LyrArc Article Gist
The knowledge that the virus  caused human to human transmission and that it spreads to wide parts of the population very quickly were critical pieces of information that remained with Chinese epidemiologists, doctors and medical researchers, and were suppressed by local authorites in Wuhan.  Yet China's version of the U.S. CDC, China's Centre of Disease Control and Prevention, modeled on the U.S. control efforts worked effectively to identify the problem. Virologist Gao Fu, heads China's CDC. This report in Germany's Der Spiegel says Mr. Fu made it a habit to scan China's internet before bedtime for any signs of possible disease outbreaks. On the night of December 30 he came across rumors of an internal memo from the Wuhan Health Commission of an outbreak of a vaguely worded lung disease. When he called the Wuhan health authority he found their answers to be evasive which alarmed him. The next morning December 31 Mr. Fu sent the first of three teams to Wuhan which is how China was able to identify the problem, in the sense that Chinese authorites in Beijing were to rely on Dr Gao Fu to overcome the problem of Wuhan provincial authorites. He informed the World Health Organization Beijing office on that day. The Der Spiegel report says "shortly afterward," the Seattle Times in its report says this was about New Years Day 2020- Mr Fu made a call to Dr. Redfield, head of the U.S. Centre for Disease Control, who was on vacation. Redfield is deeply disturbed on hearing this from Fu and they have conversations over the next few days to the point that Dr. Gao Fu is in tears about what has happened. On January 1 Taiwanese public health authorites shared the information with WHO that the cornonavirus was a human to human transmission, would the Taiwanese authorites not have shared it with the U.S. the same week during calls from the U.S. CDC or other public health authorites alarmed about the situation. (The WHO was proving useless by Jan 14 when it contradicted Taiwan's more reliable assessment  on Jan 14 going by the letter from president Trump to WHO). On January 6 a few days later Dr Redfield and Dr. Azar head of Health and Human Services ask China for permission to send a team of CDC U.S. experts to China. This is cited in the U.S. letter to the World Health organization- the lack of human to human transmission information being given to the U.S. officially early by China. A risk that could have been a topic of conversation between the U.S. and China heads of CDC. That letter from president Trump also points out that the team of experts the U.S. planned to send was not accepted by China till Feb 16, one and half months after that series of conversations between Dr. Gao Fu of China CDC and Dr. Redfield of U.S. CDC in an alert message.  In effect removing one of the key defences for the U.S. and Europe in making their own defensive actions and plans, laying the basis of the worldwide coronavirus pandemic affecting millions of people. Dr Redfield is a AIDS researcher at the University of Maryland who spent most of his life trying to control spread of HIV and was appointed by president Trump to head CDC agency in 2018. He set a goal of eliminating AIDS by 2030 and is more comfortable with aids patients and research than the bureaucratic nature of agencies- CDC has about 11,000 employees. Once it was clear that a team of U.S. experts was not given permission to make its own assessment in Wuhan in the few days after January 6 offer to sent the team to China by Redfield of U.S. CDC and Dr. Azar, would it have alerted the U.S. that something was seriously heading the wrong way for a epidemic risk. That letter of president Trump cites how the head of WHO during the first SARS crisis in 2003, Dr. Harlem Brundtland acted when she faced China's lack of cooperation during that crisis by saying openly that this was a danger to world public health and millions. Could CDC in the U.S. and the other connected health authorites have taken the responsibility and filled Dr Brundtland's role in this crisis, that the WHO failed to perform?    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The risks that China could be stuck in middle income status- plateauing similiar to countries like Mexico in middle income status- grow as China's remains stuck in a state enterprises driven model of growth at the expense of consumers and savers. Japan reached the level of development China is in today in 1970, Taiwan in 1980 and South Korea in 1990. Progress from now on depends on innovation and developing a more open society as shown in the experience of Japan and South Korea, which requires a shift away from most bank lending and funding investment going to state owned enterprises and towards private enterprises and tech startups. The resulting overbuilding has led to a vast misallocation of resources and starving new private enterprises of the large amounts of capital needed. Porter describes the lower level of rural education which has not kept up with the pace of improvement in urban schools, and which poses problems for the future, including a shortage of skilled workers.

