LyrArc Article Gist
Researchers David Autor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Gordon Hanson of the University of California, San Diego, and David Dorn of the Center for Monetary and Fiscal Studies in Madrid, in independent research, studied the impact of trade on 722 clusters of interrelated counties in the U.S. They focussed on the surge in Chinese imports and found a pattern. Counties with higher exposure to Chinese import growth showed higher unemployment and higher expenditures by the government for unemployment benefits, food stamps and disability benefits. Their calculations show the increased government payments amount to one to two thirds of the gains from trade with China. This does not include the losses suffered by people losing jobs who deplete savings as they look for new jobs. Hanson studied the effects of trade and Chinese imports in the 1990's and found the effects were relatively small. This time the effects are large and show counties that lacked local investments in industrial machinery and technologies in which China was still playing catchup such as Caterpillar in Peoria, Illinois, and Boeing in Everett, Washington, were most susceptible to higher jobless rates and in need of government support payments. Autor and Hanson found that from 2000-2007, communities in the 75th percentile- ones with greater exposure to Chinese import growth than 75% of all communities- saw a manufacturing jobless rate of about one-third more than communities in the 25th percentile. The government payments mean higher taxes or larger deficits are needed to support these communities, and long periods of unemployment reduce the incentive to work. Michael Spence, a Nobel prize winning economist from New York University, says the world has never seen such a rapid pace of growth as China experienced between 2000-2011, with rates approaching 12% in some years, making past experience and prevailing theories on trade an insufficient guide to what is happening....

LyrArc Article Gist
Trade in services is not enough. Services won't build ships for the US Navy. Services don't provide jobs for factory workers. Trade in services won't rebuild the US manufacturing base. It won't rebuild the middle class. Trade in services won't make pharmaceuticals Made in America that are available always, including in times of war, pandemics and disruptions. Bottom line as DJT pointed out in a Cabinet meeting on April 10 is that the US could no longer be a world power without its industrial base, it's manufacturing base. Americans companies doing the outshoring are really the targets of the Tariffs because they are at the heart of the mechanisms causing the destruction of the industrial and manufacturing base of America, vital for it's security and for it's leadership of the free world and western civilization. It started with Apple in 1998 and I witnessed this as a consultant seeing the production line at the Apple Colorado Springs plant in 1997 with rework and defective product before Steve Jobs returned to Apple. By 1998 Apple started shipping it's entire production base to China. DJT told the Cabinet meeting on April 10, 2025, all previous presidents had to tell companies firing all their workers and outshoring their machines was- "there will be a tariff of 50 or 100% on your products imported into the US."  And these companies would never have fired all their workers and sent their factories to China or some other country. Economists and experts who have turned their backs on American workers see the $1 trillion deficit countries have with China and the loss of their industrial and manufcturing base with one excuse or another. Trade in Services in which the USA has an advantage does not do much for American workers, or for the 5 million manufacturing jobs lost and tens of thousands of factories that have been outshored.  National Security and Jobs, the Middle Class, factory communities across all 51 states are all at stake. ...

