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.


WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It is not clear what this bazooka is. China's leaders are studying the economy carefully. Recent actions for stimulus were designed to offset weak performance of stock markets which have rebounded with Shanghai index up 11% into positive territory. Consumption spending is weak with worries about the safety net and propensity to save so that lower mortgage rates will mean households will pay of their mortgage first before increasing spending. Real estate construction is weak after bankruptcies in this sector. Some suggestions are for China to improve its safety net as in the US for working class people, low income families- to give them better medical insurance. And increase pensions of farmers, migrant workers, and low income families. They may still be inclined to save yet it is a move in the right direction as is happening in the US, and the trend worldwide is to reduce stark social divisions. China just lacks the resources for the kind of revival in the US that Harris has planned. As long as the US was frittering away its resources in foreign wars it had one hand tied behind it's back, as long as it did not invest these dollars going to wars overseas in the domestic economy it would languish and fall behind. It was in this sense Joe Biden who did the hard work that Trump after raising the alarm signals failed to do for lack of focus, and now it is Harris who is building the game plan for the kind of US that led the US into the twentieth century once before- optimism, imagination and hard work. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Of the 45 million US student loan borrowers in 2025- only 11 million are on time with payments. The rest seeing sharp credit score declines that limit their access to home loans, other credit, or increase the costs of access to credit. This limits access to housing, and other needs for this group, it also affects demand in the economy. A recent WSJ report showed Moody Analytics research that 80% of US consumer spending is now done by 20% of the top income earners in the US. Decline in demand from this group will affect the economic growth in the US and how well the stock markets do. This will affect the job growth in the economy month to month.  This means with inaction from the DJT administration and the SCOTUS lack of comprehension of the economic aspects of this issue in ruling out action taken by the Biden administration- that this failure to take action on relief poses added risks to the US economy in 2025. It also means uneven and unbalanced growth where some groups upper income are favored by the virtue of the way the economy operates leaving many young people out of the benefits of growth. This adds to the general feeling of frustration and discontent after the pandemic and after cost of living surges in 2022-2024. It also means university education is no longer affordable or accessible to young people. Other issues play into this such as the surging cost of university education and action needs to be taken to bring this into line with earlier post 1945 patterns where university education was affordable and taken up. The increase in apprenticeship programs is a good thing, yet the gradual turning away of young men from college education is a serious danger to the cultural literacy in the US in 2020-2030. Leaving aside Ivy leagues making state college and universities affordable is one of the big problems needing to be solved as a priority in the US.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial on Joe Manchin's role in aggravating child poverty cites a University of Chicago study "that child poverty would fall only by 22%" after considering decline in employment from the Biden child tax credit, as if this was OK. It argues against "hooking more families to income transfers" and this itself looks callous during the pandemic. It says faster economic growth is the best way to reduce poverty which is what Mr. Biden is seeking. It also says child poverty dropped in the Trump term in office from faster growth citing a Pew Research survey, yet ignores the effects of the pandemic that worsened poverty, child poverty and deep poverty, bringing back the need for government to play a significant role in building both growth in the economy and fairness for families and workers in a way that restores the credibility of democracy in America.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
