LyrArc Article Gist
Climate policy changes lead to $1.3 trillion savings according to analysis from DJT administration and EPA's Zeldin, with $1.1 trillion in savings from lower vehicle prices which addresses unaffordability of cars. Using the average price of a new basic Toyota Corolla the price in 2020 was $19,000 which has gone up to $23,000 a price increase of 21% by 2025 over a 5 year period. The cost in 2026 of operating a Gas powered vehicle is on average about $2500, for EV car about $1000 with $1500 in savings per year for EV's that need to be figured into the equation at gas prices that prevailed in 2024 of $4-$5 per gallon . At prices of $3 per gallon the gas costs come down to $1200 when driven 12,000 miles at 30 mpg for 400 gallons of gasoline consumed. This makes the difference between gas and EV yearly savings on gasoline costs down to about $200 from $1500. This makes gasoline powered cars attractive as car companies can reduce EV investments and pass on some of these savings in lower car prices in 2027 in exchange for favorable rules on emissions and EV transition dates.  Are there losses through the emissions and climate change? The DJT/Zeldin EPA analysis points to global climate emissions from China and India (the coal powered plants) continuing at a pace that would determine the overall change in climate for 2026-2027. In this kind of approach the goal is to make cars affordable over a 2-3 year period for US and European carmakers who would be expected to cut prices. It is about flexibility in fighting the Cost of Cars a big component in the Cost of living with housing as the next large component. It is not a long term strategy, simply one that offers a flexible approach. Will the US, Europe and Japan fall behind in EV's technology? Hybrids a focus of Japanese cars will continue to advance that technology which is becoming a preference where it is affordable for customers. Toyota for instance will have a wide lead in hybrids technology by 2030. Much of the Chinese market will have EV's and the EV's technology will advance in China in 2026-2027, and tariffs will be needed to protect European and American carmakers for 2026-2028. It is a strategy tradeoff to deal with the cost of living crisis in US, Europe and Japan answering call for a flexible approach that was also heeded by the Biden administration in relaxing carbon emissions rule changes. It will require automakers to step up and cut prices for gasoline models for buyers at the entry and lower range for affordability by 2026-2027. What about climate action? The strategy is based on the idea that climate action requires India and China (coal powered plants) on board to make a real difference so that over 2-3 years to 2027 the US, Europe and Japan need to address affordability for the lower end entry cars. There is an element of denial of climate change in parts of the DJT administration in the US but not in Europe and Japan. It is also true that leading DJT administration officials Secretary Bessent see the problem of climate as real and one that needs to be addressed yet leaving room for flexibility to tackle affordability crisis for ordinary workers with low incomes struggling to make a living. Bessent and others in the DJT administration are calling for using all of the resources to address needs of people struggling to make a living, and for a strategy for the US to get back its manufacturing capacity from China and for rebuilding the US economy after deindustrialization (caused by Clinton's huge US economy shattering failure to provide safeguards for abuse of the trading system by China in signing a poorly drafted agreement for China's entry into WTO at the end of his term in 1999-2000 just when he had fought impeachment.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A lead researcher at Stanford and UC Berkeley says he hasn't seen anything like it, the opposition intensify so quickly. 70% of Democrats and 50% of Republicans oppose overinvestment in AI  and increasing in sentiment- not about stopping progress but  about stopping hyperlevel investment of trillions of dollars and diverting from reindustrialization/infrastructure for US that creates jobs and a better qualityof life. In today's world neither China or the US can afford hyper investment, most Asian countries would prefer to let the US do it and later get that technology for free one way or the other. Therefore this means the American people are being hoodwinked- they pay the price when their bridges and roads, airports are in disrepair, when even a national network of data charging stations could not get funded under Biden which would have addressed the biggest problem for transition from fossil through EV's to fight climate change.  The investment community is being hoodwinked. Investors are being hoodwinked as the returns are uncertain and cannot be justified on financial grounds- only by hype.  