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.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Fred Hiatt of The Washington Post asks the question what would have happened if U.S. president Harry Truman had sounded the retreat for war weary Americans following the Second World War- as Greece floundered, during the Berlin Blockade 1948-1949 when Truman ordered airlifts to Berlin which totaled 200,000 in one year from the U.S. and allies, as South Korea was invaded by the Communist North in 1949 when Truman responded with the landing at Inchon. He cites an intervew with president Obama in the Atlantic magazine of Jeffrey Goldberg, where Obama's views after hours of conversations are summarized as being- that the Middle East cannot be fixed during the Obama years in office, and not for a generation, so that it would be better to simply do nationbuilding in the U.S. He points to Trump's interview with the Washington Post about pursuing a similiar policy because the U.S. is much poorer today than it was in the past. Hiatt says the U.S. GDP per capita was $27,000 in 1945, $62,000 today. And who would have thought in 1953 as the Korean War wound down and Federal Republic of Germany under Adenauer was emerging, Japan recovering from the devastation of the war, that South Korea, Japan and Germany, would one day be America's strongest trading partners and prosperous democracies. It was not about nationbuilding but lending a hand when needed, and the countries having to lift themselves up by the bootstraps- yet during a severe crisis as in Greece, Berlin, Seoul, in the 1950's when the post war Europe and East Asian countries were being established and needed help, the U.S. offered the early security and economic support needed to allow nationbuilding to happen by people in these places pulling themselves up by the bootstraps over a subsequent longer period. Truman did not shrink from the challenge and set the groundwork for today's European Union, and for today's Japan and South Korea. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Fuel efficiency rules require average fuel efficiency in the U.S. of 35 mpg by 2016. The debate is now on what to do for 2017 to 2025. New technology such as the P2 systems for hybrids already used in VW, Nissan and Hyundai vehicles makes a 20% increase in fuel efficiency possible. Large investments are being made to bring new technology to bear on increasing fuel efficiency significantly. Government agencies are looking at different scenarios by which the new fuel economy standards beyond 2017-2025 could be set between 47 mpg and 62 mpg. An additional factor is the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions- at 47 mpg the reduction would be 3%, at 62 mpg the reduction would be 6%. Another factor is how much the impact is on the cost of vehicles and reduced cost on gasoline. Here there is a wide range in the numbers for average mpg rules at 62 mpg- with EPA estimates at $2800-$3500 increase in vehicle cost and $5000 savings in fuel cost, Centre for Automotive Research estimates at $9790 increase in vehicle cost. The 62 mpg translates into "real world" actual efficiency of 45 mpg. In April 2011, 17 senators put out a letter of support for the 62 mpg proposal. There is a public value involved in this that is also significant- the reduced dependence on foreign oil means savings in defense expenditures in parts of the Middle East, and an economy that is less impacted by volatility in the price of oil. As this aspect of public value or benefits cannot be quantified easily even though they are significant, this may tend to be lost in the debate and the politics of fuel efficiency. For automakers there is significant marketing value in having a visible and strong presence in fuel efficient vehicles because of perception as forward looking- something that hurt Detroit carmakers in the last decade. During periods of gasoline prices at $5 a gallon this provides carmakers with an extra cushion of safety in securing car sales. Carmakers in one country such as the U.S. also have to worry about what carmakers in other countries such as Japan and Germany are doing- if the standards in the U.S. develop a gap compared to other countries developing advanced fuel efficiency technologies this poses significant risks because of the global nature of the automobile marketplace. See the group "Asleep at the Spigot" for more details on this. Many of these less quantifiable factors do not get the attention they deserve because they are significant from experience but not easily quantified. Throw into this the large unknown of what new technologies not yet developed lie ahead with a burst of effort by one country or another, which bring cost reductions at the same time - and the debate requires as much a good sense of what is the path offering the greatest advantages in years ahead than a pure exercize in numbers. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Washington Post uses Frequently Asked Questions to give readers an understanding of the India China border conflict. The roots of the conflict lie in  China's claim to Tibet based on Chinese troops going to aid Tibet in 1792. This based on the Qing dynasty sending troops to aid Tibet after a Nepalese invasion of Tibet. Tibet and Nepal are neighboring countries in the Himalayan mountains,  Nepal has a border with Indian state of Bihar, and Tibet is north and northeast of Nepal, all in close proximity of several hundred kilometres from India but four thousand kilometres from Beijing near Korea and Japan. The Sino Nepalese war, called the Gurkha war in Chinese, was the result of a dispute between Nepal and Tibet over debased silver coinage supplied by Nepal to Tibet and Tibet's demand for compensation, as well as a dispute about salt supplied by Tibet to Nepal. Chinese forces were repelled by  the Nepalese Gorkhas, and eventually the conflict was settled with a peace treaty between Nepal and Tibet with Chinese mediation for the Tibetan side. When the British East India company intervened in the region in 1815 China was not present, and when Nepal and Tibet had another war in 1855 China was not present.  