XI Jinping tells China's National People's Congress that "western nations- including the US- have implemented all round containment, encirclement and suppression against us, bringing unprecedentedly severe challenges to development." Addressing the private sector Chamber of Commerce representatives which create significant number of jobs in China he said the Communist Party "has always regarded private enterprises and private entrepreneurs as our own people, and will always support them whenever they run into difficulties." Job creation in China is a challenge with high youth unemployment estimated at about 20%. The pandemic worsened the situation for state finances and for unemployment for migrants, the construction slowdown has added to this. The burden of trillions of dollars of local government debt increased during the pandemic with the central government lacking the resources to help, creating problems in the local economies.  This WSJ report says Xi's speech seeks to present his government's performance in the light of these challenges and future challenges as growth slows in China. The trading relationship with US-EU added to employment and income problems for China's economy and people, yet it had one weakness an over concentration in manufacturing in one country that European and US business placed in one country. The building of a  new supply chain that creates manufacturing in other countries to reduce this concentration, and the limits placed on access to western technologies by China to protect US-EU in competition, places new development challenges for China, which Xi alludes to. In the past China was able to use huge stimulus to tackle its debt by creating more growth that supported this debt creation. The pandemic may finally have reversed this as trillions of dollars of debt have built up, and construction of homes and infrastructure has reached a saturation point. This is the kind of situation that Japan entered in the 1990's after three decades of torrid growth and development rates. History is being repeated as China like Japan is entering a new phase of an aging society. In this sense the challenges China is facing are very different from that of Russia. Creating jobs is a perennial problem in India and China with their large populations and rising aspirations of people after centuries of underdevelopment, something that Europe including Russia does not face in anywhere to a similar degree. in this sense there is more in common between the EU and Russia even when they are in a war, than Russia and China, and China has more in common with India. The struggle in Europe as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms has pointed out in his History of Europe, is more about the balance of power which is the story of European history since the 1450's where no one country has been allowed to act with impunity in invading its neighbors and other countries formed a concerted group to prevent this. Be it France, Austria, Britain or Russia that acted seemingly with impunity. China has little to do with it or Europe's history. President Biden is right to say that the US only competes with China in the economic and business fields, and seeks to find common ground on climate change and food insecurity. The US has supported China throughout the twentieth century since the time of Woodrow Wilson in 1913, around the period when Tsinghua University was established with US help. The US helped China during the Japanese invasion and the Cold War period ended with renewed relations.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Schumer calls it a "momentous 24 hours here in the US Congress, a legislative one two punch that you rarely see." Schumer negotiated a major climate change action bill for $369 billion in the Senate, that also covers tax changes to cover costs, and helps cut drug and health care expenses of Americans. The second quarter shows healthy job gains of average 375,000 a month and unemployment at 3.6%. The economy declined by 1.1% but much of this was from a slowdown in home and business construction sectors sensitive to higher interest rates and from higher inventory. Consumer spending increased by 1% during the quarter. The Fed's series of 0.75 percentage points interest rate increases had softened inflation expectations before they get entrenched in the economy. This makes it possible for Democrats to present a message to ordinary Americans that president Biden is getting things done with 2 legislative achievements. A $280 billion bill for investment in the semiconductor industry in the US. And a huge win on climate change with the $269 billion Schumer is negotiating in the US Congress. It is the opposite of what Republicans are saying is Biden's failure to tackle inflation. Appropriately Biden and Schumer are calling this the bill the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. How did Schumer get this done? After the Ukraine war and EU decision to shut down Russian oil supplies, cut oil and gas use by 15%, and the climate change action inducing fires and floods, there is increasing awareness about climate change action as vital for our future all over the world. This gives more confidence to Democrats to negotiate a temporary continuation of oil and gas, with increased exports of US LNG to Europe. Senator Manchin from an energy producing state of West Virginia was brought over to Schumer's side with this idea. What Biden gets is a 40% reduction of US carbon emissions over 2005 levels, enough to get within reach of the 50% he promised at COP26 in Glasgow. It is a win-win for all sides and for the American people, and shows that patience and hard work, and persistence in the face of adversity can bring results. