World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama first family and its many mulicultural faces from Kenyan, Indonesian, Chinese to African American and White abolitionists from Missouri. Truly a new face of the American continent. About 25% of white Americans have interracial marraiges and nearly half of all black Americans belong to a multiracial family, according to estimates made by Joshua Goldstein of the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. What it does is wake one up to the reality, the changes that have already ocurred in the country which most people had not realized. With Blacks, Hispanics, Jewish people, Asian Americans, the 25% of whites in interracial marraiges, recent immigrants, white women, and white males making up this mosaic of cultures and communities that makeup America. And the geographical mix is also just as varied, with the west and the northwest and the midwest and east having a bigger share of this mosaic than the south and the mountain states. Whites in interracial marraiges tends to breakup the traditional white protestant insular demographic. On the religious side there is a breakup of the traditional white demographic with Irish Americans especially those in the east tending to move away from the traditional white protestant insular demographic because of their own particular historical and cultural narrative. The Obama story is one of tapping into these different demographics and changing faces of America at the right time, when the conservative southern demographic, represented by the Bush family, combined with related demographic groups in counties and neighborhoods around the country had lost popular support from two wars and a failing economy....
The New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Stuart Stevens, the chief strategist of the Romney campaign points to the Romney campaign's success in getting a majority of votes of people making over $50,000, a majority of white voters under 30 by a 7 point margin, winning the votes of a majority of America's middle class, and falling short of a win of the Electoral College by 320,000 votes. He says Obama turned Democratic party weaknesses of being too liberal and too dependent on minorities into advantages. The Pew Research Center and other expert opinion cited as the principal reaon for the defeat, Romneys failure to empathize with voters. He appeared callous in his image with Hispanic voters with his self-deportation stand, and similiarly his position on the auto bailout was shown as callous in a barrage of political ads by the Obama campaign in the midwestern states, the remark about the 47% dependent on government help simply reinforced this notion of being insensitive to concerns of the less affluent. The candidate never succeeded in shaking off impressions in the minds of voters of being a private equity executive who could not empathize with weaker sections of the community, which were reinforced by heavy negative advertising in the 2012 election. Stevens says nothing about the short sightedness of a callous immigration policy of self-deportation adopted by a former governor of Massachusetts, in the face of Census statistics showing more children of minorities, especially Hispanics, born each year than children of any other demographic group in the U.S. The changing demographics may have made a crucial difference in many states....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Following the events in Charlottesville where a car drove into protesters, president Trump's remarks seemed to equate the actions of white supremacists to protesters. This has led to strong criticism from the business community with most business leaders withdrawing from the president's advisory councils from the business community- the Strategy and Policy Forum,  and Manufacturing Council. This includes the CEO's of Johnson and Johnson, Merck, JP Morgan Chase, GM, GE, 3M, and other companies. In his response president Trump disbanded both councils. JP Morgan Chase CEO Dimon said of the president's remarks- 'Constructive economic and regulatory policies are not enough and will not matter if we do not address the divisions in our country." Members of these councils had hoped to use their presence to have a voice. Yet by August 2017, 6 months into the Trump administration this appears to be changing, with CEO's of many companies expressing the view that the Republican policies favoring business would not matter if the basic consensus on tolerance and openness and what the U.S. stands for is allowed to deteriorate. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ's Monica Langley provides insights into Donald Trump's campaign strategies, some of them right out of his book "The Art of the Deal." His target voter is from a think big strategy to get voters across a broad spectrum using the slogan "Make America Great Again," with a knack of tapping into a deep well of voter frustration with the political establishment. How to get attention in the media is the next step Trump tackled by using social media to the fullest - using Twitter often, making statements that attract attention such as the ones on China, Mexico, Senator McCain and Muslims that tap into failure of political correctness to address voter frustration on trade and jobs, immigration and terrorism. The Trump campaign has 14 million followers on Twitter, and 50 million "engagement" accounts on Facebook- that cost very little. Social media is to Trump in 2016 what community networking on the PC dashboard was to Obama in 2008. As the WSJ pointed out in an editorial, the splitting of the Republican vote among many candidates, and the failure of candidates to grasp the nature of the unconventional campaign waged by Trump- descending into attacks based on target groups of voters on every candidate except Trump- created the opportunity Trump has grasped with his knack for improvising along the way. Commonsense campaigning without sophisticated strategies, improvising often along the way, using the available medium of social media at little cost to get the message and slogan across, helped Trump make the deal with voters to upset the political establishment. The Sanders campaign is also based on careful repetition of the same slogan and facts about inequality and lobbyists, over and over again, offering strong action on health care and college tution just as Trump offers strong action on China trade, immigration with the idea of the wall, and barring entry of Muslims for terrorism till "we figure out what's happening." The difference being that Trump thinks big and targets the entire electorate of his party's voters in the primaries from the beginning, and a broad based campaign on many issues. Underestimating your opponent carries many risks in politics, never more so than when you are out of touch or not listening to voter frustration, and fail to speak up to it....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One of the first questions by moderators in the Univision debate in Florida focussing on immigration issues related to the anti-immigrant sentiment fostered by Donald Trump. Trumps statements on Hispanics and Muslims came under withering criticism from Clinton and Sanders. Hillary Clinton stated in reference to the Trump campaign slogan "Make America Great Again" that you can't make America great by doing things that do not reflect America's values. She said she would continue to speak up against the anti-immigrant sentiment created by Trump's derogatory statements about immigrants.
