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.


Washington Post Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Collapsing sales for all automakers with GM results 45% decline in October 2008 over October 2007, and Toyota saw decline of 23%, Honda 28%, Ford 30%. One GM marketing executive said its like the lights were turned off in October. Dire consequences for the US and global economy. Toyota once seemingly immune to all this is affected not just here but back in Toyota City in Japan as the area around Nagoya is going into shrinking mode, and the Japanese economy will likely contract by 1% in 2009.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about how Mr Geithner has handled his job at the New York Fed and at Treasury during the bailouts of financial firms. Were there close relationships with bankers, hedge fund managers, and others that compromised the Fed's ability to regulate the financial industry? Why was Geithner advocating loosening standards for the reserves financial institutions have to hold to insure against potential future losses, as late as 2007? Inherent in the design of the job of New York Fed President was a conflict of interest, as the institution is supposed to be a watchdog over the financial industry, but the President of the NY Fed reports to a board that is comprised of the heads of banks and financial instituitons. These financial leaders also participate in the selection of the new President. Geithner was a quick learner and a listener, who asked questions, but he was an outsider coming from work at AID, the IMF and Treasury. He is described by one bank executive Sanford Weill as "a baby face," and lacked experience in dealing with the financial industry. He was brought in by Rubin and Summers, two mentors at Treasury. These two had close ties to the financial industry, and did not question practices of overleveraging and risk taking in the financial industry. Was it too much to ask of Geithner, under the circumstances, that he would rock the boat and ask the tough questions about risk and leveraging. On the other hand did he miss things completely when he was asking for even looser capital standards for banks in 2007, less than a year before the crisis hit, which were never adopted. And was he too close to the financial industry and aggressive in the wrong sort of way when advocating in a meeting as President of the New York Fed, that the government back up all the debt in the financial system. Did he too casually overlook the conditions that could easily be put in place for the government to be able to recover some of the money put into the bailouts. And was he too close to Goldman Sachs, that he brought Goldman in for advice in the AIG bailout, even though there were conflicts of interest and money that would never be recovered from the $182 billion bailout of AIG, some of which went to banks including Goldman. If Geithner had seen some of the problems in risk taking why had he not supported FDIC's Bair in her opposing view for capital reserves, and government conditions on bailouts that enabled some recovery of capital put into failing financial institutions. And did he get too close to Citi, that at one point Sanford Weill tried to bring him in as CEO even when he was already President of the New York Fed. Does it go to show that -the very idea that this was even possible- the design of the New York Fed with the President reporting to the Board of the very same bank presidents that he was supposed keep in check, makes for an incomprehensible position of regulation at odds with the structure of reporting and selection....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein's thoughts in April 2009, on Treasury's Public-Private Investment Plan. First, he says this plan will only remove $500 billion of impaired assets. The banks he says now own $3 billion of residential mortgages, $1.5 trillion of corporate real-estate loans, and $1 trillion of consumer debt. Not all of this is impaired but the banks will have to sell much more than $500 billion to regain confidence in their solvency. And with one third of all residential mortgages exceeding the value of the houses, and thie many homeowners under water, likely to default, the negative feedback loop of foreclosures begetting falling prices begetting foreclosures, threatens the whole effort to shore up the defences. If no workable solution is executed quickly to prevent this then even larger pools of mortgage debt will be impaired irretrievably. Feldstein suggests that the Obama administration seriously look at his plan suggested in March 2008 to provide government loans at low rates of interest like 1- 2% for 20% of the principal amount of the mortgage and then reduce the mortgage principal by 20%, thus keeping millions of homeowners above water. But this needs to be done quickly. All voluntary efforts have failed and have become asmokescreen for banks and lobbying groups with support from Congress to make it appear that this problem is being addressed. Thirdly Feldstein says that if banks sell these impaired mortgage assets at a loss- say 40-60 cents on the dollar on the upside with government and the FDIC picking up alot of the risk and financing for private investors under the new plan- they will now have to show the loss whereas they could have previously shown these assets at