LyrArc Article Gist
Surveys of American, European and Japanese companies show souring of outlook for China investment. And Biden administration new rules leading to investment of China profits in the US economy. About $110 billion moved out of yuan denominated China bonds since 2022. There is a sharp decline in the profits of US and EU companies in China that are reinvested in China after China's sporadic lockdowns in 2022 and increase in interest rates in the US. WSJ Analysis shows $170 billion profits reinvested in 2021 to net decline in third quarter 2023 outflows of capital over inflows declining by $11.8 billion, the first ever since 1998. Unlike in the past profits are being repatriated back out of the country so that investments can be made in the US economy or in other countries in the supply chain. This is a fundamental shift as risk of doing business in China increases. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Apple releases list of suppliers and results of audits of working conditions at plants in China. Many of the facilities show poor working conditions.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. naval exercizes in Hawaii (Pacific Rim) which include China, and the naval exercizes at Subic Bay intended to counter China in the Pacific.

LyrArc Article Gist
It is important to understand the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration because of the many misleading headlines. The new tariffs placed by the Trump administration on a list of 1300 imported products from China are for about $50 billion and targeted at high tech products in flat screen televisions, medical devices, aircraft parts and batteries, other high tech products that China hopes to get an edge over the U.S. under its "Made in China 2025" plan. China still enjoys a huge surplus with the U.S. This plan is intended to better manage the next phase of the competition with China as China seeks to get an edge in high tech products. The steel tariffs were targeted at China's buildup of surplus steel capacity in the last 2 decades, with little to do with the next phase of the competition globally between the U.S., the E.U. and China. This is a carefully planned move showing American resolve to be competitive in the high tech industries of the future. It will be followed by a comment period during which the administration will get feedback on product choices. A public hearing is set for May 15 in Washington, and companies can file objections till May 22. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden calls president Xi of China on April 2, the first call after the two met at the April Summit for extensive discussions and agreements reached. In it Biden continued discussion on topics related to Taiwan, the South China Sea and also raised the issue of China indirectly helping Russia build its defense capability in Ukraine.