For the first half of the twentieth century Tibet printed its own stamps and was an independent country negotiating treaties with Britain. China's brief intervention in 1792 is the fact cited by China for its claim to Tibet. Crossing the high mountains to get to Tibet from China's western frontier was for most of history and during this 1792 intervention, a journey that took 3 or 4 months with yaks and mules. Because of the sheer logistics China was present only in a symbolic way in Tibet or Nepal, both regions far more autonomous and remote from China than say a Finland near Russia. It takes 5 hours to go from Helsinki to St Petersburg in Russia. This is about the distance between the border with Nepal in Bihar, India, to Tibetan border with Nepal. By contrast it takes four thousand kilometres journey from Beijing to Tibet and over steep mountain ranges and rivers which would took months of journey with mules and yaks all the way into the twentieth century.  Finland was part of Sweden till 1809 when it became part of Russian Empire, till 1917 when it became an independent country. The Soviet Union invaded Finland one more time before World War II and was repelled, but this is attributed to Russian fears that Finland could be used as a base for an invasion of Russia. Tibet was a buffer between the British Empire and China. Chinese Nationalists party and Communist party thinking may have changed after Japan's invasion of China in the thirties, making extending China's western frontiers to the borders of India as part of the new nationalist idea.  How else can one see Beijing in East Asia throughout its history suddenly at the border with India after its takeover of Tibet in 1950. The period in 1950 when India was just coming out of the partition and tackling millions of refugees on the border with newly created Pakistan.      ...
Le Monde.fr Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This columnist opinion in Le Monde reflects the view in Europe that the US is in retreat, and in some quarters such as NYT that the new US foreign policy that sets the Monroe Doctrine as key aspect of foreign policy is a retreat- US setting the rules in the Western Hemisphere around democracy and governance. It says the US has set aside the ambition first proclaimed in 1945 and revived in 1991 after the fall of the Soviet Union. US administrations under Clinton and Bush took this posture after 1991 of dominant position but it did not reflect reality. US like Russia was dragged into many remote conflicts that had little to do with the standard of living, and economic advancement of the US. The US has a dilapidated infrastructure, broken healthcare system, and operates in a world trading system that has deindustrialized the nation and shipped out jobs and factories for 20 years, and worse is exposed to drug and people trafficking gangs in Mexico and Venezuela. The Monroe Doctrine 1823 asserted the US right to keep European colonial powers out of America, and it was possible only because the British also supported it in the 19th century till the US built up its Navy under TR and FDR. With Russia recognized as a European power the US is able to get its support for the US to tackle the situation in the Western hemisphere presented by drug and people trafficking gangs in Mexico and Venezuela. Tariffs are intended to get a new world trading system with new rules. Infrastructure building is underway on a scale that will far surpass China by 2030. This is not a retreat but an advancement for the Nation and the American people after three decades of failed policy. It lets the European powers Germany, France and Britain deal with Russia's requirement that NATO withdraw from its borders and recognition of Russia as a Northern European power. European history has shown that since 1700 that when faced with a majority of nations in Europe any dominant power in Europe is forced to negotiate a peaceful resolution of conflict because of it's limited resources to carry on a conflict. This should lead to a peaceful resolution in Ukraine, that allows rebuilding, and also gives the US an opportunity to rebuild its economy and standard of living for the American people. This will be a win-win for both the Russians and the Western Europeans, and both Latin America and the US, China and the US, India/Japan/Brazil and the US. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Charlie Rose talks to Nouriel Roubini about his thoughts on the next bubble and his book- "Crisis Economics." He says financial crises don't just happen out of the blue, they don't happen at random, instead they are predictable. Excessive risk taking and leverage have undesirable outcomes which are predictable as they take shape and get overblown. What happened to all the toxic assets? Banks are still carrying these assets hoping and praying that they don't need to be written down. His view coincides with that of Jeremy Grantham and other experts who see a growing danger in a prolonged period of zero interest rates which encourage risk taking. In all the developed economies of the U.S., Europe and Japan, borrowing can be done at zero interest rates. Investment banks are back to huge profits in proprietary trading using money borrowed at zero interest rates. A new bubble is developing that could burst in 2 or 3 years. The value of most risky assets has gone up by 50-80% in the last year. See Shiller's expert view on the danger from declining confidence levels and from higher uncertainty. Roubini says the Dodd bill is not enough. It does little to addresss the "too big to fail" problem as banks actually became larger after the financial crisis of 2008, and are too big and complex to manage. He also points to the risks of not separating proprietary trading from bank holding activities, and the need for something similiar to Glass-Steagall to separate the two. See Volcker's views on that subject....
