LyrArc Article Gist
US $1.5 trillion budget request for 2027 fiscal year by the president for military and defense spending is about 4.7% of US GDP forecast of $31.8 trillion in 2026. In 1960 it was 9% following the Korean War. It dropped to 3.1% of GDP by 2000 and stayed around 3.4% till the current effort to modernization of the US military is thought to require about 5% of GDP.  (World Bank charts). The US spent far higher during an earlier period reaching 14% of GDP in 1953 during the Cold War with the Soviet Union. This report shows WSJ Analysis of where the $1.5 trillion request for Defense is going-  $1.1 trillion for War Department and $350 billion for critical munitions. The munitions are in short supply and war in Iran shows that it plays a critical part in defensive systems such as intercepting of missiles as missiles in short supply affect overall capabilities. An additional $200 billion for Iran War. Pay raises for Defense personnel. $66 billion for shipbuilding- 34 ships to put the US back in the lead for shipbuilding it has lost to China, with the help of Japan which is also ramping up the shipbuilding it has lost to China. US and Japan were leading shipbuilders in the  1930's and in the 1960's, then lost it to South Korea and China. About a 12% decrease in other Department's budgets including Health and Human Services, Treasury, Commerce, Interior, Housing and Agriculture.  These cost reductions some of it coming from more efficient functioning and from concepts such as zero based budgeting where every line item in the budget gets reviewed every year for how much is needed for the purpose, is the purpose still valid, and can it be done more efficiently costing less. $660 billion is coming from the savings. The Nation's capital will also get a facelift, a major renovation, after being ignored for years. In the new Budget is $10 billion for the Presidential Capital Stewardship Program within the National Park Service for beautification projects in Washington D.C., which will give the National Capital a much needed new look for millions of visitors from the 51 states in the Union.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip says in WSJ that China turned to lender after 2010 and financed loans for development, for roads, highways and infrastructure in Asia and Africa. Between 1970 and 1990 the World Bank was extensively involved in infrastructure projects, by 1990 it retreated from this role and China after 2010 was lending at double the rate of the World Bank for it Belt and Road Initiative programs. At G20 New Delhi, India, Biden and Modi, leaders of Brazil, and South Africa, agreed on advancing the World Bank's loan capacity by $100 billion for next decade under leadership of Ajay Banga. Thjis is happening at the meeting of finance leaders in Marrakech, Morrocco in 2023. The IMF and the World Bank were set up after World War II under the agreements signed at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, as postwar finance system. The IMF was to serve as lender to countries facing short term finance crises, and the World Bank to finance development in poor countries such as India, Indonesia and after 1990 China. The largest borrowers from the World Bank were India, China and Indonesia. India is at $37 billion loans outstanding in 2021, China at about $21 billion after repaying much of its loans. By 2010 Brazil, Mexico, China and India had shifted to international capital markets for development support. Total outstanding debt of World Bank is $460 billion in 2021. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
EIA says half of the benefit of higher fuel efficiency standards for Automobiles 2010-2020 in US was lost because of SUV's and the incentivizing of SUV's in the 2006 CAFE standards have made things worse. The first SUV's came in the 1980's. By 2004 SUV's made up half of car sales and by 2025 outsold cars 2 to 1. What if we took all SUV's and large cars off the roads, or even some of these SUV's by deincentivizing of SUV's in the US CAFE corporate fuel efficiency standards? What would be the savings in crude oil and in carbon footprint? Would it be about the same as releasing an additional 400 million barrels of oil into the markets in addition to the 400 million barrels that are now released through EIA and member countries? This New Yorker essay touches on this idea. During the Iran war the volatile Middle East as a source of oil supplies is a major problem for countries. Some are rationing supplies and in one country 40 million children are not going to school for 2 weeks starting this week because of the sources of oil are so precarious, government offices will only have half of the employees, the rest working from home (almost like Covid pandemic). Many other countries face that situation. The International Energy Agency recently reported that, if “SUVs were an individual country, they would rank sixth in the world for absolute emissions in 2021, emitting over 900 million tonnes of CO2.” The agency says governments must redesign their CAFE standards and their policies so that it would reduce S.U.V. sales, tax gas guzzling vehicles. EIA cites governments in the EU doing this- “Some governments have already started introducing relevant measures, such as France and Germany, which have put a tax on large and high-emissions cars.” Within SUV's also there is an opportunity to reduce the size and make more efficient space utilization designs. Small savings also add up. One has to realize that the current freedom to use energy freely in places like the US with self sufficiency in oil comes with a sense of responsibility for using it wisely so that it can be exported to cut the trade deficit, precisely what the president is doing with India, to cut a trade deficit of $58 billion before it gets to $100 billion. Section 301 is already in place for investigations by the US of 18 countries for a new basis to use tariffs after the Supreme Court decision. A similar approach is taken with EU for hundreds of billions of reductions in trade deficit that will only strengthen the US dollar and the US economy in the long run , and be good for stock markets and jobs as it reduces oil prices and increases the manufacturing capacity/cost for the Nation. Europe, India and China can do the same. Remember that in 2010 SUV's made up 17% of total world sales, and by 2025 SUV's made up 46% of world vehicle sales. This would create another 400 million barrels for the oil markets, which would triple what was released through EIA  this week to 1.2 billion barrels and this would create 120 days of supply replacement for the 10 million b/d lost from Straits of Hormuz, and effectively end the Iran War as it would be clear that prices can be kept low even in the $50's. Essentially buying time till the SU can get more production in Venezuela and other parts of the world to replace much of the Middle Eastern oil that is ending up in a quagmire. This is the best way for the US and Europe, India, China to ensure jobs growth, economic growth with low cost crude oil in the $50 range and ensure much of the poorer countries like Egypt and Indonesia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, have access to oil at prices they can afford and eliminate poverty. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's statement calling for a list of goods for tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods leaves China without a clear response and facing new risks. The U.S. exports about $150 billion in goods to China so that China would have to impose penalties to respond at the same level. Placing restrictions on American firms on access to China's market, and imposing other penalties would have the effect of reinforcing the perception of unfair practices targeting American business and lead to hardening of U.S. response.  The U.S. sees itself as being in a better position with the U.S. economy experiencing a growth trend. China with large local government and bank debt faces a difficult situation. President Jinping's policy of reducing the risks of bad debt in the banking system involved sacrificing some growth to stabilize the system. China's GDP growth in 2017 was 6.9%, the target at 6.5%. Future targets and actual growth now look to be much lower.The trade war with the U.S. has the effect of dampening growth leading to calls for the central bank to loosen its monetary stance. In response to Trump's announcement the People's Bank of China pumped $31 billion into the nation's banks. China is studying Japan's response in the 1980's and 1990's when the U.S. took strong action against Japan's growing trade surplus. Japan responded by appreciating its currency and using stimulus to cushion the effect of lower exports on the economy. The stimulus led to the housing bubble and over time a period of low growth and stagnant economy. The large China stimulus in 2008-2009 has compounded the problems in the banking system. Not deleveraging and controlling financial risks in China's banking system because of the trade war would bring a new set of risks. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Federal Reserve's role as backup lender increased with the pandemic. The U.S. central bank lent half a trillion dollars to counterparts overseas representing most of the emergency lending at the time in 2020. It eased a dollar shortage globally, helped stop a market selloff, and continues to support global markets in 2020. The Fed is now the global source of dollar funding, which builds the role of the U.S. currency a the dominant currency. Countries that benefit from the Fed are Australia, Singapore, South Korea, Britain, Japan and European Union countries. On March 31 the Fed launched a program that let 170 central banks around the world borrow dollars against their holdings of U.S. Treasurys adding confidence.  To understand the dollar's dominant role about 88% of 6.6 trillion dollars in currency trades taking place daily involve dollars according to BIS. By end of 2019 U.S. dollar denominated debt securities and cross border loans reached about $27 trillion up from about $17 trillion in 2010. All the talk of having another reserve currency by other central banks has not happened. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
NYT's Landon Thomas gives this exceptional report on how Deutsche Bank changed from a lender to the German auto industry and safe banking practices to enter the derivatives business and other opaque financial products that led to taking on huge risks. Deutsche Bank has agreed on Dec. 22, 2016 to settle with the U.S. Justice Department paying a fine of $7.2 billion for practices relating to faulty mortgage securities. This report says the problems started in 1995 with Deutsche Bank's leadership hiring Edson Mitchell of Merrill Lynch to promote the investment banking business at Deutsche Bank. Mitchell hired two derivatives traders Broeksmit and Anshu Jain. Mr. Mitchell died in plane crash in 2000 when he was 47 years age, Mr. Broeksmit committed suicide in 2014, 58 years in age, Mr. Anshu Jain, 53 years old, is the only surviving person of the three. Under Mr. Jain Deutsche Bank assumed more and more risk, and was involved in complex and opaque financial products leading to the toxic mortgage crisis, and manipulation of the lending rate for London banks.  It also lent $300 million to Donald Trump's businesses. Most of the profits generated from this venture have evaporated, with analysts estimating $15 billion in fines and penalties owed of the $20 billion that these ventures generated. Not counting the serious damage to the bank's reputation in Germany and the U.S. This report points out the role played by the CEO from 2002 to 2012 of Deutsche Bank, Josef Ackermann, in encouraging these ventures converting the bank from its original loan as a contintental lender to business to a bank selling opaque financial products for most of its profits. Landon Thomas also describes the events and days leading up to the suicide by Broeksmit, including a visit to a psychiatrist and Broeksmit's facing enormous stress about the investigations underway in Germany and the U.S. looking into the opaque financial products and practices of Deutsche Bank. This is also a cautionary tale about what happened in banking from the late 1990's leading to the collapse in 2008, leading to the problems of today- the need to rescue the economy in 2008-2009 and the low rate world that ensued damaging the savings of ordinary people, the infrastructure that was never built, the parallel crisis of the hollowing out in manufacturing as a false prosperity boomed in banking and finance. In a sense it is also a story of everyday lives that were damaged in the high flying boardrooms of finance in New York, London and Frankfurt. The revolving door between regulators and the banks made it harder to monitor and control banking risk letting this story unfold over decades, damaging the credibility of governments and the established political parties without clear alternatives from outside; as the dominance of Wall Street executives in the new outsider Trump administration shows.