LyrArc Article Gist
One has to separate the posturing and the rhetoric from the true positions of the parties to difficult negotiations between the ECB, IMF, EU, and the Syriza government in Greece. French opinion is reflected in the comments by Finance minister Michel Sapin, who said to reporters in Brussels- "If this government was elected, it's also because Greece has lost 25% of its national wealth in the space of 5 years." The government in Greece needs the 7 billion euro payment from the EU as the last instalment in the bailout package. France's Hollande government and the Renzi government in Italy favor growth measures over the austerity path advocated by Germany. The IMF's Christine Lagarde, a former French finance minister, was quick to differentiate between reforms such as tax collection, which is weak in Greece, with austerity opposed by the Syriza government. Lagarde told the newspaper Le Monde that the reforms on tax collection are not austerity, and need to be done. The IMF has 2.5 billion euro loan due in March, 2015. Debt is also owed to the ECB by July 2015. The ECB holds about $25 billion in Greek government debt. ECB president Draghi announced a 1 trillion euro government bond buying program in Jan. 2015 with a portion of the bond buying and risks to be borne by the ECB. The ECB could help the negotiations by stepping in to buy Greek bonds. A lot depends on the flexibility shown by both sides as the hard work of negotiating a solution on debt relief and structural reforms in Greece- such as the tax collection mentioned by Lagarde- progresses. Because of the deflation facing the eurozone, and economic uncertainty, the huge bond buying effort by the ECB to improve economic conditions, the positions of the EU and the ECB are likely to favor a toning down of the sharp rhetoric during the early days of the Greece crisis in 2011-2012. This would avoid adding additional economic uncertainty to the situation facing the eurozone. Tsipras and Syriza would seek to move to the centre in their positions based on discussions held earlier in meetings between the EU, the ECB and Tsipras before the elections....

LyrArc Article Gist
With his dwindling popularity and failure to support the socialist parties alliance Macron has made the party En Marche his own creation, a failed project. Macron started out in the Socialist Party in Amiens, France, was a minister in the Socialist government of Francois Hollande 2012-2017. Socialist voters twice voted for Macron in 2017 and 2022 elections to keep the Le Pen National Rally out. After the last election 2022 Macron faced union protests on pension age changes and on issues related to fairness for workers as he failed to take cost of living action and protect workers. He now faces a divided parliament and becomes a lame duck president till the next presidential election in 2027. He called the party he created during the last year of socialist Hollande's term as president initially En Marche, later En Marche El Republique and Renaissance, initially tapping into support for reviving France with younger people in political life. Yet he failed to live up to this instead put himself at odds with working class people and families and the problems they face across rural and urban areas of France. He has run out of support after the yellow vest protests, union protests, and protests over the pension age during his first and second terms. By calling the socialist parties of which he was a member in derogatory terms Macron increased his isolation and created a situation in which the RN of Le Pen is vying to be the leading party in the National Assembly. Only by making large investments in the French economy of $140 billion that the Socialist parties alliance proposes can France's economy and infrastructure be revived, not by the programs of either the RN or En Marche which make no effort to increase investment in the French infrastructure and economic strength. A modest tax on the top 1-4% of the wealthy finances this investment of $140 billion which RN, En Marche and Macron seek to avoid calling this program in derogatory terms to protect a tiny minority of the affluent who in the right way would want to contribute a fair share to the growth and revival of France. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Since taking over Italy's right wing Northern League Party in 2013, Matteo Salvini, 44 years old, has improved the party's appeal by appealing to parts of Italy's north beyond its base in Lombardy, Piedmont and Veneto. The Milan native called for greater autonomy for the northern region, and even secession, supporting the northerners view that tax money from the prosperous north was being wasted on the poorer regions in the south. He also entered into an alliance with Silvio Belusconi's Forza Italia party. He took a hard line on immigration. Salvini has called for a train service for Milanese only, to draw attention to immigrants from non-EU countries. The head of the Five Star Movement  Party of Beppe Grillo, is Luigi Di Maio, who has called for ending the "taxi service" that brings to Italy migrants stranded on small boats in the Mediterranean. The shift in sentiment in Italy towards immigration has helped parties on the right as it has done in Italy and to a lesser extent in Germany with AfD's larger presence in the German parliament. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A cap on oil prices till the end of 2022 and beyond, indexing pension payments to inflation, and providing more income to self-employed, are some of the ways reelected president Macron plans to meet the cost of living crisis. A parliamentary majority is expected yet cohabitation with Mr. Melenchon as prime minister is a possibility says this FR24 support. Mr. Melenchon who narrowly missed beating Le Pen to become the second round candidate is positioning himself to lead France into the second term presidency of Mr. Macron. It was with the help of Melenchon supporters that Macron was able to win the presidency in the second round. Melenchon campaigned in the belief that the presidency had become too powerful and remote from the issues facing ordinary people. Melenchon as prime minister could bring someone familiar with the struggles of ordinary people in cost of living and to get good manufacturing jobs into the leadership ranks for the fight to Build Better in Europe. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Somini Sengupta and Brian Frank provide this award winning quality of coverage in text and pictures of life in California's San Joaquin Valley, hit by wildfires and scorching heat in the middle of the pandemic. Shown are workers in the fields of one of America's largest agricultural regions fighting heat and the pandemic, struggling to survive on a precarious hourly wage in these conditions. During earlier periods from 1970 this was an almost picturebook place particularly in the cool and foggy winters, which stretched for miles with apricot, grape, almond and other fruit and vegetable fields. A dry valley using irrigation of fields with water from the surrounding Sierra Nevada mountains. Most affected are millions of workers of Hispanic origin originally from Mexico, who provide most of the labor for harvesting of crops. California with a good educational system and without the drought that hit the region, without the effects of Silicon Valley splitting the people of the state in opposite directions most on minimum wage with a concentration of wealth around major cities and spiralling property values, was a very different place in the 1960's and 1970's from what it is today. Increasing wealth concentrated in pockets and not spread out as it was in the early post war period after Truman and Eisenhower has impoverished large areas and segments of the population, creating what Dickens called in his day- "it was the best of times, it was the worst of times," depending on who and where you were. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Margo Oge, headed the Office of Transportation and AIr Quality at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from 1994-2012. Here she points out the contradiction in what automakers supported when the current fuel emission standards were set and today's effort by the Trump administration to loosen the standards. She also points to the contradiction between the trends in Europe, China, India, which are moving towards stricter standards and the U.S. reversing direction.  About one dozen states in addition to California have the power under the Clean Air Act to set their own standards. These states make up about one third of the U.S. market. What would result is a fracturing of the U.S. market. This would create problems for automakers as one expert recently pointed out in the NYT, that automakers should be careful what they wish for.  Automakers such as Ford say they support the current fuel emissions standards, yet call for flexibility. GM's CEO, Mary Barra, says she supports current standards. Toyota also says it supports the current emission standards. And diesel engines are now declining in Europe as a result of fuel emissions standards to preserve good air quality. History has shown the automakers have suffered badly from competition when emissions and fuel efficiency standards were lax. During the last decade the auto industry in Michigan faced decline as a result of poor management decisions and lack of foresight in pushing forward with new technologies in this field. The current recovery in the auto industry is a result of a reversal of the poor decisions made between 2000-2008, including fuel emissions and fuel efficiency, air quality decisions.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Mr Leung, the highly unpopular Chief Executive of Hong Kong, and target of protesters demanding his resignation and universal suffrage in 2017 as originally promised, is a reserved man who does not interact much with the public. His secondary scholing was at Kings School in Hong Kong followed by studies at Hong Kong Polytechnic for a higher diploma in building surveying. He then studied valuation and estate management at Bristol Polytechnic in Britain graduating in 1977. He was a surveyor by training and worked in this field to help China open up its property markets in the 1980's. By 30 he was made head of the JLW real estate firm's Hong Kong branch, and in 1993 formed his own firm DTZ Debenham. Throughout his life he has worked for or had close ties to the authorites in Beijing in the property field, and has little political experience. In 1985 he was elected to the Hong Kong Basic Law Consultative Committee, and later became its Secretary General. This was followed by a position in the Chinese government as a member of the National Standing Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference till 2012. His first political campaign in 2012 was itself of a limited nature because he only had to win support from members of a 1200 member pro-China, pro-business Executive Council that currently approves nominees and elects the Chief Executive. Albert Ho, one of three candidates in 2012, says Leung was completely insulated from political pressures, political give and