LyrArc Article Gist
With the change in U.S. position on climate change, carbon emissions, and the move to raise tariffs on China's exports to the U.S. China faces a new dimension in its global relationships. Against this background China is shifting to a long term view of its relationship with India. China's new foreign policy leaders after the recent party Congress, vice president Wang Qishan and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, now see the need for new partners in a multipolar global world for the long term as China and India countries with large populations and a need for stable world trade share common interests. Wang steers the Central Foreign Affairs Commission with Yang Jiechi as director. China now sees " a lot of shared interests, concerns and positions," in the words of China's Representative Lu, in the long term issues of globalisation, urbanization, pollution, and concern for achieving stable development with high growth rates.  China now takes the long view looking back at the unprecedented change of the last 100 years, as it maps out its plans for the future. The U.S. has challenged the ideas in the blueprint for development of "Made in China 2025," particularly as it relates to western transfer of technology to China. This has created a new situation for which China is still looking for answers, and ways to come up with new strategies for development without the nearly unrestricted access to western technology of the last 2 decades.  Shared positions on world trade with India and India's close relations with the U.S. add credibility in China's  negotiating positions with the U.S.                  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The 800 foot Chinese ocean carrier Zhen Hua 29 sails into Kingston, Jamaica, from Shanghai on the long route with 5 cranes in epic 3 months voyage through the Indian Ocean around Mozambique- the last of the globalization voyages. As globalization dims these are the last of these voyages. US policy is for its control of the Panama Canal, the Monroe Doctrine in the western hemisphere, pushing out a globalization that hurt American industry and jobs in the USA. China continues on with its surplus capacity make for export policy, the US wants out from these imports, and the EU is wary of imports dependence.  Gemany's Foreign ministry under Wadephul is forming a commission to investigate German dependence on China made products. This is the last of the globalization that started with Clinton, and went on with Bush and Obama, wrecking huge parts of the American industrial base. Cranes- no longer made in the USA, one by one, including ships- no longer made in the USA. The great shipyards of Britain and the US languishing in disrepair! ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US census data shows Mexico exported $382 billion worth of goods to the US in 2022, an increase of 20% over 2021, according to US census data. American companies put more money into Mexico for investment than China in 2021. The high shipping costs and 2 weeks vs 2 months of shipping time are part of the reason companies are looking at Mexico as an alternative to China. The trade friction with the US and tariffs are added incentives for companies to shift manufacturing out of China. The shift is gradual as the infrastructure improvements in Mexico lag behind the infrastructure development in other countries in Asia.

LyrArc Article Gist
VW is rolling back decades of globalization, with shorter supply chains, less focus on China, more investment in the US. The war in Ukraine has further disrupted already strained supply chains and VW is rethinking its entire manufacturing system in a new way.

LyrArc Article Gist
This is an interview with Columbia University economic historian Adam Tooze about the international trade and economic issues brought about by globalization. The rapid emergence of China in manufacturing and overcapacity in steel has led to action on steel tariffs by president Trump. Tooze is typical of opinion that sees action by Trump not as limited action to level the playing field  as proposed by Trade Representative for the U.S., Robert Lighthizer, but as reckless move on trade.  Lyrarc.com shows articles from the WSJ and NYT showing how opinion got to this point in the U.S., on Robert Lighthizer's views that the U.S. was not facing a level playing field, and  on how trade has hurt communities across the U.S. a long distance away from Silicon Valley. President Trump's views reflect a different perspective that says the U.S. has to balance the favorable situation obtained by China and the European Union through moves of its own to protect U.S. interests. Political commentary that the U.S. was starting a trade war is not supported by the facts showing China's response as muted and a willingness by China to negotiate a balanced trading relationship as its trade surplus with the U.S. continues to grow. The trade surplus is so large that the Trump moves do not tell the real story. They are likely to be overshadowed by the increasing value of the U.S. dollar leading to a continued favorable situation for Chinese exports and a larger trade surplus in 2018, regardless of Mr. Trump's action.  Trump's moves are more significant in other areas- limiting China's access to advanced technologies, with the European Union also taking the same action. This is now the new field of competition for the major world economies. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Patricia Cohen show here that the global economic system (globalization) was a project that benefitted one country: China. President Biden talks repeatedly about reversing these trends at an AFL-CIO campaign rally in Philadelphia- building infrastructure and infrastructure jobs here in the USA. Biden talked about investments, in trillions of dollars, in renewable energy, chips, science, airports, bridges, the I95 repair, that had all one common thread running through it- jobs in America, jobs for union workers and families. And the idea behind it of respect, respect for the dignity of hard work of workers in the US and union workers.

