LyrArc Article Gist
In his plain talk on Syria Trump said the primary message to Russia was: "You should have peace in Syria; its enough." This is the message foreign minister Tillerson is delivering in Moscow. He described the Russian support for the Syrian government as: "I think it's very bad for Russia, I think it's very bad for mankind, it's very bad for this world." He also described Chinese president Xi Jinping's response at a state dinner during dessert when Trump told him about the U.S. missile attack on Syrian airfield, as expressing the sentiment that it was OK considering the chemical attacks by the Syrian government on civilians and children. The closest any president gets to the plain talk given by Trump is during the period of the Cold War when Truman also had this kind of plain talking style to deliver the message that needed to be heard.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Economist magazine says views in the Trump base of support in rural areas and among white working class voters are likely to persist for some time. One reason given is that many of these people live in isolation and little contact with the more educated urban voters in America. Another factor cited here is that only a fifth of voters follow politics closely, and of these voters only a small fraction have a good grasp of the positions of the two major parties. Most people follow the instincts and thinking of the groups they are with. As a result many of the issues covered in the media such as climate change and U.S. withdrawal from the Paris agreement, the Comey firing and the Mueller investigation into Russian meddling in the election, president Trump's Twitter comments, are not having much impact on the president's ratings among his support base at this early stage of the Trump presidency. Yet it is too early to tell only 6 months into the Trump term in office. After 8 years of president Obama's two terms in office voters who feel left out are not likely to change their views in so short a time. Republican voters as distinct from the core Trump base voter are also unlikely to change their views after 8 years of Democratic party administration. By staying close to traditional Republican party positions president Trump is likely to continue to have the support of the lifelong Republican party voters unless things change. Can a centrist position emerge after voter fatigue with excessive partisan opinion, as voters seek to make America a more quieter place and a consensus on working together to lift all boats emerges. This could be expected as time passes.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Progressive caucus in the US House of Representatives led by Pramila Jaypal, a first time Indian American Congresswoman defeats an attempt by Josh Gottheimer of the Problem Solvers caucus to separate much of the president Biden's agenda in health, education and social policy and risk it being defeated by Senators Manchin and Sinema in the US Senate. Without the efforts on child care, education and health, climate change and social services part of the Biden Workers and Families Plan much of the Biden agenda would remain unfinished and Democratic party promises not kept. This also means that Manchin a Senator from West Virginia with a population of 1.8 million and Arizona with a population of 7.2 million, both conservative leaning Democrats could sink the entire agenda of president Biden to support American families and workers for a population of 331 million people. That two states with a population of less than 3% of the American population could sink the entire agenda of president Biden shows how fragile a situation has been created within the Democratic party to support workers and families even during the pandemic following the leadership of Carter, Clinton, and Obama Ms. Jaypal, a three term Congresswoman from Seattle, Washington state, was first elected in 2016 with an endorsement from Bernie Sanders who was the Democratic Party's leading candidate for president till the late stages of the 2020 US presidential primaries. Bernie Sanders says of Jaypal- "I think she is doing an extraordinary job. And I think the Progressive Caucus is doing an extraordinary job." Sanders founded the Progressive caucus after getting elected to the Senate from Vermont 30 years ago. Even though it is hard to imagine the Democratic party being the Democratic party without bold policies in climate change, affordable housing, reducing income disparities,  investing big in childcare, education and healthcare, attempts were being made to sink the entire Democratic party and national agenda going back to Franklin Roosevelt. Jaypal is described in the WSJ as diplomatic and firm, saying "I am so proud of our caucus; I have never seen our caucus so strong. And I am a very good vote counter also." Fifty members of the 100 member Progressive Caucus held firm in support of president Biden's original agenda without which the president would have little to show in keeping promises he made to the American people in the election and little to differentiate him from Mr. Trump who also supported infrastructure spending. Separating the infrastructure bill would have risked sinking Mr. Biden's plan for recovery of America from the pandemic and the devastating policies pursued by American presidents in the last two decades. Policies by previous presidents that have impoverished the country, created huge income disparities, weakened America in the world in trade and technological leadership, and wasted resources in foreign wars. There are no centrists or far left- these are just labels. When Ms Japal said "Let's just remember the Speaker (Nancy Pelosi) is a great champion of this agenda. I think she was trying to do as much as she could to get this done," she could have said it is Mr. Biden's own agenda pushed forward with conviction to help workers and families during the pandemic, and build a solid American recovery, restore American leadership in the world. Pramila Japypal is the first Indian American woman in the US Congress, and one of only two dozen naturalized American citizens in the US Congress. That she could play such a critical role for good in the US Congress shows that with the right convictions, determination, experience, much can be done for the common good in America and the world.