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.


CNN Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Experts say about 110,000 votes separate Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the three states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania that decided the 2016 presidential election in the U.S. giving Trump the win. Post election reflection in the Democratic party points to a disconnect between the establishment in both parties and the white working class. It is described as something that was not thought enough about even though as pointed out in Lyrarc, and in The Washington Post by columnists, and in news coverage about the inequality movement long before Bernie Sanders appeared in 2015. In the period when banks were favored over millions of homeowners facing foreclosure in 2010-2014, the surging stock market and the zero to to half percent interest on savings that hurt savings of most of the working class and lower middle class without stock investments, and the continuing problems in communities facing job losses from trade for the third decade. The hollowing out of the regions in Ontario from job losses from the Canadian industry helped Justin Trudeau win the Canadian election. In this election it helped Trump in crucial midwestern states, combined with a degree of indifference shown by establishment Democrats. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean is planning to run for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Bernie Sanders says he backs Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison to be the next chair of the DNC. Jeff Weaver, campaign manager for Sanders, says the problem lies in what has been clear for some time now "that the centrist wing of the democratic party has no standing with working class and middle class  voters in this country." In 2016 only 51% of union households supported Clinton the lowest since 1980, 43% supported Trump. Obama won 59% of union households in 2008 and 58% in 2012 to 40% for Republican Romney. Trump picked up 3% of union households, Clinton lost 7% of union households, creating about a 10 point gap that would be magnified in industrial states where union jobs are concentrated, for about 18% of the people who voted in the election, enough to create the shortfall in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsyslvania. Fed chairman Janet Yellen pointed out the problems at an Inequality conference in Boston in 2014, pretty stark in its reminder that inequality had surged to levels not seen since the depression of the thirties, with 62 million households having a net worth of $11,000. Krugman and other economists had pointed this out on the pages of the NYT. Yet the post election reflection in the media is as if this is some special insight when it was clear for all to see, and covered in depth in Lyrarc for years since 2008. There is voter fatigue after 8 years of one party in power as pointed out by Obama campaign strategist, David Axelrod. The loss of union enthusiasm made the task of  a third term for the Democratic party even more difficult.     ...
ABC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Biden addressed the Nation from the Rose garden today November 7, 2024. His remarks were conciliatory. "You can't love your neighbor only when you agree."  "Something I hope we can do, no matter who you voted for, is see each other not as adversaries, but as fellow Americans. Bring down the temperature." It is a remarkable end to a remarkable presidency which history will judge as perhaps a single term in which more was done than in any other 4 year term of a presidency, except for FDR in 1932 and Lincoln in 1861, tackling a once in a century pandemic, and rebuilding the economy, manufacturing, and infrastructure. And even correcting missteps on immigration by getting the legislation to fix it. It is a tall order for anyone who succeeds Biden though in the current post election situation there will be the typical euphoria on one side and losing on the other.  During the Republican sweep by Herbert Hoover in 1928 Franklin Roosevelt was elected governor of New York and he used the intervening years to 1932 to prepare for the monumental task ahead by testing his plan for economic recovery using New York and a couple of states from Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Maine and New Hampshire, setting up the first unemployment insurance, shorter week, annual employment and other ideas to stabilize employment for one third of the US economy. Biden says he has asked his administration to work with Trump's team for the peaceful transition to a newly elected president. None of the fears about the transition came true with the new president getting a clear mandate to tackle the cost of living crisis for Americans. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Workers at Pemex are about half as efficient as workers at the Brazilian oil company Petrobras, and have one fourth the efficiency of workers at BP, according to a study by the baker Institute in Texas. Union leaders run the union in a manner reminiscent of feudal times with favors and patronage for workers and politicians. Once in power union leaders have run the union for decades, including shooting of rivals. Hernandez Galicia, a son of an oil worker, built up a system of patronage in the sixties and remained in power till he was arrested in 1989 on weapons charges by the government of president Salinas Gortari. The union formed part of the PRI party power base as the 200,000 union workers were expected to vote for the government. In the 1988 election union votes did not go to the PRI candidate and Salinas barely won with 50.7% of the vote. After Hernandez the system of patronage and corruption has continued. At the top of Mexico's agenda for president Nieto is changing Pemex, improving efficiency for reversing decline in oil production, and working with foreign oil companies. ...
