in financial markets and bond markets, US president DJT made the decision to give time to make the agreements with about 50 countries, and time for financial markets to understand the president's  policy and goals to reformulate the world trading system into one that offers a level playing field. The chart showing the Tariffs of 67% by China and US 34% imposed tariff in the Rose Garden on April 2, 2025, was say reports the result of the influence on the president of the advice of Peter Navarro.  Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's expertise is in financial markets as a protege of Soros, Navarro's is world trade. Bessent stepped in when financial markets appeared to reflect the uncertainty and convinced the president that the 90 day pause would be the best way to implement the policy on trade. There is a vigorous debate in the administration about how to get a level playing field for trade, and get the job done without disruptions in financial markets or a recession induced by uncertainty. On April 10 as part of the effort to talk to the American people US president DJT opened up his Cabinet meeting to the media and had Bessent, Borghum, RFK Jr and Marco Rubio talk about their plans and policies. Proper implementation, gaining confidence of the people of America and financial markets, is now as important as the goals and policies in the next 90 days. Getting the trade deals with the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Britain and India would go a long way to reassure financial markets and set the right tone for the future.   ...

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
This WSJ report looks at how China is run today with attention to details by president Xi Jinping. Mr. Jinping takes interest in all matters that relate to wellbeing, reducing gaps in wealth and privilege, coronavirus pandemic, corrupt businessmen or officials, climate change, and the economy. Some decisions have to be reversed after they appear not to be working. In some situations goals conflict such as climate change action on coal requiring shutting down intensive coal dependent factories, and economy jobs goals requiring use of coal intensive factories. Leading to a complete reversal of the original decision to cut back on use of coal as happened in 2021 when factory shutdowns affected the economy.  Jinping does not see it as micromanagement. Previous leaders such as Hu Jintao had little interest and did not put in the effort to seek out areas where policies were not working for families and workers, delegating this to lower level officials. Jinping's style is hands-on and energetic to act on issues that affect how China should be run so that the quality of life of ordinary Chinese is improved. Jinping says that if he did not take action there just is'nt the level of initiative on the part of local officials. Many officials are not competent to tackle complicated issues. Jinping says that "some officials only act when the central party leadership has instructed them to do so." And that he acts as a last resort- "I issue instructions as a last line of defense." His willingness to reverse decisions or let them be implemented with local officials using their discretion if he thinks that would be wise also shows a level of flexibility and humility. Basic to his decisions is a general idea that the original vision of China of the founding leaders in 1948 was forgotten in the headlong rush to modernization of the last 20 years. This means a balance was needed to restore some measure of equality and empowering of the disadvantaged. Xi Jinping's father was one of these founding leaders under Mao and under premier Deng during the market economy founding in the 1990's. Xi Zhongxun, Jinping's father was an energetic leader who also took a keen interest on a whole range of issues for China's modernization drive, a trait now found in Mr. Jinping. The first market economy experiment was done under Xi Zhongxun with premier Deng's encouragement. Xi Zhongxun set up the Guangdong and Shenzen special economic zone in 1979, as governor of the province in an effort to liberalize the economy and slow the exodus to Hong Kong. At the time wages in Shenzen were 1/100 of wages in Hong Kong. Some of this style can be seen in India with Mr. Narendra Modi delving into details of policy and taking intitatives that local officials had neglected to do on a whole range of issues related to modernization, development and technological progress. One of the decisions made by Jinping was to tackle Covid aggressively with a zero Covid policy, which means frequent lockdowns and restrictions even with a few cases. Mr. Modi has also acted vigorously on Covid after warning in March 2020 that this could set India 20 years back, with a policy to get over a billion people fully vaccinated. In both situations the only two countries with over 1 billion population needed this kind of strong leadership with an interest in a whole range of issues that relate to lives of ordinary people during the pandemic to inspire some essential level of public confidence and build public wellbeing.