LyrArc Article Gist
Sharing the waters of the Indus river system means— the ‘Eastern Rivers’, namely Sutlej, Beas and Ravi, for India, and the ‘Western Rivers’ of Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab for Pakistan. Indus Waters Treaty changes proposed by India include bilateral not international arbitration for Indian dam building plans, and using water storage optimally on its side for the western rivers.

The western rivers have four times the water as eastern rivers and dam building technology has evolved over 75 years. The Indus Water Treaty was written by civil engineers but its international arbitration and three levels need to be replaced with bilateral settlement so that India can go ahead with dam building for development without Pakistan simply stalling everything, which serves no purpose for modernization.

LyrArc Article Gist
That India is meeting and exceeding goals set under the paris Climate Change agreement is a great achievement of the last 6 years says this Hindustan Times editorial. India's achievements in solar and other forms of renewable energy have been achieved with a bold vision and strong effort of its own showing that climate change agreements are not the only way to tackle climate change. As one of the major users of energy from coal and fossil fuels India's bold action makes a huge difference for the world. As China, EU, Britain and Japan commit to a net zero carbon target India is now one of many countries in the competition to reduce fossil fuels. This also means HT says that India must now be prepared for technological competition as well as shift to renewable energy sources. The return of the U.S. to the climate accords now positions both countries to benefit from each others advances in renewable energy. Partnership with Britain and Japan also offers new possibilities for technology access and sharing so that more gains can be made to benefit India's and the global environment for clean skies, clean air and clean waters. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
There is a connection between crumbling infrastructure in Europe,US and India and tax evasion. Because it is massive with many large corporations not paying taxes in fair sharing of tax responsibilities, and some tech companies paying no taxes, it is how we got to this situation of crumbling infrastructure and not enough funds to rebuild our economies. In India digital solutions and a unified GST tax system,  introduced by the prime minister, are some solutions. A wider solution is a minimum corporate tax that is supported by US, Europe, and India. The Pandora Papers is just one more set of revelations of this problem of tax evasion. The more open and within the law insidious form of tax evasion is that of large corporations not taking on their fair share of responsibilities. Only a culture change where it is considered a case of honor and respect to take on a fair share of the tax responsibilities as citizens would work. For this to make sense money cannot be wasted in distant lands and foreign wars, in corrupt practices, or wasted expenditures, every dollar has to go into infrastructure so that citizens can see their dollars at work as soon as they step outside- new bridges, new roads, new childcare facilities, social services that work, climate change investments, competitive technology investments such as the one in semiconductors built at home. This requires measurement of infrastructure dollars spent, results, and grading of the work done, deficiencies spotlighted. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
No country benefited more than first Japan and then South Korea till 2000, and now China till 2022 from the trade and sharing of industrial technology enabled by the American backed system of trade and industry. Walter Russell Mead says in WSJ that China has chosen to challenge the system through which it developed into an industrialized nation with the US running huge trade deficits, sharing its technology and letting Chinese manufacturing displace American local manufacturing. China is seen as challenging the system. Yet what has happened is that this process of displacing American manufacturing and industry was not sustainable anyway and continued for a decade longer than it would otherwise have lasted because American industry could not easily reverse a course it had set of setting up manufacturing in China, once that manufacturing base had already been transferred from the US to China and American companies had grown accustomed to a new state of affairs of making overseas in China. Not much thought was given to how American workers would react to that situation as companies and industries making that transfer made independent decisions. This led to the election of Trump with wins in midwestern states that had suffered from loss of manufacturing communities.  The Trump tariffs on Chinese goods and the Biden administration lining up completely behind American workers and families for the first time for Democrats has sent the signal to China that it finds the situation of China's dominance in the trade system unacceptable. The document of "China 2030" of the Chinese Government with planned dominance in key sectors and industries was met with alarm across America in all parties. The paradox of Apple as a key sector in Chinese manufacturing and the largest American company is the result of policies pursued by America without realizing the true cost of shipping manufacturing out of the country. That process is now being reversed with change of management starting at Intel Corp. and other companies to bring the manufacturing base back to the US. This policy is being resolutely pursued by the US and will speed up following the pandemic which has further demonstrated how much of a mistake the policy of sending out manufacturing in critical areas such as health could