After the 2008 international financial crisis, the Obama administration launched a "reindustrialization" strategy; After 2017, Trump continued this vision and launched "Reindustrialization 2.0". Both have policy goals to redevelop U.S. manufacturing, and both support greater infrastructure investment. During the Obama and Trump years, the reasons for the poor results of US "reindustrialization" were complex and controversial. On the one hand, the "deindustrialization" of developed economies is regarded as an objective law of economic development; On the other hand, the cost disadvantage of the US manufacturing industry, the lack of consistency of industrial policy, the economic structure problems represented by the excessive prosperity of the financial industry, and the "Triffin problem" brought about by the US dollar as an international reserve have further increased the difficulty of reviving the US manufacturing industry. Domestic demand for goods is limited 1 Since the 980s, the phenomenon of "deindustrialization" in the United States has coincided with the continuous decline in the proportion of commodity consumption in the consumption of American residents. After the subprime mortgage crisis, the proportion of commercial goods consumption in the United States continued to maintain a downward trend, of which the proportion of durable goods consumption fell more significantly, from an average of 2 003.2006% in 1-2 Decreased to an average of 92-010 2019.1% in 0. The decline in consumer demand for goods is basically consistent with the decline in the proportion of manufacturing added value to GDP and the proportion of manufacturing employment. Although the "reindustrialization" strategy of the United States has made every effort to encourage investment, it is difficult to fundamentally break the bottleneck of commodity consumption growth, which naturally limits the space for manufacturing investment and employment growth. In fact, declining demand in manufacturing is a common problem in advanced economies and is sometimes considered a "normal" phenomenon that conforms to economic laws. The IMF article Deindustrialization: Causes and Effects (1997) argues that global "deindustrialization" since the1s Not a characteristic of the failure of the development of the manufacturing industry, but a natural consequence of the successful development of the economy; The reason is that the income of residents has increasedAnd actively increase the proportion of non-commodity consumption, and the progress of production technology has led to a relative decline in manufacturing employment demand1。 A 2 study by the Journal of Economic Theory noted that it was based on observations from 012 major economies around the world, the proportion of manufacturing added value to GDP in various countries has an "inverted U-shaped" relationship with the per capita GDP level, suggesting that when a country's economy develops toHigher leveltime人们对制造品的需求可能相对下降，对服务消费的需求相对上升2。 The Cato Institute's 2 report sharply pointed out that the loss of manufacturing jobs occurs not only in the United States, but also in other developed economies, and the manufacturing industry in the national economy Decline is a normal phenomenon of economic development, and the success or failure of US manufacturing policy should not be crudely judged on this basis3。 International competition intensifies In global comparisons, the U.S. manufacturing cost disadvantage remains prominent. KPMG 2021 Global Manufacturing Cost SurveyDisplay, based on 2012-2019 data, U.S. manufacturing "primary costs" (including labor, government rent, hydropower, taxes, interest rates, etc.) is competitive at 1 Ranked 7th from the bottom of the 4 surveyed economies, not only significantlyLagging behind developing economies such as China and Malaysia, not as well as Canada, South Korea and most European countries, only better than Japan, Brazil and Switzerland, The cost disadvantage is obvious. Among them, the high labor cost in the United States is the most significant disadvantage4。 The rise of China's comprehensive manufacturing strength has undoubtedly increased the difficulty of reviving the manufacturing industry in the United States. From 2 to 010, the added value of China's manufacturing industry accounted for 2019 in the world 1.8% rose sharply to 2.27%, while the share of the US, EU and Japan all fell over the same period, far behind China. More importantly, China's manufacturing industry has continued to move towards mid-to-high-end during this period, and competition with the United States and Europe has intensified. After 3, China's high-tech and equipment manufacturing industry acceleratedDevelopment, electronic equipment, automobiles and other manufacturing industries are particularly prominent. The Brookings Institution 2 article argues that the "fourth industrial revolution battle" is underway between China and the United StatesChina has a large investment in research and development compared to the United StatesExcellent industrial policy, occupying the central position of the global supply chain, and paying more attention to technical standards5。 In addition, the Brookings Institution article2 states, the United StatesOne possible cause of industrial policy failure is a neglect of firm heterogeneity6。 Although the US "reindustrialization" strategy contains rich preferential policies, it may not be enough to reverse the paving of some "industry leaders"7. Take Apple's outsourcing strategy, for example, 2017-2020 During the year, despite Trump's strong encouragement of manufacturing reshoring, Apple suppliers among U.S. companies increased from 2to 016 The number of companies shrank from 78 to 49 The share also fell by 2 percentage points to 8%. Industrial policy "cliff" First, Obama-era government spending has failed to sustain high levels or weaken the effects of industrial policy. As mentioned earlier, Obama's industrial policy is centered on fiscal spending and subsidies. But in 2-010, US government spending was a percentage of real GDP The proportion is declining. 