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Upward mobility in China was weak and income growth for average workers sluggish during the years before the coronavirus outbreak. In this sense China is similar to the U.S. and Europe where upward mobility gains after the second world war were lost in the last 30 years partly from the loss of manufacturing to China. It is much worse now as the effects of the coronavirus lead to drops of as much as a third in income for ordinary workers. Lower income workers, the vast majority of Chinese numbering hundreds of millions now suffer from lost work or diminished wages. Small businesses cannot afford to pay the salaries paid before and as workers dip into savings or increase borrowing the retail spending is taking a hit. As a result economists see a vicious cycle of lower spending and lower incomes for the hundreds of millions of ordinary workers in construction and smaller businesses. Some small businesses could just close down because of weak demand affecting the economy over the long term. Before the coronavirus China went over three decades from being a Communist country with relatively equal distribution of wealth but lack of growth and technological development to a capitalist country with the structure of state control of the economy from the Communist period. The result is that 1% of the people control 33% of the wealth and the bottom 25% having 1% of the wealth, according to a 2015 Peking University study. China's president Xi Jinping, head of the Communist party, tried to reverse some of these trends by attacking corruption and making changes that began the task of reversing decades of unequal distribution of wealth under state sponsored capitalist growth. Investments were made in rural medical care, infrastructure and basic services. This did not have much impact because much of the pattern of growth over three decades continues including the housing bubble.  With coronavirus the trend is set for even more unequal distribution of wealth as many workers at the bottom half of the population in incomes either lose work, or see drop in incomes as businesses that hire them struggle from shoe factories to other retail business. Reports of informal economy and street markets in Chengdu in western China and bringing this part of the economy back by the state are effort to get people work in other ways. Researchers estimate that China's bottom 60% of household in incomes lost about $200 billion in income in the first half of 2020. In May premier Li Keqiang said 600 million people in China earn only about $140 a month. Many who lost income or jobs do not have support from the government as China lacks a program of comprehensive unemployment insurance as in Europe and the U.S. to help people get over bad times. 300 million migrant workers are particularly vulnerable to loss of income and dipping into savings.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Much of what is written here about Xi Jinping pursuing Chinese socialist vision was known since he became president in 2013 when China's Communist party was losing its appeal, and efforts were made to seize power within the communist party by a leader in the western province of Chongqing. Bo Xi Lai attempted to take advantage of the situation with appeals to the working class and without any genuine commitment beyond a power grab. It was well known that Xi Jinping is a son of one of the veterans of the Communist party under Mao, Xi Zhongxun, unlike leaders who followed premier Deng Xiaoping such as Jiang Zemin. Zemin was a relatively unknown figure who was in university during the crucial period of 1947-49 when Mao came to power in mainland China. It would not be correct to say that little was known about Xi's own ideas about socialism as the long term answer to China's problems. Xi also came in as president at a time when the Communist party was losing its appeal to working class people after three administrations that followed premier Den Xiaoping. These three administrations followed a form of state capitalism that allowed companies to pollute the environment, compete without any regulations, and allowed to operate without any controls as long as they pursued growth aggressively and expanded the economy.There was an effort by Communist party regional leader in western Chinese province of Chongqing, Bo Xi Lai, to use this as an opportunity to grab power in China. During his first year as president Xi had to resolve this issue by having a court trial after revelations of corruption and misuse of power by Bo Xi Lai.  