LyrArc Article Gist
Mead points out that the world with an effective U.S. leadership based on democracy and the values we cherish is needed now more than ever, after the failures of the Bush and Obama administrations to provide the kind of balanced leadership all Americans can stand behind. A world without an effective and enlightened leadership from the U.S, is one in which the world could fall apart in regional rivalry, one in which the hundreds of millions of people in the poorer parts of India, China, Russia, Brazil, and other developing countries of the world, will have less opportunity to meet their aspirations for a better life. This is because a focus on development requires less regional rivalry and because serious missteps can reverse in a few years decades of economic progress as shown in the 2008 global financial crisis. More so because we live in an increasingly interdependent global economy. It is also the kind of world where suppression of freedoms and suppression of the opposition as in China and Russia, provides a wrong kind of message, a world in which we or our children would not want to live in. Russia, India and China, are too driven by rivalry and lack the deep experience to go it alone, multipolar is more likely to end up being multipolar rivalry leading to a race to the bottom, which would be bad for all, especially for the poor in Asia and the developing world. The 2008 crisis showed what some serious economic mistakes could do to employment and incomes in the world with output dropping by a third in most places. Political missteps could lead to a slippery slope of this magnitude but more difficult to correct. Greater participation in the political process and more enlightened leadership is needed in all countries to allow many voices and greater interaction across boundaries, focussing on the dangers of such multipolar rivalries. The world of the G-7 is already moving to the G-20 where many voices are heard and serious discussion of differences takes place, but participatory is different from multipolar....

LyrArc Article Gist
The language and tone of the leaders says something about what is likely to be the outcome of the G20 summit. Its a first for significant participation, as countries as diverse as Russia, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the Netherlands are represented. The credible positions of both sides, the US, UK and Japan, and the European side of France, Germany and the Czech Republic, well presented, provide for some serious discussion and negotiations. France's Sarkozy and Germany's Merkel want to see a global regulator that would reach inside the borders of the US with stricter regulation. Sarkozy calls this "nonnegotiable." And he said that he would reject an agreement that puts off stringent new regulations on banks, tax havens, and hedge funds. He said "the compromise has to come from all countries around the world." US President Obama said that if there is going to be renewed growth it can't just be the US as the engine, everybody is going to have to pick up the pace," at the same time saying that the US had to be concerned about its own deficits. The fact is that the US stimulus will mostly help a severely impacted domestic economy recover with social safey net payments to local and state governments and unemployment insurance, as well as targeted investments in infrastructure, education, energy and health care. It will not mean anywhere near the kinds of imports the US made from other countries, especially China. And Obama made that clear when he said the US will never return to that situation, where the US had become a "voracious consumer market." For the Germans the major market for their middle companies is China, and China has its own stimulus spending on infrastructure spending, which should provide for continued imports of machinery from Germany at a much lower level. Thus Germany and France see a strong tendency to call the source of the crisis and repeat that call till the US listens, and refer to the failure of free market capitalism in its unregulated form. And to insist on fixing it through a global regulator with strict and systemwide rules. So you hear this in Merkel's words, "the foundation for this finacial architecture must be laid now, that is why we seem to be so tough." While the vivacious Sarkozy talks of compromise, and a US gesture in regulation in return for Franc's gesture of joining NATO, the mild mannered Merkel is clear and focussed about her concern. She rejects the idea of linking stimulus spending demands of the Anglo-Americans with the Franco-German demands for global systemwide regulation. "This is not a bargaining chip," she says. The media may mistakenly report lack of consensus as a failure of the summit. But in the long run in the presence of good positions on both sides, it could lead to some tough negotiations even if continued at another meeting. And result in something serious, credible and lasting in its impact, rather than something that was easy and did not in Andy Grove's useful words involve "constructive confrontation." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Dugan and Spector of the WSJ take readers through efforts to push self driving technology to its limits at electric car maker Tesla. Tesla CEO Elon Musk is pushing the technology and plans to get a self driving car go from Los Angeles to New York by the end of 2017. Problems faced by Tesla include a car crash involving a driver who took his hands off the wheel of a Tesla automobile, leading to a crash with an eighteen wheeler truck. This led to an investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Board and a decision by Tesla to make driver's hands on the steering wheel required for autopilot to operate. Earlier in 2015 Tesla engineers confirmed that the Tesla cars were not ready for autonomous driving because of near crashes when the reliance was placed entirely on the technology. Ten engineers and two managers resigned from Tesla according to this report by WSJ, with problems relating to deadlines and marketing decisions. Sterling Anderson, the head of the Autopilot program at Tesla resigned to start his own company with the head of the autonomous driving unit at Google, saying he was going to do it the right way, citing concerns that Musk was going ahead with the technology without making it failure proof. The tricky thing about auto pilot driving is the behavioural factors involved, where drivers may take their hands off the steering wheel and not be prepared to act as a backup should the technology fail or something go wrong. Another aspect of this is the tendency of drivers not to pay attention to the road and rely completely on the auto pilot to do everything, more than its capabilities today. Toyota and other auto companies are including some elements of collision free driving, and reliable aspects of the new technology into cars. For Tesla the driverless technology is part of its marketing appeal, and CEO Musk has moved faster in this respect than his own engineering team, according to this WSJ report. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
After the hearing on November 18, 2007, in the Senate in front of the Banking Committee, most senators remained unconvinced. Prof. Morici of the University of Maryland and some senators including the senator from Tennessee asked tough questions about the automakers business model and viability going forward and some senators voiced deep concern about the automakers resistance to better fuel efficiency standards. The testimony given in advance and the remarks ahead of the questions showed the Detroit automakers CEO's were in a disconnect as they did not come forward with an acceptance of past mistakes on fuel efficiency, lack of vision on energy conservation, and failure of union and management to address benefits and work rules that were obsolete a long time ago, relying too heavily on lobbyists and on the plea by Michigan senator Debbie Stabenow for aid. Failure to do this and relying too heavily on the job losses and economic threat may have alienated many senators who are outside the midwestern region where most of the Detroit automakers are concentrated....

LyrArc Article Gist
Norbert Rottgen, chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the German parliament is realistic about the prospects of Minsk 2, after the failure of Minsk 1, which was negotiated in the Belarus capital Minsk in September 2014. The Russians have the upper hand militarily and the demarcation line moves further to the west in current negotiations in Minsk. The breakdown in Minsk 1 comes as Putin continues to support the separatists in Ukraine, who declared a Donestsk People's Republic with elections held recently, and have now taken territory to make their positions in eastern Ukraine more defensible. The war could end there with a de facto split of eastern Ukraine on the Russian side, or lead to further guessing of Russian president Putin's intentions if the conflict continues. Italy's foreign minister Paolo Gentiloni, points out that arms aid by the U.S. to Ukraine would only fail as Russia could respond, and it gives the Russian president the added advantage of the narrative that the U.S. and NATO are a threat to Russia at its borders. All sides say they respect the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine, but the fact remains that Ukraine is deeply divided with the eastern region bordering Russia having close ties to Russia, and the western region near Poland having strong ties to a newly emergent EU that includes much of Eastern Europe. Prudence and restraint is needed on all sides for a settlement. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions readers raise about Lewis Sorley's account of wins in the latter part of the war in Vietnam. The idea presented that had the country stood behind the war effort it could have been turned around. Here President Johnson's own deputy national security advisor, Francis Bator, who is Professor emeritus at the Harvard Kennedy School, refutes this notion by saying that: "in Vietnam the goal was clear but unattainable by any means not grossly disproportionate to the American stake." He goes on to say that false inferences from that failure will not help President Obama with the hard question of deciding what feasible goals and means in Afghnistan and Pakistan and other places will minimize chances of amajor terrorist attack on the United States, whaterver its origating location. And doing this in a cost-effective way. The wording is designed to first focus on what is the minimum that America wants- safety from another attack. Second, to focus on doing this in a cost-effective way. At some point resources added become disproportionate to the American stake in Afghanistan. An infantryman in the Vietnam war describes a people in villages that he was supposed to protect who would not even alert American soldiers of bombs when they knew exactly where they were placed. People in villages who were basically indifferent to the central government in South Vietnam. Are the Afghan people any different? See the links to this....