take, and uses a "greenhouse" comparison to describe this isolation from the public. His progressive credentials for providing affordable housing involve ideas to open up housing development in territories near Hong Kong appear to be merely election period ideas. The large gaps between rich and poor, or rich and a struggling middle class in Hong Kong- becoming sharply accentuated in China to the point where China is probably one of the most unequal societies similiar to Brazil- are also keenly present in Hong Kong. How much part this plays in the protests is not clear in media reports, though the "Occupy Central" name for one of the protest groups suggests a connection to social issues as well. Protestors may see democratically elected chief executives as more responsive to voter concerns including social, income, housing and other issues, in sharp contrast to more than 1200 well heeled business executives who have prospered greatly in China's boom years. China's national leadership under Jinping and LiKeqiang appeared to sense this income divide as they focussed on extragavant displays of wealth in the transition, but may still have failed to grasp how big that gap has become and how the political processes of rigid control cannot keep up with the times even with the best of intentions. Especially when growth slows and the problems of the boom years such as hyperinflation in property prices and pollution remain unsolved. Bloomberg quietly let the Occupy Wall Sreet protests fizzle out clearing protestors at times, yet voters could peacefully elect Mr. Blasio as Mayor of New York in response, a level to which Beijing's political system has not evolved and to which Hong Kong offers both a challenge and an opportunity. As one protester quoted in the NYT put it- "we are not the enemy, we are the people."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Keith Bradsher's NYT interview with Raghuram Rajan, Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, comes when Rajan has come under criticism from the business sector and the small business support base of prime minister Modi's party. The criticism centers on the drop in oil prices since Nov. 2014, and Rajan's failure to drop interest rates at the Dec. 2, 2014 central bank meeting. Rajan says it was not clear whether oil prices would remain low for an extended period at the Dec. 2, 2014 meeting. Since then new inventory data, EIA estimates and OPEC policy guidance have confirmed low prices will remain for an extended period. Rajan lowered interest rates on Jan. 14, 2015, by one quarter of a percentage point. Under India's setup the central bank chief makes decisions on interest rates, compared to the decisions made by the Federal Open Market Committee at the U.S. Federal Reserve. Rajan says there is full understanding between the central bank and the Modi government economic team led by finance minister Arun Jaitley, Jayan Sinha, deputy minister of state for finance, and chief economic advisor Arvind Subramanium. Modi and Jaitley prefer to rely on the advice and policy direction of economic policymakers with long experience in the U.S. and international circles. Both Subramanium and Rajan bring this level of experience and expertise. Subramanium brings experience from his years at the GATT which preceded the WTO, the IMF, and the Peterson Institute of International Economics, and Rajan brings experience at the University of Chicago, and as chief economist of the IMF. Modi is a dilgent listener and policymaker giving careful attention to the best advice, making it unlikely that Rajan would be seen as a holdover from the administration of Manmohan Singh. Other criticism that the business sector has made of Rajan are as financial regulator in asking state banks to increase collateral required from large business firms for large bank loans. Rajan points out the need for business to bear the costs as well as the benefits of taking risks. Under previous governments the state banks allowed large firms to keep their holdings at companies even when the risk taking resulted in losses. Rajan has also not tried to reverse the sharp decline in the rupee, which hurts business firms which took on dollar denominated loans. Rajan has instead followed policy of building up the reserves by buying dollars. The reserves were depleted in 2013 by a policy of currency interventions to reverse that decline. Inflation in India reached 9.9% in Dec. 2013, with policy of the central bank under Rajan set to bring it down to 8% in 2014, and below 6% in 2015, so that India could get out of the trap of persistently high inflation with slow growth. This is critical for a new Indian success story. A goal set by Rajan in Oct. 2012 when he was appointed as central bank chief, was to increase foreign investment and encourage new business so that India was no longer dependent on large companies for growth. This is also critical for a new Indian success story, as the Modi administration and the central bank are both keenly aware. Just as Bernanke and now Yellen at the U.S. Fed face criticism for quantitative easing monetary policy, focus on the high long term unemployed, and not focussing on inflation- with their focus on the long term economic recovery in an environment of low inflation below 2% in the U.S.- India's Reserve Bank faces a different kind of criticism for careful and prudent policies to ensure long term growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
