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
India's foreign exchange reserves of $295 billion cover about 7 months of imports. This is not enough in currency reserves for India's central bank to take actions to prevent a depreciation of the Indian currency, the rupee. The central bank, RBI, has taken other actions including giving local exporters 15 days to convert half their estimated $7 billion foreign exchange holdings into rupees. Analysts say the RBI is running out of policy options and is down to micromanaging the currency. India's trade deficit was at $13.4 billion in March 2012 with rising cost of importing oil and lower exports. The rupee is close to 54 rupees to the dollar.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The recent appointment of fast food executive Andrew Puzder as Labor Secretary has caused great concern among union leaders. Puzder supports a $9 minimum wage compared to $15 supported by Democrats. Unions now represent 7% of the labor force, down from a high of 20% during Reagan's time when Reagan appointed a construction company executive as Labor Secretary and cut regulations.  Globalization has thinned the ranks of workers in unions. And the failure of Democratic administrations to stem the shift of factories overseas to China, Mexico and other places, as part of global supply chains focussed on cost, has weakened Democratic support among workers since the period of Bill Clinton. It eroded to the point where Obama won 65% of support among unions and Hillary Clinton won 56% in 2016. Interestingly the Republican Romney gained 33% versus 37% for Trump, showing voters were more inclined to move away from Democrats and only a smaller number willing to support Republicans, but the shift enough to give Republicans a win in 2016 for the presidency. The figures are from a Election Day survey of trade union AFL-CIO, and a larger proportion in midwestern states showed disaffection with policies from Clinton to Obama. In fact Obama spent years promoting another free trade agreement TPP that favored tech more than auto and older industries, just as Bill Clinton had promoted NAFTA, without giving thought to what this was doing to its worker base of support. A similar situation happened with Social Democrats in Germany as a SPD administration moved to the centre and handed Christian Democrats led by Merkel a win in parliamentary elections. As Democrats such as former Labor Secretary Reich, a professor at UC Berkeley who served under Bill Clinton, describe the problems of working class people their is less reflection on the impact of the changes from globalization and how Democrats handled or mishandled it, and more on the politics between the two parties.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
http://www.hindustantimes.com/ Original article ›
http://www.hindustantimes.com/ Original article ›
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Galston of the Brookings Institution says globalization has hurt workers in manufacturing with job losses and declining incomes. It has produced outcomes that have favored some industries such as tech, and not others such as automobiles which in the past helped create the broad middle class by offering good paying jobs to people with less than a college education. Immigration has created an issue that political leaders outside of the main parties have appealed to in France, the U.S. and Britain. The result is a polarization in the voters that has rarely been seen to this extent before. The middle class in the period from the 1950's to the 1980's is not the middle class that we see today in Europe and the U.S. The 2008 financial crisis added to the problems with the slow and uncertain recovery for some groups such as white men, the less educated, students, and people on minimum wage. 

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Public perceptions in the USA of China are changing. Today 42% have unfavorable views of China vs. 39% tha have favorable views of China from survey results released in August by the Pew Research Center. This is a change from 2007 when 42% polled had a positive view of China and 39% a negative view. Things that have changed since then are the Tibet riots and China's strong reaction, the issues of contaminated Chinese products entering the USA market and the nationalism in China on the eve of the Olympics. The last touches McCain and his senior advisor on China, Michael Green of Georgetown University, who finds the Chinese reaction on issues like trade to be cocky but cocky to the point of being arrogant. His comment "the combination of arrogance and insecurity can be dangerous." Green was on the National Security Council under President George W. Bush. McCain and Green want to bolster trade relations with other Asian countries like India to help the USA strengthen its bargaining power with China. McCain wants to strictly enforce trade agreements with China including blocking unsafe products from China. The shift in opinion in the USA at a time when there is a shift in opinion in China to a nationalistic tone sensitive to criticism of China even when it concerns issues like Tibet which do not affect any vital interests of China should be seen as significant. This is happening at the same time as a candidate like McCain who has less tolerance for Russia and a similar position for China is running strongly for President and has the experience and support of most Americans on foreign policy issues. Its useful also to see that the figures given here show 60% of Russians seeing China in a favorable light and only 30% in an unfavorable light. And when you look at France and Germany, 72% in France and 68% in Germany see China in an unfavorable light, only 28 and 26% respectively having a favorable opinion. Britain is an exception because 47% of the British public has a favorable opinion of China, only 36% having an unfavorable view. The figures are from Pew Research Center polls of 4,257 adults in he five countries conducted in March and April (international views)....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Economic progress in South Asia may finally put behind it simmering political tensions is evident from nature of this proposal on Kashmir by Pakistan. This proposal by President Musharraf is for India and Pakistan to recognize the "line of control" as a de facto border, gradually withdraw troops, and support a new body to run the government in Kashmir. Musharraf say Pakistan then "will have to, yes," give up its claims on Kashmir. The region would have to be given more autonomy to run its affairs. Musharraf would still have to win support from the political parties for this proposal to take shape and be able to control militants in the region who oppose a settlement.
