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.


NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NYT's Keith Bradsher points out that weak sales in interior of China, and construction industry no longer supporting the economy, is leading to the new policy of pushing solar/EV's exports and sales overseas. These industries are state promoted with hidden subsidies of land, energy, and labor pool that the US lacks in similar subsidies- subsidies treated with theory arrogance in the US by economists who lack a grasp of the realities of manufacturing and trade. President Biden is freeing US industry from this stranglehold of weak economic theory that has too long beset US industry, by supporting American industry in every way possible, protecting and enlarging American manufacturing, and CHIPS technology scientific endeavors.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Differences between the U.S. and China on trade, investment and economic policy in 2015 during Xi Jinping's visit to the U.S.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Federal Reserve announced on Dec. 13, 2016, that it would increase its benchmark short term interest rate by 0.25 percentage point, to between 0.50% and 0.75%. The increase will also be reflected in business and household borrowing costs. The Fed also announced its intention to make 0.75% percentage point increase in 2017, possibly in 3 quarter percentage point moves. The Fed's forecast is for the fed-funds rate to reach 2.1% at the end of 2018, and 2.9% at the end of 2019. The Fed's policy is based on a sense of strong labor market with unemployment falling, and says it is based on discussion at a 2 day meeting, and "in view of realized and expected labor-market conditions and inflation." This reflects a view that there is now not that much slack in the labor market, that further improvements could trigger higher inflation. Fed forecasts for inflation are for it to increase from 1.5% in 2016 to 1.9% in 2017 and to the target of 2% in 2018. The unemployment rate of 4.6% in 2016 is forecast to go to 4.5% in 2017 and remain at that level till 2019. Economic growth is forecast at a median annual rate of 1.9% in 2016, 2.1% in 2017, only a slight improvement from last forecast in Sept. 2016. Support for chairwoman Yellen's policy decision was unanimous. See the link on views of NYT's Binyamin Applebaum and Neil Irwin on how Fed rate policy and economic growth under the Trump administration is likely to play out, and Ian Talley's report on impact on exports with a stronger dollar in WSJ. These views also are in line with the Fed's forecasts and policy decision as they reflect the concerns of the Fed about inflation, and also reflect the Fed's view that growth will be close to 2% in 2017-2019, and not the 3-4% stated by Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin. Fed rate policies to keep inflation at about 2% tend to counter stimulus spending by the Trump administration and effect of tax cuts. The size of the stimulus and the tax cuts are also likely to be much smaller than stated because of Republican concerns about the deficit in the U.S. Congress, according to these views. The stronger dollar also has the paradoxical effect of making trade gains more difficult while increasing trade friction in tougher bargaining supported by Trump, making the higher growth targets harder to reach.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China announced that it would make its exchange rate flexible, but also emphasized that it would do so gradually. What this means is that China will have a managed floating exchange rate. China followed a managed floating policy between mid 2005 and mid 2008, with a 21% upward valuation during that period for the yuan. During the 2008 crisis upto now the rate was pegged. The yuan was pegged at 6.83 yuan to the dollar. China is now rebalancing its economy so that it is not overly dependent on exports. The idea is to let domestic wages and domestic consumption pick up the slack in the markets of Europe and the USA. Europe is taking up austerity measures, and the mood in the US is shifting towards concern about growing budget and trade deficits. See the groups for "China wages" and "China workers."