unrealistic price levels but still not taking losses. This might push banks into insolvency, so banks will need more injection of capital by the government to make this possible. What are the risks in this situation? Without an effective plan to prevent the negative feedback loop of foreclosure waves and falling houseprices, the quantity of impaired assets will simply grow larger. In effect even if some private investors take out some of the impaired assets from the banking system, it is possible that a new set of assets equal to or larger than these assets that are taken out are added to impaired assets in the banking system as house prices fall steeply from new foreclosures. That only means the economy is in the same hole as before, or in a slightly larger one, even with all the well intentioned steps. At some point the private enterprise argument has to be seen in the correct light. It is not that there is any argument that private enterprise can function better or far superior, it is only that the banks as private enterprises are in such an enormously stressed situation that the bank executive's cannot execute a way out of this mess. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
From all accounts the lawyers against Musharraf, the opposing factions of Bhutto and Sharif and the Islamist parties alliance distancing itself from Musharraf's campaign against insurgents in the tribal areas and Waziristan, and the army's failure to do much against the militant islamist in the border areas with Afghnaistan present a picture of Pakistan coming apart. The army as a national institution is losing credibility even as the US needs the Pakistani military to continue the fight in the border areas while it is fighting with other Nato forces in Afghaistan's southern provinces. Actually whole areas in the British assigned areas of southern Afghaistan have been given up to militants or provincial leaders with their own forces. In this situation even as the people seem genuninely keen on a new direction their is no unified leadership or organization to hold it together which commands the confidence of large parts of the country and people. And so the US even under pressure to support democracy would simply put its interests in Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan before the interests of the people of Pakistan in finding some genuine solution to the problems. that would give Pakistan a chance to set a new longterm direction different from its past. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Reilly points out why the Credit Suisse and BNP Paribas legal settlements with the Justice Department do not provide the needed deterrent effect or accountability to protect our financial system.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Justice Department files a civil lawsuit accusing S&P and parent company McGraw Hill of giving improper ratings to poor mortgage investments which allowed them to inflate in value, creating the conditions for a crash in these investments when the crisis happened in 2008. The penalty sought by the Justice Department and the attorney generals for 16 states is $5 billion to cover losses to investors such as state pension funds and federally insured banks and credit unions. The civil suit comes 5 years after the onset of the financial crisis of 2008, which created the greatest financial crisis since the 1930's. Negotiations for a settlement were conducted by the Justice Department with McGraw Hill for an extended period of time. The talks broke down in January 2013. In these negotiations the Justice Department sought a penalty of over $1 billion and S&P's acceptance of wrongdoing. S&P countered with a proposed settlement of $100 million. The government pushed for admission of guilt on at least one count of fraud. It is not known why the Justice Department filed this lawsuit 5 years after the crisis when the public's memory of the ratings issue is beginning to fade. Is it because the preparation of the case required this much time, the action not taken because it would be seen as punitive in 2011 when S&P downgraded the U.S. sovereign credit rating, the fragility of the economy in 2011, because of the approaching election in 2012, or some other reason. One of the reasons why it was important to take corrective action early was to preserve the integrity and credibility of financial markets, so critical for public confidence. An additional reason was to secure from credit ratings companies the internal reforms and change in leadership and culture that would prevent recurrence and damage to the economy. An example of this change is the change in leadership and culture underway at Barclays bank in Britain after the investigation into the manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate or LIBOR. The Justice Department action in this respect is an advance from the policy at the S.E.C., which has not insisted that companies involved in the crisis admit wrongdoing, setting up the process for changes in leadership and culture such as the one at Barclays....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