What is happening here appears to be that the whole American system of government as it operates today has some serious weaknesses, which if exposed in a critical situation- and with some life threatening situation for an industry group- can subvert the whole system and the economic life of the country. The serious weaknesses are the lobbying of Congress that is legal, and the financing of Congressmen and Senators election campaigns by industry groups which is legal. The life threatening situation for an industry group are the accounting rules and nuances that require that the banking and financial industry that holds these mortgage home loans, if they change one loan to lower payments in one geographic area, have to then show the lowered value of that loan in their books on all other loans of that type in that geographic area. Without this the banks and financial institutions were already or close to insolvent with losses of over $1 trillion. With that accounting change the industry losses would make large parts of the industry insolvent. This becomes incentive enough to fight loan modifications at all costs for the industry, and explains why Hope for Homeowners has generated only 25 loan modifications when it was advertised to generate 400,000. This creates a once in a lifetime or once in a hundred year chance of the whole system of democratic government working to destroy the economic life of the country. How? By providing a big enough reason for the banking and financial industry to fight loan modifications almost to the death, against even their better judgement when in late 2008 and January 2009 this would mean suicide for the economic life of the country, and the chance that they would both go down into the depths, the industry and the boat that is the American economy. This is what this story tells us, all key Congressmen and Senators were taken into their fold by the lobbying groups with large donations to their election funds, both Republican and Democrat, Shelby, Frank, Dodd, Durbin, and their aides. After Hope for Homeowners program failed, the new Hope Now program was again designed with the connivance of lawmakers in both parties by the banking industry representatives. It was designed so it would largely fail by not doing enough to keep homeowners in their homes. The industry faced with a life threatening situation did the wrong thing. Instead of saying lets get the government to help to change the accounting rule, and advocating that the government join the industry to share the losses and go out aggressively to restructure the loans in a three way loss sharing arrangement with homeowners, government and the industry, the industry instead decided to stick its head in the sand and let nobody do anything period. To do this it had to create the illusion that somehow the problem would fix itself with housing recovering on its own. In addition to the donations many Republicans like Preston, Secretary of HUD with oversight of FHA, and others in the Bush administration, may have had the mistaken notion that somehow the housing industry would recover without much help, that the economy was basically still healthy, that the crisis was not as bad as it appeared, that freemarket principles were still the best guide, and that toxic assets of banks and foreclosures were two entirely different things, with foreclosures for those who had borrowed recklessly not a bad thing....

LyrArc Article Gist
Monthly reports are issued on bank lending by the Treasury. The report for February shows business lending is down by 24% in its dollar value from the previous month, and a similiar decline in student, auto and credit card lending. The only increase is in mortgage lending as government efforts to hold down interest rates heave led to a refinancing boom. The two largest lenders Wells Fargo and Bank of America reported a 35% jump in mortgage lending in February over January. Businesses are charged more for loans by Chase, which it says is to reflect increased risks, and Chase has sharply reduced its business lending. This is bad news for the economy, because it means businesses will continue to pull back, and some businesses will layoff employees and others may close for lack of financing. The other link to the report in the WPost about the consumers who have jobs, but are acting flat broke suggests consumption will continue to decline, which puts stresses on businesses as sales revenues for all sorts of products decline across the spectrum of the economy. With less acess to costlier financing, and declining sales, the picture of continued large job losses is being etched, and will continue to be etched as these are becoming things that will not change for a long time. Banks are insolvent or close to being insolvent, so lending is only like to change if the government takesover the banks and puses through lending at attractive rates. But it has to do this quickly, before confidence drops to a level where the demand for loans just isn't there. China is able to push lending through the banks because government controls the banks, this cannot happen in the US unless the government actually steps in to take over the insolvent banks and push through a large lending program. In this sense the Obama program while admirable and helpful to stabilize things a bit, is only part effective, and can never really restore confidence or a serious measure of economic stability because of the three pillars of progress in this situation, it can impact only two directly- foreclosure prevention, and business plus consumer lending. The third consumption is something it can only indirectly control through foreclosure prevention and lending, but which is headed down as Americans convert to a frugal lifestyle. And