LyrArc Article Gist
Sadanand Dhume in WSJ reflects opinion in the US that is wary of handout politics that has been carried to an extreme in India's election. In Venezuela the bad turn for the oil rich economy was when Chavez's successor Maduro ignorant of the problems it would create decided to give oil at almost no cost to all Venezuelans. In India the leading opposition party offered $1 lakh rupees to every woman in the state of Uttar Pradesh. India's federal government under Modi has given free food to about 800 million people and renewed the pledge this year because of the pandemic's devastating the rural economy- about 60% of India is still rural. This is essential for India to advance to build a broad based growth model for India similar to China 1990-2010 and Japan 1890-1915 and 1950-1970 during the transformation of their economies, similar also to the US under FDR/Truman/Eisenhower/Kennedy 1940-1965.  Clean environments Swacch Bharat was essential for basic sanitation and toilets to reduce health risks, cooking gas to shift rural women from firewood and health risks, direct deposit bank accounts for 300 million rural households essential to eliminate leakages, solar energy is planned to cut energy cost  This has brought and will bring the level of income and consumption power of the lower and middle classes to create a 500 million strong consumer base for industry. It is a carefully planned effort based on the success in states such as Gujarat, and looking at the way this was done in China and the US for learning lessons. It is not a reckless effort to win votes such as the offer of 1 lakh rupees to every woman in Uttar Pradesh state with no plan for industrialization and modernization of the Indian economy to make it the third largest ahead of the EU by 2035. Dhume is right to point this out and it is apparent to any outsider who looks at Sab Ka Vikas Sab Ke Saath- prosperity for all, including all parts of society irrespective of caste and religion.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
After all the media talk about tariffs inflation- inflation is at 2.4% in May 2025. Tariffs was part of the toolbox of strategies under Lighthizer and Jamieson on getting fair world trade, and not like Congressman Hawley in the 1920's who understood little about the workings of the US economy. This fact the official media such as the WSJ and NYT, Wash Post, BBC need to get it right about the Hawley Tariffs. Hawley was born in rural Oregon in 1864 went to country schools, and was president of Willamette University in Salem, when it's population was 4258. As House Ways and Means Committee chairman he wrote the failed tariffs bill Hoover signed in 1930. DJT's US Trade Representative Lighthizer in 2016 led the successful negotiations with Japan under Reagan, Scott Bessent who leads negotiations on tariffs with China with USTR Jamieson, has a deep understanding and grasp of today's financial markets. Tariffs is one of the tools in the US toolbox to get Japan, China, South Korea to even the playing field for US companies and bring back manufacturing to the US. Without it China would not budge from its unfair advantage and would not negotiate in fairness. This is proven in the way Japan in the 1980s and China today are responding to the US position preparing their economies for not relying on sudden surges in exports putting whole industries and workers in America and Europe out of work and out of jobs. DJT says- "No we are not going to accept that," the EU is catching on and adopting a similar position, China knows that.  The media is irresponsible in presenting tariffs in a negative way, irresponsible to American workers the 10 million put out of work since 2000, and to American families and the Nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Zero covid lockdowns have added to the sentiment seeing China as a less attractive location for foreign investment. American companies are seeing staff resign due the lockdowns and zero covid policy. About a fourth of companies in a US Chamber of Commerce survey see a 20% drop in sales in 2022. A similar situation is being seen for European companies in China. The other area of growth from property sector is not working anymore as there is a 59% drop in demand for new property units. Investors in the property sector fear  another situation like that of property developer Evergrande's collapse.  Similar to Japan by 2000 a lot of the government infrastructure for roads and rail and automobiles has already been built leaving less room for this sector to kick in. Investments are possible in AI, renewables, electric cars, and advanced technologies, with limited potential to tackle loss of jobs in other sectors such as construction and government financed infrastructure spending and in retail stores. Retail sales are hit by inflation and high gas prices. The result is that China's GDP may fall by 1% according to one estimate for this quarter from the previous year. For growth and foreign investment look to India where a surge in government financed infrastructure in construction of roads and rapid transit, fast rail, construction of housing, and rapid increase in use of mobile phones, automobiles, and appliances is taking place. A new logistics system is being built with a Master plan for the whole economy under Gati Shakti creating a whole new place for foreign investment in a country of 1.3 billion. With Indonesia and Bangladesh closely related to India this is a market of 1.8 billion people far surpassing China and built on values of democracy ingrained over 100 years since the experiments under the British of elected state assemblies. This happened under limited Hind Swaraj since 1930's when India was led by Mohandas Gandhi in these early experiments with democracy. Germany, France and the US have a lot in common with India and the ground is being prepared with improvements for extensive German, US foreign investment by the Modi administration.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Kyle Wingfield meets up with Robert Mundell, Nobel winner in 1999. What does he have to say now? He thinks the oil prices are on track and would reach $130 by 2020 with 3.5% inflation, starting with $34 a barrel in 1980 doubling to $68 in 2000 and doubling again to $136 in 2020. Today its already at $136 but he thinks it will settle down lower to about $100, so hethinks were not so far off track. On inflation he looks at the price of gold at$850 an ounce , and now its still about the same, with high inflation gold should be at $1500, so he does not see the public thinking high inflation is coming. He was in favor of the Reagan tax cuts and set the groundwork for this and aslo supported the euro. He believes the Bush tax cuts should be kept as it would be disastrous for the world economy. Mundell has always believed that there is a link between economic growth and lower tax rates. He advocates corporate tax rates of 25%. Tax rates went down to 28% under Reagan back up to 40% under Clinton and down to 35% under Bush. Hewould like to see a ceiling on marginal rates of 30%. He would like to see a fixed exchange rate so that there are not these large currency rate swings, the euro should be valued somehwehere between 90 cents to the euro to $1.30. The US has a growing population and better adoption of innovation with a younger population than Europe so he sees the USA as a leader in innovation and growth and the dollar or some new global currency should be formed for a global economy. Just as he supported the euro he supports a currency for Asia. He does not see overvaluing the Chinese currency as doing much good as he sees the Japanese economy hurt by the overvaluing of its currency after a period of Japoan bashing. He is an advisor to China on currency issues....