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report on Bangladesh politics and economy is from The Guardian July 14, 2019. In 2009 the Awami League party under Sheikh Hasina contested the election in a Grand Alliance with Gen. Ershad's Jatiya Party winning an absolute majority of the seats. Since then Sheikha Hasina has been prime minister through 4 elections maintaining economic growth through the garment industry till the pandemic and disrupted supply chains hit Bangladesh hard leading to its debt burden doubling in 3 years. This led to turning to the IMF in 2022  with reserves down to $23 billion and student protests over lack of jobs. A second wave of protests led to her ouster in August 2024. This report by Derek Brown in The Guardian shows the changing situation in Bangladesh in the 1980's and 1990's after independence in 1971 following the India-Pakistan 1971 war. Zia Khaled of the BNP and Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League were alternately in power with periods of rule by the Army under Ershad contesting elections as the Jatiya party when the two parties failed to govern effectively. This went on from 1996 till 2009 when Sheikh Hasina began what would be four terms in office for 15 years. The economy was improving by 2019. And then Covid hit - the pandemic had serious effects on the foreign exchange reserves of Bangladesh, Sri Lankan and Pakistan economies. Only in India with the efforts of prime minister Modi was the economy put on a sustained growth path, corruption prevented by the personal example of Modi's leadership, and a state led development focus achieved using the example Modi had set in Gujarat as its chief minister for 15 years. The rest of South Asia lacked such firm and decisive leadership that is similar in its focus to the transformation of first Japan and China into leading industrialized nations.  In 2022 Bangladesh followed Sri Lanka and Pakistan in going to the IMF. By 2023 the foreign exchange reserves had declined to $23 billion. In 2024 to $19 billion. Garment economy dependent Bangladesh was seeing the effects of supply chain disruption and decrease in earnings from exports. In 2024 student protests on joblessness and frustration at economic prospects led to the ouster of the Hasina government.  ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Takata struggled with a faulty airbag recall crisis and failures in quality control that go back to 2004, with a crisis in 2015-2017 as a result of about 14 deaths. Takata's liabilities now run to over $15 billion according to Tokyo Shoko Research because of claims against it from banks, automakers and others. Takata declared bankruptcy on June 25, 2017. Takata was sold to a Chinese owned manufacturer based in Michigan, Key Safety Systems, for $1.6 billion. Takata had hoped for a white knight investor or some of the automakers such as Honda to save it. But the liabilities were too great and automakers in Japan resisted the idea because it might upset shareholders and it made no sense to assume growing liabilities. As a result the Takata company name will go out of business- for a company that started in 1933. The Chinese company taking on the business, a quarter of the market share for the airbag market, is Ningbo Joyson Electronic Corporation. A related article in the NYT in 2014 by Tabuchi shows how management at Takata failed to act responsibly when the early beginnings of the crisis happened in 2004. See the link. [article-54918]  At that time testing of an exploding airbag in Alabama was kept secret and later closed down without informing safety regulators, according to former employees. By not taking responsible action management failed in the 2015 airbag crisis leading to this bankruptcy, the largest in Japanese history.  ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Mohammad Ayoob of Michigan State University looks at the tit for tat military responses of India and Pakistan and tries to interpret the mixed signals of the Pakistan military and civilian president Imran Khan. He says Imran Khan had the difficult task of being in line with the top generals of the Pakistan military and at the same time responding to international pressures to de-escalate the crisis. Imran Khan asked India not to take the confrontation further or Pakistan would have to retaliate, and at the same time emphasized de-escalation as the goal with pressure from Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and China. The nuclear doctrines of the two countries which differ from the manner in which the U.S. and Soviets operated during the Cold War, also make escalation dangerous. Prof. Mohammad points out that the military in Pakistan plays a different role in the state since it was created in 1947. With military control of nuclear weapons any danger of losing control of the state and its position in the state since 1947 could lead to reckless strategies, says Prof. Mohammad. Mr. Imran Khan had to speak in different terms to different audiences in a kind of double speak in this situation. Mr. Khan spoke in terms of development and the need for Pakistan to fund the needed infrastructure always at the back of the mind in the current situation at the outset of the crisis. Much of this was lost in the ensuing hours of the crisis. Yet this remains the dominant need in South Asia as Mr. Imran Khan faces the challenge of meeting his promises for development as much as Mr. Modi faces the challenges of development to catchup with Asian neighbors South Korea and China who have shown how this can be done. A longer memory does show China and South Korea falling behind in the fifties and sixties before making great progress in the last 3 decades by pursuing peaceful cooperation with earlier adversary Japan,  and in the case of China the U.S.  