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.


WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Barry Naughton at the University of California, San Diego, looks at how China has approached tech regulation in a way that has not yet happened in the US and Europe. It says tech regulation expands the role of the government, yet is one that has "a reasonable regulatory rationale," and can be easily supported on an individual basis. It says the US and Europe have recognized the issues that need to be tackled as tech companies were left with no checks or regulation after growing in insidious ways in the last ten years, but have so far failed to act on this knowledge. Some of the goals pursued in China made sense for China it says- technology self-reliance after delinking with the US, data security, de-risking the housing market, getting on a path to carbon neutrality. Other goals such as de-licensing tutoring companies and reregistering as non profit companies-  this was because of president Xi's concern that excessive costs and stress were discouraging Chinese families from having more children as China's population ages rapidly. This means the government plays a bigger role yet Naughton says when it coms to the goal of reducing inequality China has still to come up with ways to use tax policy and other ways to mitigate an extremely unequal distribution of wealth in China. Today this is limited to donations and giving by companies. In the US and Europe social democratic governments from Biden, Scholz and others are taking serious steps and have plans to address these problems of common prosperity with plans to help families and workers. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Logan lower cost model produced by Renault's Romanian affiliate Automobile Dacia SA is setting a pattern that is being looked at as a model for the future throughout Renault. It is combining the advantages of Japanese manufacturing methods with their attention to detail and good practices evident at Nissan, Renault's partner company, with the cost conscious methods evident in operations in a Renault joint venture with Mahindra and Mahindra of India. Dacia Automobile was a Soviet era plant, and Renault has modernized it but keeps a more labor intensive attitude with good basics operation here, in contrast to the trend to automate everything and use robots extensively that became popular at other plants in Europe, U.S., and Japan. As Renault managers in France and its overseas operations look at both the expanding markets for lower cost cars and the profitability of the Dacia plant in Romania, it is becoming a model to be imitated. Other plants built earlier now look overautomated and costly for manufacturing cars in a cost conscious pricing sensitive competitive market that automakers face. Logan is contributing to Renault's bottom line, and may help it in reaching the 6% in operating margins that is a new goal for Renault for 2009. Dacia Automobile S.A. initally owned 55% by Renault is now 99% owned by Renault. It has sales of 2 billion euros ,in 2007 with revenue increase of 30% over 2006. The profit was 100 million euros in 2007. It employs 14,000 workers and Renault's investment has reached 1 billion euros upto this point. The plant turns out 60 cars per hour. Compare this with a similiar investment by VW in a Soviet era Skoda automobile plant in the Czech Republic, where VW started with an inital investment in part ownership and ended up in full ownership of Skoda with large investments in modernizing Skoda, and the success in selling Skoda cars known for their good quality. The Skoda is expected to sell at the million dollar sales level in 2010 and is the fastest growing brand in Europe. It ties with Honda in quality surveys. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ's reporters Meichtry, L, Pokharel, and Soon look at the extraordinary rise of Gautam Adani through his efforts to develop reclaimed land at Mundra port in the state of Gujarat. Adani who started with a small family owned plastics maker in Ahmedabad developed Mundra port around 2001 with the help of the Modi administration. Modi saw the electricity shortages in Gujarat as an opportunity to tackle India's chronic electricity shortages. Adani's early development of a deep water port at Mundra offered both Modi and Adani the opportunity to tackle the electricity shortages by bringing coal in large ships to Mundra in the way that China was already doing by 2005 in its own efforts at industrialization. So deeply immersed was India under the Congress Raj of licenses and closed economy that India's established business failed to see what China was doing to break into the ranks of industrialized nations. India's first prime minister Nehru had build a command economy where not much happened without government licenses and approval often riddled unwittingly with corruption. Modi needed someone outside the established companies operating under the Congress Raj command economy and with a vision of an India with abundant electricity to take the risks Chinese companies were taking to build an entirely new economy. By 2005 Guangzhou was importing coal with large ships from Indonesia and Australia. State owned companies moved slowly and would take years to develop the port capacity. Using China's example Modi pushed ahead with Adani on a rapid time delivery making Mundra a Special economic Zone and helping to connect Indian Railways to the port of Mundra for coal deliveries. Adani Enterprises built the thermal power plants near Mundra and build electricity transmission lines on a rapid mission mode giving Gujarat abundant electricity supplies and giving Gujarat state in northwestern India a great leap forward in the way China was already doing right in front of everyone's eyes by 2005 with world class ports built at Guangzhou, Shanghai, Shenzen, Hong Kong and logistics connections set with the help of Maersk.  