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Romney emphasizes that he supports some of the popular parts of the Obama Healthcare Law such as coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. He tells voters he got everybody in his state insured. He also says there will not be a huge cut in taxes that would worsen the deficit. He would close loopholes and deductions to offset any deductions as shown by his advisor Harvard economist Martin Feldstein. The idea is to get a message across that will resonate with women, minorities, the middle class, workers, and business- the 100%, something he is able to do with some credibility having come from Massachusetts, a liberal state in the eastern United States.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama tax deal pushes tough decisions on spending into the future. It will put more money in people's pockets and as a result give a short term boost. Experts do not see long term benefits to the economy. It does not do what spending on much needed infrastructure and investment in other parts of the economy would do to give a long term lift to the economy.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Reactions of Republican state governors in the U.S. to president Obama's executive order on immigration. Presidential candidate Governor Jindal of Louisiana says about deportation efforts for illegal immigrants- "we will deal with people here illegally compassionately and fairly," while at the same time calling for greater security at the borders. Governor Kasich of Ohio asked about citizenship for undocumented immigrants- "I'm open to it, I will tell you that." Governors in Texas, Kansas and Wisconsin oppose the executive order.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Brooks points out that the best way to arrive at workable solutions is to take the best ideas from all sides of the political spectrum. The Republicans and the Democrats are too ideologically and politically driven and lack the imagination to come up with good solutions.
WSJ Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A UN Report shows that opium poopy cultivation is growing in Afghanistan and an enormous crop close to last year's record harvest is expected this year. 90% of the world's opium is grown in Afghanistan but it gets so little media attention compared to daily reports of injuries in the war such as on CBC for Canadian soldiers in the war zones and in other reports in American media. Of this about 52% of Afghan opium is grown in Helmand province which is largely controlled by the Taliban who finance their war with tax revenues from the opium farmers. The UN report also shows that most of the increased cultivation is happening in the south and west of the country worst hit by the insurgents. Areas where there is poor security or where there is not much help with seeds irrigation and other help for farming, are the ones that are mostly engaged in increased opium cultivation and areas where there is security and help with seeds and irrigation are the ones that don't cultivate opium. Looking at this state of affairs one would think that Western Europe and the USA which the UN report says must brace themselves for huge influx of this stuff, would rather than families and schools dealing with the problem at home in very difficult circumstances with high teenage use, would find it easier to finance seeds, fertilizer and irrigation and building of infrastructure in the country. However this shift to other farming would be possible if there is security and this requires a new policy in South Asia which reverses decades of policy that aggravated tensions in the region by not having a clear unambiguous direction of supporting peaceful economic development in the region which includes Pakistan and India and Afghanistan and Iran. Policy changed somewhat but a definite steering moving decisively in that direction needed to take place as first British policy in the pre1947 era and then American and British policy in the post 1947 period supported increased tensions in the area. Afghanistan thus ceased to exist as a country devoted to its own economic development but a place where the western powers engaged the soviet union, and then a place where Pakistan's military's policy of strategic depth against India led to the creation and support of the Taliban. By reversing this policy decisively and with direction as clear as daylight the western countries would instead of fighting these insurgents have Indians and Pakistanis work together alongside western country economic experts and agricultural experts to bring the infrastructure, electricity, irrigation, seeds, and fertilizer to these farmers across the whole of Afghanistan. Security would be mainly the responsibility of Indians, Pakistanis and Afghanis, and local leaders and people from the villages as westerners are easy targets of hostile action in a country used to fighting foreigners especially Europeans. That this may ventually happen but is slow to happen today can be attributed to how slow the process of sensible change is, how most people accept the way things are, which itself is a result of earlier policies which are themselves a result of still earlier policies. Thus pre-1947 British policy for Hindu and Muslim areas, is followed by America's Dulles policies turning India and Pakistan into aspects of the Cold War, followed by Reagan policy turning Afghanistan into aspects of the Cold War in reaction to Brezhnev's soviet policy in Kabuli affairs as a tit for tat, and this followed by the Bush policy reacting to the emergence of Saudi discontented volunteers in the Reagan supported Afghan war after Bin Laden's 9/11 attack in New York City. In the background a series of Indian leaders and Pakistan military leaders gave up any sensible steering in the direction of economic development by falling into the Cold war between 2 western factions or into a religious Hindu-Muslim strife war legacy from the earlier periods. What it means is that its hard in the human world we live in to to do anything but react, or be caught in a trap of thinking just the way we have been taught to think, or have accepted things as they are without thinking, with its resultant misery and ignorance and for south asia entrenched poverty. Its only with some grace and the right conditions and after a great deal of suffering which is true for Afghanistan war ruined countryside, Pakistan's poor economic conditions, and India's huge number of poor and economically depressed majority of the population and true also for westerners facing failed policy and failure of vision as economic conditions deteriorate at home....

