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.


The Indian Express Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What this Editorial board opinion in the Indian Express is saying is that India should concentrate its efforts on modernizing its economy on a scale that is similar or surpasses that of China because of its access to the latest technologies. Just as China capitalized on the opportunity presented by its entry in the World Trade Organization in 2001, through an economy wide effort to build a manufacturing and export logistics base. India is presented with the opportunity of building its own manufacturing and export logistics base as supply chains are being redesigned in 2023. This requires a longer term plan with clear thinking and concentrated effort with the entire resources of the nation. What looks like a small or gradual shift in supply chain with the US and EU adding India and Vietnam to their Chinese manufacturing base is going to change with every change in world events, as the US concentration of manufacturing in China becomes a situation that is impossible to to maintain. The only logical way for the US and following the US the EU to create a proper balance in its political relationship with China is to change fully its lopsided concentration of manufacturing in China. Biden is only making the initial moves, the EU is only waking up to the need to make its own changes to reduce this concentration. How much distance does the US need to cover to reduce its concentration in China? By a large amount because the shift of manufacturing was excessive and ill advised done as companies in the US raced in a competition to shift outside over 2 decades and simply outdid themselves and performed a disservice to the workers and families of America whom they served. Just for the US to get workers and families to benefit from return of good manufacturing jobs to the US and restore its manufacturing base that has shriveled, it will have to be a massive enterprise, where day by day it becomes more evident that more and more needs to be and accomplished in an accelerated way. What this also means where appropriate to leave a progressively year after a year larger base in India, and also Vietnam, much larger than is envisaged today. This situation is even more acutely felt in Japan which to bring a proper balance in its political relationship with China needs to even more urgently reduce its concentration of manufacturing in China. It must be the task of the Modi government to have a clear view of the road ahead- build the needed logistical base for exports using the latest technologies and set higher and higher targets for manufacturing.  If you look at the map of Asia this is the Global South- India is 60-70% of the Global South with its population of 1.4 billion people mostly young with aspirations for a modern economy like that of the US and Germany. Add to that Indonesia and Vietnam, and other nations already in the redesigned supply chain in 2023 and you have 2 billion people in Asia. Concentrate on this for the next 2 decades for a complete transformation of India, that is what the younger generation demands of its government. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In the past market forces pushed the US out of the chip business to highly subsidized chip companies TMC and SMIC in Taiwan and China. US cannot have it both ways. It cannot compete with China in chips and allow temporary market forces do the job of decimating its chip industry.    Market forces are rags to riches and mostly short term ignoring long term. Nvidia now valued at $1 trillion under market forces would not exist today. WSJ showed recently that only with the help of a loan from a Japanese Sega videogame executive Iramijiri to Nvidia founder Jensen Huang was Nvidia able to survive market forces in 1998. Qualcomm a maker of phone chips has made a takeover offer of Intel in 2024. Intel shares dropped 60% this year and is valued on share basis at $90 billion- yet was recently at $290 billion closer to its true value as America's chip pioneer and leader. Qualcomm is at $185 billion. Yet share values can be rags to riches as Nvidia story of going up to $1 trillion in 2021 and $3 trillion in 2024 shows. Such a deal draws anti trust concerns with too much control under one company. A deal for takeover of British owned ARM by Nvidia was stopped by regulatory authorites in UK and the EU in 2022. The US government is giving $8.5 billion to Intel to build up its chip making technology in competition with China. The Gelsinger plan is for manufacturing to be boosted up, so is the effort of the Biden administration. It may take time yet it is the right approach for the US. Pat Gelsinger is leading this effort at Intel. In the past market forces pushed the US out of the chip business to highly subsidized chip companies TMC and SMIC in Taiwan and China.    ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The landing of the lunar probe Chang'e-4  on January 2, 2019 makes China the first country to land a probe on the far side of the moon. This follows a landing by Chang'e-3 lunar probe in 2013. A followup mission Chang'e-5 in Dec. 2019 will collect samples of the moon's surface and send them back to earth. The goal is to build a lunar base by 2025 and man the facility by 2030, and in the long run mine the moon for energy resources.  The U.S. space program  has lacked the steady commitment and vision needed to put astronauts on the moon for a second time, and is now being given a fresh boost for challenges ahead.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Making some territorial concessions appears to be the only way for peace talks to succeed. For a long time there was insistence on territorial sovereignty of Ukraine by EU and NATO leaders. This appears to have prolonged the war- with needless loss of life on both sides, and costly damage to Ukraine infrastructure, a population that had to face additional winters and hardship in war ravaged areas. NATO's Stoltenberg from Norway, leaders of northern Nordic and Baltic countries, the UK, could take that position without having to face the hardship of the war. NATO had to be re-formed under a new name and new structure  following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with wariness about the possibility of centuries old since 1700 UK and Nordic historical adversarial relationship with Russia casting a shadow over that organization, and embroiling the US in conflicts not of its own choice or of wise leadership. This is the root cause of the Ukraine war. It would have been best to completely restructure NATO and give it a new name without Northern European nations leading it. Principles matter once soviet communism was no longer there NATO formed for its expansionism in 1950's had served it's purpose. Rasmussen from Denmark and Stoltenberg from Norway led the organization for the last decade and half from 2009-2014 and 2014 to 2025, with backing from Obama/Merkel for most of the period of the war in Ukraine. Also most of the period NATO expanded to Russian borders happened under Northern European leaders from Spain, Britain and Nordics (Solana, Robertson, Scheffer, Rasmussen and Stoltenberg) and the organization NATO getting the northern European slant based on historical adversarial relationship of Britain and Russia since 1700- for no other reason than the British wanting to protect its large Empire and commerce in India which in the 18th and 19th century included most of Asia. Under Robertson the UK Defense Secretary much of this transformation into turning NATO into something anti-Russian happened which was primarily because of British and Nordic perceptions of Russia as an adversary. Robertson added the following countries at the Prague Summit in 2002 to NATO- the Baltics, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Russia faced internal upheaval in those years and Yeltsin in resigned in 1999, Putin was elected in 2000. It is clear that Russia had suffered severe economic hardship in that period and Putin's first goal in 2002 was to stabilize the economy.  