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.


New York Times Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ed Miliband, leader of the Labor party, tells British prime minister Cameron in parliament on Dec. 12, 2011: "It's not a veto when the thing you wanted to stop goes ahead without you. That's called losing.That's called being defeated. That's called letting Britain down." Miliband was asking what purpose was being served, when it was expected that the European Union leaders were unlikely to provide Britain with safeguards for its financial industry, and when Britain has actually led the way in calling for stricter capital reserve requirements than Basel III standards accepted in Europe. Olli Rehn, European commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, said Britain cannot separate its financial industry from the rest of Europe: "If this move was intended to prevent bankers and financial corporations in the City from being regulated, that is not going to happen."
WSJ Original article ›
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The British parliament votes 321 to 278 on a motion that rules out leaving the UK specifically on March 29 without a deal negotiated with the European Union on future relations. The margin of votes was 43. Thirteen government ministers abstained from the vote. The repeated votes in parliament are a tactic used by the prime minister Theresa May to get her party members to back the deal she has negotiated with the European Union. The ruling Conservative party is split on whether to leave the European union and if so what the relations should be between Ireland and Northern Ireland, whether Britain should remain in the customs union of the EU.   The repeated votes have only exacerbated and made worse than before the divisions in the Conservative Party, leading to a view that only a second referendum can break the deadlock. The indifference shown in France and Germany by business and the public to Britain's membership, and the manner of handling of the immigration crisis by Chancellor Merkel with large numbers of African and Arab immigrants entering Germany, have contributed to the dissension in Europe over Britain's right to control the flow of immigrants across its borders. The deeper Merkel positioned the ruling CDU party to welcome migrants in 2016-2017, the more skeptical the British public became on the free flow of people in the EU leading to the large bill boards on open immigration in Europe during the referendum on EU membership and the small margin in favor of leaving the EU. Austerity policies of Cameron and Osborne over two terms only increased the divisions of British society. The lack of good leaders in the Conservative Party has worsened the crisis. Theresa May comes from a London constituency which voted against leaving the EU, yet has taken up the leadership of the different Leave factions in the Conservative Party as she sought the position of prime minister after Mr. Cameron. Prime Minister Cameron promised the referendum on EU membership in a ploy to win votes in a closely contested general election and called the referendum not anticipating the result, and resigned as  prime minister. By being against Britain leaving the European Union, yet willing to use the issue for opportunistic vote getting in a close election Cameron and other politicians in the Conservative Party split the country in what some have called an act of recklessness. The votes in parliament and possible fesh elections, a second referendum, are a way to find a solution to this mess.   ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT analysis of fund raising by the Republican and Democratic parties for the 2020 election campaign shows Republicans hardly raising any money from people with incomes over 250,000 and very little from incomes over $200,000 with most funding coming from the base white working class and lower and upper middle class. For Democrats fund raising is significant at the levels of income over $200,000. Geographically the Democrats get most of their funding from the east and west coast areas.  This reflects the changes in the parties starting in the the 2008 elections when higher income groups in software, finance, and in professions of law and medicine and Silicon Valley tech shifted to Democrats. The Democrats also held onto minority votes. In 2016 this changed with a sharp turn with tech on the west coast and finance professionals on the east coast shifting to the Democrats. The PPP agreement under Obama favored tech over the auto industry, and renewal fossil fuels such as solar were favored over the oil industry and fracking. In 2016 this helped shift the votes in Michigan and Pennsylvania to Republicans. Older manufacturing industries, oil and fracking were supported by Republicans who pushed back against ceding global dominance in manufacturing to China. By 2020 these changes are now entrenched with white working class voters in industries decimated and communities destroyed by foreign imports mainly from China, supporting Republicans. Republicans under Trump have made regaining the manufacturing leadership of the U.S. that was the situation after World War II, a top priority for the U.S.  The minority vote shifted with Hispanics moving towards Republicans to a much larger degree than before. The urban rural divide is similar to Europe where the similar impact of foreign imports mainly from China have destroyed older industries and led to sharp decline in older towns and communities outside major cities. This is the situation facing the U.S. and Britain, France, Italy Spain, and Poland. Germany as a manufacturing country dependent on exports is also affected but to a lesser degree. The unwholesome aspect of this is that the larger urban areas are divorced from the rest of the country  and rural small towns, smaller cities. In some form reintegration has to take place. The vast majority of the working class classified in today's terminology as the less educated lacking a college degree and white are  paradoxically with Republicans, and the wealthy professionals and industries in software, finance with Democrats. Nothing makes this more evident than a quick look at the map of the U.S. with blue on the opposite coasts for Democrats and mostly red in between and in the south. This is unprecedented in American history. A rising tide that lifts all boats in the U.S. and the return of the U.S. to the position it held after World War II could change this in the next decade. ...