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

LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Typical of so much of what is written about the World Health Organization and its role in the pandemic, this podcast in the WSJ fails to quickly convey the critical function of the WHO as an early warning system the world has depended on, including China. The H1N1 epidemic originated in Mexico. Asian countries including China and India depended on very quick response from the country where the epidemic originated  in allowing entry into the affected area for experts from advanced countries such as the U.S. The global response was then coordinated across countries quickly with complete transparency. The head of China's CDC himself faced a problem with transparency with the provincial authorites in Wuhan. 1.    Fundamentally this quick entry was denied the U.S. Request by U.S. to China was made on Jan. 6 for U.S. team to go to Wuhan, quick permission was denied and given only about 6 weeks later on Feb 16. This delay is the crux of the problem for the U.S.. Taiwan confirmed human to human transmission on Jan. 1, the WHO was saying this was not clear as late as Jan. 14. These costly delays are what the U.S.  letter is about.  The head of the CDC China Gao Fu called Dr. Redfield head of CDC in the U.S. on the next day after he suspected Wuhan provincial authorites were vague about what was happening. Gao Fu was alarmed when scanning the internet on December 30, 2019, about rumors of a vaguely worded lung disease in internal memos of Wuhan. He called Wuhan authorites and was not getting clear answers on that day, then deciding on December 31 to send his own team to Wuhan, as reported in German magazine Der Spiegel- Hackenbroch, Zand, 05/20/2020.  Der Spiegel says in its special report on the early period in Wuhan that Gao Fu was so alarmed about what was happening enough to be in tears in his series of calls with Dr. Redfield in the immediate days that followed. The date was shortly after the GAO Fu sent the team to Wuhan, December 31 and New Years Day 2020, as reported in Der Spiegel. See the link to Lyrarc gist of Der Spiegel's "A Failed Deception: The Early Days of the Coronavirus in Wuhan."  2.  President Trump points out the standards of the WHO- in the concluding point of his letter to WHO- when a three time prime minister of Norway, Gro Brundtland was head of the WHO during the SARS crisis of 2003. She acted quickly and decisively and no time was lost. It is this failure of the early warning system under the new president of the WHO after 2017 Dr. Tedros that alarms the U.S.  with about 100,000 deaths.  3.  This failure it can now be said was partly a result of a election in 2017 for the position of WHO president which was flawed. This was the first time a WHO head, an important position was put up for an election. The Executive Board was responsible for this appointment since the founding of the WHO as part of the UN, based in Geneva, Switzerland, after World War II. This system worked. The election was clearly a bad process for appointing the president of the WHO which should be done entirely on the capabilities of the person holding this position not on a flawed voting process. It is flawed because India and Bangladesh hit by a cyclone during the coronavirus have suffered greatly, as have other countries, but had only 2 votes for 1.5 billion people, when Barbados (385,000 population) and Laos (7 million) which had less than one  hundredth the population had the same number of votes. The U.S. had one vote. The election resulted in lobbying and a process in which many candidates stayed away because they simply would not go through such a process. The position was too important to the world- most of the advanced countries had forgotten about the danger of epidemics to let this happen by 2017, as shown in the way the austerity years led to cancellation of the preparations for pandemic in France and Britain. The austerity years and neglect of public health during these tech boom years in the western world made it possible for this to happen. 3.   Along with the 1 month ultimatum action is already being taken to restore the effectiveness of the importance of the Executive Board. The head of the health ministry in India, Dr. Harsh Vardhan, has been appointed the new chairman of the Executive Board on May 22. This restores the voice of billions of people in Asia in the process, and brings the major countries with the greatest risk in a pandemic into the decision process for tackling the pandemic, this includes the rest of the world.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The demand for ships went up so steeply that shipping rates hit the roof, and the prices of ships went up accordingly. Between the end of 2006 and July 2008 , shipyards received enough commissions, says the Economist, that this would double the world's fleet. Just as demand has collapsed and international trade has gone down, about 9000 ships are coming onstream. Now 11% of fleet capacity justs sits on the water, in the seas outside the harbors of Singapore, Hong Kong and other southeast Asian ports. A 150 tonne cape class ship that sold in 2003 for $18.5 million in the used market, when rates for charter were $15,000 a day, had risen by summer 2008, to $85 million with rates of $175,000 a day. These rates went up even more to $300,000 a day, which is 20 times what it was in 2003. And rates today are back down to $15,000 a day, where they were in 2003. This ship, cited by a broker, to give some idea of the extent of this boom and its collapse, was sold for scrap at $7 million. And South Korean shipyards are taking this into account, in their pricing and collection of payment, with 20% demanded upfront, 60% during construction, and 20% upon delivery. The backlog in shipyards is estimated by Clarkson Research, a maritime research firm, at $526 billion, even as banks are leery of lending and concerned about the value of the collateral in the event of default. Some smaller Korean shipyards are closing. Steve Mann, analyst at HSBC, says that half of the orders for delivery in 2010 will be delayed, so that there is work for 2011 and inventory or excess capacity does not pile up on the oceans. Even in this situation China, India and Vietnam continue to support the expansion of their own shipyards. This suggests additional losses for shipbuilders, shipping lines and the banks that lend to shipyards. All this also goes to show that the rush to industrialize, once it gets a firm footing- like it has in the Chinese model of increasing investment and local governments pushing infrastructure, industry and export factories with officials judged on GNP growth numbers- can exacerbate a boom-bust cycle. This is one industry, others include machinery manufacturers, commodity producers, and manufacturers of parts that go into finished products assembled in China for export. This means it would take the world economy down with it, if some external factor like the drop in export demand suddenly slows everything down. Machinery manufacturers in Germany, commodity producers in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Australia, and manufacturers of the high tech parts in Japan and Taiwan that are shipped to China for assembly, all go down in this boom-bust cycle, in a dramatic manner. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In a first at Davos World Economic Forum, China's president Xi Jinping uses the 2017 meeting to give a one hour long spirited defense of the world trading system, critical of U.S. president elect Trump's protectionist views without naming him. Xi pointed out that "no one will be winners in a trade war." And went on to add that restricting world trade was like "locking oneself in a dark room, keeping out wind and rain from outside but also light and air." For the first time Jinping stated that China would take the U.S. role of defending the world trading system from attack as needed. On climate change Xi defended the Paris accords, and gave China's commitment to pursue changes regardless of what the U.S. under president Trump does. This follows Chancellor Merkel of Germany's statements on the issue critical of the views of president elect Trump, and taking the lead to defend the world trading system. Xi also pointed out that many of the ills that led to voter discontent in the West were not really from the freeing up of trade but from the pursuit of excessive profit with the financial crisis of 2008.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Rising wages and rising production costs for Chinese exports of low tech products like shoes, clothing, toys, clothing, furniture, means a lot of these factories will shut down and move to lower wage countries like Vietnam and India or elsewhere. Elimination of rebates on more than 2000 export items raises cost of manufacturing 14-17% according to Guangzhou based American Chamber of Commerce in South China. And the the tough new labor law enforcing worker rights would increase manufacturing costs by 40% according to the Textile Council of Hong Kong. Additional costs would be incurred to meet tougher environmental controls and anti pollution laws and stricter enforcement. As a result of this Adidas wants its suppliers like Taiwan based Apache Footwear with 18000 employees in Guangdong to move as fast as they can to India where it opened a second factory. This process will unfold over several years till India and Vietnam bercome the new sources of cheaper goods because of the large supply of manufacturing labor for lower value added products, as it will take years to build the logistics and infrastructure for these plants in these countries. But because wages will also rise in India and the laws in India are more likely to be enforced than they were in the atmosphere in China where the Communist led government may have turned a blind eye to enforcement and worker rights in the interests of growth, the export of deflation to the west in the way of cheap Chinese products may be a thing of the past. China is doing this as a planned move it appears. Why? On the surface it makes sense that the heavily polluting factories making lower value added products like shoes, clothing, toys, furniture, would not receive rebates from te state and to improve living conditions and promote consumption at home the government woud pass tough new laws to ensure employee benefits and collective bargaining rights, and employee job security. It also reduces trde tensions at a time when the US economy will be in poor shape and jobs lost become a political issue in the 2008 presidential campaign. But there may bigger pressing concern and urgency in these moves after so many years of this being discussed and this may be that China finally may be at a moment when it is confronted with a sober fact that the US consumer is heavily in debt and may not support China's export growth model much longer and with it China faces a really significant slowdown in its growth rate from 11% to maybe half that if China does not develop its own domestic markets for growth. The old foreign investment model may not work anymore. See the link to Ireland where growth is falling off quickly. Higher wages and longer term jobs with benefits would enable a large middle class to develop from this huge manufacturing worker base especially as China moves to more value added products where even higher wages would be paid. This in turn creates a domestic market over time that would insulate China to some extent from the winds that would be blowing from a US economy suffering from a deep recession that may last several years. This may be evident in the words of the Governor of Guangdong when he says that the government is not abandoning the exporters but that selling domestically is good for the country and good for the people. Something deeper is at work here and one would expect an about turn in policy where instead of workers not receiving back wages and lax enforcement that went on freely in the last decade we would see an effort to build the kind of middle class that would provide the market for Chinese goods that would sustain growth at a more modest but sustainable pace. Which means in the short term all those workers at factories that make toys, shoes, clothing and furniture in provinces like Guangdong would be jobless. Some of these factories may move to provinces in the interior like Sichuan and Hunan provinces which may pickup employment. A report by the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai written by Booz Allen says that a fifth of the companies surveyed are considering relocating outside China, and that over half of foreign manufacturers surveyed think that mainland China is losing its competitive advantage to places like Vietnam and India....