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report says fewer jobs alone is not going to reduce inflation, US inflation is propelled by factors beyond economic theory. The Phillip's Curve is a inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation that was a convenient tool for the 1960's to get the economy to do well with low unemployment at 4% with moderate inflation. It was torn apart by high inflationary expectations in the 70's. In today's world Robert Gordon of Northwestern University suggests central banks consider inflationary embedded expectations, supply shocks and cost push as in the pandemic 2021-2022, and demand changes. The job that Mr. Powell at the Fed has is lowering inflationary expectations by reducing private sector investment and job creation by raising the cost of capital through interest rate increases. Yet today the government is a huge partner in capital investment for America in clean energy and infrastructure building which means job creation remains strong as it has in America. President Biden's effort to reduce pharmaceutical costs and for inflation reduction by fighting price increases through stealth fees, has at the same time cut into inflation. So as lower demand and increased supply in 2022 as the government better manages the supplies of energy, including release of oil stocks from the national reserves. Explained- The Phillips curve is an inverse relationship between unemployment and inflation observed by a New Zealand economist William Phillips in a paper in 1958 based on British unemployment and inflation data1861-1957. Economist Robert Samuelson turned it into a textbook concept as a simple tradeoff in 1960 more inflation gets you less unemployment- which fit the period of the 60's- but warned that it could change over time. Milton Friedman and others during the 1970's period of high inflationary expectations setting rejected it. In reality Mr. Phillips never meant for economists like Samuelson to generalize from his statistical observation of data on the British economy before 1958 and apply it to the US for the closing decades of the 20th much less the 21st century. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Much of what is written here about Xi Jinping pursuing Chinese socialist vision was known since he became president in 2013 when China's Communist party was losing its appeal, and efforts were made to seize power within the communist party by a leader in the western province of Chongqing. Bo Xi Lai attempted to take advantage of the situation with appeals to the working class and without any genuine commitment beyond a power grab. It was well known that Xi Jinping is a son of one of the veterans of the Communist party under Mao, Xi Zhongxun, unlike leaders who followed premier Deng Xiaoping such as Jiang Zemin. Zemin was a relatively unknown figure who was in university during the crucial period of 1947-49 when Mao came to power in mainland China. It would not be correct to say that little was known about Xi's own ideas about socialism as the long term answer to China's problems. Xi also came in as president at a time when the Communist party was losing its appeal to working class people after three administrations that followed premier Den Xiaoping. These three administrations followed a form of state capitalism that allowed companies to pollute the environment, compete without any regulations, and allowed to operate without any controls as long as they pursued growth aggressively and expanded the economy.There was an effort by Communist party regional leader in western Chinese province of Chongqing, Bo Xi Lai, to use this as an opportunity to grab power in China. During his first year as president Xi had to resolve this issue by having a court trial after revelations of corruption and misuse of power by Bo Xi Lai.  Xi's father Zhongxun's role in the revolutionary movement offers clues to Xi's own convictions and faith in the party. Zhongxun was a communist soldier who set up the revolutionary base areas in Shanxi-Gansu northwest border region of China that provided a refuge for Mao's army following the Long March. Other clues come from Zhongxun's role as head of propaganda during the period after 1944 and in 1952. Xi's family background particularly on his mother's side shows a fervent commitment to Chinese socialist vision during the chaotic years when the Japanese invaded China and Chiang Kai-Shek's nationalist forces failed to defend China's sovereignty. One reason Xi has been less understood is that little attention is paid to Xi's mother, Qi Xin who was highly educated and fervently believed in Chinese socialism and nationalist spirit during the Japanese invasion in 1938. In fact Qi Xin had to leave middle school after the Japanese took over Beijing. She joined the Counter Japanese Political and Military University to continue education and in 1941 attended the Central Party school. She met Xi's father Zhongxun in 1944. In 1953 she enrolled in the Marx School of Communism, and it was her position at the school that offered her husband added protection during the Cultural Revolution that affected Deng Xiaoping and others. With such a history