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.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bond investors are looking to Japan for clues after the U.S. credit downgrade and two years of zero interest rates. William O'Donnell, chief Treasurys strategist at RBS Securities sees similiarities with what happened in Japan- short term rates near zero and long term rates headed down. strategists see the U.S. 10 year Treasury note dropping to less than 2%, from 2.23% today. Japan's 10 year Treasury note yields 1.05%. O'Donnell's forecast is for 10 year rates to be at 1.70% by mid-2012.
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Harold Meyerson compares the continuing inhumanity of separating parents from children that president Obama has to face with the choice presented to Lt. Colonel Jager at the Berlin Wall in 1989. Jager decided to let both parents visiting West Germany to return to East Germany to their children, even though the father had a stamp on his passport banning a return. He says the Republican control of Congress could last till 2023 by which time current law would have separated millions of parents and children. In 2012 about 13% of schoolchildren in California and Texas had an undocumented immigrant as a parent, according to the Pew Research Center. And for the last 6 years of the Obama administration deportations have reached 400,000 a year, leading to a lot of broken families.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

The way ahead

The Economist Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Frederick Harris of Columbia University says there is a price to be paid for a black president and it may just be too much for the average black person. There is a difference betwen symbols and substance, betwen a role model and accountability in a representative democracy, which is sadly lacking when the black elites, clergy and politicians fail to debate the issues about the problems facing the black community. Problems related to the increasing poverty among black Americans, and the 14% unemployment for black people. There is he says a strange reticience among the black elite to hold the president accountable on these issues just as they would have done for any Democratic president, even one who was as popular with blacks as Mr. Clinton. He says the experience with Obama is not even remotely comparable to the transformative nature of the work of Rev. Martin Luther King in the black community. It may stem from Obama's multiracial background, growing up in many countries, his elite education and being part of a liberal elite more than of the black community. The price is too high in economic and social terms for the poor or average black person and it has created a divide between the average black person and the black elite, with different concerns and different priorities. Harris points out that poor and poverty are words not mentioned often by Obama. Related to this is the foreclosure crisis in which ordinary black people were hardest hit with no effective help from the president to homeowners badly needing relief. Sheila Bair of the FDIC and Martin Feldstein advocated aggressive help for homeowners under water which did not come from the president. Showing not just the limits of a black presidency, but false hopes, inexperience and lack of leadership in issues that mattered to all Americans in the housing and foreclosure crisis. A populist from Kansas, as Sheila Bair describes herself, had the right instincts and courage of convictions which the president lacked and the entire country needed....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Wessel says the U.S. is in a liquidity trap. He says the 500 point drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Averages was a less significant event than the decision by the Bank of New York Mellon to charge clients for keeping large amounts of cash. In a liquidity trap investors are indifferent between keeping their money in cash or in investments providing a return, because interest rates are so low. Today the S&P 500 have in total an estimated $963 billion in cash. The solutions for gettting out of a liquidity trap include government stimulus spending, devaluing the currrency, and generating inflation that could make it easier to reduce government debt. The stimulus approach was adopted in the first 2 years of the Obama administration and there are now increasing pressures to reduce the U.S. deficit. Because of the role of the U.S. dollar as an international currrency and large sovereign holdings of U.S. currency, an outright devaluation of the dollar has not been considered an option. At the same time the weakening of the U.S. currency has helped exports and is encouraged by the Fed and the U.S. government. In a sense all three options are being tried in different degrees and ways. The stimulus was the early response till the deficit concerns began to increase and require attention, the efforts to lower the value of the dollar to increase exports is underway, and the rounds of quantitative easing by the Fed were intended to produce inflation (and avert deflation). All with limited success....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Indifference on the Republican side, and a sense that not much is going to get done on the Democratic side, as President Obama pitches a $447 billion second stimulus plan in a speech to both houses of the U.S. Congress on September 8, 2011. Dana Milbank documents the attitudes and skepticism with which members of Congress received the proposals- a general sense that President Obama was too weak and ineffective to get things done and has lost credibility. John Taylor, senior economic advisor on the Republican side pointed out in a Wall Street Journal column a few days before the speech, that the jobs proposals Obama and economic advisor Alan Krueger were presenting were similiar to old plans that have not produced results. Taylor viewed them as placing too much reliance on government and not enough on the private sector to generate economic growth and jobs.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT editorial describes the failure of president Obama's immigration policy and the deportation of large numbers of illegal immigrants. It says Obama has deported more immigrants faster than any other U.S. president. And it says president Obama has used even the statement that he would look for ways to make the process "more humane" a delaying action. It says that after some 2 million deportations the whole situation is infuriating.