2019 2-009 Obama periodU.S. government spending as a percentage of GDP rose from a peak of 2016to 2.1% , gradually falling to less than 9%; During the Trump period of18-2 Further decline to an average of 0172019.1%. After the subprime mortgage crisis, Obama's "reindustrialization" policy included an element of economic relief, so it was implemented relatively smoothly; However, when the US economy recovers, fiscal stimulus has to recede, and the space for industrial policy is more constrained; After the 7 midterm elections, Republicans took control of the Senate, making it harder for the "lame president" to make a difference. Second, the rotation of political parties undermines the coherence of industrial policy. There are clear differences between the sub-sectors supported by Obama and Trump, which means that the policy has failed to consistently and steadily support the deep cultivation of related manufacturing industries. For example, Obama supports the development of the auto industry, heavily subsidizing the two largest U.S. auto companies, and investing in the auto industry 2Significant increase in the period 010-2014; But there were no more relevant policies under Trump, and related investment shrank with it. For example, Obama issued the Clean Energy Plan to support the development of new energy, and to a certain extent, restricted the development of the chemical industry through strict environmental protection policies; After Trump took office, he vetoed the Clean Energy Plan and vigorously supported the development of traditional energy, and investment in the chemical industry rebounded significantly. Third, Trump's "anti-globalization" policy may do more harm than good to the development of the manufacturing industry. In terms of results, the US manufacturing trade inverse during the Trump period from2 to 017The difference has accelerated. The negative impact of Trump's policies on the US manufacturing industry comes from many aspects: first, Trump's trade protection has been countered by other countries, and the export costs of American manufacturers have also been forced to rise; Second, trade barriers have increased the cost of importing raw materials and intermediate goods for some manufacturers; Third, the tax policy on overseas profits under the Trump era encouraged "outsourcing" rather than "returning"8。 Taking the pharmaceutical industry as an example, the new tax policy encourages pharmaceutical companies to increase investment in overseas tangible assets to increase the tax exemption base, which in turn leads to more "outflows" of manufacturing. The data shows that since the implementation of the tax reform policy (TCJA) in 2018, the import of the US pharmaceutical manufacturing industry has risenSignificantly faster than exports, trade deficit widening. Financial overdevelopment The U.S. financial boom could erode the manufacturing space. BIS's working paper in 2 states that 015 regions around the world have been past 2 The data of the year shows that the financial industry has a crowding out effect on the real economy. Its model analysis believes that on the one hand, because the financial industry tends to support projects with more pledged assets (high proportion of tangible assets) but lower productivity, on the other hand, because the financial industry may beAttract high-skilled labor outflows from R&D-intensive industries0. After the subprime mortgage crisis, under the ultra-loose monetary policy in the United States, the sharp decline in interest rates has created a good development environment for the financial services industry. The added value of the financial, insurance, real estate and leasing industries in the United States rose from an average of 30.9% of GDP from 2 to 003 20061-9 average 92.010%. However, the prosperity of the US financial industry does not seem to bring prosperity to the real economy, but is more likely to crowd out the development space of the manufacturing industry. For example, although the US government wants to increase the talent pool of high-end manufacturing, manufacturing companies are naturally at a disadvantage in the war for talent due to the higher salaries in the financial industry. From 2019 to 2, the US financial industry further outpaced the manufacturing industry, and as of 0, the average salary in the financial industry was higher than that of the manufacturing industry42%。 Another problem brought about by the financial market boom is short-sightedness in investment. According to the Fall 2 report by U.S. Affairs, U.S. listed companies are too focused on maximizing short-term capital returns, leading to chronic underinvestment: In 022-2009, S&P 2018 companies distributed 500% of their net profits to shareholders in the form of share buybacks or dividends. This means that there is a limited amount of money available for R&D, equipment investment and process optimization91. The data shows that the capital expenditure of U.S. listed companies in early 10 was twice the total amount of buybacks and dividends, but before and after the subprime mortgage crisis, listed companiesThe share of capital expenditure has declined significantly. After Trump's tax cuts in2, companies tended to spend their after-tax profits more on share buybacks and dividends than on increased capital spending11。 