United States Department of State Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Marco Rubio speaks for the US with profound convictions and long experience in the Florida legislature and the US Senate, and as akey member of the DJT administration. In his speech in Munich at the MSC he recalls his grandparents being from Piedmeont Sardinia in Italy and from Sevilla in Spain. He talks proudly of his Spanish and Italian heritage, of America founded by European settlers. For Europe this is a speech that shows America is profoundly part of Western Civilization that started in Europe. Here are some parts of the speech and Rubio's call for America and Europe to respond strongly to the mistakes in migration and deindustrialization that have hurt the people of Europe and America, with deeply felt negative consequences. "That infamous wall that had cleaved this nation into two came down, and with it an evil empire, and the East and West became one again.  But the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion:  that we had entered, quote, “the end of history;” that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.  This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history.  And it has cost us dearly.  In this delusion, we embraced a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade, even as some nations protected their economies and subsidized their companies to systematically undercut ours – shuttering our plants, resulting in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.  We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves.  This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests.  To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.  And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people.  We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.  Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past.  And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.  For the United States and Europe, we belong together.  America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before.  The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.  We are part of one civilization – Western civilization.  We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir. And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel.  This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe.  The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply.  We care deeply about your future and ours.  And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected – not just economically, not just militarily.  We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally.  We want Europe to be strong.  We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history’s constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know – (applause) – because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.  National security, which this conference is largely about, is not merely series of technical questions – how much we spend on defense or where, how we deploy it, these are important questions.  They are.  But they are not the fundamental one.  The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions.  Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation.  Armies fight for a way of life.  And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny. It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born.  It was here in Europe where the world – which gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution.  It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.  And this is the place where the vaulted ceilings of the Sistine Chapel and the towering spires of the great cathedral in Cologne, they testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels.  They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future.  But only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance can we together begin the work of envisioning and shaping our economic and our political future. Deindustrialization was not inevitable.  It was a conscious policy choice, a decades-long economic undertaking that stripped our nations of their wealth, of their productive capacity, and of their independence.  And the loss of our supply chain sovereignty was not a function of a prosperous and healthy system of global trade.  It was foolish.  It was a foolish but voluntary transformation of our economy that left us dependent on others for our needs and dangerously vulnerable to crisis. Mass migration is not, was not, isn’t some fringe concern of little consequence.  It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilizing societies all across the West.  Together we can reindustrialize our economies and rebuild our capacity to defend our people.  But the work of this new alliance should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past.  It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century.  Commercial space travel and cutting-edge artificial intelligence; industrial automation and flex manufacturing; creating a Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers; and a unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South.  Together we can not only take back control of our own industries and supply chains – we can prosper in the areas that will define the 21st century." ...
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Upward mobility in China was weak and income growth for average workers sluggish during the years before the coronavirus outbreak. In this sense China is similar to the U.S. and Europe where upward mobility gains after the second world war were lost in the last 30 years partly from the loss of manufacturing to China. It is much worse now as the effects of the coronavirus lead to drops of as much as a third in income for ordinary workers. Lower income workers, the vast majority of Chinese numbering hundreds of millions now suffer from lost work or diminished wages. Small businesses cannot afford to pay the salaries paid before and as workers dip into savings or increase borrowing the retail spending is taking a hit. As a result economists see a vicious cycle of lower spending and lower incomes for the hundreds of millions of ordinary workers in construction and smaller businesses. Some small businesses could just close down because of weak demand affecting the economy over the long term. Before the coronavirus China went over three decades from being a Communist country with relatively equal distribution of wealth but lack of growth and technological development to a capitalist country with the structure of state control of the economy from the Communist period. The result is that 1% of the people control 33% of the wealth and the bottom 25% having 1% of the wealth, according to a 2015 Peking University study. China's president Xi Jinping, head of the Communist party, tried to reverse some of these trends by attacking corruption and making changes that began the task of reversing decades of unequal distribution of wealth under state sponsored capitalist growth. Investments were made in rural medical care, infrastructure and basic services. This did not have much impact because much of the pattern of growth over three decades continues including the housing bubble.  With coronavirus the trend is set for even more unequal distribution of wealth as many workers at the bottom half of the population in incomes either lose work, or see drop in incomes as businesses that hire them struggle from shoe factories to other retail business. Reports of informal economy and street markets in Chengdu in western China and bringing this part of the economy back by the state are effort to get people work in other ways. Researchers estimate that China's bottom 60% of household in incomes lost about $200 billion in income in the first half of 2020. In May premier Li Keqiang said 600 million people in China earn only about $140 a month. Many who lost income or jobs do not have support from the government as China lacks a program of comprehensive unemployment insurance as in Europe and the U.S. to help people get over bad times. 300 million migrant workers are particularly vulnerable to loss of income and dipping into savings.   ...
