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.


DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's Economy minister Zypries warned that Germany would take legal action by taking the case to the World Trade Organization if president Trump imposes tariffs above that allowed by WTO rules. She said this before a meeting at the White House between president Trump and Chancellor Merkel. The U.S. is Germany's largest export market with 107 billion in imports and the U.S. exports 58 billion euros of products to the U.S. Zypries accepted that the large trade surplus of Germany was "a problem," but that America "needs our machines and industrial plants" for the time being. Germany has insisted that it does not provide unfair advantages to its companies, and that German companies were simply more competitive. Trump has focussed largely on China for anti-competitive practices, though he mentioned BMW by name during the campaign. In the last 2 years the euro has depreciated significantly against the dollar giving German companies competitive advantage, largely as a result of the ECB- in opposition to German economic policy- trying to stimulate the economy of other southern eurozone countries such as Spain, Italy and France. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With the strong jobs growth report in September the US Federal Reserve, America's central bank, is expected to increase interest rates by 0.75% at its meeting on Nov. 1-2. That will be the fourth interest rate increase in 4 consecutive meetings of the Fed. It is designed to tackle inflation yet it also reverses the period of low interest rates for savers that extended from 2000 to 2020. This period covered two crises one created by irresponsible behaviour of banks in the financial crisis of 2000 and the second a natural health disaster from the pandemic when interest rates were brought down to zero as a policy response. During that period savers who suffered decline in savings with little interest income and lower income groups were hit by both the financial crises, employment gaps that hurt income and savings, and the shift of jobs overseas as jobs were shifted to China and American manufacturing declined. Economic policy was determined in that period by economists who failed to grasp the dangers to American manufacturing, to American communities with loss of jobs from offshoring, rising inequality that fragmented society.   This has changed under the Fed run by Mr. Powell first appointed by Mr. Trump and now renominated by Mr. Trump, who is not an economist and brings a very different mindset to central banking, going with common sense about what works for average Americans. a sense of humility, and down to earth about American workers and American manufacturing and its place in America. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Biden administration makes its decision- it will continue the tariffs president Trump placed on about half of Chinese imports into the US. It also seeks new talks with China on trade. US is also pursuing other policies on trade that were not pursued by the Trump administration. Longer term it is about alliance building in trade with the European Union, Britain, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and India. These alliances would jointly approach China on trade, economic and security matters.  Another approach is for the US to build at home. Congress is asked to approve $52 billion in subsidies that the Biden administration wants to give to companies so that they build the semiconductor plants of the future right here in the USA. The Biden administration is also aware that China is doubling down on technology purchases within China from Chinese firms to support its own high tech industries. In response it is laying down a policy of its own for the future step by step. The Chinese market now takes less priority than maintaining technological leadership of the US in all advanced technologies. The Biden administration is steering American industry and technology advancement in this direction. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Republican party has split shows the New Hampshire and Iowa Republican  primaries says WSJ in this video that is essential to understand 2024. Demographic expert that the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) talked to in this video say Donald Trump has brought in working class voters into the Republican party, no question about that. Yet in doing so and with his style he has alienated what are suburban Republican voters, higher educated with college degrees, the country club type that was long been associated with the Republican party since 1900. Taking the Iowa and New Hampshire voters the WSJ shows in visual dynamic graphs that half of voters in both states did not vote for Trump. There are no differences between Republican voters who voted for Trump and who voted against Trump when it comes to gender, age, they are evenly divided for gender and age. Difference is in education and suburban. Higher educated, suburban Republican voters acted to vote against Trump. This means says WSJ is that the Republican party has now effectively split up. Immigration is not as important to these Republicans who voted against Trump, foreign policy is also important which is not so for Trump voters. Ukraine matters for these voters who voted against Trump. Abortion also matters and the economy matters for these Republican voters who did not vote for Trump. In the backdrop of all this is the advisers who surround the president, the chief of whom may be Jake Sullivan, not just for foreign policy but also on issues such as immigration. Where Michael Shear of the NYT who has covered the White House for 30 years shows Jake Sullivan actively pushing to close down the asylum and parole avenues that are surging migrant flows, and to get Biden to close the US Mexico border under a bipartisan deal worked out by Lindsay Graham and Chuck Schumer in the US Senate. Sullivan, Michael Burns and other thoughtful, careful advisers are helping the Biden administration navigate the Israel Palestinian conflict and the Ukraine Russian conflict. The Middle East is what tripped Jimmy Carter with the Iran hostage crisis, leading to the Reagan period and Reagan economic culture that is unwinding today with huge gaps in incomes and educational opportunities that never existed before in the US. What also tripped Jimmy Carter was the split with the party that John Kennedy and LBJ built on the foundations of the FDR Truman period, and his handling of the Kennedys that effectively split the Democratic party. This is the situation that is now happening in the Republican party as the Reagan era and its culture of extremes comes to a close. Of extremes not seen since the Great Depression of a working family struggling to live on wages near the poverty level in a automobile factory in Michigan before the UAW settlement that Biden was on the picket lines for, and the $55.8 billion pay package that was put forward for Mr. Musk at Tesla. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Trump-Vance nomination with its huge tariffs inside a Republican shell with its preference for tax cuts is with a large degree of certainty likely to put America further behind China, slipping even further by a decade. And slipping in renewable energy and in meeting the aspirations of ordinary Americans. Most of the public does not realize that Trump-Vance 60% tariffs and Republican preference for tax cuts over infrastructure spending would create inflation and lack of growth in a Trump-Vance second term. Things would get worse because of the contradictions existing in the choice of tariff preferring Trump in a Republican party that sees tax cuts not infrastructure spending -even when desperately needed- as the answer to every economic problem. Without a clear policy of making the trillion dollar investments in the US economy, in manufacturing, in renewable energy, in chips and science, as it has under Biden the US under Trump-Vance policies would have two serious problems- first it would revive inflation. 60% tariffs on Chinese imports and 10% tariffs on other nations proposed by Trump-Vance would increase inflation. In the absence of the infrastructure investment that Biden has put in place it would create both a lack of growth for the jobs missing that come from infrastructure that is badly needed in a aging dilapidated infrastructure economy, and the inflation that the high tariffs would engineer. The benefits would not be great if China chooses to find other ways to conduct business and continues to keep its currency at levels that promote its exports. Even today Chinese products enter the US through other countries or when China builds factories in the US as Japan has done. The Republican aversion to tackling Chinese industrial challenges in the same way that China does by actively supporting American manufacturers would give China another decade of advantage as America slips even further behind in chips, science and manufacturing. This is the real problem in mixing Trump-Vance to the Republican philosophies on the economy which are not right for this point in time whatever their merits may have been in the 1980's when America was the industrial leader in the world.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What happened on September 10, 2024 in the Harris Trump ABC television debate moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis? It is hard to prepare for a debate, things can go wrong, unanticipated situations may arise. 67 million audience, 51 million for Biden Trump last debate, it can stress you out- UNLESS you Trust your authentic self knowing people can see through you if you are not honest forthright and stating it clearly. Harris could say she did approve fracking now as policy action she cast decisive vote for new oil leases. I am from a family like yours struggled with a single parent mother, ("not $400 million platter")I also support small businesses. If the other side is telling lies prolifically, make it clear vigorously yet with it not changing your demeanor and your focus on housing, cost of living, experience for NATO "from the same old playbook" and a warning about the lies to come to prepare the audience very early. Save the time responding to insult to use every moment constructively to define your message for the question at hand which is in addition to the questions put to you which are merely for organization immigration, crime, economy, cost of living, chips and science competition, Ukraine, Afghanistan. Harris said nothing about "Marxist economic professor father, other personal insults just acknowledged "It is a tragedy," don't you think fellow citizens? What would 4 years be like under Harris? (and 4 years under Trump?) Here's my plan for housing, for not starting trade wars while letting chips and science help competitors as Trump.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The new faces in the Biden administration on economic policy are Janet Yellen, as head of the central bank, the Federal Reserve, and Cecilia Rouse, a Princeton labor economist, as head of the Council of Economic Advisors. In this report WSJ looks at the economic policies of the new administration after Mr. Trump rejected globalization and international trade agreements that were not in America's interest or that hurt American workers.  Informal conversations with experts suggest WSJ says, that globalization is now suspect as a way that benefitted China and other countries including Germany, and hurt the U.S. France, Britain and other countries in Europe that were not strong exporters. This hurt their industries which were eroded by imports resulting in the three decades long destruction of communities across these countries that depended on manufacturing. It has also hurt countries like India that let their markets be dominated by Chinese imports, with a reversal of policy in 2020 with self reliant economy under "Atman Nirbhar" policy as the new goal. Mr. Trump's tactic in this trade war was to fight back to regain America's position in manufacturing with tariffs on imports. The trade deficit had to come down with China just as it had done with Japan decades earlier. This was starting to happen. One problem in bringing down the imports was the increase in the value of the dollar, as Janet Yellen has noted. The new policies will look at what the effective policy will be while keeping this goal in mind.  