The dollar index appreciates After the subprime mortgage crisis, the dollar showed a strong trend as the US economy successfully recovered. Between 2010 and 2019, the dollar index appreciated by about 20%. The Obama administration supports a "strong dollar" and hopes that the international community will regain confidence in the dollar; Although the Trump administration supports a "weak dollar" to defend the competitiveness of US commodity exports, the US economy is growing well and the Fed is in a rate hike cycle (2016-2018 year), the dollar index continues to find support. In addition, the European economy was more affected by the European debt crisis from 2 to 010The recovery is slow, while the Japanese economy is still mired in long-term deflation, and the monetary policy in Europe and Japan is more accommodative, further contributing to the strengthening of the US dollar. The appreciation of the U.S. dollar has had a negative impact on U.S. manufacturing exports. Historically, when the U.S. dollar's real effective exchange rate (REER, a measure of the value of a currency relative to a trading partner) rises, U.S. net exports tend to accelerate declines and weigh on real GDP. While a stronger dollar implies an increase in domestic purchasing power, the negative impact on manufacturing from a decline in export competitiveness is more pronounced. According to the New York Fed report (2015), if the US dollar exchange rate is within a quarterA 10% appreciation would result in a 2.6% decline in actual exports for the full year thereafter, but import costs would not be significantly reduced (due to higher adjustments by foreign exporters). product prices), which may eventually reduce the pull of net exports to US GDP by 0.5 percentage points; Moreover, the negative shock of the dollar's appreciation could last for several years12。

On Monday, executives from a number of U.S. energy giants, including Occidental Petroleum, Chevron and Continental Energy, spoke out. Many companies have also chosen not to increase production when oil prices are close to $100, saying that the incoherent energy policy in the United States has hindered oil production. Some giants echoed JPMorgan's recent oil price super-cycle of $150, saying that if the US government does not act, oil prices will rise to this level. Occupied Petroleum: Oil prices will not increase production by nearly 100 Despite the recent move towards $90 and $100, Fillard, Buffett's heavily invested Occupied Petroleum Company, said it would keep oil production stable. Occidental CEO Vicki Hollub said Monday that "in a market where there is no balance in sight, we will not significantly increase oil production." Production will only be increased when we see the market balanced. Even so, oil production will increase at a moderate rate. ” Hollub noted that oil producers have learned from past mistakes and will be careful not to inject large amounts of crude into the market just because oil prices are rising. "There is more discipline here. How to do better and avoid oversupply in the market. ” Hollub also said she has seen no evidence of a need being compromised. Even if oil does break above $100 a barrel, she doesn't expect it to remain high long enough to hurt demand. On the other hand, she does not expect that even if the economy falls into recession, demand will not fall too much, so that oil prices will not fall too much. Chevron: U.S. energy policy has hampered oil production On the same day, Chevron CEO Mike Wirth said that the incoherent energy policy in the United States has hindered oil production. "I've heard people say that our production has returned to record levels. However, with better policies, we will go beyond that. ” Wirth believes that energy policy needs to balance environmental concerns with affordability and reliability, and remain stable. "We do need more coherent, predictable and durable policies to support the largest sectors of our economy and the largest single lever on which we continue to be globally competitive." Continental Energy: There is no plan to increase production, if the US government  does not act, oil prices will rise to $150 On Monday, billionaire Harold Hamm said oil prices would rise toward $150 a barrel if the U.S. government did nothing and did nothing to encourage exploration. Hamm controls Continental Resources, the largest shale producer in North Dakota's Bakken Basin, the second-largest shale oil region in the United States. Hamm called for an end to the "roller coaster" of volatility in U.S. energy policy, noting that the back-and-forth swing of U.S. energy policy has led to rising costs under different administrations. Continental Energy CEO Doug Lawler echoed Hamm's sentiments. He said crude oil production in the Permian Basin will one day peak, as is the case with shale areas such as the Bakken region of North Dakota and Eagle Ford in Texas. If there is no new production, people will see oil prices of $120-150. "It's going to have a shock over the whole system. Without policies to encourage new drilling, we will see greater pressure on crude oil prices. ” Lawler said that even if oil prices break the $100 mark, Continental Energy has no plans to significantly increase production. "Our investments are very cautious and in line with our cash flow. Investing and producing as much crude oil as possible is not how we create the most value. Lawler's statement is similar to that of Occidental Petroleum. JPMorgan calls crude oil "supercycle return" Recently, JPMorgan Chase shouted the "return of the super cycle" of crude oil, predicting that oil prices will soar to $150 and there will be multiple energy crises in the next decade. In the short or medium term, oil prices could rise to $150/b, about 60% higher than the current price of crude oil, and the global oil gap is expected to widen to 2030.710 million b/d by . J.P. Morgan's crude oil market judgment is quite accurate: it has been bearish on oil prices from 2013 to 2019, followed by the launch of the "overdue cycle" series of reports in 2020, and has been on the sidelines this year.