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Economist Paul Krugman points out the risks of a trade war in the tariffs announced for steel and aluminium by president Trump. Yet he accepts that he advocated stronger action on China's currency in 2009-2010 when the U.S. economy was weaker. In the past on the TPP agreement proposed by president Obama, Krugman said that it would have an insignificant impact as most of the gains on trade were already made. Here Krugman is critical of the language used by president Trump about trade wars being "easy."  This is taken out of context though as president Trump is saying that it is easy in the context of a country enjoying a $100 billion surplus with the U.S., because that country is going to have incentives to maintain a good trading relationship with the U.S. Essentially this means that the steel industry in the U.S. benefits. China also benefits as it closes many of the older steel plants that led to overproduction. This would reduce overcapacity in China's steel industry, a problem China's economic planners see as a priority. China already is making the shift to higher technology products and this process will be accelerated, as it puts less emphasis on steel and metals as it did in its earlier stage of development. As a result contrary to textbook economics this has the potential to be a win-win solution for the U.S. and China in the long run. So little was done under the Bush and Obama administrations to manage trading relationships with other countries so that the interests of small communities across the U.S. were protected from unfair trade- that Reagan administration trade expert Robert Lighthizer took up the cause of the U.S.,workers in these communities. Surveys showed U.S. public opinion also had shifted among educated, professionals and middle class on this issue by 2015, against unfair trade that hurt U.S. interests. Robert Lighthizer is now the Trade Representative for the U.S. in the Trump administration. Reports in the WSJ about the discussion within the Trump economic council, show Gary Cohn favored not imposing the tariffs on steel and aluminum. Lighthizer advocated the tariffs and was able to convince the president.  For Trump this presents a win-win situation, as a mild response by China -and other trading nations that have enjoyed a favorable situation in the past -with its huge surplus and favorable trading relationship with the U.S. would present a win for the president. Economist Krugman accepts this when he says tariffs in the current context of the trading field- that is more favorable to other countries- are not such a big deal, only the use of such policy that is likely to endanger world trade.  As in much of the debate that takes place this adds to the headlines today yet provides delayed and limited relief to communities across the U.S. devastated by world trade as documented by experts who studied trade patterns and their effect on regions across the U.S.  As the WSJ points out in one report the trade deficit itself may continue to grow under president Trump because of other factors. The U.S. dollar surged 8% during the last 2 years of the Obama administration with the economic recovery underway. With Trump's election win the dollar surged another 3%. This may play a bigger role in the direction of the trade deficit than the new steel tariffs announced by president Trump. Workers and unions matter. As TPP pushed by Democratic party president Obama was opposed by the unions, and by the auto industry (workers and auto companies) in the midwestern states which suffered a hollowing out in the last decade. A WSJ survey after the election showed Clinton received 56% support from union workers in 2018 compared to 65% for president Obama in the 2012 election. Some of that erosion in support may come from Obama's TPP stand fervently opposed by the unions and workers in the auto industry. A similar situation took place in Ontario with hollowing out of the auto industry in this large industrial state in Canada and led to the rejection of the Conservative government and election of the Liberal Party under Justin Trudeau. This lesson is so far lost in the Democratic Party's debate.     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Democratic Party U.S. presidential candidate Bernie Sanders tells a Georgetown University audience that Muslim nations should bear the biggest share of the burden of fighting Islamic State. He cites reports Qatar was spending $200 billion to host the Soccer World Cup in 2022 but providing little to bear the cost of fighting extremism in the Muslim world. Sanders says his focus in running is not on pursuing "reckless adventures abroad, but to rebuild America's strength at home." This contrasted with remarks by Hillary Clinton in New York the same day calling for the U.S. to lead the fight to defeat the the Islamic State terror network after Paris attacks in Nov. 2015, and putting forward a position that contrasts with that of the Obama administration.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mortimer Zuckerman of U.S. News and World Report magazine expresses his disappointment at the Obama administration's performance. He points to a "competency crisis" of the Obama administration and the President. On the Simpson-Bowles Commission's recommendations and President Obama's complete silence on its proposals, Zuckerman like other observers expresses strong disappointment. He says that he and other early supporters are no longer excited by the novelty of his candidacy and his presidency. Obama's single minded focus on getting re-elected is disturbing for Zuckerman.