in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's it is likely that Xi was profoundly influenced by his father's role in the revolutionary movement, and his mother's faith in socialism with national spirit as the way to protect against the foreign invasions. It would now appear that by the time Xi joined the Politburo in 2003 there was no question about the future course China would take given the role of his parents, and the events of 1938 the fall of Beijing, his mother having to flee, and the events that followed. Xi showed resilience during the period of the Great Proletarian Revolution when he was sent to the villages at a time when he would be studying in school and college. He was sent to an agricultural commune in largely rural Shanxi province where he worked as a manual laborer alongside other people and developed a relationship with the local farmers. Unlike other leaders during that period which could even be said about premier Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Xi took a different lesson from this experience largely because his father and mother were committed to the socialist vision for the long run. His father was still not fully rehabilitated by premier Chou en-lai when Xi was allowed to enter Beijing's Tsinghua University in 1975. He studied chemical engineering at Tsinghua graduating in 1979. Upon graduation he worked as a assistant for 3 years to a vice premier who was minister of defense. He then left Beijing for Hebei province to work as a deputy secretary of the provincial CCP. He was made Mayor of Xiamen, then governor of Fujian province in 1999 where he tackled environmental conservation before moving to Zheziang province. His father passed away in 2002 and it would appear that he was carefully trained in different provinces instead of staying in Beijing, for a position of national leadership. Xi got his break in 2007 when the upper leadership of Shanghai city was tainted in a wide ranging pension fund scheme. He was made party secretary for Shanghai. This was the position Jiang Zemin had held before he succeeded premier Deng Xiaoping. In only a few months in October 2007 Xi was made one of the 8 Politburo members, ready to succeed Hu Jintao as president. Xi's perception of being sent to the villages and making it to university education was that it was part of the long run socialist struggle, with pain that his father had also endured as simply a phase in which things would be right in the end. Xi's mother comes across as a resilient figure and one who had herself gone through the struggles of the 1930's and aided her husband on one occasion. Some of this resilience could have been passed on to the son. Xi's wife is a zealous participant in Chinese dance and music performances that created enthusiasm for the Chinese socialist revolution from the 1930's period. In his conversations  with colleagues in the party, in culture and temperament, Xi has been forthright about this background and his style of work.  Xi is unlike premier Deng and the presidents who succeeded him such as Hu Jintao mentored by a former mayor of Shanghai Jiang Zemin who came to power in 1989. Xi is more in line with the leaders around Mao like his father in his outlook and thinking, with a cautious temperament that comes from years going through ups and downs of political struggles. He is once said to have responded with dismay about being in a top position in the government knowing how precarious this had been for his father. The education at Tsinghua, his engineering background, and his easy familiarity with farmers in the provinces, mean that he understands China and its history well enough to have the confidence to shape Chinese policies in a way that none of his predecessors had except Mao, premier Chou-en-lai, Liu Shao Chi and a few veterans from that time in the 1930's. That Xi waited patiently for so long to gradually assert his ideas about socialist vision for China may be the surprising part of his behaviour till 2021.  It may be that he wanted to make the changes only after he could persuade party leaders and colleagues of his vision and long run goals. And because the Chinese economy had grown so large that it would take time to steer the ship in a different direction for the long term. In most of the negotiations with president Trump he cautiously let trade negotiators handle the situation, all the time learning about how to tackle problems of China's relationship with US and Europe. US president Biden also has a vision that is veering towards a socialist perspective in terms of bringing gains of progress to workers and families. So does Mr. Trump, Mr. Boris Johnson in UK, and Social Democrat's Scholz in Germany. It is both economic and political as Mr. Xi is quoted as saying in this WSJ report. The necessities of such action are both economic, social and politically driven as capitalism has veered way off course.  