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 ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In his State of the Union speech president Trump was off on some points such as how many jobs were created, how good the economy is, and on on safety of cities El Paso and San Diego after border walls and fencing, according to the WSJ. El Paso was the second safest city of twenty similar sized cities in the U.S. before the border wall with Mexico, and continued to be that way after the wall was built over that section. San Diego has seen 91% drop in border apprehensions over a decade after fencing the border but this has not meant a discernible impact on people crossing illegally.  Mr. Trump was right that customs duties increased by $13 billion in the third quarter of 2018 after placing tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese goods. Wages are growing faster for manufacturing and construction workers than service occupations, as Trump claimed. On the growth of the economy the economy GDP grew by 3.5% in 2018 before slowing down by the end of the year. India and China's growth in GDP is much faster. Growth in jobs was at the pace in the first 2 years of the Trump administration in some 2 year periods of the Obama administration, and much faster in manufacturing in the 1990's, says the WSJ.   ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
DW.com's Becker looks at how much an iPhone would cost if made in the USA. Jason Dedrick of Syracuse University says it would add $20-$30 if final assembly was done in the U.S.. If components and parts were also made in the U.S. this would go up to $80-$90. Other factors are that the production clusters set up by Foxconn have taken three decades to set up and would take time to replicate. President Trump has said Apple should make the iPhones in the U.S. to create jobs. As Foxconn is rapidly adding robots and automation the number of jobs are shrinking in the production process.

The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. vice presidential debate between Mike Spence and Tim Kaine showed Kaine focussing attention on Trump's crude attacks on women, praise for Russian president Putin, and opposition to the minimum wage. Spence's tone was measured and his focus was on deflecting the attacks on the crude language used by Trump in the campaign by saying Trump was "not a polished professional politician," like the others, and not responding to the Kaine references to Trump. Spence stuck to issues about immigration open borders, abortion, president Obama's inaction in Syria, the plight of workers in Scranton, Pennsylvania. He did not respond to repeated questions on Trump's failure to disclose his tax returns and his business failures leading to close to a billion dollars in losses and not having paid taxes for 18 years, as disclosed by the New York Times. Spence had to choose between hurting his own chances for reelection with the traditional Republican voters alienated by Trump and standing up for Trump's crude language against women and minorities. He deftly tried to the best using his skills as a radio broadcaster. Kaine who is usually more measured and thoughtful, had to choose between his traditional style of speaking and the role he was expected to play bringing to the public's attention the crude language and style of the Trump campaign and the instability reflected in it. He used his skills as a litigator to ask repeated questions on Trump, especially on the taxes, which leads to questions about funding infrastructure development and jobs without the wealthy paying their share of taxes. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With 22 million people in the U.S. on unemployment benefits and the economy severely affected by coronavirus, president Trump suspended all immigration to the U.S. This will protect American jobs during the recovery.

Pew Research Center Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How seriously are the Border Crossing encounters with migrants being taken by the Biden administration compared to the Trump administration, or earlier administrations Republican and Democrats. Pew Research Center provides these 7 charts and other data. In 2021 border crossing encounters with migrants were shown as 1.6 million. Of this 27% were repeat crossings a number much lower in previous years. It had fallen to just 400,000 in 2020 as the policy of expulsion put in place by the Trump administration was continued by the Biden administration. In 2019 the border crossing encounters with migrants after three years of the Border Wall construction under president Trump were 851,000. The Biden adminstration in 2021 had 52% expulsions compared to Trump administration 66% in April 2020 after invoking public health Title 42 which Biden continued. About 33% said the Trump administration was doing a good or somewhat good job in 2019 compared to 29% for Biden in 2021. But a much lower percentage of Republicans were saying Trump was doing a bad job than the 56% of Democrats saying that for Biden today. The previous surge in 2021 was mainly from Guatemala and Central America. The current surge is from about 400,000 migrants from Venezuela where expulsion does not work as well because the US has cut off relations with the government of Mr. Maduro in Venezuela, There are 7.1 million refugees from that country in Latin America. The Trump administration would have faced similar problems with the Venezuelan surge that the Biden administration is facing. The largest jump in 2021 is in Yuma Arizona 12 fold, two fold in Tucson and San Diego, three fold in El Paso, the Del Rio and Rio Grande up 5 times.    ...
