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
The way Mr. Partovi's idea of mixing keyword search with ads met with resistance at Microsoft, after Microsoft spent $265 million to acquire his company LinkExchage. Some of Partovi's bosses warmed to his idea of auctioning keywords but their eyes were glued to the prospects of display banner ads and did not think much of the search and ads combined together, like searching for a term and seeing the vendors of all kinds of related services who pay a fee every time someone clicks on their name. Bosses changed and the Keywords group was shifted to other parts of the Microsoft business ending up in software. A small trial was made but price of auctioning keywords was not set appropriately. Partovi's insistence was seen as resistance to the ordered way of doing things at Microsoft, and Ballmer in 2003 talked about "discordant and dissident directions" in the company, tendencies which he derided. Partovi's passion was seen as insubordination and finally in May 2000 with $1 million in revenue from Keywords comparing poorly with Microsoft's other online ad revenue, Keywords was shutdown. Partovi left Microsoft in July 2000. He shopped his idea around. Yahoo said it did not fit in with its plans, later buying Overture for $1.8 billion in summer 2003. Google talked to Partovi but declined, instead quietly building its own service. And Google launched its own service AdWords combining search and ads in October 2000. It was under pressure to come up with arevenue generating method.By 2002 Google was stealing advertisers from Goto.com that had pioneered the business of ads and search but lacked the advantage of having its own search engine. Microsoft also faced the same problem. In May 2002 AOL dropped Goto.com and teamed up with Google for paid search. By late 2002 Microsoft executive Yusuf Mehdi was visiting Goto.com and launched an effort to buy Overture the new name for Goto.com. But when in Spring 2003 Mehdi pitched buying Overture for $1 billion to Gates and Ballmer, both tore into the proposal saying that they could do it for less than the $1-2 billion price tag by doing it inhouse. By this time Google was already the dominant company in search ads and Overture was losing out. But even with hundreds of programmers Microsoft did not get its search engine ready till late 2004 and the search ad system in May 2006, about 3 years from the meeting with Mehdi. The resistance of founders to development of new products, is seen at HP for the personal computer which was later embraced, and at Honda where a new kind of engine had to be developed secretly without Soichiro Honda's knowledge. In both cases the product was developed successfully after initial resistance, but in the case of Microsoft the new ideas and people may have been smothered and development done to Microsoft's founders own inclinations for order, and treated the same way as its other products till it was too late. A factor not present to the same degree in HP and Honda's situation was the speed with which the internet developed and search engines like Google developed. So that in 8 years since its launch Google is firmly entrenched, and has 73% of search ad spending, with Yahoo at 13.3% and Microsoft a distant third. Google generated $5 billion in profits from this in 2008. By 2009 search ad spending is estimated to reach $12.3 billion....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Socialist candidate for president in France's runoff elections, Francois Hollande, says he will ask that the fiscal compact treaty completed in Dec. 2012 be renegotiated to include measures that promote growth in the eurozone. He praised ECB chairman, Mario Draghi's comments that uppermost in his mind was the need for a growth compact in the eurozone.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
When Airbus launched its superjumbo jet in 2000 with seating for 550 passengers large airports said they needed to upgrade facilities to meet the larger size. Technological advances and preference for smaller jets flying directly to many locations have doomed the Airbus A-380. Airbus announced it will stop making the A380 in 2021.

Technological advances since 2000 with lighter carbon fiber parts and super efficient engines make it possible to fly smaller jets directly to many airports reducing the need to use hubs. Airlines preferred these jets. Only Emirates flying out of Dubai which uses half of the A380 superjumbo jets has continued with the large aircraft which has 37 gates specially designed for 380 use. 