In this report it is mentioned that Soho China 40% stake was taken by a large capital markets firm in New York in the hope of large gains, as Soho China developer was a tycoon who wanted to leave China. Seeing it as not favorable to his company following events in Hong Kong. This behaviour of capital markets groups in New York and tech companies in Silicon Valley, driven by profits and not aware of the social and economic problems of working class American families is a problem in the US and in Europe. It is also what has driven so many large tech companies to expand manufacturing operations in China, that hurt US manufacturing capabilities and American workers jobs- an issue raised by president Trump and taken up by president Biden. Biden has already moved to make Intel Corporation change its plans and invest in American manufacturing technologies in a quietly implemented U turn. US president Biden is left with the unenviable job of solving this huge problem during the pandemic. He has also committed to a somewhat socialistic vision with a $3.5 trillion plan for workers and families, as has vice chancellor Scholz in Germany with his own version of programs, after the failures of unregulated forms of capitalism. Scholz goes so far as to say his mission is to show that there is really no such thing as a self-made man, that it is help from society, his fellow citizens, and government, that makes it possible for him to do his work. In a sense the world is shifting away from Reagan forms of capitalism without regulation after seeing disastrous results during the pandemic. Not just China. Some form of government guidance and regulations are now seen as essential in China, the US, UK, Germany and India for a better society and a better, healthier life, and for opportunity for all in each country.   ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Former U.S. Treasury secretary Robert Rubin talks to Charlie Rose about the August 2 Debt Ceiling and Deficit legislation. He says there are two constructive things about the legislation. There are no serious cuts in 2011 and 2012, so there will be almost no loss in demand as spending cuts do not affect the immediate 18 month period. Former Treasury Secretary Summers also makes this point. And that the cuts include defense and non-defense. He favors the approach of the Bowles-Simpson Commission. On the overall situation Rubin points out the importance of getting a real public discussion going about what this means, what the consequences of decisions made now. Especially important for Rubin is public understanding of the importance of setting up a serious deficit reduction program that sets the date of implementation a couple of years into the future to give time to get back on track, and the need for increased revenues. A useful point Rubin makes is that the question of jobs and the question of getting into a sound position fiscally are really the same question. He cites his experience in 1993 when he helped President Clinton setup and implement a deficit reduction program- which had half spending cuts and half revenue increases. Bowles-Simpson Commission recommendations for closing loopholes for tax expenditures and Martin Feldstein's similiar proposal for limiting the deductions and exclusions to 2% of Adjusted Gross Income offer an option that creates revenues without any tax increases....

Stimulus Package Unveiled

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Details of the $825 billion stimulus plan. Renewable energy does well under the plan including production tax credit for renewables, with $32 billion for a "smart" electrical grid for which GE makes components and lobbied for. Renewable energy producers win an extension of production tax credits now convertible into cash for companies whose losses leave them unable to use the credits. Transportation infrastructure green projects did not do so well, with $32 billion for transportation projects and only $10 billion for mass transit projects.The Natural Resources Defense Council had compiled a list of more than 80 environmentally friendly infrastructure and transportation projects worth about $405 billion. Only a small number of these projects made it. What is in the stimulus to create jobs and stimulate capital investment? Businesses get bonus depreciation, which speeds up depreciation deductions for companies that invest in plant and equipment. The stimulus doubles the amount small businesses can immediately write off for capital investments and purchasing new eqipment, and gives incentives for businesses to invest in renewable energy. States get help with $90 billion going to increase the federal share of Medicaid payments, and an additional $79 billion to help states avoid cutbacks in education and other services. And there is a "Make Work Pay" tax credit for $500 per worer and $1000 per couple. Experts say the effects of the stimulus will be felt in the latter part of 2009 and into 2010. Which is one reason the view of economists that there would be a second half recovery does not reflect conditions on the ground. Goldman has revised its view to 2010 and even that may be optimistic. One example of what has happened in the stimulus in this respect is that the earlier optimistic view of largeinvestments in science and technology, broadband networks, and transportation projects for fast rail and transit have all been trimmed down. Part of the