The Times of India Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump says he will wear a mask on a visit to soldiers at Army's Walter Reed Hospital. Trump says its "a very appropriate thing. I have no problem with a mask." As cases hit 3 million in the U.S., close to 1 million in India and Russia, Mr. Trump joins the movement for masks worldwide. Early on Mr. Trump  took up the issue of transmission from Wuhan by banning flights from China, failed to get WHO and China to respond quickly to the pandemic requests from U.S. by providing information and allowing a team to visit Wuhan quickly in January. A stumbling block appeared within the health ministry in the U.S. with poor leadership which Trump had to overcome by relying on Vice President Pence to lead the stop coronavirus team at the White House.   Trump's reopening decision came under criticism and he says he had to balance the damage to jobs and economic well being that also affected health. Some of the states and young people responded in ways that led to public gatherings that have led to surges in the south and the western states such as Calfornia. The WSJ reported that in Los Angeles County on June 20 half a million people went to bars after they reopened, showing that culturally even counties in states like California lacked what is accepted good sense. For instance Tokyo bars were paid by the Japanese government not to reopen, according to one report. By wearing a mask Trump is simply acknowledging facts about transmission - a German study shows 40% reduction in cases with face coverings. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Senators in the US Congress, Rubio and Schumer, have asked the US government to look into Apple's plans to work with Chinese semiconductor company YMTC. As a result the Commerce Department has placed export restrictions on YMTC. This NYT report looks at the two decade long rise of China and of Apple after Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997 and shifted manufacturing to China. When Jobs returned to Apple he found major quality issues at Apple's manufacturing facilities, a demoralized workforce, and financial losses, with CEO Michael Spindler running the company into the ground. Jobs had to start with afresh model for Apple and decided to shift manufacturing to China under the engineering leadership of Tim Cook. Alabama native Cook went to Auburn University for his engineering degree and Duke for his business degree. Cook joined Jobs in 1998 at Apple and for ten years till 2007 the two cut costs, shifted to contract manufacturers and rebuilt Apple with new products, iPod, iPad and the iphone. By not manufacturing Apple avoided quality control issues, and the costs of maintaining inventory. It was Tim Cook who ran operations worldwide, and he gradually built up the manufacturing relationships in China with Foxconn, which makes most of Apple's products in sprawling Chinese factories that employ 20 years later about 3 million Chinese workers. Foxconn was chosen by Apple in 2000 to manufacture the Apple Mac laptop. Before that it was a parts supplier to Apple. Increasingly Apple relied on Foxconn to make its new products including the iPhone. Both companies growth relied on the manufacturing of Foxconn to the point where Apple was dependent on Foxconn and had intertwined its operations with Foxconn in China. Today the whole relationship is being called into question after two decades in which American workers suffered the effects of the outshoring of manufacturing jobs. It should be noted that though Mr. Trump raised the issue of manufacturing exclusively in China with Apple, the Trump administration did little to change the practices of the company that pioneered this type of massive manufacturing role for China. That surrendered the entire supply chain to foreign suppliers in the interest of cutting costs and maintaining huge profit margins, with which it financed an array of new products and reached $1 trillion in sales from $10 billion, hundredfold increase over 2 decades. American workers and families for the first time in American history got very little from this Cook-Jobs project. American infrastructure in communities that would have been supported by American factories including the services and infrastructure in communities financed through local taxes, a practice throughout the Industrial Revolution in the US, was sharply disrupted over 2 decades. It caused a rupture in social relations and increased inequality in the US, and defunded infrastructure that comes with manufacturing.  It is the task of the Biden administration to now correct what Mr. Trump simply talked about but never induced or required Apple to do- lead the resurgence of American manufacturing, and make its major investments in the US, invest in its workers and families, invest in America. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In the third and final debate of the 2016 U.S. presidential election Hillary Clinton shows she has mastered the techniques used by Trump to use short jabs and comments to unsettle her opponent, yet doing it in a meaningful way to make a point about how she is better qualified and her program helps the middle and working class.