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A new report, "China: 2030," by the World Bank and the Development Research Center (DRC), has major implications for the course of action taken by new Chinese leaders. The limits to China's economic model with the dominant role of state owned companies has been pointed out in the past. It has now reached a point where China must choose to move to a modified model or face the "middle income trap" of countries like Brazil and Mexico, where income levels and growth reaches a certain level and then decelerates suddenly with little warning. The report makes some major recommendations that would modify the current system. It says the state owned companies should be supervised by asset management firms focussed on commercializing these companies, and not supervised by the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC). The asset management firms would restrict the state owned companies on what areas they participate and sell off businesses to make it possible for private companies to compete. Zoellick says- "China needs to restrict the role of the state-owned companies, break up monopolies, diversify ownership and lower entry barriers to private firms." The state owned companies would be required to pay sharply higher dividends to the government which could then be used for social programs. Currently state owned companies invest in land which is sold by local governments for revenue helping fuel the real estate bubble. Significantly, the report had its origins when it was proposed by Mr. Zoellick, head of the World Bank, during a visit to Beijing in Sept 2010. It was supported by Li Keqiang, then vice premier, and now expected to be the new prime minister of China. The World Bank is widely respected by Chinese leaders because of its assistance during the early stages of reform in the 1980's. The DRC reports to China's State Council, a top governmental institution, and the No. 2 person at DRC, Liu He, is a senior advisor to the Politburo Standing Committee. He helped draft the current five year plan and is close to Li and Xi Jinping, the next president of China. The SASAC has opposed these ideas, especially any shift in its personnel selection of management at the state owned companies, which it shares with the Communist party's personnel department. Respected China economists say China faces large risks of a sudden sharp slowdown because the the state owned companies have largely copied foreign technology and have not generated enough technological advances, which will be needed for the next stage of growth. Lower growth rates could worsen problems in China's banking system leading to a crisis. The Conference Board, estimates China's growth at 8% for 2012, slowing to an average annual growth rate of 6.6% from 2013 to 2016. Barry Eichengreen of UC Berkeley, Donghyun Park of the Asian Development Bank, and Kwanho Shin of Korea University, say the annual growth rate will drop by at least 2 percentage points by 2015....

LyrArc Article Gist
Sadanand Dhume in WSJ reflects opinion in the US that is wary of handout politics that has been carried to an extreme in India's election. In Venezuela the bad turn for the oil rich economy was when Chavez's successor Maduro ignorant of the problems it would create decided to give oil at almost no cost to all Venezuelans. In India the leading opposition party offered $1 lakh rupees to every woman in the state of Uttar Pradesh. India's federal government under Modi has given free food to about 800 million people and renewed the pledge this year because of the pandemic's devastating the rural economy- about 60% of India is still rural. This is essential for India to advance to build a broad based growth model for India similar to China 1990-2010 and Japan 1890-1915 and 1950-1970 during the transformation of their economies, similar also to the US under FDR/Truman/Eisenhower/Kennedy 1940-1965.  Clean environments Swacch Bharat was essential for basic sanitation and toilets to reduce health risks, cooking gas to shift rural women from firewood and health risks, direct deposit bank accounts for 300 million rural households essential to eliminate leakages, solar energy is planned to cut energy cost  This has brought and will bring the level of income and consumption power of the lower and middle classes to create a 500 million strong consumer base for industry. It is a carefully planned effort based on the success in states such as Gujarat, and looking at the way this was done in China and the US for learning lessons. It is not a reckless effort to win votes such as the offer of 1 lakh rupees to every woman in Uttar Pradesh state with no plan for industrialization and modernization of the Indian economy to make it the third largest ahead of the EU by 2035. Dhume is right to point this out and it is apparent to any outsider who looks at Sab Ka Vikas Sab Ke Saath- prosperity for all, including all parts of society irrespective of caste and religion.  ...

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
How China is reviving memories of its struggles with Japan since 1900 and its efforts to modernize since 1950 under the leadership of the Communist Party led by Mao and Chou-en-Lai. Who were followed by 1990-2010 by a technocratic class of engineers and professionals, and now reverts back under XI Jinping -a son of one of the founders of the revolutionary armies that fought the Japanese- reverts back to its revolutionary ideologies that defined its emergence as a modern nation. Only American business interests fail to understand the China of president Xi Jinping because they like Tim Cook have not read or understood the modern history of China. In the book "Stilwell and the American Experience in China" by Tuchman, a lot of this can be experienced first hand as we see West point colonel Joe Stilwell experience China first hand since 1920's through the phase of nationalist sentiments, outright Japanese invasion, and the setbacks as North China and the Yangste Valley fall to Japan's Kwantung Army elements who run the government by 1939. Then comes the Second World War, Marshall is appointed chief of the Army by FDR in 1939 and he makes Stilwell brigadier general and responsible for China for the next 8 years. This is a China Stilwell loved and understood from daily contacts with the ordinary people of China that are on every page of this book. Jinping's father grew up in this way leading the revolutionary armies that fought the Japanese, and some of this passed on to his son even though he suffered from the Great Proleterian Cultural Revolution of the 1960's, but understood the significance of what his parent's generation had accomplished in creating modern China free of centuries of unimaginable poverty, indifference of the ruling classes, and oppression made worse by foreign powers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Waldorf was built in 1931 by Hilton Hotels founder Conrad Hilton. After a century of use it was outdated and needed major repairs. In 2014 Hilton decided to sell it and hired Blackstone advisors who said it would get about $1 billion. China had just allowed Chinese to buy foreign assets in 2014, and a Chinese founder of a regional insurance company Anbang Group offered $1.9 billion when Hilton knowing that China was keen in acquiring foreign assets priced it at $2 billion. In 2017 only three years later China decided to pull back from allowing private investments of this kind, Anbang's Wu was arrested for business practices. 