reason may be that the bill for the nation's banking system revival may be larger than realized as an additional amount of $15-20 billion is being negotiated for Bank of America and more money will go to Citigroup. $6 billion is shown for highspeed internet access for rural and underserved areas. Science facilities get $10 billion. Repair of public infrastructure (read roads and bridges) gets $31 billion. School modernization gets $21 billion. And modernization of health information technology systems gets $20 billion which its hoped will provide equivalent or higher returns to pay for some of the universal health care costs, and preventative care gets $4 billion. There is a tax credit for R&D work on energy innovations and renewable energy production of $20 billion, and $32 billion for a "smart electricity grid." These are the proactive parts of the stimulus that create something new and make improvements. They add up to $144 billion. So much money goes to shore up the existing services and supplement incomes, and to relieve stresses on the banking system, and other ways to shore up the system, that the proactive expenditures are only a small fraction or 17% of the $825 billion stimulus. And all the time the federal deficit and debt increases with these huge outlays just to shore up the system. The Heritage Foundation Data Analysis Director Mr. Beach told Congressmen at a discussion chaired by Congressman Cantor (R), on January 16, 2009, that the federal debt would reach 92% of the nation's GDP in 2009 from 58 billion or 70% in 2008, with the $825 billion for stimulus. The federal deficit would go up to $1.31 trillion or 9.2% of GDP up from $541 billion in 2008. See the research paper on the Heritage website. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Once again the unemployment statistics lie- women's unemployment at 5.7% in 2014 does not reflect the real story. The number of women employed in 2014 is 55.2%, worse than in Oct. 2010. Many women looking for work give up and drop out of the work force, these women have not vanished, they are simply not being counted in the frequently quoted unemployment statistic. This spells bad news for Democrats in the midterm 2014 elections- today the households making less than 30,000 are almost evenly split on whether they vote Republican or Democratic 43% to 46%, according to polls by Pew Research Center, compared to the 2012 presidential election figures of 35% to 63%. Interestingly the reverse is true for voters with incomes over $100,000 where voters are about evenly split for Republican or Democratic choices for Congress. In 2012 presidential elections the Republicans had a 10 percentage point lead for this income group. Democratic advisors Carville and Greenberg advise not even mentioning the word "recovery" for the U.S. midterm 2014 Congressional elections. About 6.7 million people had multiple jobs in 2010, the figure now is 7 million. About 2.62 million people say they had part time jobs because they could not find full time work in April 2014 up from 2.57 million in Oct. 2010. A separate piece in the WSJ May 20, 2014, shows 10 million U.S. households under water on mortgages and another 10 million households having less than 20% equity in their homes in 2014....
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Applebaum describes how Obama as president took action on the stimulus after the 2008 financial crisis, but did not take the necessary action to stem foreclosures and aid a recovery in housing. This now appears to be one of the critical failures of his presidency.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
About 680,000 homeowners applied for the Home Affordability Modification Program, or HAMP, and had their loans modified so that their mortgage payments are reduced. This is only one in four of the 2.7 millon homeowners who tried to to join the program. This according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of data released by the Treasury Department. In 2009 the Obama administration launched the program to reverse the rising home foreclosures in the U.S., by reducing the monthly mortgage payments through lower interest rates and extending the term of loans. About $75 billion was estimated as the cost of the program at the time. Only $1 billion of this has been spent by the Obama administration. The program offered payments to 100 mortgage servicers as inducement to complete loan modifications. About half the applicants or 1.3 million were declared ineligible from the beginning, and the program used stricter qualification criteria than loan modification programs offered by individual banks. Applicants were rejected because the necessary paperwork was not submitted or it was lost by the mortgage company- 266,000 falling in this category. An additional 770,000 homeowners who started the program were later disqualified mostly for the paperwork and eligibility problems, with only a small number rejected for failing to make trial payments. Mortgages less than 31% of pretax income were considered affordable and considered ineligible-255,000 were in this category. Over 80% of homeowners in the southern states of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee, received no loan modification....