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.


New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The loss of some 4 million jobs is expected by experts in 2009, and Obama economic advisor Christina Romer has presented information at a meeting that shows the current downturn will be more severe than anything we experienced in the last 50 years. At that meeting on December 16, 2008, Obama met with Romer and other economic and policy advisors for 4 hours. It was decided that the target for jobs should be 3 million jobs created in 2009 and 2010. This still means a lot of the 4 million job loss will still occur in 2009, even if the infrastructure jobs estimated at $136 billion by the nation's governors get off to a fast start as they are supposedly ready to go. Money to states and local governments will reduce job losses and loss of services, and money in the form of lower payroll taxes would probably be saved to reduce debt by the public. Money to the poor to support medicaid and health care services and expanding healthcare coverage for those who lose coverage will be safety net reinforcement and support. So finding places to spend where jobs can be created quickly will be a challenge going forward and some of the $1 trillion stimulus will not go directly to job creation but as support. For the December 16 meeting Romer consulted with Martin Feldstein the senior Republican economist who said that " without action the economy will continue to decline rapidly." For a long time Martin Feldstein has been advocating strong action especially to reduce foreclosures and help stabilize housing prices. As the economy has weakened he has revised upwards what needs to be done, and his estimates are close to the lower end of the $800 billion to 1.3 trillion that is being estimated for 2 years. Lawrence Lindsay and other economists are supporting upto $1 trillion stimulus. ...
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The firing of John Bolton as National Security Adviser opens up the possibility of a meeting of Trump with President Rouhani of Iran. There is a need for both sides to begin talks on a nuclear deal that would replace the one Iran signed with president Obama to address issues raised by Mr. Trump and Republicans. Iran and countries that buy oil from Iran such as India, China and Japan have an interest in relief from sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on imports of Iranian oil. The European Union is keen to preserve aspects of the nuclear deal. Relief from sanctions is critical for Iran to develop its economy. The last two decades have seen Iran struggle to develop its economy with the sanctions imposed by  different U.S. administrations.   President Trump expressed flexibility on sanctions saying "we will see what happens. I think Iran has potential. They are incredible people." President Rouhani urged Mr. Trump "to put warmongers aside." Mr. Trump told reporters that he had resisted Mr. Bolton's opinions on issues and realized he had moderate views when compared to someone like Bolton.  Trump told Iran "We are not looking for regime change. We hope we can make a deal and if we can't make a deal thats fine too. But I think they have to make a deal." Helping the U.S. and Iran come to talks is president Macron of France who hopes to setup a meeting at the UN General Assembly which meets next week following his efforts at the G-7 meeting in France last month. In the past when tensions were high in the Straits of Hormuz President Trump refrained from aggravating this by saying actions that are "disproportionate" should not be taken and respected Iranian intentions. The tone of the conversation between the two sides has moderated to the point where both sides realize the need for coming to some compromise. This is in sharp contrast to the period a few months ago with rising tensions in the Straits of Hormuz and the seizure of an Iranian ship. Bolton's opinions were not the only issue for president Trump. He was also seen as the source of leaks including one that said Mike Pence, the Vice President, had opposed Mr. Trump's plan to bring the Taliban to Camp David. Also contributing to the new climate for talks is Mike Pompeo the Secretary of State, who has promoted the idea of talks with Iran. He told the media about such a meeting at the UN General Assembly in New York- "Sure. The president has made it very clear that he is prepared to meet with no pre-conditions." The willingness to try new ideas even contrary ones to policy pursued only a short while ago as long as the desired goal is reached is a feature of this presidency and key advisers. From the beginning of the Trump administration there is a firm sense of the need to end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. and reduce foreign entanglements that have dragged on wasting resources and destroying priorities. With a willingness to try all sorts of approaches even ones that appear to be contradictory always keeping the end goal in sight. ...

