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.


WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

No Big Deal

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman says the TPP is no big deal because most of the trade in that region is free, protectionism is way down. He cites a recent report on American import restraints by the International Trade Commission putting their total cost at 0.01% of GDP.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S., UK and Swiss regulators charged UBS AG with conspiracy to rig the London Interbank Offered Rate or LIBOR. LIBOR is the interest rate at which large banks lend to each other and is determined from daily reports made by 16 banks to the British Banking Association, giving the rate at which the bank borrows from its peer banks. This rate helps determine the rate for trillions of dollars in securities, home and auto loans, swaps and derivatives. A tiny movement in LIBOR can affect trading profits, and it influences perceptions of a bank's health particularly in a crisis such as the 2008 financial crisis. Every day a 16 bank panel reports this rate to British financial authorites. UBS took full responsibilty and pleaded guilty to criminal fraud. UBS settled the charges for $1.5 billion. Barclays PLC, a UK bank, settled charges for LIBOR manipulation in mid 2012 for $450 million, ending in the departure of the bank chairman and CEO. Britain's regulator the Financial Services Authority, FSA, says in its report that rigging the rate was "routine and widespread" at UBS in order to increase trading profits, done with the knowledge of senior managers, and included cash awards or trading opportunities to employees at other banks to participate in manipulating the LIBOR rate. During one period of 18 months UBS paid 15000 British pounds to a firm of outside brokers every 3 months. FSA says LIBOR and versions of it are "at risk of being improperly influenced " between Jan. 2005-2010. What this means is other large settlements with other banks can be expected. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may have lost $3 billon from this manipulation of LIBOR, according to an internal report from the inspector general of the Federal housing Finance Agency, which also says Fannie and Freddie should sue the banks responsible. The whole issue of LIBOR came to light after an article was published in the WSJ, April 16, 2012, and a WSJ study on LIBOR using credit default insurance to track LIBOR rates, on May 29, 2012....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the Wall Street Journal says faster approvals at the Food and Drug Administration have helped bring more generic drugs to market lowering prices for the public. In 20 months the Trump administration approved 1617 generic drugs, 81 a month on average or a 17% increase over the preceding 20 months. Council of Economic Advisers in October said this was a saving of $26 billion for the public.