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The close alliance between the CDU and the CSU in Bavaria appears to be unraveling. The immigrants at German borders have dwindled down a trickle, about 11,000 immigrants today compared to the wave of immigrants entering Germany in 2015. The CSU's prime minister in Bavaria Mr. Soder and the Federal Interior minister from the CSU Mr. Seehofer, blame the conflict between the two parties on the 2015 decision by Merkel on immigration. The German ARD broadcaster shows 62% of Germans favor stronger action on immigration. The pressure on the CSU comes from the gains by the anti-immigration party AfD in recent national elections. The CSU hopes that by shifting its own position on immigration to a standoff with the CDU and Merkel's position it can hold off the Afd in the elections in Bavaria in October 2018. The pressure on Merkel comes from members in the CDU and from the SPD leadership, which have accomodated some of the criticism of open immigration to reduce the immigrants at German borders, yet now see the need to meet any challenges to Merkel's authority. This is why the head of the SPD, Ms. Nahles called Mr. Soder's push for a confrontation on the immigration issue as acting "like a bonzai Trump." The CDU party leaders in Bavaria call for a "axis of the willing" joining leaders of the governments in Austria and Hungary. and the newly elected government in Italy to impose immediate controls on immigration at the borders. Merkel says she is open to different points of view within the CDU-CSU alliance, but action should be based on keeping the European Union together, and be taken after EU meetings in Brussels. Will this result in a fall of the government? Angela Merkel has adapted to the changing situation on immigration leading to the small trickle in new immigrants at German borders today. Even if the AfD anti immigration party joins the CSU the percentage of the vote for the AfD is mainly in the eastern part of Germany, and CSU in Bavaria, with 12.6% voting AfD in 2017 elections, and about 7% voting CSU mainly in Bavaria. This compares with the Left at 8.9%, Greens at 9.2%, and SPD at 20.5% for a combined 38.6% of the vote that favor Merkel's new coalition policies. This combined with the 25% of the vote gained by Merkel's CSU party gives it about 64% of the vote and about 489 seats in the 709 seat German parliament. A test of Merkel's authority is not likely to be sustained. By making this a pro-European position Merkel has shifted the issue from one of immigration which is now minimal and one on which Merkel has adapted her policies to a stand on Germany as leader with France of the European Union. At this particularly sensitive time when Germany and France are negotiating with the U.S. on trade and Britain on Brexit, German public opinion is likely to consider the impact of new elections and more uncertainty as not good for Germany. With the SPD, Left, Greens and CSU having 64% of the vote, and the anti immigrant parties CSU, AFD about 20% concentrated in the less economically developed eastern part and in Bavaria, the chances that Merkel's position would be weakened or her authority challenged is very unlikely.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This response by experts on transatlantic relations rejects the other view expressed in Zeit Online that the U.S. under Trump remains estranged from Germany and the EU. These experts from the American Institute for German Contemporary Studies, American German Council, and Centers at John Hopkins and Georgetown for German Studies, reject the view that the Trump administration and Germany are that far apart on many issues as it appears from media coverage.  Foremost it points out that civil society relations are sound and growing. About 50 million Americans trace their descent to Germany, including president Trump, much larger to over half the U.S. population considering European descent. Much larger is the sense of a culturally shared future with the European Union, with the nations of Europe including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Britain. The civil society relationships run deep in a way that is hardly affected by the Trump administration. Within the Trump administration the policies to Europe these experts remind the reader, are determined by the "adults" in the administration, who are senior members of the administration. This is a crucial point as Trump administration policy is not determined by the president's liking for tweets as much as by senior cabinet members Tillerson at the State Department, Gen. Mattis at Defense, Kelly at the White House, and senior members of Congress including Senators Corker and other senior committee members. This is why Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was chosen as Ambassador to NATO. It should be noted in this context of German-EU relations in president Trump's first year that there was a period of German disillusionment with president Obama, exacerbated by the NSA spying on German chancellor Merkel and on the EU delegation to the UN, with president Obama's failure to offer any apology. Relations recovered from that low point. No one suggested that there be a German led decoupling of the EU with America at that low point, or at another low point in German-U.S. relations with the setup of American Pershing II nuclear missiles on German soil under the Reagan administration when there were large scale protests.  The American view that the U.S. should not have to shoulder major responsibilities for defense and foreign relations by itself is not new say these experts, and goes back to earlier administrations before Trump.  The experts argue for an active role by Germany with its partners in Europe for defense and foreign relations, which should not be seen as a result of U.S. pressure, only responding to the situation as it has evolved upto this time. Views on immigration are also changing with effort by the EU and Germany, France, to reduce immigration from the source countries in Africa, and the changing perceptions about uncontrolled immigration in Germany and France, say the authors. A coordinated policy towards Russia  is seen as not having changed. And much as a reset in relations was advocated by Obama in the first year of his first term, the current policy of the Trump administration to work with Russia to lower tensions can be seen in the same way say these experts, and not as a fundamental shift in American policy. The deep relationship of Germany and the EU with China is another positive aspect that will also help the U.S. in framing its own policies towards China. The German-American relationship, and the European Union relationship with the U.S.  is seen as basic to the values and interests of the U.S. and Europe. This relationship is too deep and supported by civil society and Congress, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, by large trade relationships, to be affected by temporary differences under any one administration. Even these differences are part of a larger debate that is part of dialogue on issues in a democratic society, sometimes raucous and loud, and could be welcomed and carefully channelled in constructive ways.