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As a group Hispanics are reported to be hit hardest by this recession, harder than African Americans. In a Feb 9, Washington Post poll, both African Americans and Hispanics were optimistic about the future for the next generation, even with the dismal economic prospects, because things have improved greatly for this generation of black people and Hispanics compared to their parent's generation. And this progress is projected into the future. As a group the most pessimism was shown by white people. Whites say the Obama administration is doing very little for their families, and not doing enough for the middle class and working class Americans and small businesses. They were much more critical about the the administration's cozy relationship and doing "too much" for Wall Street financial institutions. By a 2 to 1 margin whites saw the Obama administration's economic program as harming the national economy.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Nocera looks at the lack of efforts to help homeowners under water in the Obama administration. Sheila Bair comments on Geithner's role, as Geithner's book "Stress Test" provides little detail on how the Obama administration addressed the issue. A story by Dougherty in the WSJ on April 20, 2014, points out that about 10 million households in America are underwater in 2014, and another 10 million households have only 20% equity in their homes. Unemployment statistics in the same issue of the WSJ show 7 million people taking parttime jobs because they cannot find work. These households are critical for consumer spending to support growth. The weak economic recovery could very well be one of the results of poor policy decisions by the Obama administration including this one, when other alternatives proposed by Sheila Bair and Martin Feldstein were offered repeatedly in 2009-2010. Here Nocera documents the efforts by Senator Durbin to give homeowners rights to go to bankruptcy court to provide ways to negotiate ways out of foreclosure....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Applebaum talks to two researchers at the University of Chicago and Princeton, Prof. Sufi and Prof. Mian, on the record of U.S. president Obama and Fed chairman Bernanke in helping homeowners facing foreclosure and underwater borrowers, comparing that record with their record in helping the banks. The issue is relevant as the policy and handling of homeowners had to be part of an overall effective plan for recovery in the U.S. economy, because ultimately without the U.S. consumer any recovery would be weak in the long run- a situation the U.S. faces in early 2014. The response to the issue of irresponsible homeowners borrowing beyond the limit without an equally robust response to irresponsible bank management that allowed wildly excessive leveraging of assets, and successful aggressive lobbying by banks in a shortsighted policy of going through with a wave of foreclosures; besides creating questions of fairness and equitable handling of the problem, also had major ramifications for the future of the U.S. and global economic growth. Here Christina Romer and other administration advisors say Bernanke was right in tackling the problem from the perspective of the banks needing to be recapitalized. Thoughtful advisors looking at the entire problem, Martin Feldstein and Sheila Bair strongly pushed for providing the same help to homeowners without getting caught up in the issue of who was responsible home buyers or the banks, and looking at the interests of the U.S. economy and the U.S. people. Proposals by Feldstein and Bair were equally robust in helping banks as they were in helping homeowners, only the banks understood their interests narrowly and had more access to policymakers in the Bush, as well as the Obama administration, Paulson as well as Geithner. This leaves us with the ultimate irony of the Obama administration pushing for the minimum wage, even to the point of electoral posture, when lasting damage had been inflicted on homeowners from the weaker portions of America's middle class by a policy that went against what two respected financial and economic experts from the Reagan period, Sheila and Bair had strongly advocated. See links and groups on Feldstein and Bair. Applebaum has followed most aspects of this problem closely and continues to provide exceptional reporting including the piece on the thinking of new Fed chairman, Janet Yellen. Private enterprise rules that require management at banks just as for other companies to take responsibility for failures, and be replaced with new management, was largely avoided leading to a fundamental failure in how a free market economy such as the U.S. and western European economies are supposed to function. Rules aggressively pushed by Geithner's mentor Treasury Secretary Rubin for a vigorous cleanup at banks in South Korea during a similiar situation in 1997, were not followed in any way here, also setting wrong precedents for the long run. ...