LyrArc Article Gist
King Salman appoints Mohamed bin Nayef, 55 years-old, as the deputy crown prince in Jan. 2015. The crown prince is Muqrin Abdulaziz, 69 years-old. Mohamed Bin Nayef is the son of the Interior Minister, who worked under his father from 1999 till he became the new Interior minister in 2012. Nayef has pursued an aggressive program to remove Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. By taking action against all dissent inside Saudi Arabia Nayef has also jailed human rights activists, including the flogging of a blogger critical of the government. The defense minister Prince Mohamed bin Salman, is a son of King Salman. King Salman was defense minister till he succeeded his half-brother Abdullah. Ali al-Naimi continues as Oil minister, a position he has held for decades. Saudi Arabia established a panel in 2006 to work with future kings after King Salman to appoint an heir to the throne. Even with the appointment of Nayef, a grandson of Saudi Arabia's founder, Abdulaziz ibn Saud, as deputy crown prince, the leadership of the country remains within a small number of princes of the royal family. Under the Obama administration the relations between U.S. and Saudi Arabia have become strained with president Obama's failure to intervene in Syria. The Saudi have pursued their own policies since then, in first Bahrain and then Egypt the Saudis supported the monarchy and the military respectively to maintain power in the face of the Arab Spring. The danger is that Saudi policies may be contrary to the U.S. position supporting freely elected governments and basic rights, particularly when it comes to suppression of all dissent including peaceful dissent and normal criticism of government, and yet with the rise of Islamic State the U.S. puts itself inadvertently behind these very policies. The Saudis would say this has happened because U.S. president Obama failed to support the effort for freedom in Syria and a transition in Libya and Iraq (with the added complication of Maliki's sectarian policies), creating a war torn neighborhood in which the Saudis had to act on their own. These are the hidden costs of the policy of the U.S. president for the U.S. and for the Middle East- more sectarianism with Shiites and Sunnis openly in conflict, reversal of hard won gains in Iraq, reversal of the Arab Spring except in Tunisia, war torn Libya and Iraq- with a withdrawal that never truly happened because it required a firmly guided transition period of support in the region with lower cost and involvement of an extended period leaving no room for reversal of gains. It leaves both the Saudis and the U.S. in a more precarious position than a decade ago....

LyrArc Article Gist
The changing attitudes to regulation after serious regulatory failures in the last years of the Bush administration. The temper and mood of the new Obama administration.

LyrArc Article Gist
Portugal in 2012-2013 stands as a good case study of what is good and what is bad about austerity measures, about what makes sense and is needed and what does not make sense and is bad both in a fiscal sense and for growth. Patricia Knowsmann does a good job of bringing this out, from the hundreds of stories written about austerity vs growth in the media. During 2011-2012, the elected government of Passos Coelho has supported an EU-IMF-ECB program that reduced wages, raised taxes, privatized state owned companies and changed labor laws that reduced hiring by businesses. During this time the Portuguese have patiently accepted the program compared to other countries and the budget deficit is shrinking from 9.8% in 2010 to an expected 5% in 2012. The unemployment rate has gone up to 15%. Now a new plan by prime minister Coelho in September has created an uproar and sparked popular opposition to the austerity measures threatening what has been achieved in deficit reduction, including the credibility of the austerity program. The plan is to reduce the portion of salaries that employers contribute to the social security system from 23.5% to 18%, in the hope that employers would increase hiring. At the same time it increases the portion of salaries employees pay from 11% to 18%. Coelho was looking at Germany and Slovenia where employees pay more than 20% of salaries to Social Security. What he failed to look at was the situation in Portugal where workers and pensioners have lost about 24% of their income through wage cuts and tax increases. The new plan would