World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Italy's prime minister, Mario Monti, in an interview with Britain's Guardian newspaper, June 22, 2012, says the detailed blueprint for action will not come out of the meetings in Rome of European leaders at the end of June. But he added: "there will be some strong elements and a short road, I hope, short, a few months, to get from there to the overall project." Separately Christine Lagarde, head of the IMF, said after meeting European financial leaders in Luxembourg: "A determined and forceful move towards complete European monetary union should be reaffirmed in order to restore faith. At the moment, the viability of the European monetary system is questioned." Monti is a former senior EU official, and Christine Lagarde was France's finance minister under president Sarkozy. The difference now compared to meetings in 2010, is the changes in France, Italy, and Spain, and at the IMF, with new leaders Hollande in France, Monti in Italy, and Rajoy in Spain, and Lagarde at the IMF, and a new context in that the austerity policies by themselves are seen as failing to produce the desired results. A further change in the dynamic is the win by Social Democrats in regional elections in Germany and Hollande opening a dialogue with the German Social Democrats. The dialogue with Merkel has been enhanced by appointing seasoned EU officials in key positions in the Hollande administration in anticipation of a tighter fiscal union in the EU....

Ratings Cut for Giant Banks

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Moody's Ratings company downgraded banks in the U.S. and Europe on June 21, 2012. Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup were downgraded two notches. Morgan Stanley managed to stave off a three notch downgrade. Credit Suisse was downgraded three notches. Bank of America was down one notch, and Wells Fargo which has only a small trading operation was not reviewed. This is the first time since 2007 that Moody's has conducted a sweeping downgrade of banks. About 100 banks were reviewed by Moody's. Banks being downgraded have large trading operations or investment banking business that is subject to higher risks. Greg Bauer, a managing director of global banking at Moody's said in his statement: All of the banks affected by today's actions have significant exposure to the volatility and risk of outsized losses inherent to capital-markets activities." For Moody's the main issue was that the capital bases of banks are maintained, considering that government support is less likely than before, according to Mr. Wassenberg, Moody's managing director for European banks. The impact on banks will be fewer opportunities for trading revenues for some banks, and will raise borrowing costs for banks. Moody's also cut the ratings of large European banks with significant trading operations. This includes Deutsche Bank, Barclays, HSBC, RBS, BNP Paribas, Credit Agricole, Societe Generale, UBS, and Royal Bank of Canada....
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the New York Times is strongly critical of former president Barack Obama for accepting $400,000 in speaking fees from Wall Street for a single speech. It says the news is causing people to question the ideas and words presented by Obama in his books about the dangers of losing sight of the interests of ordinary people. It gives the impression says the NYT, that Obama is cashing in like everybody else, and that his talk was empty. The editorial says the millions raised by Hillary Clinton led to her defeat in the election. Obama is reported to plan a foundation with the work of training a new generation of political leaders. This NYT editorial says it would be better to stay true to vision and purpose, to walk the talk for president Obama, especially now that a recent poll shows two thirds of voters, including about half of Democrats say that the Democratic Party is out of touch with the interests of the American People. By associating this closely with wealthy donors leading Democrats contributed to this. During a period when some of the remarkable achievements of the last fifty years such as the European Union are being called into question, when ordinary working people, young people and older people are struggling, this is all the more a tone deaf approach by politicians. The idea of helping train a new generation of political leaders through a foundation sounds bizarre in this context, and seems to suggest politicians believe there is always a solution through marketing their audacity and money.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. President Obama's 2013 State of the Union address focussed on the problems facing the U.S. middle class, calling it "our generation's task" to tackle this problem. Economic changes have changed the patterns of economic growth and jobs, growth, income growth, that prevailed from the end of the Second World War to about 1989. But he offered few solutions beyond increasing the minimum wage to $9.00 from $7.25 to reduce poverty.
