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.


The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What were the stories in the Economist magazine that were the most read stories of 2019? Not on president Trump. On Malaysia, China under Jinping, and exodus from San Francisco and Silicon Valley. The most read article was on the newly elected president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro. The mismanagement of the economy particularly extravagant state spending on the Olympics and soccer stadiums for the World Cup at the expense of basic sanitation services, bus and transport services, health services, led to the result of a majority of Brazilians rejecting the Workers Party and its leader former president Lula. Unfortunately most of the media including the Economist did not draw attention to this gap. During a period in which income from mining with export of iron ore, and soyabeans to China, enabled Brazil to live beyond its means, there was no effort to draw attention to glaring gaps in development of public services such as sanitation, bus services and transport, lack of building infrastructure other than to support mining. Glaring gaps in education and health services made the situation worse. The second most read piece in the Economist  was on March 10th- Malaysia's PM is about to steal an election. Here the Economist magazine joined the Wall Street Journal which originally broke the story on the 1MDB fund and irregularities in Malaysia where a development fund was misused by the government. Najib actually lost that election and the WSJ covered the story of the developments that followed in which Malaysia's new governemnt led by a returning former prime minister in his nineties Mahathir Mohammed, ousted his own protege Mr. Najib.  The third most read piece in the Economist magazine was - How the West got China Wrong.  Unfortunately the Economist magazine and most of the media covered China in the two decade long boom years without covering the other emerging story as well in which Mr. Lighthizer (now president Trump's top trade adviser) and others questioned the huge unsustainable trade surpluses in U.S. trade with China. With the economy facing huge downside risks and rising trade tensions with the U.S. Chinese president Jinping's move to remove the limit on terms in office in the Constitution was considered a shift from the notion that China was likely to turn into a democracy. Mr. Jinping had already completed his first term in office and the anti-corruption campaign, managing the economic boom for a soft landing, was carried out with the central leadership of the party, after the destabilization evident in the early part of Xi Jinping's first term. Much of China's path was predictable and rational behaviour in its national interest, what was not clearly defined or defended was the way the U.S. could sustain the trade deficits that had reached a billion dollars a day. Leading to Mr. Trump seizing on this as an election issue to form a bloc of voters separate from the two main parties, the Republicans and the Democrats. The fifth most read piece was on Oct 11, 2018- the next recession. It pointed out that with low interest rates central banks in the U.S. and Europe and America could not cope effectively with a recession. The sixth most read piece was on June 29, 2018- Bullshit jobs and the yoke of managerial feudalism. It cited Prof. David Graeber of the London School of Economics, who wrote a short essay that went viral on the prevalence of work that had no social or economic reason to exist, work he called "bullshit jobs". Graeber said people want to feel they are transforming the world around them in a way that is leading to a positive difference. No. 7, 8, 9, were on Bitcoin, Netflix and programming language Python. No. 10 most read was on Aug. 30, 2018- Why startups are leaving Silicon Valley. It showed that in 2017 more people left the county of San Francisco than entered. The main reason the cost of living was burdensome and out of control. As Amazon shifts attention to India and Brazil, and Apple pulls back from India, social media companies coming under fire for disinformation, this period of Tech is making way for a shift in a new direction. A direction that focuses on people's lives, wages, spending on much needed infrastructure and services. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ makes the America centric thinking mistake of forgetting where China started from in assessing progress and China's new priorities. In 1960 the World Bank shows China per capita at $90 which does not change much till 1990 when it was $300, the Deng opening to western technology and capital pushed it up to $3000 the year 2000 (US $36,000) and $4500 in 2010 (US $50,000) when the global financial crisis hit. Since 2010 the Chinese economy was burdened by high local government debt and struggled to get to $10,000 in 2020 under Xi Jinping's first two terms as president. Yet it paid a huge price for this -the chance of Bo Xilai (2014) upsetting the twin banners of Science and Modernization of the May 4th 1919 movement that set the course of China for 100 years uninterrupted through the Nationalists, the Japanese occupation, the Maoist CCP, the Deng CCP opening and Jinping CCP pullback. The huge inequality was seen as an opportunity for Bo Xi Lai or some other leader to capitalize on moving China in an unknown direction that posed risks for the future of China. Even then the first preference of Xi would be to carry on with what had worked after Deng. Yet it was clear that working class votes were shifting the dynamics of elections after the Trump election and closing the doors to open access to western capital, technology, and investment. With Trump in erratic and uncertain ways, with Biden after the elections of 2020 consistent and with single minded determination to limit flows. Not just Xi, any other Chinese leader would have had to have the internal discussions about the need to shift back to a model China was familiar with and one that worked before- that of state intervention in the economy, that of reducing the inequalities that posed risks for the CCP's survival as forging a path for stability to carry out the twin banners of the May 4, 1919 Movement - Science and Modernization as China's salvation. Unlike the hysteria about China posing a challenge to the US these internal debates of Xi and the party may have concluded that the US with about half the population of China's as it grows with immigration in the future and multiple times the per capita GDP was a country that no other country was going to come close to. In this sense the supply chains are deceptive as these are likely to be completely redone under the Biden administration to bring most important manufacturing back to China. It is in this context that Xi had limited room to manoeuvre and decided to focus on stability for the long term to fulfill China's dream of the May 4, 1919 Movement of the last 100 years for Science and Modernization casting aside the risks associated for instability of the inequality that comes with more of the western type of growth, and with the climate change risks also associated with it. Lower growth gives China a chance to correct some of the flaws of the hyper growth that was partly of its own making and partly thrust upon it by investors from the outside, so that the new climate would best serve the goals of the May 4, 1919 Movement of keeping high the banners of Science and Modernization. This kind of rethinking is also going on in the US in the same manner about inequalities and hardships for workers and families, with some of the anger directed at China as internal political sentiment- hence the trillions of dollars moved by the Biden administration to address the flaws of growth under free markets and intervene in the economy where needed as in climate change to give firm sense of direction. In a sense the direction taken in different contexts the American and the Chinese are the same - address the problems of workers and families, of the people, as Lincoln had pointed out and striven so hard for, so that Labor is the more important than Capital, and workers and families vital to the nation.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Cruz gets more 10 more delegates than Trump following a tight election in Louisiana Republican primary. Rubio delegates in Louisiana committed to Cruz, and other non committed delegates.
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The housing crisis and cost of living issues resonated with young voters in Canada who voted Conservative in large numbers. Only 18% of voters 18-29 years considered Trump an issue, which goes up to 45% for voters over 60 years. Support from voters 18-34 years was 44% for Conservatives and 31% for Liberals.

In the final election result Liberals got 43%, Conservatives got 41%. Liberals got 169 seats, Conservatives got 144 seats, gaining 25 seats. Clearly Carney of Liberals has a job to do to get young people's support, says the BBC.

The New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a crucial demographic Donald Trump's provocative remarks cause a stir and a slide by 13 percentage points. In late July NYT/CBS polls show 72% support among Republican women. McCain won 89%, Romney 93%, George W. Bush 93%.  Divisive tactics hurt particularly with women, say experts. In states such as Pennsylvania this is evident, as Trump has 27% there for women overall and Clinton 58%, according to one poll. The Rutgers Center for Women and Politics has studies on how women diverge in their concerns and lives from men- from lower pay, longer life expectancy, and role of government in helping them,  to cite a few. Clinton has released television ads in 5 swing states directly appealing to mothers, showing children, and emphasizing kitchen table issues, job creation. College educated white women in particular carefully look at the issues, and make independent judgements based on character and temperament, and are less likely to ignore repeated provocative remarks or clearly sexist comments. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman in the NYT reminds readers Charity Watch gave the Clinton Foundation an "A" rating, better than that given to the American Red Cross. He points out the disservice done by all the innuendo about conflicts of interest. The Associated Press report on the Clinton Foundation he finds part of this creating "shadows"  about meetings with corporate people or others with conflict of interest when all it could find was a meeting with Mohammed Yunus, a winner of Nobel Peace Prize and a longtime personal friend. This points to the need to take a good hard look at each candidate, to look carefully at the details and think about what it means for the country for the next 4 years or the next decade. Krugman fails to mention the economy and job gains and losses, yet this is a huge factor in an election year where upward mobility and the prospects for the middle and working class are major issues. For example Moody's has calculated the loss of about 3 million jobs under Trump and a gain of 10 million jobs under Clinton for the next 4 years.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ms. Annegret Kramp-Krarrenbauer, elected leader of the CDU party in 2018 with the support of Angela Merkel, will not run for chancellor in next years election and will resign from her position by the end of the year. She will continue as Germany's defense minister. After losses for the CDU in recent elections and the embarrassment of local CDU leaders in Thuringia supporting the far right AfD, AKK as she is known decided to step down. Angela Merkel has decided not to run for chancellor again. Germany is set to chair the EU in the second half of 2020, and Merkel is no longer seen as a leader of influence. The Nationalist Alternative for Germany AfD has gained votes in recent elections following the 2015-2016 migrant crisis, with large numbers of refugees from North Africa and Arab world landing in Greece and Turkey and walking to Hungary, Austria and Germany. Merkel's handling of the crisis with acceptance of a million refugees in 2015-2016 unsettled European and German politics. Why? One way of looking at it is that in the same way that the U.S. took in Chinese imported goods ending in the Trump tariffs war, at some point it just becomes too big to handle. That ended up at $1 billion a day in imports from China when president Trump called it off and accused Obama Democrats, Bush Republicans, of betraying the country. Putting it into perspective Germany with one fourth of the population of the U.S. took in about twice the number of refugees in just one year 2015-2016 that the U.S. took in 10 years 2005-2015. The U.S. took in 675,000 immigrants between 2005-2015. This is as if the U.S. took in something like 20 million immigrants in a short period of 1 year on an equivalent basis- though the cultural impact is even greater in a nation like Germany that is like Japan an historically immigrant averse nation. All this happened too quickly for Germany to handle for its fragile cultural fabric. Much of the initial outpouring of support and positive sentiment came from the sense of having gone through World War II and the refugees in that and the early post war period, the need to return in the same spirit support Germany had received. Over time it eroded support for the Christian Democratic Union and Merkel. That Merkel could have done this is itself a small miracle. Now the rebuilding has to begin. Adenauer's CDU and the socialist SPD party of Willy Brandt now have less than 50% support, only with the Greens Party do they make up 50%. The question now is can the CDU, and the SPD which has fallen to 14% in elections, make it back and what kind of future makeup political parties will have in Germany, how the social fabric can be restored. AKK's achievement is to mend relations between the liberal Merkel wing of the CDU and conservatives from Bavaria (CSU) over immigration.  Candidates for CDU leadership are Armin Laschet, Jens Spahn, and Friedrich Merz. Laschet premier of North Rhine-Westphalia has Merkel's support. Looking back too much attention was taken up by the euro crisis, and too little was done in the areas of infrastructure, inequality gaps, education, child care, under Merkel's leadership and of the preceding SPD years, much like what happened under Bush and Obama administrations in the U.S. where wars, economic crises led to neglect on issues that affect lives of ordinary working families. ...
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Zeit Online takes a look at German chancellor Angela Merkel's statement made in a beer tent in the Muich suburb of Trudering- "The times in which we can completely rely on others are somewhat over, as I have experienced in the past few days." Zeit Online says the words "ein Stuck" in German were meant to say a bit or somewhat, but the essence of the statement that the depending on the trans-Atlantic alliance was now over comes right through.

