LyrArc Article Gist
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer says this is not chaos in tariff policy because you don't change 70 years of policy overnight. He says China's is highest because it has the highest trade deficit, then EU, Japan, South Korea at 15% because of the smaller deficits with these nations, Vietnam because it is used  by China to send products to the US, India because of geopolitical reasons buying Russian oil. See Dasha Burns, Politico White House Bureau Chief's  interview with USTR Jamieson Greer.  He says about India- Jamieson USTR calls India "an outlier" and says "I'm confident we will get a deal with India in the near future." India he says has largely corrected its imports of Russian oil and negotiations are underway for a deal.  ON USMCA Greer says of the $31 trillion in trade with Canada and Mexico $29 trillion is us right. trade between Canda and Mexico is small. So he says it makes sense to negotiate separately with Canada and separately with Mexico. This suggests that there doesnt need to be a USMCA- separate deals are just fine says Greer. Mexico has gained much in automobiles under USMCA- US wants to make more in the US including auto parts which it can do by negotiating this with Mexico. It does not make a ton of economic sense to marry the three economies together, says Greer, as the import export profiles, lab,or situations are all different. Are Tariffs good for the economy and do they lead to higher prices? Greer says inflation was down in the first DJT term in trade with China and tariffs. Greer says there is never a 1 to 1 with tariffs. It tariffs become a kind of leveage in getting agreements. That is the style of these tariffs. You tell Ecuador or Brazil we don't make these here so there will be no tariffs on bananas and on coffee. Says Greer- we have seen inflation in check, imported goods relatively low priced. We have seen that we can have growth and higher wages with tariffs at the same time. The growth in 2025 third quarter at 3.8% annual growth, and Atlanta Fed predicting 4.2% growth in 2026. And tariff money can be used for paying down the debt and financing America's reindustrialization, Greer says members of Congress are asking about this.When a new administration comes tariffs will still be part of the playbook. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's central bank reduces its reserve requirement ratio, required money set aside by commercial banks and not used for lending. It lowered by half percentage point to 13% the amount of reserves Chinese banks are required to set aside. As the economy has cooled recently with trade tensions with the U.S., China's growth has slowed to 6%. The move frees up $126 billion for lending. In a speech this week president Xi used the word "struggle" over a dozen times. The State Council has plans to allocate more money for vocational training, to expand railways construction.  Analysts of S&P recently estimated China's economic growth over the next decade at 4.6% on average if the trade dispute gets to a stalemate, if trade dispute worsens it could drop to 3.7%. The trade dispute has dampened the mood at China Development Forum in Beijing, with attendees saying the distrust between the U.S. and China is based on deep concerns about each other. Besides the lending increase planned, the central government is pushing local governments to find projects to create jobs. Local governments fear this would worsen the already high debt burden they carry. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Kaiser, former managing editor of The Washington Post, reviewed this book on Joe McCathy in The Washington Post on August 7, 2020. It shows the link with today of Senator Joe McCarthy and Roy Cohn, the then 27 year old lawyer chief counsel of the senate subcommittee on investigation when Joe McCarthy became chairman in Jan. 1953. The book is-  Demagogue The Life and Long Shadow of Senator Joe McCarthy by Larry Tye. Roy Cohn passed on some of the methods used at that time to Mr. Trump. Kaiser points out that the senator Joe McCarthy assembled "a coalition of the aggrieved." Tye shows that it started with the junior senator from Wisconsin making a speech in West Virginia for Lincon Day dinner to the Republican ladies of Wheeling, W. Va. The senator used it to talk about threat of communists working in the State Department. He claimed there were 205 Communists. Today we know that this was just made up by McCarthy, at a time when Winston Churchill made the speech about the Iron Curtain in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and a sense of shock in America at the People's Republic of China being formed in 1949 under CCP chairman Mao tse tung. McCarthy saw this as an opportunity to gain prominence and a Senate career. What is seen from this carefully researched book is that for a while it succeeded in putting many of the Nation's best leaders on the defense. This includes Harry Truman, Eisenhower himself who disdained McCarthy's and Cohn's methods, Gen George Marshall who was a mentor to Dwight EIsenhower, Joe Stilwell, and other military leaders who ran the 1940's war effort under Marshall in Europe against the Nazis and in China against the Japanese imperialists. On the domestic side it included the head of TVA and the new Atomic Agency setup by president Truman. Gallup said at that time of McCarthy's 38% support in the US following his censure in US Senate by 67-22  -even if it was known that McCarthy killed five innocent children they would still go along with