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Michael McConnell, was Assistant General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget from 1981-1983. He is now a professor of constitutional law at Stanford University. Here he tries to throw light on how the budgetary process that is required by law, and which makes the formal budget proposed by the president available for public scrutiny, was circumvented through a sequence of events starting in February 2011. The Budget Act of 1974 sets specific deadlines and a process for generating revenue, setting spending priorities, and setting the debt limit. The President first submits his administration's budget by the first Monday in February. The Congressional Budget Office has until Feb. 15 to score the budget using identical metrics for all proposals for a consistent scoring. The budget President Obama put forward in February did not take into account the growing deficit and was rejected by the Senate 97-0. The President proposed a new plan in April 2011, but the proposed budget was so vague that CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said he could not score it. The subsequent efforts in June and July 2011 were carried out in closed door negotiations between senior Republican leaders and the Obama White House. This subverts the original intention of the law. The Budget Act says that both the House and Senate hold hearings on the proposal, with testimony from the administration, "national organizations" and the "general public." Transparency, openness and accountabilility are key aspects of a proper process that is democratic and prevents the parties from engaging in blame and competing claims. The closed door negotiating sessions and the lack of a concrete written budget proposal from the President has turned the current budget process into an effort by each side to see how it can best position itself for the 2012 presidential election. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Norris provides an insightful account into the research and thinking of Janet Yellen, the new chairwoman of the U.S. Federal Reserve. In her research work Fed chairwoman Yellen has placed importance on the long term unemployment rate and the difficulties workers unemployed for long period have in finding work. This is likely to determine Fed policy on interest rates as the unemployment rate inches closer to the Fed target of 6.5% set by Bernanke in Dec. 2012. Norris points out the emphasis Yelen has placed on this in speeches since being nominated to succeed Ben Bernanke at the Fed. In a recent speech Yellen emphasized that in the recession of the early 1980's median time unemployed people said they were unemployed was 12 weeks, which jumped to 25 weeks for about 6 months in 2010 and is at 17 weeks in the most recent jobs report. Another indicator Yellen has emphasized is labor's share of income in the nonfinancial corporate sector which remained between 66% and 61% from 1950 to early 2000's. This fell below 60% in 2005 and is at 57.1% barely budging from the 2011 figure. In papers written with George Ackerloff, Yellen has advanced the "fair-wage hypothesis," that workers do not do as good a job when wages are held down. Their research also shows its normal for workers in periods of recession to hold out against the lower salaries offered during recession periods, because these workers tend to fall behind newer workers hired with better wages later when the economy recovers. At the confirmation hearing Yellen made it clear that the Fed would do all it can to help the long term unemployed by creating a stronger job market, a job market where these workers would be drawn into work and employers provide job training as well as opportunities for advancement....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NATO was formed in the days of the Truman administration on 25th July 1949, following the Berlin Blockade, the coup in Czechoslovakia by Soviets, and the efforts to set up pro soviet governments in Turkey and Greece. It accomplished its purpose by pushing back against the Soviet effort securing democracy in Greece and Turkey in the 1950's. Much of this was achieved under Heads of NATO from the US- Gen. Eisenhower, Gen. Ridgway, Gen. Guenther and Gern Norstad proteges of Ike all from West Point by 1964, when Brezhnev was new head of Soviet Union and by 1991 Warsaw Pact of Soviets setup in 1955 was dissolved yet NATO was not. The US interests shifted to Asia - Gen MacArthur leading a UN effort in Korea and the US leading its own effort in Vietnam in the 1960's. The Soviet threat actually receded after 1964 when Brezhnev became head of Soviet Union till 1982. During that period in the 1970's till today the face of NATO as today was from a series of heads of governments of Dutch Stikker in 1970's or other small European states such as Norway Stoltenberg and Rutte Netherlands again in 2025. It could be said that none of these leaders  of small EU countries represented US interests- or even European interests- a point the DJT administration is trying to make. It hurt the US in Venezuela as Russia propped up a regime which led to millions of refugees entering the US illegally. And it hurt Europe as Russia propped up the Syrian regime with millions of refugees entering Germany and destabilizing its political structure. Going back if a new defense institution was set up to replace NATO by the Europeans in 1970's this would have been the right step which would have not led to Russia propping up regimes in the Americas or the Middle East. A goal that is being discussed with Russia by the DJT administration to refocus American efforts in a new direction and pause not just the Ukraine war but also put the US  and Russia in a new direction with the new competition from 3 billion people in China and India. WSJ Editorial Board takes the British position on the Ukraine peace proposals with centuries old skeptical attitude on Russia's intentions. The US government position put forward by DJT is that there are constructive discussions with Russia, and the need to settle the underlying issues behind the conflict. This includes NATO's future. NATO setup in 1949 for Soviets,  on the borders of Russia in 2025 after the end of the Cold War when its rival the Warsaw Pact set up in 1955 of the Soviets was disbanded in 1991. The British position comes from centuries of conflict in Europe and its interests in protecting its Empire till the 1950's remaining unchanged, and cannot reflect American interests in the 21st century as its economy competes with China and India and the EU, and seeks to do this by keeping former colonial powers out of the Americas including Russia, and China.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Experts say there may not be much difference whether a voluntary deal is reached between Greece and the Institute of International Finance or a deal is forced on private bondholders by Greece for the 93% of Greek bonds that are based on Greek laws. Most of the large banks that hold Greek bonds will be subject to persuasion by European authorites (EU, ECB) to accept the deal offered by Greece that brings debt down to 120% of GDP by 2020. The remaining holdouts are the hedge funds that will want to opt out of a voluntary arrangement anyway, because a forced deal by Greece would allow them to collect payments on their credit default swaps. Adam Lerrick, an expert on sovereign debt restructurings, says the hedge funds and other private bondholders are framing the discussion into one of a voluntary agreement that is orderly and an involuntary agreement that is disorderly, as a tactic to scare the European authorites (the EU, ECB) and Greece. He says not only can forced restructurings be orderly, but in this case the improved prospects for Greece with serious debt reduction would lead to a ratings upgrade for Greece. Some hedge funds have said they will sue if forced into the deal. Michael Waibel, at the Lauerpacht Centre for International Law at Cambridge University, says the case would first go to Greek courts where it would be received without much sympathy, and then to the European Court of Human Rights. Only the small number of bonds under Swiss and English law with pari passu clauses insisting on equal treatment of bondholders have any prospects, and even then legal enforcement of any awards is uncertain as shown in the case of Argentina. The 93% of bonds under Greek law have no such clauses and this gives Greece the option for special treatment of bonds held by the ECB....