LyrArc Article Gist
The recent appointment of fast food executive Andrew Puzder as Labor Secretary has caused great concern among union leaders. Puzder supports a $9 minimum wage compared to $15 supported by Democrats. Unions now represent 7% of the labor force, down from a high of 20% during Reagan's time when Reagan appointed a construction company executive as Labor Secretary and cut regulations.  Globalization has thinned the ranks of workers in unions. And the failure of Democratic administrations to stem the shift of factories overseas to China, Mexico and other places, as part of global supply chains focussed on cost, has weakened Democratic support among workers since the period of Bill Clinton. It eroded to the point where Obama won 65% of support among unions and Hillary Clinton won 56% in 2016. Interestingly the Republican Romney gained 33% versus 37% for Trump, showing voters were more inclined to move away from Democrats and only a smaller number willing to support Republicans, but the shift enough to give Republicans a win in 2016 for the presidency. The figures are from a Election Day survey of trade union AFL-CIO, and a larger proportion in midwestern states showed disaffection with policies from Clinton to Obama. In fact Obama spent years promoting another free trade agreement TPP that favored tech more than auto and older industries, just as Bill Clinton had promoted NAFTA, without giving thought to what this was doing to its worker base of support. A similar situation happened with Social Democrats in Germany as a SPD administration moved to the centre and handed Christian Democrats led by Merkel a win in parliamentary elections. As Democrats such as former Labor Secretary Reich, a professor at UC Berkeley who served under Bill Clinton, describe the problems of working class people their is less reflection on the impact of the changes from globalization and how Democrats handled or mishandled it, and more on the politics between the two parties.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new faces in the Biden administration on economic policy are Janet Yellen, as head of the central bank, the Federal Reserve, and Cecilia Rouse, a Princeton labor economist, as head of the Council of Economic Advisors. In this report WSJ looks at the economic policies of the new administration after Mr. Trump rejected globalization and international trade agreements that were not in America's interest or that hurt American workers.  Informal conversations with experts suggest WSJ says, that globalization is now suspect as a way that benefitted China and other countries including Germany, and hurt the U.S. France, Britain and other countries in Europe that were not strong exporters. This hurt their industries which were eroded by imports resulting in the three decades long destruction of communities across these countries that depended on manufacturing. It has also hurt countries like India that let their markets be dominated by Chinese imports, with a reversal of policy in 2020 with self reliant economy under "Atman Nirbhar" policy as the new goal. Mr. Trump's tactic in this trade war was to fight back to regain America's position in manufacturing with tariffs on imports. The trade deficit had to come down with China just as it had done with Japan decades earlier. This was starting to happen. One problem in bringing down the imports was the increase in the value of the dollar, as Janet Yellen has noted. The new policies will look at what the effective policy will be while keeping this goal in mind.  Both Yellen and Ms. Rouse have spent years studying labor markets and Ms. Rouse is quoted here as saying: " With open trade there are winners and losers. The losers are really losing, and we need to take care of them and take on more nuanced models of international trade as a result." Other experts from the earlier Democratic administrations such as Prof. Frankel at Harvard say that there needs to be increased focus on American workers left behind by trade, technology and unequal education, with more spending on preschool, infrastructure and health. All this suggests that there will be a continuation of U.S. policy in challenging Chinese use of globalization to advance its interests, chastening Americans