LyrArc Article Gist
Modi refers to an ecosystem that continuously shrinks the pool of capital from government revenues, revenues intended to fund development roads, bridges and other infrastructure illegally siphoned away, that stalled and suffocated rapid development in India for 75 years. Without foreign investment there can be no rapid development in India. Without strong and efficient institutions foreign investment has not come to India in the last 30 years in the way it has come to China. These institutions of good governance that prevent such siphoning away of revenues enable 100% of every dollar or rupee of taxes to go into development essential for funding infrastructure, climate infrastructure, logistics and the other inputs of capital, labor, energy and land to build manufacturing capabilities. An ever widening pool of the inputs of capital, labor and land year after year- a process that Japan, then South Korea, then China has accomplished is possible. I It is only now taking place in India. What Mohandas Gandhi, Nehru and Sardar Patel failed to grasp in the 30's, 40's and 50's is that it was possible to have an independent India and still remain a backward undeveloped nation for a staggering period of 75 years or almost half of the period the British ruled India. What Mao failed to grasp in China and which was corrected by other leaders to make China an advanced economy able to fulfill the aspirations of the Chinese people, is also the situation that prevailed in India. Post independence leaders in China and India both isolated their economies, both limited human potential, both let institutions fail in good governance.  It is only now moving India into the process of developing an advanced developed economy by 2040, able to fulfill the aspirations of a youthful population of 1.2 billion people. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
On the first day of the new vaccine policy on June 21, 2021, India has vaccinated 6.9 million people. India has now vaccinated 287 million people out of a population of 1.2 billion. This is a race against time as new variants caused the second wave of coronavirus in April and May of 2021 with cases peaking at over 300,000 a day.  The shortcoming of the old vaccine policy are being corrected. The entire vaccine supply process and the vaccination drive is now being handled by the federal government. Earlier during the second wave vaccine supply and the vaccination drives were under an arrangement with no clear overall responsibility. States shared responsibility with the federal government and target vaccination goals were missed, vaccine supplies were inadequate.  A similar arrangement in Germany failed and Germany's vaccination supplies were inadequate and vaccination drive stalled. This caused immense frustration in Germany in April-May 2021. Germany's troubled history before World War II led to a reliance on decentralized actions, and state governments imposed different rules in a relatively small country compared to India. This was corrected with the federal government taking on the entire responsibility for the vaccine supply and vaccination drive leading to good results today in vaccines. With India's huge population and political process of different state governments, some lacking experience in administration for a complex process, and others failing to coordinate well with the federal government, the lack of overall responsibility at the federal government posed serious risks of missing targets for vaccines and letting the coronavirus wreck the economy and public confidence. Complex negotiations with other governments in Europe and the US for vaccine manufacture in India could only be handled at the federal level. The resources and planning at the federal level were already in place in India for infrastructure and other projects, experience and setting targets in that area at the federal level could now be transferred to this task in vaccines. Somewhere in the range of 8 million vaccines a day need to be reached and sustained from August to December 2021 for India to reach the goal of vaccinated all 1.2 billion people ahead of any further attack from a third or fourth wave, say experts. This is not a choice for the federal government, it is simply something India has got to accomplish to be a healthy nation that can grow with neighbors in Europe, the US, Australia and Japan and build confidence in its Asia-Pacific region. The entire Asia-Pacific region has a lot resting on how well India achieve this goal and moves on to the next phase of assisting its neighbors in the region.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Waldorf was built in 1931 by Hilton Hotels founder Conrad Hilton. After a century of use it was outdated and needed major repairs. In 2014 Hilton decided to sell it and hired Blackstone advisors who said it would get about $1 billion. China had just allowed Chinese to buy foreign assets in 2014, and a Chinese founder of a regional insurance company Anbang Group offered $1.9 billion when Hilton knowing that China was keen in acquiring foreign assets priced it at $2 billion. In 2017 only three years later China decided to pull back from allowing private investments of this kind, Anbang's Wu was arrested for business practices. 