Maersk is now doing the same for modern logistics in India in collaboration with the Modi administration.  Modi and the younger generation of aspirational youth in India see a New India that can break into the ranks of the largest industrialized nations with world class infrastructure in the way China has done, and use new technologies with innovation that will speed up the process in a way that the world has never seen. A quick look at Mundra Port in Wikipedia shows the timeline, It starts in 1998 when Adani Port Ltd was setup and Mundra port work began, 2002 the port integrated with Indian Railways, 2003 when it was made a Special Economic Zone by the Modi government in Gujarat, 2007 when IPO of 40 million shares at price band of around Rs 400 was done.  The Biden administration and the Trump administration support India's efforts to build a new modern economy with a rapid shift to renewable energy. As India is building the ports and logistics with the help of Maersk and other companies in the European Union, president Biden is working with prime minister Modi to build a new supply chain that removes the overconcentration of manufacturing and supply chain logistics in China. This means new ports with the latest technologies in India to handle shipment to the US and the EU. Jake Sullivan set out the goals for president Biden to accomplish this task in meetings with his Indian counterpart Ajit Doval this week on iCERT. President Biden and Republicans, Germany and the EU, see India as a critical part of the Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies, and the new supply chain. For the Adani Group the IPO pause offers an opportunity to do what Nirmala Sitharman has done in the Indian Budget this week- build a stable growth path ahead for the long term in line with India's Amrit Kal the next 25 years to centenary of freedom in 2047. Nirmala Sitharaman set a goal of rapid capital spending and investment increasing capital spending in 2023 by 33% in 2023 over 2022, yet maintaining a stable fiscal path by keeping the deficit below 6%. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A new family sedan will come out of a new manufacturing plant VW has built in Chattanooga, Tennessee, in 2011. The plant will turn out a new version of the Passat to compete with the Toyota Camry and the Honda Accord. Production capacity will be 150,000 A new Beetle will also be introduced. This is the first time VW has built a car specifically designed for the U.S.. During its previous efforts in the 80's VW used European designs and transferred them to the U.S. Its plans are to sell 400,000 VW's in the U.S. by 2013. VW sold 213,000 cars in the U.S. in 2009, so this means doubling sales in 4 years. At it height VW sold 577,000 cars in 1970, but this was before the Japanese and the Koreans entered the market in a significant way, and now the potential is there for Chinese and Indian imports at the low end of the price scale. Another factor making this goal difficult to achieve is the smaller car market and lower economic growth. By 1992, sales had dropped to 49,000, after the boxier replacement to the bug- in its Rabbit and Golf models- never took off. The new Beetle's introduction in 1998 improved sales, which reached 356,000 in 2001, and then declined as a result of too few new models, declining quality and a weakening dollar. There is a feeling among VW's American dealers, that VW's European headquarters staff is not giving the US the priority it deserves. The revolving door change in CEO's for the US operations, has only reinforced this impression. Mr Browning of GM's European operations replaced Jaccoby recently. Jaccoby joined Volvo as its new CEO. Steps taken to address these issues are to revamp the Jetta model for American customer preferences, and advertising that appeals to price conscious customers with the line: "Great for the price of good." Another innovative effort is an ad strategy that tries to capture Hispanics in the US market, with ads on Spanish language television networks. A sign of how much German management is involved in the detail of the new Jetta, is the discussion at the management board level about whether the new model should have American style cup holders. This meant pushing the brake two inches forward towards the driver, a decision that was made to do so after some deliberation at the management board. This will lead to intense competition in the US market, with Asian, European and US manufacturers all vying for the same price conscious customers....