It could be said that this turning NATO over to UK and Nordics was a huge mistake considering that Russia was still the largest nuclear power after the US, and British policy was now determining US policy. And Britain's Robertson/NATO should not have involved itself in the Afghanistan war using Article 5, as the US could have handled this alone and limited that engagement. It got US involved in another conflict, conflict with Russia that was to come in Ukraine on the side of the Baltics and Ukraine, without US clearly understanding what the roots of that war was about and implied confrontation with Russia 20 years after the Prague Summit in 2002 under George Bush junior. The incompetence of Bush and Obama/Merkel laid the seeds of the Ukraine war in 2022 following Robertson, Rasmussen, Stoltenberg, small Nordic nations and Britain creating a conflict that did not need to happen, with loss of hundreds of thousands of lives of Russian speaking fraternal peoples of both Russia and Ukraine. The Republican sentiment under DJT of the tragedy of such huge losses of young people, and desire to end this loss of life, can nowhere be seen in bellicose talk in northern European nations, that take the US for granted to fight their wars.  The wisdom of Washington, Lincoln and TR/FDR clearly caution in getting involved in European centuries old animosities. For the US it meant in practical terms that it could no longer carry out the Monroe Doctrine essential for peace and good governance in the western hemisphere as only a Russia desperate to make its views known about NATO would interfere in the western hemisphere against US assertion of the Monroe Doctrine with the US Navy. Instead drug trafficking gangs took over Latin American countries and created a flow of fentanyl and millions of people through migrant traffickers across the US southern border. As America has expressed its concern for loss of Russian and Ukrainian men in the war for the first time under DJT Russia has distanced itself from Venezuela, Mexico and Latin America. The loss of hundreds of thousands of young Americans to fentanyl is a shared tragedy with the loss of hundreds of thousands of young Russians and Ukrainians in the last decade. How reliable are Northern European countries when it comes to protecting the eastern seaboard of the US with the acquisition of Greenland? It is a policy pursued by presidents since the Alaska Acquisition from Russia. By Seward, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman and DJT. Denmark the land where NATO secretary general Rasmussen was from followed by Stoltenberg from Norway  (for 15 of the years of the war in Ukraine 2010-2025) the US efforts to protect its eastern seaboard are rebuffed by both Denmark and Norway, and the US presented in a negative light as an imperialist power in the face of Danish East India Company's  colonial attitude since 1700 clearly imitating the colonial British East India company.  It shows Northern European nations looking out for themselves not for the US, and embroiling the US in their wars at the cost of the entire western hemisphere being destabilized. The population of UK, Denmark and Norway, Baltics is far less than the Mumbai, Shanghai, Sao Paulo , Berlin and Tokyo regions. Should the views of a small population in northern Europe of 2% of the total determine the future of US, Europe, China, India, Brazil, and other parts of the world with 5 billion people the 98%, when issues of war and nuclear conflict, nuclear buildup, the western hemisphere destabilized with drug trafficking gangs running rampant in countries, divide the world in opposing blocs, when the wellbeing of most of the world's people in Asia and Latin America, Africa is at stake by establishing a essential degree of cooperation by all sides. The US under DJT has chosen a wise policy of cooperation over conflict -with China, with Russia, with all the major powers, and with smaller powers. Reading the wisdom contained in the writings of Washington, Lincoln, TR/FDR confirms it is clearly the wise choice. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A 2024 Study by the International Trade Commission predicted that a 25% tariff on imports would reduce imports by almost 75 percent while increasing average prices in the US by about 5 percent.  As US companies have about half of the US auto market this would mean US auto manufacturers now have access to an additional 37 percent of the market by investing in auto plants in the US. US steel and aluminium plants will get additional investment to build these cars in the US. There is nothing new about this the US makers built plants in China. Germans, Japanese and Koreans took the US for stupid by keeping US cars out of their markets and thinking this could go on while by destroying US manufacturing it was  destroying America's middle class. It also gives the Germans BMW and VW, Subaru, the Japanese Toyota and Honda, Nissan, the South Koreans Kia and Hyundai, Chinese makers of EV's the option to Make in the USA and build plants invest in US manufacturing.  ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Some local governments in China are making vaccination mandatory. China is setting a goal of getting 64%  of the population fully vaccinated by the end of 2021. In European Union countries mandatory vaccination by country or region is now being put in place to fight new coronavirus variants that spread faster in the population. The reopening of economy, business and tourism is increasing the risk from variants in summer 2021. The mandatory vaccination is a way to increase the percentage of the population that is vaccinated. Getting younger people who lag behind to get vaccinated is important to protect the percentage of the elderly population that is still not vaccinated. There are risks also to the younger population as seen in previous waves of the pandemic. The initial hesitation to make health pass showing a person is vaccinated mandatory was because only a small fraction of the population was vaccinated in Europe. Now that over 50% are vaccinated in most EU countries and UK, that hesitation thinking that it is discriminatory to those people who did not have access to vaccines no longer exists. Ample vaccine supplies and the misinformation spread about vaccines are making action on health pass necessary to protect the overall population. National governments in France, Denmark, Austria, Greece, and local governments in Germany, Portugal and other EU countries such as Ireland, Italy, see the danger from coronavirus variants that spread quickly as too big to take any risks a second time. ...