Anyone familiar with the role played by the U.S. in China's civil war, and the Japanese invasions of Korea and China, during four decades of conflict,  followed by the cooperation offered by Japan and the U.S. to first South Korea and then China can see that progress is possible and lays the foundation for development. A recent article in The Guardian reports that China now lays more concrete every 2 years than the U.S. did for the entire twentieth century. None of this would be possible had Chinese leaders in their wisdom and passion for development not pursued development first and foremost, setting aside historic wounds. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Japan is playing an increasingly positive and significant role in stabilizing the international financial system, and in providing new ideas for solution and proactive measures, some of it based on its own experience with a long sustained economic downturn from which it only recently emerged. It has dedicated $100 billion to the IMF for loans to emerging economies, which will be a significant help in preventing a severe downturn in developing countries. Here Prime Minister Aso outlines ideas that Japan will bring to the global talks this weekend November 15-16, 2008. The significant immediate steps are early and thorough disclosure of nonperforming loans based on valuation and reliable standards, and the removal of these loans from their balance sheets as a top priority. Japan was slow to do this prolonging its downturn into a decade or more of no growth. Other two priorities are injecting capital into banks with government money, and supplying ample liquidity from central banks and US dollar liquidity. After the immediate challenge there lie 7 areas to be addressed in the medium term. Improving savings and reducing consumption in countries dependent on external debt and moving to domestic demand led growth in export dependent economies. Bolstering the resources of the International Monetary Fund and the Asian Development Bank. Changing the governance structures of the IMF and the World Bank and other bodies to give proper representation to emerging economies that play an important role in the world economy. Giving the Financial Stability Forum a status above standard setting institutions like the Basel Committee, the Forum reinforced and reorganized to give membership to emerging economies. International Accounting Standards Board, governments, companies and investors in ajoint effort work to come up with a set of standards that have global application. And tightening standards for credit rating agencies through the International Organization of Securities Commissions. Aso proposes giving various countries legal authority over these agencies and the nurturing of credit rating agencies in each region in addition to global agencies, for the development of regional bond markets. Aso is also pushing for regional cooperation like the initiatives in East Asia such as the foreign exchange swap mechanism. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Chinese car market is changing fast, with domestic brands making up a larger share of the local market. In 2000 these domestic brands made up 18% of total sales, whereas in 2010 forecasts show this to be about 32%, with the share increasing in future years. In a rapidly growing market this did not make much difference, but with the market growth moderating to 7-8% in the next ten years from the heady 33% of recent years, the foreign brands such as GM and VW will not see the growth of recent years. J.D. Powers projects passenger vehicle sales in China at 19.2 million by 2017, with Chinese brands taking 45% of the share, in one scenario. Under this scenario foreign brands like GM and VW would see sales growth of only 5% in the next 7 years. The foreign brands are not allowed to own more than 50% of local operations. And their partners are making their own domestic brands. If Japan is a useful example, China's automobile companies will like Nisssan, Toyota, and Honda, proceed to penetrate global markets and become a dominant player in their local market. This has implications for GM, VW and Daimler....