LyrArc Article Gist
Donald Trump's Style book would include things like, using a little hyperbole, exaggeration, like setting up a wall to stop immigration. It also includes attacks on opponents, the better with some publicity, good or bad, as his attacks on Carly Fiorina for looks, Jeb Bush for energy, and Megyn Kelly of Fox News show. Trump writes about this in his book written three decades ago- "The Art of the Deal." In the book he says that putting down the competition can help. And what about the deal itself? Its all for the joy of doing it, not much about what its about, or how it will all end up in helping people in their daily lives.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Secretary of State Tillerson calls Russia "incompetent" for letting Syria hold onto chemical weapons even after a deal to remove the weapons was made and implemented. Tillerson was also critical of Russian attempts to influence elections in France and Germany.

LyrArc Article Gist
France's Foreign Minister Ayrault says of Boris Johnson: "He lied a lot to the British. Now, he is the one with his back against the wall." He sees missing in Johnson the "clear, credible and reliable" person with whom he can negotiate. Ray Stegner, deputy chairman of Germay's Social Democrat Party says "May looks weaker after such a choice of personnel. Now he is negotiating Brexit. Enjoy the trip." In China he is seen as a celebrity not a serious person. Bildt, ZDF, see in this a part of British humor. Jurgen Hardt, foreign policy spokesman for Christian Democrats Party in Germany had a different take on Johnson- seeing this as an astute move because if the government one day comes to conclude that Brexit should not be completed then having Johnson on board to explain it to the people would guarantee support in her party and with the people of England. In her first speech May emphasized that she was a "Unionist." Her first important meeting was with Nicola Sturgeon of Scotland and made Scotland's agreement necessary before invoking Article 50. Her talk of "burning injustices" for the poor and the underprivileged also goes to address the root of the problems behind the Leave vote. By having Johnson on board she can focus on the issues that really matter and which were on the minds of people in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland- to ensure that the economic system works for all.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
At Stuyvesant, the most selective of New York public schools the student body is 74% Asian, 19% WHite, 3% Latino, and 1% African American. Mayor Blasio of New York is using the Discovery Program to limit the entry to the program which accounts for about 5% of the overall admissions to kids from schools that have a poverty rate of 60% or higher instead of to economically disadvantaged children in the city.  Two views are presented here. One that of the New York schools chancellor, Richard Carranza who says "I just don't buy the narrative that any one ethnic group owns admissions to these schools." Mayor Blasio of New York says that only 10% of Black and Latino students get offers from the specialized high schools even though they account for nearly 70% of the city's high school population. The other view is that the state is failing in its secondary schools system because New York state tests show only 47% of the city's third through eighth graders proficient in English and 43% in Math, with the number for Black and Latino students dropping to 34% for English and 25% for Math. This means about half or two thirds of New York state's school children cannot read proficiently and the numbers decline with socioeconomic conditions. Even Mayor Blasio is working at the fringes as the problem is deeper and needs to be fixed at another level than by tweaking which segment of the economically disadvantage children should have access to the best schools such as Stuyvesant.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With the theme of championing the interests of the people left out in the last 2 decades under both Bush and Obama, left out my technolgical changes and world trade trends, left out by the 2008 financial crisis and its aftermath of deep unemployment for older people especially white men, struggling economically, Hillary Clinton tells the Democratic convention, "I will carry all your voices and stories with me to the White House." She tells millions of Bernie supporters  that she has heard them loud and clear-  "your cause, is our cause." In this way Hillary Clinton sought to dispel any doubts about her in people's minds for not being forthright on questions related to a private email server and from earlier periods, and from overzealous fundraising. Telling people that on the things that really count and matter in people's lives, just as Bill Clinton did in his campaign at a similiar juncture- she will be there for them always, and always working to put their hearts up and centre, with her Methodist upbringing and her unmatched ability to work relentlessly in pursuit of worthy public goals. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions raised by Nicholas Kristof of the NYT on Russian hacking during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Kristof says the implausible or far fetched idea of foreign interference in U.S. elections is not as implausible as it may appear.