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US Fed under Jerome Powell stress tests of 31 banks for 2024 shows the banks can withstand a rise in unemployment to 10% and 36% drop in house prices. This is relevant now that the new administration of DJT makes another effort to correct the huge trade imbalance with China, Mexico and Canada, which itself is destabilizing in the long run and needs to be addressed. The first term of DJT failed to correct the imbalance with new tariffs kept in place by the Biden administration. This is not just one's imagination, reports suggest China has poured $230 billion of subsidies into its EV industry since 2003 mandate given by premier Jen Biao to dominate that industry. And now has capacity of 20 million car production a year, twice the domestic demand in gasoline cars, wanting to send the surplus production to the US and Europe. This isn't the 1930's type of tariffs, it is simply to get a fair even playing field for trade, where no one side is massively subsidizing and dumping which is one of the principles of WTO free trade that is being broken by China and Mexico. Specifically the anti dumping clause in Article 6 of the 1994 GATT agreement on free world trading mechanism to ensure free and fair trade. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Blinken Wang Yi meeting at the G-2- in Indonesia is the first high level meeting between US and China since March when the Ukraine war started. In the press briefing after the meeting Blinken said "more than four months into this brutal invasion the PRC stands by Russia." He pointed to Beijing support of Russia at the United Nations, dissemination of Russian talking points through Chinese state media and joint military exercizes with Moscow. One aspect of the relations that is beyond the control or good intentions of the two countries top diplomats is the tit for tat response that began with the presidency of Donald Trump. Trump may have seen this as a way to talk to the voter base fed up with two decades of one sided trade with China with manufacturing shipped out to China and local communities of families and workers in regions across the US losing jobs and in decline. Much of this shift was done by US companies during the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations over two decades. The strident tone adopted by Trump was met by tit for tat responses in Chinese media till the pandemic when it assumed a new aspect of Chinese origins of the coronavirus. The result is that Sinophobia in the US is met by a response in Chinese media and in the thinking of the Chinese leadership under Jinping that now sees the relationship as having already shifted during the pandemic. The paradox in this is that the US in its effort to get other countries on its side is only beginning to make an effort of get America's own companies and large business investors on its side. Most American companies are still continuing trade and business with China as before.  The same situation exists with the shift of manufacturing from Japan and the European Union to China, with the loss of jobs and decline of local communities that depended on manufacturing. Japanese and European companies are acting in ways that are similar to American companies. Having managed the shift of manufacturing from European Union and Japan to China these companies have done little to change this business situation in 2022 carrying on as before. This is the paradox of the current situation that business both in the US and EU, and Japan is not on the side of their governments, even as their governments attitude to China, particularly now after the pandemic and the Ukraine war has shifted drastically. Alongside this is the popular opinion that has shifted gradually over the last 10 years in the US and EU, first in these very local communities that lost manufacturing to China, and then across broader sections of the public, and now across whole regions of America, Britain, the EU and Japan. This shift in popular opinion has little interest in the way business conducts business overseas or governments conduct diplomacy in nuanced statements. As a result neither the governments of the US, EU and Japan or the business of the US, EU and Japan are in control of this shifting situation that has its momentum and pace operating quite independently of governments and business. And public opinion across America, Europe, Japan, and also in India is moving in an entirely new direction.     ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Kristof of the NYT writes about DJT Action in Venezuela January 3, 2026.  Some of the least understood aspects of the US president's language on Venezuela- The president's reference to oil resources is not for the US to benefit from the oil reserves. It is about oil in the sense that the oil industry in Venezuela is in total disrepair and broken from years and decades of nationalization followed by lack of investment, lack of western technology.  Sanctions put a huge price on the Venezuelan economy with the brunt of it borne by ordinary people- the same people that a socialist like Hugo Chavez thought he could help with his erratic ideology. As China, and now India has learned the only way to get ahead in this world for nations is to invest, invest, invest with larger and larger pools of capital, technologies and labour. By alienating the US or EU there is a loss of technologies and of investment so that one is going to bat with only one strike and you are out, so that from Day 1, China under Mao, India under Nehru had lost the race, so did all the "socialist" regimes in the world. Conversely China under Deng and successors, and India under Modi are breaking development records. How does the US change this? First it removes the sanctions on the Venezuelan economy. Second it gives Chevron the green light for increased production. Oil facilities of the Venezuelan oil company will get foreign investment and US investment from American oil companies with returns for both and the state oil revenues invested under a government that is able to invest it free of corruption or it being funneled out of the country to support other regimes in Latin America. This will rebuild the country's health system, its broken infrastructure, restore its finances, and make it in a decade one of the advanced economies in Latin America. But only if- the gangs and other private militias, the other military elements from the two decades of utter mismanagement and drug trafficking are  removed. A new way will have to be devised that the US as to work out ad hoc meaning in the process of doing, invented that meets the conditions of getting this done and the process of reconstruction of Venezuela under the Monroe doctrine of keeping the entire western hemisphere free of such elements. The US achieved this with the help of Great Britain in 1823 when it was only 50 years since it's founding in 1776. The US has the resources in 2026 to make this happen in the interests of the people of the western hemisphere, in the quality of life of people in the western hemisphere. It does not seek any country's resources, it seeks the development of the countries in the western hemisphere in the great tradition of Jefferson, Monroe, Lincoln, FDR and JFK. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Contrast the slow US vaccine export response with that of India, Russia, EU and China. Only in May 2021 after India's daily Covid cases were close to 400,000 a day did the US make a serious offer of vaccines to other countries in need of assistance. U.S. president Biden says that 80 million vaccine doses would be exported by the end of June 2021. The WSJ says citing Airfinity, a London research firm, as of May 10 more than 333 million doses of vaccine were produced by the US and only 3 million vaccine doses were exported. Contrast that with the European Union which has shipped 111 million doses overseas one third of its total production, Russia which has exported 27 million doses.  