on the use of the very word globalization which can mean different things to different people based on how they can gain advantage. The word may even be entirely dropped in favor of what the policies are and what they do for the American worker, American communities including small towns, and the American people, spelling each of these out every time supply chains and the global economy is mentioned. The new administration will get an opportunity to show that it too can come up with new ideas and action plan to strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. It will also have to show substantial results as people have lost patience with Democrats and Republicans on the lack of progress in rebuilding America's leadership role in the world economy, and in defending American workers and factories. Clinton, Obama and Bush all offered false promises on trade with China ignoring the damage this had done to American leadership in the world economy. Clinton with support for China's entry into the World Trade Organization, Bush with foreign wars and costly diversions and regulatory failures with banks that led to the 2009 deep recession hurting Americans, and Obama with the lack of will and interest in America's leadership role in the world as the dominant nation in manufacturing,   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Globalization is being replaced with government support for attracting new investment and industry. Germany is providing $11 billion for 2 Intel semiconductor plants. The Biden administration $280 billion CHIPS and Science Act investment by the US sets the new pathway for government to support industry to increase investment and create good paying jobs inside the US. This reverses decades of neglect of American manufacturing by administrations from the time of president Reagan through the Bush, Obama and Trump administrations. A new world order is being shaped that enables the EU and the US to compete with China with direct government support for industry.  The US and the EU gain, the UK and Singapore lose out in the new arrangement.

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Competing oligopolies or Competition? American capitalism in reality is a mix of both. Government's role in American economy shifting from higher in the Great Depression to low in Globalization and now back to supporting business to compete with China/India/Germany's Subsidized Capitalism. This WSJ piece that take a circle around the bases for a home run is in reality not a true reflection of America's management of it's economy over the last 200 years since 1825. There is a high degree of individualism, yes because it is a land that is forever expanding on sparsely populated Indian territory in the west starting under Jefferson and Washington at the Ohio/Pennsylvania frontier. By 1900 there is the emergence of the great corporations and monopolies, oligopolies with TR's busting of monopolies by 1920, and much of that structure is still there in 2025, with some obsolescence for changing technology. Oligopolies in information technologies simply absorb the small companies, and government is itself run by powerful lobbying as in the pharma industry to the sheer and alarming detriment of all Americans. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Better management of the economy has sustained Russian economic growth in past crises such as in 2008 when oil prices collapsed. Russian central bank chief Nabiullina has helped steer the economy holding US dollar reserves to just 11% the rest of $600 billion reserves in renminbi, euros and gold. Yet the war in Ukraine has introduced limits. With labor shortages and the technological isolation the war in Ukraine is setting new limits on economic growth, says the WSJ. Going forward the limit is about 0.9% economic growth a year. Before 2008 the Russian economy growth was at 7% growth a year, it dropped to 3.5% after the invasion of Crimea in 2014. With China facing deflationary trends, little recovery in growth, this shows that geopolitical tensions are changing the prospects of important economies. With globalization dimming the prospects of Singapore and UK have suffered. The US is investing in growth, and Germany is following the US model.