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade pact led by Japan and the U.S. moves to the next stage with legislation introduced by Orrin Hatch and Ron Wyden in the U.S. Congress for granting trade promotion authority to the U.S. president. This would facilitate the negotiation of an agreement leading to concessions by different countries. Talks between Japan and the U.S. intensified with the U.S. president Obama saying in his 2015 State of the Union message that China wanted to write the rules for trade in Asia, and asking why the U.S. should not work to write its own rules. Defense Secretary, Aston Carter, called it more important than another aircraft carrier. Support from Europe, India and other countries for the China sponsored Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, as a rival to the U.S. dominated World Bank and IMF, also give urgency to the TPP. The TPP countries, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Peru and Chile, make up over $400 billion of about $4 trillion in U.S. trade, according to the Peterson Institute for International Economics. The TPP is now seen not just a free trade pact, but also as away to counter China's influence in Asia. Experts see the Obama administration as having bungled its handling of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank which the U.S. did not join, and its allies in Europe, other Asian countries including India, decided to join as founding members. Democrats in Congress led by Senator Schumer, Warren, oppose the legislation granting fast track for free trade pacts citing the loss of jobs and lowering of wages for workers in manufacturing in the U.S., with only about a dozen Democrats favoring the legislation, leading to a split in the party. Projections by Peter Petri, Michael Plummer, Fan Zhai, of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, show a net negative impact on depressed wage sectors such as U.S. manufacturing with additional $45 billion in U.S. imports and $35 billion in exports for heavy manufacturing from the TPP free trade pact, and additional $33 billion of U.S. imports and $10 billion exports in light manufacturing by 2025. Higher wage sectors such as U.S. Services including IT get a boost with additional $42 billion in exports and $ 8 billion imports. Agriculture shows insignificant gains with additional exports of $2 billion and imports of 0.5 billion. The auto and transport sector disproportionately favors Japan with $33 billion in additional U.S. imports and $8 billion in exports. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Niall Ferguson, a history professor at Harvard, and Moritz Shularick, a economic history professor at the Free University of Berlin, coined the term Chimerica, to describe the Chinese export machine and the American overconsumption right down to negative savings. Now they call it an economic monster that needs to be given a burial. It does little good for America. For America its a 10-10 deal the authors say, 10% growth for China and 10% unemployment int the USA. The mood in the USA is no longer to go on with this arrangement they warn, and ask that the Obama administration take steps to end this arrangement. The USA should ask China to make a 30 % depreciation of the renminbi say Ferguson and Schularick. Krugman makes a similiar point and warns of dire consequences in aworld out of balance on the same page of the NYT, see the link. Ferguson and Schularick point out that unlike China, both Germany and Japan let their currencies appreciate by 60% for Germany and 50% in Japan, at a similiar period in their country's development. China's renmibi is pegged at 6.83 renminbi to the dollar, and China's government used $300 billion in reserves to keep the renminbi from appreciating this year. Throughout the 1980's and 1990's it was pegged at around 8.28 renminbi to the dollar. For the USA this has been very costly, with a distortion in the global cost of capital significantly reducing long term interest rates, and helping create the real estate bubble in the US. They point out that with Japan and Germany dollar reserves increased roughly in line with growth of American GDP at about 1% and stable before moving slighltly higher in the 1970's. By contrast China's reserves have grown from about 1% of Ameica's GDP in 2000 or $165 billion to 5% in 2005 and 10% in 2008 and headed for 12% in 2009 end. This is simply unsustainable any longer; carrying on any longer risks China losing the very basis of its economic success which is the open global trading system....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jennifer Lind, associate professor at Dartmouth, says the right policy for the Abe administration is to follow Defence Minister, Itsunori Onadera's apology for Osaka Mayor Hashimoto's remarks about "comfort women" during the war period. Onadera said, Hasimoto had caused misunderstanding and mistrust in Japan's neighbors with his imappropriate remarks about the history of Japan, and emphasized previous apologies of the Japanese people. A senior Chinese delegate Zhou Bo of the Defense Ministry to the Singapore regional security forum, where Onadera made his statement, stated that Onadera's remarks pointed towards a optimistic future for the region. Editorials in the WSJ have consistently pointed out what Lind says in her op-ed- that the Japanese people support for the Abe administration is based on its efforts for achieving economic recovery and not for creating tensions in the region with neighbors. This also is evidently the policy of the U.S. government and its European allies.