India has exported 66 million doses according to the Ministry of External Affairs website as of May 17, 2021. This includes 4 million doses to Brazil, 4 million to Nigeria. Within its own region Bangladesh received 10 million and Sri Lanka 1.2 million doses, Afghanistan 1 million. Mexico received about 1 million doses. In Africa the Democratic Republic of the Congo which has suffered from many epidemics including Ebola virus received 1.7 million doses, Nigeria 4 million doses, Kenya 1 million, Uganda 1 million. Of the 66 million about half of it is a direct grant assistance and Brazil, Mexico, Morocco received all vaccine as grant assistance, 70% of Bangladesh's is grant assistance. The list on the Ministry of External Affairs site of the Government of India shows 95 countries including many of the most struggling nations of Latin America and Africa, bringing hope to countries which are struggling to hold onto hope for a better life beyond the pandemic. Sending help overseas through vaccine supplies is suspended for the moment but will resume in July after India has pulled in all of its pharmaceutical manufacturing industry under a government guided effort to go all out. Never has so much help bringing much needed hope gone to so many countries of the world in the twentieth or twenty first century from a nation that is struggling to meet its own needs. The US in pursuing a US first policy of vaccinating all its citizens has not taken into account the need to bring this evolving vaccine technology into the hands of as many qualified pharmaceutical manufacturers as possible. This in a rapid response to expand manufacturing capabilities to meet world wide demand. The risks of not doing so were not taken on early- the very same way the virus spread in January to March of 2020 can be repeated as people travel around the world particularly for tourism, business family reasons. This risk takes on anew dimension of contagious mutations of the virus which are 50% more- the Indian variant being 50% more contagious by some estimates than the UK variant, which itself was estimated to be 50% more contagious than the original one.  The result a pandemic that stretches out indefinitely unless billions of doses are made in a short timetable to beat the timetable of Nature through the coronavirus. India is doing this for the first time with plans to produce billions of doses by engaging the whole of the Indian pharmaceutical manufacturing industry in the effort in a rapid response so that July to December would see 1.2 billion people vaccinated. The US effort, the European effort is left to the individual effort of pharmaceutical makers in the US and Europe, not a government guided effort to engage the entire pharmaceutical industry of the US and Europe in a rapid response timetable of 2-6 months.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Seantor Dan Sullivan and the WSJ say Alaska's economic potential and its standard of living was ignored with blanket blocking of any development of its resources. WSJ says under the Biden administration the state was turned into a nature museum.  WSJ says the state's leaders know that spoiling the environment would be mistake. Yet developing some of the state's resources would help the US in sourcing natural gas and rare earth minerals for renewable energy products. This would achieve a policy balance. One of the arguments North Dakota Governor Borghum and new US Interior Secretary makes is that China is building a coal plant every 2 weeks with 12 built in the first 6 months of 2024. As of July 2024 Statista shows China with 1161 coal plants operational, 6 times the 204 US coal plants and 4 times the 295 coal plants in India, 89 in Japan- and 90% of new coal power capacity added. This means climate change issues remain no matter what the US does. By using natural gas fired electricity the US gets transition time for the shift to renewables and can attack the cost of living, export to the EU.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's export oriented economy and its export oriented companies are struggling in 2021 with broken supply chains and high energy prices. This report in the WSJ looks at how Germany needs to rebuild its economy in a different way. German industrial output was 9% below its 2015 level in August, compared to 2% for the eurozone as a whole, according to EU's statistics agency. Italy's growth was 5% over the same period. There is a redirection underway to bring more production back home after years of outsourcing and outshoring. Other changes taking place are the policies being put in place for net zero emissions by 2050, and the targets for 2030 that would make this possible. This also changes prospects for Germany's large auto industry. By 2030 30-50% of all cars will have to be electric cars. About 30% of Germany's industrial output and exports are tied to overseas demand, 4 times that in the US. From 2003 when competitive overhauls took place under chancellors including Mr. Schroeder, German industrial growth was sustained by demand from China. Now with China looking to internal demand following global tensions on trade, sales of some companies are looking flat instead of sustained year over year growth. What will happen now? Here is what the likely new chancellor from the Social Democrats has to say about the overhaul of the German economy and industry- "It will be the biggest industrial modernization project that Germany has carried out probably for over 100 years, and it will really help our economy." The SDP and Greens that together share the same ideas for rebuilding Germany around infrastructure and climate change and upward mobility, badly neglected in the Merkel years, plan big investments. Big investments are to be made in climate protection, high speed internet, education, research and infrastructure. Germany's net investment rate has been around 0.5% of economic output since 2000, compared to 1% for Italy and 1.5% for the US, according to the World Bank. This WSJ report even says net public investment has fallen below zero as existing assets depreciate. To achieve this transition Germany has identified several problems. One is the delays in investment projects that cost German companies 55 billion euros a year, about half the money invested in research and development, according to Germany's statistics agency. Germany was thought to be an industrial powerhouse but the quality of work in projects and delays so apparent in the Berlin Brandenburg airport infrastructure project clearly shows a decline over the past two decades. This will need to be fixed. Other problems are in getting more workers as Germany faces a shortage of workers for factories to 2030.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mexico sends 80% of its exports to the US, and China a significant $439 billion in additional exports to US, which makes it incredible that for so long it did not take effective action to stop fentanyl flows, and Mexico allowed migrant trafficking across it's borders through 2016-2024. Even in the face of this becoming an explosive issue in the US with DJT elected in 2016 and the Border Wall being built. A silent but still existing in plain sight idea that the US would tolerate such flows became part of the culture in media outlets in the US and Europe and China and other parts of the world, even when there was a storm of discontent building about manufacturing shipped overseas hurting communities in the US since 2010, with added burden of safety endangered in these neighborhoods from fentanyl, drugs and illegal migrants. What worsened this situation and pain in the US was the idea that somehow it was the US's fault, an incomprehensible disdain for the US, US that enabled the modernization of China, Mexico, and Canada's economies. China sends $439 billion in exports more than the US does to China (US exports $143 billion China $582 billion in 2024). It is only surface presentation of indignation of face saving that these trading partners are showing when the real facts point to an extraordinary and incomprehensible disdain for the US as a nation in decline. There is a feeling in parts of Europe of American disdain for  Europe, without mention of the disdain for the US in Europe, China, Mexico and Canada and other parts of the world. Particularly disdain for neglected communities in the US that have suffered for far too long under previous administrations of Clinton-Bush-Obama with shipping of manufacturing and jobs overseas and inaction on drugs and illegal migrant flows. The EU Canada retaliatory approach has not worked. When DJT proposed doubling the tariffs imposed by US in the face of Canada EU retaliatory steps, the EU and Canada pulled back. Part of the reason is that in the case of Canada it is an economy one tenth the size of the US. The other is that there are real concerns on the US side that Canada EU are not playing fairly in trade. And Canada, Mexico, China, have not stopped the flow of fentanyl into the US.