The Indian Express Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What this Editorial board opinion in the Indian Express is saying is that India should concentrate its efforts on modernizing its economy on a scale that is similar or surpasses that of China because of its access to the latest technologies. Just as China capitalized on the opportunity presented by its entry in the World Trade Organization in 2001, through an economy wide effort to build a manufacturing and export logistics base. India is presented with the opportunity of building its own manufacturing and export logistics base as supply chains are being redesigned in 2023. This requires a longer term plan with clear thinking and concentrated effort with the entire resources of the nation. What looks like a small or gradual shift in supply chain with the US and EU adding India and Vietnam to their Chinese manufacturing base is going to change with every change in world events, as the US concentration of manufacturing in China becomes a situation that is impossible to to maintain. The only logical way for the US and following the US the EU to create a proper balance in its political relationship with China is to change fully its lopsided concentration of manufacturing in China. Biden is only making the initial moves, the EU is only waking up to the need to make its own changes to reduce this concentration. How much distance does the US need to cover to reduce its concentration in China? By a large amount because the shift of manufacturing was excessive and ill advised done as companies in the US raced in a competition to shift outside over 2 decades and simply outdid themselves and performed a disservice to the workers and families of America whom they served. Just for the US to get workers and families to benefit from return of good manufacturing jobs to the US and restore its manufacturing base that has shriveled, it will have to be a massive enterprise, where day by day it becomes more evident that more and more needs to be and accomplished in an accelerated way. What this also means where appropriate to leave a progressively year after a year larger base in India, and also Vietnam, much larger than is envisaged today. This situation is even more acutely felt in Japan which to bring a proper balance in its political relationship with China needs to even more urgently reduce its concentration of manufacturing in China. It must be the task of the Modi government to have a clear view of the road ahead- build the needed logistical base for exports using the latest technologies and set higher and higher targets for manufacturing.  If you look at the map of Asia this is the Global South- India is 60-70% of the Global South with its population of 1.4 billion people mostly young with aspirations for a modern economy like that of the US and Germany. Add to that Indonesia and Vietnam, and other nations already in the redesigned supply chain in 2023 and you have 2 billion people in Asia. Concentrate on this for the next 2 decades for a complete transformation of India, that is what the younger generation demands of its government. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman in the NYT describes the dangers of plutocratic power to American democracy. When exercized by the Murdochs, the Elon Musks, the Harlan Crows of this world. He cites presidents who are Republican and broke up the large oil companies in the 1900's, Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909) who warned about "a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power." This is happening with the power of the so called Tech companies today and both parties seeking to break  up the Tech companies.  Then there is a Democratic president from this period Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) who followed Theodore Roosevelt. Wilson says- "If there are men in this country who are big enough to own the government of the United States, they are going to own it." Theodore Roosevelt fought political machines such as Tammany Hall in New York as well as Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company. Wilson, a professor from Princeton, continued this tradition by protecting the working class of that time through his New Freedom campaign in 1913.  As a professor Wilson wrote the textbook The State used in colleges of that period, which set forth for the first time the basic idea of the state that we see today- "that forbids child labor, supervises the sanitary condition of factories, limits employment of women in occupations hurtful to their health, institutes official tests for the purity or quality of goods sold, that limits the hours of work in certain trades, and by a hundred and one limitations the power of unscrupulous or heartless men to outdo the scrupulous or merciful in trade or industry." Both were progressive Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Wilson under his New Freedom platform for the 1913 election, asserted that it was the task of government "to make those adjustments of life that will put every man in a position to claim his rights as a normal human being." What president Biden is doing today is closest to what Wilson and Roosevelt were trying to achieve, and what Modi is doing today in India is also closest to what Wilson and Roosevelt were trying to achieve. In 1913 Wilson won 42% of the vote, Roosevelt 27% because of a split within the Republican party with Robert Taft. Wilson proposed breakup of oil companies to provide a level playing field for all companies. Similar decisions are being considered by president Biden today for Tech Companies. The future of both the US and India is being decided in these difficult times after a pandemic and in the middle of a European war, and a supply chain overconcentrated in one country in Asia. Wilson's idea "to put every man in a position to claim his rights as a normal human being," is being set forth by president Biden through the word "dignity," by Modi in India as "sab ka vikas, sab ke sath" (development for all, with all). The Greens and SPD's Scholz also set forth this idea as "dignity" for the worker for Germany.