LyrArc Article Gist
The G20 declaration from Indonesia says that it "is essential to uphold international law and the multilateral system that safeguards peace and stability." It called the threat of use of nuclear weapons "inadmissable." It said "most members strongly condemned the war in Ukraine." Overall this was a major step forward with meetings between Biden and Xi, Trudeau and Xi of China, and discussions that led to Macron of France announcing his intention to visit China to get China to mediate for peace in Ukraine. It sets the path forward after Covid pandemic for peaceful cooperation in places other than Ukraine and efforts to bring the war in Ukraine to a close. The midterms in the US Congress also set the stage for Mr. Biden to offer a stable US participation after the volatile Trump years in peaceful competition with China, and growth in India, Africa, and other parts of Asia and Latin America.

LyrArc Article Gist
Experts say Trump could still walk away from a trade deal with China if the key goals of ending state subsidies that lead to unfair competition, and the enforcement steps if China violates the deal are not met. China has agreed to do this in the past but no mechanism was put in place for resolving this if China violated the agreement.

LyrArc Article Gist
China lets the yuan drop to below 7 to the dollar as it responds to president Trump threat of additional tariffs of 10% on $300 billion of Chinese goods. Previously the People's Bank of China, China's central bank, defended seven to to the dollar. The weaker Chinese currency would be an offset to the tariffs on Chinese goods.

This has risks for China as in the capital flight from China in 2015-2016. Debt denominated in foreign currencies has built up under an illusion of currency stability, especially for property developers in China with about $55 billion of such debt, according to Moody's.

