LyrArc Article Gist
Automakers will have to ensure that 40 to 45% of a car's content is made by workers in the U.S. earning at least $16 per hour. If this is not met automakers pay a 2.5% tariff for cars brought in from Mexico. Mexico makes 2.3 million cars and Canada 1.8 million. Automakers invested tens of billions of dollars in Mexico turning it into a lower cost export hub. This has led to job loss in the U.S. Mr. Trump's efforts in the new trade deal with Mexico are designed to increase investment in the U.S. auto industry.

LyrArc Article Gist
Projecting a sense of a voice of moderation above the messy fray of politics may be a good thing, but it may also be seen as a sense of aloofness and a lack of new ideas and vision. It could end up creating a fuzzy-fuzzy picture of the President's leadership role on major issues facing the country, say some experts. Bill Clinton's period was a period of relative economic calm, the current times and economic uncertainty may actually require serious leadership.

LyrArc Article Gist
Treasury Secretary Paulson has emerged as the critical bridge builder within the Bush administration to get some tangible economic results in the spirit of bipartisan cooperation. It has not been easy in a Bush Presidency that has not valued compromise and cooperative relationships with Democrats. Treasury's influence, unlike the Rubin days under Snow and his predecessor, has been overshadowed by the politics of the Bush administration. Some of his initiatives had not fared so well, the efforts to reform Social Security and Medicare. The China-America dialogue may have reduced tensions but still did not amount to something significant. Now with Bush going his own way on Jan 18, 2008 to announce his own stimulus plan and spurning Democrats efforts for a bipartisan agreement and making them feel left out and angry, Secretary Paulson finally got into his own groove of compromise, diplomacy and deft bridgebuilding to get restraint from Bush. He worked out the details in the meantime to forge an agreement by the following week. Paulson was instrumental influence behind this stimulus package. His disregard for ideological debate in an administration that has been too close to this and not known for cooperaive relationship building, is a breath of fresh air in an otherwise desolate field of politicking. Particularly helpful in the middle of a risk laden economic situation for the country, and the other global economies that are intertwined with the US economy....

LyrArc Article Gist
The views being currently argued in meetings with the President about the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Vice President Biden's view: Completely change the goal and strategy. Scale down the military presence. Change the goal from protecting the people from the Taliban- and note that reports on the ground suggest that the people are indifferent and see the Americans and the Taliban as equally bad, with the Americans as foreigners far worse, see Doris Kearns others- to accelerated training of the Afghan forces to fight the Taliban. The focus of US interests would shift to Pakistan. Biden points to the disparity for every $1 spent in Pakistan $30 goes to Afghanistan, and the US real interests lie in Pakistan, not Afghanistan. The US would work with Pakistan to take out Al Quaeda in the border regions. And the proof is that this is working, as Al Quaeda figures have been taken out with Pakistan's help. Counterinsurgency would be replaced by counter terrorism so the US doesn't get bogged down in support of a failing government. The fraud in the recent elections and increasing isolation and loss of support for the Karzai government, supported by unofficial evidence from the ground, make this a serious option, especially as President Obama knows the Karzai government does not merit support and presents a losing proposition. The second view is that of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton- Ike Shelton of Missouri on the Armed Services Committee and Leslie Gelb (see links) share this view- who said in an interview on PBS, "Well Al Quaeda's no longer in Afghanistan. If Afghanistan were taken over by the Taliban, I can't tell you how fast Al Quaeda would be back in Afghanistan." The problem with this view is that the US has only a limited presence in a large mountainous country with the difficult terrain that Afghanistan has, and its not American ground troops that have done the damage in taking out Al Quaeda, its mostly high tech drones. WIth a wider engagement and expanded US ground troops in support of a failing government, that is alleged to have corrupt and narcoltics connections, the popular support would dwindle to the point that the extra troops would not be seen as protecting the population- because how do you protect a people who simply don't care or are suspicious of you? The solution requires some sort of settlement with the Taliban, which guarantees that it not serve as a haven for Al Quaeda. Progress with schools and modernization would have to be, at least in the short run, be given upon the