LyrArc Article Gist
DJT Asian trip to Tokyo Seoul and Xi meeting in Seoul October 29, 2025. An important meeting with Xi after negotiators from Japan, South Korea and China tackle difficult issues in trade with the US team led by Bessent and Jamieson. The US completes agreements on trade and security cooperation with Japan and South Korea ahead of the meeting in Seoul with China's leader Xi Jinping. 

LyrArc Article Gist
A bill in the U.S. Senate in October 2011, which has bipartisan support, would push for China to correct an unfair trade advantage from keeping the value of the yuan low. The bill requires retaliatory tariffs for countries that have "misaligned" currency. This makes it possible for the U.S. Treasury Department to take action even if it finds no currency manipulation by China. This is a new approach as the U.S. Congress struggles to restore a level playing field in international trade.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. strategy has shifted to keeping tariffs on Chinese imports intact as an enforcement mechanism to make sure China keeps to its commitments made in negotiations, says WSJ. U.S. trade negotiator Mr. Lighthizer sees the latest tariffs as leverage, and that tariffs would be removed only when China keeps its commitments made to the U.S. Initially Lighthizer opposed the move for additional tariffs imposed on September 1. Now he accepts the strategy to use tariffs as leverage. Mr. Trump told the Economic Club of New York that if no deal is reached in phase one then the U.S. will "substantially raise those tariffs, they are going to be raised very substantially." Because China is seen as not willing to provide written commitments with enforcement provisions the U.S. strategy has shifted to making the tariff removal an enforcement mechanism. President Trump has committed on the campaign trail to correct misalignment in trade with China. He makes the final decision in negotiations and use his negotiating style.  China sees making commitments on stopping all subsidies as affecting its sovereignty and its industrial model of state sponsored capitalism since opening in the 1990's to trade with the world. Both sides are looking for ways to gain the maximum concessions in Phase 1 of the trade deal as it is very uncertain whether any further progress can be made given the positions on each side, say experts. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
After a weeks long standoff both sides disengage expeditiously in the India's border dispute with China over construction of a road in the Doklam plateau region of Bhutan. In this NYT report experts in Hong Kong point out that it is not in China's economic interest with an aging population and debt crisis, tense economic relations with the U.S., and for India struggling with modernization issues, to turn a remote border issue into an open conflict. It would also complicate relations in the Asian region with Japan and economic relations with the U.S, countries with whom China's economy is intertwined through supply chains and other ways. Disputes with China and South Korea have in the past affected the Chinese economy, and China has developed trade with India as its companies look for growing markets. India's Modi administration is focussed on the economy. In this context of broader relations the road construction in Doklam appears to be an aberration that is hard to explain except as a miscalculation and poor understanding of the best interests of the region and of the world.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Competing interests of the U.S. and China on issues such as jobs, currency and trade. Chinese stalling over currency revaluation.

LyrArc Article Gist
DW.com report by Mu Ciu shows a CATL(Contemporary Amperex Technology) plant in Arnstadt, Thuringia, in eastern Germany. It will not bridge Germany's technology gap. German and US consultants at the microeconomic level of the company and German and US economists at the macroeconomic level of the economy entirely fail to grasp the effectiveness of China's investment driven model. Of its joint partnering with European and American companies and China's single minded focus on technology access. This is why the DJT US administration has warned Europe that it is failing economically. China's macroeconomic and microeconomic model are run by the same authority by the state, and according to goals and plans (which in a socialist economy is weak at the microeconomic company level lacking the initiative and freedom of action). By combining its macreconomic framework run by the state with a micreconomic company level run by the state but on free market lines the Chinese investment driven model has dual advantages and operates at a speed that far surpasses the German and American model. It's society suffers as a consequence, but in few short decades 1990-2009/2020 this is all it could accomplish with a single focus on modernization for what was once a peasant agricultural economy. Where it lacks is in future technology access and as long as weak companies in the US and Germany partner with Chinese companies the technology access for Chinese companies give it the essential ingredient for its investment model to work, as American and European companies can waver in investment Chinese