On taxes she added to her plan about not increasing taxes for people making more than $250,000, with the comment that it would increase her and Trump's taxes provided she said Trump hasn't "figured out how to get out of it." It also was meant to draw Trump's response about not revealing his tax returns and plans to give hugely disproportionate tax cuts to higher income people. Trump called her "a nasty women," in response, which was a point cited by media reports as a negative for women voters.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China build its solar industry with huge subsidies, the US did not. From 2018 to 2022 the US solar industry suffered with lack of help from the US government under the Trump administration and the first year of the Biden administration. 30 US based solar companies shutdown in a bloodbath and many jobs were lost. Enter the climate law in 2022 under president Biden and in 2023 the US investment in solar reached $8 billion, three times what it was in the previous 6 years. 

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Nathaniel Taplin of the WSJ says the tariffs put on $50 billion high tech products by the U.S. and retaliatory tariffs on $50 billion products are not about a trade war but a way both countries will negotiate setting out their two positions.  A look at the role of foreign firms in China shows China has access to new technology using these firms as a conduit and these firms are also generating more jobs, being highly productive. These firms Taplin says will set back their investments if no agreement is reached or if it is harder to bring Chinese made products into the U.S. At this time China badly needs this investment and technology access because of their dynamism compared to inefficient state run firms as it struggles under a massive debt load with very high debt to GDP ratio.  A major issue is job growth as companies getting foreign investment are much more effective in jobs generation, delivering 10% of all urban job growth from 2007 to 2016, using just 5.5% of total investment. Return on assets at 9% compares to 4% at state run firms. If this dynamism is reduced or affected in some way China could have to provide more unproductive debt buildup stimulus.  For these reasons China has good reason to make concessions, says Taplin. Trump administration will ask for greater semiconductor purchases, much looser joint venture or foreign ownership requirements, higher Chinese payment for U.S. intellectual property. For all these reasons this is not about a trade war but about serious negotiations taking place so that there is a level playing field in the next phase of competition in high tech between the U.S., China and the E.U. changing the dynamics of the trade relationship in ways that reverse the trends of the past. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ of August 24 has flaws in that no questions were asked on wages and benefits for workers and climate change. About 73% of voters see Mr. Biden's age as a factor. Voters have not grasped Biden's vision for America. A Trump 10% margin for vision and record of accomplishments is unusual considering it is Mr. Biden who is making the changes on climate change, wages and income, infrastructure building with trillions of dollars of funding. The poll itself has issues because it was done by a Republican poster who is working for the Trump campaign and does not have questions on climate change or wages and benefits of workers. President Biden does well on infrastructure, on jobs, and the effects of inflation are being tackled by increase in wages and benefits supported by Biden.

The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Donald Trump, has consistently tried to capitalize on the changing demographics and economic conditions in the country during the primaries by embracing a neglected white working class on issues such as trade, wages and jobs. He now has taken on the issue of law and order. In his acceptance speech Trump once again used a canny ability to sense the public mood, in the summer following the Orlando shootings, the Nice attacks, and the Baton Rouge police shootings, by calling himself "the law and order candidate in this race for the White House." He touched on the police shootings and terrorism by making the centrepiece of his speech- "Our convention occurs at a moment of crisis for our nation. The attacks on our police, and the terrorism in our cities, threaten our way of life."  