2017 was the time when Xi at the 19th  Communist CCP Party Congress put forward his ideas for "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" and made it part of China's Constitution, and launched anti-corruption drive against corrupt business practices. The Waldorf was taken over in this drive by Chinese government. For 10 years China held onto the property and built 375 900 square feet condos in the Waldorf for $6 billion and 375 hotel rooms by the time it reopened in 2025. Was it worth it? Even if China could get $3.2 million for each of 375  900 square foot condos this would generate $1.1 billion. It would take 8 years to generate the remaining $900 million of the $2 billion paid for the Waldorf by Anbang's founder Wu if the Waldorf's 375 rooms were rented out for $1000 a night for 300 days. China would still be at a loss for $6 billion. This type of extravagant business investments characterized Japan in the 1980's and 1990's leading to the gradual stagnation in Japan's economy as other countries caught up in quality control and other production efficiency practices using new IT technologies. China looks to be following the Japanese example with infrastructure overbuilding. The US and EU will catch up in the next wave of investment in America and Europe by 2030 and other Asian economies such as India will also catch up with China. Investment productivity will play a part, new technologies will play a part, and a return of manufacturing to the US and EU, a build of India's manufacturing and logistics will play a part. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Research shows that some countries will benefit more than others through climate change action for net zero emissions by 2050. India, Argentina, Britain and European Union, Japan and South Korea will be able to reduce imports of fossil fuels and invest in infrastructure, renewable energy, and create jobs in new sectors. Countries that depend on fossil fuel exports Australia, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Gulf states, will see much of their coal, oil and natural gas assets, left in the ground. The US and Canadian shale oil producers will also be affected, along with Chinese producers but with a broadly diversified economy the US and China will continue to grow. This paper with lead author from University of Exeter, in Nature, shows $11 trillion in stranded fossil fuel assets left in the ground by 2036 for major oil producing countries under the most probable scenario.  This means the transition will have to be carefully handled as some states such as Texas, Alberta will be hit hard in North America. The paper also shows that countries that are major oil and gas exporters such as Russia and Saudi Arabia will not be pioneers or push aggressively for climate change in the way the European Union, Britain, and India are doing at COP26 because of this problem of stranded fossil fuel assets left in the ground. China and the US have strong renewable energy sectors and will join the EU, Britain and India. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's Sanseito anti-immigration party gets 7 seats, enough to deprive the ruling LDP-Komeito alliance of its parliamentary majority. Prime Minister Ishida of the LDP party may not last more than a few months. The LDP seems to have lost its way like the Democrats in the US. A recent article in NYT says LDP wanted to bring in 60 million tourists to Japan each year to boost the economy. Yet Japanese people in cities have a hard time handling 40 million tourists in 2024, with reports of disturbance of the once quiet life in city neigborhoods and failure to adopt the culture and language of Japan. Reports of migrant/tourist or immigrant crime get much press coverage. Japan has 124 million people and birthrate of 1.26 below the birthrate of 2.1 needed to stabilize population. Business asks for new immigrants to fill unfilled positions. The public has different ideas and the migration is causing disturbance in traditional way of life in Japan. Similar to what is seen in the US and Germany in more striking ways. The nationalist parties including Sanseito say even if the population falls to 100 million this is more than the population of 90 million in Germany, and is enough to sustain its economy. Use of robotics and AI is not talked about as much but offers Japan, US and Germany, a way to make up for the loss of foreign labor. In essence both American, British, Spanish, German, French, Italian, Austrian, Dutch, Danish and Japanese society share a yearning for traditional ways of life that are being ruffled and disturbed by the migration, immigration, or over tourism affecting their countries. Politicians need to pay attention to people affected and not live isolated in their own neighborhoods from the people in other less sheltered communities and neighborhoods across their countries. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that the high growth during Jeb Bush's period as governor of Florida was a result of the housing boom years. When that boom collapsed by 2008 the economy slumped badly. Taken as an average for the boom and slump years Florida's growth rate is slightly below the national average, says Krugman. Economists and other experts say productivity is a key factor for increasing wages and growth, which is a result of factors depending on the use of technology, business investment in productivity, human capital. It is stuck at a low level of 0.4% since 2010, according to economists, and not a factor that is dependent on who is president. During the two terms of president Obama growth was 2.1%, George H.W. Bush 2.0%, George W. Bush 1.6%- making the Bush and Obama years in office similiar in terms of growth. Before 2000 we see higher growth rates under a Republican president Reagan 3.4% and a Democratic president Clinton 3.7%. A significant factor since 2008 is the financial crisis and housing bubble which has in many countries such as Japan and Mexico, and to a lesser extent in the U.S., led to a lost decade....