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Drew Western, a professor of psychology at Emory University, asks the question about Obama that is on many people's minds- who is this man who wrote the book "Dreams of My Father." And what happened to him? It is as if he is asking did they conjure up something that didn't exist, was there really too little about the man in a book written when the young Obama was still in law school- about his experience growing up between two races, except a remarkable effort to grapple with that experience. It would say little about the man himself, the choices he would make, the decisions he would face as he entered his thirties, and forties, a period that provides the crucible and the formative experiences in the development of character. It is as if readers had appended their own chapter at the end of the book and conjured up many things that really did not exist. And which would serve as a kind of Rorschach test experience where readers were free to read into the picture whatever they wished to see- and something Obama could use to be all things to all people. Drew Western draws from his knowledge of psychology and his direct or virtual conversations with about 50,000 people to reflect and make some hypotheses about what has happened to Obama, or what Obama was always about. He starts by pointing out what was missing in the inauguration speech and has been missing ever since- a clear sense of narrative and a vision, a story about what had happened and how it could be made different in the midst of the global financial crisis of 2008-2009. Western provides several hypotheses for what has happened. Obama simply lacks the experience to handle the presidency -having been merely a community activist and not run a city, a state or a business, and had accomplished little before becoming president, and had an unremarkable career as a law professor having published nothing during his 12 years at the University of Chicago except an autobiography. And remarkably says Western voted 130 times in the Senate as "present" instead of "yea" or "nay," suggesting a tendency not to take a stand on difficult issues. The auto fuel efficiency standards issue may be the singular exception. The challenges of a presidency are much larger, and the challenges in 2009 were even greater. Obama could not measure upto the task. A related hypothesis is that given the lack of experience and the inability to make the narrative because of an unresolved identity, Obama is willing to do whatever it takes to dial for dollars and get re-elected. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Erskine Bowles, a former chief of staff under President Clinton, and Alan Simpson, former senator from Wyoming, say the U.S. Supercommittee members should remember that their personal priorities and the common good are not at odds. The authors of the Bowles-Simpson Presidents Commission for deficit reduction say there is growing discontent among voters with politicians who are obsessed with gaining partisan advantage. Using issues of national importance that require a common approach from all parties as a way to score political points will only backfire on these politicians. Personal priorities of members of Congress are now no longer at odds with the common good, they are converging. It is upto the Congress, members of both parties, to push back against the special interests and partisan politics, and show leadership on the deficit. The eurozone crisis has shown the dire consequences of any sluggishness or procrastination. The failure of the political class and leadership in Italy and Greece, and in other nations of the EU, has put the fate of these countries in the hands of markets, which have relentlessly pushed up the borrowing rates of Greece, Italy, Spain and other countries, and taken future direction out of the hands of politicians. Erskine and Bowles say don't wait for a fiscal crisis to take action because it will be disastrous economically and politically, with everyone as losers and no winners. Timidity is not an option, leadership is required to take action that is big and broad, tackling tax expenditures, entitlement expenditures, defense, across the board....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Former U.S. president Bush says the U.S. has an important role as a beacon of freedom, human rights and democracy in the world. The U.S. should not shrink from the challenges in the name of a false and temporary stability, and flexibility should not mean ambiguity, difficulties should not mean shrugging away from America's role. Patience, creativity and active American leadership are needed. The Bush administration supported the struggles of people in central Europe and in other countries. This is from a speech Bush gave at the Bush Institute, Southern Methodist University in Dallas, a year into the Arab Spring. A speech that was giving voice to the aspirations of people in the Arab world.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Edward DeMarco is head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which is the independent regulatory agency overseeing U.S. housing lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The FHFA was formed in 2008 after merging two existing agencies. Later that year Fannie and Freddie were taken over by the government. FHFA head, DeMarco, is reluctant to help homeowners with underwater mortgages on their homes with reduced payments because this would mean losses to the taxpayer. He sees his mandate as protecting the taxpayer. Sheila Bair, former head of the FDIC, says she understands DeMarco's mandate is not to provide fiscal stimulus, and the Obama administration has been all over the place when it comes to providing homeowner assistance. The result is that there is little help by the U.S. government to homeowners with underwater mortgages since 2008, and this creates larger headwinds for the Federal Reserve Bank to provide momentum to the U.S. economy. Many experts see this as a serious problem and a well respected economist, Martin Feldstein, has made repeated proposals for structuring the help to homeowners since 2008. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
John Lewis, is the last surviving speaker of the March on Washington in 1963, when Martin Luther King gave his historic speech. Here he describes how Martin Luther King would see today's America. Foremost he points out is that MLK would want to see justice not just as racial justice, but justice in a broader sense that says something about the dignity and value of human beings. And this means, says Lewis, the president getting away from advisers and polls, and talking to ordinary people. It means focussing on jobs, the unemployed and people facing foreclosure, and seniors struggling on limited incomes. He calls for a "freedom budget" that would pool resources for infrastructure and investments that would create a better environment for people to live in.

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