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ajami cites his own memories of Egypt's Gamal Abdul Nasser, who had a way with crowds and rhetoric in the Arab world, as giving him an insight into the way Barack Obama found his way into the American imagination as a popular leader in 2008. He points out that the coalition of black people who put their faith in him as one of their own, of white educated professionals who liked his cool image, of Hispanics who had hope for better immigration policies, and working class Americans who set aside reservations of elitism to give their support, was put together on the basis of hope and charisma and the uncanny ability of Obama to let himself be seen as all things to all people. Because of the way it was put together it was bound to come apart, particularly for a candidate without enough experience, says Ajami. The aloofness of the president, reliance on Congressional leaders Reid and Pelosi, and relying on a very small circle of advisors whose eyes were focussed on reelection, made this more so. He cites as one example, the controversial decision on Syria's chemical weapons made on a walk with chief of staff Dennis McDonough. Ajami gives a picture of how Obama may be seen from the outside, especially in the Arab and Muslim world- from Turkey and Egypt to Saudi Arabia- a sense of illusions. A European and particularly a German perspective also may have similiar sense of illusions about having gone for the ride and believing the image put out by image handlers. The lack of sensitivity to German sentiments about the tapping of chancellor Merkel's mobile phone- herself a former East German resident of the Soviet backed GDR- bringing this out. A similiar sense seems to have taken hold in Brazil, after Brazilian president Rousseff cancelled a trip because of lack of sensitivity to the tapping of her phone, as she is a survivor of brutal dictatorships in Brazil. This is ironically a full circle, as happens in these situations of euphoria encouraged by politicians inevitably followed by disillusionment, because Turkey, Germany and Brazil were some of the countries where enthusiasm for the new president was highest. More so because president Lula of Brazil, Merkel of Germany,and Erdogan of Turkey were leaders Obama seemed to relate to the most. This acts as a cautionary note for the future....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Similiarities with Japan are in the exploding monetary base growth by the Fed, just as bank lending is dropping. And as in post bubble Japan of the 1990's, all of the behaviour says Wood invites legitimate comparisons with Japan. The government has lent, spent or guaranteed about $11 trillion to the financial sector broadly defined, because of letting financial institutions remain "too big to fail," whether Fannie Mae, AIG or Citigroup. None of them have been broken up. And this is similiar to the lack of bank cleanup in Japan with regulatory forbearance for years after the bubble. He thinks there is evidence that America is already in a Japanese style "liquidity trap."
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The comparison of the British economy and the American economy with Japan, where debt constantly eats away at the economy, a long period of stagnation, is one possible outcome, says Buttonwood in the Economist. Central banks in both countries are allowing the banks to earn more money to replenish their capital, by letting them borrow short term at very low rates and invest the proceeds in higher yielding longer dated government bonds. Its acozy relationship where the banks are rescued by the government and they in turn finance the government by buying government bonds, but in the long run this means diverting lending from productive private sector projects and productive investment.
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. ...
WSJ Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin of NYT provides some counter intuitive ideas on U.S. Fed interest rate policy. He says it can't be take as a given that the Fed will raise rates in 2017-2018. This depends on how much punch there is in the Trump economic policies for stimulus, and for infrastructure spending, tax cuts. He cites Senate Majority Leader McConnell who said he would like to keep "tax reform revenue neutral." Getting large spending and pushing up the deficit is likely to run up against Republicans in Congress who have for 8 years opposed large spending increases and large deficits. Trump has given few details about his stimulus or infrastructure spending plans. He says the scale of the spending might not match the talk. Irwin cites JP Morgan Chase economists who have kept their forecasts for GDP growth just under 2% for 2017 and 2018. And he points out that even Trump appointees at the Fed might act independently. The Fed might look at being cautious considering that increased trade tensions with China, and the unpredictability of a Trump administration could hurt growth. Irwin does not mention the uncertainty in other areas such as policy towards Russia on which the Republican party and Congress have very different views than Trump, tensions over Taiwan, that can also affect growth. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Binyamin Applebaum cites different experts on how U.S. Fed policy could play out in 2017-2019. He cites Fed governor Dudley that there is increased uncertainty under the Trump administration, and other economists who say that aging population, lack of innovation, and steady growth under the Obama administration with falling unemployment, make it unlikely that growth will jump well above 2%. The Fed's own forecasts are for for under 2% growth in 2017 and 2018, and Applebaum says this is not expected to change by much. Janet Yellen does not see a huge stimulus as a positive, says Applebaum, because it would increase the deficit at the wrong time. He cites Yellen who prefers to see more fiscal space now that unemployment is down to 4.6%. Steady growth in the view of Fed officials has taken up much of the backlog of people looking for work since the 2008 crisis. Yellen sees some fiscal space as desirable with high debt to GDP ratio at 77 percent, so that the government could respond to some adverse event in the future. A Republican Congress is also averse to sudden increases in the deficit. See the link to views about the uncertainty of how things can play out in a separate article by Neil Irwin of NYT. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hillary Clinton returns on September 15, 2016, to the campaign trail after 3 days of rest to recover from pneumonia. She chose to speak at the University of North Carolina in Greensboro, with N. Carolina  now considered a state that is winnable, and with a new focus on young people on campuses where she wants to regain her once large lead in the summer. She said that the break had given her time to reflect on what it is she represents. "The campaign trail doesn't really encourage reflection and its important to sit with your thoughts every now and then. It helped me reconnect with what this campaign is all about." Adding that it was about quality health care, financial security, clean water and other critical needs of people.

New York Times 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