President Trump is looking at price controls as a way to bring down drug prices. With increasing outcry about high drug prices in the U.S. the Trump administration and Democrats in Congress are looking for new approaches to bring down prices.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ's Monica Langley provides insights into Donald Trump's campaign strategies, some of them right out of his book "The Art of the Deal." His target voter is from a think big strategy to get voters across a broad spectrum using the slogan "Make America Great Again," with a knack of tapping into a deep well of voter frustration with the political establishment. How to get attention in the media is the next step Trump tackled by using social media to the fullest - using Twitter often, making statements that attract attention such as the ones on China, Mexico, Senator McCain and Muslims that tap into failure of political correctness to address voter frustration on trade and jobs, immigration and terrorism. The Trump campaign has 14 million followers on Twitter, and 50 million "engagement" accounts on Facebook- that cost very little. Social media is to Trump in 2016 what community networking on the PC dashboard was to Obama in 2008. As the WSJ pointed out in an editorial, the splitting of the Republican vote among many candidates, and the failure of candidates to grasp the nature of the unconventional campaign waged by Trump- descending into attacks based on target groups of voters on every candidate except Trump- created the opportunity Trump has grasped with his knack for improvising along the way. Commonsense campaigning without sophisticated strategies, improvising often along the way, using the available medium of social media at little cost to get the message and slogan across, helped Trump make the deal with voters to upset the political establishment. The Sanders campaign is also based on careful repetition of the same slogan and facts about inequality and lobbyists, over and over again, offering strong action on health care and college tution just as Trump offers strong action on China trade, immigration with the idea of the wall, and barring entry of Muslims for terrorism till "we figure out what's happening." The difference being that Trump thinks big and targets the entire electorate of his party's voters in the primaries from the beginning, and a broad based campaign on many issues. Underestimating your opponent carries many risks in politics, never more so than when you are out of touch or not listening to voter frustration, and fail to speak up to it....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
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."...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama in his speech at Georgetown, April 13, 2009, describes the thinking behind the decisions made in the first 12 weeks of his administration- why the actions are not aggressive and overreaching as some critics say, and why they are not timid as other critics have said. This was not a typical downturn of the business cycle, but a perfect storm arising from irresponsibility and poor decisionmaking in Washington, Wall Street and Main Street- in effect several crises colliding for something like an explosion, if not dealt with at once, and with strong action. He says "the key to dealing with our deficit and debt is to get a handle on out-of-control health care costs, not to stand idly by as the economy goes into free fall." The recognition that the crisis itself brings with it new possibilities, the opportunity for coming to grips with and forging a good solution to health care, energy and education issues that were neglected while Wall Street directed investments to areas other than investment in building for the future. To the critics like Krugman, Rosenfeld and others who say that the takeover of insolvent banks should be done quickly before the situation worsens, he says it is not because of any ideological or political judgement he has made about government involvement in banks, but because it is more likely to undermine than create confidence at this point. He goes on step by step, through the process of decisionmaking, first to step in and boost spending vigorously, second to get lending flowing again to businesses and families, strengthening the non-bank credit market for consumer purchases and loans, the housing plan, the auto plan, and the work at the G-20. Then President Obama goes on to project his vision and the road to getting there. The five pillars he sees for the future are: redirecting Wall Street and banking to constructive investments for the future, investments in education, investments in renewable energy and technology to create new industries and new jobs, investments in health care to cut costs for businesses and families, and new savings in the federal budget to bring down the deficit. Obama says he will look for savings line by line in every corner of the budget, and has already identified two trillion dollars in deficit reductions over the next decade. And the goal is to reduce discretionary spending for domestic programs as share of the economy by more than 10% over the next decade. Procurement reform will greatly reduce no-bid contracts and save $40 billion. Secretary Gates is attacking th problem of hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and cost overruns that have bloated the defense budget, without adding to the nation's safety. And education programs that don't work will be removed, and waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare program will be controlled. Finally, Mr Obama points to the nation's political system as one more reason we are in this perfect storm- "a fundamental weakness in our political system." He cites the putting off hard decisions for another day, scoring political points instead of rolling up up sleeves to solve real problems, an impatience that is only worsened by the 24 hour news cycle, and a short attention span that focusses on the immediate results and on poll numbers. And there is too much responding to the "tempest of the moment until the furor has died away and the media coverage has moved on, instead of confronting the major challenges that will shape our future in a sustained and focussed way." After these 12 weeks President Obama says, for the first time there are glimmers of hope, and way off in the distance can be seen a vision of America's future that is far different than its troubled past. And citing the parable in the Sermon on the Mount about that "house built on a rock", he sees America's house built on a rock, a house for which we use this moment to lay a new foundation, come together and begin the hard work of rebuilding, persisting and persevering in the face of disappointments and setbacks that surely lie ahead. Then he has no doubt "that this house will stand and the dreams of our founders will live on in our time." Its a remarkable speech in its directness, its simplicity in approaching the subject, and its borrowing from the Bible for that story of that house built on a rock, and its Lincolnesque reference to the house that will stand. And more than a speech, it describes a vision, and the set of actions and steps taken and to be taken to get there. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Roger Scruton on John Stuart Mill, famous British writer on political economy and theory. Mill's books include On Liberty, and Principles of Political Economy. Mill followed his father's political philosophy, which his father acquired from Jeremy Bentham, who developed the theory of Utilitarianism. This theory's main point is stated briefly: "that action is right which promotes the greatest happiness of the greatest number." Scruton critiques Mill on the 200th anniversary of the birth of John Stuart Mill. He says that Mill's writings and ideas still dominate jurisprudence in the English speaking world. As for example the idea expressed in "On Liberty," that the purpose of law is to protect the will of the individual, and the concept of harm. If one person's actions do not harm another person then the law should protect the individual to act and speak as he chooses. Other writings are Principles of Political Economy, which expresses liberalism in its modern sense. A liberalism where the state steps in to help and assist in equitable distribution of resources and opportunites to all people within the framework of "On Liberty," which sets maintaining individual freedoms as an aim of good government. Even though Scruton is right in saying that wisdom is deeper and more valuable than rational thought alone, Mill's thought processes for that build on and expound on Adam Smith in Principles of Political Economy may be right for his time. Especially considering the problems of Charles Dickens Victorian England, of industrialization, poverty and so on, and this because they were the wisdom of the time. The same thinking taken in a different context, distorted, with different labels in the 20th century, (socialist state that destroys individual rights) gave rise to many evils but they have little to do with the author and his context of Victorian England. Wisdom may very well suggest that the state overreached and in some cases destroyed freedoms and economic wealth in recent times, and now is in a moral vacuum when it comes to social issues like raising of children, society, etc. In each situation the best approach appears to be to look at each situation in its own special context and background, and history, to find creative and human solutions. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ raises questions about Chief Justice Roberts' written majority opinion, and says Justice Scalia's comment about SCOTUScare should be replaced with the term RobertScare. It says Justice Roberts has emerged twice as a "political" Justice in the way he has interpreted the law in this case.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein emphasizes the need to help homeowners with a plan he suggested back in June.. And suggests spending by the government to build infrastructure, other spending initiatives to stimulate demand, and rebuilding military capacity. Spending he suggests should be large enough to make an impact, as the loss of household wealth from falling home and stock prices could result in a loss in aggregate spending of $300 billion or more. He points to the need for urgent action.
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Norway's sovereign wealth fund, the Government Pension Fund Global, is run by Yngve Slyngstad. The fund has $570 billon, $100,000 for each of Norway's 4.9 million people. The fund took a 23% loss in 2008. Then the fund made a shift from 40% equity holding to 60% equity holding, which has paid off. The losses were reversed with a 26% gain in 2009 and a 10% gain in 2010. The fund gets all of Norway's oil revenues less about 4% of the fund's value that goes to the state budget. Slyngstad became CEO in 2008, and persuaded finance ministers to take on greater risk, leading to $175 billion in stock investments during the financial crisis. He has told Parliament that he will get returns of 4% after inflation- higher than returns of 3.1% that were made since 1998. With assets equal to 2% of the total market value of stocks trading in Europe, the Norwegian fund is a major investor. Rules set for the fund prohibit investments larger than 10% in any one stock.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Steve Lee Myers reporting from Moscow and St. Petersburg, Jo Becker from Washington and London, and Jim Yardley from Nicosia, Cyprus, provide this extraordinary and exceptional report on the rise of a small group of friends, mostly from Mr. Putin's time in St. Petersburg, into a new sort of oligarchy replacing the old one under Mr. Yeltsin. This includes more familiar names such as Sechin at Rosneft, but also less familiar names such as Mr. Kovalchuk, chairman of Bank Rossiya, which owns major television and radio stations and newspapers in Russia. M. Kovalchuk is described as having acquired many of these media properties at a fraction of their real value. Bank Rossiya assumed management of assets of Gazprombank, and Gazprom bank purchased Gazprom Media with five television and a number of radio stations for $166 million, when Medvedev, a Putin associate put the value at $7.5 billion 2 years following the acquisition, according to this report. Other assets acquired in this manner include Channel 5 and Ren TV, giving Putin's inner circle control of the media and reducing any critical or different views on issues facing Russia. Many of Gazprom's assets were transferred to Bank Rossiya, say critics, including insurer Sogaz which was acquired for $100 million, later valued at $2 billion, says the report. Names on the this inner circle also include Yakunin, head of Russian Railways, also include names like Fursenko and Timchenko. Most of the people in this inner circle are now targets of western sanctions. Missing in this report is mention that that this inner circle of the second term as president replaces the larger circle of the first terms as president and prime minister, with Putin benefitting from experts and advisors in the first terms. That circle included Finance minister Kudrin known for his successful management of the economy, and others who left the administration after flawed parliamentary elections. Even prime minister Medvedev is not mentioned as part of this inner circle, suggesting a degree of isolation which could be perilous for the Russian economy as it deprives the Russian president of different opinion and useful advice. This is a pattern seen in many emerging market countries which experience corruption during the period of industrial development. A pattern seen also in China under the Communist Party. And in Venezuela where a new Bolivarist class was created. In emerging market democracies such as India and Turkey the problem is also present, except that in India the recent open election led to the ouster of the Congress led government with many cases of corruption in its second term. A similiar election led to a new government in Indonesia, showing that there is another way beyond the Putin Way. Behind the protests in Hong Kong and in Russia, as well as in India, were the huge gaps in wealth and the growing inequality, corruption, lack of responsiveness of ruling governments. In Russia this takes another dimension with efforts to control the internet and media, and efforts to spread this style of democracy. This has created problems in the Putin government's relations with western nations having open societies and free media, and unwilling to accept a distorted model of democracy. Another less noticed aspect of the evolution of these emerging markets is that upto a point development proceeds even accelerates even in the presence of corruption, and then reaches a point where development and growth slows with problems of corruption, mismanagement of resources, declining productivity, economic and political errors, or unfavorable external environment. India faced this problem in 2012-2013, Russia is likely to face this in 2015, and China faces the prospect of growth slowdown by 2016. This feature of emerging markets also reminds one of the frequently quoted old English saying by Lord Acton- "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." An idea also attributed to William Pitt the Elder who said- "unlimited power tends to corrupt the minds of those who possess it." ...