When asked what projects they wanted to see in Helmand province, ordinary Afghans said they wanted the repair of the main sluice gates that lead to the irrigation canals off the Helmand River. These were built with American aid in the 1950's, and its been 30 years since anyone did any work on that canal. See the link to India and irrigation, only 50% of the land is estimated by experts to be irrigated in India. WIthout irrigation, as the uncertain monsoon rains this year showed, India's agricultural heartland in the Punjab and Haryana would collapse. When other Afghans were asked they mentioned security, they did not want to see the Americans in tents, but in some sort of permanent presence. BUt considering the vast and undeveloped landscape of Afghanistan, one sees several differences from Iraq's insurgent dominated priovince near Baghdad. It has mountainous terrain, with no electricity, no roads, no water, totally desolate in most parts of Helmand and other provinces, and it is a vast country with illiterate people tired of war. Would America's 40,000 troops be enough, or would you need more and more. If McChrystal's strategy shown here is to occupy civilan areas and fight the Taliban, and the Taliban with the help of Pakistan's ISI dissident elements are getting more and more sophisticated with roadside bombs, there will be growing casualties. The Americans could hold their own if there was no outpouring of support because of unpopularity of the Afghan government, but throw that into the equation- something McChrystal has not thought through according to Dexter Filkins of the NYT- and things get muddied. And from his training as a Special Operations commander this is a problem McChrystal is not as well prepared to understand or tackle. Consider the implications if Afghanistan is not Iraq- where Shiites and Aytollah Sistani their spiritual leader formed a core of support that the US always had on its side once it supported a democratically elected government- and no core of support here in Afghanistan except an unpopular government. McChrystal may also not have factored in a key factor of the "allergy" of Afghans to foreign boots on the ground. With a largely illiterate police recruits and army recruits, would the idea of transferring the job become delayed and the American boots end up in an untenable position? See the link to Commander Adams and Khost province, where Adams points out its all about visible evidence of progress. For his 250 paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne this meant delivering on roads built in Khost province, and a spring water system for 12,000 villagers. Here Filkins starts with Afghan villagers asking for the repair of the canal leading to the Helmand river which has not been repaired since the 1950's. McChrystal could only say "it takes time." But the US has been in Afghistan for 8 years and as commader Adams says only fighting "one year wars." The other point Adams says is that an effort in Afghanistan only works by befriending the tribes, because its the tribes who will see that IED's are reported and any insurgents in the area are reported, and only they have the capabilities to do it, which no number of American troops can do. These are serious questions that need answers. See the groups for- Commander Adams, and for Dexter Filkins (the article on McChrystal's Long War), which touch on similiar development issues....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Joe Parkinson of the WSJ gives a in-depth account of the emergence of Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey's politics, with contributions by Emre Peker, Ayla Albayrak, Yeliz Candemir. Erdogan grew up in a poor neighborhood of Istanbul, and became the head of a local youth branch of the Islamist National Salvation Party in 1976 after an adolescent period steeped in mosque culture and Islamic ideas. In 1994 he is elected Mayor of Istanbul amid voter discontent with corruption and problems with infrastructure and public services. He served for four years making improvements. After reciting a poem publicly that said "the mosques are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets and faithful our soldiers," he is jailed for 4 months by a military backed secular government in 1999. During this period Erdogan, described by friends from his youth as having a unique ability to adapt to difficult situations, makes a transformation. He moves to the centre, coming out in favor of stronger ties to the EU, and works hard to attract support from the secular and nationalist voters to add to his conservative religious base. In 2003 he is elected prime minister as head of the Justice and Development Party. This begins a period of ten years in which Turkey sees remarkable period of economic growth during which Turkey's GNP nearly quadruples from a little over $200 billion in 2002 to $794.5 billion in 2012, according to the IMF. It may be partly coincidence and partly good management of the economy under Erdogan. Turkey's previous banking and currency crises before 2003 created a better understanding and discipline for managing the economy. Emerging markets such as Brazil, India, China, Russia, Indonesia, and other parts of Asia and Latin America were able to achieve high rates of growth during this 10 year period. Competitiveness in Brazil and Turkey has not improved significantly in this period according to experts, and large capital inflows into Turkey partly supported the credit boom in Turkey. And just as growth is slowing significantly in all emerging markets, Turkey under Erdogan faces a new