China's other response was to suspend agricultural purchases from the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
The deep deterioration in U.S. China relations as the U.S. sees itself in a disadvantage in trade with China and the Trump administration imposes tariffs, calls for changing existing supply chains and trade to safeguard U.S. interests. The lack of transparency from China about the coronavirus and the underreporting that led to the U.S. and Europe not taking the threat seriously enough or taking defensive steps is also seen as a part of the deeper problem as the U.S. and Europe bear the brunt of the coronavirus in terms of deaths and cases.  This presents a deeper problem than the trade issue by itself as the U.S. had a trade issue with Japan which was later resolved. The way the Trump administration sees itself as the only protector of U.S. interests in trade, security and international cooperation creates a new level of tensions. Other countries such as Australia, India, Japan, and countries in South East Asia are seen as having similar concerns as supply chains are being remade to reflect the new trading conditions and economic structures. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It is important to understand the tariffs imposed by the Trump administration because of the many misleading headlines. The new tariffs placed by the Trump administration on a list of 1300 imported products from China are for about $50 billion and targeted at high tech products in flat screen televisions, medical devices, aircraft parts and batteries, other high tech products that China hopes to get an edge over the U.S. under its "Made in China 2025" plan. China still enjoys a huge surplus with the U.S. This plan is intended to better manage the next phase of the competition with China as China seeks to get an edge in high tech products. The steel tariffs were targeted at China's buildup of surplus steel capacity in the last 2 decades, with little to do with the next phase of the competition globally between the U.S., the E.U. and China. This is a carefully planned move showing American resolve to be competitive in the high tech industries of the future. It will be followed by a comment period during which the administration will get feedback on product choices. A public hearing is set for May 15 in Washington, and companies can file objections till May 22. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
America had forgotten it's workers built America in a Clinton-Trump world. The Federal Poverty Level is $35000 - $40000 when entry younger UAW workers at lower tiers make $34000 a year during wage negotiations and a UAW strike in 2023. The contrast from 2016 could not be greater- no president in history except Biden on a worker strike picket line yesterday, Mrs Clinton oblivious about unions in the midwest in 2016. Mr. Trump saying wage negotiations not important as he visits Drake Enterprises, automobile parts supplier, in Clinton Township, Macomb County, Michigan. The Guardian reports most were small business owners, with  few autoworkers. Enthusiasm of small business owners high for Trump in this swing county in Michigan. In stark contrast to the 2016 campaign president Biden was seen the previous day with a bull horn at a UAW auto workers strike picket line, becoming the first US president in history to do this. Biden said "workers built the middle class." Trump said China was the enemy not low wages or incompetent bosses, saying "the current wage negotiations are not as important as you think," when workers had tiered wages from previous concessions on wages, with entry level wages starting at about $17 an hour. That is only slightly above the $16 minimum wage in California. America in the Clinton-Trump world had truly forgotten that workers in its factories built America, and workers families made America what it was for most of the century since Lincoln and the Industrial Revolution. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Karishma Vaswani of the BBC points out that the Trump administration tariffs and the response from China with tariffs of its own, are not the beginning of a trade war but negotiating tactics of both sides. Behind the scenes and behind the declarations and position statements both sides are talking to each other and considering the options open to each. The U.S. position is that China has emerged with a bigger share of the global economy by dumping products, subsidizing its industries from solar panels to high tech ventures, and stealing American technology by forcing U.S. firms into joint ventures that increase pass through of advanced technology. U.S. firms seeking access to the Chinese market or using China as a manufacturing base such as Boeing, Apple, GE and other high tech companies are in ventures or manufacturing arrangements where China has access to advanced American technology. Nathaniel Taplin in his article in the WSJ also sees this as a negotiating position set out in the U.S. for talks with China. Taplin says the U.S. is in a stronger position in this negotiation because of the huge surplus of about $300 billion that China now has with the U.S., and which is increasing in 2018 with the strength of the dollar. The Trump administration is looking to correct the trade imbalance in the future by focussing on China's access to advanced U.S. technologies in the next phase of competition between the U.S., Europe and China. This limited objective is more likely to lead to concessions by China Taplin argues, because of two reasons. China needs the dynamism of U.S. firms and technology advances because these firms and Chinese firms that are getting foreign investment are the most productive part of the Chinese economy with jobs generated, rate of return about twice that of inefficient state run firms. China also needs access to advanced U.S. and European technologies even in a limited form as it pursues further modernization.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. and India face difficult trade negotiations as India moves to build its Make in India campaign, building capabilities of Indian manufacturing companies for global supply chains. Mr. Trump will sign a $3 billion defense deal with India for supplying helicopters and other equipment to India. Indian policy on trade is to ensure local content and transfer of technology to build capabilities of local companies. The goodwill generated by the visit by Mr. Trump to India, and deals on defense could lead to agreement on other trade issues, as India and the U.S. balance other considerations such as the rise of China into the picture. This will take time and is likely to be done after the elections. Differences on tariffs will continue in the same way that differences with China led only to a partial deal, with contentious trade issues on technology left for the future.

LyrArc Article Gist
For the first time a senior figure in Beijing tells why China rejected a U.S. offer for a deal in May 2019. Mr. Trump said at the time that China withdrew its agreement on the deal after initially agreeing to it, creating a lack of trust. 

Senior economic official Li Deshiu says "it was a wholly unfair treaty that seeks to colonize China's economy. If this is accepted it is giving up China's development path, giving up China's rights for development, and making China a vassal of the U.S."