LyrArc Article Gist
Xi Jinping visited Hong Kong in 2017 and again this year. Jinping wanted to see Hong Kong integrated with mainland China after years of British rule and a transition period in which control remained with Beijing. This has happened after protests that sought to maintain Hong Kong's special status collapsed with huge differences on both sides. Jinping says "no country on earth would allow unpatriotic and even treasonous or traitorous people to take power." He stated his view on this trip that "political power must be in the hands of patriots." 2022 marks 25 years since the handover to China of Hong Kong by Britain in 1997. The period of transition set was 50 years. It could be said that the speed of China's integration with the economies of the US and Germany allowed by Clinton, Bush, Obama, Schroeder  and Merkel may have unwittingly determined the duration of the transition to integration with China from 50 to 25 years. In 1997 China was just beginning the transition to a market economy- 50 year seemed a long distance away.  The Clinton, Bush, Obama and Merkel years accelerated China's integration into the ports of Los Angeles and Hamburg for manufactured imports at a breathtaking pace eventually leading to the collapse of the relationship as American and European workers were ignored and communities depending on factories in parts of US and Europe were thrown out of work. With it collapsed the arrangements of Hong Kong as China by 2022 was economically already where it thought it would be in 2047. Shenzen region's economy's size exceeded the Hong Kong economy. China no longer needed Hong Kong as a entry point for foreign technology and capital. Hong Kong had lost relevance as a city state from the British period with British values for sons of the veterans of the Communist revolution of the nineteen thirties and forties, one of whom was Xi Jinping. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hong and Inman describe the deep experience in capital markets that Hong Kong has and Shanghai lacks, which China needs for further development. Even before the handover capital markets in Hong Kong have helped China, and many of China's largest companies have listings in Hong Kong. Hong is also the laboratory for China to make financial innovations for the last three decades, because of capital account controls on the mainland. A bad bank Cinda Asset management Company only recently raised $2.5 billion for buying non-performing loans from Chinese banks. Hong Kong's separate status within China, its Briain based legal system which has credibility in the international community, the rule of law, independent judiciary and independent police are critical to how it developed into an international financial hub for Asia. Any crackdown on protestors would disturb this arrangement. As China has already promised universal suffrage in 2017- which implies free elections not limited by restricted nominations as is now proposed in a change in 2014- and the Basic Law passed before the handover by Britain in 1997 also ensuring this, any retraction is only going back on past promises. A crackdown would create fears about Hong Kong's future autonomy for international financial institutions, and the bad publicity for China would affect Hong Kong and China adversely. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China faces risk of a surge inthe coronavirus in June 2021. The area in and around Guangzhou appears to be seriously affected. The city tested almost its entire population of 18.7 million between June 6 Sunday and June 8 Tuesday. This report shows pictures of a deserted Beijing airport, strict restrictions on foreign travel. The SinoPharm vaccine effectiveness against the Delta variant in India and UK is unknown. The government is locking down entire neighborhoods rather than entire cities or provinces.  As the risks of the Delta variant and other new variants increases most of the population even in the US and Europe have either no dose or one dose. Researchers at the University of New South Wales in Australia show the Astra Zeneca vaccine effectiveness with one dose at only 30%, only after two weeks following the second dose does the vaccine effectiveness reach about 70%. The population of China and India are so large that much larger parts of the population remain unvaccinated. In China with 1.3 billion people and even if the figure of 800 million doses stated by the government is accepted- it could be an overestimate as the US has only managed 300 million doses with many vaccines- most of the population is unprotected. Vaccine skepticism is high in China making vaccination an uphill task. SinoPharmvaccine is not as effective as Pfizer, Moderna, Astra Zeneca, or Covaxin vaccines, making the task even more of an uphill kind. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The issues related to India's borders all hinge on Tibet says the Council on Foreign Relations. Sardar Patel and Nehru had differences of their own on whether the McMahon Line set by the British in a treaty with Tibet as an independent country was the border with Tibet or the border with China.  Between 1913 and 1950 Tibet was an independent country, with an Indian High commissioner in Lhasa between 1947 and 1950. After the Cold War set in and China and the Soviet Union fought to defend the rights of colonial peoples the U.S. and Britain did not recognize Tibet as a part of China. Nehru simply remained with the British status quo of the McMahon line as the Indian border with Tibet, without any clear acceptance  of the invasion of Tibet in 1950 by China, yet accepting the new status quo after the invasion, differing from Sardar Patel on the issue. This is why no clear picture emerges from looking at the official positions of the two countries, and a better understanding can be gained by looking at the border issue from the Council of Foreign Relations in the U.S.   Essentially the border issue is not beneficial for what it gives back to each of the two countries. China sees itself rejecting the period of its weakness during the Japanese invasion so that it reasserts its position to borders that stretch outside where Chinese people live. India sees itself rejecting the weakness during the British period and the early post British period during which India was occupied with the issues relating to partition of British India and the partition of Kashmir. This is why the Council on Foreign Relations can provide a better understanding from and independent perspective.  Both sides have little to gain. China by being at the Tibetan border puts itself in a position where it has little to gain being on the border with a large rapidly industrializing country with a population of over 1 billion.  At over 4000 metres or 20,000 feet the territory and landscape is not one that humans can adapt too in any way, except for a few military personnel doing their term of duty of 6-12 months from India or China. China is even further away from the border as it is a remote border from Beijing, Shanghai, Canton or Chengdu, thousands of kilometres when it is just 8 hours from Srinagar by highway to Leh, Ladakh, and the Nepalese border very close to the Bihar state in India. The very distance suggests remoteness, with customs traditions in the region very different from that in China, suggesting very little connection between Beijing near Mongolia and Tibet or Ladakh very close to India by road or rail. To get some idea how close the Tibet border is to India consider that Rasuwagadhi Fort border point between Nepal and Tibet is only 127 miles by road from Kathmandu. The distance by rail from the Indian border in Bihar to the Nepalese border is only 34 kilometres with a new upgraded rail connection. Being this close India is likely to upgrade infrastructure throughout the northeast region as it upgrades infrastructure, roads and bridges and rail throughout India at an accelerated pace for economic development.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ cites economic studies that show 60% of China's overseas loans are troubled in 2022 compared to 10% in 2010. China has scaled down the Belt and Road Initiative and is reorganizing the effort to introduce risk controls and reduce lending. China's preferred approach in an increasing interest rate environment is to extend the maturity of loans. Yet the climate change disasters and rising rates have put many countries into a highly indebted position. China no longer touts the Belt and Road as a way for developing countries to advance their economies and infrastructure development.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. trade dispute with China takes a new turn after tit for tat tariffs, with the U.S. president Trump claiming that China was interfering in the U.S. midterm elections. This plays into the narrative in China that the U.S. does not want to see China's ascent as a global power. President Trump and Trade Representative Lighthizer have singled out "Made In China 2025," China's plans for tech leadership as a serious issue for the U.S. President Trump made his claim in a speech at the United Nations, saying that he was "the first president ever to challenge China on trade."