Polls only ask about AI not the hyperinvestment in AI. If the truth is known that these trillions of dollars diverted by using flaws in capital markets in the US, avoiding financial scrutiny and hyping up AI when returns are by a long shot uncertain compared to rebuilding America's infrastructure and industries to compete with China and the EU- that is desperately needed- then these numbers would show the vast majority of Americans oppose this diversion of funds from the infrastructure and reindustrialization that create jobs that support working families. Take for example Texas, a Republican state, where the Agriculture Commissioner is calling for a moratorium on new hyperscale data center development in the state, citing higher costs for farmers, and strains on the power grid. It is not about stopping progress. Fon transition to renewable energy or example the adjustments made by Biden and Democrats allowed some fossil fuels use to make the transition, the same policy being pursued under different political slogans and labels under DJT. It is not about stopping progress as progress continues even under DJT Republican administration - natural gas prices and coal use prices are making natural gas a choice for power plants, the cost of oil at $100 making EV's hybrids cost less than gasoline cars. AI technologies will advance, and the wherewithal, the framework in which AI should operate can be built alongside without throwing everything out of balance. Throwing the whole economy out of balance, destroying the chance to create jobs and bring about the 1st priority of America and EU- reindustrialization and infrastructure renewal alongside India's modernization. That requires these trillions of dollars being pushed into AI by a few self-interested individuals without returns, and trillions of dollars more. If that is accomplished any challenges from China will fade in comparison with the scale of the effort in the EU, the US, and India with the largest industrial bloc in the world far bigger than China. This is not mere words. It is a plan of action that is being put into place right now at Oslo, Norway at the Nordic+EU Summit with India on the next phase of this effort, put into place piece by piece through hard work and a clear vision for the future. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden has asked Democrats to first reach an agreement on a social and climate policy package and only then vote on an infrastructure bill. Republicans have supported investments in infrastructure, but not supported the social and climate policy package. Democrats progressive wing supports infrastructure but only after the social and climate policy package is approved. To pull together the different groups in the Democratic party and win support among some Republicans requires a skillful balancing act bringing in support from all sides in the national interest. The Biden plan for $3.5 trillion for Build Back Better has a$1 billion infrastructure plan, and a plan for workers and families on social issues confronting the country including child care, education, income related to reduce disparities, and healthcare. It also includes investments in green energy so reduce emissions to tackle climate change. Because Democrats have a thin majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives this balancing act will also require Democrats to reduce the size of the package to less than $3.5 trillion bringing in the most essential components for investment in 2021-2022 and making additional investments in the following years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
After 3 decades the US is finally offering the scale and scope of infrastructure investment overseas that is needed. President Biden says $200 billion will be invested in infrastructure overseas over 5 years at meetings of the G-7 in the Alps south of Munich in Germany. Along with its partners and with government and private investments the size of the investment will reach $600 billion over 5 years to 2027. This will include projects such as $2 billion for solar energy in Angola, and a $600 million submarine telecommunications cable connecting France to Singapore.

It is a combination of direct government aid and private investment. President Biden sees Build Back Better World as the overseas version of his Build Back Better America for workers and families in the US for which Congress has authorized $1 trillion in infrastructure and climate change initiatives in the US.

LyrArc Article Gist
Financial expert Guy LeBas- questions bond investors need to think about are whether $3 trillion in AI investments are societally productive, economically and financially productive. This WSJ podcast is a discussion on the effects in the bond market of financing by AI. LeBas says the corporate bond market is dominated by banks in 2025. AI financing makes up 7% of the corporate bond market in 2025 and is likely to double to 15% with the 5 Tech companies issuing corporate bonds. He says the question is what effect this will have on the economy, on society, and the larger question is what effect it will have on the Nation's priorities- for tackling crumbling infrastructure, investing in American manufacturing shriveled after 3 decades of neglect and unfair trading practices of trading partners, tackling climate change, needed investment in pharmaceutical manufacturing in the US, in education and childcare.

