LyrArc Article Gist
No less than the Editorial Board of the NYT says  Democrats have their heads in the sand when it comes to reflecting honestly about transgender -with the Cass Commission of Britain's NHS advising serious caution- and social issues. Lack of acceptance about the need for strong action on issues of trade that have hurt ordinary Americans with the destruction of manufacturing and the middle class. Some of this was done with Biden taking a stand on trade by keeping the DJT tariffs on China, and supporting US manufacturing. But this was not enough- stronger action was needed especially with strong tariffs action as the last resort needed to get Canada, Mexico and China to stop fentanyl flows to the US in 2025 and protect the middle and working class in the US in their neighborhoods.  Yet on immigration the NYT does not come flat out and say that opening up the border was the single biggest error of the Biden administration. And a failure to talk openly to the American people in a fireside chat reminiscent of FDR about Venezuela and Mexico. Part of the reason was a misconception about American power when it could be used to good purposes and has been in history. The Monroe doctrine of the 1820's asserted American right to prevent colonial powers returning to the American continent north and south. This was a good idea and helped this continent develop freely and independently. The US has a right to prevent migrant trafficking and fentanyl flows in its backyard in the American continent, including taking economic action, when it causes serious disruption leading to 7 million refugees and millions of migrants crossing borders. It also has a right to create an even playing field for trade, that not DJT alone but advisers with great experience, Robert Lighthizer, Deputy Trade Representative under Reagan- who negotiated with 1980's Japan on the same grounds as we do with China today- strongly advise the president to do.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Even China has not campaigned the way Canada, Mexico and British, American media have against DJT Tariffs because China knows it is basically about getting an even playing field when it is the only country with $1 trillion in trade in its favor in 2024, 12 times the Japanese high of $82 billion trade surplus in 2007. But why should China campaign when the American and British, German media are going to do the job for China? A simple quiz to K-12 would ask school children when is the last time a country has a $1 trillion trade surplus? Answer: Never. Greg Ip has written a few years back that the devastation of China outshoring of American factories and jobs was unlike the 1980's Japan trade invasion because of first China's size, second by the speed with which it happened at 10-14% Chinese GDP growth. There is a third Japan was an ally needing US for security and backed down, China's case is different it is challenging the US for control of the world economy and will fight this one over the long haul. Greg Ip of WSJ on the 53 countries asking to negotiate US Liberation Day April 2, 2025 Tariffs. These countries include Allies of the US in full support asking to negotiate Israel, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India Allies of the US in partial support asking to negotiate Britain Allies of the US not in full support asking to negotiate Germany, France Allies of the US in the past campaigning against the US, asking to negotiate Canada, Mexico Not Allies of the US, not in full support, not campaigning against the US China A look at his list tells one only one thing, mostly all trading partners except for the $146 billion exports of the US which represents exports to China are the exports that are at risk if things don't work out on tariffs. This is what the media today WSJ added this last week to the NYT, Wash. Post and the BBC, Guardian of UK, German media will not tell the reader.  The DJT Tariffs and Tariff negotiations are Lighthizer Tariff negotiations which won the fight with Japan in the 1980's over unfair trade and gaining a level playing field. Lighthizer as Deputy US Trade Representative conducted the tough negotiations with Japan. He was USTR in 2016-2020 and his Deputy Jamieson is now USTR in 2025       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US Trade Representative Lighthizer in the Report on China's Entry into WTO sees this as a mistake in the policy of president Clinton. Clinton has said that was a mistake. David Sacks raised this issue in a podcast with Larry Summers, an economist who was deputy to Robert Rubin and Deputy Treasury Secretary, then Treasury Secretary succeeding Rubin in 1999. Clinton on the advice of Rubin and Summers set up the framework for China to join the World Trade Organization without the safeguards and the setup that would prevent it using state capitalism and subisidies to build its own economy with exports, to ally with American corporations to support the outshoring of almost the entire industrial base of the US. Shocking as it sounds this has happened, had happened by 2016, when Donald Trump with the advice of USTR Lighthizer took the first steps to reverse this with Tariff policy, which was supported by president Biden, and continues in its new phase under DJT in 2025. Rubin and Summers had supported deregulation of financial markets and removal of the Glass Steagall Act by 1999. This was to led to the financial crisis of 2009 that was to be one of three body blows to the American working and middle class. The others China entering WTO without safeguards that led to deindustrializing US and loss of its