Many of China's tariffs on U.S. exports are targeted at agricultural products such as soyabeans and corn in heavily pro-Trump states, and in rural areas where the Republican party has a significant base. 

 

LyrArc Article Gist
Yellen tells the governor of Guangdong that China's huge subsidies for solar, EV and other industries disrupts "the level playing field" America needs. In all previous administrations  of both parties American economic ministry heads stayed silent or said it in a way that they were ignored. A culture of government staying out spread like wild fire under Reagan and "free to choose" advocates such as Friedman who did not realize the grave dangers to American manufacturing and its workers inside America, and to the world's other manufacturing capable nations such as India with overconcentration in one location. It was America's misfortune that economists and business leaders in the US were not listening enabling China to ignore this. By offering huge government subisidized incentives China and Taiwan shifted manufacturing away from the US in semiconductors, solar, EV's. It started with Apple and is still going on with Tesla. Today economists such as Yellen say economic resilience and supply chains are at risk before they said it lowered cost for consumers and failed to wake up when advanced technologies were at stake, as economists never trained in manufacturing had no knowledge of how it works with learning curves and knowhow that is built over decades, once lost hard to regain. The message fellow Americans is that trust your instincts and common sense, and trust observation which is what the Renaissance in the 15th century was all about and which put Europe ahead of Asia, to the great misfortune of Asia. Japan, China, have learned these lessons well, America as an immigrant nation is different from Europe, and must use its good sense to keep open the opportunities for its people and workers, and the people and workers of all nations that are manufacturing capable. Yellen said- "Direct and indirect government support is currently leading to production capacity that significantly exceeds China's domestic demand, as well as what the global market can bear...Overcapacity can lead to large volumes of exports at depressed prices, and it can lead to overconcentration of supply chains, posing a risk to global economic resilience,"    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points to the economic muddle that China is getting itself into. He says one way of looking at what is happening now with high inflation is that inflation is the market's way of undoing the currency manipulation that China has engaged in. By following aweak currency policy to protect export interests China has created an artificially high trade surplus. But this is now turning into a lose-lose proposition for both China and the US as market forces push wages and prices up, whittling away at any competitive advantage of China's weak currency policy. He says some estimates he has seen show that Chinese undervaluation could be gone in two or three years. Chinese consumers are asked to accept interest on savings limited to 2.75% and below inflation, with the spread designed to help banks earn their way out of bad loans made during the stimulus lending binge of 2009-2010. What is happening is a massive allocation of capital away from consumers to lending for state owned companies that have created overcapacity in many industries, and use part of this capital to engage in real estate speculation. Krugman says China may be on its way to some kind of crisis with collateral damage to the rest of the world as it is a major importer of commodities from Canada, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, and a major importer of high tech goods from Germany and the USA....

LyrArc Article Gist
Plans to increase VW production in China by 70% for 2018 and introduce a small budget car designed for the Chinese market at a price range of 6000-8000 euros. A depressed European market with VW sales down 8% in Europe in the first 2 months of 2013, means a vigorous push in China, India, Russia, America and Southeast Asia. The new budget car would be modeled on Renault's Dacia. VW will build 10 plants outside Europe, 7 in China. Additional plants will increase capacity in China to 4 million vehicles from the current 2.3 million in March 2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
The slowing growth in China is reducing growth and depreciating the currencies of iron ore producing countries Brazil and Australia. China makes 50% of the world's steel and imports 1.2 billion tons of iron ore traded annually. Australia exports 80% of its iron ore to China valued at $67 billion in 2013. Brazil sends 50% of production to China. For the first time in 15 years China's steel use declined 0.3% to 500 million tons in the Jan-Aug. 2014 period. The mining companies have invested heavily in ports and railroads for expanded production. BHP CEO Mackenzie says the strategy is to maximize production because reducing production increases costs on a unit basis. The result is a decline in price from $135 a ton at the beginning of 2014 to $69.80 on Nov. 28, 2014. Prices could decline to the $50 range in 2015, according to Citigroup analysts, because of an estimated iron ore surplus of 300 million tons by 2018. As China expands recycling of older cars and washing machines to produce steel this will reduce future iron ore demand in China. JP Morgan forecast for Australia reduces GDP growth to 2.8% from 3.3% for 2015, and Brazil reduced its forecast for 2015 to 0.9% from 1.8%....