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Emmanuel Macron graduated from Sciences Po University in 2004 with a degree in public affairs. He joins the Finance Ministry as an inspector and then buys himself out of government service contract by 2008 to join a private bank. He arranges an acquisition from Nestle and other business deals during this period. In 2012 he is appointed as deputy secretary general for the president's office after Francois Hollande a socialist is elected to the presidency. In 2014 he is offered the position of Minister of Industry and Digital Affairs in the second Manuel Valls government. He makes some changes to French government but opposes the wealth tax or tax on business, and is generally pro-business, though he acts as a member of the Socialist party.  He uses this period to build momentum for his own run for the presidency as support for Hollande falters having lost support from his working class base with Macron and Valls inspired changes.  Macron finally announces he will run for the presidency forming his own En Marche movement which he finances with his own fund raising. Throughout this period right up to the election in 2017 Macron has not run for public office. When he wins the presidency in that year he lacks the experience needed as the youngest president in French history at the age of 39. Like another young president Obama he handles his public image with the media for his En Marche movement promising to unblock France. This public image and his lack of experience makes him impervious to the social changes going on in France that lead to the yellow vest protests in 2018. This is a period when there are changes in the midwest as workers in Michigan and other midwestern states turn away from Hillary Clinton and Obama.  French workers are in the position of workers in the US with the decline of manufacturing, much of it shifted with the supply chain to China and Japan, and the gap opening between rural and urban tech educated areas. Macron follows Obama's quick rise from Senator to run for president yet lacks experience, and lacks sufficient grasp of the social changes with loss of manufacturing, the wide gaps between rural and urban tech educated people, conditions in the rural and farming areas. Macron survives this period, is reelected in 2022 with the help of socialist Melenchon voters. He says he will govern differently, less distant from average Frenchmen, but his instincts are to push for pension reform. At a time of cost of living crisis, and when the French budget office says the change in pension from 62 to 64 was not critical at the present time when inflation was hitting the public after the pandemic. Macron does this by Article 49 in the way he has done under the Manuel Valls government, by executive action alone. This time he faces a no confidence motion in parliament in March 2023 following some of the largest protests France has seen in years, with two thirds of the French according to FR24 opposing the change in pension law. Women see this as coming at a time when age discrimination hurts their chances of earning a living after 50 years of age.  Age discrimination is widespread in France, in a way it is not in Germany, say reports in the NYT. And with the cost of living crisis acts as a major hurdle for the average French person, if pensions are delayed without addressing these cultural issues in France. The result is that the protests have substance and Macron is seen as not sensitive to this at a time when he lacks a majority in parliament. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's EV market is very competitive and price cuts by Tesla have led to falling prices. BYD sold 900,000 electric vehicles in the first 5 months of 2023, Tesla 200,000, and Li Motors 100,000. NIO is struggling and some companies have closed operations. Ford failed in this market and VW is still to make a dent in the market. Most of the top ten companies are local. With the slowing economy, consumers resisting purchases, price drops are needed to keep up sales of EV's.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This self portrait by Vladimir Putin about his growing up years in Leningrad and the life of his father and mother during the siege of Leningrad by Germans may offer a better sense of the mind and thinking of the Russian president than the Dresden years when he was a junior Russian official in Communist East Germany (the GDR). It is an interview of the Russian president in 2000 by Nataliya Gevorkyan, Natalya Timakova, and Andrei Kolesnikov over twenty years back. Putin's father suffered severe injuries during the war in the fighting around Leningrad, twice being given up for dead and being dragged wounded across the frozen Neva river to a hospital by a neighbor. His mother was half dead from starvation and his father passed on his food given to him at the hospital. Having gone through the memories of this period affected Vladimir Putin's view of the world and no amount of US or German assurance about NATO's intentions may have erased these memories from childhood. The long period in power and the Covid isolation may have led to  perceptions that were less likely to change so that Putin did his own research and wrote a long paper on Ukraine in 2021 that reflected Russia and Ukraine's long history but did not reflect the changing national aspirations of Ukraine's people in 2022. This may have led to the miscalculation and the errors by both Putin and the leaders Merkel-Bush-Obama that the detailed WSJ report of 20 years of events show to have happened. The WSJ report of April 1, 2022, was titled "Vladimir Putin's 20 Year March to War in Ukraine and How the West Mishandled It." The Social Democrats in Germany under Schroeder and Steinmeier mishandled it by deepening economic integration with Russia as a way to make up for what had happened in the German invasion of Russia, and the Christian Democrats under Merkel with business interests never really grasped the different thinking of the Russian president relying solely on deep economic integration of the EU and Germany with Russia as well as China as an answer. Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama from a distance even less so.  This has led to the miscalculation by Russia under Putin leading to invasion of Ukraine, and the US and Germany being unprepared about taking action to prevent it.  Beyond the key participants and the war damage, there is the enormous damage that is taking place in the mental health around the world after Covid with constant barrage of images of war and refugees streaming into Poland. There is the problem of food imports, of food scarcity in the Middle East, and inflation in food prices for Africa and the Middle East. As Brendan Simms, a Cambridge historian has shown in his book "Europe The Struggle of Supremacy 1453 to the Present," which is now being read by German chancellor Scholz, this has happened before with the UK, Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Russia engaging in these conflicts that led to prolonged wars and eventually to only small shifts in power. Yet with huge effects for ordinary people caught in the wars such as today's refugees and people struggling to feed their families in Africa and Asia after the effects of Covid on income. Food prices have gone up by 50% to almost double in these countries.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Much of what is written here about Xi Jinping pursuing Chinese socialist vision was known since he became president in 2013 when China's Communist party was losing its appeal, and efforts were made to seize power within the communist party by a leader in the western province of Chongqing. Bo Xi Lai attempted to take advantage of the situation with appeals to the working class and without any genuine commitment beyond a power grab. It was well known that Xi Jinping is a son of one of the veterans of the Communist party under Mao, Xi Zhongxun, unlike leaders who followed premier Deng Xiaoping such as Jiang Zemin. Zemin was a relatively unknown figure who was in university during the crucial period of 1947-49 when Mao came to power in mainland China. It would not be correct to say that little was known about Xi's own ideas about socialism as the long term answer to China's problems. Xi also came in as president at a time when the Communist party was losing its appeal to working class people after three administrations that followed premier Den Xiaoping. These three administrations followed a form of state capitalism that allowed companies to pollute the environment, compete without any regulations, and allowed to operate without any controls as long as they pursued growth aggressively and expanded the economy.There was an effort by Communist party regional leader in western Chinese province of Chongqing, Bo Xi Lai, to use this as an opportunity to grab power in China. During his first year as president Xi had to resolve this issue by having a court trial after revelations of corruption and misuse of power by Bo Xi Lai.  