Both Yellen and Ms. Rouse have spent years studying labor markets and Ms. Rouse is quoted here as saying: " With open trade there are winners and losers. The losers are really losing, and we need to take care of them and take on more nuanced models of international trade as a result." Other experts from the earlier Democratic administrations such as Prof. Frankel at Harvard say that there needs to be increased focus on American workers left behind by trade, technology and unequal education, with more spending on preschool, infrastructure and health. All this suggests that there will be a continuation of U.S. policy in challenging Chinese use of globalization to advance its interests, chastening Americans on the use of the very word globalization which can mean different things to different people based on how they can gain advantage. The word may even be entirely dropped in favor of what the policies are and what they do for the American worker, American communities including small towns, and the American people, spelling each of these out every time supply chains and the global economy is mentioned. The new administration will get an opportunity to show that it too can come up with new ideas and action plan to strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. It will also have to show substantial results as people have lost patience with Democrats and Republicans on the lack of progress in rebuilding America's leadership role in the world economy, and in defending American workers and factories. Clinton, Obama and Bush all offered false promises on trade with China ignoring the damage this had done to American leadership in the world economy. Clinton with support for China's entry into the World Trade Organization, Bush with foreign wars and costly diversions and regulatory failures with banks that led to the 2009 deep recession hurting Americans, and Obama with the lack of will and interest in America's leadership role in the world as the dominant nation in manufacturing,   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gerlad Seib points out that one should look less at what president Trump accomplished in the first 100 days and more at how he operated and learned during this initial period. This is certainly true because much of what happened in the first 100 days contradicts some of the tone that Trump setup during the campaign. When it comes to governing Trump has made an effort to learn and adapt and show resilience in the face of early setbacks on the travel ban and the health care bill, the Flynn episode. After this early period Trump took on a more disciplined approach, gave more room to and listened to more respected advisors- Tillerson on foreign affairs in shaping policy with Russia leading to Tillerson's presence at Lucca massacre memorial in Italy sending a clear signal about U.S. policies in line with its role in the past century in world affairs, Gary Cohn and Ross on economic policy and seeking Cohn's advice on tax plan, Ross's on NAFTA negotiations with Mexico. As a result the NAFTA fears were calmed down with statements by Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary, that the goal was a win-win relationship with Mexico. Trump worked with his party in Congress to have the Supreme Court nomination of Gorsuch approved. Meetings with Merkel of Germany and Jinping of China were carefully planned and new relationships established as Seib points out, without ruffling trade relations. The appointment of Robert Lighthizer, as Trade Representative, also shows that efforts to give the U.S. a more level playing field in trade will be resolutely pursued in the win-win context. Lyrarc has profiled Lighthizer earlier in this decade after his op-eds in the media as he correctly anticipated the changing public mood on the need for fairness in trade relations. On relations with China and South Korea, Jim Mattis has taken the lead, and Pence's visit to South Korea also show deftness in handling what is one of the most difficult issues in foreign affairs. Mattis and Tillerson also have helped reinforce the Republican party policies on NATO and Europe, with the visit of NATO secretary general Stoltenberg to the White House. In the end it is how much you can learn in the first year, how much you listen, and the courage to act in difficult situations, the willingness to act contrary to one's instincts and self interest where necessary, that matters. This is especially true in an environment where as Seib points out the Democratic Party stands opposed to the Trump administration following a bitter election campaign.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WHite children born in 1992 fared worse in income levels than white children born in 1978. The reverse is true for black children- the income gap narrowing for black children born after 1992 and widening for white children born after 1992. In this unusual twist lies some of the angst about social divisions in America in 2024 where income mobility is a major issue. The Biden administration has achieved a lot with bipartisan legislation such as the Inflation Reduction Act, cancelling student loan debt or reducing it, creating 16 million jobs, bringing supply chain disruption inflation down from 9% to 3%, and yet more action is needed. Inflation in housing that for 25% of apartment renters takes 50% of household income is a challenge. Biden proposed a 5% cap on rent raises, Harris proposed capping rent payment at 30% of household income and  government aid for amounts above 30%. By contrast Trump program promises little to help with housing costs, and economic policy is limited to tax cuts heavily skewed to wealthier households. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US has expanded access to products from China and other countries gradually leading to a loss of US manufacturing over 2 decades. Today both Republicans and Democrats see the dangers of such economic policies for American workers and families. Mr. Trump first raised this issue that has been raised for a decade or more. Mr. Biden realizes what this means for the future of the Democratic party with the loss of manufacturing communities in the US. For this reason the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and new economic alliances in Asia are being built in a different way. This may not seem much today but as the US shifts its investment, and the European Union shifts its investment, to home countries and countries in Asia and Latin America, Africa, till 2030- 2040 over two decades this will create huge opportunities for the US, Europe, India and other partners in the free world. It is a mistake to think that a better life for the people of the free world can be built on the mistaken idea that the loss of American manufacturing communities was somehow acceptable. The sudden failure of the trade policy with China after the loss of so many American manufacturing communities shows that in the long run only policies that benefit both American workers and foreign workers will work and deserve support. The return of US manufacturing and European manufacturing to US and Europe must therefore be the very foundation of our effort and with it can evolve the building of manufacturing communities in friends in the free world such as India and other Asian, Latin American and African countries.  For India this is the kind of policy that Mohandas Gandhi would have chosen because of his broad and deep knowledge of the world and how it works best, he would have seen policies that benefit American manufacturing communities needed as much as building manufacturing communities in India. The ripping up of manufacturing communities in the US and Europe and what it has done to American and European workers and families, as has happened with globalization, would have been abhorrent to Mohandas Gandhi. This is why the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and economic alliance in Asia starts with the right principle even in its basic form, with the hard work of all and creative ideas creating the right solution for the Free World as it evolves to 2040. With respect for all, opportunity for all, confidence of all, efforts of all. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute points to trade barriers reducing competition and free trade that should raise an outcry when free trade and competition advocates focus alone on the Trump steel tariffs. He points to estimates that show $90 billion in additional costs to Americans from the barriers that prevent Americans from paying world market prices for surgeries and medical treatment, prices similar to what is paid in advanced countries like Germany, Britain and France. A bigger barrier in pharmaceuticals prices being sheltered from market competition worldwide costs a huge $370 billion in additional costs to Americans. These two costs in healthcare would help Americans by a magnitude compared to tax cuts that do not work for average Americans with the business tax cut going more into share buybacks than into increasing wages or capital investment in 2018.  Bernstein points to Neil Irwin's column in the NYT that flags statements such as Senator Mike Lee, Republican, that the steel tariffs are a huge job killing tax hike, as being misleading. Bernstein says two actions were never taken that would have used benefits of free trade to help affected communities that lost jobs in industries such as steel and textiles, other industries affected by foreign competition.  He lists these steps as sectoral employment training, apprenticeships ,and job creation efforts in the worst affected areas. Basically no one really knows what is good trade policy, the textbook concepts and theories are out of date when countries can subsidize particular industries such as steel and dump products into the American market. At a press conference on CSPAN with the Swedish prime minister Mr. Trump stated that China was exporting more than what is officially shown as there are transshipments from other countries, some of them with no steel mills.  As Mr. Trump stated at that press conference he was elected partly because of the worst affected communities- in places such as Michigan and other states in the midwestern U.S.- that suffered from unfair trade. Bernstein admonishes the economists and politicians, media, for the headlines that are misleading in showing that bad trade policy is being pursued and trade wars are being started. This deserves attention because the Trump administration and advisors such as Lighthizer who served in the Reagan administration seek fair trade, and the Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross successfully pushed for NAFTA trade deal renegotiation not the outright rejection of NAFTA that was mentioned in the election campaign. Ironically no one is helped by this trade rhetoric and misleading headlines. In fact the strengthening of the U.S. currency as the huge trade surplus of China goes into U.S. assets, and with the election of Mr. Trump, gives foreign competitors a continued advantage. And in fact Japan, South Korea, China, had a mild response to the tariffs as reported, because these countries are aware of global overcapacity created especially by China which produces 50% of the world's steel, and as China shifts to higher technologically value added products closing many older steel mills. ...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial opinion in Economist magazine says the dangers of cutural illiberalism are very real as the candidacy of Donald Trump and the National Front's popularity in France's 2016 first round of regional elections have shown. This is the result of increasing economic anxieties of the white working class in America, and the working class in Europe. Only by increasing economic growth, and improving the economic prospects for broad sections of society can this be addressed, says Economist magazine. It says also needed is a robust foreign policy to address the terrorist threats as the Obama foreign policy lacks credibility with the public, giving rise to anti-immigrant sentiment in the U.S. and Europe.