LyrArc Article Gist
What we bring is scale, says Teskey, co-founder of Brookfield Asset Management, which has set a target of $25 billion for 2 private funds for climate action. $10 billion has been raised and it continues fundraising. $2 billion from the UAE for energy transition fund and $1 billion for emerging markets transition. Additional fund raising will take place for emerging markets fund. Across all its funds Brookfield says it has raised $100 billion for investment in renewable power and energy transition projects. The demand for renewable power comes from cities and companies looking for cleaner ways of powering everything from data centers to manufacturing. It also comes from regulations on climate and from generous incentives offered by governments. The demand for renewable power from corporates, says Connor Teskey of Brookfield, is simply overwhelming. Teskey and Mark Carney, the former head of the central banks of UK and Canada and the point man on climate for the UN, are co-founders.   Total global energy transition investment was $1.8 trillion in 2023, a 17% increase from 2022, and yet this is nowhere near the needed investment of $4.8 trillion for climate goals needed annually for 2024 to 2030. Lyrarc.com will track these investments in its Climate Change Action part of the site. Brookfield is looking at cutting emissions in what is a broader strategy. whih means it will invest in fossil fuel projects where it can significantly cut emissions. This includes cement and steel makers.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Achieving net zero emissions by 2050 will require huge amounts of capital. One estimate is $131 trillion. Where will it come from. The UN Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero says financial groups with assets of $130 trillion have committed to its program to cut emissions. This WSJ report says that is enough scale to generate $100 trillion through 2050 to fund the investments needed for new technologies and provide the finance for companies to restructure themselves in a new world.  The question is how much of this is real as banks, insurers, pension funds and private investor groups are only now taking on the task of restructuring the finance industry. It was not even addressed during the 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change talks. For this to be truly transformative and the transformative changes to take place governments have a critical role in requiring a common standard for reporting and measuring climate change progress. Government regulatory action and oversight is essential for timely and rapid action to take place. Financial regulators, including the US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England have agreed to add their own oversight through reviews and disclosure standards. The problem is that private sector plans are not concrete. Data is non existent or inconsistent and measurement is not taking place across all of the financial sector on key parameters. The UN has limited power to enforce rules. Who will act to ensure decisions are taken, progress measured after standards are set, transparency set, and how can governments deliver on each step through 2030 ensuring the transformation of the financial sector so that the decisions are taken according to a master plan for climate change in the US, UK, European Union, and India.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Is Norway endorsing the position of a former president of the US to "Drill, Baby Drill.?" It would cost upwards of 1 trillion dollars to fix US inaction on climate change to 2028. Norway is drilling like crazy to help Germany tackle the cutoff from Russian oil and gas supplies. It is also pursuing climate change action and green energy. The result is some confusion about where it is heading. The Guardian comments on this position taken by Norway. It can only be seen as oil and gas meeting a transition period's needs, yet with the severity of cliamte change events in the form of fires and floods in the world in 2024, is this a tenable position? Norwegians will say their cleaner fossil fuel production takes the place of dirty coal plants in Europe. How could Germany manage without Russian oil and gas without Norwegian supplies they ask. Others say Norway gets a quarter of its GDP from oil and gas. It is at the same time the country that is way ahead in renewables, most of its grid runs on renewables. And yet it has cut greenhouse gas emissions only by 11% since 1990 4 times less than Germany. Norway will come up for more criticism considering that its push on fossil fuels in 2023-24 is reducing investment for shift to a fossil free world. It is not an issue that can be talked away or not confronted head on as it is the harbringer of something worse- doing nothing for 4 years to 2028 that is proposed on the back of stuff that is being done by Norway- a US presidential candidate promising to relegate climate change action to zero by denying it exists and by saying "Drill, Baby Drill," at the RNC Convention in Milwaukee. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Serious problems are ailing the television channels in the US. This is because the siloing of channels into political spaces as audiences converge to watch particular channels is resulting in these channels unable to take positions based on the merits of issues. Climate change is one example- today no television channel in the US asks the question what would happen to the climate if the US loses another 4 years 2024-2028 in dealing with the climate challenge- makes no investment in climate change action. This is a grave and serious matter that needs to be at the top of discussions alongside the forest fires and floods that show up at the top of news pages every day. This is now the central issue at one of the channels as James Murdoch and his wife Kathryn ask this question of their own family business in television channels in the US and Europe. This is also a larger issue facing the television business.  Another issue is that internet business such as Twitter X, Facebook, TikTok are also concerned with ratings, and think mistakenly that being neutral about climate change action is acceptable, that it is someone else's problem, not theirs. It would cost upwards of 1 trillion dollars in 2028 for the US to simply to address the climate change problems arising from no action for the next 4 years. The problem may become hard to control by then regardless of how much money is put into tackling it, making life difficult on this planet. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The difference between the 21% tax rate down form 35% put in place in 2017 and the proposed tax rate of 28% by Democrats is $1 trillion over 10 years. The corporate tax rate generates only 8% of government revenues and Lael Brainard thinks this is too low for investment that the government needs to make in climate change action, infrastructure, manufacturing, healthcare, childcare, education and other priorities neglected by different administrations over the last three decades, that are vital to rebuilding America.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hear this America- Calling something that is all around us a hoax is not like telling a lie on media. Calling a thing a hoax when it is a growing Threat has Big, Big, Big consequences that you might not even want to think about. Project 2025 and "Drill Baby Drill" would create billions of tons more of carbon pollution and destroy any climate change action that would help control climate change- causing even bigger fires and sudden floods all over the world. The cost says think tank Energy Innovation is 2.7 billion tons of carbon pollution- what India emits in 1 year- and 1.7 million job losses by 2030 from jobs lost in renewable energy including small offset from fossil fuels. The cost would be at the minimum over $1 trillion dollars to repair by 2028- the cost of not taking action on climate change for four years, of additional floods and fires larger than ones before,  and of tackling the additional damage to the climate, the loss of the technological advances needed over next 4 years, the investments needed to tackle a much larger problem than it is now. It would require larger deficits to tackle and risk the health and well being of future generations. For the US compared to China the consequence will be a severe loss of technological advantage in the technologies for renewable energy that no longer, no longer have the support of the government as they do in China.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US economic growth was 2.4% in the second quarter of 2023. Even though the Fed increased rates at 10 consecutive meetings by 5% since March 2022 to tackle inflation the US economy appears strong. Large investments in the trillions of dollars in US manufacturing and infrastructure, tackling climate change is what is different this time compared to the past 2 decades when bad decisions were made with twin wars in the Arab and Muslim world, and the supply chain was transferred to China, investments were neglected in infrastructure, education and health in public goods, and capital markets allocated money with decreasing advantage to the economy. President Biden was in a unique position after the pandemic to take stock of all these mistakes and move the nation forward in positive directions in a decisive way in scale as well as in spirit and determination. That he has done so is more proof of the resilience of America.

LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Henninger says in the WSJ that the debt ceiling will be raised, and Republicans should not be pitting program against program. He says the narrative though should be framed around the trillions being spent by the Biden administration on climate change action, US manufacturing and technology in chips, with interest on debt at over $400 billion a year. Yet this does not take into account that for two decades there has been an overcrowding of US government initiated capital investment for essential needs by massive Tech industry misallocation of funds even as productivity of this capital invested by tech was dropping, with much wasted capital. Today because these essential needs in infrastructure and for manufacturing and technology were starved for so long of capital the productivity of capital in these areas is high and will have ripple effects to help rebuild America.