He says the trade war is a broader U.S. strategy to limit China's development in key industries. This is the Chinese perspective on the situation which was not stated in clear terms but alluded to till now.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump has decisively changed the Republican party. Most Republicans support Mr. Trump personally, less the Republican party. Mr. Lindsey Graham, a senator from South Carolina, says of the Republican party before Trump that it had become a bit staid, that we looked like the banker next door who may foreclose on your house. Mr. Romney epitomized that in his view. Gone are the views on deficits, on wars, and on imports and transfer of technology to China as being acceptable.  Five years from 2015 when Mr. Trump came into prominence with his new style taking on the establishments of both parties with a fierce disdain for convention, both the Bushes and the Obamas and Clintons, the Republican party is completely transformed. Registered Republicans are now 60% non college educated in 2020 compared to 50% non college educated in 2016. The Trump policies on trade putting American workers first and America first have a resounding popularity with this audience- this should be no surprise after decades of job losses and factories shipped overseas under the previous administrations for 2 decades. Most of these workers are not college educated and are white and had enjoyed a good standard of living with a high school education in American factories till the shift of American manufacturing to China destroyed good paying jobs and impoverished the American working class.  Only 30% of college educated people are registered Republicans in 2020 compared to 40% in 2016. Overwhelmingly about 90% of registered Republicans are white.  They are majority male and older but there is a significant about 40% female and 40% young population under 40 years of age. This might resemble the party put together by Missouri Congressman Harry Truman as he led the Democratic Party in 1948 with a majority of non college educated Democrats, fighting for American workers and America first in the cold war with Russia. Truman also had a rough Missouri farm language and accent comparable to Mr. Trump's rough style and language disdainful of the old establishment and new tech establishment. Both were heavily disliked by the media and both did not let this bother them in any way. Both liked facing large crowds as Truman showed in campaigning by train across the country and Trump has shown in campaign rallies run in his own way. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump says the U.S. could permanently cut off funding to the WHO and revoke U.S. membership if the group does not make changes in the way it operates showing a lack of transparency in its operations and dependence on China. Mr. Trump says the WHO has shown "alarming lack of independence" from Beijing. In a direct letter to the Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus -"it is clear the missteps by you and your organization in responding to the pandemic have been extremely costly to the world." Mr. Trump gave the WHO 30 days to make "major substantive improvements" or he would cut funding and reevaluate U.S. membership. Mr. Trump said in the letter that the WHO ignored early reports of the virus spreading in Wuhan, failed to share information with other countries. The U.S. which has the largest contribution by far to the WHO was unable to influence the organization. The U.S. has influence in finance at the IMF, the World Bank, and in the tech world, yet this did not extend to important matters of public health. It could be that public health had become an afterthought in the rush to prominence in tech and finance. The contributions of the U.S. exceed anything any other country has made. During the 2 years 2018 and 2019 the U.S. contributed $893 million, according to WHO records, cited in the WSJ. During this period the contribution of China was $86 million with an additional $50 million added recently. The $2 billion Mr. Xi said China will contribute is incorrectly reported as for the WHO, it is what China says it will use to support Africa and other countries in the world to fight the pandemic. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
"Made in China 2025" is a plan by China to build competitive companies in new technology industries such as advanced microchips, driverless cars, robotics. This is one area in which there is a huge difference in trade matters more than the tariffs issue, because the U.S. sees this as an effort to dominate these industries with state subsidized loans at low interest rates. The Trump administration has threatened to impose 25% tariffs on imports from China in these industries to protect U.S. companies. The U.S. insists there should be a level playing field for U.S. companies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ says a second term of former president Trump would look very different from the first. Republicans achieved their goal of tax reform in the first two years of that term. Following that trade tariffs ensued against China creating a different environment in world trade. A second term would lead to more action on trade and more tariffs. Ip says the former president could impose tariffs on all Chinese imports and this would lead to retaliatory tariffs from China and be met with EU retaliatory action in a tit for tat manner. The result would be disruption in world trade and affect the world economy. Higher inflation could also be result of such disruptions.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump has a firm resolve not to get the U.S. involved in wars in distant places so that he can focus on important economic and other issues including the current confrontation with China on trade. He has relied on advice from General Keane as he forged American policy on Iran and other foreign policy issues. Mr. Bolton the National Security Adviser holds strong opinions on Iran and this is seen as a problem that could accidentally create more tensions or war with Iran. He was passed over with the job going to General McMaster in the earlier part of the Trump administration.The use of an aircraft carrier moving to the Persian Gulf region was merely a precautionary measure says the Trump administration, and the U.S. continues to look for ways to work out its differences with Iran even as it imposed sanctions on Iran. This brings the U.S. closer to its allies in Europe.

