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
The Chinese government is concerned that lack of a safety net, fears about a general access to health care, and lack of other assistance for the farmers, elderly, rural poor, lack of unemployment protections and welfare, all are making Chinese to cramp up and spend less. Chinese households save a quarter of their income in normal times, now unless the government steps in a big way, which it has done only in small faltering steps, savings will increase even more in response to fears about the future. Lu Mai, secretary general of the China Development Research Foundation, says China has reached a point where it has to make a big decision, does it spend more on security and the police or on social benefits. He put out a report last week which estimates the government needs to spend 2.6 trillion yuan or 380 billion dollars by 2012 for the first phase of a social safety net. With a further spending of $838 billion dollars by 2020 to complete the improvement of health care, education, pensions for the elderly, low income housing, disability benefits, unemployment protections and welfare for the poorest. And these estimates may be low depending on the assumptions made, as the situation has taken a steep descent from the time these estimates were probably made. In the last few months tens of millions have been added to the jobless, and the severe drought has created a difficult situation on the farms in rural areas, even while millions of migrants return to these rural areas as businesses dependent on exports collapse in cities in coastal areas. What is the government allocation at this time? A target for health care overhaul of $124 billion was set recently. But the actual stimulus package is heavily skewed in favor of infrastructure and investment in construction. About 1% of the big stimulus package that was announced goes to health care and 7% to public housing. Says Zhuang Jian, an economist with the Asian Development Bank, this excessive investment in infrastructure, heavy industry and manufacturing will cause serious problems, if there is not strong consumption to match it. And Eswar Prasad of Cornell University, who was head of the China division at the IMF, says that an ambitious agenda is needed for higher social spending to take away the fears of average Chinese about the future. Chinese premier Wen says the government needs to do more, but the instincts of China's planners, and decades of development with built in incentives for promoting investment in construction, infrastructure and industry, have left China with huge unsustainable underinvestment in basics like education, health care and social benefits....

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip, Chief Economics correspondent of the WSJ, says there is a disconnect between falling stock markets in Jan 2016 and the economy. This is true not only for the U.S. economy but for China as well, says Ip. He points to the 6.9% growth rate in China for 2015 as close to the target set by China's government. Reports of economic output and exports show China's economy stabilizing. This contrasts with weakness in the way the government and the central bank have managed financial markets since the summer of 2015, sending confusing signals and hurting investor confidence. One difference as the stock markets decline worldwide- the Fed in the U.S has little room to cut rates and plans to gradually increase rates, the Chinese govenment and planners do not plan stimulus as they look for ways to reduce debt in the economy. This means less support for financial markets and less support for high valuations in the tech and startup sectors, which could provide stability in the long run.

LyrArc Article Gist
As the Chinese government is pushing for more transfrer of technology one effort is for a Chinese partner and overseas partner to build a car from scratch for the Chinese and export market. Honda is going to build a car from scratch in China with its Chinese partner.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hitachi supplied signalling technology components for safety on China's high speed trains. Hitachi was the supplier to Beijing based Hollyss Automation Technologies Ltd., which is one of the two suppliers along with China Railway Signal & Communication Corp (CRSC) for the signalling equipment. To protect its proprietary technology from competitive threats Hitachi uses zumen or "black box" so that the components cannot be reverse engineered. Experts say that as a result Chinese engineers did not have a good grasp of how crucial aspects of the safety tecnology worked, leading to the collision of two bullet trains in 2011. The key components of the ATP, the Automatic Train Protection, the onboard brain on the trains, was supplied by Hitachi. Engineers at French company Alstom SA's China operations say China needs time to master the complicated technology acquired in the last seven years of the high speed rail program.

LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the every 5 years 20th Party Congress of the CCP or Chinese Communist Party, and the 2300 representatives attending from all parts of China are answered in this report in The Guardian.  Xi Jinping is expected to get a third term. To outsiders in US and Europe it is all about power in China, to insiders in China it is about China making it through the 100 years since the 1901 revolution and the tumult, the chaos of the first 100 years, and now a period of modernization and growing incomes,  the need to create jobs, tackle climate change, ensure a good future for the Chinese people. 2300 party members representing millions of party members in China attend the gathering. New appointments and retirements take place at this Congress. Of this there are 200 elite members of the Central Committee with voting rights. This central committee is responsible for electing a 25 member Politburo, of which the seven most senior persons are appointed to the Politburo Standing Committee. Xi Jinping is the General Secretary, the most senior position in this hierarchy. Age related retirements are at 68 years and a new Politburo standing committee is announced at each Congress. After the Bo Xilai effort to take power and take China in a new and unknown direction, and the gradual loss of the party's respect from corruption and abuses of power by local officials, Xi Jinping sensed problems in the future and conducted a anti-corruption campaign. Most of the system of government set up during the Deng and Jiang Zemin years after 1980 remains in place with Jinping calling for a revival of China, the next stage of modernization, under the banner of the CCP. The result of the anti-corruption campaign and a third term assumed by Xi including lifting of a term limit for heading the CCP, gives Xi Jinping an opportunity to shape the future for China as Deng did after 1980. Jinping in the manner of Deng sees the CCP as the organization that can continue the modernization and growth of China. The model set by Deng and Zemin of local autonomy for economy and centralized overall direction continues under Jinping who is General Secretary since 2012. China has made rapid growth during the period 2000-2022, but faces challenges of reorienting its economy away from dependence on a tight economic export oriented relationship with the US and EU, as supply chains are being shifted after the pandemic. This means more unemployment and need for careful economic planning and investment to create jobs in other sectors, and to meet the challenges of unequal distribution of wealth in China after hypergrowth that hurt China in some ways, and in the climate change effects of use of coal other fossil fuels. As focus of interest is on Jinping externally, within China it is these three challenges that must be uppermost in the minds of the 20th Congress members. Much of this stems from the tumult of the century that began with the 1901 revolution through Japanese invasion and upheavals in the 60's and 70's, leading to the rare period of stability and growth in the last 20 years. Jinping like Deng and Zemin has personal memories of the anguish of this period and the tumult, the chaos of the 20th century for China, and the yearning for stability with modernization.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Much of the information Friedman says comes from Ruchir Sharma could be seen through simple observation. By the time it is written about so much has already happened. For example Tech firms crowding out innovative new firms starting from scratch is happening since 2000, from the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations. By the time the concept makes it into the economics textbooks many years later it is obsolete. In economics textbooks of the eighties crowding out referred to governments crowding out private firms in the competition for capital. Concepts of comparitive advantage in economics textbooks were similarly obsolete when Japanese and Chinese competition in the last three decades brought into play a very different model of competition of subsidized private and state run companies focussed on dominating key industries that never made it into textbook economics and theories of experts. Comparitive advantage theory in textbooks were too simplistic not able to account for real life situations in which a determined national competitor could move up the ladder every few years in sophistication and technology to compete in products at many levels. The old textbooks simply said Portugal would make wine because it had some advantages and America with its advantages in steel production would make steel. This kind of theory put many people to sleep as other nations took over American markets- first steel, then electronics, then telecom, and then renewable energy. To protect American workers Robert Lighthizer and other American negotiators of trade with China, Japan, South Korea, used their own head and observation of what was happening. This was a better guide to the best response to protect American workers. Doing what makes sense, doing what works for final delivery point to the intended beneficiary, the American worker, or European worker, or Indian worker, provides a better way to get things done.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Japan says Russian planes intruded into Japanese airspace for over 1 minute on February 7, 2013, over the island of Rishiri, near Hokkaido. F-2 aircraft from Japan's Self Defense Forces responded to the intrusion. The intrusion comes at the time of the Northern Territories Day when Japan's government reiterates its determination to press for return of the Northern Territories from Russia. Japan did not sign a peace agreement with Russia at the end of World War II after Russia refused to leave the islands. The islands are known as the four Kuril islands in Russia. Policy experts at Japan's National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies say the Russian intrusion was an attempt to test Japan after an incident where Chinese radar locked in on Japanese naval ships in the East China Sea. The effects on public opinion are likely to create support for prime minister Abe's effort to increase the budget for Japan's Self-Defense Forces.

LyrArc Article Gist
How companies like Bombay Rayon, Himatsingka, Welspun are putting in new factories, and design to increase exports. The need to diversify for western companies importing Chinese textiles is also helping them.