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Next to Uttar Pradesh 242 million population adjacent Bihar with 128 million is decisive in Indian parliament elections since 1947- 2025 state elections show BJP NDA (Modi) sweeping win with over 203 of 243. Assembly seats. Unknown to most of the world is that this region is the birthplace of Buddhist civilization and culture, that later was part of Asian culture and civilization as it spread to China and Japan. Modi plans to add to Nalanda and other seats of Buddhist ancient universities on the world map with UNESCO listings.  The Indian economy needs 15-20 years of stable government dedicated to rapid accelerated growth with full access to US and EU technologies and capital to catch up with China, the US and EU. The road to this starts with 5 regions- northcentral  region Gujarat/Rajasthan/Madhya Pradesh  (99 seats), west central region Maharashtra (48 seats), northern region Uttar Pradesh (80 seats), Haryana and Delhi region (17 seats) and Eastern region Bihar (40 seats) which together provide  seats in Indian parliament  284 seats out of total of 543 seats in the Indian parliament. For the first time with the win in Bihar the Modi government is now within reach of this goal of being able to govern in a democracy for next 15 years by delivering on infrastructure, cost of living and rapid industrialization and growth of the economy similar to Japan's and China's growth since 1950. The LDP delivered this in Japan, the CCP in China and the NDA under Modi is in the same position today. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chevron CEO John Watson says the U.S. needs more affordable energy, and this means it needs to find more fossil fuels. It needs more oil gas and coal. He says the U.S. should take advantage of its own fossil fuel resources. People want strong environmental standards, but as Watson puts it, their top most priority is affordable energy which creates economic growth and jobs. He criticizes the Obama administration for not pushing ahead with developing of U.S. offshore oil, because BP's problems were not systemic and industry wide. He calls for dramatically increasing U.S. oil production, and doing this immediately. Worldwide Chevron plans to invest $26 billion for its exploration budget, and plans to drill in Australia, Western Africa, Gulf of Thailand and other locations. Watson points out that the dynamics of oil production are affected by two factors, price and technology. With current prices at over $100 a barrel more oil is accessible. At these prices new technologies can make it possible to use existing older wells to increase production. He cites the example of Bakersfield, where steam flooding is helping get 70 to 80 barrels out of every 100 barrels in the ground, when in the past Chevron could only get 10-20 barrels of oil. Another technology he mentions is hydrofracking for producing large and cheap supplies of natural gas. Chevron acquired Atlas Energy for $3.2 billion in 2010 to enter this market. Watson's overall emphasis is on the U.S. going for affordable energy and affordable conservation that will create economic growth and a better future....
New York Times Original article ›
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The knowledge that the virus  caused human to human transmission and that it spreads to wide parts of the population very quickly were critical pieces of information that remained with Chinese epidemiologists, doctors and medical researchers, and were suppressed by local authorites in Wuhan.  Yet China's version of the U.S. CDC, China's Centre of Disease Control and Prevention, modeled on the U.S. control efforts worked effectively to identify the problem. Virologist Gao Fu, heads China's CDC. This report in Germany's Der Spiegel says Mr. Fu made it a habit to scan China's internet before bedtime for any signs of possible disease outbreaks. On the night of December 30 he came across rumors of an internal memo from the Wuhan Health Commission of an outbreak of a vaguely worded lung disease. When he called the Wuhan health authority he found their answers to be evasive which alarmed him. The next morning December 31 Mr. Fu sent the first of three teams to Wuhan which is how China was able to identify the problem, in the sense that Chinese authorites in Beijing were to rely on Dr Gao Fu to overcome the problem of Wuhan provincial authorites. He informed the World Health Organization Beijing office on that day. The Der Spiegel report says "shortly afterward," the Seattle Times in its report says this was about New Years Day 2020- Mr Fu made a call to Dr. Redfield, head of the U.S. Centre for Disease Control, who was on vacation. Redfield is deeply disturbed on hearing this from Fu and they have conversations over the next few days to the point that Dr. Gao Fu is in tears about what has happened. On January 1 Taiwanese public health authorites shared the information with WHO that the cornonavirus was a human to human transmission, would the Taiwanese authorites not have shared it with the U.S. the same week during calls from the U.S. CDC or other public health authorites alarmed about the situation. (The WHO was proving useless by Jan 14 when it contradicted Taiwan's more reliable assessment  on Jan 14 going by the letter from president Trump to WHO). On January 6 a few days later Dr Redfield and Dr. Azar head of Health and Human Services ask China for permission to send a team of CDC U.S. experts to China. This is cited in the U.S. letter to the World Health organization- the lack of human to human transmission information being given to the U.S. officially early by China. A risk that could have been a topic of conversation between the U.S. and China heads of CDC. That letter from president Trump also points out that the team of experts the U.S. planned to send was not accepted by China till Feb 16, one and half months after that series of conversations between Dr. Gao Fu of China CDC and Dr. Redfield of U.S. CDC in an alert message.  