companies backed by the government will not waver in investment and have the clear advantage. DJT's approach is to give a big shock to the entire system of world trade now run by China, so that this is no longer going to work at the macroeconomic level and legislate huge investment incentives for one time depreciation and other moves to get American companies to invest. It wants Europe to do the same, including getting rid of the bureaucratic structures and regulations. German Chancellor Merz is getting the message and is acting quickly first with the trillion dollar investment plan, the meetings with Draghi and Meloni to get Italy and like minded nations on board, and internal efforts to get rid of regulations and bureaucratic structures, and building a new partnership with India to remove an error of Merkel/ Clinton+ Obama in excessive concentration and dependence on China. This requires a steady hand and steady governments, steady policy, and companies in America, Europe and India to work together for the long haul without wavering or delay, to rebuild the world economy along new lines and on a new path. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
An assessment of progress in free trade and generating jobs in N. America under the NAFTA agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The agreement was signed under President Clinton in 1994. NAFTA removed existing tariffs on over half of the exports from Mexico to the U.S. and phased out remaining tariffs between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The U.S. had two way trade of $918 billion with Canada and Mexico in 2010, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Canada is the U.S.'s top trading partner, with $462 billion in trade through Sept. 2012, and U.S. trade with Mexico- expected to overtake China- is at $369 billion in the same 9 month period of 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Economist points to the improved situation for Mexico after the scare from Trump's plans to build the wall and deport large numbers of immigrants. The peso dropped by 15% between mid November 2016 and January 2017, but has since recovered, and non-oil exports were up 5.5% in February 2017 over prior year with the manufacturing growth in the U.S.  Growth forecasts are now up from about 1% GDP growth previously to 2% for 2017, close to the 2.3% in 2016. Much of the change in mood in Mexico is a result of the failure of the early travel bans being blocked in the courts, the failure to get health care legislation through Congress, and the effort by the trade advisers and economic advisers around Trump to move Trump's positions more to the centre and closer to traditional Republican party positions. Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary, says " a sensible agreement" can be reached with Mexico. Peter Navarro, trade adviser, talks about making "a mutually beneficial regional powerhouse." Robert Lighthizer, a veteran from the Reagan days, is likely to be made the new U.S. Trade representative. Still as the Economist points out the "20% border adjustment tax" continues to be supported by Paul Ryan in Congress to pay for tax cuts. But certainly the mood has lifted in Mexico in the first 100 days. This is true for economic policy in relation to China and Germany, and the close circle of Ross, National Economic Council head Gary Cohn, and Secretary of State Tillerson is moving Trump to the centre in policy statements to get things done. Mexico is faced with internal challenges of reestablishing the rule of law, improving infrastructure, reducing red tape and corruption, addressing problems in the education system, to promote economic growth. These challenges may prove to be as large as the external challenges were once thought to be. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
David Autor at MIT authored some of the first detailed studies about the severe disruption in U.S. communities from the trade with China following China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. The sheer size of the impact now appears to have been underestimated by economists and other experts. It was believed says Hilsenrath and Davis, that the U.S. having absorbed the impact of trade with Japan in the seventies and eighties, and with Mexico following NAFTA, could do the same with China. That turns out to be false. Much of 2016 election season has been spent seeing the rise of anti-trade movements led by Trump and Sanders, and reveals a deep discontent with job shifting overseas, and disruption of communities across America by trade patterns. What happened? In 2015 China's exports to the U.S. reached 2.7% of U.S. GDP. Hilsenrath and Davis say it was about 1% less with Japan and Mexico when their exports surged. The rapidity of the impact is another problem. It took 12 years following Japan's emergence as a major supplier, to reach the same level of impact that China had only 4 years after China's entry into the WTO in 2001. A similiar situation of 12 years happened with Mexico after NAFTA. Another problem is that Japan's exports impacted mostly steel and autos, China's exports impacted a whole range of industries. The speed with which China's planners sought to change and modernize their manufacturing  base is unprecedented in