LyrArc Article Gist
Russia stated at a meeting of OPEC oil producers that it would not accept cuts in oil production to stabilize the oil market. The coronavirus effects on the world economy have resulted in a sharp decline in demand for oil. This lack of an agreement among oil producers is leading to a steep drop of 30% in oil prices on March 9, 2020. The Russian position in talks was that it was too early for deep cuts considering that the  true impact of the coronavirus on the world economy was unknown, and that the loss of 1 million bbd from Libya had already reduced production. Experts say the Russians wanted to stabilize oil prices around $50 a barrel and the Saudis a bit higher. Under the OPEC agreement Russia would have to reduce its production by 1.5 million barrels per day (bbd), in addition to 2.1 million bbd from previous cuts that would be extended to March, which it found unacceptable. The impact of the double whammy of continued increase in coronavirus cases around the world and the drop in oil prices as a reflection of business confidence was also felt in world stock markets.  Russia's budget is less sensitive to oil prices than the Saudis. The Saudis need somewhere near $80 per barrel to breakeven. Analysts say Russia does not want to lose market share to American shale oil companies which do not have output cuts and benefit from lower oil prices. Shale oil companies in the U.S. are struggling in the present situation of low prices as many of them need $65 a barrel in price to breakeven. About 208 shale oil companies in the U.S. made bankruptcy filings since 2015.  The oil importing countries with increasing oil imports such as India will benefit from the drop in oil prices. Japan and other oil importing countries in Europe, Africa and Asia will also benefit as Russia and the Saudis go all out to increase production. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ  shows that president Xi is pulling back from his signature economic policy to reduce wide gaps in wealth and opportunities in China. In 2021 this was a policy that Xi pushed to reduce inequalities that have built up over decades of hypergrowth. One tenth of the population owns 68% of the wealth in China creating an highly unequal society. Concerned about the future of the Communist party as disparities kept widening and 40% of the population was left behind, Xi early on in his first and second terms made tackling corruption and inequality part of his policy.  Yet the way China's economy is structured, its dependence on the construction industry for growth, and on local governments for investment, it is easier to tackle infrastructure projects than address widening gaps in society. Xi's efforts have led to slowdown in growth to 5% or less. With the US and Europe moving to shorter supply chains and moving supply chains to less integration with China, slowing growth to less than 4-5% presents a major challenge for China. Leading to a pull back from the Common Prosperity policies that Xi initiated and which are part of Communist party policy in its early period after 1949. A major problem for China says WSJ is that social security contributions revenue is 6.5% of GDP compared to 9% for advanced countries in the OECD, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Personal income taxes are 1.2% of GDP compared to 10% in UK and US. This prevents the better funding of programs for maintaining a better safety net and social support for the less well off in society. The pandemic followed by Ukraine war have added new urgency to the acceleration of the effort to build new supply chains, leading to new manufacturing innovation and manufacturing leadership in the US and European Union, and in countries such as Japan, India, and other parts of Asia. This too has made the goals of reducing inequalities and addressing the wide disparities in Chinese society more difficult with sharply slowing growth in China. This was also the experience of Japan and South Korea with decades of fast growth followed by sharp slowdown with unanticipated problems. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Amanda Lacaze of Australian rare earths maker Lynas- what can be learned from her experience in rare earths? Lynas is a Australian mining company with a mine in an eroded volcano Mount Weld that has a concentration of rare earths metals. In 2014 it was faced with China's near monopoly of rare earths and price subsidies, lack of awareness in financial markets and the government about the importance of rare earths in manufacturing. It was a period under the Obama administration that after the Bush administration had little grasp of the importance of manufacturing in America and how its decline would affect communities across the Nation, economists trumpeted the virtue of free markets without grasping how China would wrestle control of manufacturing with state subsidies and aggressive pricing and of strategic new technologies.  This included rare earths where the monopoly was close to 100%- if it is 90% today it is because of companies like Lynas. Production processes at Lynas's plant in Malaysia were not sufficiently developed in 2014. When Amanda Lacaze (now 66 years and head of Australia's Minerals Agency) joined Lynas in 2014 the first problem aside from getting Japanese creditors to restructure loans because of aggressive pricing by Chinese firms was to improve manufacturing processes to get 95% quality instead of 48% quality (measured in number of quality rejected product). This was achieved in the first year. To do this she thinned her management ranks and closed offices in Sydney (to cut costs) and moved management to Malaysia where the problems in manufacturing processes would make or break the company. She was able to get creditor Japanese government backed Japan Australia Rare Earths financial institution to renew and extend loans. Had this not happened the company may not exist today. It shows the sheer foolishness that pervaded most of the American industry at that time, the failed economic theory that said America could not support its industry when rivals were supporting theirs, the Bush and Obama administrations that had no understanding of how the industrial competition was takin place in world trade that could substitute other nations for America' s dominance in manufacturing and did little to push back and regain the position for America in world trade. This ignorance continues in some sections of business today that cannot see the plain facts and refuses to see the enormous damage to the Nation from the destruction of its manufacturing base and loss of good jobs in communities across the US. Lynas is now getting contracts from the US government for rare earths and is the only reason China's dominance in rare earths in 90% and not 100% along with MP Materials of the US. Planning was discredited in the crazy euphoria that turned the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Communist Soviet Union, as economists never understood that planning that was used by the Soviets and Chinese in their Five Yer Plans is just borrowed from centuries of basic ways of conducting business that had originated with the Industrial Revolution in Britain. Without planning the growth of the British Navy and the industry that supported it Britain could never have gained the dominance that it did in the 19th