Trade and Trust

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that the Obama administration has not been forthright in addressing critics of the Trans Pacific Trade Pact (TPP). He says the administration has simply talked about the benefits of free trade which finds general support, but not addressed specific issues about the pact, worker protections, the issue of access to drugs in developing countries of Latin America and Asia if intellectual property rights are strictly enforced, keeping U.S. financial industry regulations in place, and other issues raised by previous pacts.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Letters to the editor of the NYT cover issues with the Trans Pacific Trade Pact including worker protections, the right of corporations to sue the U.S. and other governments on actions that protect the public interest, and issues raised by past trade pacts.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chuck Hagel on the need to bring in more countries to handle difficult situations such as the one the US faces in Iraq and Afghanistan. He says thats why the world now has a G20 and not a G8. No country can face these situations alone especially when there is a mutual interest of many countries in these situations. He calls it a 20th century reaction to 21st century realities. He says the 2 wars cost more than a trillion dollars. One sees a new respect for international institutions such as the UN, World Bank, IMF, and GATT renamed WTO, even with Republicans. Chuck Hagel's point makes a lot of sense and is generally accepted in people's understanding of the situation from the Defence Department to the Administration, and among respected politicians. It is putting it onto practice that is the hard part. As Hagel puts it, it is important to remember what Lyndon Johnson told Senatior Russell, that he knew the Vietnam war could not be won, and yet he did not want to pull out and be the first American President to lose a war. This is a contradiction because if it can't be won its going to be lost under the next President or the one after that, in this case Gerald Ford. Hagel says it not ours to win and lose. Here he points to the interconnectedness and shared interests of all nations. Every great threat to the U.S., whether it is economic, terrorism, nuclear weapons proliferation, health pandemics, environmental degradation, energy or water and food shortages, is also a threat to global partners ansd rivals. So its wrong to view engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan through the lens that says its about winning or losing. And he asks win what? Too many cultural, ethnic and religious dynamics are involved for any one nation to control. Hagel concludes by saying that the US, the Defense Department, the Obama administration, must get this right, as it affects the global architecture for the next generation. Fresh thinking is needed. Single issue engagement is obsolete in the 21st century in dealing with global partners or rivals, or countries with aspects of both....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The results of the February 24, 2011, CBS/New York Times poll show strong support for public workers in schools, firefighters, police and other functions. On collective bargaining 60% opposes weakening the bargaining rights of public workers, only 33% support it. On reducing the benefits and pay of public workers to reduce deficits, 56% opposed cutting pay or benefits, only 37% support it. Are public workers overpaid or have overly generous health and pension benefits. On this issue 61% -including over half of Republicans- say the salaries of public workers were either "about right" or "too low" for the work they do. So how are states to reduce their deficits? The people polled say they prefer tax increases over benefit cuts for public employees- only 22% chose to reduce the benefits of public employees, 40% said they would increase taxes, 20% said they would cut financing for roads, only 3% said they would cut financing for education. How this breaks down in politcal groups. 71% of Democrats opposed weakening collective bargaining rights, the opposition was also strong from Independents with 62% of Independents opposing weakening of collective bargaining rights. Followup interviews showed independents saying the public workers work hard and still struggle to have a home, saving for retirement, and sending their kids to college, with both spouses generally having to work, which is why they oppose weakening collective bargaining rights. Which segment of the populations support cutting pay and benefits of public workers? The one income group that showed support for cutting pay and benefits- those earning over $100,000 a year! There 45% said they favored cutting pay and benefits, even here 49% opposed it. On the intentions of the governors and state legislators trying to cut pay or benefits of public workers- 45% said they did this to cut the deficits, and as many as 41% said the saw this as an effort to weaken unions. Which takes one to the last question, so how are unions perceived in the U.S. in 2011? A far smaller number of people, 37% saw unions as having "too much influence" on American life and politics vs. 48% who said that unions had the "right amount" or "too little" influence....
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The failure of the economics profession to produce any red flags for this economic crisis, and the failure of economists to come to any consensus on what works to come out of this crisis, along with the huge confidence with which the economics profession displayed as the economy sailed along in most of the post war years, is one of the very noticeable things as one reflects on what has happened. Journalists like Peter Coy at BW who wrote this report followed the housing market for BW and raised red flags long before the crisis hit, just by looking at the facts. So its clear that looking at the facts through the lens of a particular theory of economics, or the lens of some ideological bias, or the lens of triumphalism, can handicap economists. There are economists who believe in the stimulus, and economists who don't believe in a stimulus, and others who think the economy reaches equilibrium of itself if left alone, and economists who believe in tax cuts. Were it not for the fact that the risks in a time like this are really great in depending on one or the other for advice if things don't work out the way they think, this would not be such a big issue. But a lot hangs inthe balance. Which is why decisions are based on what is actually happening on the ground, and by getting a good sense of that, and a grasp of real conditions, and getting agood sense of what will work in that particular situation, and not just hoping that things will work out according to some theory or conviction in the mind. And those who execute or manage the economy instead of teaching a class, have to be aware of the great responsibility for the lives of millions of people here and in poor countries around the globe, whose lives and the lives of their children, nutrition, health and education depend on their decisions, not just when they are in office but years after they have left. And for this reason exercize needed caution....

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