LyrArc Article Gist
In his State of the Union Address president Biden set the tone for the next 2 years of his term, and in preparation for another term to Build Back Better for America. He talked about his efforts to address the needs of America in rebuilding aging infrastructure, restoring its place in manufacturing, chips and science, and addressing climate change with trillions of dollars of investments. No longer would crowding out of government investment happen as it did in the last two decades with neglect of infrastructure, manufacturing, workers and families, and massive misallocation of capital in capital markets. On Jobs, America and Renewal, "on rewarding work, not wealth" "Jobs are coming back. Pride is coming back because of the choices we made in the last two years. This is a blue collar blueprint to rebuild America and make a real difference in your lives." He told Congressman McCarthy-          "I don't want to ruin your reputation but I look forward to working with you." Reminding Republicans-  "The people sent us a clear message. Fighting for the sake of fighting, power for the sake of power, conflict for the sake of conflict gets us nowhere." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A new $490 billion aid package in Japan is designed to help families and small business. Families with small children will get $900 per child and small business will get $22,000 each if they can show they were affected by the pandemic. Wage increases for nurses and care workers. Economy minister Yamagiva in the new Fumio Kishida government says this aid will "bring security and hope to the people by rebuilding the economy." Japan is following the US by providing aid to the people and business to help rebuild after the lingering effects of the pandemic. In the US president Biden is expected to pass a $2 trillion package including help for child care, paid leave for caregivers and mothers, other aid, and a big investment to tackle climate change.

LyrArc Article Gist
France's Thomas Piketty concentrated on inequality and arrives at no solutions or relief, just a historical summary that is also intuitively seen. The pandemic, climate change's impact on agriculture and livable planet, the Ukraine war have raised three questions right before our eyes that are broader and cover more and deeper ground.  The pandemic showed that the dependence on manufacturing in remote locations was a serious error. Climate change showed that agriculture the ability to feed the world itself was affected by this dependence on remote location manufacturing.  Much of this manufacturing was shipped out to China, Europe and the US lost their manufacturing base and with the communities spread out  across the US and EU lost factories and work. Manufacturing was not just shipped out to China, the process was concentrated in a short span of time leading to destruction of the environment on an unprecedented scale in China and the world  by burning lots of coal and fossil fuels. The Russian invasion of Ukraine showed the failure of this arrangement  and exposed its cracks  for Europe, US, and the free world in Asia and Latin America. The shipping out of manufacturing in this way not only destroyed communities and jobs in manufacturing in the US and the EU, but also led to such a broad accumulation of  dollar reserves in Russia and China, that enabled the invasion of neighboring countries in Europe without serious consequences to their economies, the invasion of Ukraine and the threatened takeover of Taiwan. By tackling these issues and building a supply chain concentrated more at home and in the free world better manufacturing jobs will be created in Europe and the US and in the nations of the free world that mitigate and reduce all the effects of inequality that Piketty and others talk about. The newer factories built in advanced nations of the EU and the US and set up in the free world in Asia and other countries, will be built with climate change in mind and make the shift away from coal and fossil fuels, and for conservation plus efficiency in use of energy at every step in the newly built supply chain. The results will be good for all countries in the world including the US, EU, China and India, as climate change can be aggressively tackled in this way with the latest technology and trillions of dollar of capital investments for the benefit of all. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ shows American households are acting prudently by building up savings of $1.6 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. As much of these savings are not distributed evenly across the population, and coming back from a period after the 2009 financial crisis when savings in the lower classes had dropped to alarming levels, this saving is good for the future of the American people by building a path to sustained growth for the long term. Readers responses to this report show their dismay at calling savings hoarding, dismay at the idea that saving 3-6 months of expenses would be considered prudent when 1-2 years would be a minimum  and 2-3 years desirable would be considered decent protection in times like the last 2 decades of manmade disasters (shipping out American manufacturing, 2009 financial crisis) or nature driven disasters (the pandemic). For the Biden administration the saving also provides hope that the mistakes of the last two decades and the 2009 period can be avoided. By targeting the $1 trillion in infrastructure spending plan to projects that build synergy throughout the economy and generate more growth for every dollar spent in a long term Renewal America project. Recent WSJ reports show this is happening. The $2 trillion Families and Workers Plan works in a similar way to bring hope in improving the quality of life in America through children's education, childcare, paid leave, health care, affordable housing, climate change investments. The public in America is showing equal prudence by aligning the savings to this approach to set America on a path of long term renewal and development that could be sustained to 2030 or 2035. This will also enable the investments needed to build America's role in the world and help its partners in Europe, Asia, Latin America and Africa take the same approach for sustained and balanced growth into the next decade.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ shows how the daughter of David Rockefeller Neva Goodwin and her daughter Kaiser have led the fight against Exxon for not making the change to renewable energy from fossil fuels in time to avert climate change disasters now common worldwide. One of the major problems of the last 50 years since the Reagan administration in 1980 involve oil wealth in the Middle East used to finance wars and US involvement in these wars in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Libya, Yemen. It haunts us to this day with conflict in the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. This has its origins with John D. Rockefeller  who started the oil company Standard Oil in the 1870's in Cleveland, Ohio, now called Exxon in the US and Esso overseas. A bigger problem has emerged in recent years that remained unnoticed till about 2006 when David Rockefeller, the grandson of John D. Rockefeller, met with the head of Exxon for lunch to ask why Exxon was not doing more to invest in green energy and increase awareness of the damage to the environment by fossil fuels. This was the beginning of the dawning realization of the signs of climate change so prevalent 20 years later today in wildfires, drought, extreme heat and fast floods worldwide.   Today's Exxon is a descendent of the companies John D. Rockefeller (Library of Congress site) created by the 1880's to refine oil which he turned into a monopoly by deals with railroad companies to reduce cost of product. In 1888 he created the Anglo American Oil Company later called Esso which is a phonetic rendition of S and O in Standard Oil, which in 1972 was changed to Exxon. Many of the crises of this century have their origins in the activities of Esso and British oil companies in Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia and the wars that wasted trillions of dollars in American resources through the administrations of Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Obama have their origins in the activities of oil companies, and the governments of these countries using oil financed wealth for wars that involved the US. Huge mistakes that combined with neglect of manufacturing the lifeblood of any economy have led to the gradual decline of the US, being reversed for the first time with the decisive and complete shift made by president Biden so that investments of trillions of dollars can be made to revive the strength of the US economy and the wellbeing of its people. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Current responses to China's different posture in international relations obscure the huge investments made by US and European Union business in China that lead to about $1 trillion in exports from China to US and EU in 2021. This could not happen without the hyper investment in China by business in the US and EU that not only neglected manufacturing technologies in the home country but did this on a immense scale that would end up shipping almost the whole of the manufacturing supply chains to China from the US and EU. Done as a carefully planned shift of some manufacturing operations it could have benefitted both China and the US and EU. In what way was this hyper move in pace and scale damaging? China's water, air and land was contaminated at a rapid pace never before seen in history, seen as early as 2005. And the hyper shift by 2015 and in 2020 is now showing the severe effects of climate change with droughts, floods and fires all over the world. The German Environment Ministry today counts the cost at 90 times in the use of coal and fossil fuels over time. On the scale that this massive and fast shift was done of manufacturing to China even more so- a hugely imprudent response of US and EU business management and executives. Instead of tackling and confronting head on the challenging problems of quality control and cost in the 1990's through 2000 and beyond at