LyrArc Article Gist
 President DJT has several options after SC Tariffs decision -Sections 122 Trade Act of 1972 has 150 day limit and 15% maximum tariff rate, and Sections 232 and 301 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 is specifically designed for China and countries with high trade deficits. DJT pointed out at the press conference following the Supreme Court decision pointed out that he had these options at the beginning in April for tariffs. He chose IEEPA instead because the other options required work that would take several months showing the unfair treatment of the US by other nations. It is likely that the president used IEEPA for speed yet kept open the options to replace it with the option that would work best. The new studies will have been started much earlier in 2025 so that the president can introduce all his tariffs under new arrangements. Another aspect of this is that the president has negotiated Free Trade Agreements with most of the nations that are large trade partners from India, China, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan to UK, EU, Germany, France with the idea of boosting the US economy with tariffs of 10-15%. ...

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

LyrArc Article Gist
US actions to conduct investigations on 18 countries under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 - March 12 2026 after the Supreme Court asks DJT to use another law for tariffs. A key focus of the investigation is to show how industrial overcapacity is deliberately built through subsidies to push product into US markets and destroy American competition. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said March 11- "Our view is that key trading partners have developed production capacity that is really untethered from the market incentives of domestic and global demand." The US and DJT have repeatedly shown how this has been done over two decades to destroy the US industrial base. Another focus is on the used of forced or underpaid labor working in substandard working conditions and excessive hours. Greer says he will have the investigations results ready by mid-July when the presidents new tariff of 15% (after the SC ruling) expires. Other probes or investigations will also be conducted. All trade agreements signed with Germany, EU, Japan, UK, India, China, and other countries will remain in place. These countries have expressed a desire to keep them in place as that offers key benefit of removing uncertainty in making business decisions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US Federal Reserve Report on Economic Wellbeing of US Households 2024-May 2025 gives some insights into the well being of American households. It shows food insufficiency households the same in 2023-2025 at 7%. The situation for cost of living remains a concern in 2024 as well as 2025. Retirement savings have improved for many middle class Americans, as confirmed by reports from Fidelity and Vanguard. The people earning less than 25,000 are 19% and about the same in 2024 under Biden as under DJT in 2025. 39% make $100,000 or more and 26% make $50,000 -$100,000. Combining the 19% making less than $25,000 and the 16% making between $25,000 and $50,000 shows about one third of the population under $50,000 living paycheck to paycheck. It would appear that $2000 DJT rebate putting $160 billion out of $550 billion of tariff revenues for 2025-2026  in the hands of 79 million households that make less than $100,000 would go a long way to keep the situation stable with optimism and hope arising from the restructuring of world trade that would bring trillions of dollars of investment into the US from Europe and Asia. A this investment plus domestic investment should bring back jobs and higher incomes to US manufacturing in small towns across America. The rest of $550 billion tariff revenue of $390 billion would go to reducing the deficit which would improve prospects for the economy in 2027 and produce a more resilient economy in 2027-2028. As shown on this page the popular Democratic Governor of Michigan in her op-ed in Washington Post supports strategic tariffs, and supports using the revenue for a check to American workers of $2000 per worker or per worker household and offers to work with the opposite party to get a WIN-WIN for the American People.  In the whole process of trade tariffs it must be remembered when seeing the inconsistent cases of tariff use by this Republican administration that these were special reason situations not aberrations or whimsical. First, it should be borne in mind that behind the appearance of DJT making tariff decisions is a carefully thought out process that took ten years to form under Reagan era Trade Representative Lighthizer who negotiated with Japan, and his deputy Jamieson for 2016-2024, and the economic and capital markets experience of Scott Bessent as Treasury Secretary. The two cases of inconsistent application of tariffs relate to the 50% tariff on India and the reduction of tariffs on China agreement on rare earths, and the imposition of a large tarif on Japan and the EU. In the first instance with India it was intended to give Ukraine breathing room from Russian attacks as Germany steps up its military preparedness and assistance to Ukraine. With both countries it was about saving face important in Asian or any societies and it has achieved it's purpose. Reports show both Indian and Chinese refiners have quietly cut purchases of oil from Russia leading to Russian oil selling at about $20 discount to Brent crude oil. In the case of Japan the quick action to raise tariffs was intended not to get into long drawn negotiations and show serious intent- Japan is known for dragging out negotiations for years if not decades. The same is true for the European Union. With the Swiss it was about a certain disrespect of the US coming from attitudes that Swiss products were somehow superior. Not just in the long run, in 2026-2028 history will show that the effort done right - and it takes effort to get this right- to restructure world trade so that other nations are not siphoning off the benefits and leaving the US to lose its manufacturing and factories is the right one. And taken with courage and sincere desire to create a fair distribution of the benefits of world trade for too long distorted by egregious practices of competitors. It has nothing to do with 2 senators from the 1930's who were from places like the Mountain West in the US, having no concept of world trade, Smoot and Hawley, who under a irresponsible president Hoover got everything wrong. This is a carefully set out plan to evenly balance the benefits of world trade to all nations.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Tsutsui Yoshinobu, head of Keidanren, Japan's business federation, says China limiting exports of vital raw materials is "an obvious act of economic coercion." For the first time in 2025 Keidanren cancelled its annual dialogue meeting with China's representatives.  This was a followup to comments by Japanese PM Sanae that it would consider an attack on Taiwan as a danger to Japan's security. Sanae now enjoys 62% popularity rating. After 2 years of the LDp government with aminority in parliament she has announced a snap election to gain an abasolute majority in parliament. In the last elections small nationalist parties gained a large share of votes. Changes are happening in Japanese politics as a younger generation becomes more nationalistic. Sanae was made PM only recently at the end of 2025 after the PM in the LDP party faced criticism and resigned. Before he resigned he quickly signed a trade agreement with the US DJT administration to maintain Japanese exports to US at a 15% tariff. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
India faces tariff of 25% with policies of reliance on Russia for arms and oil,  Mexico Canada and South Korea face higher tariffs August 1 2025 as they are holdouts now that UK, Japan, EU, Indonesia, Vietnam have agreements with the US on trade.