Foreign selling of Japanese stocks hit a record high in more than four years as the Topix hit a multi-decade high, while local investors' increasingly cool attitude towards Japanese stocks pushed the Topix down last week. Last Friday, Japan's Topix closed down 0.3% at 2376.27 points, with a cumulative decline of 2.18% for the week.   Data from the Japanese Ministry of Finance showed that foreign investors sold a net 1.58 trillion yen (about 10.7 billion U.S. dollars) of Japanese stocks last week, almost double the previous week and setting a record since March 2019. Ikuo Mitsui, a fund manager at Japanese brokerage Aizawa Securities Co., said " investors who bought Japanese stocks from the beginning are taking profits" due to concerns about higher interest rates . "Globally, risk-weighted assets are trending slightly lower." Meanwhile, data released by the Bank of Japan last month showed that Japanese households put an average of only 11% of their savings into stocks and 54% into cash and bank deposits. This figure lags far behind that of the United States, where households put 39% of their funds into the market and only 13% in cash and bank deposits, according to the Federal Reserve. Instead of buying Japanese stocks, why not buy US stocks? In contrast to local investors, many investment tycoons are optimistic about Japan. Buffett said he increased investment in Japan's five largest trading companies during his visit to Japan in April. Top investor Ken Griffin is preparing to reopen offices in Tokyo for his hedge fund, Citadel and investment banks, and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have issued optimistic outlooks on the Japanese stock market. The stock god effect has exerted its power, and Japanese stocks have continued to rebound this year and have reached their highest level in 33 years. But even so, the long-term returns of Japanese stocks instantly pale in comparison to those of U.S. stocks. The Nikkei closed at 32,402 points on Friday , still 17% below the record set in 1989. For comparison, the S&P 500 has risen more than 12-fold during this period. This has led many investors to look to foreign markets instead of concentrating their bets on Japan. " The Nikkei may hit 40,000 points, but God knows when , " said Heihachiro "Hutch" Okamoto, foreign equity adviser at Japanese financial group MONEX . "Most investors in Japan prefer U.S. stocks." According to Okamoto, the most popular stocks traded on Monex day are neither Japanese stock indexes such as Topix or Nikkei, nor Japanese giants such as Sony, nor even the top five trading companies invested by Buffett, but US stock companies, such as Nvidia, Tesla, Apple and Amazon, as well as funds tracking the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100. Moreover, these investors are just one of the companies initially interested in investing. In the past few years, Japanese retail investors have become famous for entering the foreign exchange market, but the overall trading atmosphere in Japan has not been high. "Most people here think investing is very risky," said Hidekazu Ishida, special adviser at Tokyo-based international financial institution FinCity.Tokyo, which works with the government and financial industry to try to promote investment in Tokyo. He added that being involved in the financial industry comes across as kakkowarui, which means too uncool. Even some corporate leaders are lukewarm to the idea of encouraging more individual investors to buy Japanese stocks. drinks giant Suntory, said: "I am neutral on that." Investing in stocks is risky, he said. Given the severity of the previous economic downturn, many Japanese remain wary of participating in the market. "I think maybe raising rates would be better for people," he said.

At a time when oil prices are soaring, Russia is promoting "ignition" again. What will be the impact of the diesel ban? Saudi Arabia and Russia jointly cut production, which has tightened global crude oil supply. Oil prices have risen for three consecutive weeks, with Brent oil once exceeding US$95 per barrel. Overnight, Russia issued a ban on the export of diesel and gasoline , which will take effect from September 21 with no deadline, exacerbating the tight supply and demand situation. The Russian ban threatens to disrupt fuel supplies ahead of winter, but how deep the impact will be depends on how long the decision lasts, media reported on Friday . Some analysts believe that although the ban is indefinite, it is not expected to last for a long time and Russian refineries have limited storage capacity. The ban has pushed oil prices higher, and in northwestern Europe, the premium for benchmark diesel futures over crude, known as the ICE Gasoil crack spread, jumped on the ban, briefly exceeding $37 a barrel and hitting a five-day high. . In addition, the price of fuel futures for delivery in October has also increased, approaching US$36 per ton, the highest price in three days, and the crude oil market is currently in a spot premium. Impact geometry? The key is the duration of the ban Russia has exported more than 1 million barrels of diesel per day so far this year, making it the world's largest seaborne exporter. That's a huge supply gap for the market, roughly enough to meet Germany's entire demand. The reduction in supply, and the subsequent rise in prices, concerns more than just oil traders and truckers. Diesel fuel is also used in ships and trains, as well as in agriculture, manufacturing and construction. There is no fuel more important to the global economy than diesel. Eugene Lindell, director of refined products at consulting firm FGE, noted: The key is duration, with Russian refineries likely to have to shut down again in a month due to limited storage capacity. Analysts note that digesting all this fuel domestically could be a challenge for Russia. Some of this can be stored, and many refineries are undergoing maintenance work that will also help alleviate the situation. But at some point, the country will have to resume exports or cut refinery output. Koen Wessels, a petroleum products analyst at consulting firm Energy Aspects, also believes: Although the ban is indefinite, it is not expected to last long. Diesel supply drops 'gradually' after ban takes effect Before Russia announced its export ban, global diesel supplies were already under severe pressure, with OPEC+ crude production cuts and demand for other refined oils combining to curb refinery output. As for which regions the diesel ban will have a greater impact on, analysis pointed out that Russia’s diesel exports by sea were previously mainly shipped to European countries, but sanctions have disrupted global trade flows, and diesel shipments to Turkey have recently surged. Other recent cargo destinations include Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Tunisia. However, this does not necessarily mean that these countries will bear the full brunt of Russian supply cuts. The diesel market is global, and if there is an unexpected shortage in Turkey or Brazil, for example, cargoes from non-Russian suppliers may be shipped there. It is worth mentioning that the ban will take effect on September 21, but this is not an immediate and hard ban. Under the decree, fuel cargoes that have been accepted for shipment by Russian Railways or that hold sea loading documents can still be exported. This suggests that diesel supplies will only gradually decline during the shipment of these cargoes. In addition, the decree provides exemptions for a small amount of exports, including exports to some trading allies, as well as intergovernmental agreements, humanitarian assistance and transshipment supplies. Analysts believe that when the ban is finally lifted, Russian supply is also likely to rebound at an alarming rate as exporters look to unload stored products.

