LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT's look at the televised debate between Macron and Le Pen for the presidential election. Macron has this to say in closing about Le Pen's shelving her plans for exit from the European Union compared to her position in the last election. "It's a project that doesn't say its name but entails leaving the European Union. I'm not lying about the goods, you are lying about the goods." Macron says Le Pen is being disingenuous about this, arguing that by reducing French contributions to the Eu budget and by ignoring fundamental rules of the EU such as freedom of movement and the single market, that would lead to a de facto exit from the European Union for France. Lyrarc has shown today on this page how the debate was covered in FR24, DW.com, The Guardian, BBC News, WSJ, and NYT. One of the key questions is what would she or some other candidate such as Mr. Melenchon done differently than Mr. Macron- For the once in a century pandemic? Macron is not faulted by any one for the work done by two prime ministers he appointed for the task. What would she or some other candidate done differently for today's surging inflation, considering that it is happening worldwide? Are their aspects of France's welfare state, and her economy and the currency that are better protected under the European Union than in a situation of de facto exit. The absolute power in the French presidency is something that happened after a weak system of prime ministers and coalition governments in the period between the two wars, and that power used wisely enabled De Gaulle to take decisive steps  over a decade for France in the post war modernization of France. This was a problem for Melenchon with his calls for a new Republic and a new constitution. Yet many of todays problems of decaying communities and once prosperous industrial towns in decay in the north, northeast and the south require a next generation industrial revolution to bring manufacturing back to France and back to the European Union, and large scale investment in France, as is happening today in the US which is confronting the same problem.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Financial Times looks at the logistics logjam worsened by the Shanghai lockdown in China. A greater economic fallout is also expected on the long supply chains that are now becoming unworkable, leading to the rebuilding of new shorter supply chains. And bringing manufacturing back to Europe and the US from overstretched supply chains in China.

LyrArc Article Gist
A look in 2024 at Flint, Michigan and Genesee County, Michigan, once the home of General Motors and the auto industry. The Water Crisis hit hard following the closing of GM plants, Genesee County has still to recover and a lot needs to happen to rebuild this part of the industrial midwest.

LyrArc Article Gist
Now that finance ministries around the world are trying to save their economies with trillions of dollars in aid packages their finances are stretched to the limit. The so called digital tax is not really a digital tax. And efforts to recover lost tax revenues in Europe are being opposed by the U.S. because tax levies by France go only to France, not the U.S. The U.S. Treasury or U.S. government or the American people would not turn down tax revenues that it normally gets when its finances are stretched to the limit with trillions of dollars for cornavirus leaving little for crumbling infrastructure and essential public health services, other services that determine quality of life in America.  This Washington Post report shows that there is greater awareness that the right approach is to pay taxes based on where revenues are located and by the number of users in each country. But the problem goes deeper than that. The coronavirus changes the entire perspective and take this back to roots. Companies pay taxes because it is the right thing to do. In Japan Panasonic's founder Matsushita felt that it was a national duty to pay its share of taxes as it too was sharing in the benefits provided by society- in the health, sanitation, education and transportation, parks, and hundreds of services provided by government. Once this is seen as dispensable or somebody else's problem, then these very services and infrastructure can be starved of capital. Coronavirus changes this perspective. People crave for outdoor spaces- who is going to maintain them and set up new spaces. People crave for not moving around on crumbling bridges, roads, subway systems. Who is going to provide them? People crave for good schools, community colleges. Who is going to provide them? People crave for good sanitation systems? Who is going to provide them? People crave for good public health systems. Who is going to provide them? Its just good common sense. Is it possible for common sense to be missing? It is- just ask people today, and it is good common sense to have good critical infrastructure such as sanitation, medicine, public health, and local manufacturing of medicine, yet economic experts and economic theories thought it made sense not to do this.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Instead of killing the NAFTA trade agreement Trump and his advisors prefer renegotiating the treaty. Priorities for the Trump administration are reducing the U.S. deficit with Mexico of $61 billion. Trade with Mexico and Canada is worth $1.1 trillion and the complex supply chains works such that product components cross borders more than once to become finished products. Mexico promotes its auto and other industries as duty free access to the U.S. for foreign investment. Special tariffs would reduce the trade deficit with Mexico and firms that moved production to Mexico would pay additional taxes. A provision that allows Mexican and Canadian companies to challenge U.S. regulations would also be removed. Rep. Brad Sherman (Democrat) says he supports the renegotiation so that duties of 4% are imposed to reduce the deficit to $25 billion.

LyrArc Article Gist
Amy Chua talks about elites, ethnic minorities, and native peoples and and the conflicts that democratization and free markets can create in these countries, in her book "World on Fire." Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia have ethnic Chinese minorities and large native populations, and in India there are the Marwaris of Rajasthan and the commerical class among Gujaratis, the Parsees, and similarly in China. And in Bolivia, a white minority that is 3% of the population, and other white minorities in countries with large native or tribal populations like Ecuador, Peru, Columbia, or Jewish people in Latin American countries. In Africa you have a white minority in South Africa. In all these developing countries democracy empowers the native peoples, and free markets empowers these commercial minded elites. There is conflict and tension between the two and the question is how is one to look at this. If one sees it the way one ethnic Chinese person, Prof. Amy Chua -who has written a book on this subject and whose parents lived in the Philippines under Japanese occupation- the promotion of free markets and democracy is an American export leading to a lot of conflict. From Amy's perspective, there is the difficult tension for the Chinese minorities in Indonesia, Malaysia and Philippines. But are these countries better without democracy and free markets? And take Malaysia, did democracy and free markets come with an American export after the Reagan era promotion of free markets and democracy? In Malaysia native Malay peoples were empowered by democracy when the British left in the 1950's, long before the Reagan era. And somehow Malaysia has benefitted economically, even as there is tension between Malaysia's Malays, who run the democratic government, and the Chinese minority, which helps run the business sector with a rising Malay business community. With good sense prevailing all the people benefit even as the tension exists. The same is true in other countries mentioned here. Countries like Bolivia have to be seen as a legacy of long Spanish colonization and requires one to look at it differently, taking into account history, culture and place. empowers the ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Italian leader Meloni comes to the White House for a meeting with US president DJT on April 17, 2025. DJT says there will be a deal with the EU "100 percent."

"There will be a trade deal, 100 percent, but it will be a fair deal."

Meloni criticised "woke ideology" and said she fully supported the "war against illegal migration".

"The goal for me is to make the West great again, and I think we can do it together."

"I'm proud of sitting here as prime minister of an Italy that today has a very good situation - a stable country, a reliable country."