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With so much coverage of other aspects of China,  to really understand China and Xi Jinping one has to understand the rural urban situation in China. Xi's long experience as a teenager in the cultural revolution of Mao was in rural areas, the 8 years he spent there till the age of 22, as this report by James Areddy with help of Yijun, Cheng and Qi aptly shows. It traces the shift and mass migration to cities starting with Deng's modernization drive in 1979. This shift of labor to city and town factories as the U.S. and Europe shifted factories and production to China is the story of our times. How it has both helped and hurt China and how it has become the dominant issue of our times, and a lesson for India in the middle of its own modernization and shift of labor to cities. It has helped China modernize with the shift during 1979 to 2016 and run into a road block with president Trump leading a movement in the U.S. of people most hurt by the outsourcing of factories and production to China. It was not meant to be this way. Yet the shift also led to ripping up the fabric of communities and towns with loss of factories across America over three decades. Because China is a large country the impact was huge decade after decade, leading to a backlash against lost jobs in the U.S. and in Europe.  Xi Jinping has romantic view of rural China as he spent 7 years in Shanxi province rural areas during the cultural revolution under Mao. During this period he toiled as part of farm labor alongside villagers which allowed him to get to know villagers and farmers in the countryside well, and formed his view of the world around him. As it is described in a description of the man in Chinese sources- "He arrived at the village as a slightly lost teenager and left as a 22 year old man determined to do something for the people."  China's system separated migrants from city dwellers not  giving same rights to better education, to schools and housing, and official documents separating the two, city dwellers and migrant populations from rural areas. As a result as China modernized and population shifted -shown here in excellent graphic charts over four decades- in 1979 from about 80% in rural areas and 20% in urban the shift goes to 50-50 by 2001. Today it is 40-60 with 60% in rural areas but a population of 40% suffering from severe inequalities and  low incomes. So that GDP per capita of $10,000 for China is deceiving. The real incomes in average disposable income is about $4300 in urban and $1700 in rural area, according to National Bureau of Statistics. High school education is hard enough to get in rural areas, medical care is very basic and the $1700 would hardly get a room in low income housing in a large town in China, says premier Li Keqiang. Keqiang did his masters thesis on urbanization and has studied this shift from his college days. Just as in Gandhi's India, Mao's China is the story of the villages, with 128,000 villages for 600 million people in Mr. Xi Jinping's anti-poverty drive. Hong Kong other issues have to be understood in the context of these concerns of China's leadership today- the sense that strong central leadership alone can keep the country together and bring a decent life to the people in the villages and in the countryside outside the cities.  Modernization of cities still set in the context of China's vast rural population and essential to its full uplift and progress. Xi has allocated $80 billion each year to bring roads, schools, medical facilities, and other amenities including electricity and modern heating. The idea now is to shift people back to the villages, find opportunities for jobs and livelihoods in farming, tourism with guesthouse facilities, and other occupations in the villages. The villages are being turned into attractive places to live one by one in this party drive and providing new enthusiasm and support for the party's efforts. India can learn from this experience in China. The western nations of the U.S. and Europe can no longer and will no longer undertake the wholesale shift of factories with loss of jobs to China or India to offer the prospect of bringing these countries to the kind of urbanization and overall prosperity of small nations like Japan and South Korea, which are a tiny fraction of the population of China and India+ Pakistan + Bangladesh. As a result China is changing strategy now with a return to some aspects of the informal economy in Chengdu with street peddlers and tiny retail, and return of migrants back to better built and improved villages in the countryside. A better life than in cities is possible this view says for people from these rural areas, if the rural areas are given modern facilities and construction and resources are allocated, job creation locally tackled. The villages can offer better air quality, better quality of life where villagers who earlier migrated to cities with ownership of land, when they are modernized with better roads and have better facilities for education, housing and healthcare, better amenities. The new approach is to strike a good balance for urbanization, by modernizing and investing in villages and small towns, so that cities can cope and overall life can be better than with mass migration and wholesale urbanization. It is also a balance that works well for the U.S. and Europe which can redirect manufacturing to their home regions as part of a better distributed and balanced supply chain than the one that was unwittingly built over the last three decades.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In a first at Davos World Economic Forum, China's president Xi Jinping uses the 2017 meeting to give a one hour long spirited defense of the world trading system, critical of U.S. president elect Trump's protectionist views without naming him. Xi pointed out that "no one will be winners in a trade war." And went on to add that restricting world trade was like "locking oneself in a dark room, keeping out wind and rain from outside but also light and air." For the first time Jinping stated that China would take the U.S. role of defending the world trading system from attack as needed. On climate change Xi defended the Paris accords, and gave China's commitment to pursue changes regardless of what the U.S. under president Trump does. This follows Chancellor Merkel of Germany's statements on the issue critical of the views of president elect Trump, and taking the lead to defend the world trading system. Xi also pointed out that many of the ills that led to voter discontent in the West were not really from the freeing up of trade but from the pursuit of excessive profit with the financial crisis of 2008.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
