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
As OPEC members met again in June 2015 for the first time since the meeting in November 2014, there is a sense that OPEC no longer exerts the same influence on oil prices. There are 4000 oil companies in the U.S., says one U.S. State Department official, even if OPEC were to cut production the cuts could be matched by shale oil producers in the U.S. quickly increasing output. This is the new reality, say experts. OPEC expects to keep production at the same level of the current production ceiling of 30 million barrels a day in place for the 7th meeting in over 3 years. Algeria and Nigeria, both hurt badly by the drop in oil price, have called for cuts but failed to persuade the Saudis. With Russia unwilling to join a coordinated production cut, there is not much talk about doing this. The Saudis and Iraq have continued to pump more oil, with April 2015 production of 30.84 million barrels a day the highest monthly average since 2012. Other factors also remain in the minds of the Saudis and other producers such as the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar- policies on climate change, use of less energy and more from friendlier sources for the same amount of economic output demonstrated by countries such as Germany, advances in technology, energy saving transitions in emerging markets such as China and India....

LyrArc Article Gist
Inozemtsev of the Institute of Post-Industrial Studies in Moscow, asks the question wht if the Russian economy shows no growth in 2017, and 2015-2016 become the beginning of a serious downturn. If oil prices remain low for an extended period as now looks likely with factors such as shale oil technologies, Iranian oil, and Saudi policy, playing an increasingly long term role, Russia could face some of the problems former finance minister, Alexei Kudrin, other business leaders including head of Sberbank, warned about. A major problem that Inozemtsev points to is the change in the business climate for foreign investment in 2012-2016 as the Russian economy looks more inward, and the departure of many foreign companies. During the period 2000-2008, a major boost to the economy came from foreign investment which brought with it management and technological improvements. No emerging market country, including China, can have a bright future without access to new technologies and investments from foreign investment. The current period starting in 2009 stands in sharp contrast to the earlier period with the Russian economy lacking the boost from foreign investment, facing capital outflows, and international conflicts creating a long term effect on oil prices. Russia needed time to move its economy away from commodity dependence through technological improvements and investment, yet this does not appear to be happening, raising serious questions....

LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times reports that comments from Obama administration officials describe an alarming loss of trust and confidence between China and the USA over the last two years. David Shambaugh, director of the China Policy program at George Washington University, says the administration had hoped to work with China on major challenges like climate change, nuclear nonproliferation, and a new global economic order. China, he says, has failed to step up and play that role. He describes the Chinese as responding as an increasingly narrow-minded, self-interested truculent, hyper-nationalist, and powerful country. Jeffrey Baker, a key China policy adviser in the White House, says China's responses reflected a sense in Beijing that China was a rising power and the USA a declining power, especially after the strong rebound of the Chinese economy after the 2008 crisis. The administration is determined to counteract that impression. Other factors complicate things. China is facing a transition to a new leadership in the next year. There are differences within the Chinese Communist party leadership ranks about the direction China should take. Trade and currency issues have come to the point where American public opinion is shifting greatly, with educated professionals changing their views on trade and currency matters. See the recent WSJ/NBC September 2010 poll on world trade, reported by Murray and Belkin in WSJ, Oct 2, 2010. The Obama administration cannot ignore the deep concerns of the American people on these issues. The House overwhelmingly voted in September to threaten China with tariffs on its exports if the Chinese currency, the renminbi, is not allowed to appreciate significantly enough (experts estimate that it is overvalued by 20%). It is not clear whether the Administration's rhetoric on this issue is to assuage public opinion in a business as usual manner, or expected to achieve substantative results to rebalance world trade. The G-20 summit in S. Korea leaves this change for well into the future- China with current account surplus of 5.8% of GDP in 2009 is expected to lower this to 4% by 2015. With the high jobless rate in the US and the large and rising current account deficit, the United States may have reached a juncture where this cannot be put off well into the future years. Other issues, the different foreign policy objectives, and differing perceptions of China and the US of each other, the relationship with US allies in the region, may create additional tensions. These tensions may be navigated by governments of both countries, but the shift in American public opinion on trade, currency and jobs issues will require tangible and real change. As trade tensions will only increase in the next two years with the lack of fiscal stimulus on the jobs front, and no significant change in jobs expected from the Fed's purchase af additional Treasury debt, and a sense that the mutual benefit in the trade relationship with China has been lost to America's serious detriment. China's position may be perceived as stronger than it really is from the faster rebound from the 2008 crisis, and may in reality not be as Jeffrey Baker sees it. As David Barboza has reported in the New York Times, and experts have pointed out, the huge amount of lending encouraged by the government has accentuated weaknesses in the Chinese economy. A significant amount has gone into real estate speculation and will only increase the bad loans on the books of China's banks. This happens at the very time that growth is expected to slow down and make it harder to absorb the bad loans, as was done in the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Natural Gas is set at a target of 15% by 2030 of India's energy mix from 6% in 2024. India is learning from China's experience where LNG is used to fuel heavy and medium commercial vehicles. As new LNG terminals to gas pipelines infrastructure takes time to be built the use of SSNLG or Small Scale Natural Liquified Gas projects is being adopted to speed up shift to natural gas which costs less and is less damaging for climate change.

