World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Indian prime minister Modi shown in a meeting together with Biden of the US, Fumio Kishida of Japan and Albanese of Australia at the Izumi Gallery in Tokyo during the announcement of the joint efforts for launching and promoting the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity. The IPEF led by the US will have four pillars of trade and supply chain resiliency, clean energy and climate change action, taxes to promote investment in infrastructure, and good governance. Seven of 10 members of ASEAN have joined including Indonesia. India is a key partner of US and Japan for the new IPEF economic alliance. Prime Minister Modi of India says about IPEF- "India will work together with its IPEF partners to build an inclusive and flexible Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. I believe that resilient supply chains must be based on three pillar foundation of trust, transparency and timeliness, and I am sure that this framework will make these pillars strong and lead to prosperity, peace and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region." Attracting large investments in India and other reliable partners in a new supply chain that shifts out of China are part of the Biden plan working together with Japan and South Korea. Investments directly into the US are also part of the same plan. Gina Raimondo US Commerce Minister says- "I would say, especially as businesses are beginning to increasingly look for alternatives to China, the countries in the Indo-Pacific Framework will be more reliable partners for US businesses." US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan says the IPEF is intended to boost US manufacturing. By boosting US manufacturing and technological advancement with investments inside the US that directly benefit American workers and families the IPEF will serve the US and the free world in ways that will shape the coming decades to 2030 and 2040. With investments in the US will come investments in India as a reliable manufacturing partner to replace China by 2030 is envisioned by Jake Sullivan and president Biden. ...
Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this look at China's One Belt One Road Inititative, DW.com analyst Siegfried Wolf is critical of the way it was put together. It has no institutional structure, and is mostly based on bilateral not multilateral arrangement, and lacks transparency. He says its will complicate geopolitics in the region. This is already evident with Japanese foreign minister Kono calling for Japan, Australia, India and the U.S. to come up with an alternative to OBOR. Wolf says the EU has concerns about corruption, exclusion of regions inside countries such as Pakistan in economic arrangements, and seeks free trade guarantees. His biggest criticism of the Silk Road Initiative is that being based on Chinese loans it will pose a severe challenge in terms of debt buildup for weaker economies. This was already evident with the effort to convert part of about $6 billion in loans to Sri Lanka, through a $1.12 billion lease to China of the port of Hambantota. Wolf says many of the projects inside OBOR were already planned before it was setup, and now put under OBOR as part of president Jinping's initiative.  ...
South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in The South China Morning Post in Hong Kong, gives insights into the Chinese position in trade war with the U.S.  China has its own internal groups which support China being able to take a leadership role in world affairs. Xi Jinping made giving China a prominent role in the world a feature of his presidency. China  has this internal audience and its own sense that China's resurgence was won with hard work and cooperation, plus dedication of the Chinese people. In the past Japan and South Korea also used state subsidized industries, and subsidies to gain leadership in key business sectors involving high technology. China would see this state subsidies model as its own model of development. From this standpoint the U.S. demands on subsidies as unfair competition could be seen as changing a key part of its economic model.  Asking China to put everything in writing and show tangible proof of enforcement as the U.S. insisted in talks, was too much for the Chinese side. China said trust us to do this, and lift the tariffs based on our verbal assurances. The U.S. having seen decades of no progress on this point, wanted tangible proof before tariffs were lifted. Added to the demands on subsidies were the demands for no more of what the U.S. calls stealing of U.S. technology through forced transfer of technology by U.S. firms as a condition to operate in Chinese markets. With the U.S. lagging in 5G technology and Huawei ahead the issue resonates on the U.S. side. Add to this Mr. Trump's key voter base includes the former Democratic party supporting workers who have shifted to him because of trade agreements and policies of Clinton and Obama that hurt American workers through seemingly endless closure of manufacturing plants from Chinese competition.   ...