test. Especially now that Erdogan is seen as autocratic in his effort to suppress protests to build an Ottoman era army barracks in Taksim Square, Istanbul. The fears of secularists in Turkey are that this is the Erdogan of the period in 1999, after serving as Mayor of Istanbul. Just as Turks turned away from the overreaching actions of the military, the public sentiment may be shifting beyond the overreaching actions of the religious parties in Turkish politics. The protests in Brazil against the Rouseff administration after the popularity of the Lula administration, show that slowing economic growth and missteps by the elected government can alienate younger voters. The parties still retain a majority but face an uncertain future in which lower economic growth and missteps lead to a search for alternatives. At the same time Turkey's efforts for accession to the EU are beng put on hold as Germany opposes the actions to suppress protests of the Justice Party in Turkey. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Moodys Analytics forecasts U.S. unemployment at above 7% at the end of 2013. Part of the reason is the aging population effect and older people dropping out of the workforce, and another reason being businesses have to hire to grow as labor costs have already been cut sharply during the lack of hiring in 2009-2011. The problems in housing with foreclosures, the U.S. deficit, and the eurozone economic crisis will continue to affect the U.S. No mention is made of the effects of a slowdown in China and other emerging markets in addition to the slowdown in the eurozone, as these risks appear to be contained for the timebeing according to Moodys Analytics.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT Editorial on June 2, 2009, says the Obama anti-foreclosure plan is woefully inadequate, and can't stop the wave of foreclosures. The administration's foreclosure plan that went into effect in March 2009, offers upto $75 billion in incentives to lenders to reduce loan payments for homeowners facing foreclosure. Lender participation is largely voluntary under the Obama plan, making it weak. Since March about 100,000 homeowners have been offered a modification according to the Treasury Department. This is a small dent in the plan's intent of preventing 4 million foreclosures. And it continues the Bush administration's apathy and lack of effective action to prevent foreclosures. The Mortgage Bankers Association reported that in the first quarter 2009 5.4 million mortgages were delinquent or facing foreclosure. There are 15.4 million "underwater" homeowners, those who have no equity in their homes, and with average person deeply in credit card and other debt, these people have little to fall back on if they lose their jobs or have a medical crisis. The simple arithmetic of these 15.4 and the 5.4 million, adding upto 20.8 million households, shows that anywhere near a fifth of American households are in deep financial trouble. The same numbers, or another fifth of American households, are approaching foreclosure. Drawing concentric circles of these homeowners inside a circle showing all American households, and seeing these concentric circles increasing in size with every quarter of job losses, one can clearly see why this is the biggest problem facing the economy. Job losses in January 598,000, February 681,000, March 699,000, April 539,000, totalling 2.5 million for Jan-April 2009, and 8.9 million working parttime. The underemployment rate at 15.8%. Till this foreclosure situation exacerbated by rising under employment is addressed, the credit easing and the small recovery thats been managed since December 2009, is like a mirage in the desert. A false sense of comfort. The NYT editorial makes the point that the foreclosures prevention efforts focus entirely on reducing monthly payments. Even here it falls short, in not reducing the payments enough, or programs not big enough in scope to address the millions of homeowners needing help. But an even bigger problem remains unaddressed, says the NYT, and this is not reducing the principal. An effective anti- foreclosure plan has to reduce the principal for the 15.4 million homeowners under water. This as Martin Feldstein has argued repeatedly in the oped pages of the WSJ since early 2008- the homeowners under water or approaching that situation have no incentive to hold onto their homes- has to be addressed by government taking responsibility for loan principal reduction in a carefully designed plan requiring participation of lenders. NYT points out that the mortgage industry has resisted taking this approach, and the Obama plan does not emphasize this important part of an effective plan to reduce foreclosures. By opposing this, the banks with the toxic mortgage assets and the government by going along with this, are shooting themselves in the foot. This makes any recovery at best weak, and more likely a false hope lacking fundamental support, foresight and vision....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
There does not appear to be a noticeable shift in gasoline consumption, its gone up by half to one percent compared to 2005, even when gasoline prices are over $3.00 per gallon. This survey and the Pew poll were done about the time of the closing of BP's pipelines from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska.