There is a sense of cognitive dissonance in the states of former East Germany, known as the GDR or German Democratic Republic in the Soviet Union period from 1950's to 1990. The 5 states that formed the GDR continued to build close ties with Russia after the fall of the Berlin Wall, in the perception that this would build good long term relations. The crisis in Ukraine with border states of the Soviet Union opting in favor of close ties with the European Union and not Russia have disrupted the economic relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and Russia. As long as Russia needed the economic ties to build its economy and standard of living the political issues posed by NATO expansion and EU expansion were set aside by Putin and political parties within Russia. The very ties that were supposed to usher in an era of peace in Europe helped strengthen the Russian and Chinese economies. Leading to a point where these two economies were strong enough by 2021 in the midst of the waning pandemic to  assert themselves on political issues where serious differences existed such as expansion of NATO and Taiwan. When the economic relations such as making China a manufacturing powerhouse  was the path taken by American and European business in 1990's, business interests were focused on the declining quality and high wages demanded by unions and workers in the US and Germany. This could be personally witnessed at Apple's factory in Colorado Springs where quality was failing badly in the 1990's. Apple when Steve Jobs returned in 1997 adopted a China manufacturing strategy when its manufacturing operations in the US failed to deliver the quality and cost structure needed for it to expand. The high margins with low costs of manufacturing in China was the strategy adopted by Steve Jobs to compete with Microsoft and turbocharge its expansion. Soon other companies followed. A similar process happened in economic ties with Russia on a smaller scale. Two decades of such expansion whittled down American manufacturing, hurt American workers, hurt European manufacturing and European workers.  This process could not continue- yellow vest protests in France, the protest vote in US midwestern states in recent elections, the protest votes in German elections and fragmentation of parties, made this clear. The US imposed trade tariffs on Chinese products and moved to restrict flow of technologies to China under the Trump administration, accelerated by the Biden administration. President Xi was once of the view that China's ties with the US were important "thousand fold" in the period as late as 2010. Yet this lopsided trade relationship was not beneficial to American workers or American interests as a technologically advanced leader. It is true that American workers and engineers at Apple had failed to ensure American quality competitiveness in the 1980's into 1990's, yet no advanced country or its business can come up with a false narrative that cedes its manufacturing leadership and jobs for the working class of its country. That false narrative is being challenged today by Mr. Biden, Mr. Scholz, and all American and German political parties, and by Mr. Modi with Atman Nirbhar Bharat for local manufacturing. The integration one sees of the port of Hamburg as Chinese export hub with China's economy is one aspect of what has happened. A new leadership is taking its place in Europe and in America that sees clearly the false narrative. The visit of the new Danish prime minister to India is the beginning of the effort to set up a new logistics relationship with South and South East Asia, as Denmark's Maersk is a world leader in shipping logistics for exports and manufacturing. The planned Noida logistics center outside of New Delhi under Gati Shakti integrated development is part of the change happening today as a new supply chain is being built. The unwinding of the one sided trade relationship with China, and its related relationship on energy with Russia, led to the changing perception in Russia and China of the value of the relationship. Political relations superseded economic and cultural relations during Putin's second phase and Xi's second phase with assertive attitudes on NATO, and on Hong Kong, Taiwan under Xi and Putin 2.0. As could be expected Germany and the US were caught flat footed as leaders who were cast in the mold of Putin as a Soviet representative in Dresden, and Xi with his father leading the Communist struggle in the 1930's and 1940's against Chiangkaishek, acted in ways that reflected the Soviet period. Chiang left for Taiwan in 1948 when Mao-tse-tung setup the People's Republic of China. Taiwan and Hong Kong remained important in the perceptions of Xi 2.0, in the effort to build "China Dream" and erase last vestiges of what in Soviet times were seen as western colonialism. US and EU particularly Business and the new IT telecom Business failed to grasp these matters, and historical events such as the opium wars of the 1850's. Business and cultural interests lacked both the inclination to learn and the knowledge of these events in Chinese history and its relations with colonial powers Britain and Japan, and also Russia. In 1900 the Boxer rebellion against ceding Chinese ports to colonial powers Britain, Japan, Russia, ended with permanent colonial settlements in Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tsingtao, other Chinese ports. Chinese rejuvenation in the mind of leaders such as Xi from the second generation of Communist leadership, means putting this behind, leading to the action taken in Hong Kong. In some ways as some observers have commented it is as much a problem of the sluggishness of American and European thinking, particularly business interests including in Taiwan, post British Hong Kong, and ignorance of recent Chinese history which was mistakenly thought not to exist or forgotten. This is as much of a problem as the action taken by Putin and moves by Xi Jinping. The great democracies such as India, Indonesia, Bangladesh, were ignored as American and European business interests integrated the American and German economies with China's. In terms of population the population of these regions and related parts of South East Asia such as Malaysia and Vietnam which have a shared cultural history is about 1.5 times the population of China. Travelling through the parts of India's largest state Uttar Pradesh, an Madhya Pradesh one finds how much American and European business interests have failed both their own interests, their own workers and failed the great democracies of the world, by not only not investing in the democracies of Asia, and also of Africa and Latin America and bought into a narrative of China which no longer holds true and may never have been true all along. This is starkly evident in a once in a century pandemic in these great democracies of the world. These democracies have been left to fend for themselves during the pandemic and their leaders facing false narratives in the media such as the BBC and American media outlets even on issues such as vaccination of the largest part of the world's people.           ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Confessore describes ways in which the Republican Party agenda moved away from the interests of ordinary American working class voters in the last decade, ignoring some of the effects of the 2008 financial crisis and the deep recession in the years that followed.