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Steve Bannon is described in this indepth report by Scott Shane as a workaholic, born to working class family with his father a telephone line operator, who went to Virginia Tech and joined the Navy in the hope of advancing a career in politics. At Virginia Tech he won a leadership position of the student organization. He was described by another student who knew him well as passionate but not likely to get much done. The period at Virginia Tech and in the Navy were the Carter years followed by election of Ronald Reagan. The election of Reagan had a huge influence on Bannon- the same overtones of that campaign of Reagan are seen today in the forgotten men and women, white working class families that Conservatives then and Tea Party Conservatives in the Obama years felt ignored. The downward drift of the lower middle class families that saw incomes drop as manufacturing hollowed out in the U.S. with foreign competition, the failure of establishment politicians of both parties to protect American manufacturing and working class families, added to the sense of angst for Bannon. Bannon just like politicians in the Obama camp such as Emmanuel, found the way to politics through finance and gains made as the banking sector and financial institutions made huge financial gains by 2008. This was a stepping stone for their political ambitions. Emmanuel who is also a workaholic and passionate about his views worked to elect a black president, Bannon choosing to do the opposite and push for bringing back the Reagan era. Most on the liberal side see him as part of a racist movement. Reagan was none of those things. How does one reconcile the two? It is possible that seeing the fight against the established politics as an impossible task, Bannon in his passionate temperament did not object to the support of right wing extremists, in the same way that Trump did. As both Trump and Bannon have people of Jewish origin and black people in their circle of friends or family. What incensed Bannon as described here by Scott Shane of the NYT, was that after the financial crisis of 2008, hardly any bank executives who had committed wrongdoing went to jail, his father's line operator retirement savings were devastated by the financial crisis, and working class families struggled harder than ever, that his daughter at West Point was with mostly children of working class families who were the ones fighting America's wars. Many ironies abound in the story. Bannon got his business start in the same financial institutions that were involved in the financial crisis of 2008, Bannon & Co was acquired by Societe Generale. He is from an Irish Catholic working class family in Richmond and attended Benedictine High School, with a mother Doris that worked on the campaign to elect Douglas Wilder, a Democrat, as the first African American governor of Virgina.  The other ironies are in that Bannon sees Trump as "an imperfect vessel" but still good enough, and Trump sees himself as "making all the decisions" when asked about Bannon, as a range of interests struggle to form a coherent movement on the right in American politics- an unlikely combination of a telephone operator's son and real estate magnate's son who built his own real estate business in luxury real estate towers far removed from ordinary men and women they represent. ...
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Are there costs or are there savings from the Obama health care bill? Does it affect jobs and how? The Congressional Budget Office says the health care law will save $230 billion in ten years based on a whole set of calculations and assumptions. Commonsense and basic math leads others to question how spending $930 billion on insuring 32 million Americans could end up with significant savings. The different view argues that the Budget Office erred in making some calculations, by counting $70 billion in premiums from long term care because they would be used to pay benefits later, omitted $115 billion in spending to adminster the law, and omitted $208 billion needed to prevent scheduled reductions in Medicare payments to doctors. The money needed on the Stimulus, on two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the uncertain prospects of the US economy in the longer term till debt and other issues are resolved, injects the critical element of difficult choices and priorities. If state and local budgets are severely strained in 2011-2012 would that require federal help and will there be other needs that will have to be met by the federal government that are critical such as another unexpected downturn, or a resolution of unresolved bad debt at the large US banks There is also a sense that the health care law does not do enough to reduce the cost of health care that will be needed over the next decade so that other priorities are not neglected. Both parties are not up to the task in this respect for running the country's finances withot using the numbers to tell different stories....