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This is a very informative interview with Joe Biden. So far Biden has given few interviews where he talks freely at length about how he plans to run his administration and what is most important to his heart. The title is very misleading in this respect. Unlike the inexperience of Obama with his "we won" we must be doing something right, Biden with his years of experience comes closer to Lyndon Johnson or Truman and the same drive to get things done. He says in this interview "there is no elation." He just wants to get somethings done as quickly as he can and he knows Congress as well as Lyndon Johnson did when he tried to get his vision of "the Great Society." It is almost as if the Biden sequel to the inexperience of Obama, is like the Johnson sequel to the inexperience of Kennedy.   To understand Biden is to know what hurts him most. Biden feels the pain that every rural county in America did not vote for him. He knows something is deeply wrong that this should happen as it has never happened before. It may be time to define diversity differently - people of diverse backgrounds not just ethnic or race but also whether with rural or urban backgrounds as they are today totally different. He also feels the pain that seventy two million Americans voted for Trump. He will judge his success or failure in winning over about half of them to bring this down from 47-48% to 25%. These issues will define and shape the Biden presidency. Can he deliver to the rural counties, health care, education, broad band connectivity, everything that has disrupted life in rural America from the way it was in the Truman and Eisenhower administrations when it comes to the social fabric. The China issue simply fits into this. European societies are feeling the pain of the fragmentation in their social fabric with starkly different opportunities for life in rural vs urban. Respect for fellow Americans comes before respect for China- or Japan, or India, or Europe. Biden understands what three decades of shift of manufacturing jobs to China and other countries have done to American communities, to small towns and the rural areas surrounding them in America. For this reason Biden does not plan to change the Agreement China made with the Trump administration for 25% tariffs on a portion of imports from China and China's written agreement to buy $200 billion of American products. For this reason his response to China's challenge emerging from trade policy set in motion by the Clinton administration, and allowed to continue by the Bush and Obama administrations with the addition of foreign wars that dissipated the country's finances urgently needed for infrastructure building and investments in education and advancing science and technology, is to reverse all the negative trends. Biden plans to make the investment in America that Mr. Trump started but to do this more effectively, he says.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chancellor Merkel's now widely quoted words were made in Munich on May 27, 2017, after a NATO summit meeting in Brussels and a Group of 7 meeting in Italy, in which she was disconcerted by U.S. president Trump's positions on NATO, Russia, climate change, and trade. These words "the times in which we could rely fully on others - they are somewhat over." Merkel added "This is what I experienced in the last few days." After the election of Emmanuel Macron in France, Merkel expressed great relief at the outcome of the French election with Macron winning about two thirds of the vote, setting the stage for the election in Germany after several months of difficult watching and waiting. Now there is new confidence in Germany shaping its own future, with France and the rest of the European Union without Britain. Merkel says she "experienced this" meaning that she had undergone a transformation in these few months, and visibly in the last few days. She was also sending a message to Germans and people of the European Union - "we have to know that we must fight for our future on our own, for our destiny as Europeans." This also complements tactically to form the approach of Germany and France at the leadership of the EU, as French president Macron said at the end of the Group of 7 conference that multilateralism was intact, and the U.S. and EU shared many common goals.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's current account surplus has declined to 2.8% of GDP for 2011 from about 10% in 2007, and will be around 2.3% of GDP in 2012, according to IMF estimates. The U.S. current account deficit is down to 3.1% of GDP from 5.1%. By controlling the exchange rate China was able to keep the competitiveness of its exports, resulting in a five fold increase in exports from 2000 to 2010, according to the IMF. The decline could be temporary say experts, as the the recession in Europe and the U.S. resulted in slowing exports, with its infrastructure buildup sucking in imports of machinery and other goods from the western countries at an accelerated pace with its 2009 stimulus measures. Another reason is that in the last decade China has developed its own high tech and other companies which will now increase exports. IMF forecasts show a pickup in China's trade surplus to 4.25% by 2017. This could be lower if the renminbi is allowed to appreciate. Estimates of appreciation of the renminbi are 8 percent in nominal terms since June 2010 against the dollar. Including inflation, which is higher in China, the renminbi has appreciated by 13% since June 2010. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The head of the World trade Organization Okonjo-Iweala and the prime minister of Bahamas Mia Mottley say that overconcentration of manufacturing in China creates fewer opportunities for growth for poor countries. The supply chain needs to be redesigned after the pandemic not just because it creates a more dependable supply chain for the US and the European Union. It also  needs to be resdesigned to increase manufacturing in countries such as India and Mexico because this will create more opportunities for growth in other countries. For this to happen the infrastructure has to be made similar to that in China. This program of rapidly building the latest infrastructure and logistics with next generation technologies is underway in India with the Modi administration building new pools of capital, skilled labor, land and logistical infrastructure for the purpose of  rapid export led growth. A target of 2 trillion dollars in exports by 2030 has been set by India. This will affect a broad region from Indonesia to Vietnam in Asia and Mexico, Brazil in Latin America, bringing the benefits of trade to a wider region for the first time and making allies of the US and the European Union true partners in trade and manufacturing for the supply chain. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif's PML-N party wins 125 of 269 seats in Pakistan's parliament. The Tehreek-e-Insaf party of Imran Khan won 31 seats and the PML-N party of the current president Asif Zardari won 32 seats mostly in Sindh province. Independents won 31 seats and some of these independents are likely to support Sharif in forming a new government. Election turnout of 60% showed a large degree of enthusiasm in this election and hopes for economic revival in Pakistan. The focus of Sharif will be on improving the economy, tackling electricity shortages, and building infrastructure. Sharif promised to pursue peaceful relations with India and Afghanistan, and keep the focus on the economy. Sharif and his advisers are bringing a new deftness in the dealings with the Army, the Pakistan Taliban, saying he would call for a halting of drone strikes, limiting the role the U.S. plays in the region, both positions popular in Pakistan, separating differences with former president Musharraf from the institutional role of the military. Small business owners and large business support Sharif's efforts to tackle electricity shortages, with an estimated loss of $12 billion in idled factories alone. The long period of political conflicts between the military, the judiciary and the political parties have led to neglect of Pakistan's economy, as neighboring countries in Asia surged ahead. The realization that popular pressure for improving standards of living and the economic opportunities are both huge has led to an extraordinary election, and put Sharif at the centre of an important new beginning for Pakistan. ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Indian rating agency Crisil says expeditious settlement of stressed assets in India's banking system is needed for the private sector to play its part in the country's infrastructure development. In the last 4 years much of the effort in infrastructure was undertaken by the government. Crisil CEO Ashu Suyash, says Rupees 50 lakh crore needs to be allocated for capital investment in infrastructure for the 5 year period 2018- 2022. About Rupees 3000 crore investment per day is required. In addition to improving the banking system, other actions needed are new private-public partnership efforts, front ending of projects, and a deepening of the infrastructure financing system. Infrastructure investments have suffered from lack of investment in India and this should be a top priority for the government, say experts. This includes tapping into pension and insurance funds under new arrangements. The central government has announced a 7 lakh crore investment plan to build 83,000 kilometres of highways by 2022. Crisil has developed an "investability index" to track and measure the attractiveness of such projects.   ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How will posterity view Angela Merkel. As she ends a fourth term this BBC News report says it will remain a contested legacy. Much of what went right has already been written. A woman, a pragmatic scientist who hewed to the center not just as a scientist but with a knack for politics. Much of her early period in office was one in which she had to tackle the eurozone crisis. The euro's weakness had its roots in the way Mr Kohl allowed eurozone membership for countries such as Greece without adequate entry requirements. Some of the other problems were also left behind by an overzealous mentor Helmut Kohl who pushed for German reunification that never really happened in terms of bringing all east Germans into the idea of the Federal Republic. These problems in a neglected eastern part of Germany around Dresden were never tackled by Merkel. They were social issues that Merkel's pragmatic thinking failed to grasp. Letting in migrants from Arab and African countries was a move that Merkel made without realizing the full implications. This policy was reversed but led to the emergence of extreme right wing sentiment in parts of the country. It is left to a future German leader to tackle the social and economic disparities that affect Germany today. As time passes people reflect and a more careful view prevails. Dr Rudiger Schmitt-Beck reflects this when he says that the Merkel years were about  a bizarre mix of modernization and backwardness. Merkel rejected nuclear energy after the events at Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. As a scientist she was able to tackle such issues. Yet on the major social issues of the day Prof. Schmitt-Beck of the University of Mannheim, says she left Germany "grotesquely behind"- on child care, climate policy, digitization, infrastructure building, on demographic change. These are the issues that the Social Democrats and the Greens are standing up for today. Ironically Merkel may be remembered more for something that is not even mentioned in this BBC report. This is the European solidarity shown by action to financially support all EU countries including Italy with EU funding during the coronavirus pandemic.  