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Kessler point to fears of a decline in real estate values, as the reason behind the Fed's $600 billion easing decision in 2010. He sees the Fed's move as not being effective in moving stock market value. And he says, the bad loans on the books of the banks pose a new crisis. The only solution he says is tackling the issue head-on by taking these bad loans off the books of the banks and recapitalizing the banks. This includes firing management and starting with a fresh slate.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As the Obama administration plans a large stimulus spending plan that may approach $1 trillion over several years, considering also the second phase of the $800 billion first phase stimulus, there is a concern that there may be wasteful spending and social costs of borrowing and spending by the government of such proportions. In economics jargon this hinges on whether there is amultiplier effect of spending, higher if its efficiently and well spent with less impact on private consumption and investment, and lower if the opposite were true. The assumption behind amultiplier of 1.0 for an additional bridge or road is that resources like manpower and capital that would be otherwise idle are deployed to produce something useful. An increase in one unit of government purchases increases by one unit the real gross domestic product. The government has effectively created the additional bridge or road without a cut in anybody's consumption or a businesses investment. The other contrasting approaches are to say there is a multiplier of zero, meaning there is a social cost in two ways. One the reduction of consumption and the crowding out of businesses investing in new products and technologies for example, and second in the inefficent use of resources if a government bureaucracy is put to work allocating money and the additional dangers of favoritism and corruption. To say that there is a multipier of 1.5 would mean that the government figures out a way to get private investment through conversion of plants for automotive parts say to make wind turbine blades by giving incentives, tax benefits and grants, spends on a dilapidated road and public transportation infrastructure that may provide benefits in increased growth capacity over future years. The limits of a government bureaucracy and inefficiency of government would in this case be addressed by transparency rules adopted and measures that track progress that are freely available to all citizens say on a website on the internet, and by bringing in fresh management talent from the private sector. There appears to be no generalization that can be applied for one multiplier for all projects. It may be that the multiplier will vary with the project. Some projects like the conversion of a factory making unneeded auto parts to a badly needed wind energy part, to change the dynamics of energy market pricing, to meet energy needs and cut emissions, may end up having a multiplier much above 1.0. A redundant or less needed bridge has a lower multiplier than a bridge rebuilt before it leads to breakdown. And also the complication that too large a movement in one direction say of stimulus spending, might result in a shift of the curve towards a smaller multiplier and diminishing returns, as the resources to track such a large expenditure and the talent to adminster are overextended. The social cost of private investment not making that investment in new technology, new product or improved product has to be figured into all this, both at the conceptual level as all costs and benefits may not be picked up in the analysis, and at the macro level keeping in mind that the animal spirits, as they were once described, may just not be there to absorb the huge outlays which a government can make. These do not come without an opportunity cost and borrowing costs. All this leads one to to conclude that spending has to be carefully evaluated and projects assessed on a case by case basis for costs and benefits. The spending has to be balanced to provide just as many incentives for private investment to invest in new products and technologies. One way the Obama team is attempting to address this is to include a $300 billion tax cut for businesses and individuals. The business tax cuts are aimed at helping small business with losses, and for future investments and making hires and forgoing layoffs. The other part relates to careful evaluation of spending projects and transparency so the people can see if they are effective. See the link to this....
The New York Times Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
German perceptions of Mikhail Gorbachev are shown here in DW.com. He is revered in Germany because of Gorbachev's efforts to end Soviet rule in East German state called the GDR, leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Gorbachev supported German reunification but did not do this is in a way that ensured that ordinary Russians and citizens of the GDR could make the transition to democratic processes in a smooth way. He also failed to grasp that economic transition could be difficult and would require extensive aid and grants from the west, and that safeguards and protections for retired pensioners and vulnerable sections of society needed to be in place. The following is a reflection of the background in political government and economy of the events in Europe leading to the war in Ukraine.  