in these two areas of foreclosure prevention and business lending the government is failing. The fourth pillar of progress in the recovery is employment, and this is also an area the government can only indirectly control through stimulus spending on infrastructure, education and energy, but is largely influenced by foreclosure prevention- which keeps home prices from falling rapidly and overshooting and reduces household wealth- and business/consumer lending. These are ER (f) FPL (CE). Economic Recovery as a function of Foreclosure Prevention and Lending, and Consumption and Employment, where indirect control is shown by ( ). With not much in place for FPL- the only two variables government can directly control if it takes strong and immediate action before its influence on these two variables begins to diminish over time- Obama's inexperience and learning curve and failure to take bold action to get serious results on FPL, may result in admirable demeanor and rhetoric but medicore results and a struggling economy for years to come. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Timothy Geithner as New York Fed Chairman was a key person in the rescue of Bear Stearns. In an interview with the WSJ he recounts events and defends his actions on March 14 in a conference call at 5am in the morning with Ben Bernanke, Kohn, and other regulators and staffers and Treasury Secretary Paulson. By 7 am a decision was made choosing from 2 options not to do it, let Bear Stearns fail, and Fed would make an infusion of liquidity into the banking system to reduce the impact, or make a loan to to give time for Bear Stearns to make a merger. Mr Bernanke did the head count and all top officials agreed to the loan option. At 7.30 the morning of March 14 about $80 billion in short term loans would come due. If Bear Stearns went into bankruptcy protection lenders would get back collateral instead of cash and might sell the collateral en masse and pull back trillions of dollars of similiar loans to other investment banks. Also Bear Stearns had trading positions with 5000 other firms so the ripples would extend throughout the banking system. At issue in a Bear Stearns collapse with no Fed loan- a full blown run on Bear Stearns had begun on March 13 with customers and lenders pulling out billions of dollars. The man- Geithner does not have a PhD in economics and has never been a banker or trader, the background of previous chairmen of the New York Fed. He joined Treasury Department in 1988 and was an assistant to first Treasury Secretary Rubin and then his successor Sommers. Geithner was active in the rescue of Mexico, Indonesia and Korea in the Asian and Latin American banking crises. He was appointed to his position at the New York Fed in 2003, so he has 15 years of experience dealing with international banking crises. The criticism- has come from a colleague at the Fed Vincent Reinhart on the oped pages of the Washington Post, and from former Fed chairman Paul Volcker in a speech to the New York Economic Club. Geithner has asked to speak at the same club to give his account and his defense of his action. Note that Bernanke and Paulson and Kohn were in on this decision and voted in favor of it and there appears to be a consensus that all in the conference call supported it. Geithner kind of put it all together and so he is defending it. Geithner's contribution- Geithner pulled in the other players in the financial markets into close communication with the Fed. He assembled an informal advisory group including Rubin, Summers, Greenspan, Volcker, former New York Fed Chairman Corrigan and investment banker Pete Peterson. He would also phone them individually asking : what should we think about an issue? What are the best 3 arguments for or against? What do smart people think? He also initiated a series of dinners at the NY Fed's executive dining room in which 5 or 6 senior executives from a major investment firm would meet his own top people. He also calls CEO's of important banks and investment firms every week in a crisis situation to ask- Whats changed? Whats better? Whats worse? What worries you? And after the credit crisis in August ,Geithner joined Bernanke in a small group that included Fed vice chairman Donald Kohn and Kevin Warsh, a Fed governor, investment banker and White House aide. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
German leadership in the eurozone and the EU- with the strong stand for eurozone countries to do their economic homework and restore fiscal balance, and the action taken to bring the EU countries together on Russian intervention in Ukraine- is leading to questions about the dominant role played by Germany. Chancellor Merkel has played a leadership role partly because of the absence of other leaders with strong support in their home base who could provide such leadership. Merkel's poll rating in Germany actually shot up during the eurozone crisis from 40% in 2010 to 70% in 2013, and steady at 67% in June 2015, as German taxpayers and voters see Merkel as preventing debt ridden countries in the eurozone passing on higher costs in the debt crisis to Germany. With German wages kept low for the last decade to ensure a economic recovery and lower unemployment, Germans see no reason to support other eurozone countries when a low wage sector exists inside Germany, except under conditions that ensure fiscal balance. In a Harris poll taken in France June 30-July 1, 2015, Chancellor Merkel is rated higher at 43% expressing approval compared to 36% saying they approve of French premier Hollande's handling of the Greece and