history, and has an impact not only on the U.S. as a recipient of low cost exports, but also on China as it struggles with bad debts and job losses today, that are a legacy of that too rapid move. This was part of the drive to urbanize China rapidly by shifting agricultural workers to factories in the cities, at a pace unprecedented in history. Another factor not mentioned is the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 that hurt U.S. manufacturing in the auto and other industries, and the wide impact this had in loss of jobs and decline in wages. By 2010 the tide of public opinion had shifted. The WSJ/NBC poll of September 2010, cited in detail in WSJ 10/2/2010 under "Americans Sour on Foreign Trade" shows over 80% consistently for all levels of income, over $75,000 and under $75,000, Republicans and Democrats, working class Americans or well educated Americans, saying that Americans were struggling and there was less hiring, because of how trade had impacted their communities. Lyrarc covered this in considerable detail since 2006. All political parties, business leaders, ignored the implications of this huge change, the media covered it but assumed it would take care of itself as trade with Japan had done previously, and it was left to Trump and Sanders as outsiders to call it like they saw it 5 years later.  Economic inequality has widened in China to the point of it becoming unrecognizable as a former socialist economy. Now both countries are faced with the job of picking up, chastened by the experience, and hoping to limit the political fallout to achieve economic recovery. The very open trading system that had generated prosperity since World War II was being put at risk by a lack of awareness that trade brings with it changes, winners and losers, and manufacturing jobs moving overseas on a scale and speed unprecedented in history, was something that no one could cope with. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US- China trade relations 2025 and XI's rare earth minerals export restrictions response to US tariffs. DJT resonse was 100% tariff on China from 57%. After meeting Xi in Busan, South Korea, after the APEC meetings, US settled on 10% reduction in tariffs from the 57% tariffs on Chinese products down now to 47%. The 100% tariff was withdrawn by DJT and China's Xi settled on withdrawing restrictions on exports of rare earth minerals. The fentanyl tariffs are still in place and the WSJ editorial says not much is likely to happen on fentanyl action by China to stop exports of fentanyl that reach the US through Mexico. China says it will take in soyabeans exports. US signs agreement with Australia to develop alternative supplies of rare earth minerals. The WSJ says for tariffs action to work US should not tariff allies. Yet broad tariffs action was necessary as partners Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the EU, Canada and Mexico were also nations that created an unfair trade situation for the US. The US took action on all nations that take unfair advantage of free trade concepts to benefit them which also add to the credibility of tariffs as effort to restore fairness in world trade.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer was the negotiator who tackled Japan's huge trade surplus in the eighties under president Reagan. In 1985 he was the Deputy Trade Representative under Reagan. He negotiating a trade deal with China that includes U.S. tariffs on Chinese products. Here he tells the incoming Biden administration that the tariffs were a good idea in the American interest, and should remain in place till China reduces the huge trade surplus with the U.S. Lighthizer says "we want a China policy that thinks about the geopolitical competition between the United States and an adversary- an economic adversary." As this report says the cleavage with China has widened since then with the the virus that started in Wuhan, China, then spread to the U.S., killing more than 387,000 Americans and with 23 million people affected by the virus. Lighthizer has serious questions about the approach of the Biden team to seek consultations with allies in Europe and Asia. With his long experience  he is one of the very few who understand how things work. He says the U.S. started dialogues in the 90's. Nothing happened. "All of them were just a waste of time," says Lighthizer. Other countries could slow or veto U.S. actions. This is why the new incoming administration needs to show it has learned from history. In the trade negotiations with Japan the approach taken by Lighthizer worked. The U.S. can only not listen to his advice at its peril. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Latest data from the U.S. Treasury shows it has collected $63 billion in tariffs over the preceding 12 months. Even though there is no agreement on trade with China, president Trump says the U.S. is benefitting from higher tariffs by tens of billions of dollars. In May he estimated tariff revenues could reach $100 billion.This report in the WSJ says this could happen if the the new tariffs of 10% on additional $300 Chinese goods imported to U.S. goes into effect on September 1. This is likely considering that China sees this in different terms than the U.S. such as its sovereignty, whereas the U.S. sees it simply in terms of fair trade. With new elections China may be simply putting things off till the election is decided as Mr. Trump has pointed out. The tally of what the U.S. Treasury gets annually if $100 billion is generated in tariffs goes something like this. Of this $30 billion was generated previously for the U.S. government, so the incremental amount is $70 billion. Of this about $16 billion goes to offset the effect of loss of farm exports to farmers, mainly soyabeans exports to China, through a rescue fund. This leaves additional $54 billion for the U.S. Treasury. Money that could conceivably be put back into infrastructure that the U.S. badly needs in mobile and fixed to improve internet speeds and move up from its low rankings compared to China and other countries. A WSJ report this week shows Germany in worse shape than the U.S., both countries having dismal status in mobile infrastructure- the U.S. at No. 37, and Australia No. 4, Canada No. 3, and even Croatia No. 9. This throws some light on why this trade dispute has become intractable, for China the right of a sovereign nation to move past middle income status even as its telecom technology with Huawei 5G is top class, and for the U.S. the right not to fall behind in advanced technologies such as Telecom. It is also why one hears so much about Huawei and why it has become a flashpoint of the conflict in trade and trade practices. It is thought Mr. Trump is conducting this trade dispute. Yet less known is the fact that prominent Republicans in Congress such as Senator Warner have stated on television talk shows that they are concerned Mr. Trump may give up too much in negotiations that lead to the U.S. not being able to compete in telecom advanced technologies that matter for competitiveness and for national security. What was treated by Bush and Obama administrations routinely without much attention to the consequences is now a top concern for Republicans and others in Congress and business. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Australia, China, India, Canada Britain, Sweden and other countries in Europe have growing trade and other tensions with China. Gradually a new situation is evolving for world trade as each country looks at its own interests in the trading relationship with China.

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
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
Kessler in the WP corrects Obama's claim that he created 800,000 jobs. He says this is clever arithmetic as it takes a low point in Feb. 2010 following the financial crisis. Kessler points out that according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. manufacturing jobs were 12.56 million in Jan. 2009 when Obama became president. In Nov. 2016, early estimates show there were 12.26 million manufacturing jobs, a loss of 300,000. This loss does not reflect the problems in the U.S. auto industry and older industries in the midwestern states as a result of trade and globalization that speeded up with the rapid industrialization of China. And led as Greg Ip pointed out in a recent WSJ report to a rapid acceleration of job losses in a decade that did not happen in the same scale during Japan's industrialization and urbanization in the sixties. This aggravated the situation in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Pennsylvania, and was met with a feeble response from Democrats. Even a economist like Krugman favoring the Obama administration's efforts came to the conclusion that TPP did not add much to gains from trade as most of the gains had already been realized. More of the gains went to tech and IT in California, at the expense of the auto industry based in the midwest. A report in WP show a president too close to IT in California and failing to grasp the situation in the midwest. Voters punish whoever is in power, regardless of being Conservative or Liberal, in Canada the hollowing out of manufacturing under Harper in Ontario and Quebec led to the win by Trudeau's Liberals.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Big changes are expected in energy markets after 2026 following the end of the war with Iran, the naval blockade and the Hormuz straits closure. Even when the Shipping returns to Hormuz there will be continued uncertainty and prospect of conflict. As a result China, India, Japan and the US and EU will look for new sources of supply in Latin America for oil and gas including in Guyana, Brazil, Argentina, and in Venezuela. This NYT Analysis  confirms the shift to renewables will accelerate after 2026 with 2-3 years return on investment for renewables, and in 2026 wind+solar+nuclear now generating more electricity worldwide than gas. OPEC stranglehold on oil prices is weakening with UAE's exit from OPEC, and the US+ Venezuela+UAE expanding production. This will benefit poorer countries in the world in Asia, Africa and Latin America, Middle Income countries like China and India, as well as US and EU through lower prices for the new overall energy mix, with a higher component of renewables from every year 2027-2030. Lower priced component for oil possibly at $50 a barrel holding steady to 2030. From this perspective Hormuz's importance will decline over this period to the point that the world's wealth sucked up