LyrArc Article Gist
"To Invest (at home), To Align (with allies), To Compete (with the world)" sums up the approach of president Biden with China. It also sums up the approach at home and overseas. Biden senior adviser, Jake Sullivan at Council of Foreign Relations sets out the framework and path for managing US-China relations into the future for many decades. Here at the Council of Foreign Relations he shows how- through careful study of the relationship's history, the changes in the relationship, and where it is today in 2024. Having participated in previous administrations Jake understood how it has evolved, where mistakes were made by both China and the US, where misperceptions took hold and need for clarification, for action. The old Strategic Dialogue followed by Paulsen under Bush 2000-2008 allowed the relationship to be guided by business interests, -without any clear strategy or idea where it was going except maximizing interests of business on both sides- was continued by Kerry under Obama 2008-2016. Sullivan, Blinken and Biden have built a Strategic Economic Cooperation Framework that has clear goals on the American side and goals on the Chinese side, and work between the two presidents and their cabinet ministers. Trump 2016-2020 rejected the earlier Strategic Dialogue but was not able to set up a sound framework that would guide future relations for decades. Sullivan helped set up a new framework around three principles- To Invest, To Align, and To Compete.   Here he describes how the plan to invest trillions in infrastructure in the US was part of this plan's principle To Invest. On Align it was to derisk not decouple by reducing the excessive concentration of supply chains in China, that was revealed as a problem in the pandemic years. Building up manufacturing at home and in India, Vietnam and Japan. Align also was to have allies Japan, South Korea and India to be aligned with the US policy. It also meant that all three countries would follow the same framework for their economies To Invest, To Align, To Compete.  By combining the strengths of the 2 largest economic centers Seoul/Tokyo with New Delhi/Sydney in Indo-Pacific the leveraging effect of US strength could be felt to support its position. And third to compete on level field so that America retained control of its technologies and implementing exports controls. And sharing this in  open communication with China that the US was protecting its technology and interests the way China has done in the past for its interests. The benefit of open communication even where there are differences had the advantage of not turning this into open rhetoric that damaged relations as had happened under previous administrations. Wang Yi on China's side having seen and approached it with careful study and reflection had similar goals to stabilize and put the relationship on a sound footing. Sullivan met extensively with Wang Yi in meetings in several locations around the world. Ministers Yellen, Raimondo, Blinken, Kerry, were sent to China for extensive discussions as part of this strategy in 2023 leading to remarkable change in the mood and confidence in US- China relations after tumult in 2016-2020 and uncertainty in previous administrations. Much credit goes to president Biden and Jake Sullivan, Anthony Blinken, and also to Wang Yi and Jinping in no way diminishing their own initiative, so that for the first time in decades the US China relationship is now on a stable footing. Both countries faced common challenges around counter narcotics, around climate change, and other issues. These are being addressed. Competition is managed carefully and no rhetoric is taking place so that the largest two economies and about 1.7 billion in US and China and 2 billion people who are allies in India/Indonesia/Vietnam/ Korea/Japan living on the same planet earth can have economic and other cooperation  with different cultures, economic structures and systems of government. The result of such a framework also gives the basis for cooperation with America's allies to invest in Africa and Latin America and in the people of these two continents as another level of alignment and investment for a safer better world. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ looks at Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan that marks a major shift for the U.S. economy.  Households would see their costs go down by $11 trillion, boosting their ability to spend on other goods and services. Because income and wealth was highly skewed in the past three decades in one direction, the spending capacity of lower and middle income households was pushed down. This and other similar plans would help restore a higher level of spending and with it an essential element of inflation of 2-3% to the U.S. economy which was missing in the last decade. This sets the tone for the kind of broad based recovery that happened after 1950 that strengthened America's middle class and made it the core of the economy, the core of the post World War II recovery in America and Europe. The plan would be paid for by higher taxes on corporations, tax rate of 21% for corporations going back up to 35%, and reverse depreciation schedules in the 2017 Republican tax law. The argument that this would reduce business investment does not hold that much says the WSJ because amid new trade tensions business investment has declined over the last 2 quarters, and has been sluggish overall. The other source for the estimated $13 to $20 trillion cost of Medicare for All plan of Elizabeth Warren is a 6% annual wealth tax on billionaires, in an attempt to have all pay their fair share and reduce wide disparities in wealth. Mark Zandl, chief economist of Moody's Analytics, says his sense is at the end of the day from a macroeconomic view- because $11 trillion in the hands of 80% of households who could boost spending after lagging behind in the last decade- the negative effect on business investment will be cancelled out by the higher consumer spending. The overall effect and today's context is infused in this analysis. Private insurance, premiums for insurance, and out of pocket cost that the public pays would disappear in this new system where all health payments pass through the government. Health insurance premiums paid by employers would convert into a new employer Medicare contribution to the government starting at an amount employers pay now and adjusting gradually toward national averages over time. Smallest businesses are exempted. Mr. Zandl says the most important aspect of this now is that Mrs Warren has shown that her plan's revenue sources match the cost so that the plan would not lead to deficits increasing and pushing interest rates higher, leading to negative effects on the economy. Republicans under Mr. Trump have paid little attention to expanded deficits caused by their tax law, and economists across the landscape have also shown less concern. Still attacks are made if the plans don't add up. For this reason a sound assessment in today's context of depressed consumers and an overall impact becomes essential. The WSJ quotes from a pre- assessment of Warren's plan by Simon Johnson, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who co-wrote it with Mr. Zandl and Betsey Stevenson of the University of Michigan. What they point out is that putting cash in the pockets of the lower and middle class for spending makes a lot of sense today, and taking money out of the pockets at the way upper wealthy end,  does not contract the economy at all. Other effects they say are constructive by letting all workers get health coverage from the government instead of employers, this makes it easier to change jobs increasing labor mobility and productivity. A worker getting a better job and better utilization of skills could then shift without looking at the employer health care plan. Warren says there would be a five year transition so that workers in health care insurance industry can work in other insurance fields and in Medicare, no one would be left behind. The important thing being to build America's middle class again. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This review of Acemoglu and Robinson in the MIT News is relevant to the situation faced today. The two professors at MIT and University of Chicago, have provided two books relevant to today's crises, the first "When Nations Fail" in 2012 about the need for inclusive nations, and the second "The Narrow Corridor" about the importance of the role of individual and society in sustaining democracy. Their point in the first book "When Nations Fail" in 2012 coming after the financial crisis caused by banking excesses stated that the nations fail when they are not inclusive.  In practice it is about " the system being rigged" to favor some groups as the Republican party and Mr. Trump say has happened. The banks and lobbyists, pharmaceutical industry and lobbyists, tech industry and lobbyists, leading to a system where individual and society are pushed into a corner. Social theorist and economists fail to look at things in practice such as profit seeking behaviours and unethical behaviour that goes unchecked, which continued after the financial crisis into the election of 2016, with charges of rigged systems.  This week Germany's DW.com oped pages covered New York with the statement that treatment in New York costs $15,000 for coronavirus infection illness yet many New York residents in the worst affected neighborhoods would find a $500 expense difficult to bear. Early closing of schools to control infection rate was resisted by Mayor De Blasio of New York because many parents depended on schools for lunches for their kids. The situation had been allowed to deteriorate to that level.  In their second book the MIT authors are saying that the role of the individual and society are important to check that of the state (for example if it is perceived as being rigged by the influence of lobbying of legislators and politicians as the Republican party and Mr. Trump have maintained). It is only when it is checked and there is some tension is there the possibility of democracy and democratic processes, say the two MIT authors. In the absence of this the states and elites of politicians and business interests supporting the leaders and their common behaviours, become a perpetual state, in effect a one party rule of two parties with similar behaviours and interests in the state. A situation that allowed the outshoring of American manufacturing and European manufacturing to China including critical infrastructure, essential infrastructure over 2 decades even over the protests of Mr. Lighthizer since 2010. As the twin crises evolved in Europe of austerity policies after banking excesses in Europe, and the migration crisis of migrants coming from North Africa and the wars in the Middle East, a similar situation began to develop in Europe as the political elites entrenched in Germany, France, and Spain faced new voices. The tensions that arose were constructive bringing in the role of society and individual that the MIT authors say are so necessary for the narrow corridor of democratic process to function. New parties emerged in France with Macron's La Republique En Marche, Podemos and Ciudadanos in Spain, and in Germany with the SPD and CDU shrinking till the revival of Merkel for her handling of the pandemic. Coming from an intuitive way born from experience in East Germany, Germany's recent president Joachim Gauck, civil rights activist  came up with the same ideas. He is a Lutheran pastor in former East Germany who struggled against the government of the German Democratic Republic (former communist East Germany) for a role for individual and society against the state. We profiled and quoted him in "The Way Forward"  column in Lyrarc.com. Gauck's point was that  having diverse groups in the conversation is important, not excluding others from outside in the conversation is important. Gauck called  debate "the oxygen of democracy,"  that needed to be maintained.  Genuine democratic process is hard to sustain, it happens only when the role of individual and society is given prominence, so that only a narrow corridor exists for democracy, a narrow space in which can be sustained only if the effort is there, the goodwill is there, and the grace of Divine Providence.  It is fragile and it is critical to sustain.   In this sense the sometimes heated debate in the U.S. and Europe, Asia and Latin America about words such as- austerity, community, solidarity, migration, New York Mayor De Blasio's choice between school lunches and infections, about infrastructure, pharmaceutical prices, infrastructure, outshoring, jobs sent overseas, manufacturing locally, made in USA or made in India or made in France, Atmannirbhar Bharat, misallocation of capital starving health and public services, are all relevant and essential for democracy. This includes the discussion to avoid use of the military in protests in American cities in the middle of a pandemic which just crossed the 2 million mark in cases in the U.S., that was taken up by Defense Secretary Esper. In it lies the hope for democracy and many voices. Der Spiegel recent look at the pandemic how it happened in China, closes with the line- you need more than one voice in society. A constant reminder that many voices be heard, counseling patience, but also that wise choices be made with divine providence.           ...

LyrArc Article Gist
House Speaker Paul Ryan's "Confident America" campaign in 2016 aims to reassure the Republican base and build support for Congressional Republicans as the Trump movement disrupts the Republican Party.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report by Martin in the NYT points out that Ohio no longer plays a critical role in U.S. presidential elections. It was critical for a Bush win over Gore, and president Obama carried it by 2 points against Romney in 2012. It is critical for Trump to win. For Hillary Clinton other states are gaining importance as they better reflect the demographic changes in the U.S. and the mix with minorities- states such as Georgia, N. Carolina, Colorado and Florida. Ohio has not seen an influx of Hispanics as other states, and is now more white, more evangelical voters, and reflects a mix that was prevalent earlier. 

