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 ›
LyrArc Article Gist
By putting the credibility of 6 Republican National Chairmen in recent years on the line, including Republican figures such as Bill Brock and Bob Dole, this op-ed article in the WSJ aims to put to rest any doubts about the rule that an absolute majority of delegates is always needed to become the nominee of the Republican Party. This is true since Lincoln won the nomination on the third ballot, and who would never have been president if this was not the rule. The party coalesced behind Lincoln after the nominee on the first ballot failed to win. This also happened when Reagan won a million more votes than Gerald Ford but gracefully conceded to Ford who had the delegate lead. Eisenhower also was nominated on the second ballot after the leading candidate failed to win the first ballot. Reasons given by the party chairmen for this setup are that the party works to elect the best candidate to represent it by coming together at the convention behind the best leader for the party in the general election. Only about 17% of eligible voters voted in the Republican primaries, with a highly fragmented vote, which make the primaries only one way of bringing in public representation, the other being grassroots leaders in each state party having their views represented as delegates, leaders of the party in prevous elections also offering their views and being represented in some form. Even the general election system of electoral votes is based on winning by state electoral votes and does not simply tally up the votes in the entire country, the framework for the Senate with 2 senators for each state, 2 for California and 2 for Wyoming is not entirely on number of voters because it was the intent of the founders for the Senate to bring representation in a different way than for the House of Representatives, all the time looking for appropriate checks and balances for good government as the goal they set above everything else....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
James Areddy explains why the Jinping administration in China was so keen on promoting gains in the equity markets. It was seen as a way to ease the debt overhang from the 2008 Stimulus of $586 billion. The Stimulus was put together in November 2008 to pay for infrastructure, construction and social spending, at a level that was 3 times the stimulus proposed in the European Union. Critics say that the initial signs of a crisis that might affect the government are magnified in China's authoritarian political structure, with one example being the size of this stimulus. With this kind of hasty spending a common problem is that not enough good projects can be found. One example of wasted spending is the $930 million spent to build the Shanghai West rail station from a older structure that had fallen into disuse. With three other stations serving Shanghai this station gets little traffic. The Jinping administration promoted the stock market as a way for companies to issue equity and reduce debt, and make less reliance on bank loans. The result was to push the Shanghai Composite Index up by 150% for the one year gain by June 12, 2015. The government also made it possible for individual investors to borrow money to invest in the market. About $354 billion of margin lending to finance stock purchases is estimated by Goldman Sachs, which now poses problems with a one third decline in stocks after June 12, 2015, leading to losses for individual investors. The loss of the boost from the stock market is likely to hurt GNP growth by 1% percentage point, according to Capital Economics. As China's real growth according to experts is closer to 4%, because of statistical errors and overestimates, according to experts, this could pose a serious problem for the economy. Countries dependent on commodity exports to China such as Australia, Chile and Brazil are likely to feel the effects of a decline in demand for iron ore, copper and other metals....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. takes in 70,000 refugees a year, but only 1500 Syrian refugees have been taken in by the U.S. by Sept. 2015, as a huge migrant refugee crisis unfolds in Europe. Germany has to make the same background checks and is moving quickly, the U.S. takes 18-24 months. The withdrawal of the U.S. from the Middle East under the Obama administration led to the collapse of the fragile situation in Libya, Iraq and Syria, and the unraveling of these countries, a direct cause of the massive refugee crisis in the region with about half the Syrian population and large parts of Iraqi, Kurdish, and Libyan population dislocated. The result is a massive humanitarian crisis, turning the hopes of the Arab Spring into something no one could have imagined across North Africa. In a small Lutheran church in Frankfurt, Paulskirche, is the German story of a popular movement that spread throughout Europe in 1848, for a transition from autocratic governments to parliamentary democracy. Aspirations similiar to that expressed in the Middle East and North Africa in 2013-2014 in the Arab Spring were expressed in Germany and many parts of Europe in 1848. In the centre of Berlin on the Kurfstendamm lie the bombed but preserved ruins of the Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church, telling the story of the intervening years 1848-1949. It took many years before the same aspirations for liberty found shape in Germany's Public Law of 1949, finally finding a safe resting place after years of failing to unify a people around the ideas of liberty and justice for all, and not nationalism. Germans who had the hardest time waging that fight, by embracing the refugees in a spirit of openness carry on that fight into this century. Paul asks the question- who will lead? A Lutheran pastor's daughter takes up the fight without the slightest hesitation, and full measure of confidence with the words- "Europe will have failed on the question of refugees, if the close connection between it and universal civil rights is destroyed." ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