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China imports from the US only $143 billion and much of this is soyabeans (US farmers), petroleum oil products (buyers in Europe and Asia), aircraft (Boeing). Farmers were compensated from the tariff revenues in the first term, oil products would be shipped to Asia and LNG to Europe to make up for loss of supplies from Russia. India will take up the Boeing production as it's economy expands to levels China, Japan had earlier. The action is a last resort as 490,000 lives were lost in 12 years from the fentanyl shipped raw materials from China and drug trafficking gangs in Mexico processing it in labs to ship across the long US border or Canadian border into the US. China and Mexico have not stopped the flow of fentanyl into the US. How much is 490,000 American lives worth? That is 5 times the lives lost in the Vietnam War and the Korean War combined of 100,000 lives lost in both wars. China exported $436 billion to the US in 2023 increasing by about 6% from prior year. Integrated Circuits alone were more than all US exports combined to China at $154 billion. Electric batteries another $80 billion. Computers and office machine parts were $54 billion. Where will China ship all these products. It is brave but it is easier to stop fentanyl flows out of China, and cut all the trade barriers, reverse state policy to dominate key industrial sectors in State Planning. The problem in the stock market response is that this is a trade war which it is NOT. It is about National Security if this is allowed to continue as Clinton, Bush, Obama have allowed to happen US is in real danger of becoming a second rate power in the world, at which point the world will become a dangerous place with India, China, Russia, Germany and other states having no constraints to create future wars without US to set some basic principles of world peace. UN itself would not exist without Cordell Hull and FDR. The world we know will be GONE. US Navy will not be able to build the ships it needs in USA if this deindustrialization is allowed to continue.    ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Western nations including Europe, Canada, Japan and South Korea, are members of the International Enerrgy Agency, which has 1.5 billion barrels in reserve. The IEA will release oil from its reserves to support president Biden's plan to release 180 million barrels over the next 6 months. OPEC that includes Russia plans to increase production by only about 432,000 barrels a day.  During the Trump administration Saudi Arabia and Russia were at odds on production levels leading to Russia increasing production to higher levels than OPEC would allow. This led to a temporary collapse of oil prices to levels as low as $30. To help the US oil fracking industry which could not operate at these low prices president Trump brought the two sides together into what is now OPEC+. The Biden administration has ties with both Iran and Saudis, and aims to revive the Iran nuclear deal, withdrew support for Saudi air strikes on Yemeni Iran backed Huthi rebels. In this geopolitical situation Saudis are reluctant to respond to US calls to increase production as they have done in the past. With climate change and the COP26 agenda in Glasgow there is a plan to shift away from fossil fuels such as coal and oil that are supplied by OPEC and Australia. This means that a shift away from Russian or Saudi oil is also a shift towards renewable energy such as wind and solar which is needed to combat climate change. The Ukraine war and efforts to wean Europe away from Russia sourced energy will accelerate the changes needed to tackle climate change, even though the US fracking industry will step in to increase production at oil prices at $100+ in 2022. After 2023-2024 the push for conservation and renewable energy from today's crisis and Glasgow COP26 commitments, sharp slowdown in China and renewable focused India is likely to bring down oil prices to reasonable levels for a transition period to renewable energy. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Global infrastructure needs are expected to go up by 20% to 2.1 trillion dollars annually for the next 10 years compared to the previous ten years, according to the Samsung Economic Research Institute. India's investment in infrastructure will double to 1 trillion dollars in 2012-2017. compared to the prior five year period. Toshiba hopes to increase sales by 20% to $38 billion for nuclear power generation and distribution equipment and railway equipment, by the year ending March 2013. This is 38% of total revenue for Toshiba. Hitachi has set a goal of a 46% increase in sales to $29 billion, or 20% of total revenue for Jan 2011- March 2016. The Japanese Government and a consortium of Japanese companies are working together on deals such as the deal signed with Vietnam in October 2010 for nuclear power. The International Nuclear Energy Development of Japan entity, includes 12 companies and the Japanese government. The consortium was critical to negotiating the Vietnam deal.