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump announces the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Agreement of 2015 signed by president Obama. He calls it a bad deal and "a one sided agreement, that "didn't bring, calm, didn't bring peace, and never will." Since the signing of the agreement the conflicts in the Middle East have increased and relations between the U.S. and Iran have deteriorated under the Trump administration. During the election campaign candidate Trump and Republicans had criticized the deal and deal never gained Republican support. It was also not initially supported by France which called for stronger safeguards on nuclear weapons development. The appointment of John Bolton as National Security Adviser, and Mike Pompeo as the new Secretary of State, who were strong critics of the Iran nuclear deal also influenced president Trump. He was also influenced say aides by the success of his policy with North Korea of imposing strong bargaining pressure with tough sanctions on North Korea including Chinese sanctions, which led to the talks between North and South Korean presidents and the planned Trump meeting with Kim Jong-Un of North Korea. Iran's president Rouhani says Iran will stay with the agreement as the EU countries Germany, France plan to support the agreement. This could also leave an opening for future talks with Iran on a new peace agreement as  president Trump talked about Iranian people deserving a better deal at the end of his 11 minute announcement. As Stephens points out in a op-ed in the NYT Iran's economy needs the removal of sanctions so that focus could shift to economic development, as the lifting of sanctions have yet to result in increasing living standards and building infrastructure neglected during the sanctions years. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump outlines a plan for Afghanistan that increases the U.S. troop presence from about 8500 with an addition of 4000 more troops and advisors, in addition to a counter terrorism force. To war weary public in the U.S. he says: "I share your frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money- and most importantly, lives- trying to rebuild countries in our own image instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations." About his criticism of the war when president Obama was in office as a huge costly waste of resources Trump said: My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like to follow my instincts... I heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk at the Oval Office." After resisting the advice of his own advisers Trump decided to fire Bannon who had supported use of American private security contractors for the war in Afghanistan, and used parts of the media to question national security advisor McMaster's views on this. Gen. Mattis, completed a strategy review that showed the mistake of creating a vacuum would repeat the situation of Iraq where president Obama withdrew forces in 2011, leading to a sequence of negative events- with Russia, Iran and Islamic State moving into the vacuum, making American intervention in the war necessary, increase in terrorist incidents worldwide, and a flood of refugees into Europe. Ironically clearing the path for an outsider's bid for the White House, with Brexit in which refugee fears and uncontrolled immigration played a part, and the news of terrorism and the war in Syria-Iraq creating a sense of insecurity. A key difference in the Trump approach with Obama's approach is that "conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables will guide our actions from now on," in line with Trump's criticism of Obama's approach. The military in the U.S. has long maintained that the best approach would have been to insist on U.S. presence in negotiations with the Iraqi government under the sectarian prime minister Nouri Maliki. Gen. Mattis was head of Central Command under the Obama administration and must have pushed the view of the military to president Obama to no avail. Failure to do so led to the growth of Shiite militias and the alienation of Sunnis in Mosul, leading to the fall of Mosul to Islamic State thus creating the current crisis. Gen. Mattis and Lt. Gen McMaster are intimately aware of the problem and must have convinced Trump that this is what really happened, that a repeat would waste the sacrifices of American soldiers in the twin wars. Trump gave this as his reason when he said in his televised speech to the nation- essentially a criticism of Bush that he expanded the conflict too quickly, and Obama exiting too quickly to create a void. Trump call his policy "principled realism."  The roots of the crisis are in the India-Pakistan conflict. Like the conflict in South East Asia the conflict in South Asia extending from Iran to India and Pakistan, may take a generation to overcome. A rapprochement between India and Pakistan, beginning with trade and economic relations, is not only in America's interest, it also provides the basis for a realistic American withdrawal. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Trade is just one aspect of the Biden Economic plan. It covers US manufacturing and jobs, Climate Change Action and Renewable Energy, Cost of Living and Wages for workers, Interest rates and inflation, and Capital Allocation with government partnering with the private sector in key industries such as electric cars, solar panels. It has the overwhelming support of most Americans- seven out of 10 Americans favor it polls show. What is described here in the Washington Post as a change from decades of trade policy since Reagan/Bush, Clinton/Obama, is also a response to the loss of key midwestern states by Democrats to Trump in thepresidential election of 2016, and the upheavals for democracy that Biden calls the struggle for the soul of the nation on the White House website. Biden is simply saying that the old policies were a mistake, a huge mistake, and Biden is correcting the Trump response which was loud but lacked the substance that is in the Biden plan through capital allocation in size and government actions to back this up. In this move he now has the support of both Democrats and Republicans. As Greg Ip has pointed out in the WSj no one during the Clinton administration when it engaged China with the World Trade Organization on trade imagined China would replace America as the dominant nation in manufacturing, the size and th scale also affected the climate, the environment in China, and created huge inequalities in the US and China that both nations are trying to correct, Biden in the US and Xi in China. It could even be said these policies were a failure because the size and scale simply overwhelmed everything else with growth rates in China of 12-14%, and the fallout in the near collapse of the economy in the years ahead from hypergrowth.  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Peterson Institute of International Economics study on the TPP trade agreement shows it would reduce growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector by a fifth, according to this report in the NYT. Workers incomes and job losses in manufacturing are a key concern for voters and account for the surge in polls for Trump and Sanders in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. All four leading candidates Clinton, Sanders, Trump and Cruz oppose the TPP agreement. Congress will wait till after the election to decide. This is a big issue today because about 5 million jobs have been lost in 1977-2014, according to the Alliance for American Manufacturing. The Peterson study predicts job losses of 50,000 a year, yet another study by Tufts University predicts job losses of 450,000 a year. Another study by the Economic Policy Institute study shows other damaging effects such as labor's share of national income declining from the TPP.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The bottom half of all U.S. households have only recently recovered the wealth lost in the 2009 financial crisis. They still have 32% less wealth than in 2003 when inflation is taken into account. The top 1% of households have more than twice as much as they did in 2003. Wealth is defined as net worth that includes houses , savings and stocks minus any debt. The wealthy have 85% of their wealth in stocks and bonds. For the bottom 50% half of the assets are in the house or family home. Economic and regulatory trends have happened in ways that favored the people investing in stocks, and rescued people investing in stocks with policies designed with this purpose by central banks and the U.S. government. By contrast for the bottom 50% buying a home is more difficult today. The problem this WSJ report points out is that the next recession would most hurt the bottom 50%, even before they have recovered from the last one which was a result of shaky practices of banks in financial lending and not some cyclical swing in the economy. Policy was then geared to provide a recovery first for stock markets as a way to economic recovery. The bottom 50% have little stake in the stock market, the top 1% have most of their gains from the stock market. Much of the popular anger comes from the way policies by both Democrats and Republicans differed little in past administrations in the way they approached this in shaping economic policy. As a result infrastructure building and investments in public services took less priority in this period of 30 years with trade imbalances with China building up on the external front, in another side to this development. The shift to Trump and to right wing populists in Europe is only the first phase in the corrective action that has to take place to return to a fairer distribution of wealth that existed before the last 3 decades. Eventually it is not right wing or left wing factions or parties, but healthy policies, that matter to create a better balance for society.