At a time of volatility and anxiety in financial markets Americans put their trust in Vanguard Funds. Vanguard funds took in 40% of the entire cash flow of the mutual fund industry in the first half of 2012, $87.7 billion went to Vanguard excluding money market funds. This was largely because of the index funds which Vanguard originated and which were Bogle's invention. Today Bogle, 83, still speaks up for investors and investing for the long run, on staying away from speculation and protecting U.S. financial markets from speculative behaviours. He says the financial industry has to put investor and client interests first, with no excuses made for behaviour, period, at a time when the financial industry has lost its compass and direction. Bogle heads the research center at Vanguard Funds following disagreements with his hand picked successor Brennan, and leaving the Board in 1999. The current head at Vanguard Funds, CEO McNabb, says Vanguard owes its success to all the foundations set by Bogle. Bogle says strategy follows structure, and the structure he built of investor ownership of Vanguard Funds prevents a situation where owners can siphon off funds, or engage in activities that would hurt investors. Bogle's differences with Brennan came from his efforts to institutionalize other ideas such as investing for the long term, and shunning frequent trading which could happen with the creation of exchange traded funds (ETF's). Bogle has had several heart operations since 1999, and a successful heart transplant. This has not slowed his adocacy efforts on behalf of investors, with 11 books on investing and safeguarding financial markets from excesses of the kind seen in the 2008 financial crisis. The most recent book is "The Clash of Cultures: Investment vs. Speculation" (Wiley & Sons, $29.95). In the book he calls for a grass roots effort by investors to protect America's retirement system, and finances of younger parents with children to send to college, from the damage that is happening with the financial system in acute stage of dysfunction. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Andrew Higgins tells the story of the China Power Investment Corporation's hydro electricity generation project on Burma's Irrawady river. The project is located in the northern part of Burma, in Myitsone, Kachin state. This was to be the first of seven hydroelectric dams on the Irrawady river. Initial opposition to the project by local people turned into a national opposition movement against the projects as it became clear that the huge project which would generate as much electricity as the Three Gorges dam in China, or seven times the Hoover dam in the U.S., would for the most part benefit China. Burma's economy was too small after decades of neglect to need this much electricity. The fears of ecological damage, uprooting the people living in the area, took on a new dimension as national opposition coalesced around the issue of Burmese sovereignty. The former general, President Thein Sein, who assumed the position in March 2011, had second thoughts. One former military officer, leading one of the opposition groups, expressed fears that Burma would become a colony that helped China meet its energy needs under the arrangement with China Power Investment Corporation. China was already working with regimes in Sudan and Angola to meet its energy needs. In September 2011, President Thein Sein halted work on the project. This happens just as the country's military is relaxing its hold on the media and allowing opposition leaders to express their views. The two developments may be connected as the military sees the need for getting public support to counter China's pressure to go along with the project. Years of external pressure failed to create an opening for democracy in Burma. This event appears to create the atmosphere for a genuine expression of Burmese feeling and desire for protecting its sovereignty, which would help it join the world community, with the military finding a common ground with public sentiment....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Timothy Egan points to the huge gap between a T.R. in 1910 making the speech in Osawatomie, eastern Kansas, and Professor Obama making an election speech in 2011. T.R.'s was an election manifesto that brought up the issues of conservation, child labor, a plea for an income tax, call for worker protections, limits on corporate power and influence on the laws and direction of the country. The speech was made in 1910, after Taft had assumed the presidency with Roosevelt's backing, and would lead to T.R. running against Taft and Woodrow Wilson. Most of what T.R. advocated became part of the country's social and economic fabric, much of the work beginning with Theodore Roosevelt's two terms as president, and also pursued by Woodrow Wilson, the president elected in 1912. By contrast, in line with the timidity of today's politics, Obama's speech called for approving his nominee for consumer protection bureau chief, and continuance of tax cuts for the middle class. Egan calls it a curse of today's politics and national debate that no politician can set the course for revitalizing America the way T.R. did. Some of what T.R. said in Kansas that day is: "There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task, but it can be done." "The right to regulate the use of wealth in the public interest is universally admitted." Jackie Calmes covered the extensive ties of both candidates, Obama and McCain, to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, in her report for the New York Times, on September 9, 2008- "For 08' Rivals a Skein of Ties to Loan Giants." Paul Gigot, editorial page editor of the Wall Street Journal, who with his reporters did some of the difficult reporting on Fannie and Freddie, wrote in one of his columns with a note of pessimism, that he wasn't sure that either of the presidential candidates were interested in what was happening. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Floyd Norris says the announcement by the ECB on Dec. 20, 2011, that 523 banks borrowed 489 billion euros under the newly created Long Term Financing Operation goes a long way towards giving Europe time to address the debt crisis. A major problem is recapitalization of European banks and the ECB's action helps address this problem. This is one of the achievements of the December summit of European leaders, though it was not the way markets had expected. Markets were focussed on large scale bond buying by the European Central Bank or issuance of euro bonds. ECB head, Mario Draghi, aware of widespread opposition in Germany to such proposals made it clear this was not going to happen. The Long Term Financing Operation of the ECB provides unlimited amounts of loans to European banks at 1% for 3 years, and accepts sovereign government debt as well as other types of securities as collateral. The result of this action was to lower the yield on a recent Spanish bond auction to 1.7% for three month bills from 5.1% the prior month. Spanish and Italian banks can now buy government debt of their countries and use the bonds as collateral at the ECB for three year loans at 1%. This Norris estimates will generate profits of about 37 billion euros for European banks from the difference between the ECB rate of 1% and the rate on two year bonds of Spain and Italy of 3.6% and 5.1% respectively for the bond purchases of 489 billion euros- calculated on a spread of 2.5 percentage points over three years. Another infusion of funds from the ECB will occur in February 2012. The new capital infusion gives European banks less reason to reduce lending in the eurozone as they work to meet the higher capital reserve requirements set under new Basel III rules. This is especially important given the austerity measures being implemented across the eurozone countries and Britain to reduce government deficits, and in light of the lower growth expected as a result....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The engineering changes in the design of the 787 Boeing Dreamliner provide an experience in humidity levels, altitude levels, turbulence, and roominess that is not dramaically different but enough to provide a noticeably better experience. Nobumi Matsuda, who runs an eye clinic in Japan and is studying the eye health of pilots, says he expected more, that humidity levels were not enough. Boeing used the construction of the body of the jet using super strong plastics instead of aluminium, to create a small increase in humidity levels. The humidity level inside the Dreamlier is 10-15% compared to 4-7% in other airplanes. By pressurizing the cabin to lower altitudes there is a 6% increase in oxygen absorbed at the 6000 feet level at which it is set than the 8000 feet level, according to Boeing. Michael Grepo, a computer systems expert taking the Tokyo to Frankfurt flight on ANA, says he experienced an improvement in breathing, dryness of the nose and contact lens, but it was not a huge difference. Thorsten Hoffmann, a German sales executive says he did not notice till he got off the flight, when he realized that he felt good, had slept better. Othe changes are big overhead bins. The large windows are supposed to reduce motion sickness and provide great views on takeoff and landing. Boeing says "while it can be argued that the passenger comfort improvements are incremetal, the combination of so many improvements in one airplane is revolutionary in our opinion." At the customer level these are proving less revolutinary and more of a subtle type that add up to a noticeable improvement. Boeing now has on its hands a remarkable sales success, with 870 Dreamliners ordered by 59 of the world's airlines. A big factor from the airlines point of view is high fuel prices. The 787 is 20% more fuel efficient than the comparable size Boeing 767....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Questions are being raised about the lack of fairness in the cuts imposed in Greece - and the IMF acknowledges this- where the minimum wage was cut by 22%, but the most highly paid civil servants had their salaries cut by 10%. Germany's finance minister Wolfgang Schauble told the German daily newspaper Der Tagesspiegel: "I really feel for the people of Greece. The vast majority now hard-hit by reform and austerity measures... can do nothing about the backup in reforms, the loss of competitiveness and the unproductive use of funds in the past." In Greece there is a separate wage scale for the highly paid public sector employees such as doctors, diplomats, professors, and uniformed personnel in the military and police. This is different from what the ministry bureaucrats, hospital support staff and local government administrators get paid. This group took only a 10% cut, even though it makes up one third of the payroll according to IMF and EU estimates. The cuts to the minimum wage were made to improve Greece's competitiveness and because in Greece during the last decade wages went up much higher compared to Germany. Brian Carney pointed out in a Journal article Feb. 14, 2012, that nominal private sector labor costs went up by 62% in Greece from 2000-2008 compared to 15% in Germany. Showing the nature of the fight to make the cuts more equitable, is the resistance to the IMF-EU insistence on cuts to the highest pensions which amounted to $178 million. In the end prime minister Papademos said the monthly pension of $1975 was reduced by $32 or 1.6%. The lack of fairness creates more uncertainty about the cuts as elections are expected in April, only 7-8 weeks from now, and fears that this may not hold when a new government is elected. For this reason the IMF-EU officials are considering putting the $170 billion bailout money in an escrow account....