home, management at Apple and other companies simply shifted all manufacturing to China. The other ill effect of the imprudent response of American business was in the massive and wholesale shift of supply chain to China by offshoring practically the entire manufacturing base. It was to lead to the massive losses that workers, families  and communities in the US and EU that countries could not cope with as it moved on an accelerated hyper level and pace. The result was to lead to intense criticism of China and a level of rancor that has poisoned the relations with China. Some of this counsel to China was given to leaders of the Communist party who had little knowledge of American capitalism operating within constraints of social democracy in 1990. Some of that counsel was self interested given by investment banks to Chinese officials- investment bankers that have now disappeared from view- who themselves lacked an understanding of the social constraints of American and European democracies. It is that rancor that is now leading to China and the US disconnecting the supply chains leading to questions one is certain within China about how this will affect unemployment in China in the years to come. The pandemic simply accelerated this realization on both sides of this untenable situation. Still a trillion dollars in exports are taking place even as the political situation is now totally adrift -as the situation in Taiwan in August 2022 shows- the political and trading relationships at opposite ends and seemingly at war with each other. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
 Biden's kickoff speech for president in 2024- "We've got a lot more work to do." Biden was able to get the US on track for huge investments in infrastructure, chips, climate change, renewable energy, cost of living help, of trillions of dollars. He told a union audience- "Under my predecessor (Mr. Trump), infrastructure week became a punchline. On my watch infrastructure has become a decade headline- a decade headline." (Not much was actually done for infrastructure by Trump.) What Baker in NYT says Biden was not able to do is where Republicans blocked his efforts- to cut student loan debt, for pre-school education assistance, for tuition free community college, for parental leave, and help to workers and families struggling with the cost of living. Biden also helped tackle the period of mass vaccination and exit from the pandemic, and bringing unemployment to below 4%.  Baker has covered 5 presidents for the Washington Post and the NYT. His book on Trump is- The Divider: Trump in the White House 2017-2021.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A second term Trump-Vance will face uphill risks and a mess in economics from a Trumpian Republican party and Congress, says WSJ. WSJ Editorial Board says a second Trump term is not without risks. Tariffs cost 1.1% in annual growth in the Trump first term says WSJ, and it did have an impact on inflation. It would have had greater impact on inflation with the supply chain crisis of Biden's first term, had this supply chain crisis happened in Trump's first term. A second term Trump-Vance support tariffs as high as 60% on Chinese imports which would have a bigger effect on inflation and economic growth than of the first term. The key difference is that with tax cuts a basic rule for Republican policies Trump-Vance second term would not invest in infrastructure the way Mr. Biden has done and Biden will do so in a second term. As a result the economic growth is likely to be greater and inflation smaller under a Biden administration. Trillions of dollars in investment in the economy and infrastructure under Biden in a second term will be missing in a Trump-Vance tax cuts administration policy. And with it hundreds of thousand of jobs created each quarter will be missing in Trump-Vance second term. Add to this the level of clarity of stable economic policy under a Biden second term and contrast it with some of the chaos in economic policy of a Trump-Vance second term. The basic contradiction between tax cuts policy and the nation's need for infrastructure spending/rebuilding under a Republican under Trump administration will not go away, present a huge stumbling block. Chaotic policy could come from Project 2025 that says consider abolishing the US central bank Federal Reserve. This kind of erratic and unwise policy proposals are clearly not happening under Biden and Yellen. Another key difference is the cost to the economy of delays of several years in doing nothing for climate in Trump-Vance 2024-2028. Severe effects on climate if nothing is done could cause acceleration of climate negative costs which a future economy under Democrats would face, in reality the Nation would face. America's Business has taken a short term approach to climate change, when the time comes to pay the costs of short term thinking it assumes it is somebody else's problem- this happened with supply chain concentration in China the burden falling on the middle and lower classes, it would happen again with missing climate change action under Trump-Vance second term. ...