LyrArc Article Gist
There appears to be a conscious deliberate decision by the Chinese government and policymakers to shift the economy from low-end technologically unsophisticated and polluting industry, that pays low wages with little worker protections, towards technologically sophisticated, environment respecting, and higher wage industry. This does not mean textiles are out, but textile companies that are larger better managed, able to introduce newer technologies and produce higher quality product- that command higher prices in the world market and therefore also able to sustain decent wages and worker protection- are in. Phasing out the smaller shops and the poorly run or deliberately polluting and labor exploiting companies run from Hong Kong or elsewhere. The general shift is to be a leader in products which are value added either by technology or human capital, such as better trained more knowledgeable workers. This is similiar to the shift Japan made after the sixties, as it moved from a rural to a urbanized society and textile companies like Kanebo became technologically sophisticated, while small shops withered out, and Japan gradually shifted into automobiles, electronics and chip making. The noticeable difference is that Japan with a prewar industrial base and a smaller market protected its home market for Japanese companies, whereas China lacking this prewar industrial base let foreign investment and companies overseas bring in equipment and use low cost Chinese labor to supply western markets. And it turned a blind eye to labor protections, at least till it had built up its own industrial base and knowhow with policy requiring Chinese partners in industry and technology transfer. Economic winds are also doing the job. Inflation, Chinese goods prices increased by 4.6% in May according to the U.S. Commerce Department. This is a result of the Chinese government requiring worker protections and decent wages and stricter pollution enforcement resulting in increased energy costs. For years the U.S. and other countries depended on China for low cost goods and the demand for low cost goods depressed margins which resulted in legitmate costs such as pollution control technology, worker protection and decent wages, being ignored. China is now left with heavy environmental cleanup costs, and a bad image internationally as a heavy polluter. The huge external trade surpluses China has built up exceeding a trillion dollars have pushed up the value of the yuan making Chinese goods costlier in world markets, and apparel and shoe makers in developed countries seeing Vietnam as a better lowcost alternative. The story of this phase of Chinese industrial development can be seen in a town like Honghe, a 90 minute drive from Shanghai, which has half of its 100,000 residents working in 100 factories and 8000 shops that knit, dye, package and ship some 200 million sweaters a year, bringing in according to local government estimates $650 million a year. Now many of these shops are idle and mirant workers are returning home. To see the subtler signs of the Chinese policymakers hand note that even visa policies have been tightened to make it harder for foreign buyers to visit Chineses factories and trade shows. Also the Chinese government has raised the minimum age for workers in these factories from 16 to age 18 and so on. And the impact is being felt in places like Honghe near Shanghai, Shengzhou another city near Shanghai which makes one third of the world's neckties, and in Dongguan in Guangdong where its toy, shoes shops close. The change also shows how quickly things can change in the world economy. Only 3 years earlier in 2005, Jiaxing Yishangmei Fashion Company, a family owned company was booming and had just landed Walmart Stores as a customer. Now Walmart no longer sources from this company. Analysts say that the Chinese sweater industry was probably overbuilt, with about 6 cities in China claiming to produce more than 100 million sweaters annually. A wave of consolidation could boost efficiency, and bring pressures to innovate rater than compete only on price. And many Chinese economists, and policymakers think China has relied too much on cost-cutting and simple production models to increase exports. A researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences thinks such a high dependence on foreign trade is not good for China. For the US and Japan this researcher says that trade is equivalent to 20% of gross national product and by contrast for China trade is equivalent to an extreme of 75% of GNP. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China is closing energy inefficient aging factories. The Chinese government plans to close 76 factories in cement, 279 in paper, 175 in steel, and 84 in leather as part of this effort. This still leaves China with a lot of work to do to acheve the 20% reduction per unit of economic output in 2010 compared to 2005, that its current five year plan calls for. Efficiency went up by 14.4% in the first four years of the current plan, but went down by 3.6% in the first quarter causing serious concern.