LyrArc Article Gist
The US central bank the Fed's Powell leaves interest rates unchanged July 30, 2025- as he waits to see what happens with inflation following tariffs action by DJT to level playing field with EU, Japan, China. A tariff of 15% is set in US Trade Agreements with Japan, EU and South Korea. Powell says the impact on US consumers will be minimal but not zero, with some effects expected even though EU, Japan and South Korea will not attempt to pass through the tariffs and risk the other benefits of trade access to the US market.

Overall both the European Union and the US have a good economy, with inflation at 2% and the the unemployment situation the best it has been in some decades near 6% in EU and near 4% in the US. 

LyrArc Article Gist
A key figure in approval ratings is 46% with DJT getting 46% approval for the economy and on a range of issues including immigration. On tariffs the situation is steadily improving with new trade agreements with Japan, the EU, South Korea that were announced after or just when this WSJ poll was taken on July 20. Among Republicans 88% support the president and 66% strongly support him which says this report means more of them would turn out to vote. More significant is that the optimistic rating of the economy went up by 11 percentage points from April 2025 to 46% in July 2025. This is also the view of Fed chairman Powell. Each step of the way as DJT tariff actions result in tangible improvements in trade relations for the US and result in concrete real world trade agreements for a level playing field in world trade, the president's actions are seen in a different light. The first Trade Agreement with the UK, then with Japan and now quite possibly with the European Union. All this within 6 months of the president acting in February 2025. A major role played also by Bessent, Greer, Luttnick and others in the cabinet of ministers. This lifts perceptions of the president in the eyes of the American people in handling the economy, business and world trade, and protecting the interests of America's farmers, and rural communities. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A big win for the US and a win-win for the European Union in the sense that it brings stability to the trade relationship. For the US it brings a level playing field in world trade that had suffered fo far too long from unfair advantages taken by Japan, Canada, European Union and other nations, in addition to the serious distortions of the world trade system with China's state version of capitalism financing an export model. So the first step was to straighten out the situation with partners and allies the US has supported in the past 75 years. US European Union Trade Agreement is reached July 27, 2025, at meeting between Von Der Leyen of Eu and DJT of the US in Scotland. It includes $750 billion EU purchases over 3 years of US oil and gas, LNG, nuclear fuel, semiconductors, etc and $650 billion in investments in US, including military purchases. It puts a 15% tariff on all products from the EU entering the US, replaces the tariff of about 5% under Biden. On Pharmaceuticals it is what the US president decides says Leyen, though for now it is included.  The EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefovic says- “I think that what was most important for us was to make sure we would have this predictability and we would have stability for our businesses." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Indian exports to US drop from $8.8 to $5.5 billion May to September drop of 37%. A trade agreement is likely and should be similar to Japan's or EU where with Japan it is now 15% and with EU it is 10%, both key allies of the US. India is also a key ally in Asia requiring the DJT administration -once it gets over Modi-DJT differences on the nuclear aspect of the India-Pakistan 48 hour conflict in 2025, and India reverts to getting oil and energy from non Russian sources as it did in 2019, and issues of agricultural exports to India- to drop this tariff of additional 25% for Russian oil and drop the basic tariff of 25% to 15% as the US did with Japan. At 15% Japan and India will still be able to compete with China's 47% (dropped from 57%) to export to the US.  The result can be positive for India as it improves it's cost effectiveness to export to the US and EU, with rapid investment to improve logistics, and streamlining import of technologies and machinery to rapidly cut costs of production. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US- China trade relations 2025 and XI's rare earth minerals export restrictions response to US tariffs. DJT resonse was 100% tariff on China from 57%. After meeting Xi in Busan, South Korea, after the APEC meetings, US settled on 10% reduction in tariffs from the 57% tariffs on Chinese products down now to 47%. The 100% tariff was withdrawn by DJT and China's Xi settled on withdrawing restrictions on exports of rare earth minerals. The fentanyl tariffs are still in place and the WSJ editorial says not much is likely to happen on fentanyl action by China to stop exports of fentanyl that reach the US through Mexico. China says it will take in soyabeans exports. US signs agreement with Australia to develop alternative supplies of rare earth minerals. The WSJ says for tariffs action to work US should not tariff allies. Yet broad tariffs action was necessary as partners Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the EU, Canada and Mexico were also nations that created an unfair trade situation for the US. The US took action on all nations that take unfair advantage of free trade concepts to benefit them which also add to the credibility of tariffs as effort to restore fairness in world trade.  ...