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A report by two former Census Bureau officials, Gordon Green and John Coder, shows the inflation adjusted median household income in the U.S. declined by 6.7%, to 49,909, between June 2009 and June 2011. From December 2007 to June 2009 household income declined by 3.2%. The forces behind this are the large number of people not working or not looking for work who are outside the labor force, and the hourly pay for workers not keeping up with inflation. Prof Henry Farber at Princeton, says his study shows that people who lost jobs in the recession found work again with an average of 17.5% less income than in their prior jobs. This makes this downturn very different than earlier downturns, and giving credence to the argument "that this time its different." Another statistic from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows why- in the period December 2007 to June 2009 average length of time for a person who lost a job to be unemployed increased from 16.6 weeks to 24.1 weeks, with the same figure up to 40.5 weeks in September 2011. Higher declines for Hispanics and other minorities further increased income inequalities. Coder and Green call the impact a substantial decline in the American standard of living....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Monthly reports are issued on bank lending by the Treasury. The report for February shows business lending is down by 24% in its dollar value from the previous month, and a similiar decline in student, auto and credit card lending. The only increase is in mortgage lending as government efforts to hold down interest rates heave led to a refinancing boom. The two largest lenders Wells Fargo and Bank of America reported a 35% jump in mortgage lending in February over January. Businesses are charged more for loans by Chase, which it says is to reflect increased risks, and Chase has sharply reduced its business lending. This is bad news for the economy, because it means businesses will continue to pull back, and some businesses will layoff employees and others may close for lack of financing. The other link to the report in the WPost about the consumers who have jobs, but are acting flat broke suggests consumption will continue to decline, which puts stresses on businesses as sales revenues for all sorts of products decline across the spectrum of the economy. With less acess to costlier financing, and declining sales, the picture of continued large job losses is being etched, and will continue to be etched as these are becoming things that will not change for a long time. Banks are insolvent or close to being insolvent, so lending is only like to change if the government takesover the banks and puses through lending at attractive rates. But it has to do this quickly, before confidence drops to a level where the demand for loans just isn't there. China is able to push lending through the banks because government controls the banks, this cannot happen in the US unless the government actually steps in to take over the insolvent banks and push through a large lending program. In this sense the Obama program while admirable and helpful to stabilize things a bit, is only part effective, and can never really restore confidence or a serious measure of economic stability because of the three pillars of progress in this situation, it can impact only two directly- foreclosure prevention, and business plus consumer lending. The third consumption is something it can only indirectly control through foreclosure prevention and lending, but which is headed down as Americans convert to a frugal lifestyle. And in these two areas of foreclosure prevention and business lending the government is failing. The fourth pillar of progress in the recovery is employment, and this is also an area the government can only indirectly control through stimulus spending on infrastructure, education and energy, but is largely influenced by foreclosure prevention- which keeps home prices from falling rapidly and overshooting and reduces household wealth- and business/consumer lending. These are ER (f) FPL (CE). Economic Recovery as a function of Foreclosure Prevention and Lending, and Consumption and Employment, where indirect control is shown by ( ). With not much in place for FPL- the only two variables government can directly control if it takes strong and immediate action before its influence on these two variables begins to diminish over time- Obama's inexperience and learning curve and failure to take bold action to get serious results on FPL, may result in admirable demeanor and rhetoric but medicore results and a struggling economy for years to come. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
