LyrArc Article Gist
Jack Horton of BBC Verify screens the former president Trump's speech at the Republican National Convention. “Our crime rate is going up, while crime statistics all over the world are going down".  Fact: FBI data shows crime down 6% and a drop in the murder rate by 13% in 2023. For the First Quarter of 2024 crime down by 15% and recorded murder rate down 26%. "We've had the worst inflation we've ever had under this person [Biden]. I will end the devastating inflation crisis immediately, bring down interest rates and lower the cost of energy . We will drill, baby, drill."  Fact: Inflation went up to 9.1% from 1.4% at the end of the Trump term in the first 2 years of of the Biden Administration by June 2022. Biden and Federal Reserves Powell brought this down to 3%. Explained: This inflation jump to 9% would have happened from supply chain in China for Trump administration as well. Trump's last year was 2019 the Covid pandemic started in January the lockdown by midyear meant sharp drop in demand and little room for inflation. The concentration of supply chain in China was the cause of the surge in inflation as China shut down and restarted late into 2022 causing shortages in factory parts and supplies. Biden focused on vaccination in 2020-2021. This inflation would have happened under Trump- this concentration of supply chain started with Reagan economic philosophy to ship production (and jobs) overseas, Clinton Bush Obama and Trump did little about it. Biden invested heavily in Make in America manufacturing and jobs at home. Biden and Powell did a good job of bringing this inflation down by 2023 to 3% before the European Union and UK. Younger voters don't know this they get their news from the internet and show little interest, see only that the low inflation under Trump and the higher inflation during the pandemic recovery under Biden and blame Biden. will Trump do better on inflation in 2024-2028. The WSJ does not think so its analysis shows inflation higher under Trump than Biden because of a planned 60% tax on imports from China. Trump follows Reagan/Friedman theory of the old Republican party of higher tax cuts for the wealthy, so no money is left for investing in American manufacturing and jobs as Biden free of this theory is able to do, leading to slowing growth with inflation under Trump.        ...

LyrArc Article Gist
$2000 rebate to all Americans to help meet cost of living concerns is put forward by the US president. This would put the tariffs revenue to good use to achieve the goal of bringing back manufacturing and supply chains to the US using tariff policy. This is to counter other nations use of subsidies and other ways to put American manufacturers out of business in industry after industry for 30 years by pricing way below US producers. The rebate would offset the domestic effects on US consumers of products imported with tariffs, which are priced somewhat  higher because of the tariff even though most of the tariff is borne by exporters. The end result is the goal of bringing the product manufacturing for these products back to America, where manufacturing was shipped overseas through the shortsighted behavior of American producers since 1990, mostly to China. The WSJ takes no responsibility for this behavior of American corporations, and does not see this complete dependence of the US on overseas supply chains as a threat to America being able to conduct and independent policy for the Nation based on its own interests. For 30 years the WSJ and American economics profession has adopted the view that it does not matter if product after product is made in another country, or in only one other country as is the case with China as the sole manufacturing superpower in 2025. Who made China the manufacturing super power? Who ignored warnings of concentration of manufacturing in one place? It is these same economists and media such as the WSJ that have through their willingness to ignore these concerns even when it comes to advanced technologies that has made China the superpower in manufacturing it is in 2025. DJT and most of America is fighting a battle to bring these supply chains back to America knowing this is best for America and the American people. It is owing to this new spirit that once mighty industrial towns that had fallen to new lows are making a resurgence in the US- an example is in today's Washington Post report by Irina Ivanova with the title- An Old Manufacturing City sputters back to life, Nov. 11 2025. ...