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
WSJ committed to orthodox economic theory thinks of tariffs as tariffs such as Smoot Hawley from the 30's. This is why it is not true- It is about fentanyl flows that have led to 490,000 deaths over 12 years in the US and few in the US like to talk about it. Smoot Hawley had nothing to do with fentanyl, drugs trafficking and migrant trafficking that every nation not only has a right but a No.1 responsibility to its citizens to keep its neighborhoods and its children in neighborhoods safe. Smoot and Hawley were US Senators and US Congress was isolationist in mood. Their grasp of the world trading system was meager and they stepped in at a time when the world had economically not recovered from World War I, and the French against US General Pershing's advice had set the most punitive arrangement in Germany that crushed Germany after an armistice Pershing opposed that left the Kaiser's political structures intact. Tariffs is not DJT's idea. It is the solid experience of Deputy US Trade Representative, Robert Lighthizer under Reagan who conducted negotiations with the Japanese who stalled and stalled Lighthizer says, let negotiations drag on into endless nights, and Lighthizer and his team stood firm. The relentless Japanese relented and Lighthizer secured the agreements that ended this phase of trade relations in the 1980's. Lighthizer was Trade Representative in the DJT first term 2016-2020 and launched the negotiations with China. This is now 8 years since 2016 and 2016 itself was 35 years after Lighthizer negotiated with the Japanese. Today's US Trade Representative is Jamieson who was Deputy Trade Representative under Lighthizer in 2016. Each detail is carefully thought through to bring it to a fair conclusion in the interests of the world and the US. Information traveled slowly GM could not tell at any time how many cars were in inventory on its lots in 1920's. US lacked basic infrastructure for government that FDR and Labor Secretary added firt in New York in the 1930's and which was transferred to 50 states by 1940's. Today information is quickly at fingertips and consultation processes are built in between industry and government at all levels. A lot of information is carefully evaluated. USTR as DJT showed, the major study of USTR Office in the Rose Garden on April 2, 2025, has all trade barriers carefully analyzed in minute details for every country. And is working on this for 40 years. There isn't even a slightest  comparison between this and the Smoot Hawley crowd in the 1920's.  The goal not to beat anybody. Just to set the goal of a level playing field for world trade. That is the foundation of trade that is fair and respected, and is a win-win for all. WTO's basic foundation No. 1 principle is a level playing field. It is just that this was a kind of Marshall Plan for Asia of the US to let poor countries such as Japan war wrecked in 1950, and China colonial power wrecked by first Britain then Japan struggling and poor in 1990's, giving them some time to rebuild by ignoring unfair barriers to trade for 10-15 years 2005 for China. Barriers that never got dismantled and technology that leaked from the US 2005-2016 under the Obama administration. Smoot Hawley was not about the US Navy building its own ships and US shipyards in the 1920's. In 2025 US shipbuilding industry is stolen, this is why the words used "pillaged" "looted" were used in the Rose Garden. Little by little American private enterprise capitalism was superseded by a new form of capitalism in Japan then in China that combined state capitalism with private enterprise capitalism. This then was the threat America faced, and needed to redouble its energies and seek fair play.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin in the NYT why the U.S. China Phase 1 Trade Agreement is more than a hill of soyabeans as he puts it, more than about all the soyabeans that the U.S. farmers can sell to China. China's economy was seeing the effect of U.S. tariffs. Additional tariffs to cover all imports from China to the U.S. would have worsened this. China avoided this by agreeing to Phase 1. The U.S. had looked for some enforcement mechanism based on China putting this down in a written agreement particularly for avoiding subsidies to state enterprises and improper access to U.S. advanced technologies. China's reluctance to do this led to Mr. Trump saying that China had reversed its position and Trump expanding the tariffs stage by stage. These issues are now set aside for Phase 2 still to be negotiated. Both sides taking what they could get. China relief from the threat of tariffs on all exports. The U.S. under Mr. Lighthizer's negotiating leadership retaining the enforcement idea through