LyrArc Article Gist
Any Asian conflict involving China would in a few months destroy Apple's value, CEO's would change quickly, and Apple policies change to shift entire production to India and the US in a rapid shift. Tim Cook would be seen as having gambled against America's interests, unresponsive and failing after repeated warnings.  Apple's goal of sourcing from India by 2027 a mere 26% of its iphones, means that a decade after USTR Lighthizer and DJT started the task of reshoring manufacturing to US and allies in 2016, the No. 1 outshoring company would still be making 75% of its dollar value iphones in China. A degree of overconcentration that would make no sense considering that Apple's 75% of manufacturing would be entirely at risk in 2027 after repeated warnings and inaction. The only option for Tim Cook in 2025 is to come up with new goals of shifting a minimum of 50-60% of its dollar value product manufacturing for iphones to India by 2027. . Tim Cook as Apple CEO has done little to prevent the overconcentration of manufacturing in China since 2016. About 10 years after DJT was elected to bring manufacturing back to India or close allies the simple idea of diversification was not implemented. Why? Having set up this system starting in 1998, a system that did not exist before that tiem when Steve Jobs hired Tim Cook with a winning formula to Make in China, a country just emerging from its Communist phase of failed state economy. By 2008 in 10 years the infrastructure was built in a backward largely agricultural economy that was rapidly modernizing under a market economy with state run capitalism under the Communist Party experiment. The Bush Obama 16 years were ones with America not responding to the challenge posed by this new system which could create huge surges in production capacity with focus on key technologies and flood markets. The next decade after 1998-2008 was one of rapid growth of this experiment which combined with design and engineering in the US generated few jobs in manufacturng in the US, but huge profits with huge margins fro a low cost base with a high image and technology innovation product. Lighthizer, Navarro, Jamieson had already sounded the alarm for American manufacturing and loss of jobs in 2016.  America's deindustrialization was becoming a bigger challenge by 2020 so that president Biden continued the policy of reindustrializing. In 2025 China 2025 Plan that was a warning in 2016 is already a reality with China flooding the world in solar panels, and ready to flood the markets overseas with electric cars. Apple may only get a reprieve, this exemption is not the same as the last one. National security is an issue, key technologies need to be protected. There is only one more opportunity to rebuild American manufacturing and keep promises.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Darren Woods of Exxon gives the view of many in business in the U.S. when he says of the Paris climate change accords of 2015- "We need a framework like that to address the threat of climate change." GE's CEO Immelt says a decision to leave the Paris accords "is not going to change one thing we do for energy efficiency, and I think all business is going to feel the same way." Most utilities including AEP see the political changes in government as coming and going, making it important to base their long term strategies on the economics and the general trends worldwide. Only support for the move to leave is coming from some coal companies and the steel industry, a small fraction of the overall industry in the U.S. Not mentioned here is the moves worldwide, by China motivated by health and pollution concerns to shift away from coal after disastrous pollution effects seen in China, and the decades old effort in Germany that has made the country self sufficient in renewable energy through use of solar and wind energy. India has set aggressive targets for renewables energy and is likely to join this long term trend as the economics shift in favor of wind and solar, especially when the health costs are counted in.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration's $38.6 billon loan program using Stimulus funds was intended to create 65,000 jobs. Two years into this program, with half the money disbursed, the program has created a mere 3,545 new permanent jobs according to Energy Department figures. The Energy Department claims its $5.9 billion loan guarantees to Ford Motor Company to produce energy efficient vehicles by upgrading plants in 5 states saved 33,000 jobs. Brookings Institution analyst, Mark Muro, says the administration appears to be counting all the workers at these plants and not the jobs saved. 33,000 is close to half the Ford hourly and salaried U.S. employees. Harvard Business School professor, Josh Lerner, says there is a tendency to do a lot of fuzzy math in these figures. Muro points to the need to set large expectations for short term political calculations. The Energy Department's own figures show 20 "green tech"companies won loans so far under this project by negotiating with the Energy Department. If these companies hire the people they agreed to they would hire 8,050 new permanent workers. Only 10 of these companies have created or saved jobs so far. Of the other 10 some won loan approval only recently. The whole process is time consuming. Even if the Energy Department were to create the 60,000 jobs under the revised estimate, each job saved or created would come at a cost of 640,000 dollars in loan guarantees. Using the figure of $19.3 billion disbursed 2 years into this program (half of the $38.6 billion) and 8,050 jobs created, would give a cost of $2.4 million in loan guarantees for each job created- an astoundingly high figure. Other factors to consider are the additional jobs created downstream by suppliers to these companies as the administration states, and the cost of loans if as in the case of Solyndra a company goes bankrupt. Solyndra received a loan of over $500 million and represents 3% of loan guarantees. The administration and Congress assumed a failure rate of 5-10% for this program. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Panasonic forecast a loss of $10 billion or 780 billon yen for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2012. This is the second largest loss for a Japanese manufacturing company. Hitachi lost 787 billion yen in the fiscal year ending March 2009 after the financial crisis of 2008. In the prior fiscal year Panasonic showed net profit of 74 billion yen. Panasonic posted restructuring costs of 191 billion yen for the television business and 49 billion yen for the chip business for the first three quarters of the current fiscal year. For the fourth quarter it will take a 250 billion yen writedown of goodwill for the Sanyo acquisition. Panasonic acquired Sanyo based on the potential for growth in its lithium ion battery and solar panel business. But the Sanyo unit is facing stiff competition from manufacturers in South Korea and China, with Samsung Electronics as a major competitor. The strength of the Japanese yen is affecting all Japanese manufacturers. The price competition is severe in the television business and this is also affecting Sony. Since the acquisition Sanyo's earning prospects have significantly worsened says Panasonic CFO, Makoto Uenoyama. Panasonic CEO Ohtsubo defends the acquisition saying that without the rechargeable battery business and its potential in hybrid/electric cars Panasonic's growth potential would not be the same as it is now. Panasonic plans to stop production at two plants making plasma and LCD panels this fiscal year. The job cuts planned will bring the number of employees down from 367,000 in the prior fiscal year to below 350,000....