This may be her biggest achievement because it will be lasting. Without it Europe would not be the better place it is today, resilient in the face of the pandemic.  Seen from outside Merkel will be seen as a German leader who failed to see the potential for India and other Asian countries with almost twice the population of China. Fascinated with 13 visits to China she studied Chinese history, politics and economics, says the WSJ. And did too little to balance Germany's close business and trade ties with China, with efforts in India and other countries. Seen from America as pointed out in the WSJ front page on September 23, Merkel made no effort to rebuild US relations with the Biden administration after the tumultuous period under presidents Obama with spying on her phone and with Mr. Trump over the EU's participation in NATO defense. She seemed resigned to a view that America had seen her best years, a belief that today does not exist anywhere in America. US president Biden's first phone call to Merkel was put off for a few days says the WSJ, and Merkel continued to build close ties with China, ignoring the fact that this was a new administration closer to that of presidents FDR and Harry Truman who did so much for Germany. And a president very different than any of Biden's five predecessors. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mead points out that the world with an effective U.S. leadership based on democracy and the values we cherish is needed now more than ever, after the failures of the Bush and Obama administrations to provide the kind of balanced leadership all Americans can stand behind. A world without an effective and enlightened leadership from the U.S, is one in which the world could fall apart in regional rivalry, one in which the hundreds of millions of people in the poorer parts of India, China, Russia, Brazil, and other developing countries of the world, will have less opportunity to meet their aspirations for a better life. This is because a focus on development requires less regional rivalry and because serious missteps can reverse in a few years decades of economic progress as shown in the 2008 global financial crisis. More so because we live in an increasingly interdependent global economy. It is also the kind of world where suppression of freedoms and suppression of the opposition as in China and Russia, provides a wrong kind of message, a world in which we or our children would not want to live in. Russia, India and China, are too driven by rivalry and lack the deep experience to go it alone, multipolar is more likely to end up being multipolar rivalry leading to a race to the bottom, which would be bad for all, especially for the poor in Asia and the developing world. The 2008 crisis showed what some serious economic mistakes could do to employment and incomes in the world with output dropping by a third in most places. Political missteps could lead to a slippery slope of this magnitude but more difficult to correct. Greater participation in the political process and more enlightened leadership is needed in all countries to allow many voices and greater interaction across boundaries, focussing on the dangers of such multipolar rivalries. The world of the G-7 is already moving to the G-20 where many voices are heard and serious discussion of differences takes place, but participatory is different from multipolar....
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Much of the information Friedman says comes from Ruchir Sharma could be seen through simple observation. By the time it is written about so much has already happened. For example Tech firms crowding out innovative new firms starting from scratch is happening since 2000, from the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations. By the time the concept makes it into the economics textbooks many years later it is obsolete. In economics textbooks of the eighties crowding out referred to governments crowding out private firms in the competition for capital. Concepts of comparitive advantage in economics textbooks were similarly obsolete when Japanese and Chinese competition in the last three decades brought into play a very different model of competition of subsidized private and state run companies focussed on dominating key industries that never made it into textbook economics and theories of experts. Comparitive advantage theory in textbooks were too simplistic not able to account for real life situations in which a determined national competitor could move up the ladder every few years in sophistication and technology to compete in products at many levels. The old textbooks simply said Portugal would make wine because it had some advantages and America with its advantages in steel production would make steel. This kind of theory put many people to sleep as other nations took over American markets- first steel, then electronics, then telecom, and then renewable energy. To protect American workers Robert Lighthizer and other American negotiators of trade with China, Japan, South Korea, used their own head and observation of what was happening. This was a better guide to the best response to protect American workers. Doing what makes sense, doing what works for final delivery point to the intended beneficiary, the American worker, or European worker, or Indian worker, provides a better way to get things done.