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Xi Jinping's effort to shift the economy of China more towards serving the interests of Chinese who were left behind in the boom years includes a shift away from coal, away from real estate for speculation, and away from reliance on trade with the US and Europe as a driver for growth. This is proving to be difficult as the pandemic has increased demand for Chinese exports making trade a bigger driver for growth than before the pandemic. Introduction of a property tax to cut into real estate speculation has been scaled down to trials in 10 cities.  China did not put stimulus checks in the accounts of its people the way the US did which has led to Chinese domestic consumption not rebounding the way it has done in the US. Figures for consumer spending in China for September show an increase of 4.4% from the year earlier far below the pace of 8% set for 2019. The lack of social security and other safety nets in China makes people to save even more today. Chinese savings rate was 40% in 2019, today it is 45.2% for May 2021, according to one survey. Personal consumption makes up 38% of China's GDP in 2020, it was 39% in 2019. In the US it went up in 2021 June to 69% compared to 67% by the end of 2020. Infrastructure and construction deepened debt problems in China, and expanding exports created trade tensions. Both these problems have deepened with the pandemic. As this report says Chinese exports have gone gangbusters. Problems in production in Vietnam and Malaysia have added to export surge from China. China's trade surplus with the world is now at $535 billion in 2020, and surplus with US increased by 7% to $317 billion in 2020 from 2019.  Chinese government policy is now for "common prosperity" to reduce inequality and spread wealth and income more evenly for all the Chinese people. This is taking time and Chinese government policy is now set for the long run with these short run problems. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
USC Justices Roberts, Gorsuch and Coney Barrett questioning Solicitor General Sauer, and lawyer for the small business Katyal, on Tariffs by the US president DJT in November 2025. Coney Barrett says the whole thing is a big mess. Treasury Secretary Bessent who watched the proceedings in the Court benches says the issue of fentanyl is one of the reasons for tariffs on China which has played a uncooperative role on this issue of fentanyl sourced by drug trafficking gangs on America's borders. Bessent saying that it is a policy tool when unfriendly powers seek to hurt America. DJT says a SCOTUS ruling against the Tariffs would reduce America to Third World status. Most American themselves are being told by the media interests that the issue of young Americans dying from fentanyl is an issue like many others not that it is the heart of the issue that more Americans have died from fentanyl than the youth of America who died in the Korean, Vietnam and First World Wars combined. The wine import company with 19 employees whose lawyer Katyal filed a petition to SCOTUS is a tiny part of the people harmed by tariffs. It could easily be compensated from the tariffs revenue of $500 billion in 2025-2026 as could other businesses. How does the SCOTUS decide what policy the US is to use. With recalcitrant Asian nations Japan and China the only way is years of negotiations that lead nowhere on world trade. Is SCOTUS responsible or Congress to the American people when the supply chain disruptions caused by concentration of the supply chain in China led to huge price increases making life unaffordable for the low income earners,  including cost of automobiles? Large companies acting on the DJT signals are reducing this concentration in China actively, the trade deficit is coming down, the tariffs revenue is a fund to offset the cost to Americans mostly smaller businesses as large businesses increased their margins in 2022-2024 pricing moves so that today only about 30% of the tariff cost is borne by the average Americans, the rest by large businesses and some of it by exporters in China and Japan. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president elect Trump meets with the heads of tech businesses on Dec. 14, 2016. CEO's of Amazon, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft were present. Trump was exuberant about the advantages secured by U.S. tech companies in global business, saying- "there's nobody like you in the world. Anything that the government can do to help this go along, we're going to be there for you." The discussions covered need for more vocational education, advantages and disadvantages of trade with China, and immigration. Quarterly meetings of this type are now planned with a smaller group organized by Jared Kushner to cover immigration and education.  Jeff Bezos of Amazon described the meeting as "very productive." Bezos says he told the group that the best way was to use innovation to create jobs outside of tech in agriculture, infrastructure, manufacturing elsewhere, to create large number of jobs. Ginni Rometty, CEO of IBM, and other executives are part of the Strategic and Policy Forum set up to provide business input to the president. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gerlad Seib points out that one should look less at what president Trump accomplished in the first 100 days and more at how he operated and learned during this initial period. This is certainly true because much of what happened in the first 100 days contradicts some of the tone that Trump setup during the campaign. When it comes to governing Trump has made an effort to learn and adapt and show resilience in the face of early setbacks on the travel ban and the health care bill, the Flynn episode. After this early period Trump took on a more disciplined approach, gave more room to and listened to more respected advisors- Tillerson on foreign affairs in shaping policy with Russia leading to Tillerson's presence at Lucca massacre memorial in Italy sending a clear signal about U.S. policies in line with its role in the past century in world affairs, Gary Cohn and Ross on economic