LyrArc Article Gist
US Representative Katherine Tai sets out the policy of the Biden administration on trade with China. The policy is simply to keep Trump administration policy on tariffs in place and seek dialogue with China. This report in the WSJ explains what this means.  The Biden administration is preparing a long term policy to restore American leadership in the world in technology, trade and industry. This means as in semiconductors providing $52 billion to assist US firms to make semiconductors at home. The US will build a new supply chain that is resilient and brings more of the critical technologies in manufacturing back to the US. Where Mr. Trump was the initiator of a new policy on trade but lacked a long term vision Mr Biden is giving the Trump policies new vigor and shape and a long term vision of belief in America's role in the world. He is doing this by building on America's key strength - its people. The only way to do this is to invest massively after three decades of disinvestment under previous administrations. This comes in the shape of the $3.5 trillion plan for infrastructure and the Families and Workers Plan. Biden is also building stronger relationships with allies Australia, Britain, Japan, India, and Germany for trade, supply chain, and defense.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Biden administration is the first administration in decades to do this to protect American industry and industry of other manufacturing capable nations such as India, in effect protecting a whole new supply chain that allows all to participate but non to dominate unfairly. The Bush, Trump, Obama administrations failed to do this. A concern most economists and many business leaders fail to understand to the great misfortune of America's workers and communities and workers and communities in other nations. As the US restricted flow of technologies in advanced chips to China to protect its tecnologies, China is investing $40 billion in mature chips. The Biden administration is now shifting its attention to mature chips technologies to protect American chip industry and prevent overproduction of mature chips in China for export leading to dumping of the product in the US and hitting the domestic chip industry hard.