for far too long in the Middle East through the twin mechanisms of  high oil prices and decades of wars will be shifted back to infrastructure in the EU, US, India and China, Brazil and Indonesia. For the poor countries like Pakistan, India, Indonesia, China and others this is a big deal because instead of the wealth going to princes in the Persian Gulf  it will benefit people in Egypt, Arab countries such as Morocco and Tunisia,Turkey, Pakistan and India, China. Long delayed infrastructure rebuilding in US and European Union can now take place.The shift and trend to renewable energy as a major component of the energy mix of over 50%-60% in India could be expected by 2030 and have a major impact on climate change. (India has already crossed 50% of its energy from renewable sources). China will have installed half of the new renewable energy capacity added by 2030 and this too will add to the fight against climate change. Overall this combination of events and changes underway are overwhelmingly constructive and are not anticipated in this way by most of the world's media including the NY, which see slower growth when the opposite is now the case with accelerating and steady growth expected 2027-2030, and 2030-2035. For the US and EU it could not come at a more opportune time with the determination to invest at home and reindustrialize, build new infrastructure, for India to build a modern country by 2040, and for China or Japan not to get stuck in middle income status with continued modernization to 2040. For the poorest countries to work with these major nations to improve standards of living. For the US it also means the end of the border migrations flows that happened in 2025 taken to the next stage in 2026 and 2027 ending all drug flows across its borders with Mexico- as more lives are lost to fentanyl and other illegal drugs substances (1.25 million since 1999) than were lost in the Korean War (36,000 deaths), Vietnam  War (58,000 deaths) and World War 1 (116,000 deaths) World War II (418,000) all 4 wars combined. Issues of unfair trade deindustrialized the US. This coupled with drugs destroyed small towns and communities (that were based on manufacturing and lost factories) across the US for over 3 decades. The tackling of these issues will also add to the general sense of well being of the people in the US- and also in the European Union. The modernization underway in China and India+Indonesia+Brazil is also part of these changes, promise a rising tide that will lift all boats if we continue together to carefully select the right path ahead and chart the course clear eyed and clear on purpose. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
DJT comments on Denmark's comments on its contributions to NATO overseas operations like the one in Afghanistan. DJT stated the facts about participants such as Denmark that made small contributions in numbers- DJT said on Fox News -We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them. They’ll say, they sent some troops to Afghanistan or this or that, and they did. They stayed a little back, little off the front lines.” About 41 Danish soldiers were killed in Afghanistan and about 800 Danes went in. DJT is probably talking about the  brunt of the action being taken by the US including the effects of road side bombs. About 2500 US soldiers died and 20,000 were wounded and the US took the brunt of the fighting. These were Bush-Obama wars that during that time distracted the Nation from the serious challenges that emerged later in drug cartels in Mexico that led to more deaths in the US than in the Korean and Vietnam wars and World War combined, and the deindustrialization of the US that began with the Clinton era decision to allow China to enter the World Trade Organization without any safeguards continued into the second term of the Obama administration. In the European media there is rarely any mention of the huge losses from drug trafficking into the US that requires action along the lines of the Monroe doctrine which also protect Europe from drug trafficking into the EU. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the trade problems with the U.S. escalate in tit for tat tariffs, China looks back at its history for parallels. The period of the "unequal treaties" imposed by the Western powers on China in the period 1850-1900, the Korean War of the 1950's, and other analogies that come up to people. Yet China's planners and leaders are looking at another situation the Plaza Accord of 1985 in which the western nations pressured Japan into accepting a significantly higher exchange rate to reduce its trade surplus and the Japanese yen appreciated by 50%. Japan cut interest rates from 5% to 2.5%, and introduced huge fiscal stimulus, banks opened up to lend vigorously. The result was a boom by 1990's followed by a bust that led to another decade of lending to loss making firms called "zombie" businesses, that led to a stagnant economy. This has persisted for three decades. This China sees as an unacceptable situation when China has still not achieved developed economy status in terms of per capita incomes. It fears getting into a middle income trap as the economic growth slows and the aging population makes a recovery more difficult.  