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
Joe Biden was about 78 when he entered the presidency. Reagan ended his presidency at age 79 in 1989. It is about 35 years since Reagan, and advances of medicine are making it possible for people to work longer with retirement ages extended to age 65 in many countries. Mr. Biden looks healthy and brings much experience from his decades in the Senate of the US. His 36 years in the Senate are the longest for any president. Turning 80 should not be a hurdle in that sense if one is healthy and the country needs this experience. During a foreign affairs crisis with China and Russia this experience of 12 years as ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is invaluable. More so as Biden reflects America's values. During his 36 years in the Senate he put forward the Violence Against Women's legislation in Congress. As Vice President he continued to advocate for working class and middle class and for families. One has to go back to Harry Truman to sense this kind of fervent and resolute action for workers and families, and for the American people. As president he passed the $1 trillion legislation for Workers and Families and to fight Climate Change. Building America Back Better is one of its goals and further investment in America and its people is being pushed forward.  Mr. Biden is living at a time when there is a struggle for the soul of the nation and he believes in his role in this struggle which gives him the energy he needs for his role in 2024 for continuing the work he has begun. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Based on this Washington Post sample of reader views on the presidential Debate, 4 of 5 readers in the sample are critical of the way the Post, NYT, WSJ are acting against the elected and popular transformative president of the US. What do Washington Post readers think of the way media magnates running Post, NYT, WSJ are trying to run the country in the face of a elected president who remains popular for the action he has taken on cost of living, climate change, manufacturing jobs, factories and supply chains, and is investing trillions of dollar in renewing America's manufacturing, Chips and science, and Infrastructure? Their campaigns are there for all to see against the president, even as the British election shows Keir Starmer of Labour saying "from 20 points behind to 20 points ahead," achieving a landslide even with only 2% increase in votes since 2019. Starmer too was written off just twelve months ago. The first letter is from Little Rock stating the Post, NYT, WSJ position. The second is from Linda Barnes of Ashland, New Hampshire, who faults the Post for not having the headline about "Disastrous debate performance by Trump who failed to answer most questions and lied relentlessly." Lauri Costello of Las Cruces, New Mexico, says every American would have benefitted from an in depth analysis of the debate rather than a focus on how each debater looked and spoke. Diana Hasuly of Ashburn, Virginia, says the debate was an opportunity to see two men's perspectives about the future of America, and the Post had done a great disservice to America, as have the NYT, WSJ and the Media in general, by not spelling what each man was offering America for the future. To take just three Climate change, manufacturing investment and jobs, infrastructure spending, Biden is getting so much done and has the plan for 2030, the former president has none, simply none and did not talk about this. Mark Parkhurst of Silver Spring, Maryland, says of the June 28 front page in the Post that the Post uses "falshoods" not "lies" when a lie needs to be called a lie from the former president. And says to be fair the Media needs to point out the actual achievements of president Biden not dwell on MAGA rhetoric. Is the Post or the Media in general overreaching, is it listening? What would Washington, Lincoln or FDR say?   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden's $2 trillion Families and Workers plan, for early childhood education, paid leave, healthcare and climate change investment, is coming up for a vote in Congress. Paid leave that also includes maternity leave and leave that would help women return to the workforce, has been added back to the bill. Community college aid was earlier removed from the package with resistance from private colleges that expect to lose tuition paying students, even though male students are falling dangerously behind in attending college without government support. The Biden administration is facing resistance from just a couple of Democratic Congressmen- about five led by a Congressman from New Jersey, and 2 Senators from Arizona and West Virginia- on community college government aid that helps young American men and women from the working class and on paid leave that helps women. Many Republicans have supported taking this action for renewal of America on serious issues that face the country, making it likely that these issues will only become more pressing in the next three years. Sometimes as is happening today some isolated or eccentric situations can block major legislation for the good of the country such as the makeup of a Congressional seat in New Jersey with large pockets of conservative Republicans who oppose spending, and conservative instincts of two Democratic senators from Arizona and West Virginia. This WSJ report looks at Biden's position that deterrence when filing tax returns will generate close to $400 billion and not $150 billion that the Congressional Budget Office says is its estimate. To accomplish this Biden plans to spend $80 billon in large investments to increase the resources of America's tax collecting agency. Much of this was never done and policies geared to where large corporations never paid their fair share of taxes. The first step was to prevent outshoring of headquarters to reduce taxes- and this was achieved in the first year of the Biden Administration with over 100 countries agreeing on a corporate minimium tax. In the same way president Biden now seeks to correct other flaws in the tax system so that much needed investments can be made by generating new revenue not just in infrastructure, but for renewal of America through renewal of support for women, children, and America's working classes. Much of that was badly neglected by different  administrations over the last three decades.     ...