The speech ended by Trump saying "I am your voice." By embracing the major issues in a way a skilled politician would do using his years of experience on the Apprentice television show with catchy slogans and phrases; long before the other candidates had caught on, and using the language of ordinary people, on trade, wages, jobs, terrorism, Trump has galvanized this portion of voters. He also made an appeal to Bernie Sanders voters. The distance between working class voters and other candidates who feel neglected on issues of wages and jobs, and are also most open to issues of law and order and terrorism, was the story of the Republican primaries. Whether this carries over to the broader electorate- as less than 20% of the eligible voters in the Republican primaries voted to give Trump wins in the primaries- and how well Hillary Clinton has held onto traditionally Democratic white working class voters that Trump is appealing to, will affect the 2016 elections. As this piece in the Guardian points out Trump has it well on touching on all the right buttons for which he has a canny ability, but will the American voters look for more in terms of experience and other factors, and Hillary's own fighting spirit, may affect this unusual election.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mr. Trump has decisively changed the Republican party. Most Republicans support Mr. Trump personally, less the Republican party. Mr. Lindsey Graham, a senator from South Carolina, says of the Republican party before Trump that it had become a bit staid, that we looked like the banker next door who may foreclose on your house. Mr. Romney epitomized that in his view. Gone are the views on deficits, on wars, and on imports and transfer of technology to China as being acceptable.  Five years from 2015 when Mr. Trump came into prominence with his new style taking on the establishments of both parties with a fierce disdain for convention, both the Bushes and the Obamas and Clintons, the Republican party is completely transformed. Registered Republicans are now 60% non college educated in 2020 compared to 50% non college educated in 2016. The Trump policies on trade putting American workers first and America first have a resounding popularity with this audience- this should be no surprise after decades of job losses and factories shipped overseas under the previous administrations for 2 decades. Most of these workers are not college educated and are white and had enjoyed a good standard of living with a high school education in American factories till the shift of American manufacturing to China destroyed good paying jobs and impoverished the American working class.  Only 30% of college educated people are registered Republicans in 2020 compared to 40% in 2016. Overwhelmingly about 90% of registered Republicans are white.  They are majority male and older but there is a significant about 40% female and 40% young population under 40 years of age. This might resemble the party put together by Missouri Congressman Harry Truman as he led the Democratic Party in 1948 with a majority of non college educated Democrats, fighting for American workers and America first in the cold war with Russia. Truman also had a rough Missouri farm language and accent comparable to Mr. Trump's rough style and language disdainful of the old establishment and new tech establishment. Both were heavily disliked by the media and both did not let this bother them in any way. Both liked facing large crowds as Truman showed in campaigning by train across the country and Trump has shown in campaign rallies run in his own way. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The view from Germany on Trump's economic plan and the need for changes by his advisors. DW.com's Wenkel says Trump needs to understand that 80% of job losses in recent years have come from not from globalization, but automation and higher productivity, rationalization. He says higher tariffs on Mexico could backfire.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Seib of the WSJ compares the Reagan election in 1980 with Trump's bid in 2016. He finds the idea of an outsider when the public mood was for change favoring Trump, but says the comparison with Reagan falls short because Reagan had behind him 8 years as governor of the largest state in the country, and a bid for the nomination 4 years earlier. He also had personal positive approval ratings of about 70 percent compared to 27 percent for Trump.  Reagan's first trp after the convention in 1980 was to Alabama to win the support of George Wallace people in the Deep South. His focus was on reuniting all parts of the Republican Party something absent in 2016. Seib's comment about Trump being stronger on the economy is not clear. With the economy recovering, and slowing down as the presidential election approaches amid increasing uncertainty, it is possible that voters would not want to risk abrupt and sudden changes with an untested candidate. Working class voters could still see some of their concerns for change addressed by the Bernie Sanders part of the Democratic platform with help in college tution, addressing wage concerns, and opposing export of jobs, when Trump's program gives few specifics. Another difference between Reagan and Trump is that Reagan had put together an economic team under Shultz which was able to win credibility with an actual plan to implement in the first 100 days. ...