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....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Typical of so much of what is written about the World Health Organization and its role in the pandemic, this podcast in the WSJ fails to quickly convey the critical function of the WHO as an early warning system the world has depended on, including China. The H1N1 epidemic originated in Mexico. Asian countries including China and India depended on very quick response from the country where the epidemic originated  in allowing entry into the affected area for experts from advanced countries such as the U.S. The global response was then coordinated across countries quickly with complete transparency. The head of China's CDC himself faced a problem with transparency with the provincial authorites in Wuhan. 1.    Fundamentally this quick entry was denied the U.S. Request by U.S. to China was made on Jan. 6 for U.S. team to go to Wuhan, quick permission was denied and given only about 6 weeks later on Feb 16. This delay is the crux of the problem for the U.S.. Taiwan confirmed human to human transmission on Jan. 1, the WHO was saying this was not clear as late as Jan. 14. These costly delays are what the U.S.  letter is about.  The head of the CDC China Gao Fu called Dr. Redfield head of CDC in the U.S. on the next day after he suspected Wuhan provincial authorites were vague about what was happening. Gao Fu was alarmed when scanning the internet on December 30, 2019, about rumors of a vaguely worded lung disease in internal memos of Wuhan. He called Wuhan authorites and was not getting clear answers on that day, then deciding on December 31 to send his own team to Wuhan, as reported in German magazine Der Spiegel- Hackenbroch, Zand, 05/20/2020.  Der Spiegel says in its special report on the early period in Wuhan that Gao Fu was so alarmed about what was happening enough to be in tears in his series of calls with Dr. Redfield in the immediate days that followed. The date was shortly after the GAO Fu sent the team to Wuhan, December 31 and New Years Day 2020, as reported in Der Spiegel. See the link to Lyrarc gist of Der Spiegel's "A Failed Deception: The Early Days of the Coronavirus in Wuhan."  2.  President Trump points out the standards of the WHO- in the concluding point of his letter to WHO- when a three time prime minister of Norway, Gro Brundtland was head of the WHO during the SARS crisis of 2003. She acted quickly and decisively and no time was lost. It is this failure of the early warning system under the new president of the WHO after 2017 Dr. Tedros that alarms the U.S.  with about 100,000 deaths.  3.  This failure it can now be said was partly a result of a election in 2017 for the position of WHO president which was flawed. This was the first time a WHO head, an important position was put up for an election. The Executive Board was responsible for this appointment since the founding of the WHO as part of the UN, based in Geneva, Switzerland, after World War II. This system worked. The election was clearly a bad process for appointing the president of the WHO which should be done entirely on the capabilities of the person holding this position not on a flawed voting process. It is flawed because India and Bangladesh hit by a cyclone during the coronavirus have suffered greatly, as have other countries, but had only 2 votes for 1.5 billion people, when Barbados (385,000 population) and Laos (7 million) which had less than one  hundredth the population had the same number of votes. The U.S. had one vote. The election resulted in lobbying and a process in which many candidates stayed away because they simply would not go through such a process. The position was too important to the world- most of the advanced countries had forgotten about the danger of epidemics to let this happen by 2017, as shown in the way the austerity years led to cancellation of the preparations for pandemic in France and Britain. The austerity years and neglect of public health during these tech boom years in the western world made it possible for this to happen. 3.   Along with the 1 month ultimatum action is already being taken to restore the effectiveness of the importance of the Executive Board. The head of the health ministry in India, Dr. Harsh Vardhan, has been appointed the new chairman of the Executive Board on May 22. This restores the voice of billions of people in Asia in the process, and brings the major countries with the greatest risk in a pandemic into the decision process for tackling the pandemic, this includes the rest of the world.     ...