him. Tye writes that in that atmosphere similar to the sense of shock at China's rise and America's loss of manufacturing and falling behind in infrastructure by 2016, in that atmosphere if one told a small lie or big lie it made not much difference in public's penalty or censure, then why not tell a whopper of a lie. This became the ethic for a while in 2016-2024 similar to the period till the collapse of McCarthyism in America by 1957 with McCarthy's death in 1957 and in 1960 the election of John F. Kennedy. What is forgotten is that Richard Nixon a young senator from California was part of the group in Congress, so that in some shape or form it existed and remained part of the Reagan efforts to push back against the Soviets that led to wars in Afghanistan and then Iraq sapping the Nation's energies and resources and with faulty economic theory allowed China to dominate key industries and outspend America in infrastructure investment, creating the kind of shock that led to the second McCarthyist decade under Mr. Trump. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this exhibit in the Library of Congress Herblock in the Washington Post lampoons the efforts in 1952 of Senators Joseph McCarthy and Jenner to place unfounded criticism on Adlai Stevenson the Democratic candidate for president. The 1952 campaign for president in the US is reminiscent of the campaigns since 2016, 2020, 2024. In 1952 the US was engaged in the Korean War and there was increasing fatigue with that war as Communist China pushed back Gen. MacArthur's forces and the armies moved back and forth across the Korean peninsula. Eisenhower offered to go to Korea to find an end to the war. The Korean War comes only a few years after China became a People's Republic in 1949 under the Communist party led by Mao-tse-tung and the Berlin Crisis. This led to an effort by Senator Joseph McCarthy and Senator Jenner in the 1952 campaign to make all sorts of criticism much of it unfounded about Adlai Stevenson who had just been elected Governor of Illinois. Eisenhower was a much respected figure and had planned not to run or run as an Independent and only agreed under much persuasion from Dewey and the Eastern Establishment (New York and Boston). Eisenhower had led American forces in the Western Command under George Marshall and president Harry Truman and had not sought the presidency only to have his name placed on the ballot in New Hampshire. In the middle of a campaign Eisenhower (Ike) did not openly refute McCarthy and Jenner but had showed considerable discomfort with their unfounded rhetoric and tactics. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Larry Rohter says Mexico handled the swine flu epidemic much beter than China handled the SARS epidemic in 2002. Before it was brought under control SARS cost 700 lives, by contrast Mexico's response was much quicker and the government and health authorites in Mexico worked with labs in North America and the Centers for Disease Control ad Prevention in the USA, to prevent its spread. The cost in lives was much smaller, with 42 lives lost. Mexico is not the failed state that it is presented as in the media suggests Lohter. This is the impression created by adetailed account of the crisis in the WSJ, see the link, on the swine flu epidemic.

LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Hessler was a teacher in Sichuan province of China before living in Tibet and writing this article for The Atlantic.  It gives some insights into both the thinking of Chinese people and Tibetan people and the changes happening around them. Inevitably changes would have come to Tibet from outside or without China's takeover of Tibet in 1950, would have come in some other form, as it has in neighboring Nepal, Afghanistan, says Hessler, without some of the loss of some of the positive aspects of culture and of Buddhism.  Even in India feudal system of zamindars prevailed in villages into the late British period and the early Nehru period but has gradually disappeared over time, so that change has potential over time to happen, and comes inevitably.  Here he shows- the immigrants from Sichuan province, over 120 million people in the province, and part of a floating population of migrant workers in China, looking for jobs or economic opportunity, and some taking up life at the high Himalayan altitudes for 2-3 years or even 8 year terms. The belief Hessler says among Sichuan immigrants that high altitude was bad for the lungs over long periods and shortened life. The lack of women with a disproportionate number of men making the journey to start a new life in Tibet, the hardships, the enterprising nature of Sichuan immigrants in the shops and retail that Tibetans lacked the enterprising skills to do, the difficulties living with two cultures side by side, the lack of any incentive to learn the local language. The feelings of Tibetan people that they are somehow losing their culture and identity. The sense among immigrants that this is not their first choice of place but somehow would have to do till they go back and find someone to marry during brief trips back home to Sichuan. There is something timeless about this essay, as changes unfold, no one unambiguous trend, a more complex situation.  