manufacturing base, loss of 5 million jobs, tens of thousands of factories. And the third was the pandemic. “ . . .it seems clear that the United States erred in supporting China’s entry into the WTO on terms that have proven to be ineffective in securing China’s embrace of an open, market-oriented trade regime” 2017 USTR Report to Congress on China’s WTO ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's new prime minister Li Keqiang makes his first foreign trip with a trade delegation for talks with Indian representatives and business leaders, showing the importance he places on India. India offers China's companies access to large opportunties in infrastructure development, and China can benefit from India in the area of information technology and pharmaceuticals. Trade is envisioned as expanding from $70 billion in 2012 to $100 billion by 2015, and expanding rapidly as the two economies grow. Economic contacts also would provide an anchor for future relations as China faces difficulties in its relations with Japan, and S. E. Asian countries, and a U.S. wary of China's capabilities. This was pointed out in the joint statement. Li Keqiang also emphasized this in an editorial page article in India's daily newspaper, the Hindu, saying India and China have "to work hand in hand," to promote Asia as "an anchor for world peace." A peaceful India-China trade and economic relationship opens the way for investment and participation in development by China alongside Japan, Germany, France, UK and the U.S. in India, as the next major source for global economic growth. This also serves to defuse Asian tensions as both economies grow, and increased contacts between cities in India and China with the twining of cities program launched in the meetings. India can use China's capabilities in infrastructure development, the two countries share the need for information sharing on lowcost solutions in healthcare, in managing urbanization, and solutions for clean water in rural areas, and use of IT solutions in development, where much remains to be accomplished through cooperation. Some of these themes are the focus of Li Keqiang in his efforts for urbanization in China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
S. Korea and the U.S. propose limiting trade imbalances to 4% of each country's GDP by 2015. S. Korea is the host of the current G-20 meeting. Germany and Japan oppose this move, arguing that their governments cannot engineer such outcomes, as it was determined by economic activity in the private sector. Japan's representative, Finance Minister Yoshihiko Noda, said that while he was dubious about the idea of setting strict numerical goals, it would be acceptable to use them as reference numbers. Germany has traditionally opposed the idea. Germany wants to be counted as part of the European Union, rather than as a single nation, in any such reference goal. China has not commented on the target. S. Korea has presented the idea as a way to use more than currency exchange rates to achieve a global rebalancing. And People's Bank of China Deputy Gov. Yi Gang said Oct 10, that China is planning policies that could result in its surplus falling below 4% of GDP in 3 to 5 years, from about 5.8% in 2009....

LyrArc Article Gist
Munich Security Conference is being organized by Christoph Heusgen, the conference chair, who was an adviser to Angela Merkel and previous German  Representative at the United Nations. It will be held Feb 14-16 at the Bayerischer Hof hotel in Munich. JD Vance will be attending for the US with alarge delegation including Keith Kellogg US DJT envoy to Ukraine and Zelensky of Ukraine. German federal elections are on Feb. 23, 2025 with CDU's Merz holding a lead. Pete Hegseth Defense Secretary is not attending the conference. Hegseth has expressed views skeptical about Ukraine. Mark Rutte, the former Dutch PM is attending as Secretary General of NATO. The Munich Security Conference Report cites DJT and says- "Indeed, the notion of 'resource scarcity' has become a central premise of Republican foreign policy thinking." Germany barely spends 2% on defense. DJT wants to see 5%. DJT's comments are published in the Munich Security Report- "We were being ripped off by European nations both on trade and on NATO." "If you don't pay, we're not going to protect you." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Comments on X that cause difficulty for DJT chief of staff Susie Wiles to keep a clear narrative and the loss in the Wisconsin SC election are leading to a sense that Elon Musk could be a political liability. DJT focus is on the midterms and keeping the majority in the House, which is also why Elise Stefanik was asked to not accept the job of UN Representative and remain in the US Congress. The immediate focus is on tackling the Tariffs Liberation Day action April 2, 2025 so that followup negotiations with about 50 countries including major ones with Japan, Taiwan, Israel, Britain followed by European Union, South Korea and other nations. This would reassure markets as country after country is developing a new trade relationship that respects US manufacturing goals. China could then be tackled as a special case with America limited to loss of $146 billion in energy and grain sales which would be diverted to Europe's energy needs and farmers could be given a $50-100 billion support package. China would then have to find a way to preserve its $1 trillion surplus without the American market  which would require it to find other markets, and create a domestic market, if it chose not to negotiate and accept American manufacturing goals. ...