As North America's traditional consumption season - Thanksgiving and Christmas-related holiday consumption season approaches, Amazon, the world's largest e-commerce company, said on Tuesday, September 9, that it will hire 19,25 employees this holiday shopping season and raise the average salary of logistics personnel from $19 an hour to about $20.5 an hour to cope with labor shortages. The company said in a blog post Tuesday that the hiring will include full-time, part-time and seasonal workers, with hourly rates ranging from $17 to $28 depending on location. Some new hires will be eligible for a signing bonus of $1000,3000 . Amazon typically increases hiring in the fall to ensure there are enough employees for the holiday shopping season, starting with salary increases and staffing plans. Amazon said last year it would hire 15,2019 people. In 20, the company committed to hiring  seasonal employees. This means that Amazon's hiring this holiday shopping season has exceeded pre-pandemic levels. Amazon is the second-largest private employer in the United States, after Walmart. As of the end of June this year, the company employed 6.146 million people worldwide. Most of these people work in the company's huge logistics department, mainly in warehouses where items are stored and packaged. In recent years, as labor tensions have intensified, Amazon has gradually increased the average starting salary of frontline employees. Warehouse and delivery workers have taken steps to organize themselves in multiple facilities to confront management, while lawmakers and labor groups have criticized frequent injuries to their warehouse workers. In the face of rising inflation, especially the sharp rise in gasoline prices, some market analysts worry that Amazon's increase in workers' hourly wages may further aggravate inflation. U.S. CPI year-on-year growth rebounded to 8.7% in August from 3.2% in July, the second consecutive month-on-year rebound and beating expectations of 3.7%. The month-on-month CPI growth also accelerated to 3.6% in August from 8.7% in July, in line with expectations and the largest month-on-month increase in 0 months. Among them, gasoline prices increased by 2.0% month-on-month, which became an important driver. Despite rising U.S. inflation, one statistic showed that the price of online goods in the U.S. fell 8.3% year-on-year in August, marking the 2th consecutive month of decline and the biggest drop since April 12. In terms of classification, the prices of computers, electronic products, home appliances and other categories fell the most year-on-year, and even some categories fell by double digits; But grocery prices rebounded. However, online shopping only accounts for about 2020% of U.S. spending.

Recently, U.S. oil prices have been rising, causing the market to have new concerns about rising inflation. In addition to the tight relationship between supply and demand, are there other factors behind this? On Tuesday, September 19, some media quoted people familiar with the matter as saying that Atlantic Trading and Marketing, the trading arm of France's Total Oil, was raising the price of the U.S. physical crude oil market. The price of West Texas Intermediate crude for delivery in Cushing, Oklahoma, has jumped to its highest premium since November, while futures prices have surged above $90 a barrel. Overseas buyers must pay an additional $1 to $2 per barrel to ship crude oil to the Gulf Coast for export, and Total is one oil company willing to pay that fee. At current price levels, U.S. crude is quickly becoming too expensive for buyers elsewhere who rely on U.S. crude as a last resort to fill a global oil shortage caused by OPEC+ production cuts. While this may result in more oil remaining in the United States, there are concerns that higher prices for U.S.-produced crude will inevitably lead to higher gasoline and fuel costs in the U.S. and elsewhere, potentially exacerbating rising inflation.  Some analysts believe that Total's willingness to pay the extra fee actually reflects that high refining profits are driving competition for U.S. oil at a time when global crude oil supply has tightened significantly. Even as refineries enter seasonal maintenance, U.S. refining profits remain at a record high of around $30 per barrel. And, as Russian crude prices rise, the Asia-Pacific region is increasingly importing crude oil from the United States. However, the light and heavy crude oil produced in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico is not suitable to replace the heavy crude oil produced by Saudi Arabia and Russia. Futures prices have soared even as physical demand for crude oil has increased, in part because hedge funds have piled into crude oil futures as prices have risen. On Tuesday, the most recent contract for WTI traded $1.33 higher than the next month's contract, while the spread later hit $1.71. Those premiums are the largest in months and indicate scarce supply at the futures delivery point in Cushing, Oklahoma. Inventories at Cushing have gradually declined over the past three months to less than 25 million barrels, the lowest level since December. Further depletion could threaten Cushing operations - if inventories fall below 21 million barrels, tank pressure weakens and oil extraction becomes more difficult. Some analysts believe that drastic changes in oil prices are one of the biggest challenges facing the Federal Reserve. Fed policymakers are focused on core inflation, which excludes volatile categories such as food and energy, while rising oil prices will push up prices of durable goods, hurting the economy and making it difficult for the Fed to meet market expectations of three interest rate cuts next year.