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gretchen Morgenson of the Times distills key insights from 633 page report by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. Morgenson points to the role of the Federal Reserve in Washington and New York in being as she describes it, defiantly inert and uninterested in controlling the mortgage bubble even when it had grown to enormous proportions.The problem now is that the same Fed has received more regulatory powers under the Dodd-Frank law. The same Fed repeatedly did not exert its authority on predatory lending. Page 94 of the report cites a total of only three institutions referred to prosecutors by the Fed from 2000 to 2006. Page 164 shows why there have been so few prosecutions for mortgage fraud from the bursting of the mortgage bubble. William Black, a former fraud investigator and professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, says the FBI has received virtually no assistance from the regulators, the banking regulators and the thrift regulators. The report contains some outrageous comments by one of the key players in fueling the mortgage bubble, Angelo Mozilo of Countrywide Financial. Morgenson describes him as a lender that roped unsuspecting borrowers into poisonous loans. Mozilo says in an interview on page 105 that his company prevented "social unrest" by providing loans to 25 million borrowers, many from minority groups. Never mind that this wave of poisonous loans has clogged the arteries of the nation's financial system, and resulted in foreclosures for millions of homeowners, creating a troubled housing market that hobbles the economy. Neil Barofsky, special inspector general of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, sees further bailouts ahead. He said in a report to Congress in late January 2011: "Unless and until an institution like Citigroup is either broken up, so that it is no longer a threat to the financial system, or a structure put in place that it will be left to suffer the full consequences of its own folly, the prospect of more bailouts willl potentially fuel more bad behaviour with potentially disastrous results." ...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The crisis of late 2008 and early 2009 in the global economy saw huge stimulus programs, resposible economic management, and rapid recovery by the end of 2009 in developing countries. China put in place a large stimulus program, and in most developing countries, India, Vietnam, Brazil and other countries efforts were made to strengthen the safety net for the poor and to introduce stimulus for creating jobs. India and Indonesis saw the return of ruling party governments and in Brazil Lula da Silva had favorability ratings above 60%. So contrary to earlier fears in late 2008 their was both asense of political stability and asense of confidence in the developing countries. Capital is flowing into these countries and the IIF says that net private capital inflows to developing countries will double in 2010 to $672 billion. Russia which saw capital outflows of $50 billion in the first 9 months saw $20 billon of capital inflows in the fourth quarter of 2009. Half of the 140 million laborers working in Chinese cities returned home in early 2009, a fifth stayed there and another fifth counld not find work when they returned to the cities. But as the stimulus in China kicked in, and infrastructure development surged, (see link to the rail infrastructure spending) by the middle of 2009 jobless ness among rural migrant workers went down to less than 3%. This shows in the Pew Global Attitudes Project wth more than 40% of respondents in India, China and Indonesia saying that they were satisfied with their lives, in China this was 87%. In France, Japan and Britain the share is below 30%. In America 49% of those in the Pew pollingfelt that America should mind its own business internationally, 30 points higher than in 1964. When asked "Are you better off in free markets?" the respondents share fell in 2009 in Germany by 4 points, in Spain by 10 points. Shares rose in India and China, and stayed flat in Brazil and Turkey, so there is no backlash against free markets in developing countries....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As Washington Post writer points out from personal experience- he is one of those who put up 15% to buy ahome inDenver at the top of the market and now has negative equity as prices drop- negative equity is one of the most serious problems facing the US economy. It has the potential to undo many of the encouraging things from the stimulus, as rising foreclosures continue to act as adrag on the overall economy. As he says about one fourth of Americans with home mortgages, or about 11-15 million people, owe more money on their homes than the market value of their homes. As Hoffman says the administration's approach has been a Band-Aid at best for a serious injury. The Obama administration set aside only $75 billion to get banks to modify loans and also made this voluntary for banks to modify loans. Treasury Secretary Geithner testified in Congress: "This is a conscious choice we made, not to start with principal reduction. We thought it would be dramatically more expensive for the American taxpayer, harder to justify, create much greater risk of unfairness." But making it voluntary means very little of this $75 billion has gone to help achieve modifications- banks had no incentives to do this. Only 31,000 permanent loan modifications have been made. Of the 750,000 temporary loan modifications made as of Dec 2009 only 4% of homeowners signing up have qualified for permanent federal relief. See the links to Martin Feldstein's proposals for this on the pages of the Wall Street Journal in 2008 and 2009 which called for aggressive program of relief for the sake of the economy. With 2.4 million Americans likely to lose their homes in 2009 according to Moody's Economy.com estimates, following the 2 million in 2009 and 1.7 million in 2008, this may be a serious mistake of the Obama administration and drag out this recovery....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the whereabouts of Masataka Shimizu, president of Tokyo Electric Power Company, which owns the Fukushima nuclear plant. Shimizu was last seen in public appearances at a news conference on March 13, 2011. The chairman of the upper house of Japan's Diet, the parliament, calls this "inexcusable." The governor of Fukushima prefecture, Yuhei Sato, tells Japanese television that the people there cannot accept apologies, "because their anger and anxiety are extreme." Protestors walk past Tepco headquarters, chanting "No more Hiroshimas."Toko Kanoh, a former Tepco vice president, and for 12 years member of the Diet upper house, says Shimizu should talk to the public as soon as possible. This kind of disappearance is not uncommon in Japanese corporate circles. During the Toyota recall crisis, the chief of Toyota was also unavailable. Shimizu like other senior executives in the corporate elite is a lifer, having joined Tepco at 23, after graduating from Keio University. Because of the size and influence of Tepco, it produces one third of Japan's energy, he is also vice chairman of the Nippon Keidanren, the Japan Business Federation. Shimizu's role at Tepco was marked by an effort to restore profitability after the 2007 earthquake that damaged a nuclear plant. Shimizu decribed Tepco's core mission in the last annual report as "cost-cutting. He describes the need to construct "disaster resistant nuclear power stations," but at the same time in somewhat of a contradiction, says that the company had cut the cost of inspections not "by postponing them but by reducing their frequency." Just as Toyota went through a wrenching crisis after cost cutting and insulated corporate executive behaviour, which combined with technology and user behaviour put its safety reputation in risk, Tepco finds itself in severe shock. Tepco has lost two thirds of its value on the Tokyo stock exchange, and is looking for $25 billion in emergency loans. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The ABX Index which tracks subprime bonds is showing signs of recovery. The prices for representative parts of the subprime bond market have doubled from a low of 30 cents on the dollar to about 60 cents. This is happening as investors and some companies are taking on more risk and finding lenders. This is helping push up prices of commodities, junk bonds and stocks. The larger yields on the subprime bonds are attracting investors. Non-agency bonds- bonds not backed by Fannie and Freddie- yield between 5% to 7%, above the 4% yield on high quality corporate bonds and the 3.5% yield on U.S. government bonds. Demand for these bonds is growing. Companies that invest in these sub-prime bonds such as MFA Financial were buying $100 million of these bonds in 2010, and have increased this to $300 million a month recently. MFA Financial is able to do so because it can find funding from lenders who are now not as worried about the risks of these subprime bonds. Another development in this market is the offer of AIG to buy back apool of bonds that the Federal Reserve had taken over from AIG during the financial crisis of 2008. AIG offered to pay $15.7 billion for the pool of bonds with a face value of $30 billion. The Fed cited a high level of interest from investors and rejected that offer. The Fed will now let investors bid for these bonds to maximize its gain on these bonds. In another development even conservative investors such as four large life insurers are looking at buying these subprime bonds. Scott Robinson, a senior vice president of Moody's Investors Service, says the high levels of capital available is leading to a re-risking of balance sheets, even though it is not back to the old days yet. Considerable risks still remain in the housing market according to Nouriel Roubini and other experts....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Scotland joined with England and Wales to form Great Britain in 1707, at a time of increasing opportunities for Scottish people in the expanding British Empire. Britain's shipbuilding industry had a major base in Glasgow. During the Thatcher Conservative government Scotland suffered, and decades of globalization led to gradual deindustrialization for Scotland, the demise of the shipbuilding and other industries. The Labor Party under prime minister Blair pursued a "devolution of powers" policy, creating the first Scottish parliament following a referendum in 1999. Ironically this has changed the fortunes of the Scottish Nationalist Party led by Jack Salmond, a economist first elected to the British parliament in 1987. Salmond became head of the party in 1990 and led it to second place in 1999 elections, followed by a win in 2007 and 2011 elections. Salmond is seen as a vigorous campaigner, who can speak above others and not seen as a good listener. The party gained the confidence of Scottish voters by running a competent administration led by businessmen who were well aware of problems in local communities. Programs such as free prescriptions for medicines were popular with voters. The Labor Party stands to lose its voter base in Scotland (former Labor prime minister Gordon Brown is from Scotland), and the Conservative Party will also suffer a blow with a yes vote to independence. Polls show voters don't fully trust Salmond, but a majority 39% support an yes vote to 38% no vote, with 23% undecided. Britain just emerging from a deep recession would lose Scottish oil revenues of about 6 billion pounds, and the economy would suffer as business waited to see how things would turn out before making investments. Scotland now manages health, education and transport. Even without independence Scotland now stands to gain more powers and control, and control a higher percentage than the 60% of Scotland's budget that the Scottish government manages today. Scotland represents about 148 billion pounds or 9.2% of the UK GDP....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
EU Competition Commissioner, Margarethe Vestager, on a trip to the U.S. to meet FTC and Justice Department officials, says the situation in Europe is different from that in the U.S. In Europe Google has a dominant position with over 90% market share, much more than in the U.S. where Yahoo and Microsoft are competitors in general Internet search. She said about Google following the filing of formal antitrust charges by the EU against the company- "is a successful company because they have good products. But the compliments, they stop when you get the suspicion that there may be an abuse of this very strong and dominant position." In earlier statements Vestager has said that the dominant position in all its ramifications poses "societal challenges." Complaints to the EU Commission originated with Microsoft and smaller companies affected by Google. News Corp, publisher of the WSJ, has joined a group of companies in filing new formal complaints in April 2015 with the EU Commission about Google practices. Google now has 10 weeks to respond to the charges. In the U.S. the FTC also had concerns, with FTC staffers favoring filing formal charges. In the end the FTC decided to rely on Google making voluntary changes to three practices taken up by the FTC- including complaints about "scraping" of content from rival websites, and its restrictions on the ability of advertisers to use competing platforms. Vestager sees the need to get the process moving, as it has dragged on for about 5 years, saying "it is important for us to be more speedy in getting the question out, to be able for Google, for competitors, but most of all for consumers to see our concern." The EU Commission charges about Google favoring its own comaprison shopping service are a way for Vestager to establish a broader precedent, as it looks into other ways Google's uses its dominant position to favor its own products and services....