LyrArc Article Gist
Awareness about climate change is increasing. A poll in 2017 shows 61% of people in 38 countries seeing it as a big threat. Only terrorists inspired bigger fear. Even with the U.S. withdrawal from the climate change agreement many cities and states in the U.S. including California and New York are committed to the goals set in the Paris Accords. China is making a shift away from coal and fossil fuels. Yet the huge demands in Asia, particularly India as it shifts from a rural to an urbanized economy, mean that the shift away from fossil fuels is going to be very difficult. In the last decade 2006-2016 energy demand in Asia increased by 40%, according to the Economist, oil and coal use increased by about 3% a year and natural gas at 5.2% a year. Solar energy and wind power use is increasing and solar becoming cost efficient. Yet Asia still depends on fossil fuels. Even the use of electric cars in China as it pushes for higher numbers of electric vehicles means use of energy coming from a electricity grid powered two thirds by coal, producing more carbon dioxide than some very efficient gasoline driven car models. There are short term costs in the shift from coal but this comes with a better cleaner air demanded by urban residents, and less costs in health. In certain countries like India the costs are to be balanced with the need to tackle rural poverty.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Email exchanges between OMB staffers and Obama administration officials, released exclusively to the Washington Post, show the Obama administration urging the OMB to speed up its decision on the half a billion dollar loan to Solyndra. This was part of stimulus funds to the solar industry. Solyndra was a favorite of the Obama administration according to the Washington Post, and aides to Rahm Emmanuel and other officials sent emails urging speeding up approval. OMB officials in their replies stated they were under pressure. One email by a senior OMB staffer sent to McSweeney, Biden's domestic policy advisor, Aug 31, 2009, said: "we have ended up with a situation of having to do rushed approvals on a couple of occasions (and we are worried about Solyndra at the end of the week)... we would prefer to have sufficient time to do our diligence reviews." Other emails referred to "the time pressure we are under to sign-off on Solyndra," and indicated "there isn't time to negotiate." Solyndra had large investments by the funds operated for the family foundation of George Kaiser, an Obama fundraiser....

LyrArc Article Gist
How many jobs will leak out for the fiscal stimulus if a lot of them, like 40% of manufacturing ouput in the US consisting of imported goods, are jobs created in China and Europe or other countries that make the parts for the wind energy and the solar energy products made in the USA? There will be domestic content rules but the international economy is better off if some of the jobs that result from a USA stimulus are offset by the jobs created here from the stimulus packages of Europe, China and other countries. China's infrastructure spending would lead to jobs in the US making some of the infastructure equipment that is exported or in the case of India the nuclear plants equipment that is exported.

LyrArc Article Gist
Panasonic announced a third quarter loss of over $8.8 billion. New CEO Kazuhiro Tsuga says Panasonic will reduce manufacturing in Japan, cease selling mobile phones overseas and reduce investments in solar panels and rechargeable batteries. Tsuga told a news conference: "Unless we take this step, whatever we say will be an empty promise. That's how damaged our current situation is." Panasonic faces severe competition from Samsung which has larger investments in manufacturing, research and marketing of televisions and mobile phones. Panasonic share prices fell 19%.