As a result Gorbachev's instincts were right by first 1956 as a student, and then 1979 as government official about the need for democratic processes to realize the real potential of Russia, just as has happened in many countries that lacked these processes for change in government- Japan, Germany, South Korea, India, Brazil and many countries in Asia and Latin America. But not realizing that these countries made the transition with considerable American and British assistance. Even where there was no direct assistance indirectly the British setup the first limited Swaraj or free rule in India, with elections and elected assemblies in Indian states in the 1930's, following the pattern in Dominion states Australia and Canada. Mohandas Gandhi negotiated within these processes for rights of South African Indians and Colored people, gaining experience, including study of British law.  A son of poor farmers in the agricultural region of North Caucasus, in Stavropol, it is relevant today that his maternal grand parents were from Chernihiv in Ukraine. He came to power in 1980 after entering the Politburo that year. These were the waning years of Leonid Brezhnev, president of the Soviet Union who followed Nikita Khrushchev (1953- 1964). Khrushchev was from eastern Ukrainian region near Donetsk. Leonid Brezhnev was a protege of Krushchev since 1931, from Kamianske, Ukraine.   Gorbachev was influenced by Khrushchev's speech that denounced Stalin in 1956 in favor of a freer and more open society. Khrushchev, became first secretary of the Communist party in 1953 after the death of Stalin and set the pace of post war Soviet society from 1950 to 1964. He removed the fear of the dictatorship of the proleteriat working class, increasingly dictatorial under Lenin, and blatantly arbitrary under his successor to make Soviet Union a freer society.  Yet his tendency to make decisions on his own without consulting others, and the failure of agriculture in the Soviet Union including food shortages led to his replacement by his protege Brezhnev. Brezhnev's whole career was built under Krushchev in Ukraine, in the army in Ukraine, and as a political leader in the Soviet 18th Army that entered Prague in 1945 defeating the Nazis. Why is this relevant? Gorbachev was educated at Moscow State University when the Soviet Union was in the Sputnik era, and felt at the time that it could reach the 1950's standard of living in the US- very different from the earlier leaders. Yet he may have been too much of an optimist and not hands on in understanding the working of a modern economy as large as Russia and the interests of different groups of society that had to be be balanced and protected. His understanding of the US and of how the US and British economies had evolved was limited or nonexistent. The isolation of the Soviet period may have compounded this. The Russian state in the Soviet Union could not simply unwind the power of the state and its intervention and everything would come out right of its own accord.   Leonid Brezhnev, the Ukrainian Russian who succeeded Krushchev from 1964 to 1979 let the system of Soviet rule remain as it was, in the Great Stagnation, leading to lethargy, lack of innovation, and a weak economy with military expansion. Gorbachev tried to regenerate the system by opening it up, but failed to see that there was a risk that it could come apart quickly as it did in just 4 years after he became president in 1985. Only the centralized power of the state had kept the Russian state together from the Tsarist period through the Communist period. The risks of this Gorbachev failed to grasp. What if it happened too quickly without a safety net for the people who could not make the transition. What lawlessness and failure of the rule of law could happen. The US and Britain had evolved their democracies over centuries. Wars were fought in the US and Britain over rights and responsibilities of kings and parliaments. In the US Lincoln fought the civil war not just for emancipation but to ensure safeguards for free white men on the farms so that Labor did not get disabilities placed on them by Capital (entrenched forces of Capital of which the southern plantation economy was only one aspect.)  Japan and Germany were set up as democratic states through American power and constitutional frameworks with Marshall Plans or agreement to take in unlimited imports from Japan. This bad scenario happened in Russia because Gorbachev failed to set the conditions first and work patiently to achieve them including introducing limited  elections and parliamentary processes first in Russia.  Leaders such as Yeltsin who succeeded Gorbachev in 1989, winning the elections that followed, failed to provide a safety net for the vulnerable in the 1980's. Unemployment increased rapidly, life expectancy dropped in Russia, and the economy failed in the early years after 1980. A Marshall Plan like that offered to Germany could have helped but Gorbachev's failure may have been his failure to provide this transition by arranging for West Germany and the US to support a planned transition, a kind of Marshall Plan of Aid, and maintaining a gradual move to democracy as the country was given time to learn institutions of American and British parliamentary democracy. No such Marshall Plan was negotiated for a smooth transition over inevitable obstacles, no safeguards were put in place for illegal efforts to control the state by rogue elements and to seize assets of state companies, no efforts to first introduce limited elections and parliamentary processes for learning democratic process in Russia, and the people of Russia were left with a memory of the this period as a bad lawless period from 1989 to 2005.  