Xi's father Zhongxun's role in the revolutionary movement offers clues to Xi's own convictions and faith in the party. Zhongxun was a communist soldier who set up the revolutionary base areas in Shanxi-Gansu northwest border region of China that provided a refuge for Mao's army following the Long March. Other clues come from Zhongxun's role as head of propaganda during the period after 1944 and in 1952. Xi's family background particularly on his mother's side shows a fervent commitment to Chinese socialist vision during the chaotic years when the Japanese invaded China and Chiang Kai-Shek's nationalist forces failed to defend China's sovereignty. One reason Xi has been less understood is that little attention is paid to Xi's mother, Qi Xin who was highly educated and fervently believed in Chinese socialism and nationalist spirit during the Japanese invasion in 1938. In fact Qi Xin had to leave middle school after the Japanese took over Beijing. She joined the Counter Japanese Political and Military University to continue education and in 1941 attended the Central Party school. She met Xi's father Zhongxun in 1944. In 1953 she enrolled in the Marx School of Communism, and it was her position at the school that offered her husband added protection during the Cultural Revolution that affected Deng Xiaoping and others. With such a history in the 1930's, 1940's, and 1950's it is likely that Xi was profoundly influenced by his father's role in the revolutionary movement, and his mother's faith in socialism with national spirit as the way to protect against the foreign invasions. It would now appear that by the time Xi joined the Politburo in 2003 there was no question about the future course China would take given the role of his parents, and the events of 1938 the fall of Beijing, his mother having to flee, and the events that followed. Xi showed resilience during the period of the Great Proletarian Revolution when he was sent to the villages at a time when he would be studying in school and college. He was sent to an agricultural commune in largely rural Shanxi province where he worked as a manual laborer alongside other people and developed a relationship with the local farmers. Unlike other leaders during that period which could even be said about premier Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Xi took a different lesson from this experience largely because his father and mother were committed to the socialist vision for the long run. His father was still not fully rehabilitated by premier Chou en-lai when Xi was allowed to enter Beijing's Tsinghua University in 1975. He studied chemical engineering at Tsinghua graduating in 1979. Upon graduation he worked as a assistant for 3 years to a vice premier who was minister of defense. He then left Beijing for Hebei province to work as a deputy secretary of the provincial CCP. He was made Mayor of Xiamen, then governor of Fujian province in 1999 where he tackled environmental conservation before moving to Zheziang province. His father passed away in 2002 and it would appear that he was carefully trained in different provinces instead of staying in Beijing, for a position of national leadership. Xi got his break in 2007 when the upper leadership of Shanghai city was tainted in a wide ranging pension fund scheme. He was made party secretary for Shanghai. This was the position Jiang Zemin had held before he succeeded premier Deng Xiaoping. In only a few months in October 2007 Xi was made one of the 8 Politburo members, ready to succeed Hu Jintao as president. Xi's perception of being sent to the villages and making it to university education was that it was part of the long run socialist struggle, with pain that his father had also endured as simply a phase in which things would be right in the end. Xi's mother comes across as a resilient figure and one who had herself gone through the struggles of the 1930's and aided her husband on one occasion. Some of this resilience could have been passed on to the son. Xi's wife is a zealous participant in Chinese dance and music performances that created enthusiasm for the Chinese socialist revolution from the 1930's period. In his conversations  with colleagues in the party, in culture and temperament, Xi has been forthright about this background and his style of work.  Xi is unlike premier Deng and the presidents who succeeded him such as Hu Jintao mentored by a former mayor of Shanghai Jiang Zemin who came to power in 1989. Xi is more in line with the leaders around Mao like his father in his outlook and thinking, with a cautious temperament that comes from years going through ups and downs of political struggles. He is once said to have responded with dismay about being in a top position in the government knowing how precarious this had been for his father. The education at Tsinghua, his engineering background, and his easy familiarity with farmers in the provinces, mean that he understands China and its history well enough to have the confidence to shape Chinese policies in a way that none of his predecessors had except Mao, premier Chou-en-lai, Liu Shao Chi and a few veterans from that time in the 1930's. That Xi waited patiently for so long to gradually assert his ideas about socialist vision for China may be the surprising part of his behaviour till 2021.  It may be that he wanted to make the changes only after he could persuade party leaders and colleagues of his vision and long run goals. And because the Chinese economy had grown so large that it would take time to steer the ship in a different direction for the long term. In most of the negotiations with president Trump he cautiously let trade negotiators handle the situation, all the time learning about how to tackle problems of China's relationship with US and Europe. US president Biden also has a vision that is veering towards a socialist perspective in terms of bringing gains of progress to workers and families. So does Mr. Trump, Mr. Boris Johnson in UK, and Social Democrat's Scholz in Germany. It is both economic and political as Mr. Xi is quoted as saying in this WSJ report. The necessities of such action are both economic, social and politically driven as capitalism has veered way off course.  In this report it is mentioned that Soho China 40% stake was taken by a large capital markets firm in New York in the hope of large gains, as Soho China developer was a tycoon who wanted to leave China. Seeing it as not favorable to his company following events in Hong Kong. This behaviour of capital markets groups in New York and tech companies in Silicon Valley, driven by profits and not aware of the social and economic problems of working class American families is a problem in the US and in Europe. It is also what has driven so many large tech companies to expand manufacturing operations in China, that hurt US manufacturing capabilities and American workers jobs- an issue raised by president Trump and taken up by president Biden. Biden has already moved to make Intel Corporation change its plans and invest in American manufacturing technologies in a quietly implemented U turn. US president Biden is left with the unenviable job of solving this huge problem during the pandemic. He has also committed to a somewhat socialistic vision with a $3.5 trillion plan for workers and families, as has vice chancellor Scholz in Germany with his own version of programs, after the failures of unregulated forms of capitalism. Scholz goes so far as to say his mission is to show that there is really no such thing as a self-made man, that it is help from society, his fellow citizens, and government, that makes it possible for him to do his work. In a sense the world is shifting away from Reagan forms of capitalism without regulation after seeing disastrous results during the pandemic. Not just China. Some form of government guidance and regulations are now seen as essential in China, the US, UK, Germany and India for a better society and a better, healthier life, and for opportunity for all in each country.   ...