policy and seeking Cohn's advice on tax plan, Ross's on NAFTA negotiations with Mexico. As a result the NAFTA fears were calmed down with statements by Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary, that the goal was a win-win relationship with Mexico. Trump worked with his party in Congress to have the Supreme Court nomination of Gorsuch approved. Meetings with Merkel of Germany and Jinping of China were carefully planned and new relationships established as Seib points out, without ruffling trade relations. The appointment of Robert Lighthizer, as Trade Representative, also shows that efforts to give the U.S. a more level playing field in trade will be resolutely pursued in the win-win context. Lyrarc has profiled Lighthizer earlier in this decade after his op-eds in the media as he correctly anticipated the changing public mood on the need for fairness in trade relations. On relations with China and South Korea, Jim Mattis has taken the lead, and Pence's visit to South Korea also show deftness in handling what is one of the most difficult issues in foreign affairs. Mattis and Tillerson also have helped reinforce the Republican party policies on NATO and Europe, with the visit of NATO secretary general Stoltenberg to the White House. In the end it is how much you can learn in the first year, how much you listen, and the courage to act in difficult situations, the willingness to act contrary to one's instincts and self interest where necessary, that matters. This is especially true in an environment where as Seib points out the Democratic Party stands opposed to the Trump administration following a bitter election campaign.   ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With the change in U.S. position on climate change, carbon emissions, and the move to raise tariffs on China's exports to the U.S. China faces a new dimension in its global relationships. Against this background China is shifting to a long term view of its relationship with India. China's new foreign policy leaders after the recent party Congress, vice president Wang Qishan and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, now see the need for new partners in a multipolar global world for the long term as China and India countries with large populations and a need for stable world trade share common interests. Wang steers the Central Foreign Affairs Commission with Yang Jiechi as director. China now sees " a lot of shared interests, concerns and positions," in the words of China's Representative Lu, in the long term issues of globalisation, urbanization, pollution, and concern for achieving stable development with high growth rates.  China now takes the long view looking back at the unprecedented change of the last 100 years, as it maps out its plans for the future. The U.S. has challenged the ideas in the blueprint for development of "Made in China 2025," particularly as it relates to western transfer of technology to China. This has created a new situation for which China is still looking for answers, and ways to come up with new strategies for development without the nearly unrestricted access to western technology of the last 2 decades.  Shared positions on world trade with India and India's close relations with the U.S. add credibility in China's  negotiating positions with the U.S.                  ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Pakistan prime minister Imran Khan visits the White House to meet president Trump. Mr. Trump welcomes Khan and lauds the Pakistani leader as an athlete and a leader. He tells him trade deals can be struck, future was bright and flow of aid can be turned on. Trump makes a casual offer to help mediate the dispute between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, even though it is certain that nothing comes out of this, because of India's position not welcoming other countries doing any mediation. At the heart of this reconciliation is Afghanistan and president Trump's conviction that Pakistan can get the U.S. out of Afghanistan. Trump stated this- "I think Pakistan is going to help us out, to extricate ourselves. Pakistan is going to make a difference." The idea is that Pakistan can persuade the militants, the Taliban, into a face saving settlement that will allow American troops to come home. Mr. Khan in turn stated that Pakistan had given up its policy of using Afghanistan to give it "strategic depth" against India. The army would not go behind the back of the civilian government to conduct a policy of its own. Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Trump are impatient to get this done. The deadline of Mr. Pompeo is September 1 and talks continue between the Taliban and representatives from Afghanistan. The U.S. effort is handled by Zalmay Khalizad. How Afghanistan is governed in the future is not determined and Pakistan has a key role to play in making a sensible solution take place if it decides that something new has to be tried.  In the past U.S. governments from both parties lacked the ability to take a good hard look at the facts the origin and evolution of this dispute. To tackle it directly with a willingness not only to call it for what it is but also to give the other side an incentive to try new solutions. The inventive style of the Trump administration to tackle the situation directly, but also come up with new and novel solutions is what is now being tried. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jeanne Whalen on the Two Speed Economy in the US September 2025- diverging paths of low and high income Americans. With the new administration in 2025 priorities shift to immigration and what to do about 14 million illegal migrants from Latin America and other places, war on fentanyl and drug trafficking gangs with hundreds of thousands of lives lost to fentanyl and drugs in the US, crime and safety which includes the unprecedented illegal movement of drug trafficking in the Nation, and to a bold posture on using US advantages of its huge market to get European Union, Japan, South Korea, and China to level the playing field on trade bring jobs home.The Biden administration had already conceded to DJT's approach in its one term presidency by shifting on uncontrolled illegal migration but not fast enough, by not removing DJT's tariffs, and failing to take an aggressive posture on fentanyl and drug trafficking. Of the DJT plan US has tariff based revenues of 10--15% for all countries imports into US can that it redirect to groups to soften any effects of tariffs. DJT administration oil transition policy of stretching out the transition to give middle class and lower classes cost of living relief was also accepted by the Biden administration and is now the policy of Democrat run California state government.  