Leading to the situation today under Putin of aspiring to the Soviet period as a kind of period that had offered Russia the world recognition it had lost. And this had happened even though the Russian economy had recovered and the standard of living had risen under Putin. Putin's career spanned the period as a Russian official in Dresden, Germany Democratic Republic or Soviet period East Germany to working in the St Petersburg City Council under Yeltsin. He personally witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the German Democratic Republic from Dresden and Gorbachev's refusal to build a transition period for the changes so that it would not be traumatic for the GDR. Even after reunification these traumas remain in some segments of the older population in East Germany that saw themselves as neglected and support extreme right wing parties in eastern German states by 2020- considering the Soviet period as one in which their lives were less neglected.  After three terms as president Putin with his own traumas from that period in Dresden, and with a mother lost in the period after the Nazi invasion of Russia, a father who survived the Battle of Stalingrad, saw the period of lawless behaviour in the collapse of the Soviet Union as the"greatest geopolitical disaster of the century."  Putin and people around him made missteps and miscalculations launching a war in Ukraine, leading to the situation today- jeopardizing hard won gains for the Russian economy. By 2022 Russian standards of living had risen and the economy was in the best shape it had been in the modern period since the Industrial Revolution. Yet largely exposed because of the dependence on oil and gas during a period of climate change and focus on building future economies free of fossil fuels.  Putin in his own peculiar logic may have seen this as the only opportunity in 2022 before deliinking from fossil fuel reduced the importance of the Russian fuel dependent economy to make some territorial readjusments in Ukraine with a quick war taking Kviv. That turned into a massive miscalculation with the emergence of nationalist fervor in western Ukraine spreading to the whole country of 40 million people. In the future to 2030 with phasing out of the fossil fuel economy, Russia without the connections to the US and European Union's technology and resources it had during Putin's three terms, and facing strict sanctions from US and EU, faces a difficult future. This has cautionary lessons for all countries- the US that read too much into the fall of the Berlin wall and indulged in a losing proposition with free markets that damaged its infrastructure and manufacturing with shifts to China, China understanding of how it to was dependent on the world economy for its future development, India that had to navigate a difficult period and what lessons to draw for building a bigger economy, the EU realizing the failure of its policies of depending on Russia for energy and China for manufacturing with fragile supply chains,  and Russia that there were twists and turns and the need for safeguards and experience building democratic processes before these processes would work for the economy, its people and for Russia as a nation. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The view that the war in Afghanistan should move forward as acounter insurgency effort like this one, does not see the partner in the Karzai government or the Afghan dislike of foreign troops on their soil as factors to be addressed seriously. It also does not address the difficult mountainous terrain in the country. It also does not look for alternative solutions that could be worked out with Pakistan for addressing the presence of AlQuaeda terrorist group in the border regions.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Failure of U.S. regulatory agencies to implement an important provision of the Dodd-Frank legislation- instructing regulators to find all references to ratings agencies in their rules, and then replace them with better standards for judging credit risk. Treasury's Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, is one of the agencies trying to gut this reform, says this Wall Steet Journal editorial. The S.E.C. voted unanimously in March and April to propose rules eliminating credit agencies in their regulations on money funds and stock brokerages. As the comment periods have ended, the Journal calls for the rules to be immediately made final. Officials from FDIC and OCC are dragging their feet on this. One problem they face is their assumption that the Dodd-Frank law requires them to come up with the perfect rule for measuring credit risk. This is not what the change is intended to do. It is enough says the Journal to return the responsibility for the right metrics and the hard work of analyzing a security back to where it belongs- to people who manage these assets and institutional managers. Even if they made some mistakes it would be far less than the systemic risk posed by having all major institutions making the same mistake at the same time and the entire system following flawed ratings by the big three credit ratings agencies. This happened in the 2008 mortgage securities financial crisis. S&P has stated that it does not support the old system. And new alternatives are appearing for ratings- CreditSights, Rapid Ratings, Kroll Bond Ratings which got S.E.C.' support, and other alternatives still to come....