In effect removing one of the key defences for the U.S. and Europe in making their own defensive actions and plans, laying the basis of the worldwide coronavirus pandemic affecting millions of people. Dr Redfield is a AIDS researcher at the University of Maryland who spent most of his life trying to control spread of HIV and was appointed by president Trump to head CDC agency in 2018. He set a goal of eliminating AIDS by 2030 and is more comfortable with aids patients and research than the bureaucratic nature of agencies- CDC has about 11,000 employees. Once it was clear that a team of U.S. experts was not given permission to make its own assessment in Wuhan in the few days after January 6 offer to sent the team to China by Redfield of U.S. CDC and Dr. Azar, would it have alerted the U.S. that something was seriously heading the wrong way for a epidemic risk. That letter of president Trump cites how the head of WHO during the first SARS crisis in 2003, Dr. Harlem Brundtland acted when she faced China's lack of cooperation during that crisis by saying openly that this was a danger to world public health and millions. Could CDC in the U.S. and the other connected health authorites have taken the responsibility and filled Dr Brundtland's role in this crisis, that the WHO failed to perform?    ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The 28 Point Peace Plan offers a basis for further work to arrive at an agreement acceptable to Ukraine and to the European Union, is the view emerging at the G20 talks in Johannesburg, South Africa. The leaders of Finland, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Italy and Spain met on Saturday, November 22 2025. Separately Leyen and the EU council president Costa meet with Meloni of Italy and Macron of France on Saturday after conversations with Zelensky on Friday.  British prime minister Starmer has this view of the 28 Point US plan negotiated with Russia-  “There is only one country around the G20 table that is not calling for a cease-fire, and one country that is deploying a barrage of drones and missiles to destroy livelihoods and murder innocent civilians.” Ms. Von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, says-  “Ukraine can count on us because this is not only an aggression against Ukraine, but it is an aggression against the principles of the U.N. charter." “It’s on European soil. Therefore, we will support Ukraine for as long as it takes.” Macron of France commended American efforts to reach a peace deal but said EU nations would work with Ukraine to map out a plan for way forward in 48 hours.  "What is at stake is Ukrainian sovereignty and European security.” It is this aspect of European security that may be the reason the EU and Germany may decide to modify the plan to offer a counter proposal on several points. One on limits to the size of Ukraine's defense forces to ensure its defense. Another on the stationing of forces by NATO in a peacekeeping role in Ukraine as proposed earlier. Third on the ceding of territory now in the hands of Ukraine so that these parts of Ukraine can remain independent after 4 years of ragged defense. Germany under CDU Merz and with Pistorius of SPD at Defense in a strong coalition government may be the deciding factor as Merz has already set the goal for the Bundeswehr to become the strongest army in Europe, with plans and action to prepare for this transition to defend European interests. It is true that Ukraine is at a difficult point yet if the Europeans see this as a "capitulation" and a US DJT deadline of one week to push this through Europeans may come up with a counter offer that includes these points that would make it clear that they are not an obstacle for peaceful resolution of this conflict. The history of Europe shows that in such situations with most of Europe on one side and Russia or some other major European power on the other side, eventual settlement ends up with all sides making some concessions, and in no way seen as "capitulation." Asian powers China and India have been pulled out of the conflict to a large degree in 2024-2025, with US shifting to a neutral position. Making this a purely European conflict with the Russian economy mobilized for wartime yet facing all the nations of Europe led by Germany, France and the UK in a transition towards military preparedness and unwilling to see any form of capitulation. In such a situation the larger economies and resources of the EU could effectively counter a Russian threat leading to a settlement that is better for all parties to the conflict.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
United States Department of State Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Marco Rubio speaks for the US with profound convictions and long experience in the Florida legislature and the US Senate, and as akey member of the DJT administration. In his speech in Munich at the MSC he recalls his grandparents being from Piedmeont Sardinia in Italy and from Sevilla in Spain. He talks proudly of his Spanish and Italian heritage, of America founded by European settlers. For Europe this is a speech that shows America is profoundly part of Western Civilization that started in Europe. Here are some parts of the speech and Rubio's call for America and Europe to respond strongly to the mistakes in migration and deindustrialization that have hurt the people of Europe and America, with deeply felt negative consequences. "That infamous wall that had cleaved this nation into two came down, and with it an evil empire, and the East and West became one again.  But the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion:  that we had entered, quote, “the end of history;” that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.  This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history.  And it has cost us dearly.  In this delusion, we embraced a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade, even as some nations protected their economies and subsidized their companies to systematically undercut ours – shuttering our plants, resulting in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.  We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves.  This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests.  To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.  And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people.  We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.  Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past.  And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.  For the United States and Europe, we belong together.  America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before.  The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.  We are part of one civilization – Western civilization.  