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
The sense of conflict in China and US relations may not have developed in the shaping of Xi Jinping's thinking till the emergence of Mr. Trump. Jinping comes into the China shaped by Deng and Zemin after the collapse of the purely Communist experiment with modernization without access to western technologies and capital, and the experiment with American help. It is only after the realization that the Communist party had lost its sense of purpose in these years leading to the Bo Xilai episode, and the rhetoric of Mr. Trump against China, that the idea of first friction and then conflict emerged. The initial idea for Jinping before Trump was that this has worked for China- the experiment with the cooperation of the US in modernizing China. Trump's rhetoric and the Republican party's rhetoric about China stealing American jobs and technology after 2015 may have been targeted to win the election but it had an unintended effect after the tariffs of shaping Jinping's thinking about the future for China. Between the Bo Xi Lai episode in 2012 when it appeared he would be attempting to manipulate the Communist party's direction in unknown and unpredictable ways, Bo's trial in 2013 and the anticorruption campaign and the 2015 election campaign of Mr. Trump in the US, there must have been much soul searching in the party that shaped Jinping's thinking about the future for China after all the tumult of the 20th century starting with the Boxer rebellion in 1901. Stability is highly prized in China particularly for modernization. This perspective is important to grasp for world peace to be preserved with different coexisting perspectives about the world based on national as well as shared interests in issues such as climate change. US after its own disastrous experiment with capitalism that led to widening inequality of the kind not seen since Lincoln in the 1850's, the 2009 crisis, and the shift of jobs to China under a purely capitalist idea of how economies should function, had its own national interests in jobs, local manufacturing and Made in the USA. Once this process was underway after 2016 and grasped by president Biden after 2020, and supply chain reconstruction made the goal after covid, the US and China were on divergent economic and political paths.   That rethinking by Xi Jinping is not over as it may still be going on. The war in Ukraine may even convince Jinping and China's No. 2 leader Li Keqiang who studied the US constitution and American urbanization under mentors when he was in college, that Russia's prolongation of the war in Ukraine does not serve the interests of China. That risking relations with the European Union as Russia prolongs the war and finds itself in the complex problems of  a war it started, is not in China's interests in setting its own course for the future. ...
CNN Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Experts say about 110,000 votes separate Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the three states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania that decided the 2016 presidential election in the U.S. giving Trump the win. Post election reflection in the Democratic party points to a disconnect between the establishment in both parties and the white working class. It is described as something that was not thought enough about even though as pointed out in Lyrarc, and in The Washington Post by columnists, and in news coverage about the inequality movement long before Bernie Sanders appeared in 2015. In the period when banks were favored over millions of homeowners facing foreclosure in 2010-2014, the surging stock market and the zero to to half percent interest on savings that hurt savings of most of the working class and lower middle class without stock investments, and the continuing problems in communities facing job losses from trade for the third decade. The hollowing out of the regions in Ontario from job losses from the Canadian industry helped Justin Trudeau win the Canadian election. In this election it helped Trump in crucial midwestern states, combined with a degree of indifference shown by establishment Democrats. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean is planning to run for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Bernie Sanders says he backs Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison to be the next chair of the DNC. Jeff Weaver, campaign manager for Sanders, says the problem lies in what has been clear for some time now "that the centrist wing of the democratic party has no standing with working class and middle class  voters in this country." In 2016 only 51% of union households supported Clinton the lowest since 1980, 43% supported Trump. Obama won 59% of union households in 2008 and 58% in 2012 to 40% for Republican Romney. Trump picked up 3% of union households, Clinton lost 7% of union households, creating about a 10 point gap that would be magnified in industrial states where union jobs are concentrated, for about 18% of the people who voted in the election, enough to create the shortfall in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsyslvania. Fed chairman Janet Yellen pointed out the problems at an Inequality conference in Boston in 2014, pretty stark in its reminder that inequality had surged to levels not seen since the depression of the thirties, with 62 million households having a net worth of $11,000. Krugman and other economists had pointed this out on the pages of the NYT. Yet the post election reflection in the media is as if this is some special insight when it was clear for all to see, and covered in depth in Lyrarc for years since 2008. There is voter fatigue after 8 years of one party in power as pointed out by Obama campaign strategist, David Axelrod. The loss of union enthusiasm made the task of  a third term for the Democratic party even more difficult.     ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What has happened that makes it so hard for Democrats Biden who stood on a picket line for the UAW autoworkers union, Harris fighting for workers, that they cannot easily convince workers that they are on their side? It is because compared to 1980 not the lowest income groups but the "downwardly mobile" white and other groups without college degrees have taken the brunt of the loss of manufacturing jobs. It is why the "zero-sum" stories of the former president have appeal to some workers who have lost the most from deindustrialization of the US. Even though Biden, and Harris, have fought hard and are putting in place the policies for the fight to reindustrialize America by taking old plants and modernizing them one by one across the country. No one has ever done this before including years in which the former president was in office. In these visual graphs it is easy to see the sharp decline in incomes and status in society of workers without college degrees as the economy changed after 1980 sending steel, auto and other industries to Asia. By 2024 these workers lives had been upended by the loss of these industries and the hope for income and place in society that existed in 1980. Every US president from Reagan through Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump had failed to address this. Biden was the first president to take this up but too much has happened with to reverse this in 4 years, the pandemic, inflation from loss of supply chains to Asia, and wages not keeping up with cost of living.  NYT's Badger, Gebeloff and Bhatia show analysis of the economy, incomes and jobs in 1980 vs the economy, incomes and jobs in 2024 for persons with a college degree and without a college degree.It shows the sharp differences in the eastern Midwestern states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania over 4 decades of job losses, loss of income status and self worth for men without college degrees. With their jobs in manufacturing disappearing also disappearing was the middle class lifestyle- of owning a house, having a cottage or boat in the countryside, and sending kids to college. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A second term Trump-Vance will face uphill risks and a mess in economics from a Trumpian Republican party and Congress, says WSJ. WSJ Editorial Board says a second Trump term is not without risks. Tariffs cost 1.1% in annual growth in the Trump first term says WSJ, and it did have an impact on inflation. It would have had greater impact on inflation with the supply chain crisis of Biden's first term, had this supply chain crisis happened in Trump's first term. A second term Trump-Vance support tariffs as high as 60% on Chinese imports which would have a bigger effect on inflation and economic growth than of the first term. The key difference is that with tax cuts a basic rule for Republican policies Trump-Vance second term would not invest in infrastructure the way Mr. Biden has done and Biden will do so in a second term. As a result the economic growth is likely to be greater and inflation smaller under a Biden administration. Trillions of dollars in investment in the economy and infrastructure under Biden in a second term will be missing in a Trump-Vance tax cuts administration policy. And with it hundreds of thousand of jobs created each quarter will be missing in Trump-Vance second term. Add to this the level of clarity of stable economic policy under a Biden second term and contrast it with some of the chaos in economic policy of a Trump-Vance second term. The basic contradiction between tax cuts policy and the nation's need for infrastructure spending/rebuilding under a Republican under Trump administration will not go away, present a huge stumbling block. Chaotic policy could come from Project 2025 that says consider abolishing the US central bank Federal Reserve. This kind of erratic and unwise policy proposals are clearly not happening under Biden and Yellen. Another key difference is the cost to the economy of delays of several years in doing nothing for climate in Trump-Vance 2024-2028. Severe effects on climate if nothing is done could cause acceleration of climate negative costs which a future economy under Democrats would face, in reality the Nation would face. America's Business has taken a short term approach to climate change, when the time comes to pay the costs of short term thinking it assumes it is somebody else's problem- this happened with supply chain concentration in China the burden falling on the middle and lower classes, it would happen again with missing climate change action under Trump-Vance second term. ...
POLITICO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
If the trade war escalates to the point at which president Trump imposes tariffs on all Chinese goods imported into the U.S. on Jan. 1, 2019, China could retaliate with its own tariffs and this might affect Boeing aircraft as well. The results would be to tip the economies of both countries into a recession, and affect Mr. Trump's best chances for reelection in 2020. This can happen as Mr. Trump has a great deal of confidence in his negotiating style. The negotiations so far have shown China misread the U.S. and Mr. Trump leading to a strong U.S. response.  There is also the importance of not losing face, Mr. Xi's domestic audience, Chinese industry that sees a fundamental change from state subsidies model as eroding its position and offering resistance, patriotic sentiment making it harder to meet U.S. demands. Fundamentally for Mr. Trump it is about U.S. trade deficit and changing the huge trade surplus of almost $1 trillion that China enjoys each year with the U.S. which has been and is no longer sustainable. Mr. Trump also has the backing of Republicans on this issue and Democrats cannot afford to be soft on this issue as it involves American workers and jobs are at stake. Both sides could be in for a protracted negotiation as Mr. Trump feels it is right for Americans to expect fair trade and technology transfer that respects American concerns. In addition the U.S. could sense that it exports less to China, is less dependent on exports than China, and as the party that is hurt by unfair practices insist on its position. After Japan agreed to U.S. demands that it reverse a huge trade surplus in the seventies in which Mr. Lighthizer was the negotiator its growth declined sharply and is economy stagnated. China may sense inside that this could happen to its economy. Today Lighthizer the U.S. negotiator and Trade Representative could also push hard because of he was able to convince Japan to change its course. ...