BHP Billiton was known as Broken Hill Proprietary in the 1990's. The largest Australian mining company, it was based in Melbourne and simply known as the Big Australian. It had huge losses in that period - $3 billion in 1998-1999. The turnaround at BHP Billiton comes as a remarkable turnaround for the whole mining sector. BHP made $6.5 billion in profit in the year ending June 2005. Its not just rising Chinese demand that has made this possible. Billiton has taken steps to avoid past boom bust cycles in mining by taking a conservative approach to investing in new mines that might create an oversupply in the market. The company is run buy a banker. CEO Charles Goodyear avoids taking on large risky projects and has announced plans to return $2 billion to shareholders in stock buybacks. Even with this discipline compared to the past, some mining analysts believe the boom bust cycle will occur over time. HP has $10 billion worth of projects in different stages of development. One advantage the mining companies enjoy is the concentration of mining in a few companies- BHP, Rio Tinto, Xstrata PLC. This makes it possible to price aggressively for the nickel, copper, iron ore, and other metals. A 72% price increase was negotiated with steelmakers in 2005. Another part of the transformation is the use of risk-analysis tools. BHP uses "Monte Carlo analysis" to check all potential outcomes once a range of parameters- commodity prices, currency vales, interest rate scenarios- are entered that affect financial performance of a new mine or a new investment. Goodyear came in as CFO under a new team led by Paul Anderson, a former executive of Duke Energy Corporation, after the huge losses in failed copper mining investments in the late 1990's. Even with the recent success and the careful investing discipline there is a sense that things could change quickly if rising demand slows in China and other developing countries. And in that situation this discipline may prove insufficient and the models may only be good as the assumptions and information entered....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Proposals by economists Rajan, Stein and Kashyap on financial catastrophe insurance, and bonuses held in escrow, as corrective measures after learning from the 2008 global financial crisis.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Note that Goldman Sach's analysts who first predicted that oil prices could reach $100 are now predicting that the downward momentum is building up. The prediction from them now is that prices may go up further than the $96 right now but should drop to $80 by April. Its not too difficult to see why. First on the supply side the momentum for downward shift is not so significant but still there are signs. The Iraqi oil flow disruption either from a Turkish invasion of norther Iraq or from internal disruption is shrinking as the Turks see this as a small operation at most, and the Iraqi law and order situation is improving. The Iranian situation may be stabilizing without US intervention possibilities shrinking. On the supply side the oil majors except for Total see their output shrinking somewhat, and OPEC has not increased supplies significantly as oil inventories have not built up as they do before winter. But overall the supply situation is stable. On the demand side is where the significant downward momentum exists. With the US economy slowing down amid the buildup of the housing tumble and the credit crunch which looks to get worse in 2008 before stabilizing in 2009 and a stronger euro and other factors affecting Europe's expansion oil consumption by industry in the industrialized countries is slowing. Much of the pressure on oil prices comes from increases in demand each year from China and India. Here gasoline is subsidized by the government and this reduces incenive for conservation. The policy of letting market prices be reflected at the pump to a limited degree so as not to seriously affect people is now taking hold in these countries. In China prices were raised 10% and there is likely to be further increase in the near future. This along with the increasing awarenes of the dependence on foreign oil and the need for conservation in both China and India should build pressures in both countries to make the best use of resoures and have users share some of the burden of higher prices. The American and European gasoline market is driven by a public that has not been too conscious of conservation especially in America. It appears that high oil prices have not encouraged conservation, witness that with rebates for higher oil prices and zero interest rates financing large pickups are still selling at levels of 2005, and there has not been a significant reduction in consumption at the pump. What may shift this equation now is probably government mandated fuel economy standards. Europe already has new standards and the automakers there are racing to meet it with new technologies, in America its now almost certain that public sentiment and congressional sentiment is likely to lead to similiar standards or at least significantly improved standard. Public sentiment is already pushing the automakers in the USA to introduce new models with higher fuel economy and use this as a n advertising and competitive edge. This reduction in gasoline consumption at the pump through new technologies in the industrialized countries and through price increases being allowed to flow through in the developing countries of China and India in a stable supply environment where the downward political risks are stable may be the pivotal turning point for the price of oil. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Lack of meaningful reform of credit rating agencies by 2014, 6 years after the 2008 financial crisis.

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