The US economy was slowing in 2024 under the Biden administration. What has changed in 2025 is that the US stock markets are responding to steps taken by the DJT Republican administration to lower the cost of doing business by softening regulations, and giving US business the upper hand in different industries, and rebuilding the manufacturing sector with calls for EU and Japan/South Korea to invest more in the US as a quid pro quo for market access. This has led to increase in the value of market portfolios of the income earners above 250,000, or 10% of American households. As this happens the process of trade renegotiation has introduced some uncertainty in 2025 and businesses are looking for more clarity before increasing investment and slowing job hiring which hurts younger people entering the job market and lower income Americans. Were things better under Biden? Government Covid assistance and payouts in the early years 2020-2021 helped lower income workers, as this faded and the cost of living autos, housing increased sharply under Biden in 2022-2024 the situation deteriorated. The situation today is similar to the situation in 2024 with the difference in 2025 that inflation is coming down just as government help is receding. And added factor is the DJT administration plan to tackle head on the increasing cost of Medicaid to about $1 trillion by adding new requirements and reducing subsidies. The federal workforce had a disproportionate share of black workers and the policy changes to reduce the federal workforce have increased black unemployment from 6.1% under Biden in August 2024 to 7.5 % a year later. Hispanics have seen slight improvement in unemployment to 5.3% in 2025, and the middle class incomes also have held up and are holding steady. Meantime Bloomberg points out that one third of people in the top 10% are living paycheck by paycheck because of high cost of housing, university education for children, and inflation.     ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Geithner in written testimony to the Senate Finance Committee, stated that "President Obama - backed by the conclusions of a broad range of economists- believes that China is manipulating its currency." What is noteworthy is that experts are generally in agreement that something should be done about this in cooperative fashion, from Obama's economic team, Obama's own views on this, The National Association of Maufacturers, Labor and so on. The trade deficit with China has continued at high levels even with the current economic slowdown, so this issue remains as one that the Bush administration never really addressed. Simon Johnson, a MIT Professor, and former IMF Chief economist says that even the IMF has not addressed it, and that the Obama administration needs to call China to account. He says this could lead to a spat with China, and if the US does not back down to a row. The concern has been that China would not buy up Treasury debt the way it has in the past, at the same time the question is whether there is some point where the deficit is so large and the US so dependent on foreign buyers of Treasury debt, that it needs to be addressed on a number of levels. Including addressing currency and fair trade issues, a more rational balanced consumption of everything from oil to goods from lowcost Asian countries, to reduce the toll on the overextended American consumer and on the extent of US borrowing needed. From China's perspective there may also be the same concern about export led growth, which may come to be seen as undependable anyway, because with or without some currency advantage the overextended US consumer is not buying anyway, holding off on purchases of everying from cars to flatscreen televisions. With growth at 6.8% in 4th quarter 2008, according to the Chinese Government Statistics Bureau, and expected to drop to 5% in 2009, the export growth model is no longer the panacea for China's unemployed as it once was at 12-13% growth rates in 2006-2007. In fact it may now look to be a better wiser policy if China had increased the value of its currency even more than its slow gradual approach to slow the growth rate from 12-13% to a more sustainable 9-10%, and lower American imports and lower the American trade deficit. Part of the problem in China was the difficulty of applying any sort of brakes once the local governments were set free to expand as much as they could, and prevented any controls from being effective. Steel production continued to grow even after there was evidence of large overcapacity, and government direction failed. Buy some time to shift to domestic consumption based recovery, is what the Chinese policy may be now. Indications of this are evident with its grappling at the issues it has not tackled like giving ownership of land to farmers in rural areas, and to building a healthcare system for the country, both of which are part of a host of issues to shift to domestic consumption based recovery. So unlike the way the media and some experts portray it its not a tough line that the US is taking against Chinese unwillingness. China may want to cooperate.That may be true if China was missing out on 10-13% growth rates, but these were unsustainable anyway and bad policy. At growth rates below 5% as projected by analysts China may want to jettison the export model of growth and build an alternative one. In that case as China shifts to domestic consumption, currency adjustments may be seen quite differently than they were in the past....