2017 was the time when Xi at the 19th  Communist CCP Party Congress put forward his ideas for "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" and made it part of China's Constitution, and launched anti-corruption drive against corrupt business practices. The Waldorf was taken over in this drive by Chinese government. For 10 years China held onto the property and built 375 900 square feet condos in the Waldorf for $6 billion and 375 hotel rooms by the time it reopened in 2025. Was it worth it? Even if China could get $3.2 million for each of 375  900 square foot condos this would generate $1.1 billion. It would take 8 years to generate the remaining $900 million of the $2 billion paid for the Waldorf by Anbang's founder Wu if the Waldorf's 375 rooms were rented out for $1000 a night for 300 days. China would still be at a loss for $6 billion. This type of extravagant business investments characterized Japan in the 1980's and 1990's leading to the gradual stagnation in Japan's economy as other countries caught up in quality control and other production efficiency practices using new IT technologies. China looks to be following the Japanese example with infrastructure overbuilding. The US and EU will catch up in the next wave of investment in America and Europe by 2030 and other Asian economies such as India will also catch up with China. Investment productivity will play a part, new technologies will play a part, and a return of manufacturing to the US and EU, a build of India's manufacturing and logistics will play a part. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The head of ISRO, India's Space Agency, is an unassuming man of simple needs and simple living. He studied in the Tamil medium, doing his Bachelors in Science from Kanyakumari Hindu College. He comes from a farming family in a village of Kanyakumari.  Used to walking barefoot, wore a dhoti, and only wore slippers when he went to Engineering college. Even with modest rural means, helping his father in his fields, he got his Masters in Aeronautical Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology in Madras, pursued Aerospace Engineering at Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore, and PhD. from IIT, Bombay. He is meticulous about details, and would cancel a meeting till errors found were corrected. Behind the unassuming simple manner is a extremely diligent person who has worked in every phase of rocket design and technology for 36 years at India's Space Agency. India achieved a world record by sending 104 satellites into space with one flight of PSLV, a third generation satellite  launch vehicle with liquid stages, in February 2017- Sivan was a key scientist in this endeavor. He is in every sense a vindication of Gandhi's idea in Hind Swaraj written in a steamship coming back from London to South Africa in 1910 that India would have to go back to its own language, culture, bring opportunity to the mass of rural India, before adopting new technologies from all places. He is also a vindication of the idea that the most diligent and dedicated scientists and engineers willing to persevere over decades are the key to progress for Asia's developing nations, and similarly for a bright future in Africa and Latin America. ...

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
Its going to be very difficult to adopt the bad bank option in current circumstances, where the banks find their situation continually and rapidly deteriorating with renewed loss of public confidence and collapsing share prices. The efforts with the first TARP under Treasury Secretary Paulson to isolate the toxic assets of banks did not take off and had to be diverted to capital injections for precisely this reason. Banks in November and December 2008 went through a continually escalating problem situation, with losses, collapsing share prices and so on, and the government had no breathing room to develop the bad bank solution. In some cases decisions had to be made in a few days to prevent the collapse of some banking institution like Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley or Citicorp. At the same time its very clear that there can be no restoration of confidence in lending, and no recovery, without lending by banks, without a bad bank to separate these toxic assets from the banking system in the USA. The Swedish and American example in the 1990's of a bad bank, was possible because the banks were either gone bust, or under government ownership. With the banks in private hands, it is somewhere between difficult to impossible to value these toxic assets without serious problems. So nationalizing these banks becomes the only serious option, which would become more acceptable as the crisis unfolds in 2010, and it becomes clear that one way or another the government is guaranteeing these assets. Banks are in reality entirely dependent on the US government for capital and support, and it would not be wise to pretend otherwise. The safest and most direct option would be to mitigate the risks of nationalization, with prudent safeguards, and develop the bad bank option with the government in ownership of banks, in which case the bad bank option can proceed quickly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Wall Street Journal reporters Walker in Berlin, Forelle in Brussels, and Meichtry in Rome, reconstruct the events during critical days after the indecision and failure to reach agreement during the July summit of eurozone countries. This took the form of intervews with leading players and over 25 policy makers. What emerges are accounts of how Germany's Angela Merkel, daughter of a Lutheran pastor, and protege of Eurozone founder, former German chancellor Helmut Kohl, handled the crisis. Merkel was widely criticized in the media for indecision. What emerges is an account of a leader who took decisive action at key moments in the crisis- leading to the formation of new governments in Greece and Italy taking action to improve finances, and