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

LyrArc Article Gist
India's challenges in securing $1.3 trillion in capital over 5 years for infrastructure spending. This is needed including capital from the private sector to support government funding, so that India can build the infrastructure to create new manufacturing hubs that compete with China as the world's manufacturing workplace. The Biden administration's determination to compete effectively with China using is own supply chain in Asia, and the EU's plan to follow what the Biden administration does, is likely to create a new kind of environment by 2024-2025 that will create a steady flow of capital to India and other parts of Asia to finance this effort for rebuilding its supply chain. The Biden administration is seeking to build a culture change from the old culture pushed by Reagan type free marketers that delivered lost decades in manufacturing and jobs in manufacturing for the US. Biden's State of the Union message was clear- "Folks we're just getting started. We're just getting started." By 2024-2025 the Adani story may just be a footnote to this story as other manufacturers and investors pick up the infrastructure challenges facing the US, EU and India for a new supply chain for the Free World built around self-reliance. The Ukraine war and China incidents such as one that happened recently, will accelerate the rebuilding of the new supply chain on the part of the US and the EU with partners in Asia. And change decades old assumptions and trade relationships over months, not years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US foreign direct investment to China goes down 40% in 2020 to 2022 compared to the period 2015 to 2020, for India this was up by 20%, according to IMF. India was the only G-20 country that received this level of foreign direct investment. Prashant Jha of the Hindustan Times correctly points out that the IMF paper and the model on which this paper is based are flawed. The paper sees countries based on alignment and India as a so called non aligned country not part of friendshoring, even though Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has openly called for friendshoring in India alongside finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman. IMF experts have not caught up to Mr. Biden's remarks about the US- India relationship that it would be "the closest on earth." Closer even than America's relationship with Britain or Europe. On oil imports Biden and Jake Sullivan believe that after the pandemic India should import oil at the lowest possible cost to meet the long time denied aspirations of 1.2 billion people, and build the infrastructure that will make it a critical part of America's new supply chain. Every time there are military drills and blockade of Taiwan by China the people of America are moving a step further away from American companies that have overconcentration of manufacturing in China and closer to calling for a new supply chain that reduces concentration in China and builds new manufacturing in India.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US Supreme Court hears arguments from D. John Sauer Solicitor General of the US on DJT Tariffs Wednesday, November 5, 2025. The Supreme Court will hear about a case brought by a small wine importing company with 19 employees. The US president used the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) that allows the president to impose tariffs. The IEEPA was introduced by president Jimmy Carter in 1977. It was used during the Iran hostage crisis. It has been used for the Venezuelan regime after elections were rigged with human rights violations, on Belarus as early as 2006, and on Mexico for drug cartels. This increases the responsibilities of the Justices of the Court as these sanctions have broad support of the American people. Tariffs were imposed on China for illicit fentanyl flows and a 25% tariff was imposed on Canada and Mexico under Executive Orders 14193, 14194, and 20% on China under Executive Order 14195 in 2025 for illicit drug traffic flows across their borders into the US. Illicit flows that has taken the lives in the case of fentanyl of more young people than were killed in the Vietnam, Korean and First World Wars combined.  For the reason that the economic aspect of tariffs now overlaps with trading partners abuse of basic rights of their largest trading partner the US in the case of Canada, Mexico and China not stopping such flows, the issue before the Supreme Court is basic to the US as a Nation to protect its citizens under these Executive Orders and IEEPA- not the kind of interpretation of the law the USC does for most or almost all of its cases. In 2025 a lot of the discourse is distorted and does not reflect the way citizens of the Nation should show concern for the welfare and safety of their fellow citizens in communities around them severely hurt by the scourge of fentanyl and other opioids making their way from other countries conducted by drug trafficking gangs outside the US.  Also relevant is that the tariffs are correcting trade deficits of $1 trillion of the world with China that threaten the economic security of the US, EU, India and other countries. Larger companies are moving their supply chains out of China to reduce concentration in China, impact on inflation is slight with 3.0 % inflation in September 2025. Smaller companies such as the wine company in this lawsuit are unable to do so. Most of the smaller businesses affected can be compensated with a fund from the tariffs revenue of $500 billion in 2025-2026. In this way the goals of the US as a Nation can be achieved of reducing the supply channels concentration in China, cutting supply chain concentration in China, for fair trade with trading partners EU/Japan, and for action on fentanyl and drug trafficking. Justice Roberts and his team have a lot to think about in this effort by the Nation to correct abuses that should never been allowed to happen. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Does a 10% reduction in tariffs on China with the October 30 2025 agreement- made in Busan South Korea at APEC meetings- make a difference for companies relocating from China? It only does for smaller companies who are stuck with Chinese sources. Larger American companies prefer to diversify their supply chain and continue to relocate part of their factories to Vietnam, India and other countries knowing that the tariffs game will end up with allies EU, Japan and India in the 10-15% tariff range as a concession to US for putting up with trade disadvantages and job losses 2000-2025. China's will still be at 47% in comparison and the fentanyl issue causing serious questions to be asked by the American people which have not been grasped in China or even in the US by companies and politicians.   Does it affect the urgency and general shift out of China? The fentanyl issue is unlikely to change and it is likely to do lasting damage to China's credibility to a degree that it not clearly understood in China, and even not fully grasped even in the US today because of the sheer size of the number dead- more young Americans dead from fentanyl than in the Korean, Vietnam and First World Wars combined. Other issues are technology that has been transferred without a proper assessment of the importance to national security, the need to shift the manufacturing base back home that US industries have inadvertently and carelessly shifted to China in the disastrous Bush and Obama years 2000-2016, and for the jobs, the wages, and cost of living concerns when supply chains are outside one's control. This article asks the question about tariffs on India and Brazil as being contradictory and showing a lack of consistency in tariffs. India is compared to China with India facing a 50% tariff because of Russian oil purchases, and Brazil a 100% tariff related to treatment of former president Bolsonaro even though US has a trade surplus with Brazil. One expects that at some point India and the US will come to an agreement that lowers the tariffs in a way that was done with the European Union to bring it closer to 10%. China's tariff to be sure is still around 47% dropping from 57% a concession for rare earths and for the upcoming elections and economic concerns not because of policy intent which has not changed on  strong action for fentanyl which is also part of the Appeal to the People in the DJT base.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip in the WSJ says India is shifting towards  becoming an important partner with the US and the European Union in trade under the Modi government. This report reflects the situation upto 2021 and the changes in Indian and American perceptions during the pandemic. It does not reflect the rapidly evolving situation under president Biden.US president Biden and Jake Sullivan National Security Advisor see rapidly expanding US trade and investment in India. The recent Raisina Dialogue  brings together 26 countries- named after Raisina Hill in New Delhi where India's administration is located- in dialogue with Indian leaders. Finance Minister Sitharaman in an interview at Raisina Dialogue stated that Janet Yellen, US Treasury Secretary, was with her during a G-20 meeting, and Yellen called for friendshoring- foreign investment in democracies that respect the rule of law and provide the right conditions for investment. The right conditions are now being created in India, including infrastructure and logistics, trade practices, and assistance to foreign companies, to invest in Indian manufacturing. The conditions are being created for shifting significant number of manufacturing facilities to India in a complete redesign of the supply chain. A look at the period 1950-2015 in US-EU India relations says little of the newly evolving situation in trade in the way that looking at the US-EU China relations 1950-1990 during the Cold War would tell one little about how that relationship evolved in trade after 1990 in the 1990-2019 period for massive trade with China. The pandemic and the inflation from existing supply chain bottlenecks has led to a realization in US-EU that the existing concentration of manufacturing in one country  was a mistake and is a serious problem that needs correction.  This means an acceleration in the effort to build rapidly over the next 5-10 years a strong US-EU manufacturing presence in India for advanced technologies. India under prime minister Modi is creating the infrastructure and logistics for this to happen with large domestic investment, the help of Denmark's Maersk in port logistics, and from other countries.  Fo India manufacturing and infrastructure building is the only way to create the jobs needed to meet the aspirations of its young population. For the US-EU the redesign of the supply chain is the highest priority to cut inflation, remove potential bottlenecks, and provide a stable supply chain.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China after American and European offshoring of supply chain and manufacturing over three decades is going through a rapid reversal. People to people contacts are also falling off a precipice as it were, showing how badly structured efforts by business focused on profit and not people to people fail miserably, hurting the long term prospect of peaceful cooperation. Foreign Investment that was $100 billion in the first quarter of 2022 is now $20 billion. Tourism down by about 80%. At Zhangjiajie National Park goes from half a million foreign tourists to 50,000 last year. It is typical of this staggering change.  People are not going from America and Europe to China unless they have to. It shows the complete failure of a purely business relationship such as offshoring manufacturing when it hurts workers and families in America and Europe, who turn against it leading to a free fall in relations. American and European business and the governments allied with it failed in this sense to build a world of better interpersonal relations between Asia and the western world. China's experience with industrialization and modernization begun in 1990 is now a cautionary tale for other regions such as India and the Middle East that are planning their own modernization. Much of it happened less from a people to people relationship than from an effort by US business to seize the opening of China after Mao's revolution to offshore American manufacturing as if realizing a new opportunity without understanding its long term consequences for the American people. European business followed American business in this offshoring. It damaged the basic structure of the American and EU peoples based on locally based supply chains and manufacturing at home needed for strong healthy communities, leading to this situation today. The rancor and deeply seated discontent all across America and Europe from communities losing factories and the jobs and wealth coming from it from offshoring by business interests has created this situation.