The End of Fannie Mae

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Wall Street Journal's editorial columns have followed closely the working of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years. Especially during the last decade, when most of the excesses, missteps and failures in the operations of the two companies occurred at huge cost to the US economy and to taxpayers. The Journal quotes from the recent Treasury report on the planned winding down of the two agencies. And focusses attention on the question of what will replace Fannie and Freddie. Only the first of three options looks viable considering the goals of reducing misallocation of national resources, and winding down the federal government's role in housing, says the Journal. With this Option the federal government guarantees are limited to Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans to low income buyers and VA assistance for veterans and farm programs- narrow segments that limits the guarantee strictly to 10-15% of the mortgage market. The Journal says that the conclusions of the Treasury report are what WSJ has been saying for 20 years: " The strength of this option is that it would minimize distortions in capital allocation across sectors, reduce moral hazard in mortgage lending and drastically reduce direct taxpayer exposure to private lender's losses." And the points about the benefits: " With less incentive to invest in housing, more capital will flow into other areas of the economy, potentially leading to more long-run economic growth and reducing the inflationary pressure on housing assets. Risk throughout the system may also be reduced, as private actors will not be as inclined to take on excessive risk without the assurance of a government guarantee behind them. And finally, direct taxpayer risk exposure to private losses in the mortgage market would be limited to the loans guaranteed by FHA and other narrowly targeted government loan programs: no longer would taxpayers be at direct risk for guarantees covering most of the nation's mortgages." This bit of wisdom is especially significant, as misallocation of capital that went on in housing for the better part of the last decade has hurt America and the American people. It makes sense to have explicit money allocated by Congress for housing help to the poor and have no housing guarantees that have hurt the economy....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Landler of the NYT intervews Ben Bernanke at his office overlooking the Washington Mall, and Secretary Paulson in his Treasury office. Both men look back at events that led to Chinese savings financing excessive American consumption, and currency and other policies on both sides perpetuating the dependence of America on lowpriced Chinese products, and of China on the American export market. Now that this export market is collapsing it presents China with serious problems with unemployment in the export sector, and pesents America with the hangover from a consumption binge that now must be paid for with years of low or negative growth. Could this have been foreseen and if foreseen could things either have been mitigated or prevented. In March 2005, Prof. Bernanke at Princeton was not at the Fed (his Fed job started in 2006), and cautioned about the imbalances presented by Chinese savings finacing American consumption. But Bernanke saw this as a market phenomenon that would take years, even a decade to work itself out in a global economy. He said "for now, we have little choice except to be patient." The prevailing opinion among Greenspan, Bernanke and others was that the global economy worked in ways that were ultimately benign and regulation was not a good thing. After all the situation benefitted American consumers and kept inflation low while also providing China as an additional engine for global economic growth. The American economy it was believed was large and resilient, and it would not be adversely affected in the long run by such a large dependence on foreign savings. Only the positive effects were visible and the adverse effects were simply talked away as not serious for now. Zoellick, who was deputy secretary of state says that successful models are very hard to change, and Paulson says that without some kind of crisis its hard to get changes made once asituation gets entrenched. For China efforts to strengthen the currency that would slow exports and improve internal consumption were stymied by a reluctance to disturb the status quo, and Americans were lulled into complacency as years of low priced imports provided the best of both worlds, high growth and low inflation. ...