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's growth rate for GDP in 2016 was 1.9% compared to 2015. This is the highest growth rate in half a decade, and better than 2015 when the growth in GDP was 1.7%. Fiscal surplus was 0.6% of GDP in 2016. Germany's Economics and Technology Ministry says the economy is improving because of the positive labor situation, rising incomes and consumer spending. Real estate boom is also helping growth, and also the state spending including on refugees accomodation. Exports have surged and the economy has recovered from the Brexit effect. Exports surged to 1.1 trillion euros in 11 months of 2016.

The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Zero covid lockdowns have added to the sentiment seeing China as a less attractive location for foreign investment. American companies are seeing staff resign due the lockdowns and zero covid policy. About a fourth of companies in a US Chamber of Commerce survey see a 20% drop in sales in 2022. A similar situation is being seen for European companies in China. The other area of growth from property sector is not working anymore as there is a 59% drop in demand for new property units. Investors in the property sector fear  another situation like that of property developer Evergrande's collapse.  Similar to Japan by 2000 a lot of the government infrastructure for roads and rail and automobiles has already been built leaving less room for this sector to kick in. Investments are possible in AI, renewables, electric cars, and advanced technologies, with limited potential to tackle loss of jobs in other sectors such as construction and government financed infrastructure spending and in retail stores. Retail sales are hit by inflation and high gas prices. The result is that China's GDP may fall by 1% according to one estimate for this quarter from the previous year. For growth and foreign investment look to India where a surge in government financed infrastructure in construction of roads and rapid transit, fast rail, construction of housing, and rapid increase in use of mobile phones, automobiles, and appliances is taking place. A new logistics system is being built with a Master plan for the whole economy under Gati Shakti creating a whole new place for foreign investment in a country of 1.3 billion. With Indonesia and Bangladesh closely related to India this is a market of 1.8 billion people far surpassing China and built on values of democracy ingrained over 100 years since the experiments under the British of elected state assemblies. This happened under limited Hind Swaraj since 1930's when India was led by Mohandas Gandhi in these early experiments with democracy. Germany, France and the US have a lot in common with India and the ground is being prepared with improvements for extensive German, US foreign investment by the Modi administration.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
migrationpolicy.org Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Foreign born population after a series of restrictive Immigration Acts dropped from 15% in 1890 to 12% in 1930, to 5% in 1970. The effort of 1924 Act was to make the southern and eastern European immigration that jumped by 1924 to 41% of total to much lower numbers. A look at the Immigration Act of 1924 under the Coolidge administration sponsored by senators from Washington state and Pennsylvania, Albert Johnson and David Reed, by Chishti and Gelatt in MPI. It shows the prejudices of the early Europeans from one country to Europeans from other countries that followed, after the British, the Germans, the Irish, the Italians and Polish, as the immigration waves shifted to Eastern and southern Europe in the period between 1880 and 1920. During this period Southern and Eastern European immigrants that made up 16% of the population reached 41%. In 1882 Chinese immigration to the US came under the Chinese Exclusion Act restricting it. The Dillingham Commission of 1911 stated the merits of different racial types with northern European and western European preferred to southern and eastern European. Still only 1% of the immigrants entering America were turned back between 1880 and 1924.  The 1917 Immigration Act set up an "Asian Barred Zone" that included Japan, a head tax of $8 on immigrants, requiring proof of read and writing of all immigrants, vetoed by president Woodrow Wilson. The Emergency Quota Act of 1921 set the first quotas at 358,000. Under the Immigration Act of 1924 it was revised to 165,000. President Hoover asked for strict consular restrictions so that between 1929 and 1945 immigrant numbers fell below 100,000 a year.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The foreign ministers of the U.S., Japan, India and Australia meet in Tokyo as Mr. Pompeo visits Tokyo to meet the new prime minister, Mr. Yoshhide Suga. The Quad group is now coming closer for economic and military cooperation to counter China's aggressive positions in the Himalayas, in the South China Sea, in interference in Australia's domestic affairs, and in the Taiwan Strait.


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