South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The South China Morning Post, SCMP, looks at China at the 40th year of the great economic experiment  that changed China. This started with the Deng reforms by the then Chinese leader that opened up the economy in 1978. As this report points out in 1978 Deng Xiaoping's efforts at loosening the state control of the economy and business was actually a way to get out from the effects of the Cultural Revolution and prevent another Cultural Revolution. Deng was removed from office during the Cultural Revolution. Instead of unquestioned acceptance of Mao the new criterion was "Practice is the Sole Criterion for Testing Truth." In economic and business matters this was followed so that if it worked then the experiment was expanded, gradually giving life to the Chinese model of state capitalism, economic expansion under the state with the state supporting state corporations that operate in a market economy.  This means the Communist Party was to continue its control but with experimentation away from the planned economy in the coastal provinces of Guangdong and Fujian, and then into Shanghai. Experts close to Jiang Zemin, the next leader after Deng, say China's Communist state would not have survived without the changes started by premier Deng. Farmers still did not own the land but they were free to plant and own the yields for their efforts.  Deng established the Three Benefits Principle in 1992 trip to Guangdong, whatever helped increase productivity, increased the strength of the country and improved living standards was good, you did not judge it by whether it was socialist or capitalist. Jiang Zemin's work was to follow Deng's ideas and help negotiate the entry into World Trade Organization and set up the new economic regulations. Capitalists were allowed to join the Communist Party for the first time. State and local government ownership of land was turned into an advantage as this provided one of the critical inputs in terms of land for setting up new factories, with capital coming from savings, and other inputs of technology and investment coming from the U.S. after entry into the WTO brought American and European companies to China. A steady supply of labor poured in from the countryside and urbanization became a goal of Chinese development policies. Today India and other countries in Africa, Latin America, can look at the Chinese experience and effort and look for ways to modernize, urbanize and improve living standards, productivity and strength of their economy. One key is to experiment and look for what works that can then be expanded to other locations, and build on the advantages that may open up as the experiment makes progress. Following entry into WTO China was able to take advantage of overseas markets and build an edge in manufacturing, something that was not evident even in 1992.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even though U.S. president Trump has singled out countries such as Mexico, South Korea and China for trade practices, the U.S. today faces stronger competition in trade from Germany. The trade surplus with Germany for 2016 was $297 billion for Germany compared to $245 billion for China, according to Ifo economic institute. China's trade surplus according to the World Bank was down from 10% of gross domestic product or GDP in 2007 to 3% in 2016, while Germany's has gone up to 8.5%. The Chinese currency is seen as not being undervalued by some experts, while the euro has lost a quarter of its value in the last 3 years, giving Geman exporters an edge. The U.S. also competes with Germany in nine of the 10 export categories such as machinery and electronic equipment, according to the Peterson Institute. Then why is the focus under U.S. president Trump not including Germany? One reason is that China's products have put a downward pressure on U.S. manufacturing wages, and the the speed with the Chinese manufacturing has grown in certain industries. Germany has very few of the manufacturing subsidies that China provides to its industries. And the depreciation in the euro is not favored by the German government as it opposes the policies of the European Central Bank. Germany also has a higher propensity to save about 10% of GDP compared to about 3% for the U.S., according to OECD. As a result Germany is accumulating foreign assets at a faster rate than any other nation, while the U.S. is borrowing capital from overseas. Ways to change this are minimum wage regulations introduced by the government, but larger measures such as increasing government investment in the economy are not supported as the country prepares for the future with an aging population.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The difficulties the new U.S. Treasury Secretary faces as she tries to navigate the politics in Congress and the tries to reach out to moderates and progressives within the Democratic party. All have different views on spending, and where stimulus money should go in a second stimulus. Her long experience with the Fed is seen as not preparing her for the political role of evaluating different opinions that are described by some experts as ten times more political than anything going on in Fed meetings. As a student of Prof. Tobin Yellen sees government intervention as needed in times of economic crises. Twice in ten years the U.S. and the rest of the world has been struck by economic crises- the bank leveraging behaviours and poor lending practices that induced the 2009 financial crisis and in 2020 the coronavirus pandemic. Lessons learned Yellen says about the 2009 recession are that not enough stimulus was provided after the initial stimulus to get a strong enough recovery. Democrats are eager to spend over $2 trillion in a second stimulus. Republicans much less so particularly with a new president. Even under Mr. Trump spending was set at under $700 billion by Republicans for a second stimulus. Another economic crises is one of the U.S. strategic economic position in the world. On this issue of trade Yellen's husband George Akerloff, also a economist is more skeptical of the value of free trade. The failure of the World Trade Organization to ensure a level playing field as China subsidized key industries, and the loss of America's manufacturing advantage over three decades is now the defining issue in American politics. It takes