Xi's father Zhongxun's role in the revolutionary movement offers clues to Xi's own convictions and faith in the party. Zhongxun was a communist soldier who set up the revolutionary base areas in Shanxi-Gansu northwest border region of China that provided a refuge for Mao's army following the Long March. Other clues come from Zhongxun's role as head of propaganda during the period after 1944 and in 1952. Xi's family background particularly on his mother's side shows a fervent commitment to Chinese socialist vision during the chaotic years when the Japanese invaded China and Chiang Kai-Shek's nationalist forces failed to defend China's sovereignty. One reason Xi has been less understood is that little attention is paid to Xi's mother, Qi Xin who was highly educated and fervently believed in Chinese socialism and nationalist spirit during the Japanese invasion in 1938. In fact Qi Xin had to leave middle school after the Japanese took over Beijing. She joined the Counter Japanese Political and Military University to continue education and in 1941 attended the Central Party school. She met Xi's father Zhongxun in 1944. In 1953 she enrolled in the Marx School of Communism, and it was her position at the school that offered her husband added protection during the Cultural Revolution that affected Deng Xiaoping and others. With such a history in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's it is likely that Xi was profoundly influenced by his father's role in the revolutionary movement, and his mother's faith in socialism with national spirit as the way to protect against the foreign invasions. It would now appear that by the time Xi joined the Politburo in 2003 there was no question about the future course China would take given the role of his parents, and the events of 1938 the fall of Beijing, his mother having to flee, and the events that followed. Xi showed resilience during the period of the Great Proletarian Revolution when he was sent to the villages at a time when he would be studying in school and college. He was sent to an agricultural commune in largely rural Shanxi province where he worked as a manual laborer alongside other people and developed a relationship with the local farmers. Unlike other leaders during that period which could even be said about premier Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Xi took a different lesson from this experience largely because his father and mother were committed to the socialist vision for the long run. His father was still not fully rehabilitated by premier Chou en-lai when Xi was allowed to enter Beijing's Tsinghua University in 1975. He studied chemical engineering at Tsinghua graduating in 1979. Upon graduation he worked as a assistant for 3 years to a vice premier who was minister of defense. He then left Beijing for Hebei province to work as a deputy secretary of the provincial CCP. He was made Mayor of Xiamen, then governor of Fujian province in 1999 where he tackled environmental conservation before moving to Zheziang province. His father passed away in 2002 and it would appear that he was carefully trained in different provinces instead of staying in Beijing, for a position of national leadership. Xi got his break in 2007 when the upper leadership of Shanghai city was tainted in a wide ranging pension fund scheme. He was made party secretary for Shanghai. This was the position Jiang Zemin had held before he succeeded premier Deng Xiaoping. In only a few months in October 2007 Xi was made one of the 8 Politburo members, ready to succeed Hu Jintao as president. Xi's perception of being sent to the villages and making it to university education was that it was part of the long run socialist struggle, with pain that his father had also endured as simply a phase in which things would be right in the end. Xi's mother comes across as a resilient figure and one who had herself gone through the struggles of the 1930's and aided her husband on one occasion. Some of this resilience could have been passed on to the son. Xi's wife is a zealous participant in Chinese dance and music performances that created enthusiasm for the Chinese socialist revolution from the 1930's period. In his conversations  with colleagues in the party, in culture and temperament, Xi has been forthright about this background and his style of work.  Xi is unlike premier Deng and the presidents who succeeded him such as Hu Jintao mentored by a former mayor of Shanghai Jiang Zemin who came to power in 1989. Xi is more in line with the leaders around Mao like his father in his outlook and thinking, with a cautious temperament that comes from years going through ups and downs of political struggles. He is once said to have responded with dismay about being in a top position in the government knowing how precarious this had been for his father. The education at Tsinghua, his engineering background, and his easy familiarity with farmers in the provinces, mean that he understands China and its history well enough to have the confidence to shape Chinese policies in a way that none of his predecessors had except Mao, premier Chou-en-lai, Liu Shao Chi and a few veterans from that time in the 1930's. That Xi waited patiently for so long to gradually assert his ideas about socialist vision for China may be the surprising part of his behaviour till 2021.  