reduce incomes even further. Portugal's small business owners expressed strong disapproval for the plan because it would mean a drastic drop in consumer spending. The president of a Portuguese shoe maker, Kyaia, with 600 employees, says it makes no sense to reduce companies contribution if the company can't sell enough shoes to keep its workers. Kyaia has already experienced a 25% decline in demand and its CEO Fortunato Frederico, says he cannot understand how a company can hire workers if demand declines. This impact on consumer demand and sentiment is a fact that policymakers cannot ignore throughout the eurozone as austerity measures are implemented, especially when demand has already declined to an unacceptable point. The move by Coelho ignored a study by Portugal's finance ministry and central bank that showed export businesses may be induced to hire from the savings in contributions, but the businesses serving the domestic market would simply take in the savings. The EU-IMF-ECB recognized this and suggested increasing taxes to pay for the reduction in employer contributions, which would also depress demand by reducing incomes further. Portugal's economy and business is not focussed on exports, small business makes up 97% of Portugal's companies and most of them do not export. The introduction of such a plan gives credibility to the idea that there is a transfer of wealth from workers to business under the austerity programs, which affects the credibility of the entire deficit reduction and competitiveness improvement programs. For Coelho it also means the strong opposition of a minority party in his coalition government and from members of his Social Democratic Party. Large demonstrations were held on Sept 15 in 40 cities in Portugal in the first large scale opposition to further austerity measures and the Coelho social security contribution plan. Capital markets in Europe also see a problem with such plans because it removes the essential element of popular acceptance of deficit reduction plans jeopardizing the entire program. After the failure to win popular acceptance in Greece capital markets see additional risks and failures as one too many for the eurozone. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A major shift in foreign investment may be taking place as the 2014 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum takes place in May 2014. Russian policy in Ukraine and tensions with the U.S. and Germany could lead to a shift in investment to other emerging market countries. China's tensions with Japan could lead to a similiar shift of Japanese foreign investment. At the same time India has elected a new government with an absolute majority and an overwhelming mandate from young people to accelerate development. The new government under the BJP party's Modi has a decade of experience attracting foreign investment in western India. Indonesia, Vietnam, Africa and other emerging market countries, could benefit from the shift in investment. Investment could also return to the home countries with lower labor costs in Southern Europe, lower labor/energy/transport costs in North America. For Russia the debate at the St Petersburg Economic Forum was about pursuing one of three policy paths with some riskier than others, or some combination also risky and uncertain- depending on state banks and oil windfall funds, increasing ties with Asian countries, continuing on the current path with lower foreign investment and continued capital outflows. The failure to use the time wisely to diversify the oil based economy which could have been better accomplished in an economy not overly dependent on crony capitalism and centralized economy, both current characteristics, will affect future progress. A key weakness for Russia compared to China is the centralization under one person Putin, more so in the third term. In China the two man team Keqiang and Jinping is part of a larger team chosen by consensus and negotiation and part of a rotational scheme. It has senior leaders who initiated the changes to a market driven economy in the nineties determined to see China on track....

LyrArc Article Gist
CreditSights, a New York research firm says about $33 billion in losses from home equity loans will hit the five largest banks in the latter part of 2010, an amount equal to what they expect in earnings for 2010. This would have an adverse effect on the banks and has the potential to stall the economic recovery.

LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein says that the $700 billion plan to buy impaired assets will not prevent an overshooting downward in house prices, as more people have negative equity in their homes, rising to 40% of all mortgages at some point; and leading to a cycle of foreclosure and further price declines. This will only decrease the value of the mortgage securities that Treasury seeks to take off the hands of banks. And without direct government help in form of lowcost loans, say 2%, the cost of capital for the government, for 20% of the loan upto $80,000; more and more homeowners will have negative equity in their homes. This will lead to more foreclosures as housing loans are not full recourse, so that only the house is lost and the homeowner can move to an apartment and carry on from there. Thw size of this program would be $1 trillion but it gives the government income from the loans made and these would be full recourse loans so the taxpayer is protected. In Feldstein's view the current plan does not address declining house prices which is the root of the problem. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The American Treasury Secretary who handled the 2008 financial crisis, Henry Paulson, gives the new US financial reform legislation an incomplete grade. His main concern is that the too-big-to fail risk in the US banking system continues, and without clear rules a lot depends on the regulators. He does not see higher capital requirements doing much to ease that problem, and sees another crisis in a few years as inevitable. Former SEC chief, Harvey Pitt, gives it an F for failure or an I for Incomplete. He sees it as a boon for lawyers, because it is not clearly written and leaves so many loopholes, to a degree that is simply astounding. He says it does nothing in the way of preventing another crisis. Does nothing for transparency, nothing for monitoring and action by regulators, all factors that led to the crisis of 2008. Nouriel Roubini gives it a C+, because it does little to fix the reasons why securitization failed and caused the crisis, and in this way will keep credit creation and expansion in a weak state. He sees this financial reform bill as a failed effort that is laying the ground for the next crisis, with little action in the "too-big-to-fail" area, a huge dilution of what former Fed Chairman paul Volcker had advocated in the Volcker rule, and no real impact on the risky trading of derivatives. Bill Gross of PIMCO gives his frank assessment in no uncertain terms. A D+ for this bill. It shows how lobbyists for the banks still control Congress he says. It would have been better to let Paul Volcker take charge completely, than to have the lobbyists dilute the critical reform proposals. Simon Johnson gives it the lowest passing grade at MIT, a B. The only large change he says, is the Kanjorski Amendment, which give federal regulators the authority to breakup the large banks. But he cautions that it may require another crisis for the regulators and Congress to "get it," and do what they should be doing....

LyrArc Article Gist
The treaty of handover by Britain of Hong Kong under one country, two systems was flawed in the way it was negotiated. French commentators looking at the problem say the city is caught between its past in the British Empire and the new monolithic state that China represents. Under the British French visitors looked at the city and wondered how there was freedom but no democracy, people were just selfishly just interested in making money. Chris Patten, Britain's administrator of the territory tried but failed to get democratic process, During the negotiations in 1984 for handover the chief British negotiator, Percy Cradock, a former ambassador to China, tells the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that - In Hong Kong where there is such a disparity in strength between the two sides, you go for the best you can get, I take the simple view that half a loaf is better than no bread." Britain had very little leverage to secure a separate future for Hong Kong because it was small compared to much larger China resulting unequal negotiations. The same is true today as the best Britain could do is to get out a joint declaration with Australia and Canada saying that it did not approve the new security law, that it violated the treaty signed by Britain and China. The French view expressed by the editor of La Croix is that hasty poorly planned British exits- as happened in British India -have led to crises and conflicts for postcolonial generations, a legacy of British colonial rule. India and Pakistan still sorting out Kashmir, and India and China still fighting about the McMahon Line border area. The situation is very different for the U.S. which now has to respond in some way, and this comes as trade tensions and coronavirus tensions about its origins in China and the failure of Beijing to allow quick entry for an American team into Wuhan. This being for 7 weeks between Jan 6 request and February 16 permission. America sees this as losing 7 precious weeks to make up its own determination of the dangers when every week health experts say means saving or losing tens of thousands of lives. With loss of 100,000 lives the Trump administration has a sense of being misled. This French report in FR24 points out that the lack of a strong response from the U.S. would be something similar to letting the Berlin Wall happen without a response. Both sides in a situation where the territory of Hong Kong remained mostly about money and with a disproportionate influence of business interests similar to its founding under the unequal treaties of the 1850's. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A slight shift in American opinion favoring a deal with Iran is shown in a WSJ/NBC poll in July 2015 compared to the poll in April 2015. Support for reaching a nuclear deal with Iran remains stable at 36% in both polls, the opposed drops by 6 percentage points to 17% from 23%, and the percentage of people who say they do not know enough to formulate an opinion goes up to 46% from 40%. The intricacies of a nuclear technology deal and the sites involved lead to a high percentage of don't know enough to give an opinion. Factors hindering a deal include inspection of military sites, and Iranian intentions. Factors favoring reaching a deal now is the risk that this would mean Iran would go back into isolation and the opportunity to work with moderates might be lost. The Rouhani administration was an effort by voters to elect a government that could ease or remove sanctions to improve the economy and living conditions- its failure would lead to Iran losing an opportunity to open up to the world. The pressure from the U.S. Congress and Israel served to push for a verifiable and effective agreement to control development of nuclear technology for weapons systems. Behavioural factors involved are the very young population in Iran which has no memories about the period before the revolution in 1979- 70% of the population of 74 million are people under the age of 35. This group is eager for ties to the outside and could change Iran's outlook and policies int the future towards moderation. Risks in not reaching a deal also include the possibility of the Saudis developing nuclear technology and nuclear proliferation. Winners from a deal because of the flow of Iranian oil to world markets and a period of extended low oil prices are the U.S., Europe, China and India. Germany gains new markets to replace the growth in the Russian market after sanctions. Lifting of an arms embargo, an added risk in the last days of the talks, would be mitigated by making the lifting of that embargo very gradual....

LyrArc Article Gist
The India-Pakistan-Afghanistan issues are still framed in the old way in terms of communalism, cold war then and the war on terrorism now. These policies were a legacy of the colonial policies of an earlier empire designed to preserve foreign rule, with a policy of perpetuating divisions between communties on religious and other lines. Modernization, the spread of mass communications that makes possible the reduction of prejudice and division by assimilating different values and beliefs into acommon aspiration for progress and better living standards, and the spread of education, commerce, and technological progress, create the conditions that should put this behind us. Put behind us communalism, and the political and military structures of communal states. Pakistan needs to be transformed from a communal state with a military structure designed to preserve that state - resulting in conflicts with its neighbors- into a state that represents a community and a religion, but in all other ways seeks peaceful coexistence and economic integration with the rest of South Asia. A good example of this is Mexico with its own culture, language and religion (Spanish Catholicism), and Canada with its own bilingual French-English heritage and British political structures and allegiances, both arriving at an arrangement of peaceful coexistence and economic integration with the USA with its different political structures and culture and sporadic conflicts with Canada and Mexico. This has promoted the peaceful development of the North American region. The US involvement in the region can then be seen as a misguided effort that continued framing the region's differences in the old British way or in a cold war stereotyping, first with John Foster Dulles in the India-Pakistan conflicts, and then with Reagan in the Afghan anti-Soviet war. This has worked to exacerbate the conditions that led to slow progress in the drive for economic development, infrastructure building and modernization in all of South Asia. Just as in Europe, as in North America, the processes of economic development work best when a policy of inclusiveness and integration of different communities and people is followed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A detailed account by Thomas Schweich, a senior official and deputy in the law enforcement bureau to Anne Patterson, Assistant secretary of State for international narcotics and law enforcement affairs. He talks about how the Pentagon and the UK military have thwarted efforts for aerial eradication of poppy fields which has worked in other countries like Columbia. In fact Anne Patterson was an Ambassador to Columbia and knows about this first hand. He also talks about how through their efforts northern Afghanistan was cleared of poppy fields but how the cultivation has shifted to the south to Helmand and Kandahar provinces. The government officials in these provinces are actively involved in the poppy farms that are being setup there and support Karzai and help him organize the Pashtun vote for coming elections. So Karzai is protecting these officials and because of this opposes aerial eradication and does not support using Afghan Army for land eradication. The military in the U.S. and the UK does not want to take more casualties by turning against them the officials and farmers who support the government, but this is a short sighted policy because this helps make the Taliban insurgency stronger with access to cash and weapons because they also are actively setting up farms in their areas of southern Afghanistan. Aerial eradication takes care of poppy farms in all areas and has been effective in other countries. In the long run the military takes many more casulaties because of the bigger insurgency and Taliban they have to deal with. The military's policy is called "Sequencing," and its basically we'll deal with drugs later which is based on a complete misperception and understanding of the situation facing them. Schweich is in the thick of these battles and has fought them wit courage it appears from this account. He has the support of Secretary of State Rice but has not been able to get the Administration to get Karzai to change the way he is operating. It risks making the situation and insurgency in Afghanistan a lot worse if not corrected. Its a call for action and for educating the public and clearing all the misunderstanding and myths and fog about whats happening in Afghanistan....