LyrArc Article Gist
The full text of the letter is given here. In this letter the U.S. sets out some important facts about events that happened during the coronavirus crisis during the crucial 4 month period from December 2019 to March 2020. Every week lost in this time due to reasons of a lack of transparency, openness meant hundreds of thousands of people more infected and tens of thousands of deaths worldwide. There are questions of transparency, of openness and this raises questions about the manner in which the World Health Assembly operates with hundreds of small countries in Africa and Asia having votes equal to that of the U.S., India, Brazil, Mexico with votes taken of over 200 countries. The entire election process can now be seen as questionable, when over a billion people in one country alone such as India or hundreds of millions in Brazil and Mexico would have to bear the consequences of poor decisions made by small countries that can be swayed in one direction or another based on political bias and other considerations that have nothing to do with global health.  At the conclusion of the letter by the U.S. to the current WHO shaped by a controversial election in 2017 the following is stated about the standards set by Gro Harlem Brundtland and which helped the world prevent the SARS crisis which originated in China in 2003 from spreading to the large countries of the world India, Brazil, Mexico, and other such countries in Asia and Africa, Latin America, and the U.S. European Union. "In 2003, in response to the outbreak of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in China, Director-General Harlem Brundtland boldly declared the World Health Organization’s first emergency travel advisory in 55 years, recommending against travel to and from the disease epicenter in southern China. She also did not hesitate to criticize China for endangering global health by attempting to cover up the outbreak through its usual playbook of arresting whistleblowers and censoring media. Many lives could have been saved had you followed Dr. Brundtland’s example." Even this does not come to grips with the flawed way in which the election of WHO head is done. It can no longer be relied on when there is the danger that lack of transparency can emerge in the WHO leadership itself because of a flawed process. It risks endangering the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions in countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico, as well as in the relatively small countries of Africa and Latin America where even basic water supplies are at risk but which could tilt elections at the World Health Assembly. Consider that a cyclone just hit the Indian state of West Bengal and Bangladesh on May 20 just as the coronavirus pandemic is spreading. That this region of 1.5 billion people had just 2 votes out of over 200 cast at the World Health Assembly in 2017 shocking. And even these votes cast based on old geopolitical considerations not how good the candidate is, and how good the country he is coming from is in terms of its record  on public health. The irony here is that private foundations in the advanced countries in the U.S. and Europe some of whom are major donors to WHO did not think that more experienced candidates in their own countries with a better record of public health such as in France or Germany are better qualified, in a flawed NGO support mentality left from the Clinton years. Basically the people in these large countries such as India, Brazil, Mexico were disenfranchised, when the austerity policies were consuming the European Union, and the U.S. had just elected a new administration itself groping for ways to reverse years of neglect of public services and infrastructure priorities. They would trust good leaders no matter where they come from, who have a record of transparency, leadership, and all the values we cherish together no matter where we come from. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's energy efficient industry is a role model for the western world and for India and China. For years Japan has had a national consensus on consuming less energy an industry has focused on developing energy efficent technologies and investing in it even when oil prices were low. Japan wants to now contribute to the world in this area at the G8 summit on the island of Hokkaido. According to the International Energy Agency in Paris, Japan consumes half as much energy per dollar worth of economic activity as the European Union or the United States, and one-eighth as much as India or China in 2005. According to the Japanese Economic Ministry data corporate Japan has kept its energy consumption annually at a billion barrels of oil since the early 1970's even as the country's economy doubled in size during the 1970's and 1980's. The Japanese steel industry invested $45 billion dollars between 1972 to 2006 in developing energy saving technologies, according to the Japan Iron and Steel Federation. By capturing heat and gases that go into waste JFE Steel at its Keihin mill on Tokyo Bay uses it to power generators that produce 90% of the plant's electricity. The Japanese government is now pushing an initiative that sets Japan's level of energy conservation as targets of global industries. For instance the group leader of JFE's climate change policy group says that by adopting Japanese conservation technologies the global steel industry could reduce carbon emissions by 300 million tons a year. The sector approach advocated by Japan means setting the same numerical goals for all companies in an industry, regardless of location. At next week's summit meeting Japan willl back an initiative that sets its conservation induced energy levels as the new standards for global industries. This will also promote the sale and use of Japanese energy saving technologies around the world....