China's sense that the west has violated its sovereignty under the British and foreign powers in the nineteenth century. The feeling that somehow Tibet is part of this sense of China regaining what it had lost to the foreign powers. Without the realization that Tibet has served as a gift of nature, a given mountainous buffer that helped two Asian civilizations prosper in the Ganges and Yangtse river valleys, thousands of miles apart. And both having the similar experience with the British and foreign powers in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, and both recovering modernizing at the same pace.    The sense China has, says Hessler, that it is about China's sovereignty following a Qing dynasty entry into Lhasa in 1792, even though the Qing saw Tibet as a buffer state running its own affairs separating it from the British Empire on the other side of the Himalayas. Very little contact between China and Tibet for centuries simply because using yaks and mules it would take several months from northern China to Tibet crossing mountain ranges at 15,000 feet. The British saw this as a buffer state in the same way as happened also with the Mughals in the 15th to 18th century, and the Empires between the 11th and 15th century in India.  Because opium was shipped from Bengal under British colonial rule causing great poverty in India against the will of the Indian people, the same sense of violation of sovereignty existed in exactly the same way in the perception of foreign powers in India, so that the notion of violation of one's self respect being shared was serving no useful purpose in this context between China and India.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jaishankar was asked at the 2021 GLOBSEC conference in Bratislava in 2021 why he thinks anyone will help India in case of a problem with China after it did not help others for Ukraine. Chancellor Scholz of Germany cites Indian Foreign Minister Jasihankar's remarks in Bratislava, Slovakia, in 2021. Jaishankar said- "Europe has to grow out of the mindset that Europe's problems are the world's problems, but the world's problems are not Europe's problems. That is if it is you it's yours, if it is me it is ours. I see reflections of that. There is a linkage today which is being made. A linkage betwen China and India and what's happening in Ukraine. Chia and India happened way before anything happened in Ukraine. The Chinese do not need a precedent somewhere else on how to engage us or not to engage us or be difficult with us or not to be difficult with us." These are Scholz's remarks at the Munich Security Conference. Scholz says Jaishankar has "a point."  "This quote from the Indian Foreign Minister is included in this year's Munich Security Report and he has a point it would't be Europe's problem alone if the law of the strong were to assert itself in international relations." To be credible European or North American in New Delhi or Jakarta, it is not enough to emphasize shared values. "We generally have to address the interests and concerns of these countries as a basic prerequisite for joint action. And that's why it was so important to me to not merely have representatives of Asia, Africa and Latin America at the negotiating table during the G-7 Summit last June. I really wanted to work with these regions to find solutions to the main challenges they face growing poverty and hunger, partly as a consequence of Rusia's war, as well as the impact of climate change or COVID-19. There is another side to this -Scholz and Germany's president Frank Walter-Steinmeier are from the social Democrats party which has sought closer cooperation with Russia, and also carry a great deal of ambivalence for the war. America is not fighting this indirect war in its neighborhood, Germany is. And some of the roots of this conflict go back to the Napoleonic invasion of Russia in the 1800's period and the German invasion in the 1940's. Macron is even more ambivalent in his position and he has remained this way from the beginning- not committed to humiliating Russia. In a way it is the position of the Social Democrats from the historical context of Germany's invasion of Russia, and Christian Democrats eagerness to create a German recovery with low cost Russian energy that created the dependence that Russia sought to use. In what it sees as the unfairness of NATO being allowed to expand right next to its borders. Because of a sense of righteousness on both sides- Russia of the Soviet period failing to see the feelings of a Budapest in 1956, East Berlin in 1953, and Prague in 1968, sees little wrong in an invasion of Kviv. And with it all the biography of Brezhnev the last leader of the Soviet Union, describes that very struggle in the Great Patriotic War the soviets fought against Nazi Germany which was fought by Ukrainians including Leonid Brezhnev with great will and purpose against all odds.  Cambridge historian has written the history of Europe that Scholz is cited to be reading in 2021- Europe The Struggle for Supremacy 1453 to the Present.  It shows Europe since 1453 engaging in balance of power of European powers, Sweden Denmark, Russia, Austria, Germany, France, Britain, Turkey, continually for 500 years. Europe simply forgot its own history. Asia including Japan, China, Indonesia and India, simply emerging from the situation of falling behind in science, technology, and the industrial revolution and building their economies with the help of the US since the Meiji Restoration in Japan in 1868. The Balance of Power Simms says was maintained for 500 years is simply based on no country allowed to act with impunity, no country allowed to do whatever it wanted because of its position of strength at that moment or period of time. In that situation all other powers regrouped to keep the balance from being upset. The war in Ukraine is also likely to end in a way that is consistent with that which Brendan Simms writes about because this has not changed now for over 500 years. Biden knows this and it has fallen on America to shoulder the burden for this in the last 150 years, Scholz is aware of this, Modi in India sees this, and Jinping in China realizes this even with its concerns about Taiwan.