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump's willingness to use U.S. economic strength through tariffs, sanctions and other methods comes from the view that in the decade of the 1990s and 2000s U.S. worker and the U.S. was suckered by others. In this situation it was seen as acceptable to use U.S. tariffs and economic pressure to fix a global trading system and a China trade surplus with the U.S. exceeding $300 billion a year. Mr. Lighthizer it should be remembered, now the top trade negotiator with China was also the trade negotiator with Japan when it enjoyed a similar trade surplus with the U.S. during the Reagan administration. Economic pressure did not have to be ratcheted up to this level with Japan at the time. Japan was an ally at the time in the Cold War, Today China is seen as both a global competitor in world affairs and a technological competitor. Unlike the situation with Japan many Republican and Democratic administrations had failed to tackle the growing trade imbalance with China till it had become unsustainable. The views of Mr. Trump on trade were views articulated by Mr. Lighthizer for the last ten years resulting in a shift in opinion on trade in the U.S. by 2016 where a majority of people in the U.S. felt that globalization and world trade was working against American workers and industry. Mr. Trump as a Republican was both responding to the failure of others to tackle trade issues hurting the U.S. worker and business, as well as rallying support from workers, farmers and business to his party.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Kessler in the WP corrects Obama's claim that he created 800,000 jobs. He says this is clever arithmetic as it takes a low point in Feb. 2010 following the financial crisis. Kessler points out that according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. manufacturing jobs were 12.56 million in Jan. 2009 when Obama became president. In Nov. 2016, early estimates show there were 12.26 million manufacturing jobs, a loss of 300,000. This loss does not reflect the problems in the U.S. auto industry and older industries in the midwestern states as a result of trade and globalization that speeded up with the rapid industrialization of China. And led as Greg Ip pointed out in a recent WSJ report to a rapid acceleration of job losses in a decade that did not happen in the same scale during Japan's industrialization and urbanization in the sixties. This aggravated the situation in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Pennsylvania, and was met with a feeble response from Democrats. Even a economist like Krugman favoring the Obama administration's efforts came to the conclusion that TPP did not add much to gains from trade as most of the gains had already been realized. More of the gains went to tech and IT in California, at the expense of the auto industry based in the midwest. A report in WP show a president too close to IT in California and failing to grasp the situation in the midwest. Voters punish whoever is in power, regardless of being Conservative or Liberal, in Canada the hollowing out of manufacturing under Harper in Ontario and Quebec led to the win by Trudeau's Liberals.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
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 and governments staying away from keeping an eye on how it was happening. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this essay in Der Spiegel, Charles Hawley says that the Trump movement has become a movement of patriotic downtrodden whites, with a whole range of interests-of extreme right talk show hosts, Tea Party politicians, white power supremacists, those left out by globalization in the working class especially in the midwestern states. The danger he says is that this movement of which Trump has become a part, rejects the narrative on which America is based of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers establishing a country based on principles of "the inalienable rights of man," that have evolved through the years to include black people, women, and minorities.  To put this in perspective, president Obama writing for The Economist magazine in October 2016, puts this movement in a different context- that of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, Know Nothing Movement of the 1800's, the anti-Asian sentiment in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, periods when anti-immigrant or anti-foreign sentiment gained prominence. Obama's view is that it is not fundamentally economic. In this he is right in that some of the forces on the far right do not stem from globalization. Yet he would be missing a great deal if he did not address the economic problems for the middle and working class that have given such views the support of a broad segment of the population, especially in some midwestern and older industrial states compared to say the economy of California or New York. Obama is aware of the problems in his essay as he points to the problems of workers trying to get a decent wage, of job losses through globalization, and the aggravation of these problems by the financial crisis of 2008 when some of the potential physicists and engineers as he calls them went into the financial sector to create faulty mortgages. Yet he goes back to the free trade and global networks of supply chains as having reduced global poverty, without showing a keen awareness of how it has through a combination of events and decades of policy indifference to manufacturing communities in the U.S.