the tariffs that are still in place of 25% on half of China's exports to the U.S. The bonus for Mr. Trump is the goodwill China generates by agreeing to buy all the U.S. farmers can produce, farmers having not only stood behind Mr. Trump but also forming a key part of his support base. China will continue to compete in technological areas with the U.S., and the state enterprise model which worked for China as Mr. Xi tells visitors will continue. Phase 2 is just that Phase 2, when and if it can be negotiated between Trump with his negotiator Lighthizer and Xi with his negotiator Liu He. On key points neither side is budging. A key goal for Mr. Trump is to put the trade surplus China enjoys of $300 plus billion a year with the U.S. on a serious downward path, and bring so many of the jobs and manufacturing back home. On this trade data for 2019 and the plan for 2020 of both countries is clear. It should be down each year by 10-20% for the next few years, a major achievement of Mr. Lighthizer, who did the same with  Japan under president Reagan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ report shows that on the morning of the 90 Day Pause in Tariffs announcement discussions took place with the Swiss prime minister, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and watching Fox News interview of JP Morgan Chase's Jamie Dimon. Seeing the turmoil in financial markets and bond markets, US president DJT made the decision to give time to make the agreements with about 50 countries, and time for financial markets to understand the president's  policy and goals to reformulate the world trading system into one that offers a level playing field. The chart showing the Tariffs of 67% by China and US 34% imposed tariff in the Rose Garden on April 2, 2025, was say reports the result of the influence on the president of the advice of Peter Navarro.  Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's expertise is in financial markets as a protege of Soros, Navarro's is world trade. Bessent stepped in when financial markets appeared to reflect the uncertainty and convinced the president that the 90 day pause would be the best way to implement the policy on trade. There is a vigorous debate in the administration about how to get a level playing field for trade, and get the job done without disruptions in financial markets or a recession induced by uncertainty. On April 10 as part of the effort to talk to the American people US president DJT opened up his Cabinet meeting to the media and had Bessent, Borghum, RFK Jr and Marco Rubio talk about their plans and policies. Proper implementation, gaining confidence of the people of America and financial markets, is now as important as the goals and policies in the next 90 days. Getting the trade deals with the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Britain and India would go a long way to reassure financial markets and set the right tone for the future.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in The South China Morning Post in Hong Kong, gives insights into the Chinese position in trade war with the U.S.  China has its own internal groups which support China being able to take a leadership role in world affairs. Xi Jinping made giving China a prominent role in the world a feature of his presidency. China  has this internal audience and its own sense that China's resurgence was won with hard work and cooperation, plus dedication of the Chinese people. In the past Japan and South Korea also used state subsidized industries, and subsidies to gain leadership in key business sectors involving high technology. China would see this state subsidies model as its own model of development. From this standpoint the U.S. demands on subsidies as unfair competition could be seen as changing a key part of its economic model.  Asking China to put everything in writing and show tangible proof of enforcement as the U.S. insisted in talks, was too much for the Chinese side. China said trust us to do this, and lift the tariffs based on our verbal assurances. The U.S. having seen decades of no progress on this point, wanted tangible proof before tariffs were lifted. Added to the demands on subsidies were the demands for no more of what the U.S. calls stealing of U.S. technology through forced transfer of technology by U.S. firms as a condition to operate in Chinese markets. With the U.S. lagging in 5G technology and Huawei ahead the issue resonates on the U.S. side. Add to this Mr. Trump's key voter base includes the former Democratic party supporting workers who have shifted to him because of trade agreements and policies of Clinton and Obama that hurt American workers through seemingly endless closure of manufacturing plants from Chinese competition.   ...