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The difficulties the new U.S. Treasury Secretary faces as she tries to navigate the politics in Congress and the tries to reach out to moderates and progressives within the Democratic party. All have different views on spending, and where stimulus money should go in a second stimulus. Her long experience with the Fed is seen as not preparing her for the political role of evaluating different opinions that are described by some experts as ten times more political than anything going on in Fed meetings. As a student of Prof. Tobin Yellen sees government intervention as needed in times of economic crises. Twice in ten years the U.S. and the rest of the world has been struck by economic crises- the bank leveraging behaviours and poor lending practices that induced the 2009 financial crisis and in 2020 the coronavirus pandemic. Lessons learned Yellen says about the 2009 recession are that not enough stimulus was provided after the initial stimulus to get a strong enough recovery. Democrats are eager to spend over $2 trillion in a second stimulus. Republicans much less so particularly with a new president. Even under Mr. Trump spending was set at under $700 billion by Republicans for a second stimulus. Another economic crises is one of the U.S. strategic economic position in the world. On this issue of trade Yellen's husband George Akerloff, also a economist is more skeptical of the value of free trade. The failure of the World Trade Organization to ensure a level playing field as China subsidized key industries, and the loss of America's manufacturing advantage over three decades is now the defining issue in American politics. It takes the shape of manufacturing communities that were once a part of Democratic party support shifting away after devastated local economies from the loss of manufacturing plants to China. It takes the shape of a Republican party that is committed to bring back American manufacturing, and a Democratic party that under Biden is seeking the same result. How much each party will invest in terms of making things happen to get this done is one of the issues facing all parties, Congress, the administration, Ms. Yellen, and the new president. Economics does not have the answers. As economists could not have predicted the increase in women participation in the workforce, the drop in Black and Hispanic unemployment rates under the Trump administration. The lack of moral will to get trade to work for the American worker was more of an issue under Democratic and Republican administrations for the last 2 decades, so that issues of growing inequality were never better addressed by any party. It depended more on focus of the president elected to help American workers, and to avoid the cost and distraction of foreign wars when American interests could be protected in other ways. Yellen was not able to make a difference at the Fed because of these reasons and low interest rates have both helped and hurt the middle class, as low interest rates meant Americans were less able to accumulate savings for retirement since 2000. Determination and action counts for more than ideology or policy is the lesson learned in building strong economies and manufacturing.   ...

How to Rig an Election

The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Krugman, Nobel prize winning economist points out an astonishing fact about the 2016 U.S. presidential election- U.S. television networks nightly news devoted only 32 minutes in 2016 to all policy issues combined. And these networks devoted 100 minutes to Clinton emails. He calls this "disgraceful."  For weeks at a time in September and October the main television networks lacked the integrity and courage to ask questions and persist on the major questions facing the country of the economy, correcting income distribution that has been skewed away from the middle and working class, infrastructure rebuilding, education and healthcare, and what the policy proposals of each candidate would do for the country. Krugman does not mention this but the media devoted hardly any time to the economic plan devised by Trump that respected economists and economic analysis showed would increase the deficit by $5.3 trillion, and lead to a short term temporary increase in growth followed by a sharp decline. The worst thing that could happen to middle and working class families struggling to recover from the blow to their finances from the last recession.  The cyber hacking of a U.S. presidential election by a foreign power never received the unanimous rejection that it deserved from the television networks, not just Fox News as Krugman points out, but by all the networks. The future landscape of the media needs assessment to bring in new ideas and new entrants to bring constructive improvements, and for older media organizations to rebuild after the loss of confidence among young people. Only about a quarter of young people in the U.S. have confidence in the large media organizations news coverage according to surveys done recently. There are other pressures coming from the tech world that make it imperative to do this. Many experts point to the destructive effect of social media in spreading rumors or information disguised as facts, which are spread instantly by Twitter and Facebook, without any obligation to check the facts. This is also dangerous with a public that is now divided between better educated and less educated along political lines, older more settled in their views people, and younger people quicker in looking for the facts and checking things out before believing them. ...