eurozone crisis. Over 50% of people in Spain and in France disapprove of Merkel's handling of the eurozone crisis, yet two thirds of France's main centre right party support Merkel's handling of the eurozone crisis. In the Harris poll when asked how Merkel, IMF, Hollande and Tsipras handled the Greece crisis people polled in France gave 43% approval to the IMF and Merkel compared to 36% for Hollande and Tsipras of Greece, and 60% disapprove of Hollande and Tsipras handling of the crisis compared to 53% disapproval for the IMF and Merkel. The Christian Democrats party in Germany has dominant leaders in its tradition starting with Konrad Adenauer in the early postwar years, through the Kohl years during reunification and Merkel in the eurozone crisis. By contrast the Social Democrats from the period under Wily Brandt, through the Schmidt years and Schroeder have operated under more of a consensus leadership. Under Sigmar Gabriel or some other Social Democratic leader Germany is likely to have a different style of leadership in the future, especially because the German public does not favor Germany playing this kind of dominant role. At different points in the eurozone crisis Merkel's leadership was needed for decisionmaking- making banks take a 50% writedown on their loans in negotiation with Charles Dallara in Brussels, calling for Italy's president to bring in a new government (led by Mario Monti) when premier Berlusconi failed to make needed changes, and providing flexibility for spending rules for Spain, Italy and France. Merkel has actually moved to the centre to maintain popular support inside Germany, especially since the new coalition government was formed with Social Democrat leader Sigmar Gabriel. On the other major issue of immigration Merkel has provided decisive leadership to prevent the rise of anti-immigrant parties in Germany. Herfried Munkler, author of "Power in the Middle," about why Germany is playing this role may provide clues to Germany's role- by representing different aspects of German public opinion Merkel has prevented the rise of right wing populist or nationalist parties in Germany, which would distort the German narrative about what it sees as its role in keeping Europe together after three wars. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ukraine with its rich soil used to produce 40% of the agricultural output of the Soviet Union. With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 governments cbroke up the old state farms and gave plots to ordinary Ukrainians. These small landowners lacking the capital to invest usually planted small vegetable plots or let animal graze. About 55 million acres of arable land in Russia, Kazakhstan and the Ukraine remain uncultivated. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization in that region 494 million acres cultivated in 1992 dropped to only 437 million acres by 2005. Comparable figures for Brazil show that from 1992 are 128 growing to 146 million acres by 2005, and China growing from 306 to 350 million acres by 2005. The USA's figures show slight drop from 454 to 432 million acres by 2005. These 55 million acres of rich agricultural land can produce an additional 115 million metric tons of wheat per year which would be 20% of the total world production today. For this to happen this small plots have to be stitched together to form larger modern farms which can get captial investment and be run along modern lines. This is being attempted in the region by several companies. Landkom and other companies are trying to do this even though this is a difficult environment to operate in with corruption high in Ukraine and the attitude to foreign investment not always positive. With a large part of technology gains in agriculture already harnessed the search is now for more arable land to be put into cultivation....

LyrArc Article Gist
Jose de Cordoba of the WSJ provides this excellent story on the nature of the migration crisis in the U.S. that is creating political divisions in the U.S. What is causing this surge in migration to the U.S.? Cordoba provides some useful insights to understand the nature of this problem. Nine out of ten migrants in Guatemala which sends most of the migrants from Central America are moving north from Guatemala through Mexico to the U.S. for financial reasons, it points out. Only 10% are because of violence in the region, the rest for financial reasons according to the United Nations International Organization for Migration The jump in apprehension of Guatemalans at the American border shows a surge from 15,000 in 2007 to 236,000 in 9 months of 2019, according to U.S. government data. The surge began in 2008 and jumped in 2014 after U.S. court rulings that first required migrant children to be allowed to join relatives in the U.S. followed by a ruling in 2015 that allowed a parent to join the children and allowed court proceedings to take place that takes years. The result was that smugglers advertised on radio and families sold small plots of land to join relatives in the U.S. who had gone before them. The migration is also specific to certain areas hit by damage to crops, including coffee crop from drought, or certain towns that simply sent more people simply for financial reasons advertised openly.  For 8 hours of work a migrant could make at $12 per hour amount of $96 per day, in Guatemala the daily wage would be about $5.  