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
For years Apple concentrated all its iPhone production in a few factories in China. The Zhenzhou factory with 300,000 employees is one of the largest of the Apple suppliers. These suppliers including Foxconn and Luxshare work witn Apples NPI process in which manufacturing is designed around Apple designs and prototypes. For the first time WSJ reports on protests at the Zhengzhou factory over Covid controls and wages, conditions. Young people in China are no longer keen on working in these conditions and protested. Apple finally recognizes the need to reduce concentration in one country and plans to bring 40 to 45% of the production of iPhones to India. Initially it plans to bring NPI trained suppliers such as Luxshare that have facilities in Vietnam to assemble outside China. Over time suppliers in India will have to develop the needed skills, planning and engineering concentration of people to Make in India what is now Made in China.

LyrArc Article Gist
Leaders of North Korea and South Korea, Kim Jong-Un and Moon Jae-in meet on April 27, 2018, at the military demarcation line between North and South Korea.  After handshakes and Mr. Moon stepping onto North Korean soil for a few minutes, Kim Jong-Un visits Seoul for peace talks.  This is a historic moment for the two countries as this is the first time since the Korean War (1950-53) that a North Korean leader has visited the South. No peace treaty was signed after the Korean War. During the period of six decades that followed the Korean War, particularly the period after 1980, the South Korean economy recovered from the war and expanded following the Japanese export model with large conglomerates such as Samsung. The North Korean economy has struggled in the period and North Korea is one of the poorest countries isolated for most of this period like Burma from the rest of the world. The development of nuclear weapons was pursued to prevent any external threats to the government, and decades of sanctions followed with aborted efforts to denuclearize the Korean peninsula. Recent ballistic nuclear tests and the installation of a new anti missile system in South Korea led to tighter sanctions with the cooperation of China. This heightened tensions, followed by the tighter sanctions. Kim Jong Un and the government are looking for ways to win approval in the international community, and find a way out of the tight sanctions. South Korea, Japan and the U.S. government are not sure whether this will lead to any results in denuclearization. The summit with Moon will be followed by a summit between president Trump and Kim Jong Un of North Korea. If a way can be found for the North Korean government and party leaders to transition to acceptance in the international community followed by integration of the North and South's economies over an extended period, there is a possibility that denuclearization could work, because it is to maintain the current government in North Korea that nuclear development was pursued in the North. Ideological conflict is now less of a factor in the conflict between North and South Korea as it was in the early days of the Korean War with the Cold War and Communism's advances in Eastern Europe and Asia the big issue at the time. Today China itself is more of a state run economy under the Communist Party following capitalism with Chinese characteristics than the old Communist model, and ideological conflict is not an issue between the U.S. and Communist run countries. This leaves open the possibility of a solution particularly as at some point just as in the case of Vietnam and the U.S., North Korea could see its future more allied with that of South Korea than with China. That leaves an opening for a timetable of transitional actions plus effective implementation stages, with incentives for the U.S. and Japan to negotiate a settlement. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Blinken Wang Yi meeting at the G-2- in Indonesia is the first high level meeting between US and China since March when the Ukraine war started. In the press briefing after the meeting Blinken said "more than four months into this brutal invasion the PRC stands by Russia." He pointed to Beijing support of Russia at the United Nations, dissemination of Russian talking points through Chinese state media and joint military exercizes with Moscow. One aspect of the relations that is beyond the control or good intentions of the two countries top diplomats is the tit for tat response that began with the presidency of Donald Trump. Trump may have seen this as a way to talk to the voter base fed up with two decades of one sided trade with China with manufacturing shipped out to China and local communities of families and workers in regions across the US losing jobs and in decline. Much of this shift was done by US companies during the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations over two decades. The strident tone adopted by Trump was met by tit for tat responses in Chinese media till the pandemic when it assumed a new aspect of Chinese origins of the coronavirus. The result is that Sinophobia in the US is met by a response in Chinese media and in the thinking of the Chinese leadership under Jinping that now sees the relationship as having already shifted during the pandemic. The paradox in this is that the US in its effort to get other countries on its side is only beginning to make an effort of get America's own companies and large business investors on its side. Most American companies are still continuing trade and business with China as before.  The same situation exists with the shift of manufacturing from Japan and the European Union to China, with the loss of jobs and decline of local communities that depended on manufacturing. Japanese and European companies are acting in ways that are similar to American companies. Having managed the shift of manufacturing from European Union and Japan to China these companies have done little to change this business situation in 2022 carrying on as before. This is the paradox of the current situation that business both in the US and EU, and Japan is not on the side of their governments, even as their governments attitude to China, particularly now after the pandemic and the Ukraine war has shifted drastically. Alongside this is the popular opinion that has shifted gradually over the last 10 years in the US and EU, first in these very local communities that lost manufacturing to China, and then across broader sections of the public, and now across whole regions of America, Britain, the EU and Japan. This shift in popular opinion has little interest in the way business conducts business overseas or governments conduct diplomacy in nuanced statements. As a result neither the governments of the US, EU and Japan or the business of the US, EU and Japan are in control of this shifting situation that has its momentum and pace operating quite independently of governments and business. And public opinion across America, Europe, Japan, and also in India is moving in an entirely new direction.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Apple and protests over working conditions at factories of suppliers like Foxconn which make the iPads and iPhones. Issues related to Apple's large profit margins and the low wages paid to workers at supplier factories in China and other countries.