Wilson Center Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Harder in this Wilson Center publication of research uses correspondence between Jawaharlal Nehru and his sister Vijaylakshmi Pandit ambassador to the US in 1950, to show that the US made an offer for India to take a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India had supported two resolutions on June 25, and June 27, first condemning the invasion by North Korea and second the organizing of a UN force of 29 countries to push back the North Korean invasion. Even though the US is not seen as actively engaging with India during that period and seeing through British eyes the colonial policies of encouraging  different powers in South Asia, that may not be true.  Who was India's foreign minister in 1950? Jawaharlal Nehru was both prime minister and foreign minister till 1964, which means there was less discussion of foreign policy than happens today during the Ukraine invasion with Jaishankar a career diplomat with 30 years experience, Rajnath Singh, and Mr. Modi, in talks with president Biden recently, and in further discussions Modi had with EU's Von der Leyen and UK's Boris Johnson, Kishida of Japan. Who was India's defense minister in 1950? Baldev Singh, a Sikh independence struggle leader was Minister of Defense for 1947-52 and tackled partition of Punjab and Kashmir issues. The rest of the years to 1957 when India faced the Chinese invasion of Tibet India's defense minister was also for most of the period Mr. Nehru, except Ayynagar in 1953, and Kailash Katju in 1955 and 1956. The controversial V.K. Krishna Menon was Defense Minister from 1957 to 1962, when Indian defenses were further neglected leading to the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, and his replacement by Yashwantrao Chavan. The purpose of this is to look back at what happened in earlier periods to understand where India stands today- and what choices it makes today. Clearly the US was looking for allies then and now. Nehru saw things from his own reading of history seeing China and India as both suffering from western invasion, not realizing that China's experience under Mao was different- that of Japanese invasion and bombing of China's major cities not just colonization of Hong Kong and other ports for trade under British trade based policies in 1850-1900. Thus a Communist Chinese version of China's defense involved taking over border regions such as Tibet putting China in direct and open opposition to India. Nehru never really grasped what was happening in Tibet and the war China fought against the Nationalists. American general Stilwell loved China deeply and had an understanding of its people as shown in Tuchman's account in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945. Stilwell during that war had a better understanding of China, the strengths and weaknesses of Mao's China and of the Nationalists under Chiang, than Nehru. Some of these errors post 1950's and a concentration of foreign, defense and embassy positions in the person of Mr. Nehru and of Nehru family member such as Mrs. Pandit led to the Indian failure to act on Tibet and see it as see it for what it was -facing a Communist Mao led China that had fought the Japanese invasion as different from Bodhidharma's China of the history books. Bodhidharma's China will outlast Mao's China, yet it is Mao's China that India faces today. This also tells us that India has to think in new ways- as Lincoln said during a period when America was also making its own progress as an industrial nation in the 1860's. "The dogmas of the quiet past are not adequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew, we must act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and we shall save our country." India's values are values of democracy heightened not just by Mohandas Gandhi's ideas with Hind Swaraj written in 1910 just as powerful in 2022, but also by the heights of Ladakh where elections are held in remote regions of the Himalayas. India's values are values that are also shared in the best that America has in its values and culture and in the defense of freedom.    ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jim Lehrer of PBS deserves a lot of credit for the remarkable way in which he handled the new format of 15 minute segments designed to draw out the distinctions between the candidates in the first 2012 U.S. presidential television debate.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Turkey is reviving its relations with Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Prince Bin Salman will visit Turkey as part of a remake of Turkey Saudi relations. Turkey's economic crisis has revived the relationship as Turkey badly needs aid for its economy. The pressure on emerging markets is increasing with US central bank raising rates reducing inflows of western money into Turkey even further. Prince Salman has already received visits from French and British leaders. He visited Jordan and Egypt this week and will now be in Ankara. In the summer he will visit Greece and Cyprus. Saudis are modernizing their economy changing culture in relationships of men and women, in women's rights and education, and broadening relationships with the world under Salman. There is an astonishing openness to science and technology in a drive to be modern. The old Saudi monarchy and conservative rule with ancient traditions is giving way to what the Saudis in the group under Salman see as the modernization of Europe and America in the 20th century using science and technology as what they would like to see in their own country. There is also a drive to think independently from the dogmatic positions of the past that have turned the Kingdom into an American dependency with no obligation or incentive to modernize its culture and be open to the world outside.  