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What this Editorial board opinion in the Indian Express is saying is that India should concentrate its efforts on modernizing its economy on a scale that is similar or surpasses that of China because of its access to the latest technologies. Just as China capitalized on the opportunity presented by its entry in the World Trade Organization in 2001, through an economy wide effort to build a manufacturing and export logistics base. India is presented with the opportunity of building its own manufacturing and export logistics base as supply chains are being redesigned in 2023. This requires a longer term plan with clear thinking and concentrated effort with the entire resources of the nation. What looks like a small or gradual shift in supply chain with the US and EU adding India and Vietnam to their Chinese manufacturing base is going to change with every change in world events, as the US concentration of manufacturing in China becomes a situation that is impossible to to maintain. The only logical way for the US and following the US the EU to create a proper balance in its political relationship with China is to change fully its lopsided concentration of manufacturing in China. Biden is only making the initial moves, the EU is only waking up to the need to make its own changes to reduce this concentration. How much distance does the US need to cover to reduce its concentration in China? By a large amount because the shift of manufacturing was excessive and ill advised done as companies in the US raced in a competition to shift outside over 2 decades and simply outdid themselves and performed a disservice to the workers and families of America whom they served. Just for the US to get workers and families to benefit from return of good manufacturing jobs to the US and restore its manufacturing base that has shriveled, it will have to be a massive enterprise, where day by day it becomes more evident that more and more needs to be and accomplished in an accelerated way. What this also means where appropriate to leave a progressively year after a year larger base in India, and also Vietnam, much larger than is envisaged today. This situation is even more acutely felt in Japan which to bring a proper balance in its political relationship with China needs to even more urgently reduce its concentration of manufacturing in China. It must be the task of the Modi government to have a clear view of the road ahead- build the needed logistical base for exports using the latest technologies and set higher and higher targets for manufacturing.  If you look at the map of Asia this is the Global South- India is 60-70% of the Global South with its population of 1.4 billion people mostly young with aspirations for a modern economy like that of the US and Germany. Add to that Indonesia and Vietnam, and other nations already in the redesigned supply chain in 2023 and you have 2 billion people in Asia. Concentrate on this for the next 2 decades for a complete transformation of India, that is what the younger generation demands of its government. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden proposes to reduce the US deficit by $2 trillion by increasing taxes on American households worth more than $100 million that would apply to their earned income, and their unrealized gains on liquid assets like stocks. Biden also plans quadrupling the tax on stock buybacks by companies, a tax approved in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2021. The deficit in 2023 will be about $1.4 trillion and rise to about $2 trillion, so that Biden's plan is to practically eliminate the  large deficit if the Republicans come on board. Republicans prefer cuts in spending. US companies have engaged in a dramatic increase in stock buybacks in recent years leading to calls for increasing the tax on stock buybacks. Biden says even high income households will not see an increase in their taxes, only the wealthiest households with over $100 million who have benefited vastly through the Reagan type policies of the last two decades. These households with over $100 million in assets will not be affected in the same way as students, workers, and middle income households are affected in shouldering a large part of the burden of these Reagan type policies that did not adequately fund education, healthcare, and manufacturing in communities across America. This was a period when Democrats in Congress awed by Reagan type policies failed to vigorously oppose policy that increased the US deficit and burden on households for health costs by not allowing Medicare to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies. A senior AARP official says that when we talk about the Biden Inflation Reduction Act of 2021 the key component is the Medicare price negotiation with companies that is now law. Why Republicans and Democrats before Mr. Biden allowed such a gross distortion for two decades since 2001 that burdened ordinary  working Americans while neglecting American manufacturing, till Mr. Biden assumed the presidency, says much about the policies of the last two decades and how it has affected ordinary working families. Shriveling factory towns and creating much distress in these communities with these distortions that are a legacy of Reagan type laissez faire policies that government should do little. The result of these policies is that manufacturing is concentrated in only one country for the whole supply chain something that would never have happened with a thoughtful policy planning process. India and Vietnam are only today seen as alternatives for the supply chain in 2023 when policies were in place in these countries since 2014 for the supply chain to be distributed in a way that would be a win-win situation for all countries, avoiding the national security threats of today with overconcentration of manufacturing in China. This has not benefited China or the US because of the rancor and tension it has created. It was the fall of the Berlin Wall that created some of this awe for Reagan, when looking at it objectively it was nothing more than a course correction in Europe after the Hungarian revolution suppressed in 1956, Czech in 1968. It had little to do with what policies the US should pursue for workers and families, just as the war in Ukraine today remains another course correction in a different direction in Europe, and does not affect domestic policy in the US to build a better society for workers and families that Mr. Biden is doing. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The big difference between the US at about 1.2 million electric car sales and China at over 9 million in the last year is that companies such as BYD have found away to come up new battery technology that uses different more accessible materials. BYD's research into new batteries came up with a iron phosphate battery as shown on articles on BYD in 2024 to substitute for less available lithium and cobalt. On one of its models BYD is offering a price of $11000. This attracts a different kind of buyer than what American makers are reaching. Another plus for BYD is that while sales are stalling in the US because of battery range and lack of charging station access, BYD also sells a large number of hybrid electric cars that help urban dwellers go back to their homes in the countryside. BYD also manufactures two thirds of its parts internally producing needed savings. China is also pushing electric cars with government subsidies and government is working hand in hand with industry in a concerted effort for two decades. Compare that with US where the Biden administration was the first to start changing the way the US does business to put government industry cooperation and working together at the heart of the way of doing things. The US could learn from other nations and adapt its own industrial and modernization efforts in the world after the pandemic and as supply chains are being renewed and restructured. Every nation can learn from its peers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The sense of conflict in China and US relations may not have developed in the shaping of Xi Jinping's thinking till the emergence of Mr. Trump. Jinping comes into the China shaped by Deng and Zemin after the collapse of the purely Communist experiment with modernization without access to western technologies and capital, and the experiment with American help. It is only after the realization that the Communist party had lost its sense of purpose in these years leading to the Bo Xilai episode, and the rhetoric of Mr. Trump against China, that the idea of first friction and then conflict emerged. The initial idea for Jinping before Trump was that this has worked for China- the experiment with the cooperation of the US in modernizing China. Trump's rhetoric and the Republican party's rhetoric about China stealing American jobs and technology after 2015 may have been targeted to win the election but it had an unintended effect after the tariffs of shaping Jinping's thinking about the future for China. Between the Bo Xi Lai episode in 2012 when it appeared he would be attempting to manipulate the Communist party's direction in unknown and unpredictable ways, Bo's trial in 2013 and the anticorruption campaign and the 2015 election campaign of Mr. Trump in the US, there must have been much soul searching in the party that shaped Jinping's thinking about the future for China after all the tumult of the 20th century starting with the Boxer rebellion in 1901. Stability is highly prized in China particularly for modernization. This perspective is important to grasp for world peace to be preserved with different coexisting perspectives about the world based on national as well as shared interests in issues such as climate change. US after its own disastrous experiment with capitalism that led to widening inequality of the kind not seen since Lincoln in the 1850's, the 2009 crisis, and the shift of jobs to China under a purely capitalist idea of how economies should function, had its own national interests in jobs, local manufacturing and Made in the USA. Once this process was underway after 2016 and grasped by president Biden after 2020, and supply chain reconstruction made the goal after covid, the US and China were on divergent economic and political paths.   That rethinking by Xi Jinping is not over as it may still be going on. The war in Ukraine may even convince Jinping and China's No. 2 leader Li Keqiang who studied the US constitution and American urbanization under mentors when he was in college, that Russia's prolongation of the war in Ukraine does not serve the interests of China. That risking relations with the European Union as Russia prolongs the war and finds itself in the complex problems of  a war it started, is not in China's interests in setting its own course for the future. ...

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
WSJ looks at the 75 years of the US Saudi Arabia relationship that started when US president Franklin Delano Roosevelt met Saudi king Ibn Saud at Bitter Creek, Egypt, on a US Navy destroyer ship in 1945. It has gone through many phases over this period and mainly involved the Saudi kingdom maintaining its supply of oil to the US and Western Europe. This relationship went through an oil embargo during tense periods of Israeli Palestine conflict as in 1983 with an oil embargo that pushed up oil prices. What is different this time is the situation in Yemen where Iranian supported Houthi rebels near the border with Saudi Arabia are engaged in a conflict with the Saudis. Democratic administrations under first Obama and Biden today support reaching a deal with Iran on nuclear weapons development and limit US military support for the war in Yemen. The Saudis for their part are not keen on a regional war and turned down efforts by president Trump to respond to attacks from Yemen. Mr. Biden's envoy has arranged for a deal to reduce tensions between the Houthis in Yemen and Saudis. The diplomatic impasse in relations stems from the Kashoggi incident and president Biden's concern for the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia. Other