The New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Dan Balz, chief correspondent of The Washington Post, says the stakes have hugely escalated in the 2016 presidential election with the rhetoric on immigrants and Muslims entering the U.S. following terrorist attacks in France and California offered by Donald Trump. He cites experts who point out that establishment voices are being ignored as a section of the American public supports Trump's opinions. An earlier article in the Post points out that about 30% of Republicans in a PPP poll support Trump's views, and 21% unsure. Other polls show American who are older, working class and not college educated support Trump in large numbers, compared to the support from college educated and higher income people who support Sanders on the Democratic side and who oppose American intervention in the Middle East- both Trump and Sanders supporters preferring to focus on problems at home than involvement in overseas entanglements.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US is on track to bring back 350,000 jobs in 2022 that were taken overseas during the two decades of hyper growth in China, according to the Reshoring Initiative. A false idea was created mostly by economists and business that shifted jobs to China during two Democratic and one Republican administration, the Clinton, Obama and the Bush administrations, that this would benefit the American workers and families through lower prices at the retail level. It ignored the severe damage this would do to jobs, incomes and whole communities when factories on which they depended for a living were shipped overseas. It damaged labor in ways that destroyed much of the American working class and the families built during the years of FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson. Business failed during this period to meet the challenge of higher American wages and productivity issues by using innovation and other steps to keep manufacturing at home.  This led to the hyper growth that did not benefit China, because a moderate pace of growth would have helped China control the rampant contamination of its air, water and soil. It also was leading China to a dead end reached during the 2016 election campaign with the election of president Trump with deep discontent from workers in midwestern states. The pandemic simply underscored the need for supply chains that were close to home and reliable in crises. By 2020 president  Biden was committing to a restructuring of the supply chains and pushing forward with it with legislation in the $369 billion Climate bill, and SCIENCE and Chips Act, to make solar panels, semiconductors and other products in the US. Reports from China showed that growth was slight or flat during 2022 and youth unemployment at 20%. The policy was to shift people back from the cities to the rural areas and support the informal economy, a sense of nationalist sentiment, and preparing for a future where the supply chain for the US and the European Union had moved away from China. In the long run the policies now look as ones that benefitted neither the US, the European Union, India or China.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A former mayor of Mexico City wins the election for president in 2018 with 53% of the vote. Obrador's margin was over 30% over Ricardo Analya of PAN party who had 22.5%, and ruling PRI's Antionio Meade with 16%, with 72% of votes counted according to Mexico's election agency. Issues in this election were corruption, with many corruption scandals for ruling PRI under president Nieto, and failure to maintain rule of law. The last time that a president won this size margin of victory was in 1982. Morena as Obrador's party is called, won 306 of 500 seats in the lower house of parliament and 70 of 128 seats in the Senate, winning majorities in both houses of parliament. It also won 4 of 8 state governor races and the Mayor's office in Mexico City. FOr the first time since 1997 one party will control both houses and Mexico City. Obrador formed his own party after leaving the PRD party, calling it The Movement for National Regeneration. Most Mexicans were highly disturbed by the violence and corruption that prevailed in local administration under president Nieto's PRI government. The PRI's dominance in Mexican politics is now broken. Obrador says he will work to put more emphasis on helping the poor in Mexico in framing his policies, distancing himself from the politics of the PRI which had distanced itself more and more from grassroots and ordinary workers in Mexico. This means adapting the free market economic model to suit Mexico's own conditions, the differences between northern and southern Mexico, and pushing for more worker friendly policies. It also creates more room for agreement with the U.S. as both Mr. Trump and Mr. Obrador agree on raising labor standards and wages for factory workers in Mexico ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hancock County, Iowa, is one of those rural counties in the American heartland that did not support Mr. Trump in 2016. This county now supports Trump by a large margin because they see his policies benefitting rural America, and see him as a way for the Republican party to be back in power to pursue a conservative agenda. WSJ reports from Hancock County in Iowa. The American voting system gives more importance to states with smaller populations in the Electoral College relative to larger states. States with large farming communities such as Wisconsin, Michigan and Iowa play