The US fought a war to ostensibly modernize a backward mountainous remote state as Afghanistan, while being perfectly comfortable with the old Saudi monarchies of the past that made little change in the ancient culture and tradition and in women's rights and education. Such were the contradictions in American policy and the failure to think anew. As president Lincoln said "as our case is new we must think anew, and act anew." President Biden will now visit Saudi Arabia to build a new relationship with an independent nation, which along with the UAE is bringing change to the Middle East through infrastructure development and modernization. Salman's modernization comes as the kingdom also faced a need to make a transition out of dependence on fossil fuels. Salman sees trips to Greece and Turkey as opening up to all sides. Saudis have good relations with Israel and Egypt another part of this openness. The US senses this, India has sensed this. India's Modi government  made sending the Oxford vaccines manufactured in India to Saudis a priority during 2021. The Indian example is also changing the way the UAE and Saudis see infrastructure development and modernization in the region. This is also changing the way the region is looking at itself. For decades Egypt lacking the resources to build infrastructure on its own has languished economically. A helping hand from the Saudis is changing Egypt. The entire rail system is being modernized with the latest technology from Siemens. The Saudis have stabilized the Egyptian economy with a $5 billion deposit in the Central Bank of Egypt. On June 21 Egypt and Saudis signed $7.7 billion in investment deals for infrastructure, logistics, port administration, food, industry, medicine, energy and technology. In the investments in Egypt some of the oil money going to Saudis with $100 per barrel oil price is going to an economy in Egypt that can easily absorb and make good use of the investment to modernize.   The influence of Saudi leverage in fossil fuels which drove the US relationship with Saudis since FDR is being replaced with an independent Saudi kingdom making decisions to modernize across the board in all aspects compared to one that favored a few American companies such as Exxon Mobil and ARAMCO or arms makers such as Boeing and Lockheed that helped recycle American money going to pay for Saudi fossil fuels back to America.    ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How the Australian Central Bank raised rates starting in May 2002, with the key lending rate at 5.5 % in July 2005, compared to 3.25 % in the USA. The idea was to control the housing bubble which has scaled back, with the Australian economy growing at 2% and this growth coming mostly from the commodities demand in global markets. Meanwhile the US central bank under Greenspan is holding onto the view that its hard to tell when a bubble is occurring, and it would hurt a healthy economy to raise rates to cool developing bubbles. Australia's central bank holds onto the other view that it is wiser to act now before the bubble gets out of hand. Governor MacFarlane of the Australian central bank said in aspeech in early 2003 that a "scaling back" of household borrowing and property development would be in "the longer term interest of the Australian economy." And the state of New South Wales, which includes Sydney, instituted a 2.25% tax on the sale of investment properties. This move discouraged speculators who bought and "flipped" properties for quick profits. By early 2004 a glut of downtown apartment units emerged in Melbourne, and the bubble began to scale back. During the height of the boom consumer spending was growing by more than 6% ayear, in 2005 this has slowed to 3.5% a year. Because of commodity demand, Australia was able to see growth at 2%, and still avoid the longterm effects of a bubble in housing markets by scaling them back. Patrick Barta closes with a reference to Texas in the 1980's and early 1990's, and Southeast Asia in 1997, when housing prices and the economy went down in tandem hitting employment in the oil and banking industries in Texas. In the case of Asia hitting the economies of some Asian countries with the fall of their currencies. He refers to the overstretched US consumer with load of debt, and the possibility of housing and the economy going down in tandem in the USA, similiar to what happened in Texas and Southeast Asia....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama repeatedly compared the Iran nuclear deal vote in Congress to the 2002 vote to authorize the war in Iraq under president George W. Bush, in a speech at American University. President John Kennedy made a speech on a strategy for peace at American University in Washington D.C. on June 10, 1963, offering negotiations as away to a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty with the Soviet Union. Obama said the "choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy or some form of war." The nuclear deal faces bipartisan opposition in Congress on grounds of weak verification, doubts about Iran's intentions, lifting of a weapons embargo including ballistic missiles, and lifting of economic sanctions with snapback seen as unrealistic, and support limited to Democrats in Congress. Compared to the speech by Kennedy which was hopeful- " in the final analysis, our most common link is that we all inhabit this same planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future's. And we are all mortal." It was also a response to Soviet Union's head Nikita Krushchev's letter to Kennedy of Dec. 1962 following the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962, saying "the time has come now to put an end once and for all to all nuclear tests." Compared to the enthusiasm with which the Kennedy speech was received, the Obama speech brought up the divisions of the wars in Afghanistan and Iran, in which many Democrats including Senator Hillary Clinton voted to support the Iraq war, and missed the power of president Kennedy's (and Krushchev's) words of 1962. The last minute inclusion of a lifting of an arms embargo including ballistic missiles," created doubts about Iran's intentions in the U.S. Congress, unlike Kruschev and Kennedy's decisive response on the nuclear issue which led to the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. The condition agreed to that the Iran nuclear deal of July could pass with only one third of Congess supporting it- based on a presidential veto if Congress did not approve it with a two thirds majority- created the prospect of the U.S. moving ahead on a major foreign policy issue with only limited support....