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Adam Bryant interviews Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft in Feb. 2014. Nadella led the cloud computing effort at Microsoft before becoming CEO in 2014. He is a native of Hyderabad, India, studied electronics and communication engineering at Manipal Institute of Technology, and computer science at the University of Wisconsin. Here Nadella recalls his early leadership experiences. As a bowler on his school's cricket team (similiar to a pitcher in baseball), Nadella was pulled out from a bowling spell when he wasn't having success getting batters out. He recalls the captain bowling to get some outs and then putting Nadella back in, who continued getting wickets at that point. He sees this sports analogy as a leadership experience where the captain was sensitive about keeping Nadella motivated and confident, and giving him an opportunity to try again. He takes more out of this and other experiences in his role at Microsoft- to create energy and genuine commitment in his team, and build a team effort to take advantage of opportunties that present themselves in the future. Nadella makes some interesting observations about the tech business. A $1 million business can seem too small for a large company, but in the tech business driven constantly by innovation, there is the need to pay attention to innovation that starts small. At some point says Nadella an innovation can appear to be a failure, an absolute flop, until it becomes a hit. Leadership has to be able to dig deeper and listen, as small changes can lead to big things. About people Nadella likes to know what people have done that they are most proud of, and what they feel didn't work out or where they failed, and looks for how a person can reflect on his experiences and grow as a result of having had them. A useful point Nadella makes at the end of the interview is that people outlive companies in our rapidly changing society, having a sense of our own mortality within this short duration, gives one a special sense of responsibility. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A professor at Georgetown University on why it takes time to build democratic institutions, with one important omission- the military in Muslim countries such as Egypt have no intention of building these institutions and have undermined the development of these institutions for decades. A bigger omission lies in inability of the military in the most populous Muslim countries with horrendous gaps in development in basic welfare indices such as education, infrastructure and services, that have put these countries decades behind developing Asia and even Latin America which also had a past of military rule. In countries such as Pakistan and Egypt the military simply lacked the skillset and abilities to deliver in economic terms. Therein lies the biggest failure. In China and Russia the governments have popular support because of their capability to deliver economic growth that has transformed both countries and improved the lives of the people in the region. These crucial omissions explain why Republicans such as Senator John McCain and Lindsey see the need for the U.S. to be on the right side for change. Latin America shook off its history of military rule or one party rule and Brazil, Chile, Mexico are part of two free trade regions in Latin America, supporting the free trade system and economic growth in this hemisphere. The issue ultimately rests with the people of Pakistan, Egypt, and other Muslim countries, and a process of learning, compromise, healing and reconciliation that ocurred in Latin America is likely to follow in the Muslim world. It has already begun in Pakistan which like India has a independent judiciary and lively press, and some of the institutions for a functioning demcoracy. The worst omission is unmentionable because it is so obvious - that of firing live ammunition into protesters for democracy. Years after this happened in S. Korea, Mexico and other countries the day is remembered in a certain way. The important point is that when it comes to this there is no exception to the pattern. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
By July 2013 only about 40% of the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation rules were completed, 60% of deadlines were missed, according to law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP. A singular aspect of the Dodd-Frank legislation was that rule making was left to regulators in different agencies and open to lobbying by the financial industry. This has the effect of delaying the rule making until a consensus is reached, diluting some of the original intent as financial firms jockey for advantage, and making it voluminous in many cases because of the wording designed to achieve consensus and account for objections by various interests. Reform legislators such as Barney Frank openly said they had no interest in learning enough about the financial industry to do the rule making, and may have left an excessive amount of the rule making to regulators in the future. A consumer protection agency was established under the new law and derivatives are required to be traded on exchanges. The Volcker Rule to separate investment banking from deposit taking and a requirement that banks hold onto a portion of mortgage securities marketed are not completed. The S.E.C. has to write the rule on how much money brokerages must set aside for losses on swap trades. Another bubble in financial markets would leave the U.S. and European economies vulnerable to problems similiar to the global financial crisis of 2008, which is why the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and the European regulatory authorites are requiring large banks to set aside more capital reserves. The S.E.C. under its new chief is also taking a more active role in overseeing the banks for violations of securities laws, including a series of actions taken against JP Morgan Chase bank in 2013. This has a deterrent effect as the huge monetary easing by the U.S. Federal Reserve to reduce unemployment also creates bubble conditions in financial markets, according to Fed governor, Jeremy Stein. Former FDIC chief, Sheila Bair, says the lack of leadership in this area is simply astonishing....