the shape of manufacturing communities that were once a part of Democratic party support shifting away after devastated local economies from the loss of manufacturing plants to China. It takes the shape of a Republican party that is committed to bring back American manufacturing, and a Democratic party that under Biden is seeking the same result. How much each party will invest in terms of making things happen to get this done is one of the issues facing all parties, Congress, the administration, Ms. Yellen, and the new president. Economics does not have the answers. As economists could not have predicted the increase in women participation in the workforce, the drop in Black and Hispanic unemployment rates under the Trump administration. The lack of moral will to get trade to work for the American worker was more of an issue under Democratic and Republican administrations for the last 2 decades, so that issues of growing inequality were never better addressed by any party. It depended more on focus of the president elected to help American workers, and to avoid the cost and distraction of foreign wars when American interests could be protected in other ways. Yellen was not able to make a difference at the Fed because of these reasons and low interest rates have both helped and hurt the middle class, as low interest rates meant Americans were less able to accumulate savings for retirement since 2000. Determination and action counts for more than ideology or policy is the lesson learned in building strong economies and manufacturing.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How Ohio which lost quarter million jobs since 2005 and is skeptical of free trade policies that cost jobs at home is being pandered to by the Clinton and Obama campaigns in primaries March 4, 2008, before a Presidential contest. Criticism of Nafta by both candidiates and a call for 27.5% tariff on Chinese imports as action against China for manipulating exchange rates. The working class white male, steel worker or factory worker is becoming important part of the determiners of this election campaign for primaries and for President. See his concens in the link in the WSJ. One thing is for sure a tariff on Chinese goods would upset a delicate trade balance that has existed for the last 2 decades. Its also ironic as China is finally shifting policy that will make Chinese goods more expensive in the USA, which is already apparent in apparel on American store shelves. And exchange rates are gradually shifting to add to price pressures inside the USA. Whats more the Fed finds it more difficult to raise rates while inflation picks up so a tariff would add to inflationary pressures and lower consumption in the US. See the links on this under China inflation policies. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The boost to investor perceptions for India with Modi's election, and to Indonesia with Widodo's election are major changes in the second half of 2014. The first half saw the dented confidence in Argentina, Venezuela, Turkey and South Africa. To this can be added Russia with Putin's response in Ukraine and western sanctions. China with Jinping's response to pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong for restoration of the pledge of free elections by 2017, appears to be losing investor confidence, especially with investors seeing this as adopting the Putin Way. This is happening with a gradual movement towards restoration of trade relations with Iran.
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip points out in this WSJ analysis that the new NAFTA after negotiations and warnings from Mr. Trump to scrap NAFTA, is not very different from the old NAFTA. Mexico made concessions on auto exports and labor rights, wages. Canada made concessions for the dairy industry. Yet the combined influence of business interests, Canada's lobbying in U.S. Congress and state governments, and the restraint shown by Trump's own advisers prevailed in limiting Mr. Trump's tendencies to go for a "America first" agenda. It shows, says Ip, that there is resilience in the existing order.  It also shows what future trade negotiations with the European Union and Japan over steel and autos could look like. President Trump will continue to face resistance within from his advisers and from exporters, business, Congress, on following an exclusively "America First" agenda. President Trump will need to extol NAFTA in its current version the USMCA, U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement, to get it through the U.S. Congress in 2019.   Mexico's main concessions on autos were to agree to potential tariffs if exports exceed 2.6 million vehicles.  This keeps Mexico's status as a major auto export hub intact. Auto experts say VW and Mazda may simply pay the tariff of 2.5% for lower priced models assembled in Mexico that do not qualify for duty free entry instead of shifting production to the U.S. Current shipments from Mexico are not affected as U.S. demand is weak. Labor rights and higher wages in Mexico's auto industry are a win-win for Mexico and the U.S.. They are supported by the socialist administration of newly elected Mexican president Obrador. Canada's main concession was to expand U.S. access to Canada's protected dairy industry, with Canada already prepared to make the concession. Mr. Trump had also to consider the possibility that excluding Canada from the USMCA would have not passed Congress, and face even more resistance in a Democratic controlled Congress after 2019 elections.  The support Canada has received in Congress does not extend to China, which gets much less support in Congress, leading to higher uncertainty in the negotiations with China and possibly different outcome with the size of the trade imbalance of $1 billion a day factored in.   ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Washington Post's Fred Hiatt interviews Seiji Maehara, Japan's Foreign Minister. Hiatt says Maehara is committed to easing immigration and increasing tourism and student exchanges. A new program of child allowances is designed to reverse population decline. Prime Minister Kan has proposed closing the deficit by raising the consumption tax. What struck Hiatt most from the interview was the emphasis on the US-Japan partnership and shared values of democracy and open trade, and the sense of a shared disillusionment with China.