basis of the U.S. coming to terms with what it can and cannot accomplish at an acceptable cost, and the idea of vital interests not lying in Afghanistan but Pakistan. The missing elements in this puzzle would help this strategy, bringing together key countries in South Asia, India and Pakistan, to assume greater joint responsibilities and abandon the entire postindependence. approach to relations. The third view is that presented by Bruce Reidel, who led the Obama administration's strategy review of Afghaistan and Pakistan earlier this year, and is based on pragmatic considerations and the unofficial information on the ground. Reidel puts it this way: "A counterinsurgency can only work if you have a credible and legitimate Afghan partner, and thats in doubt now." And he goes on to say "part of the reason you are seeing a hesitancy to jump deeper into the pool is that thay are looking to see if they can make lemonade out of the lemons we got from the Afghan election." For a complete change in policy and focus Obama would have to admit that he now has different information, and he is willing to admit to have misread the situation during the first 6 months and during the campaign. That is a test of leadership, being able to change after looking at the reality of the situation and digesting it fully. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greenspan testifes before the House Oversight Committee headed by Congressman Henry Waxman (D., California). Congressmen read back quotations from Greenspan where he talked about the resilience and efficiency of American free markets and defended derivatives and complex financial instruments. Some referred to the comments he made saying that housing markets would not collapse and the worst may well be over. Almost by 10 to 1 the readers responding to a WSJ poll say Greenspan was responsible for easy money for most of the decade and his lack of the most elementary safeguards for the economy instead defending derivatives and complex financial instruments, and considering the bubble in house prices as not the Fed's concern. Many used expletives deleted or the words "clowns" or "illiterates" for Greenspan and associates at Treasury. A congresswoman from Minnesota asked pointed questions about state effforts to stop predatory lending that were nixed by the federal authorites under Greenspan and Treasury's watch. She thensuggested that they the stewards of the economy try pragmatism and commonsense for policy decisions. Describing the present crisis he seemed so out of touch that when asked about rising foreclosures and need to stabilize home prices, he still was trapped in his libertarian ideology and impulses. He said transfer payments should be tried instead as modifying the mortgages would not be good in the long run when markets return to normal. He said this crisis has still some months to go. In these observations he showed that he has still not grasped the full extent of the crisis, as a realistic assessment of the economy suggests that the economic downturn has not really hit in terms of unemployment and drops in consumption, which will hit in 2009 and 2010 and years beyond. He looked old and worn out showing every bit of his 81 years, which begs the question how could he have been chairman for 17 years till he was nearly 80, as he was still Fed chairman just 2 years ago. There are term limits for mayors, and for President, how is it that there are no term limits for Fed chairman? Should'nt the Clinton administration or the Bush administration have made a new appointment to get fresh blood, fresh thinking, just as corporations do. Wells Fargo chairman Kovacevich is supposed to retire, even though he has good skills for accomplishing the merger of Wachovia having done this for Norwest. Bloomberg is fighting the term limits to stay on for another term and will need a special vote. Doesn't senility hit the best of us, and isn't there an age when people should have to retire from these positions, long before they get close to 80. An assessment of Greenspan watching him over the years would show that he loved data and data analysis, and trusted data as almost carrying infallible weight. As most of the data he looked at was for the postwar expansion of the USA economy, he saw as he himself testified this week data that showed the economy with small setbacks to be sure but on a constant upward trend. The way down he said in response to a question the data looks completely different, with fear and lack of trust and other things making this pattern have no relationship whatsoever with the way up. Greenspan and the nation's misfortune maybe that for too long the country's political leaders trusted over two decades a man who did not have the healthy skepticism of data even when it appeared to reflect certainty, and did not have the healthy impulses for safety and safeguards that surpass all ideological thinking, and a respect for basic ethics and common sense that goes beyond everything and puts it above everything else. This is a misfortune because these are qualities required for good