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Large Institution Supervision Coordination Committee (LISCC) was setup by Fed chairman Bernanke and Fed governor Tarullo, in 2010. The Fed's 200 PhD's, bank examiners and other experts at headquarters are now tapped for the the task of looking at adverse scenarios, checking on assumptions made by the banks in their analysis, requesting data from large banks on their loan and securities portfolios, and asking banks to consider adverse scenarios. Such adverse scenarios include a decline in the U.S. economic growth of 1.5% in 2011, and decline in housing. The Fed checks the banks estimate of its financial position aginst the Fed's own standard and prods the banks to consider new risks. Before the 2008 crisis the Fed's 12 Reserve Banks did the day to day supervision and reported back to Board of Governors, a system that led to a diffusion of responsibility and did not work. Former Fed vice chairman, Alan Blinder, says the bank boards did not exercize responsibility, and "blew it, big time," during the financial crisis. This approach has the effect of acting as a early warning for the banks for things that could go wrong. J.P. Morgan Chase CFO Braunstein made a Feb 15 presentation to show that Chase's stress scenario was more stringent than the Fed's. The current review says Tarullo includes asking banks to do a check before issuing dividends to shareholders, and consider what would happen if the economy is in trouble in the next 9 quarters. According to Fed guidelines issued in November if the bank's plan does not show enough capital to handle economic, regulatory and lending risks, the Fed can challenge the bank's decision....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The constructive contribution made by the G-20 meetings of leaders towards building agreement on economic and other policies for peace and progress in the global economy. The meetings were especially useful for coordinating policy and addressing issues arising in the global economy after the 2008 financial crisis. Here Li Baodong, China's vice minister for international organizations and conferences, international economic affairs, describes the path ahead: IMF reforms implementation, better coordination of macroeconomic policies, pursuing the anti-protectionist and free trade policies with further support to the WTO and ministerial MC9 meeting in Bali in Dec. 2013, and infrastructure financing proposals for developing countries on the agenda at the St Petersburg, Russia, G-2- meeting in Sept. 2013. Baodong says the mechanism called the Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth as part of the G-20 meetings is a major achievement. Each G-20 economy submits it macroeconomic policy plan for a Mutual Assessment Process under this arrangement. The progress from the Bretton Woods financial architecture to the new arrangement- from the G-6 to the G-20 to include developing countries from India to Mexico and Brazil- is another major achievement, not fully recognized by the public, says Baodong. Interestingly Baodong makes particular mention to global rebalancing, rather than pushing what he calls the impossible task of increasing demand to get growth. This is a realization coming to China's economic policymakers under the new Jinping-Keqiang administration after the overly aggressive effort to stimulate demand in the 2009-2011 Stimulus, and the ensuing financial problems in the banking and credit system. It is indicative of the policy shift and its implementation underway in China in 2013-2015....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's new foreign policy team under the Jinping-Keqiang administration. Foreign minister Yang Jiechi, becomes state councilor, and senior official on the team. The new foreign minister Wang Yi, was China's ambassador to Japan 2004-2007. The new ambassador to the U.S. is Cui Tiankai, a diplomat who graduated from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in the U.S. Cui was ambassador to Japan 2007-2009. Managing the China-Japan and China-U.S. relationships is critical for China because China depends on U.S. and Japanese companies for investment and new technology, for continued economic progress. The relationship has been affected by the territorial disputes with Japan in the East China Sea. Germany as an advanced technology manufacturer and commodity exporters Australia, Canada, Argentina and Brazil depend on the Chinese market for exports, creating an interwoven economic dynamic that is likely to be the dominant factor in relations. This is also the perception of Li Keqiang who told a press conference in Beijing that the competition with the U.S. has been overemphasized, that he "does not believe conflicts between great powers are inevitable." Foreign affairs remains subordinate to domestic policy and priorities in China, as China tackles the problem of reorienting its economy to give an important place to the private sector and consumers. Itself not an easy task, as prime minister Keqiang pointed out at his first press conference: "Talking the talk is not as good as walking the walk." One of Keqiang's main allies in this effort is Robert Zoellick, former president of the World Bank, who helped put together with China's DRC, the report "China: 2030," outlining these priorities....