LyrArc Article Gist
Zardari is asking for $100 billion when Pakistan has in its central bank enough foreign currency reserves for 2 months of imports of oil and food. He also wants to defeat the Taliban and militants and find those responsible for the death of Benazir Bhutto. This interview with Bret Stephens who gives an account of it and his own comments, ends with some remarks by Zardari about wanting to defeat the militant elements that killed Mrs Bhutto in a manner where "not letting them get away with it" referring to those responsible, is something he wishes to do before his own life ends. It suggests that this war is likely to take a new turn as the military in Pakistan takes on the militants and Taliban and as General Petraeus looks for a way to reverse Taliban gains in southern Afghanistan and other parts of the country.

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post analysis of the Republican tax bill gives an exceptional view of the bill's impact and provisions. This is the first major change to the tax laws since 1986. The size of the bill is $1.5 trillion, with the Joint Committe on Taxation projection that the bill will increase tax revenues over a decade by $500 billion, meaning that it will cost $1 trillion being added to the deficit. What the bill does: 1. It offers a permanent tax cut to corporations by reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Industries benefiting the most are mining, real estate, technology, manufacturing. 2. The individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They are skewed to disproportionately help highest income Americans, much less lower income Americans and much more highest income Americans compared to high income Americans. In this sense it is skewed in a an unusual way to the highest earning Americans- a sort of Trump effect in place. The top 1% get a tax break of $51,140 in 2019, middle income people earning about $100,000 get about $1000 a year in 2019, tax payers earning around $50,000 about $380, and those earning less than $25,000 about $60 a year in 2019. Taxpayers earning about 150,000 get about $2000 a year tax cut. (Tax Policy Center) 3. The basic assumption is that tax cuts are revenue neutral if there is economic growth and most of that growth comes from corporations investing in growth. The problem as Greg Ip points out in the Wall Street Journal is that countries trying thsi approach in the past such as Britain have not seen such growth materialize. Corporate profits are the highest in 15 years as percentage of GDP, according to Vanguard founder Bogle, and are now 20% of GDP compared 11% in 1980. If corporations did not invest with this level of profits how much additional investment is going to happen, ask critics, especially as demand drives growth and wages are not boosted under this plan.  4.  Because the bill's changes to current law makes it likely that 13 million less Americans will be insured over a decade- from fewer people signing up for Medicaid and on exchanges for Affordable Care Act- it will hurt lower income Americans. Skewing at both ends of the income spectrum of this type is rare in American history particularly in the twentieth century after the Depression of the 1930's, and poses risks for social cohesion, making it unpopular with most Americans. A CBS News poll taken Dec 3-5 shows 53% of all Americans opposed, only 35% support the tax bill just passed in Congress.  5. Then why did Republicans do this? Republicans needed a legislative success after failure to repeal the Obama Affordable Care law. This pressure led to passage with Republicans probably aware that this is temporary tax reform requiring a real effort by both parties working together after the midterm elections in 2018 and as the presidential election approaches in 2019.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Many of the 255 Comments on this article in the NYT say it is misleading or grossly misleading title. Michael Crowley of NYT quotes Wertheim for his conclusion that there seems to be a sense that the world is out of control, there is chaos under president Biden. This is subtly presented and clearly wrong. Wertheim is the author of a book that questions America's exceptionalism, and says "isolationism" was somehow concocted by policy makers such as Eisenhower and Dulles, both Republicans for a postwar world built on American supremacy. What Crowley and Wertheim do is put their very idea of asking questions about policy which is a part of the discussion into misrepresenting through misinformation about what happened. Biden has acted with courage to close wars no other president not Reagan/ Rumsfeld who started the conflict with Iran by