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ looks at the result of changes in supply chains away from China, and the new trading relationship with China to 2028. He says the shift to a new global supply chain that diversifies it away from concentration in China is taking place. Would taking the tariffs from 30% to 60% under a new Trump administration be a good idea? Greg Ip thinks it is a bad idea as the change is gradual and is actually taking place. It may have the unintended effect of worsening US China relations essential for global stability when it is coupled with erratic or retaliatory rhetoric. Rhetoric that appears to China that it is being singled out in world trade beyond what are changes that have taken place with Japan in the past in trade. The Biden administration is for good reasons working to restore a balanced yet stable relationship with China. Apple is shifting production of 25% of iPhones to India. Samsung is investing more in Vietnam. The trade deficit with Mexico has reached $151 billion twice as large as in 2017. And $100 billion with Vietnam three times as large as 2017. The US trade deficit with China has dropped from $381 billion to $281 billion in the last 12 months, the Commerce Department reports show. And from $1.1 trillion with the whole world from $1.2 trillion for the last 12 months, 4% of US GDP. Overall the Trump era tariffs of 30% have not reduced the US  trade deficit substantially but has shifted American and European foreign investment to India, Vietnam, Mexico and other countries as well as to the home country. Over time the supply chain would become truly diversified as India makes great strides to become the third largest economy with new infrastructure by 2030. The head emeritus of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China, Joerg Wuttke, says the pressure to export will be high for China as its economy shifts more to manufacturing from construction. Most Chinese companies are producing more than internal demand in China, and most companies in solar are losing money, in wind turbines and solar all are losing money, Wuttke says. This means China will double down and increase its investments in Mexico, Vietnam, Morocco and other countries so that it can send its products to the US through third countries that do the final export. One expert even says removing a few screws here and some there, find a different supplier, and shipping to a third party for final export that makes it not 100% Chinese content, the pressure for that is high. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Blinken Wang Yi meeting at the G-2- in Indonesia is the first high level meeting between US and China since March when the Ukraine war started. In the press briefing after the meeting Blinken said "more than four months into this brutal invasion the PRC stands by Russia." He pointed to Beijing support of Russia at the United Nations, dissemination of Russian talking points through Chinese state media and joint military exercizes with Moscow. One aspect of the relations that is beyond the control or good intentions of the two countries top diplomats is the tit for tat response that began with the presidency of Donald Trump. Trump may have seen this as a way to talk to the voter base fed up with two decades of one sided trade with China with manufacturing shipped out to China and local communities of families and workers in regions across the US losing jobs and in decline. Much of this shift was done by US companies during the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations over two decades. The strident tone adopted by Trump was met by tit for tat responses in Chinese media till the pandemic when it assumed a new aspect of Chinese origins of the coronavirus. The result is that Sinophobia in the US is met by a response in Chinese media and in the thinking of the Chinese leadership under Jinping that now sees the relationship as having already shifted during the pandemic. The paradox in this is that the US in its effort to get other countries on its side is only beginning to make an effort of get America's own companies and large business investors on its side. Most American companies are still continuing trade and business with China as before.  The same situation exists with the shift of manufacturing from Japan and the European Union to China, with the loss of jobs and decline of local communities that depended on manufacturing. Japanese and European companies are acting in ways that are similar to American companies. Having managed the shift of manufacturing from European Union and Japan to China these companies have done little to change this business situation in 2022 carrying on as before. This is the paradox of the current situation that business both in the US and EU, and Japan is not on the side of their governments, even as their governments attitude to China, particularly now after the pandemic and the Ukraine war has shifted drastically. Alongside this is the popular opinion that has shifted gradually over the last 10 years in the US and EU, first in these very local communities that lost manufacturing to China, and then across broader sections of the public, and now across whole regions of America, Britain, the EU and Japan. This shift in popular opinion has little interest in the way business conducts business overseas or governments conduct diplomacy in nuanced statements. As a result neither the governments of the US, EU and Japan or the business of the US, EU and Japan are in control of this shifting situation that has its momentum and pace operating quite independently of governments and business. And public opinion across America, Europe, Japan, and also in India is moving in an entirely new direction.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senators in the US Congress, Rubio and Schumer, have asked the US government to look into Apple's plans to work with Chinese semiconductor company YMTC. As a result the Commerce Department has placed export restrictions on YMTC. This NYT report looks at the two decade long rise of China and of Apple after Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997 and shifted manufacturing to China. When Jobs returned to Apple he found major quality issues at Apple's manufacturing facilities, a demoralized workforce, and financial losses, with CEO Michael Spindler running the company into the ground. Jobs had to start with afresh model for Apple and decided to shift manufacturing to China under the engineering leadership of Tim Cook. Alabama native Cook went to Auburn University for his engineering degree and Duke for his business degree. Cook joined Jobs in 1998 at Apple and for ten years till 2007 the two cut costs, shifted to contract manufacturers and rebuilt Apple with new products, iPod, iPad and the iphone. By not manufacturing Apple avoided quality control issues, and the costs of maintaining inventory. It was Tim Cook who ran operations worldwide, and he gradually built up the manufacturing relationships in China with Foxconn, which makes most of Apple's products in sprawling Chinese factories that employ 20 years later about 3 million Chinese workers. Foxconn was chosen by Apple in 2000 to manufacture the Apple Mac laptop. Before that it was a parts supplier to Apple. Increasingly Apple relied on Foxconn to make its new products including the iPhone. Both companies growth relied on the manufacturing of Foxconn to the point where Apple was dependent on Foxconn and had intertwined its operations with Foxconn in China. Today the whole relationship is being called into question after two decades in which American workers suffered the effects of the outshoring of manufacturing jobs. It should be noted that though Mr. Trump raised the issue of manufacturing exclusively in China with Apple, the Trump administration did little to change the practices of the company that pioneered this type of massive manufacturing role for China. That surrendered the entire supply chain to foreign suppliers in the interest of cutting costs and maintaining huge profit margins, with which it financed an array of new products and reached $1 trillion in sales from $10 billion, hundredfold increase over 2 decades. American workers and families for the first time in American history got very little from this Cook-Jobs project. American infrastructure in communities that would have been supported by American factories including the services and infrastructure in communities financed through local taxes, a practice throughout the Industrial Revolution in the US, was sharply disrupted over 2 decades. It caused a rupture in social relations and increased inequality in the US, and defunded infrastructure that comes with manufacturing.  It is the task of the Biden administration to now correct what Mr. Trump simply talked about but never induced or required Apple to do- lead the resurgence of American manufacturing, and make its major investments in the US, invest in its workers and families, invest in America. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The coronavirus is making implementation of the U.S. China trade deal less likely as Chinese imports from the U.S. decrease and China's exports continue to grow. China's exports to U.S. decreased by $60 billion but increased to other countries by $70 billion in 2019.