LyrArc Article Gist
India's emissions rates up by 57% and China's by 34% in the past decade. U.S. contributes 25% of the world's greenhous gas emissions.

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
Prakash and Ghosh in the Hindusthan Times remind readers that even though India has ambitious plans for renewable energy much remains to be done in shifting to clean coal technologies. An estimated 80% of India's coal plants use obsolete technologies, making this an obvious area for improvement. India plans to make solar the source of 100GW of 175GW it plans to generate in renewable energy by 2022. Yet it must not be forgotten that coal is a dominant source for the foreseeable future and shifting to clean coal technologies is an area that should get top priority from the government. Today India is the third largest in terms of carbon emissions after the U.S and China.

LyrArc Article Gist
A traffic jam on Highway 110, leading from the border with Inner Mongolia to Beijing for 60 miles, is now passing 10 days, with traffic inching along at 3 miles per hour. With roadwork on a highway from Beijing to Tibet starting August 13, sections of a major road which circles Beijing have been closed. Chinese bought 13.6 million vehicles in 2009, compared to 9.4 million in 2008. China is building roads, but cannot keep up with this surge in automobile use, especially in Beijing. A study by IBM puts China at the top for "commuter pain," the pain suffered by drivers as they stay stuck on roads. In fact China's media reported that average driving speeds for Beijing could go as low as 9 miles per hour, if car sales in Beijing keep growing at the rate of 2000 new cars per day. According to the Beijing Transportation Research Center, Beijing will have 7 million vehicles by 2015. Beijing was once known for bicycles in the Mao era, and this could be the pace that traffic moves says the Center....

LyrArc Article Gist
India is an attractive place for foreign investors with the country moving up 23 places in the ease of doing business rankings of the World Bank. Growth is faster than China since 2015, and GDP is expected to double to $5 trillion by 2030, according to government think tank NITI Aayog. Corporate deal making from foreign investors exceeds that in China. Mergers and acquisitions targeting Indian companies reaching a total of $93.7 billion in 2018, up 52% from last year, according to Dealogic. Overseas purchases were $39.5 billion for India in 2018 compared to $32.8 billion for China. In comparison to China where trade tensions are increasing, India under the Modi government has improved the ease of doing business- implementing a new bankruptcy code, easing foreign direct investment rules, introduced a nationwide goods and services tax to replace a hodge podge of taxes in different states. In the consumer sector Unilever NV made purchase of a malted drink brand Horlicks from GlaxoSmithKline PLC as part of a $3.75 billion deal. Softbank led a $1 billion investment in OYO Hotels. In infrastructure Tata Steel made a $8.3 billion acquisition of steelmaker Bhushan Steel. Reliance Jio's aggressive push in mobile with low prices is leaving the telecom industry ripe for mergers and consolidation- Bharti Infratel acquired Indus Towers for $6.5 billion. Closely held family companies are also selling out their controlling stakes. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Coral Davenport of the NYT provides some of the basics of the Paris climate change agreement. This includes an effort to cut greenhouse gas emissions by half to avoid a situation in which atmospheric temperatures rise by 2 degrees Celsius or 3.6 degree Fahrenheit.  The earlier effort to negotiate an accord failed in 2009 in Copenhagen. This time all 186 countries were asked to signup with the USA and China, the No. 1 and No. 2 polluters and India leading the way. Germany is well on its way to self sufficiency through development of solar and wind energy with the German government leading the way, and France leads in the use of nuclear energy. How did this happen now? As Davenport points out there are scientific studies. But this is not the primary reason China is shifting.Davenport fails to emphasize the health concerns and pollution concerns that motivated China to shift away from coal. China's industrial revolution of the last 3 decades has come at a huge cost in pollution of air and water, and president Xi Jinping has decided to make the shift away from coal a top priority. It is estimated that mortality rates for areas of high coal use north of the Yangzte river have higher mortality rates than areas of lower use of coal south of the Yangzte river. The other big polluter India is shifting because it is learning from China's experience. Davenport mentions the resistance to the scientific evidence in the Republican party. As a result it is already clear that it lacks support in Congress and under a future Republican administration. In a fashion similar to healthcare, president Obama failed to create a consensus before proceeding in the hope that this would be better than waiting. However American industry is already moving away from coal as documented in Links- "The Trump executive order on coal and the continuing shift to natural gas." Utilities in the U.S. are making the shift away from coal because of the economics and planning ahead as governments can change every four years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points out the shortcomings in Indonesia's effort to attract foreign investment and increase growth under the Widodo administration.