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.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
No less than a report by Harry Truman's Commission on Migratory Labor in 1951 says-  Migratory labor caused low wages in the Southwest and traced social ills to illegal immigration: “The magnitude … has reached entirely new levels in the past 7 years.… In its newly achieved proportions, it is virtually an invasion,” the report says. What one sees from this archive of the US Congress is that there ebbs and flows back and forth on migration across the southern border. The trade unions and even Harry Truman's Commission come out for restricting migration depending on this ebb and flow. Remember that Asian immigration is flatly opposed from 1910 to 1950. twenties - open to meet farm labor needs, 40% of US vegetables grown in the southwest. thirties - with the Great Depression a Hoover deportation effort forties- welcoming immigrants to meet war needs under Franklin Roosevelt fifties- under both Truman and EIsenhower the welcome ends and apart from the bracero program for agriculture, the Eisenhower administration conducts Operation Wetback. The House of Representatives Archives show the history of Hispanics in the southwest and immigration from Mexico in the period of the 1930's to the 1950's. One sees the effects of the Depression and Labor's AFL CIO and trade unions favoring limits on immigration from Mexico because of the difficulties American citizens were having finding jobs during the 1929-1934 period. Herbert Hoover moved illegal immigrants back to Mexico in the first program at a time when there were strict limits to Asians emigrating to the US. For much of the twenties the border was left open to meet the needs of the southwest farms for Mexican labor. Then came the war when Mexican Americans joined the war effort in great numbers. After the war the difficulty of finding jobs for troops returning to the US created new pressures to limit immigration. Ike setup Operation wetback to deport about 1 million migrants.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Gloomy spirits after Portman shifts to OMB Director and Susan Schwab takes over as Trade Representative. Doha Round stuck over negotiating points between Brazil, India and the EU and US over tariff reduction for agricultural exports from developing countries.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump pushes forward with a deal with Mexico so that it can be signed before the new Mexican administration of Lopez Obrador takes over. This means leaving Canada out and having a separate deal with Canada later on. Mr. Trump sees negative connotations in the term NAFTA and would like to call it the "United States - Mexico Trade Agreement." Terms for Canada to join the agreement would be tougher and the pressure on Canada to strike a separate deal was increased with Mr. Trump saying there could be tariffs on imported Canadian made cars. Mexico has accepted revisions to NAFTA that make it harder for Mexico to challenge U.S. trade penalties. Mr. Trump's negotiating position is based on his conviction that the eagerness of other nations to sell in the U.S. market gives the U.S. a lot of clout. Mr. Trump also faces pressure from within the Republican Party to show results not just by imposing tariffs and playing hardball on trade but to come up with new trade deals. Steps taken by Mr. Trump were to impose tariffs of 25% on imports of aluminium and steel, and 25% tariffs on a list of imports from China including solar panels. President Trump hopes to get support from Democrats by including provisions that support trade unions in Mexico and higher wages in Mexico. The provisions also require higher wage labor in the U.S. to build the required U.S. content and are designed to support American jobs and wages in the auto industry.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. trade agreement with Mexico is for 16 years, to provide business with a stable rules environment to operate in. It includes a clause for review after 6 years. The content made in the U.S. is increased to 70% from 62.5%. This has to be made by workers earning at least $16  an hour. Aluminium and steel going into the cars has to come from the U.S. helping push U.S. steel plant capacity utilization to 80%. Labor collective bargaining is strengthened in Mexico through new provisions, a provision supported by new Mexican socialist president Obrador. Free trade in agricultural products is maintained. $4.7 billion was added in help to U.S. farmers as aid for the effects of China's tariff retaliation. New rules are set for textiles, chemicals, and steel intensive products that set requirements to qualify for tariff free import into the U.S. This is intended to help bring more jobs and investment in these industries in the U.S.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump escalates the trade battle with China by increasing tariffs on $200 billion Chinese goods from 10% to 25%. The U.S. says China went back on its commitments in a 150 page agreement at the 11th hour or last minute, by deleting these commitments in all 7 chapters of this agreement. These are firm commitments sought by the U.S. in a number of areas of deep concern to the U.S. and the U.S. Trade Representative Mr. Lighthizer had already conveyed the determination of the U.S. to not relent on this. In the past China was seen to go back on its commitments and the U.S. side now wanted to ensure promises were kept. The U.S. concerns cover- theft of intellectual property and trade secrets, forced technology transfers, competition policy, access to financial services and currency manipulation.  The situation has been building up fro a decade with the Trump campaign honing in on this issue of China stealing U.S. jobs, and factory closures in the U.S., because of unfair trading practices. It also led to Mr. Trump's winning election campaign in the American midwestern states. With China seen as gaining an unfair technological advantage over the U.S., most recently over 5G telecom networks, the U.S. is not likely to back down. The U.S. is less dependent on trade with China. China is more dependent on the U.S. and a lot of manufacturing jobs in China are affected by the U.S. tariffs. This is why president Trump has decided to take a strong stand, including putting on tariffs on and additional $300 billion of Chinese goods.