arming Iraq's unprovoked war on Iran, not Bush who initiated the war in Afghanistan, not Obama and Trump who did not close the war in the mountains around Kabul that is a "graveyard for Empires" - the Maratha Empire in India in the 1700's that opened the door to British rule in India, not the British Empire wisely staying out of it, the Soviet Union beginning its decline there, and the US mired in it similar to the Soviets. Crowley/Wertheim are only making things worse- Netanyahu was emboldened by the former president and made a major security failure. Putin miscalculated in Ukraine, Biden simply acted in the way any wise American president would -strengthened NATO with Finland and Sweden, providing reasons for Russian restraint yet without escalating the conflict. To say this is chaos is to misinform and misrepresent, and favor the very Supremacy that former president Trump proposes as policy based on US power. By contrast Biden' approach is peace through strength from building close relations between partners in Europe and Asia, not provocation or supremacy. Wertheim is only one voice in a larger discussion not the authority he is presented as. For Wertheim to say "isolationism" was a bogey and point to 1950 as the point when it was created is simply wrong. It existed in some form from the early days of the Republic. Washington was an advocate of not involving the fledgling Republic in foreign entanglements of France even though it was an ally. It is not that response to isolationism is the cause of America embracing the role of leading the Free World as it is now. It is simply the situation leaders faced. Truman faced it when Soviets planned insurgencies in Turkey and Greece which would not exist as democracies today without Truman. And across Eastern Europe Hungary 1956 Ike acted cautiously. Czechoslovakia 1968 LBJ Johnson acted cautiously already in the wrong war with Vietnamese nationalism.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Another view from ecology and environment friendly advocates why the strategy of companies that did not embrace conservation and the environment led to failure. This eco-expert makes a good point about making an eco-footprint for each company as a part of a successful strategy, he cites GE and Walmart as companies doing this. And he significal=ntly points out that there is money to be made doing this.

LyrArc Article Gist
Yuen Yuen Ang presents the view that China is an autocracy with democracy characteristics. Her view of Xi is conventional reflecting contemporary ideas. Yet Xi was profoundly influenced by his father Xi Zhongxun and mother Qi Xin, revolutionary heroes in the fight against the British, Japanese and Chiang Nationalists which shape his view of the world. Zhongxun also shaped the response to the struggle for modernization after failures of the Maoist period, in efforts he made under Deng. In this sense he adapted to different conditions. This view of China's leaders is that they are intuitive and human, that China is simply responding intuitively under Xi to the conditions it faces and perceptions about these conditions to maintain the wellbeing of the vast majority of the Chinese people after the century of struggles 1850-1950 and later missteps. The experiment with capitalism and a new generation with no memories of the past meant to Xi and other Chinese leaders that everything that an earlier generation (his own parents) had fought for in the struggle against the British and Japanese invasions could be lost quickly, if China was allowed to fall into the kind of corruption and self-seeking leaders that marked the Chiang regime of the 1930's. This led to the effort to consolidate the gains of the Chinese nation made over 2 centuries since the rise of the British in Asia in 1800, with Xi seeing no choice but to take responsibility and the initiative as his father Zhongxun had done in the 1930's and 1940's to breakout of isolated regions in the north of China. The sudden shift to adapt to open covid policy is also apparent from Zhongxun's ability to adapt to and lead the changes after Deng's experiment with a market economy. A report by Rohan Premkumar in the Hindu on Jan 25 on a British sub-jail in the Nilgiri hills of Tamilnadu shows prisoners from the Opium wars with China sent to this jail by the British. These events still shape Chinese perceptions of the world- the backwardness in faceoffs with the west and the cost to the mainland Asian nations India and China. Inland river based civilizations on the Ganges and the Yangtze that failed, as Adam Smith says in The Wealth of Nations, to change in ways that the Renaissance  and the Industrial Revolution changed Europe. ...