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." ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Washington Post looks at the events leading to the firing of Stephen Bannon, the controversial advisor to the U.S. president. Bannon, a right wing populist, joined the Trump campaign in the late stages. Bannon is seen as one reason for the chaotic situation at the White House that White House chief of staff Kelly is trying to correct. Reasons for Bannon falling out of favor are his interference in the affairs of other departments, his opposition to Gen. McMaster, national security advisor, and an interview he gave to liberal magazine American Prospect, in which he openly derided Gary Cohn, economic advisor. In that interview Bannon contradicted the policy of the administration towards North Korea. 

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? ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
See the adjoining report in DW.com that covers the planned meeting between Japanese PM Kishida and Kim of North Korea to reduce tensions in the region. Kishida is taking a proactive approach as the ideological positions have failed and talking directly to North Korea as Junichiro Koizumi had done in 2004 (with a visit to Pyongyang when Kim's father was president) is now the right course. It is now twenty years that this was not tried. Former president Trump met Kim of North Korea at the Demilitarized Zone DMZ near Seoul in 2019. Not much changed after that meeting. North Korea has increased missile testing with ICBM missiles and increased its nuclear missiles with improvement in technology since then. One aspect of the Reagan/Weinberger era policy was its sense that America would keep investing in defense and at some point everyone else would fall behind. This has not happened. After a slowdown in its economy in the early 1990's opportunities to build Russia relations were left to business interests and opportunities were lost. The memory of that period of Russia's economic collapse lingers and feeds a sense that somehow Russia was diminsished by waht happened after the abrupt collapse of the Russian position in Eastern Europe.  In fact the only nuclear missile tests conducted in this 21st century were conducted by North Korea.  ...
The Hindu Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Atul Aneja looks at Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi's comments on the India- China relationship in March 2018.  The comments by Wang Yi show an extraordinary effort by the Foreign Minister to push for better relations. He raises the need for greater dialogue and "mutual trust" to improve the relations. Wang visited India in December during the period of tense relations and the post-Doklam meeting between prime minister Modi and president Jinping on the sidelines of the BRICS meeting in Xiamen. India's Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale visited China in Feb. 2017. A China-India economic dialogue is planned for April, 2018, preceded by visits of Commerce Minister Zhong Shan and Guo Yezhou, Vice Minister of the International Department of the Communist Party of China. Compared to the comments by both sides during the Doklam crisis there appears to be a significant change in policy. Wang refers to "more far-sighted leaders" who have realized the importance of the India- China relationship as that between the two largest developing countries each with a population of 1 billion.  In the context of events in early March with pressure from the Trump administration on trade with China- calling for China to come up with plans to reduce the trade surplus in 2018- and the growing influence of Mr. Lighthizer as a trusted advisor of president Trump and exit of Gary Cohn, this could be a strategic move.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Compared to the situation in North Africa in 2016 with emigration to Europe and the migrant crisis happening without any preparation to prevent it in 2015-2016, Germany and France are acting in coordination with Russia and Turkey, Saudis, UAE, to provide stability to the region. Angela Merkel will host leaders Macron, U.S. Secretary of State  Pompeo, and representatives of foreign powers in Berlin to work out a deal for disengagement of foreign powers. Turkey and the United Nations support a government of National Accord in Tripoli which controls the west of Libya, and a Libyan-American Mr. Haftar has a militia that controls the south and east with the help of Egypt, UAE, and Russia. Earlier the U.S. under president Trump had distanced itself from the region, but Mr. Trump and his advisors now see the need to engage in the region to ensure stability, and support the Europeans in the effort to prevent the large scale emigration that threatens European unity. Europe following the 2015 Merkel migrant crisis is acting with the policy of heading off both wars, terrorism and economic dislocation that fuels emigration right at the points of origin, before it even starts. This shows that the French after action in Ivory Coast and Mali and the Germans with aid to Africa are remaining involved in development and stability programs in Africa, lessons learned from 2015. The goal of the Berlin meetings is to arrange high level agreement for foreign powers to withdraw from destabilizing the Arab regions in North Africa particularly Libya by supplying weapons and support to quarreling factions. ...

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