On Monday, September 9, some 18,12700 members of the United Auto Workers (UAW) in the U.S. auto industry went on another day of strike, with the UAW threatening to expand strikes against Detroit automakers. Four days after UAW workers went on strike at three U.S. factories, the labor situation remains highly tense. The union and Jeep maker Strandis have been fighting each other over the company's proposal to close 18 U.S. plants. Strantis has submitted a new contract proposal to the UAW. The plan could reduce the number of parts and distribution facilities the company has in the United States, but the automaker said its intention is not to cut jobs. The automaker also offered to repurpose a now-unused assembly plant in Illinois. The factory that makes the Jeep Cherokee closed in February, leading to indefinite layoffs for 2,1350 people, some of whom already work elsewhere in the company. The plans could affect thousands of UAW members, downsize the automaker in North America and create a new "modernized" parts and distribution network, the sources said. Strantis described Monday's talks with UAW leaders as "constructive, with a focus on where we can find common ground": We will continue to listen to the UAW to determine where we can work together and will continue to bargain in good faith until an agreement is reached. We look forward to getting everyone back to work as soon as possible. UAW Chairman Shawn Fain criticized the company's handling of the proposal, saying Stellantis was using workers at its Bellevuedale, Illinois, plant as bargaining chips. Although the company said Monday it was committed to finding a solution for the facility, it was unclear whether the proposal was still under discussion. On Monday morning, Fain reiterated that the UAW was willing to call more strikes without fear that negotiations would drag on longer. If these companies "don't respect the demands of our workers, then we will escalate our actions," he said. Discussions over wages were at the center of negotiations between labor and management, with companies negotiating parallel contracts with the UAW for a new four-year contract for 146000,<> auto workers. The companies have made proposals for a pay rise of about 20 percent over four years, while the UAW has been demanding a wage increase to about 30 percent. The UAW also wants to incorporate cost-of-living adjustments into its base salary, while automakers offer one-time payments to combat inflation. Wells Fargo analysts estimate that the proposals would add about $7 million to $12.30 billion to each company over the four-year duration of the contract. Based on the union's demand for a 17 percent raise, plus cost-of-living adjustments, those costs would amount to $24billion to $billion. Some workers expressed concern that if their factories closed down due to the knock-on effects of strikes at other factories, they would struggle to get financial support. A union official confirmed Monday that, just like striking workers, dismissed non-strike workers will receive $500 weekly wage support. Frustration at Detroit automakers peaked late last week after the UAW strike began. Auto industry executives said they were disappointed by the union's strike decision, with some saying they were proposing the biggest pay increase ever. The UAW said there was some progress in discussions with Ford over the weekend, saying it had a "fairly productive conversation" with the company. Ford said: Committed to making an agreement with UAW that rewards our workers and allows Ford to invest in the future.