century Industrial Revolution. As the Industrial Revolution spread in the US in the 19th and twentieth century every major company had a 1 year Operating plan and a Long Range Plan for 5 Years and 10 Years. The government would have identified rare earths with foresight as one of the newer technologies and the manufacturing infrastructure needed to support its development if these plans were developed at the different levels of government and at the highest levels. This was done under market economy in China. Instead DJT was forced to step back from trade negotiations with China for unfair trade when China held out with a threat to stop export of rare earths materials in 2025, because a huge hole or gap in planning happened at the highest levels of the US government. That happened 11 years after 2014 when Australian rare earths maker Lynas survival was in doubt under a new CEO Amanda Lacaze. This is only one of many misses in American manufacturing and industry, in world trade, that came from misguided economic theory and failure to grasp the basic facts behind the success of the Industrial Revolution in Europe and the US. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What this Editorial board opinion in the Indian Express is saying is that India should concentrate its efforts on modernizing its economy on a scale that is similar or surpasses that of China because of its access to the latest technologies. Just as China capitalized on the opportunity presented by its entry in the World Trade Organization in 2001, through an economy wide effort to build a manufacturing and export logistics base. India is presented with the opportunity of building its own manufacturing and export logistics base as supply chains are being redesigned in 2023. This requires a longer term plan with clear thinking and concentrated effort with the entire resources of the nation. What looks like a small or gradual shift in supply chain with the US and EU adding India and Vietnam to their Chinese manufacturing base is going to change with every change in world events, as the US concentration of manufacturing in China becomes a situation that is impossible to to maintain. The only logical way for the US and following the US the EU to create a proper balance in its political relationship with China is to change fully its lopsided concentration of manufacturing in China. Biden is only making the initial moves, the EU is only waking up to the need to make its own changes to reduce this concentration. How much distance does the US need to cover to reduce its concentration in China? By a large amount because the shift of manufacturing was excessive and ill advised done as companies in the US raced in a competition to shift outside over 2 decades and simply outdid themselves and performed a disservice to the workers and families of America whom they served. Just for the US to get workers and families to benefit from return of good manufacturing jobs to the US and restore its manufacturing base that has shriveled, it will have to be a massive enterprise, where day by day it becomes more evident that more and more needs to be and accomplished in an accelerated way. What this also means where appropriate to leave a progressively year after a year larger base in India, and also Vietnam, much larger than is envisaged today. This situation is even more acutely felt in Japan which to bring a proper balance in its political relationship with China needs to even more urgently reduce its concentration of manufacturing in China. It must be the task of the Modi government to have a clear view of the road ahead- build the needed logistical base for exports using the latest technologies and set higher and higher targets for manufacturing.  If you look at the map of Asia this is the Global South- India is 60-70% of the Global South with its population of 1.4 billion people mostly young with aspirations for a modern economy like that of the US and Germany. Add to that Indonesia and Vietnam, and other nations already in the redesigned supply chain in 2023 and you have 2 billion people in Asia. Concentrate on this for the next 2 decades for a complete transformation of India, that is what the younger generation demands of its government. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japanese Dads are taking on a bigger role and changing parenting. BBC Future shows this story about Japanese dads from a new generations that are taking on the joys, difficulties and responsibilities of parenting.  A new kind of superhero in Japanese manga comics is Ikumen, a Japanese term (from ikuji for childcare) for young dads actively spending time with their children compared to an earlier generation of fathers who spent most of their time at work, and rarely took on family responsibilities. During the sixties and seventies as Japan emerged from the wartime recovery and modernized Japanese culture defined men's role to spend most of the time at work, even getting allowance for spending from their wives who controlled the family budget.  In 2010 the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare started the Ikumen project to increase paternal involvement in child caring. This was a major cultural change and was part of the change in culture needed for the Third Arrow of Japan's Abenomics project to get women's participation up to western country levels. Today the women's participation rate in workplaces exceeds that of the U.S. Even in the 1980's men spent on average about 40 minutes with their children mostly during the family meal in the evening and even had to have their wives find their clothes. The common saying was - "jishin, kaminari, kaji, oyaji," earthquake, thunder, fire and father, remote and given respect. Women's reaction was not positive as they postponed marraige for later, then even not marrying at all for the next generation, leading to reduced childbirth rates. The Ikumen project projected fathers in a masculine role of heroes for taking on parenting, like the t-shirt logo "Strength for Society" portraying them as saving society, saving the  country. About 45% now support the idea of "men should work, women should stay at home" compared to 60% in 1992- drop of 15%. The statistics do not quite tell the story because during this period women participation in the workplace has jumped to western country levels as part of Abenomics Third Arrow to revive the economy. The problem that is still being tackled is that of bosses in the workplace who lack awareness and discourage taking paternal leave which has risen from 2% to 7% in five years 2012 to 2017. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Heizo Takenaka, head of the supervising agency for banks in Japan under prime minister Koizumi, took strong action to get banks to disclose the full extent of bad loans. This was needed to repair the banking system as piecemeal efforts had failed from 1996 to 2002. Takenaka says he realized that the economy could not recover with stimulus efforts until the banking system was cleared of bad debt and functioned normally to lend to business and consumers. He tells the NYT's Tabuchi that he stood firm and told the banks he was not ready for negotiation even when the banks called him absurd. He describes his experience with the banks, and says he cannot understand why the U.S. is not taking firm action with the banks.