We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir. And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel.  This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe.  The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply.  We care deeply about your future and ours.  And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected – not just economically, not just militarily.  We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally.  We want Europe to be strong.  We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history’s constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know – (applause) – because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.  National security, which this conference is largely about, is not merely series of technical questions – how much we spend on defense or where, how we deploy it, these are important questions.  They are.  But they are not the fundamental one.  The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions.  Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation.  Armies fight for a way of life.  And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny. It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born.  It was here in Europe where the world – which gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution.  It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.  And this is the place where the vaulted ceilings of the Sistine Chapel and the towering spires of the great cathedral in Cologne, they testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels.  They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future.  But only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance can we together begin the work of envisioning and shaping our economic and our political future. Deindustrialization was not inevitable.  It was a conscious policy choice, a decades-long economic undertaking that stripped our nations of their wealth, of their productive capacity, and of their independence.  And the loss of our supply chain sovereignty was not a function of a prosperous and healthy system of global trade.  It was foolish.  It was a foolish but voluntary transformation of our economy that left us dependent on others for our needs and dangerously vulnerable to crisis. Mass migration is not, was not, isn’t some fringe concern of little consequence.  It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilizing societies all across the West.  Together we can reindustrialize our economies and rebuild our capacity to defend our people.  But the work of this new alliance should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past.  It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century.  Commercial space travel and cutting-edge artificial intelligence; industrial automation and flex manufacturing; creating a Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers; and a unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South.  Together we can not only take back control of our own industries and supply chains – we can prosper in the areas that will define the 21st century." ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A NATO summit has tension and uncertainty with president Trump pushing forward his idea that Europe should take on a larger share of the burden for its own defense. Some of this goal was achieved with the jawboning style of Mr. Trump- NATO plans to increase military spending and increase EUropean governments share of defense spending. A European Defense Fund with 13 billion euros of funding is being set up to develop military capabilities. This is also what Mr. Trump hopes to accomplish by using this approach where other approaches were resisted by Germany in previous American administrations from Bush to Obama. It is also why Mr. Trump says he thinks NATO is now stronger than before, even though his approach throughout is unorthodox from Korea to NATO. Europeans see a divergence between the U.S. and EU on issues- such as Iran, Middle East and Israel, and Mr. Trump's efforts to maintain good ties with Russia meeting Mr. Putin after the Summit. This leads to a sense that the U.S. cannot be depended on in the face of threats to the EU. Mr. Trump's policy suggests the U.S. has no permanent friends or permanent enemies, will follow its own interests independently of its transatlantic partners, says one expert. At the root of the problem lies Trump's conviction that the European nations benefit economically by spending less on defense and thrusting more of the burden on the U.S. -even after 2 costly wars have diminished American desire to take on responsibility especially as other economies have prospered better than the U.S. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Robert Stavins of the environmental economics program at Harvard is cited in this NYT article by Coral Davenport. Stavin says that even with the change in policy favoring fossil under Trump administration the trend is towards using less fossil fuel and this trend is unlikely to change. This makes the claims of Trump that half a million jobs can be created with less regulation of the coal industry and shale oil industry, less likely. Industry is shifting away from coal for economic reasons and investors preferences, say experts. At the same time the progress away from fossil fuels is likely to be inadequate to avoid the worst effects of global warming, says Stavins. The change by industry is reflected in the decisions made by executives such as Nicholas Akins at American Electric Power, Ohio based electric power company. Akins tells NYT that he is making decisions for power generation 20, 30 and 40 years from now, and this assumes some form of carbon control. He says no question but that industry will move forward with cleaner energy and that means closing large coal facilities. The incoming Trump administration does not affect his policy. Another factor away from coal is dictated by economics- the availability of cheap natural gas from hydraulic fracturing. Incentives for renewable sources such as wind, solar, are not likely to change either say experts, because the solar panels and wind turbines are made in Republican and Democratic favoring districts and have support of Republicans in places like Arizona, Texas and Kansas. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Western nations including Europe, Canada, Japan and South Korea, are members of the International Enerrgy Agency, which has 1.5 billion barrels in reserve. The IEA will release oil from its reserves to support president Biden's plan to release 180 million barrels over the next 6 months. OPEC that includes Russia plans to increase production by only about 432,000 barrels a day.  During the Trump administration Saudi Arabia and Russia were at odds on production levels leading to Russia increasing production to higher levels than OPEC would allow. This led to a temporary collapse of oil prices to levels as low as $30. To help the US oil fracking industry which could not operate at these low prices president Trump brought the two sides together into what is now OPEC+. The Biden administration has ties with both Iran and Saudis, and aims to revive the Iran nuclear deal, withdrew support for Saudi air strikes on Yemeni Iran backed Huthi rebels. In this geopolitical situation Saudis are reluctant to respond to US calls to increase production as they have done in the past. With climate change and the COP26 agenda in Glasgow there is a plan to shift away from fossil fuels such as coal and oil that are supplied by OPEC and Australia. This means that a shift away from Russian or Saudi oil is also a shift towards renewable energy such as wind and solar which is needed to combat climate change. The Ukraine war and efforts to wean Europe away from Russia sourced energy will accelerate the changes needed to tackle climate change, even though the US fracking industry will step in to increase production at oil prices at $100+ in 2022. After 2023-2024 the push for conservation and renewable energy from today's crisis and Glasgow COP26 commitments, sharp slowdown in China and renewable focused India is likely to bring down oil prices to reasonable levels for a transition period to renewable energy. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ford is offering packages with additional incentives, college tution for entire family, packages of upto $140,000 to sign up workers to take buyouts. Its goal is to get 8000 more workers to take buyouts. This is in addition to the 32,000 workers already given buyouts or early retirement.It is putting up job fairs in its plants and mailing each of its 54,000 hourly workers full length DVD " Connecting With Your Future" that shows the advantages of looking beyond the assembly line jobs in auto plants. This suggests that Ford has done its anlaysis and sees things getting tougher in the US auto market over the next few years. The US auto industry will definitely see a smaller market and shrinking sales from now on. Just look at the shrinking sales in the Japanese and German auto industry. Something like this is likely to happen in the US and the attention to sales is going to shift overseas where most of the new sales are going to occur. Companies like GM and Ford will do what IBM and GE are doing shifting their focus to overseas sales in an expanding global economy with more than 50% of their sales from overseas and the US markets playing a smaller role. All this means fewer workers needed in the USA and new workers and plants to be put up overseas in new international locations over the next 10-15 years. Its not just a down cycle for the auto industry, its a big shift and the kind of change that happens every 50 or 100 years as huge macro changes are underway in the world....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What Handan Iron and Steel in Hebei Province 300 miles south of Beijing and ThyssenKrupp in Dortmund, Germany, have in common. The transplanting of Germany's aging defunct iron and steel furnaces and plant to Handan, boxed and crated away- its unreal that in 1998 Handan Iron and Steel bought and transferred an aging polluting plant to a city where the steel works are located in China which has 8.5 million residents. When years later the steel works were debated to be moved to a distance away from the city with Baoshan Steel, the decision was made to instead put a new plant there instead. The solution was to make pollution payments to residents of Handan. It was Mao's dream to build a steel industry in Hebei province ,which has large deposits of iron ore and coal and a rail line. Couple of questions come up to mind- one why did the first steel works go up right in Handan, and same is true of Dortmund, labor supply perhaps but couldn't homes be built nearby instead and these plants located away from cities. Second the deal for bringing the ThyssenKrupp plants was as recent as 1998, by this time China was already a big steel producer (producing more than the US by one estimate) and in a few years Chinese steel production was to exceed the US, Europe and Japan combined. With steel production already on the rise why didn't China move more carefully. Some of the Thyssen Krupp assets were built only a few years before 2000 and met stringent environmental control. China bought these.. Why didn't China pick out the best assets instead of old aging blast furnaces. The possible answers are that they were available at cut rate prices, but were they worth it. The second is that Hebei must be competing with other parts of China, and there wasn't a rational allocation of capital as would happen if a sophiticated company like a Mittal or a Tata Steel is involved. Is China operating on a outmoded concept- nationalism, competition between provinces with local government officials running the show? The other question is that in the case of the automobile industry a different pattern is seen, the most modern technology was selected , and in the case of Cherry, the most recent technology was selected for manufacturing cars, then why was this same pattern not adopted in the case of steel. In the end China has a surplus of steel mills, which makes this rush into steel production without carefully thinking through this appear to have been a mistake. The visual picture if one flies into Dortmund of manmade lakes, green park areas and residential housing and shopping from the $22 billion the EU and Germany are investing to turn the Ruhr valley region of Dortmund into a centre of education, technology and tourism now contrasts sharply with Handan in Hebei province. Can emerging countries do better, build manufacturing for jobs but keep living conditions in mind, be patient and work to achieve the best overall results, and build education, technology, appropriate for their own situation. ...