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One has to separate the posturing and the rhetoric from the true positions of the parties to difficult negotiations between the ECB, IMF, EU, and the Syriza government in Greece. French opinion is reflected in the comments by Finance minister Michel Sapin, who said to reporters in Brussels- "If this government was elected, it's also because Greece has lost 25% of its national wealth in the space of 5 years." The government in Greece needs the 7 billion euro payment from the EU as the last instalment in the bailout package. France's Hollande government and the Renzi government in Italy favor growth measures over the austerity path advocated by Germany. The IMF's Christine Lagarde, a former French finance minister, was quick to differentiate between reforms such as tax collection, which is weak in Greece, with austerity opposed by the Syriza government. Lagarde told the newspaper Le Monde that the reforms on tax collection are not austerity, and need to be done. The IMF has 2.5 billion euro loan due in March, 2015. Debt is also owed to the ECB by July 2015. The ECB holds about $25 billion in Greek government debt. ECB president Draghi announced a 1 trillion euro government bond buying program in Jan. 2015 with a portion of the bond buying and risks to be borne by the ECB. The ECB could help the negotiations by stepping in to buy Greek bonds. A lot depends on the flexibility shown by both sides as the hard work of negotiating a solution on debt relief and structural reforms in Greece- such as the tax collection mentioned by Lagarde- progresses. Because of the deflation facing the eurozone, and economic uncertainty, the huge bond buying effort by the ECB to improve economic conditions, the positions of the EU and the ECB are likely to favor a toning down of the sharp rhetoric during the early days of the Greece crisis in 2011-2012. This would avoid adding additional economic uncertainty to the situation facing the eurozone. Tsipras and Syriza would seek to move to the centre in their positions based on discussions held earlier in meetings between the EU, the ECB and Tsipras before the elections....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This condensed adaptation of the book by McNish and Silcoff on the collapse of Blackberry with the launch of the iPhone, tells a story of complacency at Research in Motion. Supreme Court Justice Brandeis once said that complacency was like all the seven sins rolled into one. In the smartphone industry the results were lethal. RIM founders Lazaridis and Balsillie responded to the iPhone launch believing this would not affect Blackberry. The founders rationalized that what would determine success in the business was security, battery life, ability to type, and using less capacity so as not to strain networks, areas in which RIM was strong and on which it had built its market presence. Design, using mobile to offer broad access to internet content, and the touch screen, were not seen as changing the very nature of the phone market. During the summer of 2007 many users shifted to the iPhone, and it cultivated a cult following using strategies Apple had honed on earlier product launches, reaching 1 million in sales. RIM was completely unprepared and could offer Verizon Communications a prototype called the Storm, which was launched hastily with product glitches still remaining. This happened in November 2008 and turned out to be complete disaster- initial sales were great selling 1 million units in 2 months of 2008, but reversed when almost all of the units were returned because the browser was slow and the clickable screen did not respond well. Nokia, another competitor, is also caught unawares sticking to its formula of success, when all the rules were being rewritten by Apple by showing what the new possiblilities were with the right technology in what one could do with a smartphone. Blackberry introduced a smartphone in 2012 by putting together a patchwork of licensed technologies. By this time Apple, Samsung and other competitors had captured significant market share, and the smartphone flopped. The successor Z10 also flopped in 2013. Nokia faced another problem- the inability to convert R&D, at times larger than Google and Apple, into new products, and the failure of management to grasp the potential of new technologies. According to a former employee, Nokia management turned down a internet ready phone with touch screen developed by its engineers in 2004....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke, says the Fed will keep interest rates low till unemployment reaches 6.5%, as long as inflation remains at about 2%. If unemployment reaches 6.5%, and this is because more people are dropping out of the labor market, he will take this into account. If unemployment stays high the Fed indicated in its statement that it would tolerate a higher inflation of 2.5%, as long as the longer term outlook was for inflation to be at 2%. Bernanke said this doesn't mean monetary policy is on autopilot, because the Fed will watch conditions carefully and will leave room for flexibility- keeping an eye out for new asset bubbles that could develop, and monitoring labor market conditions and inflationary pressures and inflation expectations. If inflation falls well below 2%, or unemployment rate falls mainly because of people dropping out of the labor market, the Fed may continue to keep interest rates low. This policy was announced as U.S. fiscal cliff deficit negotiations continued in Dec. 2012 with one scenario being considered by both political parties being going over the Jan. 1 deadline before coming to an agreement. Bernanke pointed to this, saying "this is a major risk