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

LyrArc Article Gist
The meeting planned between Xi and Biden is important for stable US China relations after the Trump administration angry rhetoric, the Covid pandemic, and when imbalances in the poorly managed trade relationship with the entire supply chain shifted to China with millions of its American jobs has shaken working class communities in the US. China's and Xi's views on Hong Kong and Taiwan have also affected the relations. After the Ukraine war this will be the first meeting between the two leaders, and follows a visit by German chancellor Scholz to Beijing. Under Bush America appeared to be distracted by middle east wars, under Obama and Trump America appeared weak or angry but not resolute. Under Biden America appears resolute and sure of itself. This makes a difference for US China relations. Following the Ukraine war both the US and Germany, and China, appear to have grasped the dangers of nuclear threats such as were made in recent weeks. India has also shown its serious concerns about wars for territorial gains, and the world community of nations has expressed this through the words and actions of UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres speaking for Europe, and the rest of the world.  Under Biden America seeks decent Competition with China and not conflict, and this is in the interest of both countries and of all the countries in the world. Neither China or America represent the largest share of the world's peoples, and in a world of advanced technologies other regions such as India, Europe, South East Asia and Japan, have just as great a determination and influence to seek a mutually beneficial peaceful coexistence in the interests of all the peoples of the world including the continents of Africa and Latin America. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street Journal/NBC poll conducted in September 2010 shows a big change in public opinion in the US towards outsourcing of production and on free trade agreements. Poll respondents were asked "Do you think free-trade agreements have helped or hurt the US?" The response in 1999 was close to 30% for those who said hurt and those saying helped. By 2005 the curves diverged seriously with more people saying that it hurt and fewer saying it helped. In 2010 this swing is sharp with about 50% saying it hurts the US and only about 10% saying it helps. When asked "Do you agree or disagree that outsourcing of production and manufacturing work to foreign countries is a reason the U.S. economy is struggling and more people are not being hired?" the response is overwhelmingly agreeing that this is bad for the U.S. job situation. The answers are the same across party affiliation, in fact higher for Republicans than Democrats 90% to 84%, higher by income level with 93% for those making over $75,000 agreeing and 86% for those making less than 75,000 agreeing, 93% of professionals and managers agree compared to 89% white collar and 83% blue collar agreeing. This shows all segments of society agree that that the manner in which free trade and outsourcing of production is taking place is not helping the U.S., and this time the highly educated segments are leading the way. Bill McInturff, the Republican pollster who helped do the survey points to the big change in the way well educated and upper income people perceive free trade agreements. In 1999 only 24% of this group making over $75,000 said free trade hurt the U.S., now 50% of this group says it hurts the US. This is sure to lead to big changes in U.S. trade and currency issues with China and other countries. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in The Times take a look at the work Liz Truss has done as International Trade Secretary and now Foreign Secretary. Truss does not want Britain to become economically dependent on China. More than Johnson Truss is a UK Atlanticist who wants the UK to work with the US and the EU to build a western world that is entirely independent of China. Looking at her work and experience it would appear that Truss is the most underestimated of the candidates for prime minister, much more so than Sunak. She can be strident and aggressive but she has gone through a process of thinking and studying before that with a willingness to try new ideas. She come from an intellectual  family and one that was active in left wing activism. She studied at a comprehensive school in Leeds before going to Merton College Oxford  to study philosophy, economics and politics, and was willing to change her thinking when persuaded about a different course of action to get better results. She also gained the knowledge she needs to do her own thinking with experience first hand as Chief Secretary at Treasury, Secretary of International Trade, and as Foreign Secretary, getting trade deals with Australia and negotiating with other countries. Cameron, May, Johnson lacked this kind of knowledge and experience. And Sunak also falls way short of this kind of knowledge acquired and experience handling international assignments key to Britain's advancement after Brexit. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Mexico replaces China as the U.S. top trading partner in the first half of 2019. U.S. imports from China fell by 12% and exports fell by 19% in first half 2019, according to Commerce Department. The total value of trade with China of $271 billion was less than the trade with either Canada or Mexico.

Mr. Trump said yesterday to China- "If they don't want to trade with us anymore, that would be fine with me. Until such time as there is a deal we will be taxing them." He went on to say he would place 25% tariff on additional $300 billion of Chinese goods on Sept. 1, 2019.

Meanwhile in first half 2019 the U.S. imports increased to 34% from Vietnam. Some of this could be Chinese goods transhipment through Vietnam. Japan, South Korea, India, Europe, all increased exports to the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
A graphics view of the severe trade imbalance in U.S. trade with China and the trade war after president Trump put tariffs in place.