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
German foreign policy is seen as too dependent on China and too China focused, in this conversation of DW.com with experts at German Council on Foreign Affairs (DGAP), European Council on Foreign Relations. Germany had little focus on India and no clear policy to expand ties under Merkel. German foreign policy should take the example of France and other Scandinavian nations in building strong ties with India, says this report. Relations with China of the US and EU countries are strained following trade and technological competition. Merkel continued old policies from 2000-2010 in 2010-2020 even as the EU was losing its technological edge with China. This report says a new German federal government after the upcoming election has to decide what relations it wants to build with India, following the example of France, and Scandinavian nations. And what role the EU will play in India's rapid development in industry,  technology, shipping, transportation, renewable energy, other fields, and opportunities for co-operaton in many fields in 2020-2030. This is also about "Whats at stake for Germany?" in new foreign policy under a new chancellor from SPD or Greens, or some other coalition. And what role Germany will play in the rapid modernization transformation that is now likely to take place in India in the next 10 years. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin of NYT provides some counter intuitive ideas on U.S. Fed interest rate policy. He says it can't be take as a given that the Fed will raise rates in 2017-2018. This depends on how much punch there is in the Trump economic policies for stimulus, and for infrastructure spending, tax cuts. He cites Senate Majority Leader McConnell who said he would like to keep "tax reform revenue neutral." Getting large spending and pushing up the deficit is likely to run up against Republicans in Congress who have for 8 years opposed large spending increases and large deficits. Trump has given few details about his stimulus or infrastructure spending plans. He says the scale of the spending might not match the talk. Irwin cites JP Morgan Chase economists who have kept their forecasts for GDP growth just under 2% for 2017 and 2018. And he points out that even Trump appointees at the Fed might act independently. The Fed might look at being cautious considering that increased trade tensions with China, and the unpredictability of a Trump administration could hurt growth. Irwin does not mention the uncertainty in other areas such as policy towards Russia on which the Republican party and Congress have very different views than Trump, tensions over Taiwan, that can also affect growth. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A sharp increase in imports leads to a growing trade deficit affecting the outlook for the Pakistan rupee. The central bank allowed the currency to devalue by 3% in the last week. The IMF has called for a weaker Pakistan rupee to narrow the trade deficit. The Pakistan rupee stands at about 109 rupees to 1 U.S. dollar, according to Thomson Reuters data. Experts say it is overvalued by about 25%. Pakistan gets about $20 billion in remittances from overseas for 2016, about 7% of GDP, and the central bank has now reversed an earlier policy of intervening in currency markets to prop up the rupee. A lower value for the rupee is now seen as good for economic growth.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China sees the situation in Hong Kong spiralling out of control after two months of protests and leading to a loss of China's sovereignty in Hong Kong. The Chinese official in charge of Hong Kong Affairs in the State Council, Zhang Xiaoming, met with the Hong Kong government representatives in Shenzen and made it clear offering a dire assessment and the most severe since China resumed sovereignty over Hong Kong in 1997 from Britain. Zhang stated- "If the situation worsens further, and there is turmoil that the Hong Kong government is unable to control, the central government absolutely will not just watch without doing anything." He also stated that the central government had enough strength to end the unrest, that the Party center and military force if necessary is behind the Hong Kong government. Wang Zhmin, China's top official in Hong Kong gives a better view of how this is seen in the Party in Beijing. He even called it a "life and death war" comparing it to the "color revolutions" the democratic movements that unseated governments in Georgia, Ukraine and Serbia. China sees this differently than western countries. With its long struggle against colonial rule in the territory controlled by Western powers along China's coastal region, China's ruling party leaders have a very different perception of the situation than is shown in most western media, particularly during the two decades of China's reconciliation with Japan and the U.S. in its effort to catch up. In the rest of the world the perception is very different. The use of a military garrison or riot police from other parts of China would affect China's image carefully built up over two decades of a peaceful developing country working hard to catch up in living standards and technology. As the economy slows to 5-6% the damage would be to business confidence and investment, and to Hong Kong's status as a world financial center. This could also affect China's relations with the U.S., European Union and Britain. with criticism on action by China. Unlike negotiations with Japan by Mr. Lighthizer for president Reagan, when Japan enjoyed a trade surplus such as that of China today (where there were no such issues with Japan as the U.S. had offered security guarantees to Japan), negotiations with China on trade could be affected by issues such as status of Hong Kong. This could lead to a worsening of trade relations, indefinite duration of tariffs and lack of any settlement on trade, further slowing the Chinese economy and hardening positions. ...