factor right now." The Fed's activist policy in economic policy has given financial markets and business a measure of stability not provided by government and Congress. Fed policy is to buy $40 billion of mortgage securities, and $45 billion of long term Treasury securities for each month in 2013. It will fund the purchases by adding reserves to the banking system, which is to say that it will print money to buy more bonds. This is a major decision by the Fed in that the Fed has shied away from unemployment targets in the past. Bernanke described this action as a new"automatic stabilizer" in the U.S. financial system- if unemployment rises investors know this pushes the Fed's interest rate increases further down the road and would drive interest rates down, if unemployment drops sooner than expected, investors anticipating Fed's rate increases would drive long term interest rates up, to keep stable growth....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Steve Lee Myers reporting from Moscow and St. Petersburg, Jo Becker from Washington and London, and Jim Yardley from Nicosia, Cyprus, provide this extraordinary and exceptional report on the rise of a small group of friends, mostly from Mr. Putin's time in St. Petersburg, into a new sort of oligarchy replacing the old one under Mr. Yeltsin. This includes more familiar names such as Sechin at Rosneft, but also less familiar names such as Mr. Kovalchuk, chairman of Bank Rossiya, which owns major television and radio stations and newspapers in Russia. M. Kovalchuk is described as having acquired many of these media properties at a fraction of their real value. Bank Rossiya assumed management of assets of Gazprombank, and Gazprom bank purchased Gazprom Media with five television and a number of radio stations for $166 million, when Medvedev, a Putin associate put the value at $7.5 billion 2 years following the acquisition, according to this report. Other assets acquired in this manner include Channel 5 and Ren TV, giving Putin's inner circle control of the media and reducing any critical or different views on issues facing Russia. Many of Gazprom's assets were transferred to Bank Rossiya, say critics, including insurer Sogaz which was acquired for $100 million, later valued at $2 billion, says the report. Names on the this inner circle also include Yakunin, head of Russian Railways, also include names like Fursenko and Timchenko. Most of the people in this inner circle are now targets of western sanctions. Missing in this report is mention that that this inner circle of the second term as president replaces the larger circle of the first terms as president and prime minister, with Putin benefitting from experts and advisors in the first terms. That circle included Finance minister Kudrin known for his successful management of the economy, and others who left the administration after flawed parliamentary elections. Even prime minister Medvedev is not mentioned as part of this inner circle, suggesting a degree of isolation which could be perilous for the Russian economy as it deprives the Russian president of different opinion and useful advice. This is a pattern seen in many emerging market countries which experience corruption during the period of industrial development. A pattern seen also in China under the Communist Party. And in Venezuela where a new Bolivarist class was created. In emerging market democracies such as India and Turkey the problem is also present, except that in India the recent open election led to the ouster of the Congress led government with many cases of corruption in its second term. A similiar election led to a new government in Indonesia, showing that there is another way beyond the Putin Way. Behind the protests in Hong Kong and in Russia, as well as in India, were the huge gaps in wealth and the growing inequality, corruption, lack of responsiveness of ruling governments. In Russia this takes another dimension with efforts to control the internet and media, and efforts to spread this style of democracy. This has created problems in the Putin government's relations with western nations having open societies and free media, and unwilling to accept a distorted model of democracy. Another less noticed aspect of the evolution of these emerging markets is that upto a point development proceeds even accelerates even in the presence of corruption, and then reaches a point where development and growth slows with problems of corruption, mismanagement of resources, declining productivity, economic and political errors, or unfavorable external environment. India faced this problem in 2012-2013, Russia is likely to face this in 2015, and China faces the prospect of growth slowdown by 2016. This feature of emerging markets also reminds one of the frequently quoted old English saying by Lord Acton- "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." An idea also attributed to William Pitt the Elder who said- "unlimited power tends to corrupt the minds of those who possess it." ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman on the ECB President Trichet's support for austerity programs in European countries facing debt crises, and the loan programs for Ireland, Portugal and Greece that require large cuts in spending. The austerity programs lead to lower growth in these countries, further reducing their ability to repay these loans. The reluctance of the German government and other European leaders to consider debt restructuring even though it appears Greece is unlikely to be ever able to repay the loans extended, shows that EU has not grasped the reality of the situation. ECB officials warned against any restructuring effort in late May 2011, saying that if a restructuring were to take place the ECB would not accept the Greek bonds as collateral for ECB loans. This leaves many to question the ECB's thinking. And to question the German government's resistance to provide aid for troubled European economies even though the current rescue programs were made to protect German banks from losses in loans made to these countries....