It may be that he wanted to make the changes only after he could persuade party leaders and colleagues of his vision and long run goals. And because the Chinese economy had grown so large that it would take time to steer the ship in a different direction for the long term. In most of the negotiations with president Trump he cautiously let trade negotiators handle the situation, all the time learning about how to tackle problems of China's relationship with US and Europe. US president Biden also has a vision that is veering towards a socialist perspective in terms of bringing gains of progress to workers and families. So does Mr. Trump, Mr. Boris Johnson in UK, and Social Democrat's Scholz in Germany. It is both economic and political as Mr. Xi is quoted as saying in this WSJ report. The necessities of such action are both economic, social and politically driven as capitalism has veered way off course.  In this report it is mentioned that Soho China 40% stake was taken by a large capital markets firm in New York in the hope of large gains, as Soho China developer was a tycoon who wanted to leave China. Seeing it as not favorable to his company following events in Hong Kong. This behaviour of capital markets groups in New York and tech companies in Silicon Valley, driven by profits and not aware of the social and economic problems of working class American families is a problem in the US and in Europe. It is also what has driven so many large tech companies to expand manufacturing operations in China, that hurt US manufacturing capabilities and American workers jobs- an issue raised by president Trump and taken up by president Biden. Biden has already moved to make Intel Corporation change its plans and invest in American manufacturing technologies in a quietly implemented U turn. US president Biden is left with the unenviable job of solving this huge problem during the pandemic. He has also committed to a somewhat socialistic vision with a $3.5 trillion plan for workers and families, as has vice chancellor Scholz in Germany with his own version of programs, after the failures of unregulated forms of capitalism. Scholz goes so far as to say his mission is to show that there is really no such thing as a self-made man, that it is help from society, his fellow citizens, and government, that makes it possible for him to do his work. In a sense the world is shifting away from Reagan forms of capitalism without regulation after seeing disastrous results during the pandemic. Not just China. Some form of government guidance and regulations are now seen as essential in China, the US, UK, Germany and India for a better society and a better, healthier life, and for opportunity for all in each country.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip in the WSJ says India is shifting towards  becoming an important partner with the US and the European Union in trade under the Modi government. This report reflects the situation upto 2021 and the changes in Indian and American perceptions during the pandemic. It does not reflect the rapidly evolving situation under president Biden.US president Biden and Jake Sullivan National Security Advisor see rapidly expanding US trade and investment in India. The recent Raisina Dialogue  brings together 26 countries- named after Raisina Hill in New Delhi where India's administration is located- in dialogue with Indian leaders. Finance Minister Sitharaman in an interview at Raisina Dialogue stated that Janet Yellen, US Treasury Secretary, was with her during a G-20 meeting, and Yellen called for friendshoring- foreign investment in democracies that respect the rule of law and provide the right conditions for investment. The right conditions are now being created in India, including infrastructure and logistics, trade practices, and assistance to foreign companies, to invest in Indian manufacturing. The conditions are being created for shifting significant number of manufacturing facilities to India in a complete redesign of the supply chain. A look at the period 1950-2015 in US-EU India relations says little of the newly evolving situation in trade in the way that looking at the US-EU China relations 1950-1990 during the Cold War would tell one little about how that relationship evolved in trade after 1990 in the 1990-2019 period for massive trade with China. The pandemic and the inflation from existing supply chain bottlenecks has led to a realization in US-EU that the existing concentration of manufacturing in one country  was a mistake and is a serious problem that needs correction.  This means an acceleration in the effort to build rapidly over the next 5-10 years a strong US-EU manufacturing presence in India for advanced technologies. India under prime minister Modi is creating the infrastructure and logistics for this to happen with large domestic investment, the help of Denmark's Maersk in port logistics, and from other countries.  Fo India manufacturing and infrastructure building is the only way to create the jobs needed to meet the aspirations of its young population. For the US-EU the redesign of the supply chain is the highest priority to cut inflation, remove potential bottlenecks, and provide a stable supply chain.    ...