LyrArc Article Gist
Privileged minorities ethnic or white among large native populations. Amy Chua argues that free markets that empower the white minority giving it special privileged status, and democracy that empowers the native peoples, leads to conflict and exacerbates tensions. She talks about the Venezuelan experience with Chavez. Before Chavez Venezuela had free markets and elections in which two parties alternately controlled the government. Even before Reagan era and post Reagan era promotion of free markets and democracy this existed. However people were fed up with corruption and the native peoples did not see their lives improve. They tried a populist politician in Chavez who redistributes petroleum wealth to the poorer classes. Some of this tension is inevitable, but if all sides use good sense and understanding, and manage this tension constructively there still exists a better situation than there was before- when looking at overall public welfare and considering the welfare of the people and the educated professional classes. When there is a failure to work together it shows the shortsightedness of both sides, the poor understanding and lack of joint effort for mutual benefits, and not the shortsightedness of free markets and democracy. And one is not talking of free markets as American type, but free markets as crafted for each individual country based on its own history, culture, time and place, as free markets are not the same in America, Britain, Germany, France, Japan and South Korea, China and India in the post war period. China is not even a democracy and has practiced one of the wildest kind of free market economy based on its own unique situation, calculated consensus to use exports, foreign investment, and domestic investment in infrastructure as engines of development- its own peculiar use of free market ideas for its own situation. If it works, for as long as it works its good. Now as the situation changes with loss of export markets expected in 2009, China is changing to another kind of use of free market ideas tailored to its idea of free markets for development of the Chinese economy and distribution of benefits to urban and rural areas. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Even China has not campaigned the way Canada, Mexico and British, American media have against DJT Tariffs because China knows it is basically about getting an even playing field when it is the only country with $1 trillion in trade in its favor in 2024, 12 times the Japanese high of $82 billion trade surplus in 2007. But why should China campaign when the American and British, German media are going to do the job for China? A simple quiz to K-12 would ask school children when is the last time a country has a $1 trillion trade surplus? Answer: Never. Greg Ip has written a few years back that the devastation of China outshoring of American factories and jobs was unlike the 1980's Japan trade invasion because of first China's size, second by the speed with which it happened at 10-14% Chinese GDP growth. There is a third Japan was an ally needing US for security and backed down, China's case is different it is challenging the US for control of the world economy and will fight this one over the long haul. Greg Ip of WSJ on the 53 countries asking to negotiate US Liberation Day April 2, 2025 Tariffs. These countries include Allies of the US in full support asking to negotiate Israel, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India Allies of the US in partial support asking to negotiate Britain Allies of the US not in full support asking to negotiate Germany, France Allies of the US in the past campaigning against the US, asking to negotiate Canada, Mexico Not Allies of the US, not in full support, not campaigning against the US China A look at his list tells one only one thing, mostly all trading partners except for the $146 billion exports of the US which represents exports to China are the exports that are at risk if things don't work out on tariffs. This is what the media today WSJ added this last week to the NYT, Wash. Post and the BBC, Guardian of UK, German media will not tell the reader.  The DJT Tariffs and Tariff negotiations are Lighthizer Tariff negotiations which won the fight with Japan in the 1980's over unfair trade and gaining a level playing field. Lighthizer as Deputy US Trade Representative conducted the tough negotiations with Japan. He was USTR in 2016-2020 and his Deputy Jamieson is now USTR in 2025       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Berlin based China studies center MERICS experts say China's weak spot is domestic consumption, as it is too reliant on export demand. These experts say overseas demand from Europe and US has held up in recent months, but where would China pick up manufacturing production when this demand slows down? Stimulus is seen as risky by experts and contradictory to efforts by the Chinese government to reduce debt based financial risks, with the debt built up in hypergrowth of two decades since 2000. Much of this hypergrowth itself has resulted in trade tensions with US and today puts China in what MERICS calls this "tricky situation." This situation resulted from growth since 2000 that was was unleashed from local governments in China with failure to control it from the central government in Beijing to reduce its impact on deindustrialization of towns and communities in the US and Europe. A lesson that China's planners may be looking at as they look to the future for more balance and quality of life,  and dignity of life for rural, town and city communities across China. Politburo CCP's standing committee has put forward the idea of a "dual circulation economy" to reduce dependence on foreign demand, and balance it with growing domestic demand, yet experts at Berlin base MERICS say this has not happened. A report from the Atlantic Council says without domestic demand picking up the pace of China's growth, China would have difficulty growing beyond 3% annually by 2025.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. exports reached $2.34 trillion in 2014, increasing by $760 billion over the figure in 2009, according to the Commerce Department. Exports accounted for one third of the U.S. economic growth since 2009, say Pritzker and McNerney. Goods and services for exports supported 11.7 million U.S. jobs in 2014, and a Commerce Department 2010 paper shows these jobs pay 18% higher than jobs unrelated to exports. Commerce Department Secretary Pritzker, and McNerney, chairman of the President's Export Council, say free trade agreements and investment by private business is critical to supporting export promotion, but make no mention of the effect of the stronger dollar on future exports. In a period of a few months in 2015 the euro is approaching parity with the dollar and the yen is now 120 to the dollar, giving European and Japanese business a significant advantage, and raising questions about the strength of the U.S. recovery going forward.