factors making relations difficult are the economic interests of the two countries diverging. The relationship Roosevelt started in 1945 has changed in its fundamental character. Oil supplies for imports into the US is no longer a factor for the US which was the original interest of president Roosevelt in Saudi Arabia. This changed by 2015 as the US fracking industry enabled US to become self sufficient in oil and able to supply LNG to western Europe. Instead of the US Saudi oil now goes to China. Russian oil also goes to China as its industry expanded with American investment. This has led to a new Saudi relationship with China which has changed the dynamic of the American Saudi relationship. Some of the new aspects of this can also be seen in Saudi relationship with South Asia. Saudi ties have increased with India and India in 2021 was the first country to provide vaccine supplies to Saudi Arabia. Saudis, Qatar, United Arab Emirates are building relationships with India as a close neighbor in the region. Relationships are in some ways improving in the Asian region compared to the period when oil was simply exchanged as a commodity for defense supplies from the US without regard to cultural, educational and other changes in Saudi society. In a sense US and Western Europe paid little attention to the huge democracy of over 1 billion people right in the middle of Asia and followed policies that led to major investments in China and little or no investment in India, and without realizing it followed a policy that the British had pursued in the British Empire of treating different communities and religions as separate as opposed to one community of people in South Asia that were engaged in modernizing, building infrastructure and changing centuries old ways of living. The British Empire was sustained by this kind of thinking, and as long as Indians were complacent and lacked the will to make their aspirations for a better life and infrastructure for modernization this kind of thinking prevailed. The economic crises in Asia have reinforced the idea that there is one community entirely focused on development and modernization in South Asia. The people in South Asia care most about the cost of living and the infrastructure and services for the quality of life they live and their children can aspire for- same in European Union that chose the Greens and chancellor Scholz, and same in the US that chose president Biden to invest infrastructure and people, the same in China and the same in India and the rest of Asia. This is the situation that the US and Britain, and the European Union are now beginning to learn and adapt to that is a constructive aspect of these changes to rebuild the connections and supply chains that were sorely neglected before now. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Surprisingly very little can be found on the internet on how the relationship between Apple's Tim Cook and Foxconn started and how it evolved over the two decades- a key to understanding the two decade rise of Apple since 1998 when Tim Cook, an Alabama engineer, joined Apple's Steve Jobs to rebuild an almost demolished Apple. It is also key to understanding the rise of China in manufacturing to the point of excluding all other countries, including the US, for major investments. It is also key to understanding how the social relations have been disrupted in the US, how the US workers and families suffered from outshoring on this massive scale never before seen in the US for 100 years of the Industrial Revolution since Lincoln in the 1860's. This has not significantly changed to this day as the US goes into the midterms to elect a new Congress. Mr. Trump ruffled sentiment on this issue but had little action or results to show for it to reverse this. Mr. Biden is making some headway as the US elects a new Congress in November 2022 to take up the tasks to restore American leadership in manufacturing and in technologies that support advanced manufacturing from semiconductors to renewable energy. What happens now depends on many things. Mr. Cook talks about intuition as a main driver along with preparation and hard work in his project which has done little for America and the American people, in the sense of how its communities look like, and how its families live, as they are largely excluded from Cook's Apple project. Even as it employs about 3 million workers of contract manufacturers, for the most part in China with Foxconn. Total employees in the US are 37,000 mostly highly paid engineers and technical workers. The 270,000 working in what it calls its ecosystem are mostly workers in retail stores paid much lower wages. Of manufacturing there is little on the scale in China. Not since the days of Lincoln in the 1960's who fought a civil war so that the rights of labour in the US were protected as seen in his message to Congress in the 1860's, and through the Industrial Revolution for 100 years, has something like this happened in the US. It is not about some manufacturing taking place in Asia, it is the sheer scale that excludes America from significant manufacturing, about 300,000 workers in the US mostly in lower paid retail jobs, and 3 million in China with contract manufacturers that is an aberration from history. It is about delegating an entire supply chain in manufacturing that constitutes this huge aberration.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Emmanuel Macron graduated from Sciences Po University in 2004 with a degree in public affairs. He joins the Finance Ministry as an inspector and then buys himself out of government service contract by 2008 to join a private bank. He arranges an acquisition from Nestle and other business deals during this period. In 2012 he is appointed as deputy secretary general for the president's office after Francois Hollande a socialist is elected to the presidency. In 2014 he is offered the position of Minister of Industry and Digital Affairs in the second Manuel Valls government. He makes some changes to French government but opposes the wealth tax or tax on business, and is generally pro-business, though he acts as a member of the Socialist party.  He uses this period to build momentum for his own run for the presidency as support for Hollande falters having lost support from his working class base with Macron and Valls inspired changes.  