be. This is the reality behind the rhetoric and verbal exchange between China and the US. With the rapid growth of Chinese manufacturing countries such as India were put in a difficult situation  as this was preventing the local industrial base developing in India with Chinese imports in the same way as it had damaged that of the US and the EU. Worse it led to the use of US and European technology in China's defense industrial base including aviation and other sectors that threatened India's borders with repeated Chinese incursions in the Himalayas, from the Pakistan western Himalayas to Ladakh and the eastern Himalayan mountains. That situation existed long before the Trump and Biden administration and the Modi administration called for a return to America of its industrial manufacturing base and its technological leadership. Both the Bush and Obama administrations and the Indian Congress administrations failed to realize the dangers of letting the US, European and Indian industrial base wither. India is not just a country but a culture that extends from the Himalayas all the way across Bangladesh to the Indonesian islands which shares a common cultural history of Buddhism and the Vedanta. This is a region that has a population of about 2 billion people. In a larger sense the cultural history extends to  Vietnam and Japan with its Buddhist culture whose origins go back to India, and also of China itself. In the larger sense this is a population of close to 3 billion people. The economic development of this region and learning from the parliamentary traditions and scientific discoveries of the modern period since 1700 is a task for both the US, Europe and the people of the region.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Eric Schmidt, former chairman of Google, says that dependency taken to this extreme where TSMC makes 92% of the advanced semiconductors needed for every smartphone, laptop and missile systems, needs to be quickly corrected. He says America's technology advantage could face serious damage with the Taiwanese production lost in the event of war or missile attack. The supply chain is already at risk with over 70% of supplies of silicon, tungsten, and gallium in the supply chain under China's control. Surprisingly Schmidt does not ask for action beyond Congress authorizing the $50 billion investment proposed for American manufacturing of semiconductors. What is needed as Andy Kessler has proposed in WSJ is to ask Taiwan and South Korea to invest in the US and allies such as  India where production cost challenges can be met with the engineering manpower and facilities as has been done in health care and vaccines manufacturing. Only token or small investments have been made by South Korea and Taiwan in the US compared to what is required. The US should ask for this to be done as part of the exchange for security guarantees that the US is already making for South Korea and Taiwan. It is also the responsibility of South Korea and Taiwan to make these and other investments in other technologies considering it as its obligation to the Free World. For too long countries in Asia that have benefited from US assistance have ignored their reciprocal obligations to the US. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and China have all benefited from US technology sharing and assistance. It is only an egregious example that China has put itself in the situation where Japan found itself or placed itself in the first half of the twentieth century.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new head of India's Space Agency ISRO, Kailasavadivoo Sivan, talks to DW.com about the Space Agency's plans for the future. ISRO launched a mission to Mars which went into Mars orbit, at a very low cost.  The Mars Orbiter Mission vehicle is orbiting the planet Mars since 2014. In 2008 ISRO sent an unmanned spacecraft to orbit the moon. The future missions include a second mission to the moon, and a mission to the Sun. The solar mission Aditya-L1 will study the properties of the Sun. Mr. Sivan says his focus includes use of High Throughput Satellites(HTS) for providing high data-rate transmission. This is now available in cities, and the HTS will enable this for remote regions of India. Other focus is in agriculture with information on crops increased from 8 to 15 crops so that farmers have more information on fertility of soil, crop yields. Sivan says progress can be made with more international cooperation and sharing of technology, particularly with India leading the way with low cost high tech applications that benefit education, agriculture, and bringing space applications to people it never reached before. Sivan comes from one of India's villages, which are now experiencing change through India's rapid modernization efforts. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The auto sector has an outsized effect on economic growth that is not easily grasped. The IMF sees a fifth of slowdown in growth of global gross domestic product and a third of world trade coming just from low demand for autos. The auto sector feeds into demand for steel, aluminium, copper, plastic and electronics, so it feeds into other sectors. Aging populations, stagnant incomes, ride sharing, and economic headwinds on trade for China, slower demand with lower economic activity in India from bad loans and low credit in the finance sector, all have cut into growth. Tariffs from president Trump and tit for tat tariffs increase costs and cut into profits. In Europe there is added factor of mandated drop in carbon dioxide emissions by 20% by 2021. The new technology will increase costs of autos by 800 to 5000 euros and add 5-11% to the selling price, reducing sales by about 5%.  