LyrArc Article Gist
The tensions that exist in Australian society, as a result of the large Chinese investments and imports of infrastructure building commodities such as iron ore, natural gas and other commodities. Australia's Pilbara region in the northwestern part of the country, has become one huge quarry for China, as an estimated 1 million tons of iron ore raw material is loaded onto 2 story high trucks each day- with automated driverless trucks system being implemented- and shipped by 2 mile long trains to waiting ships on the coast. Australians remember this done on a smaller scale in the 1980's by Japan. At the time Japan brought in Japanese workers. The same is true today but on a bigger scale, with China bringing in workers with lower pay. The concern now is what it was then, as one local leader put it- are we going to have towns with mines or mines with towns, he asked. The mining companies are looking at it purely as a commercial venture, and not investing in the towns. The towns now fear they will find the boom times gone someday and nothing tangible to show for it, no schools, hospitals and no infrastructure. And because the mining project companies fly people in and out, the 8000 aboriginal people in Pilbara- the original people of this land- see little of the mining expansion's benefits. Wandoan, a small place with 300 homes in the outback in Queensland, in eastern Australia, is an example of the gut wrenching change taking place in the mining areas. The lives of the people from the local pharmacy, the local supermarket, and the local ranchers, depend on the mining decisions made in China. This area was part of a planned, on again off again, $6 billion coal mine -part of a A$150 billion complex of natural gas and coal projects for exports to Asia in Queensland- and involved Xstrata buying 70,000 acres of the best grazing land for 7 coal mines. With the locals selling off, the mining uncertain, the supermarket closing, the whole town has the feeling of being up in the air, and fading out someday. Australian public sentiment recognizes this feeling, and at the same time is ambivalent about the impact. Polls conducted by the Lowy Institute for International Policy, show 73% of Australians feel Chinese economic growth has a positive impact, and at the same time 57% feel that there is now excessive Chinese investment, and 46% feel China will be a military threat in 20 years. Australians remember the same feeling about Japan's investments in raw material sources in the eighties. In 1988, polls then showed 70% of Australians saying there was too much Japanese investment, even though they also recognized that Australia had benefitted. The difference now is that there are also fears of China's influence, and foreign investment guidelines limit investments in Australian mining companies to below 50%. China's investment in Australia's natural resources comes in several ways: in the year upto July 2009 A$42 billion in export demand, A$3 billion in direct investment in Australian companies, and about A$5 billion in project financing. Iron ore sales to China amount to A$22 billion each year, and about one fourth of Australia's exports went to China, growing at a rate of 31% in 2009. According to the chief economist of Austrade, the government trade organization, Australia benefits from the economic relationship with China- this adds A$3,400 per year to every Australian household. Efforts to use some of the profits made by mining corporations for infrastructure and other public purposes, by increasing the mining tax have failed; as the mining industry launched a campaign against the government of Kevin Rudd, who was removed from office by his party. In the recent national elections, the ruling Labor party lost its majority, after losses in the resource rich states of Western Australia and Queensland. In the meantime the Australian currency has become the currency used by currency speculators who cannot use the yuan to make a bet on the currency- as the yuan is pegged to the dollar- and instead use the Australian dollar as a proxy. This makes it volatile, with the Australian dollar losing 10% of its value in a single day, when pessimism increased about China's growth forecasts. It also shows how much of the good story of employment and gdp growth in Australia is tied to the story in China, and the extent of the negative impact a reversal in this area can mean for Australians; especially now that the bad debt in the post-2008 explosion of bank lending poses risks to China's banknig system. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The earthquake in Sichuan will probably not have a significant impact on the Chinese economy as it recovers according to experts.