LyrArc Article Gist
It is important to know the cause of 0.3% contraction in first quarter 2025 for US economy. It is says WSJ because of a 5% hit from net exports, the difference between exports and imports, as importers rushed to import more before a tariff deadline. Imports by the US increased by 42% in first quarter 2025. Some include MIchigan Governor Whitmer who supports the tariffs as a way to take back America's industrial base, build factories in the US, say the uncertainty of the way tariffs were implemented is damaging confidence in the economy. For instance could the US have excluded the EU, Japan, UK, India as allies, and focused on China.  The problem with that approach is that it would single out China. It means other nations Japan, South Korea, Germany are not investing in the US, also have used trade for unfair advantage, are not called out. This would put China in an odd position. It is better to call out all who benefited from unfair advantage including China, Germany, Japan South Korea, Taiwan, because this has more credibility, giving all a honest and fair picture that they could then look at themselves in the mirror and correct. In the short run it looks messy, the tariff methods look erratic and back and forth increasing tariffs is also messy and unruy. Yet when every major trading nation knows deep inside that US is only saying it like it is asking only for fairness in trade, it will lead it to negotiate a fair trade agreement with US. ...

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

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Lighthizer, was deputy trade representative for the Reagan administration. He says, trade is one area in which the establishment has simply got it wrong. In this area there is little difference between George Bush, Bill Clinton, Obama and Republican politicians. It is one area, he says, where the feeling that elites are thwarting the will of the voters resonates most. He says the talk about America's decline, and the idea that the 21st century belongs to China, leaves voters unconvinced that our trade policy is working for America. For voters who are unconvinced, it makes sense to have a nationalist trade policy that takes on foreign abuses and fights for American interests. He cites 2 statistics that worry these voters. One is the huge trade imbalances that require the USA to sell hundreds of billions of dollars in assets each year. The value of foreign investments in the USA exceeds the value of American investments abroad by $2.74 trillion, and China by itself has $2.5 trillion in foreign currency reserves, mostly in dollars. The other fact is that while the trade deficit for the last decade was about $4.3 trillion for the last decade, America also lost 5.6 millon jobs. And its becoming increasingly clear that as with managed currencies such as the Chinese yuan, and other trade practices, the rest of the world is stacking the free-trade deck against us. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The difficult task facing Wang Yi, former foreign minister of China, of maintaining relations with the European Union in the middle of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on which China has not supported the EU. Some changes have taken place in the EU in 2022 that affect EU relations with China. Italy and Czech Republic have new governments that are critical of China. The Ukraine war after one year is taking its toll on EU relations with China, as trade between Russia and China is expected to grow to $200 billion in 2023 from $140 billion in 2021.

LyrArc Article Gist
Value added industrial output in China increased by only 4.4% in August, showing deteriorating economy. Fixed asset investment outside rural areas, was up to 5.5% in Jan-August 2019 compared to year earlier period. Premier Li Kequiang says "Against the backdrop of a complicated international situation and given the higher  base of comparison, it is not very easy for China to still sustain a medium to high growth speed of above 6%." 
China's economy expanded at 6.3% in the first half of 2019- the government's target is between 6 and 6.5%.

In the light of this situation in the economy China is taking aflexible approach to trade negotiations with U.S. trying to separate issues of competition and technology of the long run from trade, and seeking areas of agreement after the rhetoric of the past 6 months.

LyrArc Article Gist
A German reporter questions the value of the G20 meetings following the violence on streets at the last Hamburg meeting. He says the first G20 during the global financial crisis was useful but later meetings have not lived up to the hope for discussion and search for solutions to world problems. Global trade is at the top of the agenda following the tariffs dispute between China and the U.S. Divergent interests of participants are a problem. Would going back to G-7 in private meetings be a solution asks this reporter.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ says China's government faces severely strained government finances. Local government entities sale of land financed 40% of local government revenues in China, and most of these have dried up with the very real loss of confidence in property sector. Government now faces $900 billion in shortfall in revenues says this report. There may be psychological hurdles in China's growth with the effects on mental health from lockdowns in major cities, the revolt in the property sector with home buyers losing confidence in developers, the loss of confidence of foreign investors from US and EU. The dependence on the property sector to carry so large a burden of growth for the last 2 decades in China may now look like an error. The dependence on foreign investment may also be an error as the loss of confidence could mean some withdrawal and a lack of sustained investment.  It could even be said that restraints on both sectors property and foreign investors could have created alternative paths to growth, and reduced the shift of factories from the US and Europe to China that have now caused trade friction and and a reverse shift of investment back to home countries of US and EU. Trade friction has it appears backfired in a way that extends to the overall relationship which could have been prevented by preventing the hyper growth that happened. Greg Ip of the WSJ has argued that compared to Japan's growth in the sixties and seventies from a country of 100 million the hyper growth for a country of 1 billion for 2 decades created a massive impact on communities in US and EU that were dependent on factories that were lost to China. This has alienated large sectors of the public in the US and EU which could have been prevented by restraints on hyper growth in China. Ip says the growth was too large and too fast for the US to cope. It may have permanently damaged the relations between the two countries showing that trade and globalization had unintended effects when left to business which has no comprehension of how the macro developments can affect the relations between the peoples if the other effects in the relationship such as community impacts are ignored which business says is not its role,  and governments staying away from keeping an eye on how it was happening and adjusting for ill effects with restraint and redirection of business policies. ...