negotiations with banks represented by the International Finance Corporation leading to acceptance by banks of a 50% loss on loans to Greece to reduce Greece's unsustainable debt burden. Merkel also worked with the European Central Bank's departing president Frenchman Claude Trichet and new president Italian Mario Draghi to resist French president Sarkozy's efforts to have the ECB assume responsibility for the crisis through large scale buying of Italian and Spanish bonds; which was opposed by German public opinion as a backdoor way of having German taxpayers assume responsibility for European debt. Shown are three critical moments when Merkel intervened. In October 2011, after Italian prime minister Berlusconi reneged on promises to make pension and other reforms to improve Italian finances because of political resistance. He survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote by one vote. Merkel took the lead on October 20, by directly calling Italian President Georgio Napolitano on the phone, to urge him to take action for forming a new government in Italy. The result was Napolitano talking with all political parties to form a new government, leading to the formation of a government by a non-political figure respected in Italy, former EU commissioner Mario Monti. A day earlier, on October 19, French President Sarkozy met ECB president, Trichet, at an event honoring him as departing ECB president in Frankfurt's Alte Oper concert hall. Trichet, Merkel and Sarkozy met in a side room. Sarkozy asked for decisive help from the ECB for large scale buying of Italian and Spanish bonds to lower yields, which had reached 7% on Italian bonds. Trichet responded that the ECB's charter did not allow it to finance governments, with the meeting ending in a shouting match between the two leaders. On October 21, EU and IMF inspectors warned that Greece's debt was reaching unsustainable proportions and austerity measures alone would not work, unless the bondholders, the European banks, took losses of 60% on their excessive lending to Greece. At this point France agreed to the German position arguing for this level of bondholder haircuts or losses, fearing the prospect of large future bailouts that would jeopardize France's triple AAA credit rating. The July 2011 summit accord had only provided for 10% in losses for bondholders. On October 27, at a meeting that went past midnight, Merkel and Sarkozy called IIF head Charles Dallara, who headed negotiating for the banks, to EU headquarters in Brussels. Merkel handed Dallara an agreement containing the 50% bondholder loss demand, and told Dallara- "This is the last offer." Merkel was saying banks would be left with nothing if they rejected it and Greece defaulted. Dallara called bankers and the IIF accepted Merkel's agreement. The final moment that October came on October 31, when Greece's prime minister Papandreou said he would call a referendum on the bailout provisions and austerity measures demanded by the IMF, the EU and the ECB. Bond markets reacted negatively to the announcement fearing a rejection and a Greek default. The Group of 20 leaders was meeting in Cannes, France on Nov. 2, 2011. Papandreou was asked to come to Cannes for a pre-summit meeting. Here Merkel told Papandreou- "the real question" for the referendum was, "Do you want to be in the euro, or not?" Days later Papandreou, lacking support in Greece from political parties and opposition inside his party, submitted his resignation. A non-political figure respected in Greece, former ECB vice president, Lucas Papademos, was appointed prime minister to head a Unity government. Polls after the appointment showed three fourths of Greeks said that this was "a positive step for Greece," with Papandreou's party getting only 11% support and the opposition led by Samaras about 20%. The criticism leveled at Merkel is that Germany should take responsibility for debt throughout the euro area through the issuance of eurozone bonds or the ECB buying large amount of bonds of Spain and Italy. Merkel faced strong opposition inside Germany and from the Bundesbank to this idea. The other criticism was based on austerity measures worsening the finances of Greece because of a lack of growth in the economy, which is true; yet Germany may see the situation in Greece as taking a long time to be resolved in any event because of excessive and faulty financial management. For Italy and Spain putting finances in order was a necessity, and austerity measures should lead to short term sacrifice but improve prospects for the long term by returning the economies to growth. Another criticism is the installation of governments that lack popular or electoral support. As the polls in Greece showed the Unity government there has far greater support and public opinion blames the politicians for the huge mess. In Italy, Berlusconi was widely seen as losing popular support when he resigned. And in Spain Mariano Rajoy, the newly elected prime minister, was elected with a huge majority in parliament following winning in local government elections. Merkel also held her own party, the Chrisitian Democrats together at the recent Leipzig convention. Mario Draghi, was elected with German support to head the European Central Bank. He has long argued for better management of Italian finances as head of Italy's central bank. Draghi was able to support Merkel with carefully planned and managed actions. First to reduce interest rates to support economic growth in a slowing eurozone. Following this with the ECB's Long Term Financing Operation in late December 2011, to provide unlimited loans to European banks at 1% interest for three years in exchange for a broadened list of collateral deposited at the ECB. In a final twist in this drama, Charles Dallara, who was a key negotiator for the U.S. Treasury in setting up the Brady Bonds- that converted bad Latin American government debt owed to U.S. banks in the 1980's into long term debt with large reductions in principal owed and lower interest rates. This was in exchange for guaranteed repayment with 30 year U.S. zero coupon bonds. Dallara was now a negotiator for the banks to reduce the chance of the very same bondholder haircuts that he had negotiated in an earlier period to solve the Latin American debt crisis. Other players in the drama were Axel Weber, head of the Bundesbank, Germany's central bank, who resigned after strong and outspoken opposition to the ECB's large scale purchase of bonds of Greece, Italy and Spain. Jens Weidmann, his protege, who replaced him. And Jurgen Stark, German representative at the ECB, who also resigned in opposition to Germany assuming responsibility for eurozone debt. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The SEC requirement that companies disclose the ratio between median worker pay and the pay of senior executives. The SEC says it is putting out the rule as part of implementing Dodd-Frank legislation to control excessive executive pay. Companies will be allowed to survey a fraction of their workforce as appropriate for companies with global operations. Executive pay will include pension benefits and stock options under the new rule. A WSJ chart using information from the University of Southern California and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, shows the ratio between what CEO's on average make and rank and file workers make remained at about 30 times in the post war period till about 1970, a period of rapid growth in the U.S. economy. By 1980 this climbed to about 60 times and exceeded 100 times by 1990. The period of stratospheric growth for CEO pay and extreme widening of the gap then occurs between 1990 and 2000. By 2000 the dot com boom- telecom boom and the internet- creates a surge in executive pay reaching over 500 times. This drops to about 280 times in 2008 and picks up again to reach about 320 times in 2011. Many of the poor business practices, the excessive leveraging and risktaking in the financial industry, take place against this background of excessive pay for senior executives. Some of that risk was passed on to others through such methods as securitization in the period leading to the 2008 financial crisis, so that executives were compensated with higher pay for taking excessive risk that they personally or their companies did not assume. Dodd-Frank legislation following the 2008 financial crisis sought to correct this imbalance by having pay information disclosed. The excessive pay has also coincided with an increase in the frequency of boom-bust cycles in the economy. The busts prompted the needs for intervention by the U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, to drop interest rates more than would otherwise have happened during this decade, culminating in the huge bond purchases and monetary easing by the Bernanke Fed. The SEC under Mary Jo White is mindful of these distortions in the economy as a result of misallocation of resources based on excessive executive pay, and the need to take action before the next crisis. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's biggest bank Deutsche Bank is described here in WSJ as one of the banking industry's biggest basket cases, having suffered legal investigations, management turnover and legal fines over many years. This time the German government is working on merging the bank with Commerzbank AG in a last effort to straighten out the huge mess and losses at the bank, says WSJ. A former JP Morgan manager, Mr. Zames, 48 years old, who joined the bank at the time of the London whale scandal is now working for Cerberus Capital which is acting in a multilayered relationship with Deutsche Bank  as adviser to management as well as having complex financial dealings with Deutsche Bank. In the process says WSJ he would be rescuing a soured bet on Deutsche Bank by Cerberus which owns 3% of Deutsche Bank as well as 5% fo Commerzbank. The investment made in 2017 was shown as $1.1 billion but is worth half that today. The arrangement is unusual for Deutsche Bank and shows how far the bank has changed from its early years as Germany's leading bank. It was founded in 1870 and in 1998 acquired Bankers Trust for a presence on Wall Street. This turned out to be a bad investment as $4 billion premium paid for Bankers Trust was later written off. Deutsche Bank never really recovered from these moves into Wall Street banking. The SDP in the German coalition government sees the merger with Commerzbank as one more move to get out of the mess, though no one really knows considering the complex dealings of the bank and its problems with legal authorites in Germany. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
China's vice premier, Li Keqiang, wil visit Spain Jan 4-6, 2011. In an editorial page article for El Pais, Li wrote that China will continue to purchase Spain's public debt in the future. China is a large buyer of Spain's sovereign debt, owning about 10% of the total foreign holdings. Spain's central government will need to raise 170 billion euros in 2011, and its regional governments an additional 30 billion euros. Natixis expects 824 billion of eurozone government bonds to be auctioned in 2011. For China the eurozone is its largest market and it is concerned abou the impact of a eurozone crisis on imports from China. A declining euro would make Chinese exports less competitive and costlier in European markets. And China is wary of the impact on its export industries at a time when its economy is trying to make a soft landing, and strains are showing with an asset bubble in real estate, too much bank lending and high inflation.

LyrArc Article Gist
Baer describes the role played by Jeb Bush at Lehman, the sensitive moments when Lehman was near collapse and Lehman executives suggested Dick Fuld, the CEO, should talk to his brother George W Bush, the U.S. president. According to Baer this call was never made because of the odd position it would place the two brothers in. Jeb Bush made a trip to Mexico City to meet Carlos Slim, a telecom billionaire, seeking investment prior to Lehman's collapse. Bush was paid $1.3 million annually for his work at Lehman, and after Lehman was acquired by Barclay's bank $2 million annually. Bush worked under Steve Lessing, a key fund raiser for his brother George W. Bush, at Lehman and Barclay's. The work involved talking to clients including healthcare companies Cigna, insurance company MetLife, and other clients. About half of Bush's time was spent working at the bank as an adviser, not an employee. The only other candidate for president in 2016 who worked at Wall Street, Ohio governor John Kasich, also worked at Lehman from 2001 to 2008. Kasich was reportedly paid $182,000 and a bonus of $432,000 as managing director at the investment banking division, less than Jeb Bush but working full time. When Jeb Bush graduated from the University of Texas in 1974 he worked at Texas Commerce Bank, founded by James Baker III, a close friend of his father George H.W. Bush. He worked there from 1974 to 1980, in the international division looking at country risks in Latin America. Both Jeb Bush and Kasich face the prospect of facing difficult questions about their time at Lehman Brothers, because of the 2008 financial crisis and aggressive leveraged expansion at the bank leading to its collapse....