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With the decline of its hardware business making iPhones Apple is looking at other fields. It is launching cheap online TV subscriptions in streaming wars in competition with Netflix and others. Apple is launching a new TV streaming service Apple TV+ in 100 countries for 4.99 British pounds a month undercutting Netflix's price of 5.99 pounds. The new service will be started November 1, 2019. Disney plans a streaming service for 7 pounds a month starting November 12. This service is alongside iPhone 11 launch and anew iPad, a new iWatch. Buy any new Apple device and you get a 1 year streaming service free.  Sales of iPhones fell 14% in the April to June 2019 quarter to 39 million units. Samsung's business is growing by 4% to 75 million units and Huawei by 16% to 58 million units. Apple sees the need to increases its services business with a target of $50 billion in 2020. Apple sees itself more as a media and cloud services company as it makes this change. In markets such as India Apple's growth is limited by its failure to lower prices on new iPhones. In China it faces strong competition from Huawei. The trade tensions are increasing the strength of Chinese brands in the Chinese market. The market in U.S. and Europe is saturated after years of expansion. New iPhone models are costly and bring peripheral advantages such as more and better cameras and features such as screens that are not breakable- for the iPhone 11- not dimensions that are critical for making a costly purchase. After years of growth tech companies such as Apple, Google, Alibaba, Amazon are reaching a point where incremental growth is not what it used to be and most of the rapid growth behind them. Trade tensions are also limiting the outlook in the Chinese market, and pricing remains a major factor in the Indian market. Western markets are saturated. There are fewer and fewer substantial new ideas from these tech companies. ...
Wilson Center Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Anton Harder in this Wilson Center publication of research uses correspondence between Jawaharlal Nehru and his sister Vijaylakshmi Pandit ambassador to the US in 1950, to show that the US made an offer for India to take a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India had supported two resolutions on June 25, and June 27, first condemning the invasion by North Korea and second the organizing of a UN force of 29 countries to push back the North Korean invasion. Even though the US is not seen as actively engaging with India during that period and seeing through British eyes the colonial policies of encouraging  different powers in South Asia, that may not be true.  Who was India's foreign minister in 1950? Jawaharlal Nehru was both prime minister and foreign minister till 1964, which means there was less discussion of foreign policy than happens today during the Ukraine invasion with Jaishankar a career diplomat with 30 years experience, Rajnath Singh, and Mr. Modi, in talks with president Biden recently, and in further discussions Modi had with EU's Von der Leyen and UK's Boris Johnson, Kishida of Japan. Who was India's defense minister in 1950? Baldev Singh, a Sikh independence struggle leader was Minister of Defense for 1947-52 and tackled partition of Punjab and Kashmir issues. The rest of the years to 1957 when India faced the Chinese invasion of Tibet India's defense minister was also for most of the period Mr. Nehru, except Ayynagar in 1953, and Kailash Katju in 1955 and 1956. The controversial V.K. Krishna Menon was Defense Minister from 1957 to 1962, when Indian defenses were further neglected leading to the Chinese invasion of India in 1962, and his replacement by Yashwantrao Chavan. The purpose of this is to look back at what happened in earlier periods to understand where India stands today- and what choices it makes today. Clearly the US was looking for allies then and now. Nehru saw things from his own reading of history seeing China and India as both suffering from western invasion, not realizing that China's experience under Mao was different- that of Japanese invasion and bombing of China's major cities not just colonization of Hong Kong and other ports for trade under British trade based policies in 1850-1900. Thus a Communist Chinese version of China's defense involved taking over border regions such as Tibet putting China in direct and open opposition to India. Nehru never really grasped what was happening in Tibet and the war China fought against the Nationalists. American general Stilwell loved China deeply and had an understanding of its people as shown in Tuchman's account in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China 1911-1945. Stilwell during that war had a better understanding of China, the strengths and weaknesses of Mao's China and of the Nationalists under Chiang, than Nehru. Some of these errors post 1950's and a concentration of foreign, defense and embassy positions in the person of Mr. Nehru and of Nehru family member such as Mrs. Pandit led to the Indian failure to act on Tibet and see it as see it for what it was -facing a Communist Mao led China that had fought the Japanese invasion as different from Bodhidharma's China of the history books. Bodhidharma's China will outlast Mao's China, yet it is Mao's China that India faces today. This also tells us that India has to think in new ways- as Lincoln said during a period when America was also making its own progress as an industrial nation in the 1860's. "The dogmas of the quiet past are not adequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew, we must act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and we shall save our country." India's values are values of democracy heightened not just by Mohandas Gandhi's ideas with Hind Swaraj written in 1910 just as powerful in 2022, but also by the heights of Ladakh where elections are held in remote regions of the Himalayas. India's values are values that are also shared in the best that America has in its values and culture and in the defense of freedom.    ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
DJT plans for 25% tariff on all imported cars goes into effect April 2, 2025. It is intended to promote additional investment in the US auto industry, boosting jobs and wages in the US. These countries have now wrapped their behavior around national sentiment even though they very well know how the US has looked out for Europe, and especially China throughout cataclysmic events in the 20th century and the 21st century such as foreign occupation and failures in modernization. By 2015 the US which had given Europe the Marshall Plan and helped Japan rebuild from the ashes of World War II, South Korea rebuild from the devastation of the Korean war, and China rebuild after the failed industrialization experiments of the 1960's and 1970's, was now facing nations that only saw this as a One Way Street, making the US look stupid and showing a degree of irresponsible behaviour on fentanyl, drug and migrant trafficking  by Canada Mexico and China that has few parallels in history. The narrative from the US is that the US allowed Europe, Japan and South Korea, and Mexico as a manufacturing base for these countries 25 years since the 1970's when Japanese Toyota vehicles made inroads into the US market to help these countries recover, a post Marshall Plan benefit given to Europe and Asia. During 1995-2015 a series of weak administrations Clinton-Bush-Obama allowed the US manufacturing base to decline under a falsely premised globalization that served US financial interests but hurt US manufacturing towns and communities across the country.  This means BMW, VW cars imported from Germany, Subaru, Toyota, Nissan, Honda cars from Japan, Hyundai and Kia cars from South Korea, Chinese EV vehicles, and cars made in Mexico for Asian and European makers, all will face this tariff. ...