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....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A New York hedge fund Elliott Management Corp. finally makes a settlement with the new Argentine government of president Mauricio Macri. It took 15 years and 5 different administrations in Argentina. Eliott gained $2.4 billion 10-15 times the original investment on Argentine bonds made in 2001, but requiring extraordinary persistence from hedge fund manager Mr. Newman at Elliott Management Corp and Mr. Singer. In 2001 the Argentine bonds traded at 20 cents to the dollar, and Mr. Newman who had made large gains on Peruvian bonds saw this as a good investment. By 2008 the bonds instead traded at pennies on the dollar, and the Argentine government later settled with 93% of bondholders at 30 cents to the dollar. The holdouts were three hedge funds, including Elliott. The Argentine government of Kirchner opposed any settlement with the holdouts. The situation changed with the election of Mauricio Macri in 2015, who made resolution of the issue a priority, so that Argentina could borrow in global financial markets and grow its economy. The U.S. Supreme Court had rejected Argentina's appeal of a U.S. District Court ruling prohibiting paying interest on exchanged bonds when payment had not been made to the holdout hedge funds- which led to the settlement with Elliott, and closing a long and difficult chapter for Argentina....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Baucus is a six term senator from Montana. He won easy re-election in the fall. Question are being raised about the extent of fundraising Baucus is doing even as he is conducting the negotiations for writing up the health care reform bill. He continues to accept donations from health care executives and health care companies. Public Citizen advocacy group says that Baucus's fundraising in the middle of the health care debate is very troubling. As chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Baucus is a key person in the health care legislation development.The Washington Post says health care companies gave Baucus $1.5 million in 2007 and 2008 as he began to hold hearings for the health care reform debate. The health care industry gave $170 million to federal lawmakers in 2007 and 2008, with 54% going to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Senator Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican in Baucus's committee received more than $2 million from the health care industry since 2003. House Ways and Means Committee chairman Rangel took in $1.6 million, and ranking Republican Dave Camp $1 million. Clearly any new health care legislation will fall short on achieving the critical reduction in health care costs that is needed to help the U.S. economy as long as lawmakers are beholden to lobbyists and donations....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A big hurdle for local brands in China is the Chinese consumer's interest and respect for foreign brands. Asked about local brands buyers say they can't think of any, or say Chinese brands are shoddy in quality and value. Brands such as Haier in consumer appliances and Lenovo in tech are an exception. During the big surge in consumer sales in the last two decades Chinese companies producing local brands thought it adequate to simply imitate foreign brand names rather than take the difficult route of establishing the credibility of their own brand- an effort which might take years. Often the foreign name was changed slightly to keep the resemblance but mean something positive to Chinese consumers in the local language. Common are names such as Adidos, Hike, Cnoverse and Fuma for sneakers. Clio Coste keeps the connection to Lacoste with its crocodile logo. Coca Cola in Chinese is Kekoulele, translated to mean Tasty Fun. Only now are local companies giving serious attention to creating long term brand entity and image. The serious attention to brand names and branding comes at a time when China increasingly depends on consumer sales to power the economy with the decline in real estate and slower manufacturing. For the 11 months of 2014 retail sales were up 12 percent over the prior year period to $3.8 trillion, according to the National Bureau of Statistics. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A news story about French president Francois Hollande saying he wanted to see tough negotiations sends the British pound plummeting on October 7, 2016. It fell to $1.18 before recovering to $1.24 to the dollar. Experts say algorithms overreacted to the news story about Hollande's remarks. Further declines are expected as Brexit negotiations happen in 2017 closer to elections in Germany and France, with issues such as movement within the EU likely to be obstacles. Other factors influencing the pound are the that the pound is no longer a safe haven following Brexit, and the uncertainties generated by the Brexit "yes" vote. This would mean higher prices in Britain's retail stores for imported products, costlier vacations overseas, and higher inflation. It could boost British exports with a devalued currency making them more competitive. 