LyrArc Article Gist
Most Americans pay less in taxes, including state, local and federal taxes, today than in 1980 in inflation adjusted dollars. The taxes have gone down by 2-3% for incomes in the range of $50,000 to $150,000, and gone down by 3-4% for incomes between $150,000 and $350,000. Taxes have gone down over 7% for incomes above $350,000. The main reason is the decline in federal income taxes.Tax rates increased in the period to 1990 and declined from 1990 to 2010. The Democratic party and president Obama are pushing for increase in taxes for incomes above $250,000. Republicans are resisting the changes citing disincentives to investment and growth for small business which generates a large proportion of new jobs created in the U.S. economy. The New York Times study shows the percent of the U.S. population that makes between $200,000 and $350,000 almost doubling in the period 1980-2010 and at the same time its share of the U.S. income remaining the same - many small business owners who hire employees would fall into this income category. Republican's response is for tax reforms that reduce loopholes, deductions and other tax expeditures that disproportionately help the wealthy. Democrats say this cannot create enough revenues to address the deficit, when mortgage deductions, charitable deductions are excluded. The back and forth is leading to stalemate but also opening up discussion for the first time on whether the mortgage and charitable deductions make sense in today's environment. A significant portion of revenues lost in the mortgage deduction goes to affluent households, subsidizing larger borrowings to build larger homes than otherwise, according to the Brookings Institution. Politicians have resisted changes that would go against powerful lobyying groups in the past, yet the impasse has opened up new thinking outside the box because of the pressing need to come up with a solution....

LyrArc Article Gist
It is not commonly realized how much of an economic collapse Russia suffered as a result of Mr. Gorbachev's failure to plan a smooth transition out of communism- a 40% drop in  drop in GDP, a peak of 2000% increase in inflation, and drop in life expectancy from 69 years to 65. With lack of safeguards in place for vulnerable sectors such as the elderly and displaced workers, no setup for securing the rule of law, no periods of experimentation with market economy in parts of the country as China had done. Krugman says it was worse than the Great Depression in the US in the 1930's, a particularly traumatic period Americans remember, because the collapse was deeper, and the rogue elements took over parts of the economy leading to a breakdown of the rule of law. One hears too much about the fall of the Berlin Wall, great for West Germany and less about the trauma this was for elderly and vulnerable workers in  East Germany, and for Russia as a whole. Here Paul Krugman describes what happened and how this brought to power another group under Putin. For Putin and many Russians these are the memories that lead them to say it was the "greatest catastrophe" of the twentieth century. Krugman has put this in graphs showing the economic data from multiple sources, including the World Bank and US Bureau of Economic Analysis. The graphs show the Great Depression in the US was about loss of 27% of GDP, inflation was not severe and FDR ensured both rule of law and hope with his election to tackle the problems, including America's vast resources. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A major shift in public opinion happened between 1990 in the public's perception and tolerance of gay people and gay marraige. Support for gay marraige in Journal/NBC News polling shows young people, especially people 18-34 year old, were leading the way. In this group support for gay marraigne increased from 47% in 2009 to 57% in 2012, going up to 74% in March 2015. The increase is also shown in suburban residents, political independents, Midwesterners and Hispanics. A key factor in the change is that many people now know of one person in their work or personal lives who is gay. Technology, television and internet media also helped changed attitudes. In 1990 7 of 8 Americans said sexual relations between the same sex were wrong. In 2004 only 3 of ten Americans supported same sex marraige. A vote in Maine shows the dramatic shift- in 2009 same sex marraige was rejected by 53%, in 2012 53% approved it. The change in attitudes is faster than happened for miscegenation, which took 30 years after the Supreme Court ruled against anti-miscegenation laws to reach a point where a majority of Americans approved marraiges between black and white people. The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision on June 25, 2015, now makes gay marraige legal in all 50 states, and strikes down bans in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Yet there are a significant number of Americans who do not favor same sex marraige especially in southern states such as Texas, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama. A Pew Research Center poll shows 73% of white evangelical Protestants do not approve of same sex marraige. Other groups who do not favor same sex marraige in the Pew polling are conservatives and persons born before the post World War baby boom. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Fisher and Taub in NYT give a brief history of Venezuelan politics and government since the 1950's to help readers understand today's economic and political crisis under president Maduro. How did a country with huge oil resources end up with depleted cash reserves to the point of creating shortages of basic goods on supermarket shelves, how did inflation reach over 700%, and how did the economy contract by over 10%, by some estimates close to 20%, in 2016? Venezuela's story is a reminder that populist movements do not hold the answer to political or economic problems, as they create corruption of their own as new groups of people try to perpetuate themselves in power, and new economic problems as they try to win favor with their own support base. Also through economic mismanagement worsened by economic changes such as oil prices or some other adverse development in the global economy. Internal divisions means the capacity of the country to respond is weakened. Brazil has shown the problems of corruption with new political groups and the weakening of government finances. Venezuela is the extreme example of how a lot can go wrong over time after the initial response to a new populist group is positive as it was in Venezuela in 1998, even with advantage of rich natural resources. Change that fragments a country and polarizes a country instead of pulling together the country's human talent around a program that all groups agree to support, is a signal of future problems. The rule of law is an essential component not just of democracy, but of economic development and progress of any country. These are the lessons of Venezuela for today. Economic crises in the eighties led to loss of public confidence in the two main political parties which alternated in power since the founding of democracy in 1958. In 1998 a military officer named Chavez won the election on