LyrArc Article Gist
Pokhara airport Nepal cost about $200 million but it does not get international flights from India which make it unsustainable. On the 10th anniversary of China's Belt and Road which has invested $1 trillion in development projects in poor countries of Asia and Africa, NYT's Wakabayashi, Sharma and Fu look at the China project that built a new international airport at Pokhara. CMAC initially submitted a bid for $305 million about twice what it would otherwise cost says this report, which was lowered to $216 million. Nepal signed a 20 year agreement with China. Only Chinese firms would be used in construction. A quarter of the loans at no interest. The rest a loan at 2% interest with repayment starting in 2026 from the Export Import Bank of China. 

LyrArc Article Gist
After denying clearances for development projects for three decades, the Indian Supreme Court green bench of Justices Gavai and Vikram Nath clears 118 development projects already delayed for 5 years for pending litigation. 118 projects were cleared, including 15 held up for 10 years, based on the "sustainable development" idea that takes a look at the bigger picture, the aspirations of youth, and the bigger possibilities for renewables and environment with a bigger economy. It shows how India which at one time in 1990 had about the same GDP as China, has today one fifth the GDP of China, and with it lacks the same scale of investment for renewable energy and climate change action that China has because of China's larger economy. In this sense the whole country of 1.2 billion Indians, including hundreds of millions of farmers and urban residents, the Supreme Court and India's institutions, have suffered more than the one lost decade the prime minister referred to in the Budget session of parliament. It is more like three decades since China pushed ahead after 1990. China having suffered from the Japanese invasion and civil war for three decades in the 1920-49 period and three decades of drift in economic direction following 1949. India faced its own period of failed governance that matches the failures in China by 1990. The SC bench stated- "The Supreme Court is flooded with applications after applications, seeking permissions to construct primary schools, public health centers, anganwadi centers, an other public utility buildings in remote areas. Himachal Pradesh is constrained to approach the Supreme Court even for seeking permission to connect villages in remote areas by roads. Needless to state, the citizens residing in the remote areas cannot be deprived of the developmental activities that are being done in other parts of the country."  The Supreme Court called it ridiculous that the states were required to rush to the Supreme Court to do the minimal developmental activities.  That the Supreme Court and other institutions have taken so long to say and do this is itself one of the reasons India has fallen behind China. It will need to accelerate its efforts, in the way that the rest of the country and the world is doing to create an environment in which development can meet the aspirations of the Indian people. Efforts for climate change action can take place at the same time with bigger investment capabilities from the larger economy and advanced technological capabilities. The two can and do go together, a point missed for far too long.  An approach even the US has grasped and is doing under president Biden. The US has gone through its own period of failed governance for four decades of neglect of manufacturing and infrastructure that president Biden talked about in his State of the Union address to the US Congress last week.  Biden now sees the problem itself as an opportunity to get it right. So can India.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Competing interests of the U.S. and China on issues such as jobs, currency and trade. Chinese stalling over currency revaluation.

LyrArc Article Gist
See these pictures of the Yangtze River and the Poyang Lake in BBC to understand how the decades of hyper growth in China with use of coal and fossil fuels unprecedented in history were not good for China and the world. The Yangtze river has never recorded less rainfall than this year since records began in 1961. That hyper growth is being followed by slight or flat growth both situations China and the world could have avoided if a steady growth pattern was put in its place. Common sense and wisdom would have done better than economists and business  in the US and local governments in China that dictated a self-interested pattern of hyper growth that led to ravaging communities in the US and the EU by shipping all manufacturing to China, then starting to reverse this process as the same ravaged communities in the US and EU responded in elections in the US and EU. None of the participants in this now take responsibility for their role in the changing climate and natural disasters one sees in 2022. China now faces the task of rebuilding its entire fossil fuel driven industry along renewable energy lines, when it is at the end of a property driven, land sale driven boom, with local governments finances precarious.   ...