The difference with Japan in the 1985-1990 period is that Mr. Trump lacks the kind of five nation economic coordination that put pressure on Japan. Today there are differing views on China in Europe and the U.S. and different policies. Mr. Trump is known for his style of deal making and could settle early, as feared by some Republican leaders in Congress who see in China a challenge to America's technological dominance. There are no calls to appreciate China's currency. Only calls for China to change its state subsidies model and put in writing and through laws that change the way of doing business that does not require American companies to hand over advanced technology. This is also a concern for Japan and the European Union countries such as Germany, and is something all nations try to protect in global competition. Japan is still facing the consequences in creating a new competitor in high speed train technology after building the first high speed trains in China and transfer of the high speed train technology by Kawasaki. The Household Survey by the Federal Reserve showing the financial fragility of 40% of American families shown on this page today shows how this situation is likely to evolve as working class families in the U.S. support a trade stance that protects American jobs and technology. Job losses over three decades and a $891 billion trade deficit in 2018 are seen as unacceptable to the U.S. in 2019. A stronger U.S. dollar helped increase the U.S. trade deficit by 10% in 2018, nullifying some benefits of Mr. Trump's trade actions. Mr. Robert Lighthizer was a negotiator in the trade dispute with Japan in 1985, and runs the negotiations with China with support from president Trump. This alone has kept the Japanese situation in 1985 uppermost in the minds of China's leaders as they try to come up with a way to settle the trade dispute with Mr. Trump.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's president Xi Jinping visiting a trade fair in Shanghai, says China will shift to larger imports as it responds to calls from the U.S. and Europe to further open its markets, and buy more rather than focus on selling to the world. He said "it is China's sincere commitment to open the Chinese market." More than 80% of China's trading partners have trade deficits with China with severe complaints and tariffs imposed on Chinese goods by the U.S. president Trump.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump approved tariffs on $50 billion of Chinese goods. The U.S. Trade representative is expected to announce the goods subject to a tariff of 25% on June 15, 2018, and publish them in the Federal Register next week. China's Foreign Minister Wang met with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Beijing, saying at a joint news conference that  if the U.S. went ahead with the tariffs on $50 billion of Chinese goods China has made preparations for tariffs of its own on American goods. The biggest targets for China are aircraft and soyabeans. Separately the Tax Foundation shows the tariffs on Chinese imports, coming on top of tariffs on steel and aluminium imports, would lower GDP in U.S. over long run by 0.06% and reduce employment by 45,000 positions. Other reports also confirm the impact is not significant enough and the U.S. sees its strategy as one of reversing the trade imbalance in the way it acted in negotiations with the Japanese after a similar trade imbalance with Japan. In some ways the trade imbalance with China is more severe in its impact on manufacturing in the U.S., hollowing out some sectors, and the size of the imbalance at about $ 1 billion a day much larger. This is also the position taken by U.S. Trade Representative Lighthizer, an experienced negotiator who negotiated with Japan during the Reagan administration. There is also the added issue today of intellectual property losses for the U.S. that the U.S. is seeking to address in the negotiations. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's huge trade surplus with the U.S. continues to grow even after President Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese imports. China's total exports have risen by 15.6% from a year earlier, higher than the 14.5% increase year over year in September. Exports to India, Hong Kong, grew by more than 20% in October over a year earlier.  By Chinese figures China's trade surplus with the U.S. of $260 billion for 10 months of 2018 is up 15% from year earlier, ready to set another record. This does not tally with what the U.S. says it is, with the U.S. estimate of the trade gap at $375.2 billion, over $1 billion each and every day. Previous administrations of both Republican and Democratic parties put up with the trade surplus or did little. President Trump has taken this up as a big issue and imposed tariffs on Chinese goods in a series of actions. The combined U.S. and Chinese tariffs now cover 60% of their trade in goods after the latest round of tit for tat tariffs. Experts say there is front loading of Chinese exports which accounts for the sharp increase in exports to beat the date when tariffs go into effect. Yet the overall increase in China's exports, with an added impetus from a stronger dollar suggests that the trade gap with the U.S. is a problem that will fester for a while till the trends are reversed.  ...