LyrArc Article Gist
The 2016 primaries with Sanders and Trump have brought to the forefront voter dissatisfaction with the agenda of both parties, especially so for Republicans with the lack of specifics and personality driven campaign of frontrunner Trump. On a whole host of issues from poverty, wages and inequality, regulatory reform, to trade, borders, security, ISIS, both parties are facing questions from voters. Particularly the Republicans who have lacked specifics during the two terms of the Democratic Obama administration with a divided Republican Congress, and the risks for Republicans running for Congress under frontrunners Trump or Cruz who have provided few details on their agenda. The Agenda project of Ryan will have about 25 meetings and prepared specific agenda, including white papers and legislation, that would give Republicans hope to run on positive proposals that are placed before the Republican Convention in Cleveland. Chairmen of House standing committees were assigned 6 areas- health care, taxes, national security, regulatory reform, poverty, and Congress reasserting constitutional authority. Ryan told the Ethics and Public Policy Center on April 19, 2016- "A lot of people don't like conservatism as they know it. For too many people Republicans seem to be caught in a time warp. They're thinking, 'We don't control our borders. Wages are going nowhere. College and healthcare keep getting expensive. ISIS continues to spread. And what are Republicans going to do about it?' So we need to adapt our policies to meet the challenges of the 21st century."...

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ reports that the former president's supporters will rally to his side but swing voters might be repelled by this latest legal controversy including the context in which it happened that of a sordid affair. Mr. Trump built his support base out of two mistakes of president Obama, his neglect of rural America, and neglect of American manufacturing. And of the mistake of president Bush in pushing America into two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that put money into wars with no productive purpose that needed to be put in rebuilding America's infrastructure. Others could have done this, Mr. Trump aggressively pushed ahead and found himself first. President Biden has closed the chapter on the wars by ending them, he has also closed the chapters of neglect of American manufacturing and put working families and America at the top of his agenda at every point. And as he did at the State of the Union address in 2023, made it personal by reciting what his father has told young Joe about standing up for working families. Biden's abilities rival that of president Lyndon Baines Johnson, who had as much experience in the US Congress as Biden, and delivered the passage of Medicare and Social Security for all Americans. Biden has done something that ranks similar with trillions of dollars for the Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS and Science Act and pandemic assistance, and has the conviction that there is much more to be done. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ story shows how China started its steel industry from small beginnings when Chinese leader Deng visited a Nippon Steel plant in 1978. He made the decision to go big with Baosteel, with an investment of $6 billion, with the words- "if we do it lets do it big." This was 36 times the Chinese foreign exchange reserves at the time. From 4% of steel production, this went up and up, passing the U.S. in 1993, past Japan in 1996, and in 2018 producing three times the steel of U.S., Russia and China combined, producing 923 million metric tons of steel in 2018, or more than half of world production of steel. With steel China was able to build its automobile industry, shipbuilding, bridges, infrastructure, high speed rail network. This was done using global demand, subsidies from the government, cheap loans and tax breaks. Markets worldwide were affected by substantial excess production in China. From Baosteel the spread of the steel industry to all 23 Chinese provinces led to China accounting for 25% of world exports. By 2016 5 million workers mostly from the agrarian countryside were employed in the steel industry, helping China transform itself into an rapidly urbanizing and modern economy. It was a period when the rail network was tripled between 1975-2017, with shipping companies that ensured access to Australian coal and Brazilian iron ore. From 2011 to 2017 Chinese steel dropped global prices by 57% triggering closure of steel mills in EUrope and the U.S. About a third of trade complaints since 2001 by G20 countries against China are about steel. After entry into the WOrld Trade Organization Chinese steel exports rose to 8% of GDP from 2%. Subsidies, cheap energy, and shift of agrarian workers to cities. U.S. investigations around 2006 showed Chinese steelmakers subsidies covered 30% to 45% of the subsidized value of steel pipes exported overseas. China's steel prices were set 20-40% lower than the U.S. China responded to complaints saying it was trade protectionism. The WTO rules call for full disclosing of all subsidies. This was disclosed 5 years after joining WTO in 2001, and only for central subsidies. Local government subsidies were not disclosed till 2016- the U.S. says 15 years late. Still the Bush and Obama administrations failed to take action. In 2018 Mr. Trump seized on this as a campaign issue that resonated with American workers in manufacturing communities across the U.S. In 2018 November president Trump announced a 25% tariff on imports of Chinese steel. A six month probe by U.S. officials had already shown 40% of sales value came from subsidies for corrosion resistant steel from China. The U.S. Trade Commission imposed tariffs of its own from 39% to 241%, with the Trump tariffs of 25% coming as an additional tariff to tackle the trade surplus with China. Meanwhile in China the government is closing uncompetitive smaller steel mills and in 2016 it combined baosteel with Wuhan Steel to create a larger company, and consolidate remaining companies. Baosteel now provides the steel for CIMC to dominate the steel container business, and to make ship to shore cranes, and make the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.  It also goes to show what can be accomplished from small beginnings for countries in the developing world from Asia to Africa and Latin America, with government and industry focussed on development and growth.   ...