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Progressive caucus in the US House of Representatives led by Pramila Jaypal, a first time Indian American Congresswoman defeats an attempt by Josh Gottheimer of the Problem Solvers caucus to separate much of the president Biden's agenda in health, education and social policy and risk it being defeated by Senators Manchin and Sinema in the US Senate. Without the efforts on child care, education and health, climate change and social services part of the Biden Workers and Families Plan much of the Biden agenda would remain unfinished and Democratic party promises not kept. This also means that Manchin a Senator from West Virginia with a population of 1.8 million and Arizona with a population of 7.2 million, both conservative leaning Democrats could sink the entire agenda of president Biden to support American families and workers for a population of 331 million people. That two states with a population of less than 3% of the American population could sink the entire agenda of president Biden shows how fragile a situation has been created within the Democratic party to support workers and families even during the pandemic following the leadership of Carter, Clinton, and Obama Ms. Jaypal, a three term Congresswoman from Seattle, Washington state, was first elected in 2016 with an endorsement from Bernie Sanders who was the Democratic Party's leading candidate for president till the late stages of the 2020 US presidential primaries. Bernie Sanders says of Jaypal- "I think she is doing an extraordinary job. And I think the Progressive Caucus is doing an extraordinary job." Sanders founded the Progressive caucus after getting elected to the Senate from Vermont 30 years ago. Even though it is hard to imagine the Democratic party being the Democratic party without bold policies in climate change, affordable housing, reducing income disparities,  investing big in childcare, education and healthcare, attempts were being made to sink the entire Democratic party and national agenda going back to Franklin Roosevelt. Jaypal is described in the WSJ as diplomatic and firm, saying "I am so proud of our caucus; I have never seen our caucus so strong. And I am a very good vote counter also." Fifty members of the 100 member Progressive Caucus held firm in support of president Biden's original agenda without which the president would have little to show in keeping promises he made to the American people in the election and little to differentiate him from Mr. Trump who also supported infrastructure spending. Separating the infrastructure bill would have risked sinking Mr. Biden's plan for recovery of America from the pandemic and the devastating policies pursued by American presidents in the last two decades. Policies by previous presidents that have impoverished the country, created huge income disparities, weakened America in the world in trade and technological leadership, and wasted resources in foreign wars. There are no centrists or far left- these are just labels. When Ms Japal said "Let's just remember the Speaker (Nancy Pelosi) is a great champion of this agenda. I think she was trying to do as much as she could to get this done," she could have said it is Mr. Biden's own agenda pushed forward with conviction to help workers and families during the pandemic, and build a solid American recovery, restore American leadership in the world. Pramila Japypal is the first Indian American woman in the US Congress, and one of only two dozen naturalized American citizens in the US Congress. That she could play such a critical role for good in the US Congress shows that with the right convictions, determination, experience, much can be done for the common good in America and the world.   ...

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
This editorial in the WSJ argues against Trade Representative Lighthizer's move to increase the percentage of North American content in a vehicle so that it creates more jobs. Currently Nafta rules require 62.5% of a duty free vehicle be made in North America. Lighthizer wants to lower the content coming from Asia or Europe. This is not favored by Canada and Mexico and it makes Mexico less competitive than it is now.

LyrArc Article Gist
See how dysfunctional today's politics have become in the way the Speaker in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. president expressed utter disdain for each other and their opposite political parties at the State of the Union gathering in the U.S. Congress. Trump focussed on the economic gains for the U.S. in trade and the economy, and sees impeachment efforts as unfair as not rising to the level of high crimes and demeanors defined for that in the U.S. Constitution. Pelosi and Democrats see Trump's style and manner as violating norms for politics followed earlier.  Harry Truman, a president in the fifties never got much respect from Republicans who saw his style and manner as too rustic and Missouri farmlike. Andrew Johnson a Republican during the early post Civil War period after Lincoln, without the education of the upper class was treated with disdain by Democrats. Interestingly both were chosen by icons Roosevelt and Lincoln. This time the focus of attention is a president who comes from outside, motivated to run in politics as he said in his speech in Congress by the wrongs the U.S. suffered from other nations in business and trade. Truman got attention from Roosevelt through the hard work to cut the extensive cost overruns and mismanagement in production for the war effort. Johnson for his loyalty to the Union from a Southern state, Tennessee. All seemed to shrug off the disdain without much discomfort and Truman was known to say- "The Buck Stops Here." ...