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This response by experts on transatlantic relations rejects the other view expressed in Zeit Online that the U.S. under Trump remains estranged from Germany and the EU. These experts from the American Institute for German Contemporary Studies, American German Council, and Centers at John Hopkins and Georgetown for German Studies, reject the view that the Trump administration and Germany are that far apart on many issues as it appears from media coverage.  Foremost it points out that civil society relations are sound and growing. About 50 million Americans trace their descent to Germany, including president Trump, much larger to over half the U.S. population considering European descent. Much larger is the sense of a culturally shared future with the European Union, with the nations of Europe including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Britain. The civil society relationships run deep in a way that is hardly affected by the Trump administration. Within the Trump administration the policies to Europe these experts remind the reader, are determined by the "adults" in the administration, who are senior members of the administration. This is a crucial point as Trump administration policy is not determined by the president's liking for tweets as much as by senior cabinet members Tillerson at the State Department, Gen. Mattis at Defense, Kelly at the White House, and senior members of Congress including Senators Corker and other senior committee members. This is why Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was chosen as Ambassador to NATO. It should be noted in this context of German-EU relations in president Trump's first year that there was a period of German disillusionment with president Obama, exacerbated by the NSA spying on German chancellor Merkel and on the EU delegation to the UN, with president Obama's failure to offer any apology. Relations recovered from that low point. No one suggested that there be a German led decoupling of the EU with America at that low point, or at another low point in German-U.S. relations with the setup of American Pershing II nuclear missiles on German soil under the Reagan administration when there were large scale protests.  The American view that the U.S. should not have to shoulder major responsibilities for defense and foreign relations by itself is not new say these experts, and goes back to earlier administrations before Trump.  The experts argue for an active role by Germany with its partners in Europe for defense and foreign relations, which should not be seen as a result of U.S. pressure, only responding to the situation as it has evolved upto this time. Views on immigration are also changing with effort by the EU and Germany, France, to reduce immigration from the source countries in Africa, and the changing perceptions about uncontrolled immigration in Germany and France, say the authors. A coordinated policy towards Russia  is seen as not having changed. And much as a reset in relations was advocated by Obama in the first year of his first term, the current policy of the Trump administration to work with Russia to lower tensions can be seen in the same way say these experts, and not as a fundamental shift in American policy. The deep relationship of Germany and the EU with China is another positive aspect that will also help the U.S. in framing its own policies towards China. The German-American relationship, and the European Union relationship with the U.S.  is seen as basic to the values and interests of the U.S. and Europe. This relationship is too deep and supported by civil society and Congress, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, by large trade relationships, to be affected by temporary differences under any one administration. Even these differences are part of a larger debate that is part of dialogue on issues in a democratic society, sometimes raucous and loud, and could be welcomed and carefully channelled in constructive ways.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will spend Tuesday night August 2 in Taipei, Taiwan. China has threatened severe consequences and Taiwanese forces are on alert. Yet with over $1 trillion in China's exports to US and EU in 2021 the response will have to take this into account as also the US and EU to redesign its supply chains. This is the first trip of a senior US official to Taiwan as Speaker Pelosi comes next to the Vice President to succeed the presidency. The US response to the Russian attack on Ukraine was made in Biden's word as a deterrent to China in its role in the Indo-Pacific region. The Pelosi trip may be a reflection of this policy that seeks to maintain the US position that Indo-Pacific is international waters, that US policy will continue as before undeterred by actions such as the Russian attack on Ukraine with the support of China. And that US will engage fully with allies in the Indo-Pacific- Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia and Taiwan. And that is doing this with the cooperation of its allies in the region- Australia, Japan and India. US and EU imports from China are $541 and $522 billion over $1 trillion for 2022. Loss of even a significant portion of these exports from major tensions in the region would have a severe impact on Chinese economic growth. The US and EU are already engage in redesigning the supply chain and would also face problems in a transition similar to the gas rationing in Germany after cutoff of Russian supplies. The trade is too big a factor at this time. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One foreign policy expert says president Trump tried to reverse everything in Obama's foreign policy almost to the point of an obsession. He visits Saudi Arabia before visiting Mexico and Canada, close neighbors, as other presidents have done. The relationships with Mexico and Canada deteriorated. Yet Mr. Trump has a good personal connection with Trudeau of Canada and Macron of France.  Taking the advice of advisers including Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, president Trump despite tough talk on the North American Free Trade Agreement, takes a moderate approach on NAFTA renegotiation. Trump also softens some of the rhetoric on China as he seeks Chinese help to restrain North Korea. An international coalition of states supported by the U.S. reverses gains by Islamic State, with Iraq and Iran gaining over Islamic State. President Obama's policy of not taking decisive action, reversed towards the end of the second term, had led to the rise of Islamic State and the refugee crisis in Europe as refugees left Syria and Iraq. NATO or the South Korean defense was not significantly weakened as feared at the beginning of the first year. Missile defense proceeded in South Korea with U.S. missile systems. The appointment of a senior senator from Texas, Kay Hutchinson, signaled that the NATO policy had not changed significantly. As a result it could be said that the year 2018 began with a bang about the risks internationally with president Trump's unconventional approach, and ended without some of the worst fears being realized. Relations between North and South Korea improved as Koreans decided to work together for peace in the peninsula- with North Korea agreeing to participate in the Winter Olympics in South Korea.   ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Next five year plan for China calls for more concentration on industry, dominance in key sectors identified by China such as rare earths, and more exports- not less in each of these areas. Chinese Communist Party is very conservative and once this has worked for China it is not going to change its reliance on exports even at the risk of leaving goods unsold in China or oversupply. The result is that the US effort to reduce the trade deficit, trying every tool in the book does not work, leading to an effort to resort to tariffs as a last resort to cut the unhealthy and risky $1 trillion trade deficit China has with the world. Has it worked? WSJ and other reports show that large companies are diversifying their supply channels, only smaller companies without the resources are sticking with China dependence for supplies. The tariffs themselves make headlines yet the US has made careful calculations not to upset relationships with key partners Britain, European Union, and Japan, keeping tariffs low at 10% with EU, and 15% with Japan which exports automobiles to the US to recover some of the years US made concessions to Japan. There are also loopholes on certain products where it is in the US interest to do so. As a result the effective tariff is 10-12.5% not 17-20% shown in reports. Of this 10% what is passed on to consumers is small- as in autos 80% of tariffs are not passed on by auto importers such as Toyota and Subaru because of the higher margins postpandemic. In retail only 30% is passed on again because of the post pandemic higher margins. The administration of DJT has also carefully worked with world oil suppliers to keep oil prices low, lower than in 2023-2024. The result is that inflation is at about 3% in September 2025. The idea that a capricious DJT is doing the tariffs is a myth as careful economic planners including Bessent, Jamieson, Lighthizer, and Luttnick, economic advisors in the Republican party, are carefully articulating the policy with room for DJT's political talk and appeal to public sentiment. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's total public debt was 95% of GDP in 2022, Japan's was 62% in 1991. It's population aging faster than Japan's with population declining in 2022, Japan's declining in 2008 twenty years after its bubble burst. China's per capita income at $12,850 in 2022, compared to Japan's at $29,000 in 1991. China is facing more difficult headwinds than Japan in many ways. There is also higher tension in trade relations with US and EU limiting export growth. There is also the policy stance of the Communist Party that sees rural areas left behind with about 35% people in rural areas and Xi is slowing growth to reduce disparities and housing construction led speculative growth. In Japan urbanization was 77% in 1991, compared to 65% in China today. 

United States Department of State Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Marco Rubio speaks for the US with profound convictions and long experience in the Florida legislature and the US Senate, and as akey member of the DJT administration. In his speech in Munich at the MSC he recalls his grandparents being from Piedmeont Sardinia in Italy and from Sevilla in Spain. He talks proudly of his Spanish and Italian heritage, of America founded by European settlers. For Europe this is a speech that shows America is profoundly part of Western Civilization that started in Europe. Here are some parts of the speech and Rubio's call for America and Europe to respond strongly to the mistakes in migration and deindustrialization that have hurt the people of Europe and America, with deeply felt negative consequences. "That infamous wall that had cleaved this nation into two came down, and with it an evil empire, and the East and West became one again.  But the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion:  that we had entered, quote, “the end of history;” that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.  This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history.  And it has cost us dearly.  In this delusion, we embraced a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade, even as some nations protected their economies and subsidized their companies to systematically undercut ours – shuttering our plants, resulting in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.  We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves.  This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests.  To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.  And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people.  We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.  Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past.  And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.  For the United States and Europe, we belong together.  America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before.  The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.  We are part of one civilization – Western civilization.  We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir. And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel.  This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe.  The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply.  We care deeply about your future and ours.  And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected – not just economically, not just militarily.  We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally.  We want Europe to be strong.  We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history’s constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know – (applause) – because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.  National security, which this conference is largely about, is not merely series of technical questions – how much we spend on defense or where, how we deploy it, these are important questions.  They are.  But they are not the fundamental one.  The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions.  Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation.  Armies fight for a way of life.  And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny. It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born.  It was here in Europe where the world – which gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution.  It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.  And this is the place where the vaulted ceilings of the Sistine Chapel and the towering spires of the great cathedral in Cologne, they testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels.  They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future.  But only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance can we together begin the work of envisioning and shaping our economic and our political future. Deindustrialization was not inevitable.  It was a conscious policy choice, a decades-long economic undertaking that stripped our nations of their wealth, of their productive capacity, and of their independence.  And the loss of our supply chain sovereignty was not a function of a prosperous and healthy system of global trade.  It was foolish.  It was a foolish but voluntary transformation of our economy that left us dependent on others for our needs and dangerously vulnerable to crisis. Mass migration is not, was not, isn’t some fringe concern of little consequence.  It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilizing societies all across the West.  Together we can reindustrialize our economies and rebuild our capacity to defend our people.  But the work of this new alliance should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past.  It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century.  Commercial space travel and cutting-edge artificial intelligence; industrial automation and flex manufacturing; creating a Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers; and a unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South.  Together we can not only take back control of our own industries and supply chains – we can prosper in the areas that will define the 21st century." ...