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This behind the scenes account  shows how the NATO communique with policy declaration was prepared by July 6 before European leaders and Mr. Trump set foot in Brussels on July 11. It shows to what lengths key members in the Trump administration will go to achieve American objectives in preserving the NATO alliance. Particularly now that Russia is taking an aggressive stance to NATO near its borders.  General Mattis at Defense Department pushed for the 4 30's initiative which is about preparing a rapid deployment force to be ready by 2020. This is in the communique. Also in the communique is the setup of a command post in Norfolk, Virginia, ready to act to deploy forces in Europe. U.S. ambassador to NATO, Kailey Hutchinson, received the demand from National Security Adviser Bolton to have ambassadors from all countries work overtime to get the declaration done by July 6. Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary General supported this effort. All were concerned that there should be no repeat of the mess that happened for the G-7 communique when at the last minute president Trump refused to sign on, leading to derisive comments about Canada's Justin Trudeau. It was seen as critical to preserve the sense of unity in the U.S. alliance with Europe. This time there was no disruption even though Mr. Trump acted unpredictably in Brussels. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
On Mercedes Chryslers efforts to bring new diesel technology to the United States. Diesels account for half of all cars sold in Europe can they make enough of a dent in the US to affect oil imports and oil prices? "Bluetec " is the European competitor to Japanese hybrid technologies, if it can be made environmentally friendly (with urea and other additives to reduce bad emissions) the its a real competitor to hybrids. The remaining task is marketing which is the challenge facing the Europeans. One bit of encouragement the new bluetec meets California emission standards.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
AIG has $7.8 billion loss in 1st quarter 2008 and will try to raise $12.5 billion in capital to help its balance sheet against these losses. It took a $9.1 billion writedown in the first quarteron credit derivatives designed to protect against losses on a range of investments including subprime mortgages. AIG shares have fallen 40% in the past year. Mr sullivan is having to manage an increasingly complex company built by a dominant manager like Hank Greenberg over may decades.which may prove to be a difficult task in this economic environment.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Martin Feldstein on the U.S. economy in 2014 and the risks of the U.S. Federal Reserve tackling the economy on its own with monetary policy, without Congress taking on the task of policies to promote economic growth. Feldstein points out the 3.6% GDP growth estimate for the third quarter 2013 does not look that good considering that half of this is from buildup of inventory. GDP growth is about 2% as net result. With paralysis of Congress and the Executive branch the Fed's policy of huge buildup of long term bonds to reduce short term interest rates to zero and stimulate stock and home prices, he describes as the only game in town. The problem is that the size of the effect of increase in consumer spending from this increase in household wealth is small and not enough to contribute to significant GDP growth. The risks of this approach are that it contributes to destabilizing the economy as investors buy risky securities and bid up prices. He suggests a five year $1 trillion infrastructure development program, including defense, as a stimulus Congress should consider. Not the kind of stimulus that happened after the 2008 crisis. If not enough investment ready projects are available as in 2008 that will contribute to future growth, Congress should take another one year to prepare for this before moving forward. Debt reduction is key, and debt as a percentage of GDP should be reduced and set on a path to go where it was before 2008 to about 40%, deficits to below 2% of GDP. This should be done by slowing growth of Social Security and Medicare, and increasing revenues by limiting subsidies in the tax code that Feldstein as pushed for since 2010....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Anat Admati, is a professor of finance and economics at Stanford University School of Business. He says banks should depend on generating 30% of their assets from equity, something the banking industry of today in the U.S. and Europe considers heretical. More of the bank's assets should come from equity and much less from borrowed funds. Outside of banking healthy corporations in the U.S. carry debt at about 70% of assets and there is no reason banks should not do the same. In 2013 says Admati, the situation is not much different from that after the 2008 global financial crisis- large banks carry liabilities and debt at over 90% of their assets. The $2.2 trillion in debt at JP Morgan Chase bank is about 91% of assets of $2.4 