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. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Local elections for 181 local councils in Britain in April 2012 show the toll taken on the Conservative party led coalition government of David Cameron from austerity measures and general dissatisfaction with the government. The Conservative party Mayor of London won the election in London over Labor's Ken Livingstone, with a slim majority, largely determined on personality issues. Throughout Britain the Conservatives lost seats in local government. BBC projections with most of the votes counted show Conservative share of the vote dropping from 35% to 31%, Labor moving up from 35% to 38%, and the Liberals remaining at 16%. Labor gained 823 seats, Conservatives lost 405 seats, and Liberal Democrats lost 336 seats. Voter indifference was shown in the voter turnout at 32%, the lowest since 2000, according to the BBC. Cameron said he would continue with his austerity program and cuts in spending, saying "these are difficult times, and there aren't easy answers."
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Who should lead the Conservative Party in 2016 till the next elections in 2020? The Economist magazine says strong negotiating skills and stamina are needed, and on this point it says Theresa May, Home Secretary, does better than former Energy minister, Andrea Leadsom, who has not done such tough negotiating and is not so well known as May. May had the support of 199 members of parliament to 84 for Leadsom, whose experience is less and was junior Treasury minister in prior position compared to May's 6 years in the position of Home Secretary handling immigration issues. Being an ardent Brexiter Leadsom has an advantage with Brexit supporters, though May handled her Brexit Remain position in a low key way and can appeal to both sides of the Conservative party. The result will come from a postal ballot to 150,000 members of the Conservative Party.

Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist says British prime minister David Cameron's negotiations with the European Union during the recent summit talks were a failure. The diplomacy of the Cameron administration is described as inept and is seen as damaging British interests severely. It leads to an isolation of Britain in Europe. In this negotiation French President Sarkozy is seen as coming out ahead. The inept efforts to protect Britain's financial sector are unlikely to benefit the sector.
New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Pearlstein argues that the US and the Obama administration achieved most of its goals, even though the Europeans took the credit. On regulatory reform, Geithner's regulatory reform proposal he says, could well have been written at the French Finance Ministry, as at the US Treasury. And it gives Obama ammunition to prepare, as private equity, hedge funds, and banks try to water down his proposals for regulatory reform. By having member countries commit to adding $850 billion to the resources at the IMF, and regional development banks to provide help to countries in serious difficulties- and giving instructions that the money can be used not only for debt rollover, bank recapitalization and balance of payments support, but also for stimulus spending, infrastructure investment, trade finance and social support- the Obama adminstration has accomplished a great deal. It has succeeded in putting in place the necessary financial resources to support not only the financial systems of countries in Eastern Europe, Asia and Latin America that need help, but put emphasis on the need for resources to go for helping reduce job losses, create jobs, and provide some forms of income or support to people in these countries. This is a major step as it means the countries of Eastern Europe and other developing countries can deal with their crises in confidence. Mexico is taking loans from the IMF. Dominique Strauss Kahn had begun the policy of shifting IMF's focus to these social goals as significant parts of the recovery process in countries, but he faced the old mindset among the IMF staff, as when its reported staff wanted to increase interest rates in Pakistan by 10% instead of the 3% that was finally agreed to. That would have caused serious difficulty to the people of Pakistan, created chaotic situation and disturbed the social fabric of that country. See the link to this for S. Korea and for Pakistan. And as Gordon Brown put it the old conditionality that lay behind the IMF loans, is phased out. This makes it the new policy at the IMF backed by the G20 mandate. The Washington consensus which prescribed open borders, floating exchange rates and fiscal prudence is now ended. And to support this change the developing countries will have a bigger say in IMF policy and decisions. ...