Overwhelmingly it is financial reasons or economic opportunity that sends migrants north. After it became known that kids could help migration the people in family groups apprehended at the border jumped from about 40,000 in 2015 to 390,000 in fiscal 2019. Smugglers charge $8600 per adult and half that for a child and an adult that can be dropped off at a checkpoint. The efforts of president Trump to close the border to this migration include having Mexico sign an agreement to police its southern border with Guatemala using its newly setup National Guard. As a result the migration has actually surged in 2019 with migrants seeing this as their one last opportunity to join relatives in the U.S. or to migrate to the U.S. The Trump administration tried separating families because of the loophole in the law that allows children to be not deported and parents to join their children. But this created a public outcry and the effort now is to close the loophole in the law. It is also strange that as many migrants are coming from one town Joyabaj  with population 100,000 as from Guatemala City the capital population 2.5 million. In fact the economy has grown by 3.4 % a year in Guatemala and efforts have been made to improve conditions with the help of donor countries in the West for several years, though the drought conditions exist. The situation is similar to that in Europe. If one looks at the violence by gangs in central American region after the end of the guerilla wars and compares it to the wars in Syria and Iraq, one can see how humanitarian concerns preceded what eventually turned out tobe a full blown migration for economic reasons. Initially chancellor Merkel adopted a humanitarian stance but failed to recognize that there was another side to his situation that would attract a wave of economic migrants from places as far apart as North Africa to Afghanistan. Poverty has existed in these regions for many many years before the current migration, with drought and lack of economic opportunity going far back in time. Merkel only recently recognized this problem and the new CDU leader Kambrauer has clearly recognized this. CDU policy shifted in 2018-2019 with curbs on economic migration that has reduced it to a trickle. This process is underway in the U.S. at its border with Mexico and for Mexico with its border with Guatemala. In the short run Europe and the U.S. are paying a price. Not just in the way it has divided each country with a far left and a far right eroding the centrist parties that existed before. In some cases centrist parties that were popular on the right and the left now hve leaders from a far right or a far left faction within the centrist ruling parties. Boris Johnson in Britain, Trump in the U.S., leaders in Italy, Austria and Hungary. Or as in Germany and Spain new far left or far right parties causing the centrist parties to dwindle in influence or as in Germany this combined with a shift to the Green Party in Germany and Liberals Party in Britain as a show of disapproval for how the migration issue has been tackled.  The Economist in a July 2019 issue also points out that the country's own citizens have fared worse with migration. It shows how the Conservative Party's austerity cuts for welfare budgets was popular in Britain as long as eastern European migration at high levels in Britain were allowed starting with the Labour party under Blair. This disproportionately hurt the middle class and the poor after the hit already taken from the faulty banking caused recession. With the drop in migration it is now felt by a majority in Britain that the austerity cuts have just gone too far and a mood is set in to restore many of the cuts and fund public services. Meantime some of the damage has been done and will take a decade to correct as the issues that mangled the centrist parties and led to fragmentation on views of what society should look like have taken place with Brexit and high levels of poverty, income inequality in Britain, lack of investment in infrastructure with overallocation to tech with declining productive benefit for every additional dollar spent. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Tsai Ing-Wen is elected president of Taiwan by a landslide in the Jan. 2016 election. Tsai, leader of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was elected with 56 percent of the vote, compared to 31 percent for the Koumintang candidate Eric Chu. The DPP won 68 seats out of 113 in Taiwan's parliament. Tsai told a news conference about Taiwan- China relations - "I also want to emphasize that both sides have a responsibility to find mutually acceptable means of interaction that are based on dignity and reciprocity."

LyrArc Article Gist
Gordon Crovitz points out in this op-ed that an issue of this importance of preserving an open and independent internet free of influence of governments and politicians, should not be left to the Assistant Secretary of the Commerce Department and administration officials. He points out the need for Congress to play a role in determining the future openness and independent nature of the internet free of politics and governments. He says the Obama administration's move to use the Dotcom Act to transfer the role now played by ICANN to a new body in which other governments say they want to play a major role, is a mistake as it risks the very openness of the internet that has been its core quality and mission till now. Doing this by July 2016, in 30 days following its submission to Congress by the Obama administration, is prevented by Senator Ted Cruz's effort in Congress requiring clear approval by Congress. The U.S. has a unique role in this respect because of its role in defending freedom of speech since its founding, a role found nowhere else in the world. ...