As a result the Trump administration is shifting its focus to another approach. The new multilateral approach is to combine the effort with allies Australia, India, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and France. This would take the shape of a Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership to replace the old Obama period Trans Pacific Partnership which becomes defunct. The goal would be to build new supply chains with allies in Asia outside of China with the help of France and other countries that are wary of excessive dependence on China and have deep reservations of China's handling of the coronavirus outbreak.

LyrArc Article Gist
With the arrival of Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State, and John Bolton as National Security Adviser, president Trump finds support for his own instincts on foreign policy. On North Korea, Iran, and China, president Trump takes charge of foreign policy favoring strong bargaining pressure to achieve foreign policy  goals in trade, containing nuclear weapons and reducing conflicts. He sees the peace talks with North Korea as moving in the right direction with his efforts, and makes the decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal of 2015 on May 8, 2018, as he leaves the door open for new negotiations with Iran for a better deal that achieves U.S. goals.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report shows the approach taken by the trump administration in the U.S. to the coronavirus crisis, acting early to cut travel but showing restraint on social distancing practiced in Italy and China.

LyrArc Article Gist
Experts at Moody's say that a partial deal with China like the phase 1 deal Mr. Trump announced this week will leave unresolved the fundamental differences in the two countries' economic, political and strategic interests. Mr. Trump suspended a new tariff on Chinese imports set to go into effect in December on mobile phones, laptops and the remaining import products not yet covered by tariffs. Any improvements in relations is seen only as temporary. In the agriculture sector most farmers are taking a cautious attitude. Importers of products such as luggage and other basic consumer products are living with the uncertainty- product quality may deteriorate now that importers cannot pass on a 25% tariff cost.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump reiterated his threat to place tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese goods in addition to earlier tariffs on $250 billion in goods.  The problem China faces is that it China imports less, far less than the U.S. does. China has only $10 billion in U.S. goods to place tariffs on. This is after placing tariffs on $110 billion in U.S. goods, mostly agricultural products such as soyabeans in retaliation for U.S. tariffs on the $250 billion of Chinese goods. China could place a ban on imports from Boeing or restrict the access for U.S. companies to the Chinese market. U.S. companies have invested billions of dollars in the China and employ about 2 million Chinese in well paying jobs. Concerns about unemployment would be uppermost to prevent these jobs being affected. Other concern for China is the loss of foreign investment as relations deteriorate. Already supply chains in some products such as clothing and consumer products is shifting other countries in Asia. In automobiles the regional hubs are expected to shift with India as a potential hub for Asia, and Mexico preserving its place as a North American hub following renegotiation of NAFTA. In media the dispute is leading to a shift from Chinese consumers buying Adidas instead of Nike and Huawei smartphones instead of Apple.  For an already slowing economy this hurts China more than the U.S. which is why the U.S. is pushing China to settle with an agreement that the U.S. can trust to bring down China's trade surplus. For the U.S. as most of the loss in exports is in agricultural products the solution has been to provide government aid to farmers, and for Mr. Trump to use the issue to point out that he is fighting for U.S. interests and for fairness. This is why the trade dispute poses more problems for China. Because the surplus is so wildly skewed in China's favor after the inaction of many U.S. presidents just as it was for Japan in the eighties, the situation appears to be headed towards a definite reversal of the lopsided trade surplus enjoyed by China. In the process the U.S. plans to build up the competitive edge it has lost to some degree.  ...