LyrArc Article Gist
In this thoughtful essay Bob Davis of the WSJ asks whether the decision of the Clinton administration to admit China into the World Trade Organization was a bad one for the U.S.  Mr. Clinton in 2000 tried to persuade Congress citing words of president Woodrow Wilson that of a dream "of a world full of free markets, free elections, and free peoples working together."  Every year China would have its most favored nation status renewed with help from supporters in Congress. After WTO entry this was not necessary. Chinese leaders saw the entry into WTO as a way to knock down trade barriers, to act a wrecking ball for the planned economy, to give the economy a big boost.  In 1994 China was a relatively backward economy with 60% of the population living on less than $1.90 a day. Hard to imagine today.  Not everyone was convinced that it was good for the U.S. This included a trade attorney who had tackled a huge trade deficit with Japan in the Reagan period- Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer was Deputy Trade Representative negotiating with the Japanese. His prediction was that no job in America would be safe once China entered the WTO, that China would become a dominant trading nation.  Robert Cassidy, 73, trade negotiator for president Clinton looks back on that time and says that he regrets what has happened, that all his work night and a day only benefited business and hurt workers. David Autor, MIT economist and his colleagues,  in a later study documented loss of 2.4 million jobs to Chinese competition between 1999 and 2011, in many manufacturing towns dotting the landscape of America, particularly in the midwestern states. And the expectation that the higher economic growth would lead to less political control did not turn out to be true.  In the process multinationals rushed to China after WTO entry and China became the world's manufacturing floor. By 2013 China's per capita income reached $7000, after years of fast GDP growth approaching 10% a year.  About 400 million Chinese were lifted out of poverty from living on less than $1.90 per day from 1999 to 2011, according to the World Bank. A big problem was that the U.S. did not plan for the change from WTO entry. No resources were allocated for the plan to let American workers adjust through worker retraining and special trade handicapped income support, to allow for a slow planned shift. Instead the pace of growth was faster than that which the U.S. faced with the Japanese export offensive in the eighties. China experienced double digit growth after 2000. The irony is that the Republican administrations that followed Clinton followed a policy of free trade to the advantage of China's state run economy when working class Americans voted mostly for the Democratic Party. Little was done and little said in the media from Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the establishment during this time even after Mr. David Autor documented the effects of trade in the U.S.  Till Mr. Trump recognizing the alienation in communities hit by job losses from trade upended American politics, shifted this part of the electorate to the Republican base. Mr. Lighthizer's view is that complaints about China should be left out of WTO because it is naive to tackle it that way. With a $375 billion China trade deficit for 2017 the challenge has to be met in a different way, and the U.S. has to rely on regaining its economic strength within a fair trading framework. Having negotiated with the Japanese Mr. Lighthizer sees the approach adopted then as the one right for today. During the long negotiations Lighthizer is said to have received many negotiating positions of the Japanese signifying no change in long sessions. He once simply made a paper plane and sent it right back, in one of these sessions. He meant that the U.S. was serious about reversing the imbalance in trade. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Russian forces in Port Arthur (Dalian, Lushun) like the other European colonial powers in Tientsin took part in the joint operations of Japan, Britain, France, US, and Germany in the invasion of Peking in mid July 1901. Under the Soviet era China was an ally of the Soviet Union yet there was a strong sense of independent action that led to the breakdown of the relationship between Krushchev and Mao in the 1960's. This may be true also today as the European conflict in Ukraine may not be in China's interest of developing its economy and continuing on the path of modernity it adopted throughout the events of the 1930's to the 1990's to today. This report from that period shows the Russian army under Colonel Anisimov and General Stessel rescuing British admiral Seymour's force near Tientsin. The Russian forces under Russian Admiral Hildebrand played a leading role in the battle of the Taku forts that followed in late June 1901. The forces at Tientsin under Admiral Alekseev of about 8000 are mostly Russian. On 19 July 1901, Russia's General Linevich assumes control of the joint Japanese, Russian, British and French forces that conducted the campaign towards Peking.  The American version of the events in China in 1901 is given by Cornell University Prof. David Silbey in his 2010 book- The Boxer Rebellion, The Great Game in China. It shows the depressed condition of China at the time and the struggle to free China of the opium of British traders and conversions by Christian missionaries that undermined Chinese culture and society. The rebellion of 1901 is similar in China's history to the events of 1857 in India with the rebellion against British rule.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