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
Fareed Zakaria points out that the primary elections of the Republican and Democratic parties can pose a danger to democracy because of demagogic politicians who can appeal to popular passions to bring a fringe group or individual to the presidency. Primaries for both parties became important after 1968. Eisenhower and Lincoln won the nomination after the person nominated on the first ballot failed to win the necessary votes. Another serious problem is that the turnout in the primaries is low, so low that a 15% turnout is considered high turnout. The media attention is so great that it creates the impression that a real election has taken place when in reality about 85% of the people have not voted- as the Economist magazine points out a representative turnout would change the outcome significantly so it is not clear how much this promotes democratic process.

LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the crude rhetoric at Donald Trump rallies, and use of coarse language, according to the NYT. Working class and older Americans show their anger at a system that appears to have left them behind with slogans, stickers, T-Shirts. The idea of the wall figures in much of this and shows that the wall has become not jut about Mexico but a metaphor that captures this anger, that reflects this anger. Another aspect of the 2016 campaign is that those most vulnerable and most in need of help have not sought the comfort of knowing about programs to improve middle class and working class wages, incomes, to build infrastructure, create jobs, stop companies from shifting jobs overseas, plans for improving accesss to health care and education, to ask for specifics and delivery. This is the supreme irony of the 2016 election campaign that not enough attention is going to what will be done for the middle and working class, and what specifics will be delivered, in what time frame- which is essential for restoring the condition of the American middle and working class to where it was in the 2 decades after the Second World War. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
During the presidential debates Donald Trump was asked about his proposal for a 45% tariff on imports from China to the U.S.. Trump's response was "if they don't behave." he would use this as a negotiating tactic against China. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas responded by reminding viewers of the high tariffs under Smoot-Hawley legislation that were one of the factors that created the Great Depression in the 1930's. Economist and former Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke is a student of the Great Depression, and says "it was highly counterproductive, it lengthened and deepened the Great Depression." Economist Peter Petri of Brandeis University in his study cited in this article, says that the tit for tat that starts with such a move could eventually cost the U.S. 1 million jobs. It might fix one problem the one of imbalanced trade with China his figures show, and create another huge problem the loss of markets for U.S. goods all over the world. Overall a 45% tariff would reduce U.S. merchandise imports by $383 billion and reduce U.S. merchandise exports by $658 billion, says Petri. Gordon Hanson, economist at the University of California, San Diego, who has actually shown how trade has affected different counties in the U.S., leaving some dependent on government assistance. Hanson sees this tariff as counterproductive, it makes the U.S. more self-sufficient but hurts U.S. exporters, would significantly hurt the tech boom, and reduce America's standard of living. The problem is that everybody can get into this in a tit for tat. France did this even before the Smoot Harley Act of 1938 was passed in 1930 with 60% increase in tariff on individual items, by higher tariff legislation in 1928. Close allies Canada followed quickly after Smoot Hawley increasing its tariffs, so did Great Britain. Unemployment went up significantly after 1931, worsened by weak banks and lack of support from the Federal Reserve. Trade with Mexico would come to a halt Petri shows, and the result would be more Mexicans trying to cross the border turning a relatively non existent problem of immigration in 2015 -with Mexicans preferring to remain home and net immigration dropping significantly following the 2008 financial crisis and the strict Obama policy of deporting illegal immigrants- into a real one. Trump says its just a threat, but it is likely to lead to a tit for tat response by China, then by U.S. allies, other trading partners. Consider that president Herbert Hoover opposed the Smoot Hawley bill for raising tariffs on industrial goods, and only proposed adifferent legislation reducing tariffs on industrial goods and increasing the tariffs on agricultural goods to give relief to American farmers. Politics intervened as Smoot from Utah and Hawley from Oregon, from mountain and agricultural states with a lack of understanding of how the international trading system works but as heads of two influential commmittes, the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, let politics overrride and pushed their legislation through Congress. In 1932 Smoot and Hawley were defeated for reelection, but the damage had been done, and promises of better conditions for workers and farmers never kept. A significant reason for the U.S. standard of living is that it is a leader in the global trading system. Even in 1945 and the years following the end of the war tariffs were higher in Britain and other countries. In return for this leadership the U.S. enjoys the advantages of the dollar being the main global currency, and the advantages of a world leading technological sector that has large global markets. Hanson and Autor have pointed out how imbalanced trade has hurt some counties in the U.S. This is a very real problem for workers in the manufacturing sector, as shown by elections in the midwestern states, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and other parts of the country. The problem is compounded by the tech sector looking out for itself, the financial sector looking out for itself, and forgetting that we are all in the same boat. And that includes the Chinese who are in the same boat. China is doing a major shift in policy towards a consumer driven economy, and this needs to be accelerated for the benefit of ordinary Chinese. This makes the policy of a 45% tariff by the U.S. doubly unproductive because it hopes to add urgency to the problem of the U.S. trade deficit and manufacturing workers, but takes an approach that risks ending up damaging the global trading system by setting in motion a process that no one controls or can foresee the destination....

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Peterson, a professor who heads the Program on Education Policy at Harvard, says that public school education has not done as well as private or charter school education. In two areas character or values, and school discipline, public schools lag far behind private schools or charter schools. Private schools score 59% and 46% in these two areas, public schools lag far behind at 21% and 17%, in the 2016 Education Next Survey, says Peterson. He says by appointing Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary, the Trump administration sees the need to think how public schools can benefit from improvement in these areas.