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,   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT report looks at the 20 counties within 5 battleground states in the midwestern states of Wisconsin, Michigan, eastern state of Pennsylvania, southern state of North Carolina and western state of Arizona. It shows the percentage of votes gained by the Republican and Democratic parties in the last 3 presidential elections. A look at the trend and direction of vote percentages gained by each party in each of the 20 counties in different states may be a better indication of the final result than polls alone as both parties are pushing hard in the 2020 election down to the last day. The Republicans strong in the ground game and organized effort, and Democrats in television advertising outspending the Republicans. Because of the clearly delineated positions the Democrats and Republicans stand in sharp contrast to each other both in image and substance.  Because of the Electoral College and states assigned electoral votes based on size the U.S. system is not based on the total vote count in the country. Who wins each state by vote count and gets the assigned electoral college votes assigned to that state, an builds up more than 270 Electoral College votes wins the election for president of the USA.  In Michigan there is the impact of the resurgence of the auto industry, with president Trump pulling out of TPP agreement and renegotiating NAFTA in favor of the U.S. auto industry bringing back jobs from Mexico. This puts the union vote in the auto industry- with Ford, GM and Chrysler located in Michigan- favoring these auto friendly policies from the current administration. The resilience of the auto industry sales during coronavirus is part of the economic story in Michigan. The renegotiated NAFTA treaty also helped dairy farmers of Wisconsin increase sales to Canada. In Pennsylvania the coronavirus and economic impact has hit harder than in Michigan with the decline in oil prices and effect on fracking industry. Closure of coal plants is also having a negative impact on the state. Tariffs on Chinese steel by the administration are helping the steel industry. Offsetting these economic stories is perception of how the coronavirus pandemic has been tackled by the administration. Added to this is the suburban women's vote and the shift of out of state liberal voters to suburbs in North Carolina (Wake county), and in Arizona (Maricopa county and Tucson area). States not covered here but also relevant are Minnesota which could be a battleground state in the midwest and Iowa. Racial protests in Minneapolis add another dimension with controversies about the policing in cities such as Minneapolis and recently Philadelphia. The sharp contrasts in image as well as policy, the coronavirus pandemic and the handling of the pandemic as well as the way rallies are being conducted differently by both candidates, and the economic stories, present an election like no other since the 1960's. The contrast is as sharp as between Gen. Dwight Eisenhower of the wartime allied effort and Adlai Stevenson a liberal and humanist in the 1952 election. That election saw some of the highest turnouts since the second world war, and this is now happening today. That election also determined the direction of postwar growth and dominance of American industry, the setting up of the National Highway system and important changes that were later continued under the Kennedy administration. It also marked the beginning of the Cold War following the Korean War under the Truman administration, a situation that is emerging in a different way today with the free world and the tension from relations with China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jakab's discusses the difference betwen the ADP estimate for jobs added and the Labor Department's figures. ADP numbers had a wide divergence with Labor Department figures for 2011-2013. ADP now uses a different methodology to more closely track the government numbers. For the last five months ADP numbers came out lower than government figures by an average of 32,000, says Jakab. ADP estimate of private non-farm jobs growth is 281,000 for June 2014. A WSJ survey of economists shows nonfarm payroll jobs growth for June at 215,000. In 2010-2011 ADP numbers vastly overestimated the number of jobs created.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Labor Department report shows 156,000 jobs added in September 2016. The unemployment rate increased by a tenth of a percentage point to 5.0%, because of the increase in the total pool of workers, The labor force increased by 3 million workers over the first 9 months of 2016. The labor force participation rate was up by half a percentage point to 62.9% for the year 2016, as it drew more workers who were earlier discouraged to look for work. Wages grew by 2.6% over the year.