The Times of India Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
India's robust debate as a democracy is of an astonishing size and diversity of opinion. The debate did not diminish when there was one federal party in many states under Indira Gandhi (1970's). It actually increased many times during this period compared to the period under Jawaharlal Nehru (1950's) taking the example of one state Gujarat as an example of what was going on in 18 states of that time. Newspapers in Gujarati such as Jansatta, Gujarat Samachar and others carried on a vigorous debate with opposing points of view to the Indira Gandhi government at the state and federal level of the 1970's. Most people in places like New York and London fail to understand or see the local language newspapers or are totally unaware of their existence, and the debate carried on in their pages. So that they falsely assume what a small group of English language newspapers tell them about the vigor of Indian democratic debate that is truly unmatched anywhere in the world. And in terms of its 22 languages in one nation one could say in the entire history of the world. Swapan Dasgupta in the Times of India gives the staggering number of publications today in 2023- 144,520 publications reaching 386 million people every day. And 392 television news channels . All in 22 languages. To ignore the local languages as if they did not exist is to ignore India as if a billion people did not exist. Or as it is for China to say that everything written in Chinese papers and Chinese news channels did not exist. Dasgupta also points out that one should take Mr. Modi and the BJP out of this as at the national level its a 10 year old phenomenon. Look back from 2010 for the sixty years from 1950 to 2010 and India was as badly misconceived, misrepresented, and misperceived back then. India he says fell from 105th place in Freedom House rankings in 2006 to 140th place in 2013. Mr. Modi only enters the picture after that. Dasgupta points out the small sample for these ratings 150 respondents and the methodology having missed much if not everything that is needed in a robust democratic debate. There is another aspect which is present which is prominent in New York and London and Washington D.C. and that is that non-alignment is not popular.  One has to see the way Adlai Stevenson running against Eisenhower twice in the 1950's very warmly received Jawaharlal Nehru on his visit to the US and compare it with the way the US perceived India under John Foster Dulles after Dwight Eisenhower was elected in 1952 to understand this aspect of American perception. Dulles was facing the Soviet Union and the British under Churchill then Macmillan had an equal disdain for Nehru's non alignment and tilt towards the Soviet Union. These root perceptions did not change with the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, and continued into the 1970's when Nehru's daughter Indira Gandhi was prime minister and continued non alignment.  India's political alignment after the pandemic is anything but non-aligned. It thinks, acts and lives in a way that is similar to the people of the US and Europe. Not even because it chooses to but because of what it is, coming from being part of its ancient path of Vedanta and Buddhist civilization that is the core Asian experience. It also needs to bring 400 million out of poverty and build the next phase of industrialization and modernization that requires fossil fuels in large quantities at lower prices to sustain its rapid growth. Some of it comes from Russia purely as an economic decision during the pandemic. The Biden administration fully supports India in this task of rapidly growth to meet the aspirations of a mostly young population- sourcing fossil fuels from whichever source that makes sense. To become a key part of the US new supply chain that reverses the overconcentration of the supply chain in China. It can only be said then that Freedom House has the peculiar affliction left behind from the John Foster Dulles period, combined with a bit of arrogance in failing to grasp the central fact of India which is its 22 languages forging one nation- a task nowhere seen in the history of the world. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The lower house of the French parliament approved the EU budget discipline treaty that limits deficits to 3% of GDP. It passed with a large majority of 477 votes to 70. About 284 members of the left parties voted for the bill. Sarkozy had pushed for passage of this treaty and Hollande agreed to it in his talks with chancellor Merkel of Germany. At the same time Germany and France agreed on promoting growth measures. The new French budget for 2013 reflects this committment to reducing the deficit to 3%. France's deficit declines from 4.5% in 2012 to 3% in 2013 under the new budget. It does this with shared sacrifices and higher corporate taxes and without sharp cuts in government spending that could hurt the economy.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hong Kong's new chief executive, Leung Chun-ying, is intervewed by the WSJ's Te-Ping Chen, Jeffrey Ng, and Robert Thomson. He was elected by 1200 business and political leaders in 2012. The term ends in 2017, by which time China says it will hold direct elections with universal suffrage in Hong Kong. Leung plans pro-growth policies and says Hong Kong's growth rate of about 4% for the last two decades lags too far behind Singapore's over 6% growth rate. No action is planned to reduce property prices by providing new land supply. He sees more room for growth in maritime insurance and ship financing services to complement Hong Kong's development as a global shipping center, citing London as an example. To improve the problem of cramped housing space and small apartments he is looking at ways to build new towns in the New Territories, which are on the border with mainland China. Leung will not change Hong Kong's flat tax structure, and is not going to follow Singapore's example in granting tax holidays. Growth in China will be about 7% in 2012, and future growth will depend on how fast China shifts from export led growth to domestic consumption....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
France's parliamentary elections showed the Socialist party gaining 280 seats, with two allied parties getting 34 seats, giving the Socialists an absolute majority in parliament. Greens won 17 seats and the far left 10 seats. Former president Sarkozy's Union for a Popular Movement won 194 seats and allies 35 seats, for a total of 229 seats, down from 304 seats.The National Front led by Marie Le Pen won 2 seats. Marie Le Pen and Segolene Royal both lost their seats. The absolute majority gives Socialist president Hollande more room to implement his legislative program and make changes in eurozone architecture.

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