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With the decline of its hardware business making iPhones Apple is looking at other fields. It is launching cheap online TV subscriptions in streaming wars in competition with Netflix and others. Apple is launching a new TV streaming service Apple TV+ in 100 countries for 4.99 British pounds a month undercutting Netflix's price of 5.99 pounds. The new service will be started November 1, 2019. Disney plans a streaming service for 7 pounds a month starting November 12. This service is alongside iPhone 11 launch and anew iPad, a new iWatch. Buy any new Apple device and you get a 1 year streaming service free.  Sales of iPhones fell 14% in the April to June 2019 quarter to 39 million units. Samsung's business is growing by 4% to 75 million units and Huawei by 16% to 58 million units. Apple sees the need to increases its services business with a target of $50 billion in 2020. Apple sees itself more as a media and cloud services company as it makes this change. In markets such as India Apple's growth is limited by its failure to lower prices on new iPhones. In China it faces strong competition from Huawei. The trade tensions are increasing the strength of Chinese brands in the Chinese market. The market in U.S. and Europe is saturated after years of expansion. New iPhone models are costly and bring peripheral advantages such as more and better cameras and features such as screens that are not breakable- for the iPhone 11- not dimensions that are critical for making a costly purchase. After years of growth tech companies such as Apple, Google, Alibaba, Amazon are reaching a point where incremental growth is not what it used to be and most of the rapid growth behind them. Trade tensions are also limiting the outlook in the Chinese market, and pricing remains a major factor in the Indian market. Western markets are saturated. There are fewer and fewer substantial new ideas from these tech companies. ...
FRANCE 24 Original article ›
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. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Xi Jinping, president of China says at the Davos Forum that world leaders should "join hands and rise to the challenge" from protectionism coming from the new U.S. administration. He called on world leaders to support the Paris climate accords- "to stick to it instead of walking away from it."

WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Trump administration's early proposal for NAFTA moves away from campaign pledges to completely renegotiate the treaty, instead taking the approach of working to improve the U.S. trade position in relation to Mexico and Canada. It includes seven objectives for tougher rules for labor and the environment favored by Democrats in Congress, and it also has support from Republicans with its effort to update NAFTA for changes in technology and in other areas since the accord was signed during the Clinton administration. The area in which U.S. and Mexican business are wary is one in which the Trump administration still seeks to keep the option of imposing protective tariffs, and a border-adjusted tax to level playing field for differences in taxes, as well as other measures to protect American jobs and interests. Because any renegotiated NAFTA also has to pass both houses of Congress this proposal took into account the different constituencies and interests for this issue. Robert Lighthizer, trade representative under president Reagan is likely to become the next U.S. Trade Representative and lead negotiator. We first profiled Lighthizer in a group in Lyrarc for pointing to the need for a level playing field in trade. As early as 2010 Lighthizer argued in op-ed articles that globalization and trade practices should ensure a level playing field for the U.S., and was covered in Lyrarc. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's Economy minister Zypries warned that Germany would take legal action by taking the case to the World Trade Organization if president Trump imposes tariffs above that allowed by WTO rules. She said this before a meeting at the White House between president Trump and Chancellor Merkel. The U.S. is Germany's largest export market with 107 billion in imports and the U.S. exports 58 billion euros of products to the U.S. Zypries accepted that the large trade surplus of Germany was "a problem," but that America "needs our machines and industrial plants" for the time being. Germany has insisted that it does not provide unfair advantages to its companies, and that German companies were simply more competitive. Trump has focussed largely on China for anti-competitive practices, though he mentioned BMW by name during the campaign. In the last 2 years the euro has depreciated significantly against the dollar giving German companies competitive advantage, largely as a result of the ECB- in opposition to German economic policy- trying to stimulate the economy of other southern eurozone countries such as Spain, Italy and France. ...