PM Modi will meditate for 3 days and nights at the Vivekananda rock in the Indian Ocean on May 30 to June 1, 2024. In 1892 Swami Vivekananda meditated on a rock in the ocean at the tip of India in Kanya Kumari, as he set India on a path to modernization for the next 100 years and beyond. Many Indians including prime minister Modi have Vivekananda's mission for India's modernization as their clear objective, and this is behind the everything the PM does including the vision of Vikshit Bharat, a developed country by 2047 on the 100th anniversary of independence. Gandhiji read all of Vivekananda's writings and his freedom struggle against British rule was based on Vivekananda's ideas for India's regeneration and renewal leading to his book Hind Swaraj in 1905. The Bhagavad Gita was translated by Swami Swarupananda, a disciple of Vivekananda, and formed the basis for Gandhiji in the freedom struggle against the British.  Europe faced colonization on the Iberian peninsula and invasions right up to Budapest and Vienna by the 14th century, India faced the same and this was followed for India and China by the expansion of the British into Asia when China and India failed to grasp early the importance of science and technology and the new ideas that happened in Europe by the 18th and 19th century. Vivekananda wanted to see science and technology and the advances of modernization brought to the people of India a process happening as India modernizes all aspects of its economy. Vivekananda was also the inspiration for Indonesia's freedom struggle by Sukarno against Dutch rule. India and Indonesia today make up the largest population in the world larger than China and Japan combined, with a common culture and heritage and are together modernizing every aspect of the life of people.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new faces in the Biden administration on economic policy are Janet Yellen, as head of the central bank, the Federal Reserve, and Cecilia Rouse, a Princeton labor economist, as head of the Council of Economic Advisors. In this report WSJ looks at the economic policies of the new administration after Mr. Trump rejected globalization and international trade agreements that were not in America's interest or that hurt American workers.  Informal conversations with experts suggest WSJ says, that globalization is now suspect as a way that benefitted China and other countries including Germany, and hurt the U.S. France, Britain and other countries in Europe that were not strong exporters. This hurt their industries which were eroded by imports resulting in the three decades long destruction of communities across these countries that depended on manufacturing. It has also hurt countries like India that let their markets be dominated by Chinese imports, with a reversal of policy in 2020 with self reliant economy under "Atman Nirbhar" policy as the new goal. Mr. Trump's tactic in this trade war was to fight back to regain America's position in manufacturing with tariffs on imports. The trade deficit had to come down with China just as it had done with Japan decades earlier. This was starting to happen. One problem in bringing down the imports was the increase in the value of the dollar, as Janet Yellen has noted. The new policies will look at what the effective policy will be while keeping this goal in mind.  Both Yellen and Ms. Rouse have spent years studying labor markets and Ms. Rouse is quoted here as saying: " With open trade there are winners and losers. The losers are really losing, and we need to take care of them and take on more nuanced models of international trade as a result." Other experts from the earlier Democratic administrations such as Prof. Frankel at Harvard say that there needs to be increased focus on American workers left behind by trade, technology and unequal education, with more spending on preschool, infrastructure and health. All this suggests that there will be a continuation of U.S. policy in challenging Chinese use of globalization to advance its interests, chastening Americans on the use of the very word globalization which can mean different things to different people based on how they can gain advantage. The word may even be entirely dropped in favor of what the policies are and what they do for the American worker, American communities including small towns, and the American people, spelling each of these out every time supply chains and the global economy is mentioned. The new administration will get an opportunity to show that it too can come up with new ideas and action plan to strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. It will also have to show substantial results as people have lost patience with Democrats and Republicans on the lack of progress in rebuilding America's leadership role in the world economy, and in defending American workers and factories. Clinton, Obama and Bush all offered false promises on trade with China ignoring the damage this had done to American leadership in the world economy. Clinton with support for China's entry into the World Trade Organization, Bush with foreign wars and costly diversions and regulatory failures with banks that led to the 2009 deep recession hurting Americans, and Obama with the lack of will and interest in America's leadership role in the world as the dominant nation in manufacturing,   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China and India pass Mexico as immigration to the U.S. from Mexico declines rapidly, as a result of an improving Mexican economy, the 2008-2011 recession in the U.S. with sharp drop in jobs for construction, lower birthrates, and stricter U.S. law enforcement at the U.S. border with Mexico. Researchers using the American Community Survey of the U.S. Census Bureau found immigration from China increased to 147,000 from China, 129,000 from India, as it declined to 125,000 from Mexico, for 2013. This Survey counts a person as an immigrant for a particular year who says he was living abroad previously. Mexico shows a decline from 400,000 in 2000, with steady decline for every year after 2005. In 2000 India and China were at about 75,000, and did not cross the 100,000 mark till 2007. Other Asian countries are also at the top including S. Korea, Philippines and Japan. William Frey documents this surge in diversity in the U.S., -which is supplemented by now common intermarraige between young people from different countries of origin- in his book "Diversity Explosion."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Landers and Gale of the WSJ show how undersupplied conscript soldiers, high inflation and industrial breakdowns during wartime have led to major upheavals in Russia. Three conflicts led to such changes in Russia's domestic situation. The Russo-Japanese war in 1905 led to Russia seeing one fourth of 340,000 Russian troops killed in a battle near the Chinese city of Shenyang, and loss of most of its Baltic fleet in a Japanese attack on Port Arthur. The war ended with a peace treaty arranged by president Theodore Roosevelt of the United States. The Russian czar gave up most of his absolute powers in 1905.  