LyrArc Article Gist
India's leading energy official, Anil Swarup, the Coal Secretary, says India has to depend on what is available, with slow progress on nuclear power there is not much else. As India increases its growth rate to 7-8% India will increasingly be dependent on coal. The Modi government plans to double coal production. About 300 million people in India have no access to electricity. The country faces energy shortages in other areas. Even with a push for renewable solar and wind energy, coal is expected to provide 60% of energy needs in India in 2030. One government model shows solar and wind increasing from 6% to 18% by 2030. India points to per capita emissions which are 1.7 for India, 6.2 for China, and 17.6 for the U.S., according to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center.

LyrArc Article Gist
Country Garden is turning into a worse problem than Evergrande. Both housing developer companies are in serious financial problems in China affecting the larger economy. Consider that Country Garden has $286 billion in liabilities and $7 billion in first half losses for 2023. Two years earlier Evergrande went into insolvency over extravagant projects and spending. Country Garden's problems come from a shift away from housing in the country a retreat by investors and buyers. Yet 25% of the economy and the savings of ordinary Chinese are tied up in housing. Local government finances are also strained adding to the debt burden. In the boom years housing created hyper growth, now it is in reverse acting as a drag on the economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Air pollution concerns are leading China's National Development Reform Commission to set a higher goal for cleaner energy. The NDRC plans a 52 gigawatt increase in installed capacity for green energy in 2013, an increase from 36 gigawatts in 2012. This includes 10 gigawatts for solar energy. Clean energy will take up 57% of additions to installed capacity in 2013, compared to 35% in 2010, according to Tian Miao, an energy anayst at NSBO.

LyrArc Article Gist
The constructive contribution made by the G-20 meetings of leaders towards building agreement on economic and other policies for peace and progress in the global economy. The meetings were especially useful for coordinating policy and addressing issues arising in the global economy after the 2008 financial crisis. Here Li Baodong, China's vice minister for international organizations and conferences, international economic affairs, describes the path ahead: IMF reforms implementation, better coordination of macroeconomic policies, pursuing the anti-protectionist and free trade policies with further support to the WTO and ministerial MC9 meeting in Bali in Dec. 2013, and infrastructure financing proposals for developing countries on the agenda at the St Petersburg, Russia, G-2- meeting in Sept. 2013. Baodong says the mechanism called the Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth as part of the G-20 meetings is a major achievement. Each G-20 economy submits it macroeconomic policy plan for a Mutual Assessment Process under this arrangement. The progress from the Bretton Woods financial architecture to the new arrangement- from the G-6 to the G-20 to include developing countries from India to Mexico and Brazil- is another major achievement, not fully recognized by the public, says Baodong. Interestingly Baodong makes particular mention to global rebalancing, rather than pushing what he calls the impossible task of increasing demand to get growth. This is a realization coming to China's economic policymakers under the new Jinping-Keqiang administration after the overly aggressive effort to stimulate demand in the 2009-2011 Stimulus, and the ensuing financial problems in the banking and credit system. It is indicative of the policy shift and its implementation underway in China in 2013-2015....

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...