Macron finally announces he will run for the presidency forming his own En Marche movement which he finances with his own fund raising. Throughout this period right up to the election in 2017 Macron has not run for public office. When he wins the presidency in that year he lacks the experience needed as the youngest president in French history at the age of 39. Like another young president Obama he handles his public image with the media for his En Marche movement promising to unblock France. This public image and his lack of experience makes him impervious to the social changes going on in France that lead to the yellow vest protests in 2018. This is a period when there are changes in the midwest as workers in Michigan and other midwestern states turn away from Hillary Clinton and Obama.  French workers are in the position of workers in the US with the decline of manufacturing, much of it shifted with the supply chain to China and Japan, and the gap opening between rural and urban tech educated areas. Macron follows Obama's quick rise from Senator to run for president yet lacks experience, and lacks sufficient grasp of the social changes with loss of manufacturing, the wide gaps between rural and urban tech educated people, conditions in the rural and farming areas. Macron survives this period, is reelected in 2022 with the help of socialist Melenchon voters. He says he will govern differently, less distant from average Frenchmen, but his instincts are to push for pension reform. At a time of cost of living crisis, and when the French budget office says the change in pension from 62 to 64 was not critical at the present time when inflation was hitting the public after the pandemic. Macron does this by Article 49 in the way he has done under the Manuel Valls government, by executive action alone. This time he faces a no confidence motion in parliament in March 2023 following some of the largest protests France has seen in years, with two thirds of the French according to FR24 opposing the change in pension law. Women see this as coming at a time when age discrimination hurts their chances of earning a living after 50 years of age.  Age discrimination is widespread in France, in a way it is not in Germany, say reports in the NYT. And with the cost of living crisis acts as a major hurdle for the average French person, if pensions are delayed without addressing these cultural issues in France. The result is that the protests have substance and Macron is seen as not sensitive to this at a time when he lacks a majority in parliament. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Two US carrier strike groups and 17 naval ships prepare for joint exercizes with Japan's Self-Defense Forces off Okinawa in the first week of October 2021. In late September a British aircraft carrier group goes through the Taiwan Straits. China has flown aircraft near Taiwan's airspace before. On October 1-5 over a period of 4 days China sends 150 fighter, bombers and other aircraft near Taiwanese airspace. This situation is reminiscent of the situation in 1950-53 during the period of the Korean War when US president Harry Truman sent the Seventh Fleet to the Straits of Taiwan. In 1954 Chinese artillery started the shelling of offshore islands Quemoy and Matsu. This happened again in 1958 under president Eisenhower. At that point the US sent a naval contingent to the Taiwan Straits. The crisis was resolved through talks with China. Eisenhower then setup a joint defense agreement with Taiwan.  Here the Taiwan Defense Minister says China is capable of an invasion of Taiwan in 2021 but "it has to calculate what it would cost and what kind of outcome it would achieve." He also says that after 2025 "it would have lowered the costs and losses to a minimum." As US companies seek expansion in China the situation is changing rapidly in 2021 in the other areas.The US under president Biden sees the wars under previous presidents and the economic policies of not investing in American industrial strength have created risks for America in its role in the world. Biden seeks to restore American industrial strength through massive investments. It has been reported that Taiwan even considers the concentration of world semiconductor industry in Taiwan a way to assure the US dependence on Taiwan for semiconductors would lead to allied economic commitment to Taiwan in addition to defense commitments already given. In a sign of awareness of the distorted situation in semiconductor manufacturing that American companies such as Intel have allowed to happen, including ceding essential technologies in manufacturing semiconductors to other nations, the Biden administration has pushed to reverse these policies giving $52 billion in state aid. President Biden talked to president Xi of China in early September in a 90 minute call. This was aimed at easing hostility between the two countries. During that call the two leaders had agreed to abide by the Taiwan Relations Act, that states Taiwan's status should be resolved through peaceful means. It was passed in the US Congress in 1979 during the period when the US restored diplomatic relations with China. The situation today resembles that in the period after the Korean War into the late 1950's when China under Mao continued shelling of islands under Taiwan from the mainland. This makes the existing supply chains that make the US, Europe and India overly dependent on China,Taiwan, Singapore, for manufactured goods look antiquated and out of place. American companies such as Apple, GM, Black Rock and American financial companies are caught in a bind as they operate as if nothing is happening, when a lot has changed during the coronavirus pandemic. The Biden administration is pursuing its own long term policy for restructuring the supply chain for American industry. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The fears within Mexico's auto industry that the TPP will allow imports of cheap Chinese auto parts hurting its auto industry, and reversing years of gains made under NAFTA. Canada also has fears about the TPP for its auto industry. Japan uses China and Thailand as part of its supply chain. China is not part of the TPP. Add to this the UAW and Detroit's suspicion of TPP concessions to Japan. This has stalled U.S. negotiations with Japan on the TPP trade agreement in 2015.