- as documented by experts and shown in Lyrarc, with David Autor and Gordon Hansen in the WSJ, 2016- 08-16. A Gallup Study, WSJ, 2016-05-16, supports Obama's assertion by showing that many of Trump supporters are actually self-employed and not in economic distress. Yet the movement would not have taken its proportions without the merging of different groups particularly largely disadvantaged working class voters, and fortunately Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, have a better sense of this than the president. It is by their efforts that income and wealth disparities can be tackled in a way that restores the social fusion of all parts of society- in Hillary Clinton's emphatic words in the final debate by "growing the middle," growing the middle class. This is the task of the next decade, or possibly two decades. (For Gallup study see WSJ, How Economic Anxieties Explain Trump's Appeal- And Where They Fall Short, Nick Timiraos, 08-16-2016. And for Autor, Hanson, see Tallying the Toll of U.S.-China Trade, Justin Lahart, 08-27-2011)   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Harold Meyerson poses some difficult questions for those who like Mitt Romney say America's choice is between the merit based society Romney sees and the "European social democratic vision." In Romney's words- "a merit-based opportunity society- an American-style society- where people earn their rewards based on their education, their work, their willingness to take risks and their dreams." Meyerson cites several studies to show that European societies today are more dynamic on several measures of performance than America's. In intergenerational mobility he cites a Brookings Institution study by Julia Isaacs, that shows incomes are three times more likely to remain the same in America compared to Denmark, Norway and Finland, and one and a half times more frequently than in Germany. Another measure evident from Germany's experience is the degree of union-company-government cooperation to worker retraining, corporate boards that have representatives of workers and management, the "kurzarbeit" program of retaining employees to smooth out impact of cyclical swings in the economy on workers and companies, and worker's willingness to show restraint on wages especially because management wages are not way out of line as in America. Meyerson reminds readers that the U.S. had a more merit based society in terms of upward intergenerational mobility, distribution of rewards of work between workers in manufacturing and service sectors and management, educational mobility with the G.I. bill, in the first 30 years after the Second World War. In a separate article in the Washington Post on Jan. 5, 2012, David Ignatius poses questions about the effects of globalization in shrivelling the middle class. The access to lower wage manufacturing in China, India, Mexico, and other countries, and lowering of wages in the U.S. to be competitive, was part of globalization. The two tier wage structure in the U.S. automobile industry is one example, making middle class wages a thing of the past. Globalization opened up new markets for American companies. Yet many of the gains in employment were made in emerging markets, as the example of GM's expansion in China showed, with automobile manufacturing expansion inside China....

LyrArc Article Gist
Helen Gao provides this exceptional story of how 544,000 Chinese students studying abroad far from being success stories are facing stress, anxiety, depression to an unusual degree. About 329,000 of them are in the U.S. where the $50,000 to $60,000 college tuition cost is ten times the disposable income of a Chinese family. For working class families study abroad means using up savings. Researchers at Yale in a 2013 survey found 45 percent of Chinese students on campus had symptoms of depression, 29% had anxiety. This is similar to other universities in the U.S., Australia and Britain with large Chinese student populations. Language barriers and cultural barriers pose a problem particularly in student interactions with advisers and professors. Liberal arts studies emphasize critical thinking and other skills that are not found in a results oriented, memorization from note cards oriented system in China, creating academic stress. Worse what awaits students who return is not enough recognition for years spent studying in a different environment- about 80% of Chinese students from abroad earn a mere $1500 a month, according to a Beijing think tank Center for China and Globalization report done with a recruitment agency Zhilian Zhaopin. As she talks about the experience of other students from China, Gao describes her own anxiety attacks during 8 years of study in the U.S. Her father sent pictures after his first visit to the U.S. in 1995 says Gao, with words about how he wanted his daughter to see the U.S. with her own eyes, the beauty of the country and its spirit. Years later Helen Gao of Beijing sees a different America as she walks from one Harvard campus building to another in 2015 during her last year of graduate study, one that brings anxiety, financial insecurity, and uncertainty about the future.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Half of the 17 percentage points of lower investment in Britain between 2016 and 2023 came from administrative barriers with EU and of Brexit. Britain had deindustrialized and hoped to get growth from so called "clever industries" such as finance, media, and higher education. The Tories party led by Johnson and then Sunak painted a rosy picture for Britain leaving the European Union and doing better without it by working with China and the US and connecting to global supply chains. They ignored the actual facts of the globalization cycle reversing itself leaving Britain exposed in the storm.The slump in investment from Brexit hit Britain hard, the Ukraine war meant higher prices for energy imports from Norway and the US. The result is that only about half percentage point of 2 percent cumulative GDP growth in Britain between 4th qtr 2019 and 4th qtr 2023 came from jobs growth compared to about 3.75% in the EU economies. Eurozone growth at 4% was twice that in UK, and the US with higher productivity and job growth was growing at four times that in UK and twice that in EU at 8% over this period. ...