LyrArc Article Gist
A professor of sociology at the University of Basel describes the growing inequality in Germany, in graphic terms. For the lower middle class the efforts to gain upward mobility are like trying to move up on a downward escalator. About one third of jobs are temp jobs which lack the protections of permanent jobs which were at one time 90% of all jobs. Her book is titled- "The Hidden Crisis; German Social Decline at the Heart of Europe." Nachtwey says on the surface Germany has become competitive and has maintained its growth rate, benefiting from the strong manufacturing sector with trade surpluses, low unemployment. Yet this conceals the underlying crisis of the cost which this has come at- a persistent erosion of the social compact of one elevator where everybody moved up together that was the norm in the early postwar period, fulltime employment, a strong welfare state. Job protections weakened, and while manufacturing sector pay remained stable or rose, less skilled and low wage workers suffered. This has also led to the fracturing in the vote with the fragmentation of political parties following the refugee crisis and the weakening of centrist parties. Voters are now open to different messages after the increase in inequality and uncertain economic future for the lower middle class. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The recent appointment of fast food executive Andrew Puzder as Labor Secretary has caused great concern among union leaders. Puzder supports a $9 minimum wage compared to $15 supported by Democrats. Unions now represent 7% of the labor force, down from a high of 20% during Reagan's time when Reagan appointed a construction company executive as Labor Secretary and cut regulations.  Globalization has thinned the ranks of workers in unions. And the failure of Democratic administrations to stem the shift of factories overseas to China, Mexico and other places, as part of global supply chains focussed on cost, has weakened Democratic support among workers since the period of Bill Clinton. It eroded to the point where Obama won 65% of support among unions and Hillary Clinton won 56% in 2016. Interestingly the Republican Romney gained 33% versus 37% for Trump, showing voters were more inclined to move away from Democrats and only a smaller number willing to support Republicans, but the shift enough to give Republicans a win in 2016 for the presidency. The figures are from a Election Day survey of trade union AFL-CIO, and a larger proportion in midwestern states showed disaffection with policies from Clinton to Obama. In fact Obama spent years promoting another free trade agreement TPP that favored tech more than auto and older industries, just as Bill Clinton had promoted NAFTA, without giving thought to what this was doing to its worker base of support. A similar situation happened with Social Democrats in Germany as a SPD administration moved to the centre and handed Christian Democrats led by Merkel a win in parliamentary elections. As Democrats such as former Labor Secretary Reich, a professor at UC Berkeley who served under Bill Clinton, describe the problems of working class people their is less reflection on the impact of the changes from globalization and how Democrats handled or mishandled it, and more on the politics between the two parties.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Kessler in the WP corrects Obama's claim that he created 800,000 jobs. He says this is clever arithmetic as it takes a low point in Feb. 2010 following the financial crisis. Kessler points out that according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. manufacturing jobs were 12.56 million in Jan. 2009 when Obama became president. In Nov. 2016, early estimates show there were 12.26 million manufacturing jobs, a loss of 300,000. This loss does not reflect the problems in the U.S. auto industry and older industries in the midwestern states as a result of trade and globalization that speeded up with the rapid industrialization of China. And led as Greg Ip pointed out in a recent WSJ report to a rapid acceleration of job losses in a decade that did not happen in the same scale during Japan's industrialization and urbanization in the sixties. This aggravated the situation in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Pennsylvania, and was met with a feeble response from Democrats. Even a economist like Krugman favoring the Obama administration's efforts came to the conclusion that TPP did not add much to gains from trade as most of the gains had already been realized. More of the gains went to tech and IT in California, at the expense of the auto industry based in the midwest. A report in WP show a president too close to IT in California and failing to grasp the situation in the midwest. Voters punish whoever is in power, regardless of being Conservative or Liberal, in Canada the hollowing out of manufacturing under Harper in Ontario and Quebec led to the win by Trudeau's Liberals.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The problems 900,000 Ukrainian refugees in Germany are facing are shown here in DW.com. 350,000 are registered as looking for work. Ukraine refugees are given 3 year protection status, access to health insurance and the labor market. This report says many of the problems come from the lack of German language skills. There is also a lack of English language skills for people from eastern Ukraine who learned Russian, rather than English. Ifo Institute estimates a third of Ukraine refugees are led to taking jobs below their qualification level because of the lack of these language skills. All this is happening even as Germany is facing a severe shortage of workers with 1.7 million open jobs in 2022.