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
DJT 1.0 was led on the tariffs policy by USTR Robert Lighthizer, who had experience negotiating with the Japanese negotiators in the Reagan era. He is today respected by  Republicans, is seen in an important role in economic policy and to prepare the tariff policy actions of the new DJT administration. Lighthizer prefers to get Congress to take action with legislation. He also believes that domestic manufacturing will make gains with new and higher tariffs on Chinese imports. Lighthizer policy is falsely compared with Hoover Tariffs Act of 1930 when world trade was 9% of world GDP, today it is 63% of world GDP, and where under Hoover in 1930 the tariffs were across the board all countries 20,000 goods. Under Lighthizer on specific products where dumping is happening -steel, aluminium, autos, with Japan in 1960-70 or China 2000-2020 targeting American industries + technologies for takeover. And falsely when it comes to raising costs to each American family on average by $4000 a year by economists. The conventional view for business for 2000-2016 through Bush and Obama favoring free trade did not take into account the unusual experience of China which entered WTO in 1990, then expanded in a way unprecedented in history at 10-12% growth rates for 15 years destroying American manufacturing with dumping, having support of outshoring by companies in the US, and not giving reciprocal treatment for exports from the US to China. China also had unrestricted access to US technologies in this type of trade. Lighthizer's approach was to specifically address this problem not a general across the board tariffs on all goods (20,000 goods) on all countries as with the Hoover Tariffs Act in 1930. Lighthizer's approach adopted by DJT called for reciprocal trade response with China as the US had already done with Japan, not unilateral across the board tariffs, and when world trade had advanced to about zero tariff rates. And falsely compared to Hoover 1930 Act because under Hoover tariffs were 29-40%. raised to 60% when world trade was small, was 9% of GDP. The Biden administration has tacitly agreed with Lighthizer's vision by not reversing DJT tariffs. A new higher tariff will probably be selective based on the industry, country and what goals the US has set under the new administration for that industry. Some of the tariffs revenue may also be used for tax cuts. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Trade economists from Ivy League universities, are still peddling the old theories on trade from textbooks that make no sense and have got America in this huge mess that it is in where other countries are ripping America off with unfair trade practices. These economists have turned a blind eye, turned their backs to the great damage done to industrial towns and communities across America for two decades with the loss of manufacturing. Take Irwin's point that the US would have to monitor rates on 13000 tariff line items. This is ridiculous because the US simply needs to monitor the key products such as semiconductors, oil and gas, LNG. In just one negotiation with India the US having a trade deficit DJT states of $100 billion with India- terrible trade. By opening up supply of LNG and oil US can fill India's needs for Oil and LNG and cut the deficit to zero. Who came up with this idea. Indian PM Modi and his trade team. Once it was known that the status quo was unacceptable India came up with its own ideas lets import what we get from Russia from the US. Yes we had discounts from Russia but that was when oil prices were high. DJT's effort to get oil prices down by increasing US production will make it possible for India to get this oil at similar prices. India is a much bigger economy now than during Covid 5 years back India can do this. US and India win-win by doing joint aviation production deals and US gains with sale of F-35 stealth fighters. It is just common sense. Sadly, much of this is common sense that is beyond Ivy League Economics departments at American universities.  Reciprocal Tariffs make a lot of sense because this is how fairness is done- for China, for India. In the case of Mexico, Canada, China, on stopping flow of fentanyl- this reciprocal tariff is not a tariff it is as Commerce Secretarty Luttnick pointed out domestic policy of the United States. Which country would tolerate 490,000 deaths from fentanyl over 12 years and not take domesti policy action. It is not that the policy actions are taken it is that these action should have been taken a long time back. ...
The Indian Express Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With the gradual decline in the second wave of the coronavirus in India, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman highlighted some of the progress and the plan ahead -to achieve macroeconomic stability in the face of coronavirus spending and needs, the progress in GST for formalizing the economy and getting tax compliance, the infrastructure investment and forward looking timely completion of projects, increasing foreign direct investment flows into the economy, and making India an important part of the renewal of supply chains of America and Europe. The highest ever GST, Goods and Services Tax collection, helps build the framework for revenue to support investment in new infrastructure. Ease of doing business in India was a key goal to increase new inflows of foreign investment. Coordination of domestic and foreign trade and investment policy was part of the effort to build the environment for partnering with US and European Union countries, and UK, so that implementation in supply chain renewal could take place. ...

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