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Economist points to the improved situation for Mexico after the scare from Trump's plans to build the wall and deport large numbers of immigrants. The peso dropped by 15% between mid November 2016 and January 2017, but has since recovered, and non-oil exports were up 5.5% in February 2017 over prior year with the manufacturing growth in the U.S.  Growth forecasts are now up from about 1% GDP growth previously to 2% for 2017, close to the 2.3% in 2016. Much of the change in mood in Mexico is a result of the failure of the early travel bans being blocked in the courts, the failure to get health care legislation through Congress, and the effort by the trade advisers and economic advisers around Trump to move Trump's positions more to the centre and closer to traditional Republican party positions. Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary, says " a sensible agreement" can be reached with Mexico. Peter Navarro, trade adviser, talks about making "a mutually beneficial regional powerhouse." Robert Lighthizer, a veteran from the Reagan days, is likely to be made the new U.S. Trade representative. Still as the Economist points out the "20% border adjustment tax" continues to be supported by Paul Ryan in Congress to pay for tax cuts. But certainly the mood has lifted in Mexico in the first 100 days. This is true for economic policy in relation to China and Germany, and the close circle of Ross, National Economic Council head Gary Cohn, and Secretary of State Tillerson is moving Trump to the centre in policy statements to get things done. Mexico is faced with internal challenges of reestablishing the rule of law, improving infrastructure, reducing red tape and corruption, addressing problems in the education system, to promote economic growth. These challenges may prove to be as large as the external challenges were once thought to be. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Trump administration's early proposal for NAFTA moves away from campaign pledges to completely renegotiate the treaty, instead taking the approach of working to improve the U.S. trade position in relation to Mexico and Canada. It includes seven objectives for tougher rules for labor and the environment favored by Democrats in Congress, and it also has support from Republicans with its effort to update NAFTA for changes in technology and in other areas since the accord was signed during the Clinton administration. The area in which U.S. and Mexican business are wary is one in which the Trump administration still seeks to keep the option of imposing protective tariffs, and a border-adjusted tax to level playing field for differences in taxes, as well as other measures to protect American jobs and interests. Because any renegotiated NAFTA also has to pass both houses of Congress this proposal took into account the different constituencies and interests for this issue. Robert Lighthizer, trade representative under president Reagan is likely to become the next U.S. Trade Representative and lead negotiator. We first profiled Lighthizer in a group in Lyrarc for pointing to the need for a level playing field in trade. As early as 2010 Lighthizer argued in op-ed articles that globalization and trade practices should ensure a level playing field for the U.S., and was covered in Lyrarc. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This article in the NYT explains why the loss of jobs particularly in the auto industry to Mexico, with the experience of NAFTA passed by president Bill Clinton, has caused widespread opposition to the TPP trade agreement proposed by president Obama. Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in 2016 oppose the TPP.

LyrArc Article Gist
A shift in priorities away from focussing on high growth to lower sustainable growth was announced by China's premier Wen Jiabao at the National People's Congress, China's parliament, in March 2012. This shift will reduce investment in infrastructure, power generation and exports, which will affect the level of imports of commodities from commodity producing nations in the Middle East, Australia, Canada and Brazil. It should increase imports of software, computers, entertainment, tourism and high tech goods from the U.S. and Europe. Chinese leaders have said they would make this kind of shift for some years now but growth has consistently increased more than the target rate, and domestic consumption as a percentage of the economy has actually decreased in the last decade. Now 9-10% growth rates may be a thing of the past and the target of 7.5% set this year may be actually closer to the real figure. The Chinese leaders have belatedly realized the need to make these changes now because slowing markets in Europe -which is seeing declining growth and high unemployment- and in the U.S., make the issue impossible to avoid. Wen told the Congress: "Accelerating the transformation of the pattern of economc development... is both a long term task and our most pressing task at present... Domestically it has become more urgent but also more difficult... to alleviate the problem of unbalanced, uncoordinated and unsustainable development." This is his way of saying that its unavoidable and better to start in earnest now, and at the same time recognizing the resistance to change from the stateowned companies and the other interests who have benefitted from surging growth, and now occupy a central role in the power structure. An opinion article in the People's Daily, China's official newspaper, said: "imperfect reforms are to be preferred to a crisis caused by no reforms." The World Bank's president Zoellick is respected by the Chinese leaders. He also urged them to make changes now. The recent report of the DRC, China's planning research arm, and the World Bank, also laid out the new direction away from a focus on infrastructure to domestic consumption. The fear is sudden deceleration in the absence of policy action. The impact of this will be negative for commodities over time, leading to slower growth in Australia, Brazil, and Canada. It should boost imports from Europe and the U.S. of high tech, consumer, pharmaceutical goods over time....