At 0:00 EDT on Friday, September 15, labor agreement negotiations between the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the three major auto giants failed, and a general strike in the US auto industry that spread to multiple states began. After the midnight deadline for new contracts passed, Ford Motor Co.'s plant in Michigan that builds the Bronco SUV, General Motors Co.'s plant in Missouri that assembles the Chevrolet Colorado pickup truck and one in Strantis, Ohio, that builds the Jeep Wrangler workers in the factory went on strike. According to statistics, these three factories account for 9% of North American automobile production. The UAW said the strike, which started at a few plants rather than a full-scale strike, was intended to methodically reduce vehicle production that can bring profits to these car companies while minimizing the impact on the UAW strike fund. The UAW said it would add strike locations based on the progress of negotiations. On Friday afternoon, UAW President Shawn Fain said in a statement: Over the past six weeks of negotiations, the automakers have chosen not to get down to business. Today we are gathering with our members. Tomorrow, we are expected to be at the negotiating table. As the three major auto giants continue to jack up prices for American consumers, rip off American taxpayers, and shortchange American workers, we will continue to fight for justice for the working class. Biden attempts to mediate labor-management negotiations After talks with labor and management on Thursday, U.S. President Biden said on Friday that he would send two government officials, the acting labor secretary and the White House adviser, to Detroit to try to mediate between the two parties to promote an agreement. Biden said U.S. auto companies were not sharing record profits fairly with union members but hoped they could "reach a win-win deal": These companies have already made some significant offers, but I believe they should go further to ensure that record corporate profits mean the UAW gets record contracts. Thanks to the extraordinary skill and sacrifice of their workers, car companies have achieved record profits over the past few years. In my opinion, these record profits are not being shared equitably with workers. Biden said: No one wants the UAW to go on strike. The UAW and the automakers are still working hard to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement, and I appreciate that. I hope that all parties can return to the negotiating table and reach an agreement. The strike puts Biden in a dilemma over whether to support unions or support clean energy policies. He calls himself "the most pro-union president in American history," but the UAW's demands are in part a response to his electric vehicle policy, which the union says will cost jobs. Senator Sanders, a representative of the radical wing of the Democratic Party, supported the strike on Friday. He criticized the high salaries of the CEOs of the three major automakers: It's time to end your greed! It’s time to treat your employees with the respect and dignity they deserve and it’s time to sit down and negotiate a fair contract! Let us unite to end corporate greed, let us unite to rebuild the disappearing middle class, and let us create an economy that works for everyone, not just the top one percent. The three major automakers consider the strike "unnecessary" and "extremely disappointing" GM CEO Mary Barra expressed her displeasure with the strike, saying the company's latest offer to the union was the best in its 115-year history: I am extremely disappointed and frustrated, this was an unnecessary strike. GM is offering a 20% pay increase over four years, a cost-of-living allowance and subsidies for existing pensioners. Barra also said that GM will build electric vehicle power units in existing factories to ensure that workers find jobs in the electric vehicle era: As we make this transition, we have jobs for all of our employees. We have a plan to bring all employees together through the transformation. Barra said the UAW strike "had no need to happen" and that she has been directly involved in negotiations. She said the company is ready to continue operating during the shutdown. General Motors said that 2,000 workers at the Fairfax Assembly Plant in Kansas City were idle due to the "ripple effect" of a strike at the Wentzwille Assembly Plant in Missouri. Strantis said it was "extremely disappointed" that UAW leadership refused to engage in negotiations. The company stated: We immediately placed the company in emergency mode and will take all appropriate structural decisions to protect our North American operations. Ford said the union had taken "little to no action" on the initial demands, which it warned would give non-union rivals Tesla Inc and Toyota Motor Corp an extra boost. On Friday afternoon, Ford announced that it would temporarily lay off about 600 workers at a Michigan assembly plant where the UAW is on strike. Ford said the temporary layoffs were mainly due to the strike disrupting the production chain. Workers who are temporarily laid off cannot apply for unemployment benefits. In addition, Ford expects to have to temporarily lay off more workers if the strike continues. The general strike has officially begun, and the market reaction is calm. What is the union planning? On Friday, Ford Motor fell slightly, General Motors rose nearly 1%, and Strantis rose more than 2%, outperforming the U.S. stock market. Market analysts believe that the market's lukewarm response to the strike at the three major automakers reflects the uncertainty about how long the strike will last and to what extent the scope of the strike will expand. Some analysts believe that although the start of the general strike was more restrained than some expected, it sent a signal to Detroit Motor Company that if negotiations drag on, actions may escalate. Regarding the selection of striking factories in the early stages of the strike, some analysts believe that this action may be more damaging. Some analysts expressed surprise that the UAW did not target the more profitable full-size pickup truck factory or the key parts factory. These two factories may cause a greater blow. The UAW said the longer the negotiations go on, the more factories it plans to target, launching a series of sporadic strikes with little notice aimed at disrupting auto companies' production plans. Some media reports believe that in addition to large car companies, once a strike occurs, auto parts suppliers will also be implicated, especially some small suppliers, who may lack the financial resources to deal with a strike, even a short strike. American consulting firm Anderson Economics estimates that if the strike lasts for 10 days, it will cause US$5 billion in economic losses to the United States. It is also worth noting that for consumers, as the strike continues, the inventory of relevant brands of cars will decrease, and consumers may turn to other brands. The National Association of Manufacturers said in a statement: Small and medium-sized manufacturers across the country will feel the brunt of this shutdown, whether or not they have union members.