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
People in California did not feel the early blows of the coronavirus like New York. This is now turning into a disadvantage as people in California have now failed to follow the guidelines for social distancing and masks as carefully as they should be. The state reopening  took place as the case numbers were increasing as the economy and unemployment became an issue.  State hospitalizations are up 40% on July 1 from 2 weeks ago. Percentage of tests coming positive are close to 6% but in some counties much higher- in Riverside county has rate positive in tests at 11.7% and bars are only recommended to close. In Los Angeles county it is 8.2%. On June 20 the day after the bars were allowed to open 500,000 people visited bars in Los Angeles County. A big problem is that for lockdown the whole state was asked to lockdown by the governor. For reopening it is done by county and each county is doing this differently. Pressure to reopen has led to counties with increasing and poor metrics for cases still reopening. Some counties felt pressured to open when other counties had reopened. Even when a county such as Riverside or Los Angeles county is doing poorly the governor waits 14 days for it to be on a watch list before acting. This is too long for the extremely contagious virus giving it time to spread quickly. Governor Newson is now facing serious problems tackling the coronavirus. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Wall Street Journal reporters Walker in Berlin, Forelle in Brussels, and Meichtry in Rome, reconstruct the events during critical days after the indecision and failure to reach agreement during the July summit of eurozone countries. This took the form of intervews with leading players and over 25 policy makers. What emerges are accounts of how Germany's Angela Merkel, daughter of a Lutheran pastor, and protege of Eurozone founder, former German chancellor Helmut Kohl, handled the crisis. Merkel was widely criticized in the media for indecision. What emerges is an account of a leader who took decisive action at key moments in the crisis- leading to the formation of new governments in Greece and Italy taking action to improve finances, and negotiations with banks represented by the International Finance Corporation leading to acceptance by banks of a 50% loss on loans to Greece to reduce Greece's unsustainable debt burden. Merkel also worked with the European Central Bank's departing president Frenchman Claude Trichet and new president Italian Mario Draghi to resist French president Sarkozy's efforts to have the ECB assume responsibility for the crisis through large scale buying of Italian and Spanish bonds; which was opposed by German public opinion as a backdoor way of having German taxpayers assume responsibility for European debt. Shown are three critical moments when Merkel intervened. In October 2011, after Italian prime minister Berlusconi reneged on promises to make pension and other reforms to improve Italian finances because of political resistance. He survived a parliamentary no-confidence vote by one vote. Merkel took the lead on October 20, by directly calling Italian President Georgio Napolitano on the phone, to urge him to take action for forming a new government in Italy. The result was Napolitano talking with all political parties to form a new government, leading to the formation of a government by a non-political figure respected in Italy, former EU commissioner Mario Monti. A day earlier, on October 19, French President Sarkozy met ECB president, Trichet, at an event honoring him as departing ECB president in Frankfurt's Alte Oper concert hall. Trichet, Merkel and Sarkozy met in a side room. Sarkozy asked for decisive help from the ECB for large scale buying of Italian and Spanish bonds to lower yields, which had reached 7% on Italian bonds. Trichet responded that the ECB's charter did not allow it to finance governments, with the meeting ending in a shouting match between the two leaders. On October 21, EU and IMF inspectors warned that Greece's debt was reaching unsustainable proportions and austerity measures alone would not work, unless the bondholders, the European banks, took losses of 60% on their excessive lending to Greece. At this point France agreed to the German position arguing for this level of bondholder haircuts or losses, fearing the prospect of large future bailouts that would jeopardize France's triple AAA credit rating. The July 2011 summit accord had only provided for 10% in losses for bondholders. On October 27, at a meeting that went past midnight, Merkel and Sarkozy called IIF head Charles Dallara, who headed negotiating for the banks, to EU headquarters in Brussels. Merkel handed Dallara an agreement containing the 50% bondholder loss demand, and told Dallara- "This is the last offer." Merkel was saying banks would be left with nothing if they rejected it and Greece defaulted. Dallara called bankers and the IIF accepted Merkel's agreement. The final moment that October came on October 31, when Greece's prime minister Papandreou said he would call a referendum on the bailout provisions and austerity measures demanded by the IMF, the EU and the ECB. Bond markets reacted negatively to the announcement fearing a rejection and a Greek default. The Group of 20 leaders was meeting in Cannes, France on Nov. 2, 2011. Papandreou was asked to come to Cannes for a pre-summit meeting. Here Merkel told Papandreou- "the real question" for the referendum was, "Do you want to be in the euro, or not?" Days later Papandreou, lacking support in Greece from political parties and opposition inside his party, submitted his resignation. A non-political figure respected in Greece, former ECB vice