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.   ...
The White House Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The White House Council of Economic Advisors lists the accomplishments of president Trump for the First 10 Days in cost of living, in job creation, costly regulation, and the economy. Costly regulation cuts $935 billion of costs or $11,000 per family of 4 over the next decade. Lower interest rates improve access to housing saving households $1080 per year. Cost of pharmaceuticals down by 2% and energy prices down by 2%. Used motor vehicles and auto insurance price decreasing. DJT creating 345,000 jobs in the First 100 Days. 

The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump tells Mexico to either slow the increasing flow of migrants from Guatemala or face higher tariffs on Mexico's exports to the U.S. For the first time in recent decades Trump uses tariffs as a tool of diplomacy to reverse policies of countries with which it is in an unfavorable position. For the first time Trump uses negotiations to convey America's position that when it comes to some issues such as migration or trade because of the slippage in America's middle class incomes the U.S. should be considered as the same as a developing country. So that no preference should be given to other countries to the detriment of people in the U.S. when it comes to jobs, incomes, and funding for social services. Mexico a developing country could no longer insist that Guatemalans should not find a home in Mexico just because it was a developing country, if its policies supported the flow of migrants from Guatemala to the U.S. as in the case of Mexican president Lopez Obrador.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ provides a fact check of Trump statements on crime, debt, and taxes. Trump says he is looking at a new plan for taxes not the $10 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years reducing tax collection by 22%, but something about a third of the size. No details are available on the plan. WSJ disputes Trump's statement that the U.S. is "one of the highest taxed nations in the world." WSJ points out that the U.S. in 2014 for federal, state and local government taxes collected 26% of gross domestic product in taxes, compared to average of 34% for about 30 countries, according to OECD. Debt to GDP ratio is about 75% that is high, but because of low interest rates the budget deficit is less than 3% of GDP, which is close to the long run average. For this reason economists say the government should invest in infrastructure and R&D that supports long run economic growth. On crime the record is mixed with increase in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City, but decreases in Washington D.C. and Baltimore. Police shootings were 67 in 2016 compared to 62 in July 2015, and the high being 280 officers in 1974 when Nixon was President. Crime was an issue in the 1968 Republican National Convention during the Vietnam era protests, police shootings and terror incidents attracted attention in July 2016, yet the situation today is very different from the war protests of the Vietnam era. On terrorism fact checks by the NYT and in Lyrarc shows Clinton at State Department and Panetta at Defense Department taking hawkish stands only to hit a barrier from President Obama for taking action needed in Syria, Iraq and Libya. Panetta's new book calls for robust action where needed. A Clinton administration would take action with allies in the Middle East. Even Hollande and Obama who pulled the U.S. and France out of following up in the French-British Sarkozy-Cameron led intervention in Libya, have changed policy, with Obama calling it his biggest mistake. France under Hollande with the U.S. is now actively engaged in the Middle East, having changed policy. It is highly unlikely that a Trump led policy which alienates most allies in the Middle East- Iran, Iraq and Saudis- is likely to work better than a determined Clinton-Panetta led effort which has support of the local countries on the ground actually currently on both sides because of complexities of Middle Eastern politics.  On trade a new administration will still have to work with China, India, the European Union, and other countries, as global trade supply chains are not likely to evolve overnight. Lessons will have been learned by Clinton about the need to bring back jobs and ensure the strength of U.S. manufacturing. Economic and jobs growth will require prudence in strengthening U.S. manufacturing coupled with global cooperation, which a Trump administration that alienates trading partners without the possibility of making any serious immediate gains in jobs, is highly unlikely to do better.      ...

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