New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ story shows how China started its steel industry from small beginnings when Chinese leader Deng visited a Nippon Steel plant in 1978. He made the decision to go big with Baosteel, with an investment of $6 billion, with the words- "if we do it lets do it big." This was 36 times the Chinese foreign exchange reserves at the time. From 4% of steel production, this went up and up, passing the U.S. in 1993, past Japan in 1996, and in 2018 producing three times the steel of U.S., Russia and China combined, producing 923 million metric tons of steel in 2018, or more than half of world production of steel. With steel China was able to build its automobile industry, shipbuilding, bridges, infrastructure, high speed rail network. This was done using global demand, subsidies from the government, cheap loans and tax breaks. Markets worldwide were affected by substantial excess production in China. From Baosteel the spread of the steel industry to all 23 Chinese provinces led to China accounting for 25% of world exports. By 2016 5 million workers mostly from the agrarian countryside were employed in the steel industry, helping China transform itself into an rapidly urbanizing and modern economy. It was a period when the rail network was tripled between 1975-2017, with shipping companies that ensured access to Australian coal and Brazilian iron ore. From 2011 to 2017 Chinese steel dropped global prices by 57% triggering closure of steel mills in EUrope and the U.S. About a third of trade complaints since 2001 by G20 countries against China are about steel. After entry into the WOrld Trade Organization Chinese steel exports rose to 8% of GDP from 2%. Subsidies, cheap energy, and shift of agrarian workers to cities. U.S. investigations around 2006 showed Chinese steelmakers subsidies covered 30% to 45% of the subsidized value of steel pipes exported overseas. China's steel prices were set 20-40% lower than the U.S. China responded to complaints saying it was trade protectionism. The WTO rules call for full disclosing of all subsidies. This was disclosed 5 years after joining WTO in 2001, and only for central subsidies. Local government subsidies were not disclosed till 2016- the U.S. says 15 years late. Still the Bush and Obama administrations failed to take action. In 2018 Mr. Trump seized on this as a campaign issue that resonated with American workers in manufacturing communities across the U.S. In 2018 November president Trump announced a 25% tariff on imports of Chinese steel. A six month probe by U.S. officials had already shown 40% of sales value came from subsidies for corrosion resistant steel from China. The U.S. Trade Commission imposed tariffs of its own from 39% to 241%, with the Trump tariffs of 25% coming as an additional tariff to tackle the trade surplus with China. Meanwhile in China the government is closing uncompetitive smaller steel mills and in 2016 it combined baosteel with Wuhan Steel to create a larger company, and consolidate remaining companies. Baosteel now provides the steel for CIMC to dominate the steel container business, and to make ship to shore cranes, and make the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.  It also goes to show what can be accomplished from small beginnings for countries in the developing world from Asia to Africa and Latin America, with government and industry focussed on development and growth.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Uniqlo, the unit of Japan's Fast Retailing, is now the largest apparel chain retailer in Asia. Uniqlo has expanded rapidly in Asia, opening on average 2 stores a week. Uniqlo has 182 stores in China. CEO Tadashi Yanai, says the goal is to become the world's No. 1 apparel shop by 2020, even though Uniqlo has only half the sales of Zara's fast fashion apparel chain, which is part of Spain's Inditex Group. Uniqlo plans to open about 10-20 stores a year in the U.S. and is not planning on making an acquisition. Yanai, who owns one third of Fast Retailing shares, says he prefers organic growth. He has studied Gap in detail during the 1980's and 1990's when Gap was popular, including its display methods for khakis, sweaters and tees, calling its then CEO Drexler, "professor."
The New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

Support LyrArc

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

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


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