trillion. Basel III regulations allow banks to borrow upto 95% of assets, and proposed banking regulations in the U.S. put this at 95%, with the way this is measured still being debated. At such high levels of debt the margin of error is small, and systemic risk which is high in a globally interconnected banking system means the whole banking system can freeze from one large bank going into failure such as Lehman Brothers. This happened in 2008 and the margin of error is still small, which is why global banking is such a high wire act with the U.S. Federal Reserve, the ECB and other central banks issuing regular warnings and regulators faced with the task of keeping the banking system in check through vigilance and investigations of banks violating laws. How much difference has Dodd-Frank legislation in the U.S. made after 2008? Jason from Atlanta says in response to Admati's article, that the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was 37 pages and the banking system did not freeze up in the way it did in 2008 for the rest of the twentieth century until its repeal. The 879 page Dodd-Frank legislation of 2011 is overly voluminous and still leaves 243 rules to be written by regulators in consultation with the financial industry. Banks are larger now than they were in 2008 and have an outsized influence in shaping the rules, leaving the U.S. Federal Reserve's supervisory committee and Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo with the job of somehow keeping banks out of trouble. JP Morgan Chase, Admati reminds readers, has $2.4 trillion in assets as of June 30, 2013, and debts of $2.2 trillion, with $1.2 trillon in deposits and $ 1 trillion in other debt owed to money market funds, other banks, bondholders and the like. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Mohammad Ayoob of Michigan State University looks at the tit for tat military responses of India and Pakistan and tries to interpret the mixed signals of the Pakistan military and civilian president Imran Khan. He says Imran Khan had the difficult task of being in line with the top generals of the Pakistan military and at the same time responding to international pressures to de-escalate the crisis. Imran Khan asked India not to take the confrontation further or Pakistan would have to retaliate, and at the same time emphasized de-escalation as the goal with pressure from Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and China. The nuclear doctrines of the two countries which differ from the manner in which the U.S. and Soviets operated during the Cold War, also make escalation dangerous. Prof. Mohammad points out that the military in Pakistan plays a different role in the state since it was created in 1947. With military control of nuclear weapons any danger of losing control of the state and its position in the state since 1947 could lead to reckless strategies, says Prof. Mohammad. Mr. Imran Khan had to speak in different terms to different audiences in a kind of double speak in this situation. Mr. Khan spoke in terms of development and the need for Pakistan to fund the needed infrastructure always at the back of the mind in the current situation at the outset of the crisis. Much of this was lost in the ensuing hours of the crisis. Yet this remains the dominant need in South Asia as Mr. Imran Khan faces the challenge of meeting his promises for development as much as Mr. Modi faces the challenges of development to catchup with Asian neighbors South Korea and China who have shown how this can be done. A longer memory does show China and South Korea falling behind in the fifties and sixties before making great progress in the last 3 decades by pursuing peaceful cooperation with earlier adversary Japan,  and in the case of China the U.S.  Anyone familiar with the role played by the U.S. in China's civil war, and the Japanese invasions of Korea and China, during four decades of conflict,  followed by the cooperation offered by Japan and the U.S. to first South Korea and then China can see that progress is possible and lays the foundation for development. A recent article in The Guardian reports that China now lays more concrete every 2 years than the U.S. did for the entire twentieth century. None of this would be possible had Chinese leaders in their wisdom and passion for development not pursued development first and foremost, setting aside historic wounds. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Yuriko Koike is elected the first woman governor of Tokyo, in a three way race, winning by over a million votes. She was Minister of Defense in the first government of prime minister Abe in 2007 which lasted only a short time. She was a news anchor before being elected to parliament in 1992 and supporting conservative causes. As a student she studied overseas learning Arabic at the American University of Cairo, and getting a degree in sociology at the University of Cairo. At 64 she is relatively young compared to a LDP candidate who was 76. The previous two governors resigned from office in financial scandals. Her immediate task is preparing for the Tokyo Olympics in 2020 and keeping the costs down for Tokyo residents.

 


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