NATO Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Soviet threat actually receded after 1964 when Brezhnev became head of Soviet Union till 1982. During that period in the 1960's till today the face of NATO as today was from a series of heads of governments of Dutch Stikker in mid 1960's or other small European states such as Norway Stoltenberg and Rutte Netherlands again in 2025. It could be said that none of these leaders  of small EU countries represented US interests- or even European interests- a point the DJT administration is trying to make. First NATO head UK's Hastings Ismay's NATO for "keeping the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down" is more British Imperial policy of 1904 -1940's as the Indian Viceroy's Assistant, not US policy or in America's or even Europe's interest in 2025. It hurt the US in Venezuela as Russia propped up a regime which led to millions of refugees entering the US illegally. And it hurt Europe as Russia propped up the Syrian regime with millions of refugees entering Germany and destabilizing its political structure. Going back if a new defense institution was set up to replace NATO by the Europeans in 1970's this would have been the right step which would have not led to Russia propping up regimes in the Americas or the Middle East. A goal that is being discussed with Russia by the DJT administration to refocus American efforts in a new direction and pause not just the Ukraine war but also put the US  and Russia in a new direction with the new competition from 3 billion people in China and India changing everything we know about the world. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor on the dangers of a loose U.S. monetary policy and the effects this had in fueling a housing bubble in Spain, Ireland and other EU countries. Taylor points to the bubble ocurring in emerging market economies from low interest rates. Taylor says the ECB's interest rate moves in 2003-2005 were affected by the Fed's low interest rates. He estimates the ECB set rates about two percentage points too low leading to housing bubbles in EU countries. A similiar process is taking place today with the Fed's near zero interest rate policy. Taylor points to interest rates in a group of 18 emerging market economies- including Brazil, China, India, Mexico and Turkey, which have held interest rates on average about 5 percentage points below widely used benchmarks fueling a doubling of global commodity prices between 2009-2011. The U.S. Fed's policies make it harder for central banks in emerging market economies to take aggresssive action against bubbles developing in these countries. Taylor says his does not mean that the Fed should not pay attention to the U.S. unemployment rate and long term unemployed, but should keep in mind the negative effects of slowing demand in emerging market economies and in the EU as a result of its monetary policy of keeping rates at near zero for long periods of time. This feeds back to the U.S. economy at a critical time....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NATO was formed in the days of the Truman administration on 25th July 1949, following the Berlin Blockade, the coup in Czechoslovakia by Soviets, and the efforts to set up pro soviet governments in Turkey and Greece. It accomplished its purpose by pushing back against the Soviet effort securing democracy in Greece and Turkey in the 1950's. Much of this was achieved under Heads of NATO from the US- Gen. Eisenhower, Gen. Ridgway, Gen. Guenther and Gern Norstad proteges of Ike all from West Point by 1964, when Brezhnev was new head of Soviet Union and by 1991 Warsaw Pact of Soviets setup in 1955 was dissolved yet NATO was not. The US interests shifted to Asia - Gen MacArthur leading a UN effort in Korea and the US leading its own effort in Vietnam in the 1960's. The Soviet threat actually receded after 1964 when Brezhnev became head of Soviet Union till 1982. During that period in the 1970's till today the face of NATO as today was from a series of heads of governments of Dutch Stikker in 1970's or other small European states such as Norway Stoltenberg and Rutte Netherlands again in 2025. It could be said that none of these leaders  of small EU countries represented US interests- or even European interests- a point the DJT administration is trying to make. It hurt the US in Venezuela as Russia propped up a regime which led to millions of refugees entering the US illegally. And it hurt Europe as Russia propped up the Syrian regime with millions of refugees entering Germany and destabilizing its political structure. Going back if a new defense institution was set up to replace NATO by the Europeans in 1970's this would have been the right step which would have not led to Russia propping up regimes in the Americas or the Middle East. A goal that is being discussed with Russia by the DJT administration to refocus American efforts in a new direction and pause not just the Ukraine war but also put the US  and Russia in a new direction with the new competition from 3 billion people in China and India. WSJ Editorial Board takes the British position on the Ukraine peace proposals with centuries old skeptical attitude on Russia's intentions. The US government position put forward by DJT is that there are constructive discussions with Russia, and the need to settle the underlying issues behind the conflict. This includes NATO's future. NATO setup in 1949 for Soviets,  on the borders of Russia in 2025 after the end of the Cold War when its rival the Warsaw Pact set up in 1955 of the Soviets was disbanded in 1991. The British position comes from centuries of conflict in Europe and its interests in protecting its Empire till the 1950's remaining unchanged, and cannot reflect American interests in the 21st century as its economy competes with China and India and the EU, and seeks to do this by keeping former colonial powers out of the Americas including Russia, and China.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
G-7 nations reach agreement for a global minimum tax of 15% a floor for taxes that the Biden administration finds acceptable. This agreement was reached at a meeting of the Treasury chiefs of the 7 G-7 countries in London on June 5, 2021. The G-7 countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, and US. Next agreement from Russia, China, India and Brazil in the G-20 nations would establish new ground rules for the major economies. The G-20 meeting is in Venice July 9-10. The OECD is steering the international efforts to achieve that goal. For the agreement to be effective a number of small nations that use tax rates of below 15% to attract business have to be part of the new rules. One of these countries is Ireland with a tax rate of 12.5%. For the Biden administration in the US the goal is a significant one as president Biden seeks business to pay its fair share so that long neglected priorities for education, healthcare, infrastructure, post pandemic improvements can be met. France and other nations in the EU face similar needs in the post pandemic environment. By setting a floor the Biden administration is both creating a new cultural concept of fairness in taxation and making it possible to finance the $2 trillion spending programs for these priorities of president Biden. Behind this are important facts that have left the large tech businesses paying little or no tax depriving governments of the very revenues that are needed for infrastructure and services for a modern well run state. The Biden administration seeks to include the tech businesses as well as all businesses in the new tax rules so that a uniform idea of fair taxation applies across the whole economy for the first time in two decades. In this way it makes up for the missed opportunities in the OBC administrations of Obama, Bush, Clinton that have led to loss of faith in the state and institutions in the US. A similar situation prevails in the UK,  France and Germany where previous administrations failed to address this important issue of fair taxation and financing infrastructure and priorities in health, education, and critical needs of the people.   ...

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