LyrArc Article Gist
France is moving quickly with spending on the $37 billion stimulus. Public buildings, museums, cathedrals and historical sites are being renovated in 2009. About 50 chateaus, and 75 cathedrals are part of 100 million euros for cultural centres. About 75% of France's stimulus money will be spent in 2009, in contrast to the slow work in the USA.

LyrArc Article Gist
Taiwanese contract manufacturer Hon Hai is moving quickly to address higher costs for workers at its manufacturing sites in coastal regions of China. After extensive media coverage of conditions at Foxconn factories, a number of suicides, and Chinese government policy that encouraged higher wages for workers in foriegn owned plants, Foxconn has moved to sharply increase wages at its plants. By the end of 2011 production in cities in the interior of China- Chengdu, Chongqing, and Wuhan, where costs are one third less- will be 25% of production, up from 10% in 2010. By 2012, this will be up to 50% of Foxconn's production, according to Yuanta Securities of Taipei. Hon Hai is lowering dividends to finance the shift. Fourth quarter 2010 earnings of Hon Hai were $742 million, down 26% over the prior year, even though revenues went up by 56% to $33.1 billon- reflecting the higher costs. Hon Hai's stock is down 20% in the past year on the Taipei stock exchange. Other locations being considered by Hon Hai are Brazil, Turkey and Slovakia. Brazil's President Dilma Roussef, said that Foxconn is considering a $12 billion plan for Brazil. Hon Hai is the only manufacturer of Apple iPads and one of two manufacturers of the iPhone....

LyrArc Article Gist
China's trade surplus rose to $457 billion at an annual rate in the 4th quarter, 50% bigger than in the same period for 2007. Exports dropped by 13% in the 4th quarter but imports dropped faster by 21%, which explains the growing trade surplus. With the stimulus spending kicking in in 2010 imports should pick up just as exports decelerate fast, reversing the direction of the trade surplus.

LyrArc Article Gist
Labor conditions in Chinese factories that supply Walmart, Disney, Dell and other companies and in China's manufacturing in general.

LyrArc Article Gist
The yuan is up 5.5% since the peg to the dollar ended in 2010, reaching 6.469 to the dollar. But this is not helping the U.S. trade deficit. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows the price of imports from China are up 2.8% in May over the same month prior year. And the trade surplus for China in the first four months of 2011 is higher than the same period in 2010. What is happening? The improvements in productivity of Chinese manufacturers and the acceptance of lower margins is reducing the effects on trade balance of a small appreciation of the yuan, so that only a fraction of that appreciation is showing up in higher prices for Chinese goods. Also significant is that the yuan's small appreciation against the dollar is not enough to make up for the dollar's fall against other currencies. The yuan is down 8.3% against the euro and has actually declined 3.7% on a trade weighted basis in the last year.

LyrArc Article Gist
Research from Australian National University shows steadily improving conditions for migrant workers in China. Migrant workers were able to spend more time in cities- an average of 8.9 years. The hukou sysem ensures migrants return to rural areas when they have to raise a family. About 252 million migrant workers work in factories and construction jobs in urban areas. Migrants with children leave them with grandparents back home. Improving the conditions of these workers is important to reduce the wage and income disparities in China and to reduce inequality. About a fifth of the migrant population now has pension and health benefits. Creating a balanced economy with domestic consumer spending making a larger share of GDP also requires improving wages and benefits of migrant workers. Incoming prime minister Li Keqiang says in a statement on a government website: China "must take migrant rural workers and gradually change them into urban residents. This requires that we push forward household registration reform." If done seriously this will create a new kind of China as these migrant workers are integrated into urban society after years of being shunned and ignored by China's educated middle class. Professor Meng's research at Australian National University of migrant workers shows the proportion of migrant workers with unemployment insurance increased from 11% in 2008 to 21% in 2012. The research shows similiar figures for health and pensions. Improving their living standards also make it attractive for more young people from rural areas to migrate to cities increasing urbanization....