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
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
USC Justices Roberts, Gorsuch and Coney Barrett questioning Solicitor General Sauer, and lawyer for the small business Katyal, on Tariffs by the US president DJT in November 2025. Coney Barrett says the whole thing is a big mess. Treasury Secretary Bessent who watched the proceedings in the Court benches says the issue of fentanyl is one of the reasons for tariffs on China which has played a uncooperative role on this issue of fentanyl sourced by drug trafficking gangs on America's borders. Bessent saying that it is a policy tool when unfriendly powers seek to hurt America. DJT says a SCOTUS ruling against the Tariffs would reduce America to Third World status. Most American themselves are being told by the media interests that the issue of young Americans dying from fentanyl is an issue like many others not that it is the heart of the issue that more Americans have died from fentanyl than the youth of America who died in the Korean, Vietnam and First World Wars combined. The wine import company with 19 employees whose lawyer Katyal filed a petition to SCOTUS is a tiny part of the people harmed by tariffs. It could easily be compensated from the tariffs revenue of $500 billion in 2025-2026 as could other businesses. How does the SCOTUS decide what policy the US is to use. With recalcitrant Asian nations Japan and China the only way is years of negotiations that lead nowhere on world trade. Is SCOTUS responsible or Congress to the American people when the supply chain disruptions caused by concentration of the supply chain in China led to huge price increases making life unaffordable for the low income earners,  including cost of automobiles? Large companies acting on the DJT signals are reducing this concentration in China actively, the trade deficit is coming down, the tariffs revenue is a fund to offset the cost to Americans mostly smaller businesses as large businesses increased their margins in 2022-2024 pricing moves so that today only about 30% of the tariff cost is borne by the average Americans, the rest by large businesses and some of it by exporters in China and Japan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US and China agree on the first step to a broader trade deal. US offers to take in Chinese students at American Universities, something DJT says he was good with.  “Chinese students using our college and universities,” adding that such attendance has “always been good with me.”  China for its part will not slow move export of magnets and rare earth minerals on which it has established a near monopoly of the supplies. These rare earth minerals are needed for technology products made in the US. US tariffs of 55% will still say in place as "deterrance" that the other side keeps its promises and to cut the trade deficit with China not simply talk about it has has happened for a decade of Bush, Obama, Biden. Treasury Secretary Bessent and Jamieson Greer US Trade Representative were at London talks with Commerce Secretary Howard Luttnick to find ways to get an impasse resolved. Both sides lack confidence in what the other is doing so that theis the first step to clarify the direction of talks for achieving a broader deal.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China improves relations with South Korea after protesting a decision to install anti-missile system THADD made by South Korea. In a meeting in Beijing, South Korea's president Moon and China's president Xi affirmed their commitment to a denuclearized Korean peninsula, agreeing that a repeat of the 1950-53 Korean war cannot be tolerated. The effort is part of a move to restore normal economic relations after economic retaliation by China on the issue of THADD system to deter North Korea. Mr. Moon was accompanied by 200 South Korean executives, the largest trade delegation ever sent overseas by South Korea.