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's energy efficient industry is a role model for the western world and for India and China. For years Japan has had a national consensus on consuming less energy an industry has focused on developing energy efficent technologies and investing in it even when oil prices were low. Japan wants to now contribute to the world in this area at the G8 summit on the island of Hokkaido. According to the International Energy Agency in Paris, Japan consumes half as much energy per dollar worth of economic activity as the European Union or the United States, and one-eighth as much as India or China in 2005. According to the Japanese Economic Ministry data corporate Japan has kept its energy consumption annually at a billion barrels of oil since the early 1970's even as the country's economy doubled in size during the 1970's and 1980's. The Japanese steel industry invested $45 billion dollars between 1972 to 2006 in developing energy saving technologies, according to the Japan Iron and Steel Federation. By capturing heat and gases that go into waste JFE Steel at its Keihin mill on Tokyo Bay uses it to power generators that produce 90% of the plant's electricity. The Japanese government is now pushing an initiative that sets Japan's level of energy conservation as targets of global industries. For instance the group leader of JFE's climate change policy group says that by adopting Japanese conservation technologies the global steel industry could reduce carbon emissions by 300 million tons a year. The sector approach advocated by Japan means setting the same numerical goals for all companies in an industry, regardless of location. At next week's summit meeting Japan willl back an initiative that sets its conservation induced energy levels as the new standards for global industries. This will also promote the sale and use of Japanese energy saving technologies around the world....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Walmart comes out in favor of requiring employers to provide health insurance to all workers, a central feature of President Obama's effort to provide near universal coverage in the USA. As the country's largest private employer, employing 1.4 million Americans, this change is significant. In a letter to the President, Walmart CEO Mike Duke, joined by Andrew Stern of the Service Employees International Union, and John Podesta of the Center for American Progress, who also signed the letter, say they are for an employer mandate which is fair and broad in its coverage. Walmart had a couple of reasons for doing this. For one Walmart needed to join the negotiations, as the Senate Finance Committee is considering other proposals that are less favorable to Walmart than employer mandate. Already Walmart is covering 52% of its employees, and has improved health benefits in recent years in response to criticism of the company. The industry average is 45%, according to a 2008 Kaiser Foundation study, and some companies do not provide the health benefits that Walmart does, so this helps level the playing field by requiring all large companies to share the burden. Walmart wants to see effective cost controls to keep costs down, and Rahm Emmanuel, the President's chief of staff, assured Walmart that "cost control and employer mandate are heads and tails of the same coin." Under the plans considered by the Senate Finance Committee under Max Baucus, small businesses are exempted from the employer mandate. Republicans have opposed employer mandate. And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has opposed it saying it would make companies lower wages and cut jobs. Walmart's shift has been gradual. From a company used to providing skimpy benefits, it has evolved as it improved benefits, and two years ago it joined the SEIU union to call for affordable health care for all Americans by 2012. It has Mr Dach as its governmental affairs vice president, and this is significant, as Dach is an advisor to Democratic party politicians....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
After a long year of uncertainty this is what it comes down to. The new turnaround plan developed by CEO Fritz Henderson and the government's auto task force will leave the government owning more than half of GM. Under this plan GM will get an additional $11.6 billion in loans from Treasury, on top of the $15.4 billion already received. THer government will get half of the ownership of the company in payment for half of these two loans. And GM will use stock instead of cash to pay off half of the $20.4 billion it owes a United Auto Workers fund to cover retiree health care. That transaction will leave 39% of GM in the hands of the UAW. This happens just as another agreement was reached to leave the UAW with 55% ownership of restructured Chrysler, and FIat SpA getting 35%, with the US government and lenders owning the rest. What happens to bondholders? They were told to swap $27 billion of unsecured debt for a 10% company stake. GM and the government give bondholders little choice, if they do not do so GM's Fritz Henderson says GM will file for bankruptcy. In 2011 hourly workers will be less than 40,000. Market share will shrink to 18% in 2014 from 22% in 2008. The number of dealers will drop to 3605 by 2011, down 42% from 2008, and GM will kill the Pontiac brand. Much of the company will have disappeared, showing how market forces are at work in our system in destroying companies, and leaving them as a fragment of what they once were, if management gets complacent and makes a series of errors. Its a big development and shows the savy shown by the government auto task force's leaders in setting up the arrangements. A smaller GM will emerge. But this is an understatement if ever there was one. Here is a company that had close to 200,000 workers in 2000, with hourly workers close to 150,000. See the graph. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The decision to replace Gen. McKiernan with Gen. McChrystal and to have Lt. Gen David Rodriguez as his deputy, was made by Defense Secretary Gates and Jt Chiefs chairman Mullen, after thinking about this during the transition to the new Obama administration. The failing war effort in Afghanistan with the Karzai government controlling only pockets of Afghanistan and Kabul and leaving the countryside to the Taliban has alot to do with this. Gates feeling is "we can and must do better." That it took so long, with the Taliban only 50 miles from Islamabad, Pakistan, and the question of Paksitan's nuclear weapons falling into thier hands vexing the adminstration, shows that things slowed down with the transition and the economic crisis. The decision was not adifficult one considering that McKiernan had little to show for his efforts, and the rapidly deteriorating situation by all accounts. McKiernan was a senior officer who spent his entire military career commanding conventional forces, serving in the Balkans and the Iraq war in 2003, and has the wrong midset and background for counterinsurgency warfare. McChrystal has experiences suited to counterinsurgency warfare, having commanded commando teams that took out leading insurgents. He is also director of the Joint chiefs of staff, so known to Mullen for his abilities. Rodriguez commanded the 82nd Airborne Division in eastern Afghanistan, is seen as aleading expert in counterinsurgency warfare. He is also Gates's senior military advisor so known to Gates for his abilities. The new strategy is to go with counterinsurgency warfare to turn this thing around. This puts 2 commanders with this kind of experience in Kabul, and close communication with Gates and Mullen because they worked together before. With additional troops, and shift in resource acquisition at the Pentagon that Gates is trying to secure for this kind of warfare, this creates the kind of combination that could help the US in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and achieve more modest goals. See the links to Gates's and Petraeus's more modest goals....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
43% of children under 5 are underweight in India, according to nutrition experts. This compares with 5% for China. China made its biggest strides in combatting malnutrition between 1990 and 2002, say experts by reducing malnutrion for children by two thirds. This suggest that malnutrition must have been much higher than 21% in China in 1990. And during the period between 1949 and 1980 China had focussed under Mao and his successors on the bread bowl, making sure that hunger was no longer a problem. This suggests the Indian middle class that thinks of the poor as there but not so worse off as to require a sense of urgency, or feeling slighted by the comparison with China need to do some thinking. From the perspective of progress the economy can only do well if rural and poorer areas are also part of development and share in the benefits of development. The other aspect of this is that the government can setup a program, and other countries like Brazil are also faced with the similiar problem and are tackling it aggressively. This is already takng place with a Right to Food Act in the Indian Parliament. Drafts of this Act call for a government subsidized minimum of 25 kilograms of food grain per family per month. But atttitudes in India need to go through a big change to take this problem seriously and with the urgency it requires from a developmental point of view, not only a moral point of view. What good is demographic devidend that many Indian leaders in many fields talk about if that demographic dividend is stunted by malnutrition, is the question all have to answer. Even software leader, Infosys's Nilekhani, in his book Imagining India talks about the large changes affecting India in the rural areas, the economic and technological progress, but fails to mention this aspect of malnutrition....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How Obama's new selection for Fed governor, Daniel Tarullo- who taught banking law at Georgetown University- is shaking things up at the Fed. He is in charge of regulation of the banking system at the Fed. He has instituted a review of bank review practices and supervision at all of the regional Federal Reserve banks. With many banks failures in the south, the Atlanta Fed came in for serious review, and regulators from outside the area were sent to the Atlanta Fed. Tarullo did not hesitate to make new appointments for serious oversight, as regulators had simply become lax. Tarullo has brough in economists to take a fresh look at how the banking system would perform in the event of another crisis, and what action needs to be taken. This compares to individual bank examiners having alimited perspective what damage the overall banking system could do with lax regulation. He has also asked the Fed regulatory staff to look closely and hard at the troubled commercial real estate loans and toughen regulatory measures. Welcome and overdue as this is, in another banking crisis this could be too little too late. Congress has weakened regulatory reforms proposed by the Obama administration, and the Obama administration itself has not the will to address the tough issues raised by the banking crisis. Both have buckled under pressure from the lobbying of the banking industry, and the close connections between some banking executives and the administration. This has raised the level of urgency felt by Tarullo, Volcker, Mervyn King and some in the financial industry itself, with the issue of "too big to fail" and breaking up the larger banks into smaller ones, moving to the top of everyone's agenda. With the simple fact that if banks were "too big to fail" before the crisis, then they are much bigger now, and the question of what action must be taken shoved aside as too big to tackle....

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