WSJ Original article ›
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Guardian's Greenhouse says the UAW sees the tariff action with 25% tariff on cars imported into the US starting April 2 2025, as a positive step.  Shawn Fain of the UAW who had the support of president Biden during his term 2020-2024 says DJT's actions match those taken by Biden to help working class Americans and the middle class. Supporting the president “for stepping up to end the free trade disaster that has devastated working-class communities for decades”. “Ending the race to the bottom in the auto industry starts with fixing our broken trade deals, and the Trump administration has made history with today’s actions.” Greenhouse is concerned that the way it is being implemented can create problems with tariffs on one day and off the next. The reason for the on again off again action was to give Mexico, Canada, and China time to respond with action they have not taken on fentanyl flows into the US, and Mexico time to address migrant trafficking across its borders. The US International Trade Commission study in 2024 on the 25% tariff on US auto imports cited by BBC shows it would reduce imports by 75%, increase prices by a modest 5%, and increase revenues of auto makers in the US by 5%. Figures such as prices going up by $6000 may apply to BMW's that are imported from Germany and carry high price tags for a very small very affluent customer group unrepresentative of the US automobile market. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The influence of business executives who helped shape president Trump's views on Mexico, China, Export Import Bank, and other issues is covered by Stokols and Bender of WSJ. On Mexico the departure of Mike Flynn helped moderate views, Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary also provided a moderating influence. The plans are now to change NAFTA but not entirely redo the agreement. On the Export Import Bank the views of Boeing CEO Muilenburg, who explained to Trump why the Bank supported U.S. exports and how other countries had similar banks, led to the president filling the bank vacancies. On China the influence of NEC head, Gary Cohn, former president of Goldman Sachs, and other business executives, led to a less confrontational position. The president once called NATO obsolete during the campaign but he met this week with NATO secretary general Stoltenberg this week and expressed strong support for NATO after rising tensions with Russia.

WSJ Original article ›
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This is an interview with Columbia University economic historian Adam Tooze about the international trade and economic issues brought about by globalization. The rapid emergence of China in manufacturing and overcapacity in steel has led to action on steel tariffs by president Trump. Tooze is typical of opinion that sees action by Trump not as limited action to level the playing field  as proposed by Trade Representative for the U.S., Robert Lighthizer, but as reckless move on trade.  Lyrarc.com shows articles from the WSJ and NYT showing how opinion got to this point in the U.S., on Robert Lighthizer's views that the U.S. was not facing a level playing field, and  on how trade has hurt communities across the U.S. a long distance away from Silicon Valley. President Trump's views reflect a different perspective that says the U.S. has to balance the favorable situation obtained by China and the European Union through moves of its own to protect U.S. interests. Political commentary that the U.S. was starting a trade war is not supported by the facts showing China's response as muted and a willingness by China to negotiate a balanced trading relationship as its trade surplus with the U.S. continues to grow. The trade surplus is so large that the Trump moves do not tell the real story. They are likely to be overshadowed by the increasing value of the U.S. dollar leading to a continued favorable situation for Chinese exports and a larger trade surplus in 2018, regardless of Mr. Trump's action.  Trump's moves are more significant in other areas- limiting China's access to advanced technologies, with the European Union also taking the same action. This is now the new field of competition for the major world economies. ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us