A fast growing market is India but companies such as Ford and GM have moved out as it slows down. Higher emissions standards in India for 2020 are likely to increase prices in a very price sensitive market. Lower availability of credit in China and India have led to drop in sales of about 15% in both major markets for autos since mid 2018.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's new prime minister Li Keqiang makes his first foreign trip with a trade delegation for talks with Indian representatives and business leaders, showing the importance he places on India. India offers China's companies access to large opportunties in infrastructure development, and China can benefit from India in the area of information technology and pharmaceuticals. Trade is envisioned as expanding from $70 billion in 2012 to $100 billion by 2015, and expanding rapidly as the two economies grow. Economic contacts also would provide an anchor for future relations as China faces difficulties in its relations with Japan, and S. E. Asian countries, and a U.S. wary of China's capabilities. This was pointed out in the joint statement. Li Keqiang also emphasized this in an editorial page article in India's daily newspaper, the Hindu, saying India and China have "to work hand in hand," to promote Asia as "an anchor for world peace." A peaceful India-China trade and economic relationship opens the way for investment and participation in development by China alongside Japan, Germany, France, UK and the U.S. in India, as the next major source for global economic growth. This also serves to defuse Asian tensions as both economies grow, and increased contacts between cities in India and China with the twining of cities program launched in the meetings. India can use China's capabilities in infrastructure development, the two countries share the need for information sharing on lowcost solutions in healthcare, in managing urbanization, and solutions for clean water in rural areas, and use of IT solutions in development, where much remains to be accomplished through cooperation. Some of these themes are the focus of Li Keqiang in his efforts for urbanization in China. ...

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 US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
GM's joint venture with Luizhou Wuling Motors has produced a win-win situation for both companies. Wuling was a small, regional manufacturer when the joint venture started. Now Wuling has more than 1 million in unit sales. And GM has benefitted from the rapidly growing sales. Year over year sales were 29% in 2010, and were slowing to 10% in 2011, with the end of government incentives. Wuling vans can now be sold under the GM brand in India, using lower cost manufacturing in China. Looking back this was good for GM. The future however has some twists and turns and could turn out to be different. Wuling joint venture will produce cars at a lower price point under the Baojun brand. These cars were shown at the Shanghai Auto Show, and will be marketed to customers who are looking for affordable cars in the second and third tier cities in China. The Baojun brand joint venture will have one difference. This brand involves intellectual property being held in common with Wuling Motors. This is part of China's new plan for American and European manufacturers in China- the price of access to the Chinese market is greater technology sharing with Chinese partners. In the long run this should enable Chinese manufacturers to be dominant inside China. This process is already underway. According to J.D. Powers, Chinese brands had 32% of the domestic passenger vehicles market in 2010, up from 18% in 2000. Something similiar happened with Japan, where Nissan was making Britain's Austin A40 series in the mid-1950's. By the 1960's the foreign tieups were replaced by Japanese manufacturers dominant in the home market and exporting their own models. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Steve Jobs anticipated a post PC period when he told a technology conference in 2010 that PC's would retain a lot of their value, but he said they will be used only by one out of so many users. Tim Cook told a Goldman Sachs investor conference recently: "From the first day it shipped, we thought- not just me, many of us thought at Apple- that the tablet market would become larger than the PC market, and it was just a matter of time that it took for that to occur." Analysts see this happening sometime between 2013 and 2017.

LyrArc Article Gist
Lawrence Katz, Harvard labor economist, talks to Friedman about the jobs crisis in the U.S.. Katz identifies three jobs crises occurring at the same time today. One is the drop in the demand for goods and services that resulted from the longer term effects of the financial crisis of 2008, with rising foreclosures, weak housing markets, bad debt on the balance sheets of banks, and interest rates at close to zero reducing the scope of action by the Federal Reserve bank. The second, is the widespread long term unemployment with workers dropping out of the labor market. The third, is the nature of new factories and hiring. Work in new factories is done through increased automation, information technology and fewer workers. As a result job creation is a fraction of what it was in the past. Not mentioned here is the shrinking of the public sector under the strain of budget deficits for local, state and federal government. This leads to the question of how America will create jobs in the future. Katz believes the answer is creating more "hubs," networked urban areas like Austin, Silicon Valley, and Raleigh-Durham, by bringing together universities, high-tech manufacturers, software providers, and startup companies, to cooperate in creating new products that enhance people's lives worldwide. This has to be done by the private sector and government working together to build the infrastructure and make the investments in education, training of workers, and equipment for new job creation....