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Healthcare, climate change, pensions and social benefits, are three issues uppermost in the minds of German voters. Three million new young voters most of them only about 2 years old when Merkel started 16 years in office, look for change. They are well informed and for these young voters climate change is the most important issue. DW.com shows three voters and how they plan to vote. One voter has cast a mail in ballot for The Greens party. The second voter will vote for the Greens. Both because of climate change concerns. The third voter Thurid says her mother is a geriatric nurse and is not vaccinated. She is vaccinated but had talks with her mother and understands her worries about vaccination. She will vote for the Free Democrats because they oppose compulsory vaccination. The three leading parties for young voters are the Greens party, the Free Democrats, followed by the Social Democrats all in the range of 16-18% of support. The Greens have sent out 2 million brochures to voters. Out of 60 million voters in a German population of 80  million, 3 million is only 5% of the vote. What makes a difference is that it is consistent with the general direction of voters young and old, all looking for change in Germany as the CDU party attracts only about 20% or one fifth of German voters. Social Democrats Scholz is way ahead of Christian Democrats Laschet in how voters view each candidate. Will German voters be well informed enough to make a decision based on their desire for change after 16 years of Merkel or will the CDU bringing back in the last days of the campaign the old fears that the communist Left party would somehow find its way into the government using the Greens as a way in- this is a question for German voters. In1994 during the Cold War with Soviets Kohl used this to keep the Social Democrats out and Greens out and formed a coalition with the FDP. Yet today Merkel has grown close to both Russia and China and away from the Western alliance in a way that was unimaginable under Adenauer who helped build the new Federal Republic of Germany after the war. Merkel refuses to even immediately accept a call from a new US president Biden, American president who is closest in style and temperament to Harry Truman who faced off the Soviets in Berlin in 1948.  The FDP opposes a wealth tax or any form of taxes in which the wealthier pay a fair share of what is needed to build crumbling infrastructure in Germany neglected in the Merkel years. In Germany social and economic disparities have grown during the pandemic with poverty increasing during the pandemic as has happened throughout Europe and the world. The US is already committing to increase taxes for the upper incomes. This is where voters have a choice- do nothing with infrastructure, health or climate change or do something by increasing taxes. The choice is now before the German people.  With this question comes a choice for western civilization, with the recent election in the US, and two elections in Germany and then France. Will it look with optimism to the future or will it huddle up in a deeply cautious and slightly pessimistic view of the world that is embedded in Angela Merkel's cautious vision that ended up only responding to crises- some self inflicted as in migration policy, and even self inflicted in tackling euro problems created in the euro currency's faulty design. In fiscal policy as in migration policy Merkel has reversed her position- by supporting European solidarity. Will Germans vote for optimism or never ending caution? Are lessons learned?     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Jon Huntsman, Republican candidate for President in 2012, calls for a fee on banks with a size that is above a certain percentage of the GDP. This would cover the cost banks impose on taxpayers when they are bailed out. It would eliminate the advantage banks gain from "too-big-to-fail," a subsidy Huntsman estimates to be one half percentage point in today's market. He points to efforts by the UK and Switzerland for more stringent financial standards than the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial in September 2014 says many of president Obama's statements and decisions on Obama healthcare legislation and implementation, Syria, NSA and privacy, the Middle East, Russia, showed poor judgement. It refers to a piece by Peter Baker in NYT where it is said that Obama mocked how people see him as too professorial, diffident, in a sarcastic statement. The problem says WSJ is that president Obama has poor judgement. Being academically credentialed and quick grasp of subject matter is not the same as having the ability to discern things, instinct and grasp of the essence of the matter. George Bush senior had a long resume and was academically credentialed. By comparison Truman had a short resume and was not academically credentialed or quick with data and analysis. He had something more essential and important- a discerning mind and grasp of the larger picture, as well as listening abilities for exceptional advisors such as General Marshall and Acheson he gathered around him....