In 1914 Ukraine was involved in regime change as the Germans fought to take Ukraine. The czar wanted to keep Russia's expansive sphere of influence. Without Ukraine's agriculture and industry and its population Russia would not be a great power, says an expert on Czarist Russia. At the time the Russian military was ill prepared in motorized vehicles and communications equipment, and industry lacked the ability to resupply the military. Inflation jumped leading to unrest and protests. Fighting in the First World War led to millions of refugees. In 2022 experts see the same old problem of seeking spheres of influence leading to wars, and the lack of sufficient ability to cope with prolonged wars when short wars were expected by the regimes in power in Russia. Dissent inside Russia and protests led to the abdication of Czar Nicholas in March 2017, and Bolsheviks led by Lenin seizing power in November of 2017. By 1979 Ukrainian leader Leonid Brezhnev was leader of the Soviet Union as Russia's economy could not keep up with modernization. Seeking spheres of influence Brezhnev pushed into a long war in Afghanistan in the mistaken idea that a quick strike on Kabul with a change in government would achieve Soviet goals in central Asia. By 1989 the Russian army withdrew from Afghanistan and in 1990 the protests led to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union and emergence of Russia as a separate country. Landers and Gale of the WSJ see these events in Russian history showing how wars have led to domestic changes and upheavals in Russia when leaders projected power beyond Russia's capacity to handle the results of conflict. Russia's economy is about the size of Italy or Britain say experts and its industry much smaller than the European Union economies and the US, Japan combined.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Fuel efficiency rules require average fuel efficiency in the U.S. of 35 mpg by 2016. The debate is now on what to do for 2017 to 2025. New technology such as the P2 systems for hybrids already used in VW, Nissan and Hyundai vehicles makes a 20% increase in fuel efficiency possible. Large investments are being made to bring new technology to bear on increasing fuel efficiency significantly. Government agencies are looking at different scenarios by which the new fuel economy standards beyond 2017-2025 could be set between 47 mpg and 62 mpg. An additional factor is the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions- at 47 mpg the reduction would be 3%, at 62 mpg the reduction would be 6%. Another factor is how much the impact is on the cost of vehicles and reduced cost on gasoline. Here there is a wide range in the numbers for average mpg rules at 62 mpg- with EPA estimates at $2800-$3500 increase in vehicle cost and $5000 savings in fuel cost, Centre for Automotive Research estimates at $9790 increase in vehicle cost. The 62 mpg translates into "real world" actual efficiency of 45 mpg. In April 2011, 17 senators put out a letter of support for the 62 mpg proposal. There is a public value involved in this that is also significant- the reduced dependence on foreign oil means savings in defense expenditures in parts of the Middle East, and an economy that is less impacted by volatility in the price of oil. As this aspect of public value or benefits cannot be quantified easily even though they are significant, this may tend to be lost in the debate and the politics of fuel efficiency. For automakers there is significant marketing value in having a visible and strong presence in fuel efficient vehicles because of perception as forward looking- something that hurt Detroit carmakers in the last decade. During periods of gasoline prices at $5 a gallon this provides carmakers with an extra cushion of safety in securing car sales. Carmakers in one country such as the U.S. also have to worry about what carmakers in other countries such as Japan and Germany are doing- if the standards in the U.S. develop a gap compared to other countries developing advanced fuel efficiency technologies this poses significant risks because of the global nature of the automobile marketplace. See the group "Asleep at the Spigot" for more details on this. Many of these less quantifiable factors do not get the attention they deserve because they are significant from experience but not easily quantified. Throw into this the large unknown of what new technologies not yet developed lie ahead with a burst of effort by one country or another, which bring cost reductions at the same time - and the debate requires as much a good sense of what is the path offering the greatest advantages in years ahead than a pure exercize in numbers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin in the NYT why the U.S. China Phase 1 Trade Agreement is more than a hill of soyabeans as he puts it, more than about all the soyabeans that the U.S. farmers can sell to China. China's economy was seeing the effect of U.S. tariffs. Additional tariffs to cover all imports from China to the U.S. would have worsened this. China avoided this by agreeing to Phase 1. The U.S. had looked for some enforcement mechanism based on China putting this down in a written agreement particularly for avoiding subsidies to state enterprises and improper access to U.S. advanced technologies. China's reluctance to do this led to Mr. Trump saying that China had reversed its position and Trump expanding the tariffs stage by stage. These issues are now set aside for Phase 2 still to be negotiated. Both sides taking what they could get. China relief from the threat of tariffs on all exports. The U.S. under Mr. Lighthizer's negotiating leadership retaining the enforcement idea through the tariffs that are still in place of 25% on half of China's exports to the U.S. The bonus for Mr. Trump is the goodwill China generates by agreeing to buy all the U.S. farmers can produce, farmers having not only stood behind Mr. Trump but also forming a key part of his support base. China will continue to compete in technological areas with the U.S., and the state enterprise model which worked for China as Mr. Xi tells visitors will continue. Phase 2 is just that Phase 2, when and if it can be negotiated between Trump with his negotiator Lighthizer and Xi with his negotiator Liu He. On key points neither side is budging. A key goal for Mr. Trump is to put the trade surplus China enjoys of $300 plus billion a year with the U.S. on a serious downward path, and bring so many of the jobs and manufacturing back home. On this trade data for 2019 and the plan for 2020 of both countries is clear. It should be down each year by 10-20% for the next few years, a major achievement of Mr. Lighthizer, who did the same with  Japan under president Reagan. ...