president, Lucas Papademos, was appointed prime minister to head a Unity government. Polls after the appointment showed three fourths of Greeks said that this was "a positive step for Greece," with Papandreou's party getting only 11% support and the opposition led by Samaras about 20%. The criticism leveled at Merkel is that Germany should take responsibility for debt throughout the euro area through the issuance of eurozone bonds or the ECB buying large amount of bonds of Spain and Italy. Merkel faced strong opposition inside Germany and from the Bundesbank to this idea. The other criticism was based on austerity measures worsening the finances of Greece because of a lack of growth in the economy, which is true; yet Germany may see the situation in Greece as taking a long time to be resolved in any event because of excessive and faulty financial management. For Italy and Spain putting finances in order was a necessity, and austerity measures should lead to short term sacrifice but improve prospects for the long term by returning the economies to growth. Another criticism is the installation of governments that lack popular or electoral support. As the polls in Greece showed the Unity government there has far greater support and public opinion blames the politicians for the huge mess. In Italy, Berlusconi was widely seen as losing popular support when he resigned. And in Spain Mariano Rajoy, the newly elected prime minister, was elected with a huge majority in parliament following winning in local government elections. Merkel also held her own party, the Chrisitian Democrats together at the recent Leipzig convention. Mario Draghi, was elected with German support to head the European Central Bank. He has long argued for better management of Italian finances as head of Italy's central bank. Draghi was able to support Merkel with carefully planned and managed actions. First to reduce interest rates to support economic growth in a slowing eurozone. Following this with the ECB's Long Term Financing Operation in late December 2011, to provide unlimited loans to European banks at 1% interest for three years in exchange for a broadened list of collateral deposited at the ECB. In a final twist in this drama, Charles Dallara, who was a key negotiator for the U.S. Treasury in setting up the Brady Bonds- that converted bad Latin American government debt owed to U.S. banks in the 1980's into long term debt with large reductions in principal owed and lower interest rates. This was in exchange for guaranteed repayment with 30 year U.S. zero coupon bonds. Dallara was now a negotiator for the banks to reduce the chance of the very same bondholder haircuts that he had negotiated in an earlier period to solve the Latin American debt crisis. Other players in the drama were Axel Weber, head of the Bundesbank, Germany's central bank, who resigned after strong and outspoken opposition to the ECB's large scale purchase of bonds of Greece, Italy and Spain. Jens Weidmann, his protege, who replaced him. And Jurgen Stark, German representative at the ECB, who also resigned in opposition to Germany assuming responsibility for eurozone debt. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How the weaker dollar is helping exports, and could take some of the stress on the economy from the drop in housing and consumer purchasing. This should happen as long as the dollars decline is gradual and does not adversely impact the economies of Europe and Asia, which have to be strong enough to take in American exports.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt points out in the NYT that Hillary Clinton actually won in the popular vote by a substantial margin, by more than 2 million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points. He says that Democrats need to pay more attention to the working class in midwestern states- the job losses, crumbling infrastructure, and the plight of communities such as Detroit, Michigan which suffered through the bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM, and again with the foreclosure crisis, the financial crisis of the City of Detroit. With a similar situation in the neighboring states of Wisconsin and Ohio, in places like Toledo and other parts of communities facing industrial decline. While the Silicon Valley centred region powered the economy in California, and the financial industry and real estate powered New York, older midwestern communities never really recovered from a long decline stretching over 2 decades. The result was the loss of faith in Democrats among union workers and young people, leading to the loss of Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan. For most of its history the Democratic Party was based on its union and working class base including a large number of white voters. Only under Obama because of his unique candidacy was the coalition so dependent on the minorities vote. Before minorities were part of the Democratic coalition, but not in the way under the Obama candidacy. A return to its historic and normal base among whites in unions and working class communities, liberals, minorities, is a way to go back to the historic and natural base of Democratic support. In a sense dependence on tech communities for election funding and the tech booms, globalization, may have distorted Democrats sense of their historic role as champions of the working class and middle class communities throughout the country. There is now an opportunity to restore this lost mission of protecting the interests of the middle and working class who have seen huge drop in net worth as reported by Janet Yellen of the Federal Reserve at the Inequality Conference on October 17, 2014-"62 million households with a net worth of $11,000 for the year 2013." Poorly covered in the media and not made the utmost priority by Democrats (or Republicans). In the words of Janet Yellen, this was in the past several decades "the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality since the Great Depression." She added the shocking words "by some estimates, income and wealth inequality near their highest levels in the past hundred years, and probably much higher than much of American history before then." Even discussion in the media goes back to the Obama coalition and treats it as a way forward for Democrats, when history shows it was different and the situation described by Yellen calls for a serious response. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This look at China and leaders Mao, Chou-en-lai, Deng, Xi Jinping through the lens of the Hoover Institution series on authoritarianism "The Party's Interest Come First," by Hoover research fellow Turgian makes the same errors as is evident from expert at Oxford University/ Kennedy School Rana Shantasil Mitter of Indian descent. Which is to see China as an academic, not by immersing oneself in China of 1890- 1950 into the lives of China's millions of ordinary people. And how is one to immerse oneself into these lives. One can do this through the eyes of General Stilwell who loved and immersed himself in China like it could be said no other American of that period in Barbara Tuchman's well researched account of this China of 1890-1950.  One clue to this is also that Tuchman unlike Torgian or Mitter by a long shot is the only writer who met Mao in Beijing in the 1970's. In 1971 she met Mao and made observations on the lives of the people in "Notes from China- If Mao had met Roosevelt in 1945." As a result of Tuchman's account of Stilwell's personal experience of China since 1900's being lost to most Americans, there is no concept of what China had experienced with the gradual collapse of China's economy and politcal structures, its defense as China, like India, and Asia as a whole failed to experience the opening up to science and technology and modern ways of thought since 1600. The results were catastrophic for the Chinese people and for the people of India leading to economic destruction on a scale unknown in history and lives shortened and reduced by poverty.  ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's DW.com says in this report- "However, economists have pointed out that the US benefits from having large trade imbalances with the rest of the world, as the dollar is used in most trade, and offers major tailwind effects to the US economy." Which economists one must ask? Most of these economists had turned their back on the working people in factories in America, on their wages turned into a downward spiral, on their jobs, their factories lost for three decades. Today the American people have a sense of the true cost of this colossal failure to protect American workers and small towns across America depending on manufacturing. The pandemic exposed the risks of supply chain shocks and inflation by overly concentrating manufacturing in China.  The US has 1 trillion in trade deficits each year and it is completing the destruction of manufacturing in the US. Half of this is with China as China exports through Vietnam and Mexico, third countries, in addition to 295 billion dollars of trade imbalance the US has with China. China, Mexico, Canada and Vietnam are the largest offenders. No country can long endure with such a loss of its manufacturing base. The US Navy itself is in danger without the manufacturing to compete with China that has taken up over 50% of shipbuilding, and soon will not be able to protect the free world if these types of economists and self serving German or other foreign interests drive a false narrative. Without the US Navy in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans no one is safe, not Germany, not the EU, not India or the rest of the world. ...
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Lower oil prices in 2015 make it possible for president Joko Widodo of Indonesia to remove costly fuel subsidies in Jan. 2015. With the steep decline in oil prices this made it possible to lower fuel prices at the pump at the same time. The costly fuel subsidies cost Indonesia more than money spent on education and healthcare. This frees up money for other programs. In November the Widodo government fulfilled one of its election promises by sending out national "smart cards" to over 15 million poor Indonesian families, which gives them free health insurance and education related expenses for children for upto 12 years of school. Programs planned for infrastructure in 2015 include 13 new dams and long overdue upgrade to the north-south Trans Sumatra Highway. Critics point to the appointments, including for police chief and attorney general, that reflect the influence of Megawati Sukarnoputri, a former president and chairwoman of Mr. Joko's party, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, and of parties that supported Widodo. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Saudi Arabia continued to follow a policy of high oil production in 2016, and reported that it produced 10.67 million barrels a day in July 2016. Iran is producing at a pre-sanction level of 4 million barrels a day. 2017 oil demand prediction by OPEC is at growth of 1.15 million barrels a day. Experts says that the interests of Iran and the Saudis may be converging to reduce production as they face low oil prices. Iran needs to make large investments and Saudis face budget cuts with low oil prices. They point to this cooperation being temporary as there are issues of competing politics in the region, and beyond that both countries seek to expand their market share.