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In China since 1981 the poorest people making below $1.25 a day fell to 207 million in 2005 from 835 million in 1981. In India the number of people below $1.25 a day increased to 455 million in 2005 from 420 million people in 1981. The share of the people in poverty fell to 42 percent from 60 percent during the same period. Corresponding figures for East Asia including China show a drop from 80% of the people in poverty in 1981 dropping to 18% in 2005. The proportion of people living below the $1.25 a day poverty line worldwide fell over the nerarly 25 year period from 1981 to 2005 from 52% in 1981 to 26% in 2005. In subSaharan Africa, now the poorest region half or 50% of the people live under the poverty line of $1.25 a day in 2005 almost where it was in 1981. In absolute numbers the region had 380 million people living below the poverty line in 2005 compared to 200 million people in 1981. Note that the World Bank this year changed the poverty line from $1 to $1.25 a day, to make allowance for the inflation that is hitting the poorer countries. Is China a rich nation after the Olympics? Some parts of China, the coastal regions and the regions around big cities like Shanghai and Beijing are relatively affluent with pockets of poorer people but in the rest of the country there is poverty as defined perhaps in terms of deep poverty, poverty, poor middle class without health insurance or any kind of savings for emergencies. With 200 million people in 2005 below the poverty line a question could be asked how many people in China below say $2.00 a day which could be seen as being poor at a time when inflation in food and fuel costs has been significant in developing countries. If its somewhere in the range of 300 and 400 million people in China this explains why in relative terms China would identify with India and the rest of the developing countries and it also explains its stand in the WTO trade talks acting as a developing country protecting the rights of agriculture and farmers within China. And it also explains the reasons why China sees a long transition before it ceases to be a poor developing country and why there is real concern that these 300-400 million people as well as others adversely affected by the rapid industrialization and exercize of state authority, corruption and increasing gaps between rich and poor, adverse effects on environment, that these people adversely affected are listened to and accomodated in the interests of stable progress and fairness. Much of recent history has shown that countries open to foreign trade have done better given the right conditions and careful policy measures. China opened up around 1981, and India around 1991. Also progress and gains are more significant in infrastructure building and in poverty reduction in the latter phases of development as the synergies increase, capital pool increases, and the development accelerates, this shows why China's gains look significant compared to India's at this point in time. In ten years or fifteen years a better assessment could be made and then some points may favor China and some India, and the results will be a result of different history, experiences and problems faced and routes taken because of prior developments in each region and varying complexity. ...
South China Morning Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The South China Morning Post, SCMP, looks at China at the 40th year of the great economic experiment  that changed China. This started with the Deng reforms by the then Chinese leader that opened up the economy in 1978. As this report points out in 1978 Deng Xiaoping's efforts at loosening the state control of the economy and business was actually a way to get out from the effects of the Cultural Revolution and prevent another Cultural Revolution. Deng was removed from office during the Cultural Revolution. Instead of unquestioned acceptance of Mao the new criterion was "Practice is the Sole Criterion for Testing Truth." In economic and business matters this was followed so that if it worked then the experiment was expanded, gradually giving life to the Chinese model of state capitalism, economic expansion under the state with the state supporting state corporations that operate in a market economy.  This means the Communist Party was to continue its control but with experimentation away from the planned economy in the coastal provinces of Guangdong and Fujian, and then into Shanghai. Experts close to Jiang Zemin, the next leader after Deng, say China's Communist state would not have survived without the changes started by premier Deng. Farmers still did not own the land but they were free to plant and own the yields for their efforts.  Deng established the Three Benefits Principle in 1992 trip to Guangdong, whatever helped increase productivity, increased the strength of the country and improved living standards was good, you did not judge it by whether it was socialist or capitalist. Jiang Zemin's work was to follow Deng's ideas and help negotiate the entry into World Trade Organization and set up the new economic regulations. Capitalists were allowed to join the Communist Party for the first time. State and local government ownership of land was turned into an advantage as this provided one of the critical inputs in terms of land for setting up new factories, with capital coming from savings, and other inputs of technology and investment coming from the U.S. after entry into the WTO brought American and European companies to China. A steady supply of labor poured in from the countryside and urbanization became a goal of Chinese development policies. Today India and other countries in Africa, Latin America, can look at the Chinese experience and effort and look for ways to modernize, urbanize and improve living standards, productivity and strength of their economy. One key is to experiment and look for what works that can then be expanded to other locations, and build on the advantages that may open up as the experiment makes progress. Following entry into WTO China was able to take advantage of overseas markets and build an edge in manufacturing, something that was not evident even in 1992.   ...
Wall Street Journal 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