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Philipp Rosler, head of the FDP party and Germany's Economy minister, says he opposes further involvement by German taxpayers or the ECB in the debt restructuring for Greece. He pointed out that the current negotiations between Greece and the bondholders (mostly French and German banks) were about private sector involvement. Tax payers of Germany and other European countries are already making a contribution he said. The IMF is pushing for the ECB to take a haircut or writedown on the $40 billion of Greek bonds it holds to supplement the haircut taken by bondholders of over 50%. Rosler said in an interview with the Journal that Athens should keep its side of the bargain by implementing reforms and not letting them just be on paper. On Germany or the EU directly taking responsibility over the Greek budget, Rosler said this should be the responsibility of the Greek parliament. At the same time he pointed out that its important to have a specific and rigorous montiroing process just to be fair to taxpayers in the EU....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
During the Greek debt crisis in 2011 the ECB bought Greek bonds at a discount to face value to support the price of Greek bonds. It did so under the agreement that the bonds would be worth the full amount. Now as part of the negotiations between Greece and private bondholders (mostly French and German banks) about how much losses private bondholders will take- to make Greek debt serviceable as its economy shrinks and tax revenues decline- the ECB says it will take $11 billion in losses on these bonds as its contribution. The ECB will do this on the condition that Greece comes up with an agreement with private bondholders that makes debt serviceable. This could mean increasing private bondholder losses to 70%. from 50%. The central banks of EU countries hold $12 billion of Greek bonds. The ECB says this will not apply to these bonds. Negotiations are also underway between the EU and Greece for a 20% reduction in Greece's minimum wage and an additional 3 billion euros in government spending cuts, and pension cuts for retirees. The EU is asking for a written committment from the Greek government and from Antonio Samaras of the New Democracy party to the austerity program, as the measures are highly unpopular in Greece and are leading to continued street protests in Athens. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Reich of the Clinton administration responds to a question by Charlie Rose, about Obama's failure to have a narrative of governing that connects the dots. Reich says Obama got caught up in tactical judgements and failed to grasp the larger strategic narrative. He sees Obama as having supported Wall Street and business as much or more than any previous administration, but is not perceived as pro-business.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Lawyers Buchheit and and Gulati help Greece design a legal agreement that writes in a new collective action clause. The collective action clause ensures a 95% participation for the bond restructuring deal Greece is doing in March 2012 to cut its debt to sustainable levels. A similiar deal could be designed for Portugal says Mitu Gulati, a law professor at Duke University. Because Greece's bonds are written under Greek law, writing in a new collective action clause is a legal mechanism for achieving a meaningful debt reduction and bond restructuring deal- this is something Gulati and Buchheit figured out because of their expertise in this field. A joint paper by Buchheit and Gulati in 2010, first explored the way in which private bondholders of Greek bonds who reject a bond debt restructuring could be forced to accept the same losses as other investors who accepted the deal. They are now advisors to the government of Greece. In early 2011 there was serious discussion that the Brady Bonds debt restructuring for Latin American debt of Argentina, Mexico and Brazil of the 1980's, under which private investors traded in their old bonds for new bonds with longer duration at reduced interest rates and lower value- reflecting voluntary losses accepted by bondholders- was the approach needed for Greece, Portugal, Ireland and other eurozone countries. Then U.S. Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady took the lead- in Landon Thomas Jr., NYT, 11/30/2010. Bondholders held out throughout this period, with Charles Dallara, one of the architects of the Brady bonds restructuring, hired by European banks to negotiate on their behalf. It was only when German Chancellor Merkel delivered an ultimatum by telling Dallara "this is the last offer," during a late night meeting on Oct. 27, 2011, at EU headquarters in Brussels, was an agreement reached on serious debt reduction- in Walker, Forelle, Meichtry, WSJ, 12/30/2011. The long delay meant a worsening crisis in Greece and the rest of the eurozone. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
European Union leaders including European Council president, Herman Van Rompuy, European Commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso, ECB president Mario Draghi, and Eurogroup finance ministers head, Jean-Claude Juncker, draw up a 10 year road map for "a genuine economic and monetary union." The prime ministers of Italy, France and Spain push jointly for deposit insurance to cover European bank deposits, Europe wide banking supervision, and bailout funds to directly purchase sovereign debt of Italy and Spain without conditions. This takes place June 22-27, 2012, with the EU leaders increasing pressure on Germany for the first time in concerted fashion. Ms. Merkel and her coalition partners the Free Democrats see this as an effort at mutualizing debt. Merkel says Europe will not have total sharing of debt "as long as I live," in her talks with Free Democrats.

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us