the platform of returning power to the people and reducing corruption. Chavez reforms initially were popular. Popular protests in 2002 led to the military briefly taking power before returning power back to Chavez. This led to Chavez moving further towards consolidating power leading to a polarization of society. The oil company workers who went on strike were fired replaced by Chavez supporters and oil funds were diverted to popular programs. In the process Chavez isolated Venezuela from the world economy, leading to lack of foreign investment, and Venezuela falling behind other countries in Latin America, even though it had large oil resources. To retain control of the streets this report shows Chavez helped organize the colectivos or local supporters organized as vigilante groups, which has led to further polarization. Corruption in the military and with the colectivos has led to power being fragmented between different groups. The oil companies fund reserves were depleted by corruption depriving Venezuela of an essential cushion as oil prices dropped. Chavez died of health problems with Maduro winning the election in April 2013 by 50.6% of the vote. The parliamentary elections led to the opposition parties winning by a landslide in December 2015. The current problems with daily street protests stems from the economic crisis, with inflation as high as 700% and shortages of basic goods, the economy declining by over 10% in 2016. The uncontrolled printing of money has fueled rampant inflation.The efforts by president Maduro to nullify the powers of Congress in an effort to control the country and override Congress, has worsened the discontent with the government.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
With so much coverage of other aspects of China,  to really understand China and Xi Jinping one has to understand the rural urban situation in China. Xi's long experience as a teenager in the cultural revolution of Mao was in rural areas, the 8 years he spent there till the age of 22, as this report by James Areddy with help of Yijun, Cheng and Qi aptly shows. It traces the shift and mass migration to cities starting with Deng's modernization drive in 1979. This shift of labor to city and town factories as the U.S. and Europe shifted factories and production to China is the story of our times. How it has both helped and hurt China and how it has become the dominant issue of our times, and a lesson for India in the middle of its own modernization and shift of labor to cities. It has helped China modernize with the shift during 1979 to 2016 and run into a road block with president Trump leading a movement in the U.S. of people most hurt by the outsourcing of factories and production to China. It was not meant to be this way. Yet the shift also led to ripping up the fabric of communities and towns with loss of factories across America over three decades. Because China is a large country the impact was huge decade after decade, leading to a backlash against lost jobs in the U.S. and in Europe.  Xi Jinping has romantic view of rural China as he spent 7 years in Shanxi province rural areas during the cultural revolution under Mao. During this period he toiled as part of farm labor alongside villagers which allowed him to get to know villagers and farmers in the countryside well, and formed his view of the world around him. As it is described in a description of the man in Chinese sources- "He arrived at the village as a slightly lost teenager and left as a 22 year old man determined to do something for the people."  China's system separated migrants from city dwellers not  giving same rights to better education, to schools and housing, and official documents separating the two, city dwellers and migrant populations from rural areas. As a result as China modernized and population shifted -shown here in excellent graphic charts over four decades- in 1979 from about 80% in rural areas and 20% in urban the shift goes to 50-50 by 2001. Today it is 40-60 with 60% in rural areas but a population of 40% suffering from severe inequalities and  low incomes. So that GDP per capita of $10,000 for China is deceiving. The real incomes in average disposable income is about $4300 in urban and $1700 in rural area, according to National Bureau of Statistics. High school education is hard enough to get in rural areas, medical care is very basic and the $1700 would hardly get a room in low income housing in a large town in China, says premier Li Keqiang. Keqiang did his masters thesis on urbanization and has studied this shift from his college days. Just as in Gandhi's India, Mao's China is the story of the villages, with 128,000 villages for 600 million people in Mr. Xi Jinping's anti-poverty drive. Hong Kong other issues have to be understood in the context of these concerns of China's leadership today- the sense that strong central leadership alone can keep the country together and bring a decent life to the people in the villages and in the countryside outside the cities.  Modernization of cities still set in the context of China's vast rural population and essential to its full uplift and progress. Xi has allocated $80 billion each year to bring roads, schools, medical facilities, and other amenities including electricity and modern heating. The idea now is to shift people back to the villages, find opportunities for jobs and livelihoods in farming, tourism with guesthouse facilities, and other occupations in the villages. The villages are being turned into attractive places to live one by one in this party drive and providing new enthusiasm and support for the party's efforts. India can learn from this experience in China. The western nations of the U.S. and Europe can no longer and will no longer undertake the wholesale shift of factories with loss of jobs to China or India to offer the prospect of bringing these countries to the kind of urbanization and overall prosperity of small nations like Japan and South Korea, which are a tiny fraction of the population of China and India+ Pakistan + Bangladesh. As a result China is changing strategy now with a return to some aspects of the informal economy in Chengdu with street peddlers and tiny retail, and return of migrants back to better built and improved villages in the countryside. A better life than in cities is possible this view says for people from these rural areas, if the rural areas are given modern facilities and construction and resources are allocated, job creation locally tackled. The villages can offer better air quality, better quality of life where villagers who earlier migrated to cities with ownership of land, when they are modernized with better roads and have better facilities for education, housing and healthcare, better amenities. The new approach is to strike a good balance for urbanization, by modernizing and investing in villages and small towns, so that cities can cope and overall life can be better than with mass migration and wholesale urbanization. It is also a balance that works well for the U.S. and Europe which can redirect manufacturing to their home regions as part of a better distributed and balanced supply chain than the one that was unwittingly built over the last three decades.    ...