LyrArc Article Gist
The damage done to India and China by the Opium Agency, and the British East India Company through the forced growing of poppies in northern India and the sale of opium in China. Two wars by Britain opened up China for sale of opium. Britain gained access to the port of Hong Kong as a base for this trade. BBC New gives a new perspective on the situation in Hong Kong and the questions about the rule of law in Hong Kong today by showing the story on the other side, that of China and the Shenzen region which suffered the consequences of British enroachment on China's sovereignty during the 19th century. Young people in Hong Kong today may be oblivious of the history of the region under colonial powers, and how far China has come from the situation of hopelessness of the 19th century.

LyrArc Article Gist
As Russia makes gains in the whole Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine the UK approves use of its long range missiles inside Russia. Biden is on the verge of making a similar decision as Iran sends long range ballistic missiles to Russia according to reports in NYT. Use of American long range missiles is not expected to affect Russia's overall military position in the Donetsk region in the east. The US and president Biden has only reluctantly provided support for use of US weapons systems to not risk escalating the war. Even artillery on the Russian side was off the list of approved use till Russia used it in Kharkiv border region at which point it was approved. Russians see Kiev as the origin of the Russian State in the 1400's, and eastern region of Donetsk as Russian if western Ukraine seeks to join NATO and EU. Britain has opposed Russia since 1750 as it saw Russia as the threat to an Empire it was building in South Asia, in India that financially supported its Empire worldwide. Britain has a long history of engaging Russia in conflict to protect British trade interests and expand its imperial influence as in the Crimean War fought in 1850's against Russia with the French to gain control of the Ottoman Empire and its Arab states for its trade and imperial interests. Republicans other than Mr. Trump and his supporters are for stronger support to Ukraine following US policy of opposing invasion to achieve military goals since 1900 against the Japanese in China and the Vietnam War was fought on the same basis in the 1960's considering the South Vietnamese state as an independent republic, just  invaded by the north, by North Vietnam, just as the US had done in the Korean War between North and South Korea. In the Vietnam War nationalism played apart with the Vietnamese nationalism prevailing by 1970.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's COSCO taking an ownership stake in Hamburg port was opposed by the Greens and Free Democrats parties in the three party coalition government with the SPD in Germany. Scholz of the SPD went ahead over their opposition saying this will preserve jobs in Hamburg port. In the compromise reached the ownership is capped at 24.99% so that no foreign country owns a majority stake. At one point Germany's cyber security agency BSI classified the Hamburg port as critical infrastructure.

China is Germany's largest trading partner  for 7 years with trade reaching a record $320 billion.

LyrArc Article Gist
Of 20 pictures of Shinzo Abe shown in this photo gallery in the WSJ the ones by Kashiyama of Abe on his knees at Iwo Jima recovering remains from the battle in World War II, and by Numata of a safety drill with children in Chiba perfecture where he is seen seated on the ground peeking through metal bars with children, are a must see. Shinzo Abe who led Japan through the 2000-2020 period came from a politically privileged family, but went much beyond that- building relationships with leaders such as Narendra Modi in India and nurturing the India relationship in an act of immense foresight, encouraging an independent minded policy yet working with the US, and defending Japan's position in Asia yet continuing to foster the trade relationship with China and seeking better relations with Russia.  Leaders of US, EU, Germany, France, India, Russia and China, personally felt the loss of Abe in the words they chose to describe the loss. India declared a day of national mourning, showing how far Abe had carried Japan's relationship with India and the number of visits he made to India. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
"We will never abandon the American worker and her community wherever it is located," says president Biden's head of the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA). He tells the Economic Policy Institute that many economists had questioned the policies that hurt American workers even as early as 1996. He joined EPI in 1992 and says he has followed the trade debate since then and heard the warnings as China entered the WTO in 2001 after years of negotiations in the last year of the Clinton administration.  Common sense questions were asked- Why asked Thea Lee now at the Labor Department is it good to have protection of intellectual property rights but not labor rights under NAFTA. On TPP and FTA's or free trade agreements in general he who writes the rules gets to benefit from them. Free trade having far less to do with free trade as generalized is the first thing he noticed when coming to Washington. Certain business groups captured the task of writing the rules in TPP  to benefit them.   ...