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
There are similarities in the Republican and Democratic party platforms in 2016. One area of agreement is in the reinstatement of Glass Steagall Act. That legislation made in the Depression period to separate commercial banking from investment banking was changed  when president Clinton made changes in a deal with Senators Phil Gramm and Jim Leach in 1999. The too big to fail problems of banks and the problems of investment banks during the 2008 financial crisis are attributed to the lack of Glass Steagall protections for financial stability and safety. The result is that in the post 2016 environment banks can expect a tougher regulatory environment. Another are is in trade where both parties are expected to take tougher positions to protect U.S. interests. The Republican platform calls for "better negotiated trade agreemets that put America first."

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

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

LyrArc Article Gist
This response by experts on transatlantic relations rejects the other view expressed in Zeit Online that the U.S. under Trump remains estranged from Germany and the EU. These experts from the American Institute for German Contemporary Studies, American German Council, and Centers at John Hopkins and Georgetown for German Studies, reject the view that the Trump administration and Germany are that far apart on many issues as it appears from media coverage.  Foremost it points out that civil society relations are sound and growing. About 50 million Americans trace their descent to Germany, including president Trump, much larger to over half the U.S. population considering European descent. Much larger is the sense of a culturally shared future with the European Union, with the nations of Europe including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the nations of Eastern Europe, and Britain. The civil society relationships run deep in a way that is hardly affected by the Trump administration. Within the Trump administration the policies to Europe these experts remind the reader, are determined by the "adults" in the administration, who are senior members of the administration. This is a crucial point as Trump administration policy is not determined by the president's liking for tweets as much as by senior cabinet members Tillerson at the State Department, Gen. Mattis at Defense, Kelly at the White House, and senior members of Congress including Senators Corker and other senior committee members. This is why Republican Senator Kay Hutchinson was chosen as Ambassador to NATO. It should be noted in this context of German-EU relations in president Trump's first year that there was a period of German disillusionment with president Obama, exacerbated by the NSA spying on German chancellor Merkel and on the EU delegation to the UN, with president Obama's failure to offer any apology. Relations recovered from that low point. No one suggested that there be a German led decoupling of the EU with America at that low point, or at another low point in German-U.S. relations with the setup of American Pershing II nuclear missiles on German soil under the Reagan administration when there were large scale protests.  The American view that the U.S. should not have to shoulder major responsibilities for defense and foreign relations by itself is not new say these experts, and goes back to earlier administrations before Trump.  The experts argue for an active role by Germany with its partners in Europe for defense and foreign relations, which should not be seen as a result of U.S. pressure, only responding to the situation as it has evolved upto this time. Views on immigration are also changing with effort by the EU and Germany, France, to reduce immigration from the source countries in Africa, and the changing perceptions about uncontrolled immigration in Germany and France, say the authors. A coordinated policy towards Russia  is seen as not having changed. And much as a reset in relations was advocated by Obama in the first year of his first term, the current policy of the Trump administration to work with Russia to lower tensions can be seen in the same way say these experts, and not as a fundamental shift in American policy. The deep relationship of Germany and the EU with China is another positive aspect that will also help the U.S. in framing its own policies towards China. The German-American relationship, and the European Union relationship with the U.S.  is seen as basic to the values and interests of the U.S. and Europe. This relationship is too deep and supported by civil society and Congress, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party, by large trade relationships, to be affected by temporary differences under any one administration. Even these differences are part of a larger debate that is part of dialogue on issues in a democratic society, sometimes raucous and loud, and could be welcomed and carefully channelled in constructive ways.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hillary Clinton narrowly loses the Michigan primary to Bernie Sanders in March 2016, as the Sanders campaign focusses on Clinton's support for trade agreements that hurt American workers and lead to loss of manufacturing jobs. About three fifths of voters in the Michigan primary considered this a major issue. Many less educated younger workers see their job prospects diminish and wages drop with free trade that hurts American manufacturing jobs. Bill Clinton signed the NAFTA agreement with Mexico, and as a member of the Obama administration Clinton supported the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement, later opposing TPP when she left the cabinet. Sentiment against trade that hurts manufacturing jobs in the U.S. is strongest in midwestern states such as Michigan, Ohio and Illinois. This was also a major issue benefitting the Liberals under Justin Trudeau who won in Canada's industrial Ontario province which has suffered hollowing out and loss of manufacturing jobs under the Conservative Harper administration. In the U.S. the issue goes back to the Clinton Administration for two decades. New jobs created by Apple, Google, and other tech companies pale in comparison with the industrial jobs created in another era that benefitted working class families. This issue and high unemployment or under employment, lower wages for working class families, was a major issue in the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign. Widening wealth disparities, and lack of upward mobility, high tution and healthcare costs for ordinary families, dominated the campaign in the U.S....