LyrArc Article Gist
Texas is becoming a swing state for 2024 The deep divisions in the Republican party in Texas with one faction supporting former Governor Rick Perry who was the longest serving Texas governor 2000-2014, and the Bush family and the other faction supporting Mr. Trump. Attorney General Ken Paxton who supports Mr. Trump faces impeachment by Republicans who support Perry-Bush. Texas is the home of Democrat Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ) who was John F. Kennedy's vice president and then president, and also of the 2 Bush Republican presidents George H. W. and George W. Bush. It is also a state that has swung to Republicans since 1976, but has a history of Democrats under LBJ.

LyrArc Article Gist
In his second part of the series on Capitalism and Globalization Schieritz says Trump's arguments have backing, and goes back to the studies done by David Autor of MIT on the adverse impact of free trade on communities across the U.S.. Lyrarc has covered this issue since 2006, and the reality is that this issue was brought up long before the Autor study gained prominence. On Nov. 12, 2010 Robert Lighthizer, Deputy Trade Representative under U.S. president Reagan wrote an op-ed in the NYT titled "Throwing Free Trade Overboard," that made a strident and strong case for what Trump says 5 years later, and from no less than a top trade official under Repubican Reagan.Trump comes late to this in 2015 when it was already amply clear what was happening. It is not so much Trump having discerned this, than others who should have paid attention, including Lew and leaders in both parties, and the business community,  who for too long ignored it. Or as Hilsenrath in a recent WSJ report says, simply said we have seen this before with Japan's entry into the American market, not realizing the speed and widespread impact of the changes in trade with China, that are unprecedented in history- evident just from the great speed of urbanization and manufacturing work force growth in China, policy rapidly impacting vulnerable communities across the U.S. The corrective course has to be credible which is why it has to come from a a reawakening among leaders such as May, Merkel and Clinton, who are keen students of change, and capable of designing and executing a corrective course of action, and winning the popular support and patience needed to stay the course which could run for most of the next decade. It would also provide leadership and show the way for societies in Brazil, China, India and other countries facing similar problems.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The situation for the day before the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 1, 2016, with voter turnout playing a key part in the election primary.

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Key donors to the Republican Party, the billionaires Charles and David Koch,  say they will conduct a grass roots campaign against the Trump administration's use of tariffs. Charles Koch is 82, and David Koch is 78 years old. The Koch brothers groups launching the campaign are - Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, Americans for Prosperity, and the LIBRE Initiative. David Koch ran in 1980 as vice presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party. Both brothers are free trade advocates.

LyrArc Article Gist
Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University economist, author of the well researched book on the 2008 financial crisis, "This Time Is Different," gives his thoughts on the economic prospects for the U.S under the new Trump administration. He says 4% GDP growth and 3% inflation is possible temporarily for a while with stimulus policies, less regulation, and increased private investment. After 8 years of not investing in much needed infrastructure because of concerns about the deficit, the timing is right for such investments, especially as the economic effects of the crisis of 2008 gradually fade.  This is about taking advantage of ultra low interest rates to invest in infrastructure. He says it helps that Trump policies are pro-business. He sees drawbacks as the stimulus program adds a 25% increase with extra debt, adding $5 trillion over 10 years, but adds that for many years Nobel prize winning economist Krugman and others have said that there is good reason to increase borrowing to invest, and this is now being tried. Inflation remains an uncertainty- if there are large quantities of underutilized and unemployed resources it would raise prices less than its effect to increase output. The reverse would apply if the U.S. economy is closer to full capacity. One factor that would help- increasing confidence for business and increasing investment. Against this what he calls optimistic view or spin, is the idea of mistakes under a Trump administration, errors made and a degree of incompetence which he says is a real possibility. Overall his view is that some risks are appropriate now, and from his deep study of financial crises sees the slow growth of the last 8 years a result of a financial crisis that now begins to fade, creating the possibility of higher growth under prudent policies.  ...