A series of optimistic data overnight rekindled hopes for a soft landing, pushing the three major indexes of U.S. stocks higher. However, potential risks are brewing, and investors will celebrate the largest option expiry date in September in history on Friday, the Four Witches Day. Driven by the growth in index and ETF options, this "Four Witch Day" will be the largest September option expiration date ever. According to Goldman Sachs derivatives strategist John Marshall, more than $9.3 trillion in options derivatives will expire on Friday, including $4 billion in single stock options. The "Four Witch Day" of the financial market is the quarterly centralized maturity date of financial derivatives of US stocks, which occurs on the third Friday of March, June, September and December every year, on which stock index futures, stock index options, individual stock futures and individual stock options expire at the same time. The last trading hour of the day is known as the "Quadruple Witching Hour", during which investors rush to close their positions, often resulting in a sharp increase in trading volume and increased market volatility. As a result, the "Four Witch Day" is usually accompanied by short-term large fluctuations in stock and derivatives prices. Marshall observed that given the continued volatility in U.S. equities over the past few weeks, a significant portion of open interest options are exercised close to current spot levels, which will give the green light to wild volatility in the broader market, with the 500,4500 mark of the S&P 4000 being dangerous. Given the popularity of bullish and put spread trading, interest in open positions at 5000 and <> strike prices is also high. It is worth mentioning that the size of options expiring on Friday is the sixth largest on record and the largest September option on record. Against the backdrop of low volatility in recent weeks, the number of high open interest is staggering, and once more than $3 trillion of options expire, be careful. In addition, another big risk is that zero-day expiring options (0DTE) continue to dominate options trading, and although its market share growth has slowed, according to Goldman Sachs, the share of 0DTE options trading in S&P trading continues to grow, flat at 40% over the past year and now at 49%. Wall Street News introduced 0DTE options earlier this year, which have less than 24 hours left to expire, so it can reap huge returns in just a few hours. But it brings both the possibility of high returns and huge risks, and the risk of selling it is like "picking up coins in front of a roller". The problem with 0DTE is that it is very volatile, which means that a small movement in the S&P 500 can cause the value of these options to fluctuate wildly – from valueless to sky-high in a matter of minutes. Goldman Sachs noted that index options and ETF options drove options volume growth, with single stock option volumes remaining stable over the past year and zero-date rights growth driving overall growth. For now, the zero-date options market remains balanced, with put and call options each accounting for 50% of trading volume. In fact, zero-date options tend to trade in small lots, with more than 17% of zero-date options trading 1 lot, while 1 lot is only 10% in longer-date option trades.

On Wednesday, September 9, former US Treasury Secretary Summers, known as the "high-inflation whistleblower", said not to be overly optimistic about the prospects of the US calming inflation without triggering a recession, and reiterated that the Fed may need to raise interest rates further. According to Summers: The window for achieving a soft landing is very narrow ... There is currently no indication that the current U.S. economy is a "2% inflation economy." Summers sees three possibilities: a soft landing, a no-landing where inflation cannot fall below 3%, and a hard landing, in which the Fed's cumulative rate hikes hit the economy. He said the probability of all three scenarios is one in three. Summers also said: People need to be very careful when declaring victory in the fight against inflation – very cautious about certain assets, especially US stocks. U.S. stock pricing right now may be a bit too perfect. He also said the Fed's reliance on data to set policy was the right thing to do. According to Summers: For now, I expect inflation to rebound slightly, and the Fed will need to raise rates again, and of course they may have to raise rates multiple times. Summers also warned against thinking that inflation is falling and the Fed will automatically start cutting interest rates. On Wednesday, data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that the US CPI rebounded to 8.7% year-on-year in August from 3.2% in July, the second consecutive monthly year-on-year rebound, beating expectations of 3.7%. The month-on-month CPI growth also accelerated to 3.6% in August from 8.7% in July, in line with expectations and the largest month-on-month increase in 0 months. Among them, gasoline prices increased by 2.0% month-on-month, which became an important driver. Summers is a whistleblower on high inflation in the United States, and he was one of the first well-known economists to expect inflation in the country to not be transitory. His views are highly concerned by the market. Monetary policy does not automatically enter restrictive territory as inflation slows At present, there is a view in the market that if prices rise slowly, because the Fed has raised interest rates a lot, this actually means that even if the Fed keeps interest rates unchanged, monetary policy will automatically tighten in reality as inflation growth declines, real interest rates will be higher, and interest rates will automatically "move towards a restrictive range." Summers called that claim "too flippant." Summers said that at present, service sector inflation is the main problem. He said a slowdown in price growth "wouldn't actually have much of a contractionary effect on spending." Summers said: Therefore, I think the argument that monetary policy automatically moves towards a restrictive range is a bit overdone. Summers said he hoped the Fed would not "overly imply that interest rates will fall next year" in its latest forecast next week to send the wrong signal to the market. Earlier this month, Summers said he still thought the road to a soft landing was tough, but now he has taken a step towards that goal. Going forward, it is important to monitor the potential pressure on wages from labor activity. At the time, Summers said of the auto industry's collective bargaining that automakers were doing well and many workers were not being treated as they were getting along, and it was understandable that unions were very aggressive. Unlike last year's railroad industry, the federal government's influence on the auto industry is now limited. In the event of a strike, this is something that needs everyone's attention in the coming month from the perspective of inflationary pressures.