LyrArc Article Gist
A detailed look and appraisal of the Tata's achievement and the vision and plans of Ratan Tata. See the Creation of Wealth a book about the Tata family and the epilogue written by Ratan Tata. And Conversations with Tata about Ratan's father Jamshedji Tata. Some of the achievements are the restructuring of Tata Steel, the acquisition of Corus, the Tata Motors Indica car and the first 1 lakh ruppee car the Nano a Ratna Tata vision coming true, the growth of Tata Consultancy in the software industry, the entry into retail, telecom, biotech, solar, and others, all meant to put Tata at the forefront of India's industrial development and to bring millions of Indians into the market economy. A lot of foresight is built into this, and now Tata believes in setting bigger goals following the example of China knowing that as India grows it will grow into Tata's larger projects. The Nano especially makes it possible to put a car in the reach of India's millions and by this way helping build a large auto manufacturing industry in India for the first time, and enlarging a number of other industries like steel. And Ratan Tata is not content with what tata achieved with the Nano, he wants Tata to reinvent the auto business. In the process of doing all this Tata has kept to its roots which is a strong social committment and a ethical foundation. Even the Jamshedpur Tata Steel restructuring was done by keeping the committments to education, health care etc for Jamshedpur. Tata is owned 66% by a charitable foundation and the ownership and management structure is designed such that even though the Tata family owns only 3% of the shares Ratan Tata manages the direction, goals and progress of the diverse companies which are independently run through management groups that oversee the companies. These management overseeing structures are the holding companies Tata Sons and Tata Industries staffs, and the Group Corporate Office headed by Ratan Tata and which has 9 senior executives who sit on the boards of the companies and act as mentors, nentoring managers and supporting corporate social responsibility values. ...

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
International Energy Agency estimates show the U.S. surpassing Saudi Arabia as the world's largest oil producer by 2020 because of the boom in shale oil production. The estimates are for 11.1 million barrels a day from the U.S. in 2020.

LyrArc Article Gist
Yale Prof. Fair says that evidence from his model shows the yuan appreciation having a positive effect on American jobs looks better than it really is. Two negative effects are in play. The first is that Chinese output decreases will have an effect on Chinese imports that will affect US exports. And the other effect that will come into play is the increase in US prices. His conclusion is that it unlikely we will see a large increase in American jobs from the appreciation of China's currency.

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Reich, a former Labor Secretary, says that instead of "rebalancing" with Chinese consumers buying more American goods and China exporting less to the USA, things are headed in the opposite direction. Why? Because at the macroeconomic level China is devoting more of its country's resources to production capacity. Chinese consumers are taking home a smaller proportion of the total economy. In 2008 personal consumption amounted to 35% of the total economy, whereas in 1998 it was 50%. Capital investment in the same 10 years went up 35% to 44%. Chinese continue to save and these savings are going into infrastructure and manufacturing capacity. There is even a social twist to the savings, with fewer young Chinese women than men parents with boys have to compete in the marraige market and save assets for this. Households are also saving to support more elderly people as population is aging quickly with population policies. All this means that with all the talk (see links to Niall Ferguson and Krugman), the situation will likely roll on in this manner till things reach an impasse, or there is a strong political backlash in the USA which leads to stronger trade actions by the government, or there is a crisis. Meanwhile the trade deficit is headed higher and Chinese foreign reserves will go far above the current $2.3 trillion. And the Europeans will also be getting restless with their trade imbalance, as the euro edges higher and the yuan remians pegged to the dollar, leading to trade distortions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Kasman of J.P. Morgan Chase only sees a small upturn in activity, that as he sees it in a world where activity is so depressed that modest changes by business and households give a lift, with unemployment coming down to 9%. Hatzius of Goldman sees unemployment rising in an economy where capacity utilization is extremely low, with unemployment rising to 10.5% even with the best efforts of the government. Hatzius sees a painful defaltion as a serious risk and he points out that the Fed can do less about deflation than it can do about inflation. The one point that both agree on is exports have to give alift to the economy, and both welcome a depreciatipon of the dollar to lift the economy through exports. Hatzius makes the point that the lift to exports is still limited- not enough in exchage rate depreciation of the dollar to help the American economy. And Kasman actually says it now Asia's turn to do their share. We lifted them out of the slump after the 1997 Asian crisis, when their currencies depreciated and exports to the US lifted their economies....