a larger role in elections in the US than population alone would suggest. John McCormick of the WSJ talks to farmers in this rural county in Iowa with a higher proportion of less educated voters than the rest of the counties in Iowa. One of five voters have a bachelors degree in Hancock County compared to one in three in Iowa as a whole and 38% nationally. The median age is 44 years compared to 39 years nationally and in Iowa. This part of rural Iowa is also in farmland that is many miles away from large cities and urban areas and more isolated and homogenous as 9 out of ten people are non-Hispanic and white. About a fourth of these voters are supporting his candidacy over Nikki Haley because they see it as more likely to win because of polls, even though Haley is according to the WSJ editorial opinion the stronger candidate for Republicans across the suburbs critical for 2024, which are slightly younger, more educated, and less isolated from the rest of the country. Biden and Obama are a sharp contrast when it comes to rural America. Where his own Agriculture secretary felt rural America was neglected by president Obama, Biden truly cares for rural America and has huge investments in rural America as part of the rural infrastructure effort. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Attacks from Iran on Saudi oil infrastructure leading to a loss of half of Saudi oil production is likely to be a problem for countries such as China, South Korea and Japan that have reduced oil imports from Iran and increased dependence on Saudi supplies. This was a result of tighter U.S. oil sanctions on Iran. India is also affected. About 30% of the lost production will be restored say Saudis.  The U.S. is less dependent on Saudi supplies and as Gerald Seib points out in a video in WSJ the U.S. has 3 reasons not to intervene on behalf of Saudis. The U.S. has increased its oil production from shale oil and is less dependent on Saudi oil. It is also becoming reluctant to engage in Saudi Arabia's wars such as the one in Yemen against Houthi rebels. There is also less support in Congress and in the country for supporting endless wars that originate from Saudi actions. A Trump tweet before his election campaign shown in WSJ makes this point about endless wars and the U.S. needing to be paid trillions of dollars for these wars. The conflicts in the region affect China and India where growth is close to 5% before any impact from oil price increases. Together Asian countries take in 72% of Saudi oil exports and China now imports more Saudi oil than Russian oil by a wide margin- in June 1.88 million barrels a day. Saudi oil makes about 19% of imported oil in India and 33% for Japan. Imports into India of Saudi oil are up 8% this year to 847,000 barrels a day in 2019. China is better situated than Japan with reserve supplies of 644 days of imports compared to 230 days for Japan. This why Japan has played a constructive role in reducing tensions between the U.S. and Iran and urged both sides to negotiate. China and India also have interests that converge in reducing tensions between the U.S. and Iran. As a first step president Trump removed his National Security Adviser John Bolton in preference for reduced tensions.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Seib points out why the current political landscape with the popularity of Trump and Sanders reflects demographic, economc and social changes in America compared to when Geroge H.W. Bush won the election in 1988 and Bill Clinton won in 1992. The Republican party is more populist, with older Americans, more Southern and conservative, making it harder for Jeb Bush or Wall Street backed candidates. The Democratic Party more liberal, more popular on both the east and west coast of the U.S., with younger Americans, diverse demographic groups, making it harder for Hillary Clinton as an establishment candidate. A Journal/NBC poll of Oct. 2015 shows 28% of Republicans describing their views as very conservative, and 26% of Democrats saying they are very liberal. Yet there is another aspect that will show up once the primaries are over. And this is the steady group of somewhat conservative and moderate combined in the Republican Party of 64%, and the steady group of somewhat liberal and moderate in the Democratic Party of 62% in the 2015 Journal/NBC poll. The moderates are up from 26% in the above 1990 poll to 31% in the 2015 poll for the Republican Party, and from 26% to 33% in the Democratic Party. So that one sees about a quarter of people polled in each party pushing for fringe views and a countervailing trend for moderate or close to moderate views with about two thirds support in the 2015 Journal/NBC poll for each party....
https://www.hindustantimes.com/ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The prospect of improved ties between India and China as president Xi Jinping meets prime minister Modi in an informal summit meeting. China sees India as an important trading partner as its trade relations with the U.S. deteriorate in a trade conflict and higher tariffs on China's exports to the U.S. Mr. Modi of India sees the need to maintain steady economic growth ahead of general elections in 2018 where a good economic record and performance would boost his chances for another term. 

Both India and China see the potential for a larger global role as the U.S. under president Trump seeks a smaller role than in the past. On issues such as climate change China has taken the lead and India is also an active participant in limiting carbon emissions.