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
In this report WSJ looks at US Treasury Secretary's warning to China about its role in the free world and its position in the international trading system and the obligations to human values that come with it. Janet Yellen is so well known as head of the Federal Reserve and as US Treasury Secretary that it is easy to forget her experience at Yale studying under James Tobin who supported meeting social goals, whom she calls a life long mentor. Tobin set the foundations for economic policy in the Kennedy administration in the early post war period, after working in the Franklin Roosevelt administration during the war. Social goals, business paying its fair share of taxes, building infrastructure, were all a part of the FDR and Kennedy-Johnson administration.  It is also easy to forget that Yellen set the foundations for economic policy under Clinton and then under Obama administration the period when social goals were not met, infrastructure was neglected, globalization meant shipping jobs and factories overseas to China, and lack of financial oversight over banks that led to the 2009 financial crisis. The contradiction made Yellen realize only late during the Obama administration how much of a diversion she had taken from the social goals of the FDR-Truman-Kennedy post war period.  As one of the architects of the economic policy underpinning the emergence of China's role as the factory of the world, that destroyed many working class communities in the US, Yellen is in the economic role that Merkel shares in world of political economy with her integration of the German economy with that of China. Today as she calls for a retreat to the values shared by her mentor James T, Tobin and of FDR and Truman as they responded to the Berlin Crisis in the aftermath of 1945, and the Korean War with large scale invasion of South Korea and the kind of refugee crisis that we see today in Ukraine, there is much room for reflection. Reflection on what was lost in the intervening years of the Bush-Clinton and Obama years that led to the situation that the free world faces with totalitarianism today.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Chief of TechMet a company in mineral resource development says that it will take years to dislodge China's dominance in rare metals mining and development for metals critical to technologies in car batteries, wind turbines, cellphones. This includes nickel and cobalt for car batteries.Last week president Trump signed an executive order declaring a national emergency and authorizing use of the Defense Production Act to speed development of mines. The U.S. imports 80% of its rare earth elements from China, with further supply coming indirectly from the country. For 14 of 35 critical types of minerals the U.S. has no domestic production. Gallium for light emitting diodes in cell phones is one of these metals. Half of Barite a metal used in hydraulic fracturing for shale oil is imported from China. To get some idea of the neglect in U.S.policy in these area under three administrations, the U.S. in the 1980's was the largest producer of rare earth metals and the technology to process them. Today there is only one mine the Mountain Pass mine in California, and no processing plants. It takes about 10 years to develop a mine. Just as in health care products essential to tackle the virus the U.S has found its manufacturing and technology base left in woeful shape after manufacturing and mining were neglected in a failed policy. Under the guise of globalization corporations transferred essential manufacturing from the U.S. and Europe to China, without understanding the importance these products played in the life of countries, and governments neglected to help local manufacturers and mining companies. Governments play a critical role as China has done by providing loans and grants to develop the national industrial base. Tariffs and quotas are also used to promote local development of the manufacturing base and mining base. Another factor is that investors are more able to invest in these companies when the government take some of the risk with its help and active support. With the Trump executive order comes a new awareness in Canada, Australia, and European Union which are now taking active steps to nurture and develop the local resources. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in The Times shows that from April to October the Tory red wall seats in the north of England have been hit hard by the coronavirus, much harder than the south of England. The infection rates in October are about three or four times in the north of England. The second lockdown came earlier in the north, in Liverpool Greater Manchester and Yorkshire. The result is that instead of levelling up the great disparities in wealth and income that are seen between the south, London and the north of England the gap is widening under the impact of coronavirus. Deindustrialization in the north after their prominent role in Britain's industrial revolution was followed by the same type of decline seen in parts of the American midwestern states. Imports from China and globalization, hit these areas in a sort of second wave, just as America was hit first by the wave of Japanese imports, followed by an even bigger wave of imports from China and complete loss of manufacturing. With it the loss of well paying jobs for workers in manufacturing and the decline of industrial cities. Influx of cheap labor from other parts of the European Union also affected the north. The result is that the popularity of Boris Johnson and the Conservatives with 58% approval rating in April in the north of England is replaced by a rating of about 31% in October 2020. The 40 Tory MP's in the Northern Research Group expressed their serious concern to the prime minister. ...