WSJ Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Harry Markovitz who invented Portfolio Theory and won the Nobel Prize in 1990 on the economic crisis and solutions. His idea in portfolio theory is that you reduce risk by creating a portfolio of uncorrelated assets. Owning GM and Ford together is more risky because they are correlated. The securities owned by banks were not not portfolio type with uncorrelated risk, they were all of one type in the mortgage securties industry. He goes to the heart of the problem saying until all these securities are scrutinized and underlying mortgagesare scrutinized, sorted out down to the individual zip code level, and this is not as complicated as it seems given the amount of resources that can be thrown at this problem, and given what is at stake, and they are striped of their lack of transparency, the country and the global economies that are intertwined with America's problems cannot see a solution to this problem. And this is true for the banks like Bank of America and Chase and the government run banks like the FDIC Indymac bank, where only a small fraction of homeowners can be helped with loan modifications to make monthly payments affordable, as a big part of the mortgage loans they hold or service are in the form of mortgage securtities where they don't make the decisions. Unless mortgage securities are sorted out to restore transparency and the government steps in with help and mandates a direction, the foreclosure process will lead to dropping property prices and further deterioration and economic stagnation similiar to the experience of Japan. Markovitz says it could take a year to do this. He says "the valuation process will take as long as takes, but it is the primary step toward effectively utilizing the very controversial bailout and avoiding the structural problem of a stagnant economy." Writes Gordon Crovitz of WSJ, "to put the issue in probability terms, the odds are very remote and nonexistent that the economy can recover until these basic steps are taken."...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WIth extensive experience as Chief Investment Officer from 2003 to 2012, Sauter has seen market swings and extreme volatility over a long period of a decade. For the current investment cycle and the pullback in Oct. 2014, he points to the pullback of -16% in spring 2010, and pullback of -18% in summer 2011. In the bigger picture of the chart for this period since 2010 these pullbacks look less significant. There are reasons for a pullback. The conflicts around the world bring more uncertainty for business investment, though Sauter's point about the conflict being more than any period since 1946 may be an overstatement because this includes the period of the Berlin Airlift, Iron Curtain in Eastern Europe, Korean War, Vietnam War, and the twin wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.There are problems in the eurozone economies with near contraction in Germany in the 3rd and 4th quarter. China is slowing down at the same time. The U.S. economy and lower oil prices are the bright side of the picture. Overall the comment by Christine Lagarde during the eurozone crisis in 2012 is still relevant. When asked about the situation then, she suggested adding perspective to what was happening by asking "compared to what?" referring to the situation in 2009, 2010 and 2011. Sauter says investors who remain steady are more likely to be happy some years from now that they remained that way....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A CBS/New York times poll shows that 63% of the American people approve Obama's performance as President. And 77% are optimistic about him being the President for the next 4 years. 55% of Americans are just making ends meet, and more than 6 out of 10 fear that someone in their household may lose their job. Most say it will be years before any significant improvement. Over 53% feel the stimulus plan will improve things, half of them say it is not likely to shorten the recession, and two thirds expect more money will be needed. Nearly all Americans are concerned that the cost of the economic programs will have significant long term effects on future generations, with 65% being very concerned. Yet about 75% say they are more concerned about the economic crisis. On the partisan politics, of those polled 63% say Republicans opposed the legislation for political reasons, not policy ones. 79% want Republicans to work in a bipartisan manner. And 56% surveyed want Obama to folow the policies he proposed during the campaign, rather than working with Republicans, and to make this his priority. All this suggests that a large number of Republicans are supporting the President, even though both Republicans and Democrats are concerned about the cost of programs, because a large majority of those polled are more concerned about the effects of this crisis on jobs and the economy....
WSJ Original article ›

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