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mario Monti, Italy's prime minister, tells Alessandra Galloni of the WSJ, "Germany will never let France go." French economist Sorman says Americans do not realize that the EU and the Euro were created for political, not economic reasons, and the idea was to bring peace to Europe and especially between France and Germany. He sees the EU countries staying through this crisis together, and France emerging more competitive from this experience.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
European banks have been slow to get rid of risky assets such as collateralized debt obligations, subprime mortgages and other risky assets after the 2007 financial crisis. As a result sixteen top European banks hold 386 billion euros of suspect credit-market and real estate assets, according to Credit Suisse analysts. The Royal Bank of Scotland has 79.6 billion of assets dating from the 2007 financial crisis. Over the three year period since the 2008 financial crisis, the top three U.S. banks shed 80% of this type of risky assets, compared to 50% for European banks. The four largest British banks have reduced these risky assets by more than 50%, and four French banks have reduced these assets by only 30%. At 29 billion euros, French bank Credit Agricole had the largest amount of such risky assets among the leading French banks. This adds to the difficulties facing French banks which also have large amount of loans to customers in Greece and Greece's sovereign bonds. Deutsche Bank has 20.2 billion euros in commercial mortgages and whole loans and 2.9 billion euros in U.S. residential assets including subprime loans. Mediobanca analysts estimate that Deutsche Bank's exposure to such assets is more than 150% of its tangible equity....
DW.COM Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A complete breakdown in negotiations between the U.S. and Russia happens after Russia continues its bombing campaign in Aleppo. About 275,000 people and 100,000 children are in the war torn area in northern Syria. The U.S. had called on Russia to stop the bombing campaign, but Secretary of State Kerry failed to persuade Russia to commit to a ceasefire. The result has been international criticism of the Russian role in the war, and speculation on what president Putin sees Russia gaining from this intervention in DW.com and other sites. 

The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NYT's Landon Thomas gives this exceptional report on how Deutsche Bank changed from a lender to the German auto industry and safe banking practices to enter the derivatives business and other opaque financial products that led to taking on huge risks. Deutsche Bank has agreed on Dec. 22, 2016 to settle with the U.S. Justice Department paying a fine of $7.2 billion for practices relating to faulty mortgage securities. This report says the problems started in 1995 with Deutsche Bank's leadership hiring Edson Mitchell of Merrill Lynch to promote the investment banking business at Deutsche Bank. Mitchell hired two derivatives traders Broeksmit and Anshu Jain. Mr. Mitchell died in plane crash in 2000 when he was 47 years age, Mr. Broeksmit committed suicide in 2014, 58 years in age, Mr. Anshu Jain, 53 years old, is the only surviving person of the three. Under Mr. Jain Deutsche Bank assumed more and more risk, and was involved in complex and opaque financial products leading to the toxic mortgage crisis, and manipulation of the lending rate for London banks.  It also lent $300 million to Donald Trump's businesses. Most of the profits generated from this venture have evaporated, with analysts estimating $15 billion in fines and penalties owed of the $20 billion that these ventures generated. Not counting the serious damage to the bank's reputation in Germany and the U.S. This report points out the role played by the CEO from 2002 to 2012 of Deutsche Bank, Josef Ackermann, in encouraging these ventures converting the bank from its original loan as a contintental lender to business to a bank selling opaque financial products for most of its profits. Landon Thomas also describes the events and days leading up to the suicide by Broeksmit, including a visit to a psychiatrist and Broeksmit's facing enormous stress about the investigations underway in Germany and the U.S. looking into the opaque financial products and practices of Deutsche Bank. This is also a cautionary tale about what happened in banking from the late 1990's leading to the collapse in 2008, leading to the problems of today- the need to rescue the economy in 2008-2009 and the low rate world that ensued damaging the savings of ordinary people, the infrastructure that was never built, the parallel crisis of the hollowing out in manufacturing as a false prosperity boomed in banking and finance. In a sense it is also a story of everyday lives that were damaged in the high flying boardrooms of finance in New York, London and Frankfurt. The revolving door between regulators and the banks made it harder to monitor and control banking risk letting this story unfold over decades, damaging the credibility of governments and the established political parties without clear alternatives from outside; as the dominance of Wall Street executives in the new outsider Trump administration shows.  ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us