 

The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Following Brexit on January 31, 2020, Britain's government led by Boris Johnson prepares to negotiate new trade deals with the U.S. and other countries. The freedom to negotiate these trade deals was a key part of the plan of Brexit supporters and Mr. Johnson. The Times, Britain's leading newspaper, looks at the prospects of trade deals with each country- the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, Japan. Facing re-election Mr. Trump is seen as favorably inclined to work out a trade deal that he can show during the campaign. Trade discussions have taken place between the UK and Australia, Japan. Mr. Morrison in Australia and Mr. Shinzo Abe want to see strong trading ties and investment with Britain. Japan or Australia could be the first countries that work out a trade deal with Britain as discussions are at an advanced stage.  Britain has a small deficit with Japan in trade. It has a small dollar surplus in trade with the Australia and New Zealand. With the U.S Britain has a large surplus, it exports 121 billion pounds and imports 76 billion pounds. The prospects of trade deals are enhanced by the similarity in outlook of the governments of the U.S., Australia, and Japan, which share views on jobs expansion, economic growth and are centre right in economic philosophy. They also share a strong connection with working class voters under Johnson,Trump and Morrison. Mr. Trump is seen as a strong deal maker so that any deal would involve some concessions from Britain that increase U.S exports, including farm exports. Difficult issues with the U.S. are -pharmaceutical drug imports that could increase Britain's NHS cost for drugs, the digital services tax from Britain on U.S.  companies such as Google and the Trump retaliatory threat to impose tariffs beyond the current 2.5% on car imports of $11 billion from Britain. On agricultural imports Britain's natural foods preference conflicts with imports of genetically modified (GMO) foods from the U.S. Experts say this could lead to a partial or Phase 1 deal that does not need approval from the U.S. Congress, similar to the Phase 1 trade deal with China which sidestepped the thorny issues on trade. This is something both sides can show their support base as a win. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ Editorial Board speaking for the business community traditional Republican groups finally takes up the election on issues of policy difference between Trump run Republican party and Harris run Democratic Party which it should have from Day One. The former president says something that has never happened in the last hundred years- policy will be decided after the election depending on what he decides to do. Cost of Living action is No 1 on voter priorities. "Drill, Baby Drill," is the whole Republican party platform for cost of living action. What is the Harris Democrats policy plan for cost of living action? WSJ says it is spending blowouts that caused inflation, the Green New Deal, entitlement expansions and student loan forgiveness.The real reason for the increase in cost of living comes from the overconcentration of supply chain by American business in China, on which every president Bush, Obama, Trump, did little or nothing. The lack of an effective vaccination program and ineffective vaccines in China by 2021 and 2022 led to the loss of the supplies from China leading to shortages for automobiles parts and other supplies and surge in prices in 2021-2023. Powell and the US central bank correctly raised rates but cautiously and waited for this to correct, president Biden brought manufacturing home through huge investments called the "spending blowout" that brought down the inflation from 9% to 3%. Some of that "spending blowout" went to chips and science to correct the errors of American Business and Reagan-Friedman theory of the Republican party that created this problem with a culture of utter  indifference to the ultimate costs of who makes what and where. The Inflation Reduction Act also tackled higher health and other costs paid by American workers and families, and invested in public services and in repairing the dilapidated crumbling American infrastructure. Are Republicans saying let the roads, bridges, airports, built in the 1940-1960's heyday of American industrialization as China and India's is now, let them crumble? What do the educated minds of the WSJ Board say about coal in China and India and their effects on their massive use multiple times that of US and EU in history, is it not damaging to the environment and why the Chinese realized the health in North China with coal winter use was worse than in South China cut their coal use. Are they saying lets burn fossil fuels and ignore, and if investment has to be made in solar who is going to do it? Is it Ok for Republicans thet we just import from China all our solar panels indefinitely into the future. "Green New Deal" is just a perjorative term, policy has to be made thoughtfully and without prejudice or bias of any sort for the best that we can do for the American people, ignoring so called "right" or "left." Doing what is right, what makes sense, is a lot harder.     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The last Republican presidential debate before the Republican primaries focussed attention on foreign policy issues with candidates critical of president Obama's policies in the Middle East and calling for tougher anti-terrorist measures. Trump says he does not think Bush really believes he is "unhinged" when he called for action to bar Muslims from entry into the U.S., adding that this reflected more about the disaster that Bush's election effort has become.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer interview by NYT's Lulu Navarro looks at the swing state of Michigan and its popular governor. Asked about president president Biden's 3 trillion dollar investments in Manufacturing, in Chips and Science, in Infrastructure, Whitmer says the public is still just coming out of the pandemic and has seen only some of the beneficial effects of this program of massive investment in the US economy. She says it is similar to what she heard from Michiganders which amounted to "Governor Fix the Dam Roads." She says the former president Trump lacks any such vision for the US economy, and for the future. Of the present time Whitmer says that the pandemic has taken a toll in people's lives, people are stressed out, and just hanging in there trying to pay the grocery bills, get the kids to school, and show up at work. They have hardly the time to figure out what the CHIPS Act means. Whitmer is in her second term as governor and comes from the western part of the state around Grand Rapids which is traditionally Republican. In her election for governor she was able to win with good margins in this western part of the State even as a Democrat. This interview show Whitmer wanting to be able to work with Republicans in the best interests of the state and the Nation. ...

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