leadership especially leadership entrusted with such huge responsibilities which can never be taken lightly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Commerce Secretary, Wilbur Ross, has balanced the rhetoric of president Trump on trade in the NAFTA debate by saying the U.S. is looking for win-win solutions in trade relations with Mexico. At the WSJ CFO network Ross says the trade regime from the post war years is now an anachronism and does not work well especially for the U.S. Many experts agree that the trade framework from that period is problematic. It does not take into account, for instance say experts, the situation where a command economy such as China could help manufacturing industries with state policies, including currency policies. The rapid growth in China was different from the rapid growth in an earlier period of Japan, in terms of its impact say experts. The U.S was the dominant economy during the sixties, and the growth in Japan was not at the accelerated pace and of the magnitude that happened in China. As a result the impact on  some communities in the U.S. was much more intense in the last two decades, as documented by prominent trade studies, leading to the sense that trade did not work for these communities. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist magazine says the difficult process of Brexit is now being put by Theresa May into the hands of the pro-Brexit ministers, Liam Fox, David Davis and Boris Johnson. Just staffing the Department for Exiting the EU under Davis, and the Department for International Trade under Liam Fox is taking a lot of time. And the differences between Fox and Davis also figure into the time it will take to invoke Article 50. It says the points put forward by Brexiters that Britain could revert to WTO rules do not work so well in practice, and it takes years to negotiate new trade agreements with other countries. It sees many problems, and says it is no wonder that Theresa May has told the Brexiter ministers to come up with answers as they are the ones who have sold this idea to the country.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Trump administration sends an official notice to Congress that it intends to renegotiate the NAFTA treaty with Mexico and Canada. The new U.S. Trade Representative Mr. Lighthizer served as Deputy Trade Representative under president Reagan in 1983. He says the focus of the negotiation will to promote economic growth and jobs by making improvements to the treaty. The notice does not mention major modifications of the type that were hinted at by president Trump earlier. The leaders of Canada and Mexico had asked president Trump to renegotiate. Republicans in Congress and business in the U.S. favor improvements instead of the drastic changes. Mr. Lighthizer's approach is stated in his letter that said "NAFTA was negotiated 25 years ago, and while our economy and business has changed considerably in that period, NAFTA has not." New provisions will be needed said Lighthizer for intellectual property rights, state owned enterprises, labor and environmental areas, with effective enforcement.  Because of the rhetoric and language used in the election campaign, it is important to note that Lighthizer has in the past negotiated favorable terms for the U.S. steel industry to prevent dumping from overseas. His style is the opposite of the president. He has stated- "I am friendly when negotiating. I am not theatrical. The art of persuasion is knowing where the leverage is." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A WSJ/NBC News poll taken in Dec. 2015 after the San Bernardino terrorist attack on Donald Trump's proposed total ban on Muslims entering the country, shows 57% of the people surveyed opposed to it, and 25% supporting it. Among Republican primary voters 39% oppose it and 38% support it showing the Republican voters almost evenly divided on the issue, and the proposed ban not affecting Trump's standing with his supporters. About 56% of Republican voters see Trump in a positive light compared to 26% negatively, showing that Trump has strong support in the Republican party. The divergence in views sharpens when considering that half of Republican primary voters have an unfavorable view of Muslims while 79% of Democratic primary voters having a favorable view. In the country as a whole the poll shows about 60% have a favorable view of Muslims.

LyrArc Article Gist
Protests in Hannover, Germany, as U.S. president Obama visits the Hannover Trade Fair. Protesters oppose the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Treaty promoted by president Obama. A recent Bertelsmann Stiftung research institute poll shows larger rejection of the treaty in Germany than a mid-Feb. poll by German broadcaster ZDF showing about half of Germans opposed. Interviews with a dozen protesters show suspicion about large corporate interests, and fears that the talks are secretive, a sense that the interests of ordinary people would be neglected. Elections in the U.S. in 2016 have shown a surge in sentiment opposing trade agreements.