Liquidity Now!

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How Martin Feldstein weighs the risks of inflation and of moral hazards in helping those who fueled the subprime crisis with their mistakes with the risks of a sharp downturn, and what thoughts he has on the issue of lowering rates just as the Bernbanke Fed prepares for its policy meeting September 18, 2007. He looks for a cut starting from the current 5.25% to 4.25% or even less depending on the situation as it evolves. Feldstein gives a measure for household wealth that will be lost and what will be lost in consumer spending as a result. His measure is for a 20% cumulative fall in house prices that would reduce household wealth by $4 trillion which would impact consumer spending by about $200 billion, thats about 5% consumers would spend more if they had that $4 trillion. This works out to about 1.5% of GDP which he suggests would tip the US economy into a recession. This is not counting the loss of access to spendable cash that the consumer has used for the last decade in terms of mortgage equity withdrawals which totaled $9 trillion this last decade and financed a lot of the sustained consumer spending, these mortgage equity withdrawals to finance spending would decline significantly in the new conditions. In addition with more defaults and falling prices in a vicious circle the process could accelerate quickly, further impairing the portfolios of banks and financial institutions causing some to collapse. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein points out that other recent recessions were of short duration because the the Fed tightenend monetary policy to get back to price stability so that the Fed had some control over duration. This time the six years of steady house price increases has created a bubble which is the cause of this recession, and to make things worse it has affected the creditworthiness of institutions, as a cloud hangs over the assets carried by financial institutions because complex securities were created with risky mortgages and dispersed throughout assets of these financial institutions. So there is only so much the Fed can do. Feldstein is pessimistic about how long this recession could last. Feldstein faults the poor supervision and bank examinations of the Fed over banks and institutions they lend to such as nonbank financial institutions.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

Only Trump Can Trump Trump

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Thomas Friedman of the NYT points out the three aces held by Donald Trump in the U.S. election campaign of 2016. He could move to the centre in a campaign against Hillary Clinton and voters could give him a pass saying he only meant to start a conversation on immigration with his comment on the wall, that his comments on Muslims read carefully only means he would tighten controls on some countries, that he was acting in the way he said in his book "The Art of the Deal." A terrorist attack could change the atmosphere in the election and benefit Trump. And he could set a barrage of ads against Hillary bringing anti-Hillary Republicans back to his side after the divisions in a Republican convention. On the opposite side of this is Trump's penchant for making wild statements that could lead to a break with his support base, especially women who are shifting away according to some recent polls in mid March. Another vulnerability says Friedman is the rough way in which minorities are treated at Trump rallies, which could backfire with a serious incident resulting in hugely negative media coverage....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that a centrist solution is not the panacea it sounds. A lot depends on what it is and what is seen as centrist, if it really is centrist, and if it makes sense. A centrist proposal that leaves out tax expenditures but is different from the positions staked out by the factions on both sides of the political spectrum, and sounds moderate may not be the right solution.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Haberman and Thrush of the NYT provide an account of what happened at the White House when U.S. president Trump met privately with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to work out a deal on the Dreamers, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, called DACA, that under president Obama allowed 800,000 young immigrants to stay in the country. President Trump had earlier said he would reverse DACA. DACA was setup under an executive order by president Obama in 2012 to allow immigrant children brought in under the age of 16 to stay in the country, with maximum age 30. In 2014 a second executive order by president Obama expanded this to include children under the age of 18, with no maximum age. Both executive orders were opposed by Republicans. In the meeting Chuck Schumer answered Trump's question on delaying or changing Trump's mind on DACA, "what's in it for me?"  Schumer said Democrats would work with Trump on new legislation on border security, but not on funding for a border wall. Trump agreed to work on a deal, including no deportations for a six month period. After different back and forth in the media, typical of the politics in immigration issues, the president says he is ready to work out a deal on DACA, if the Democrats work with him on toughening border security. Both Democrats and Republicans in Congress now agree that steps have to be taken on border security in stages. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A survey of 414 National Association of Business Economics (NABE) economists shows Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson with 15%, overtaking Trump at 14% on who would best manage the economy. On protectionist views only 9% support this. 15% said they have no opinion and 55% said Hillary Clinton would do the best job of managing the economy. About 62% say the election uncertainty is holding back growth. Some aspects of Hillary Clinton's economic plan are the $275 billion infrastructure investment over 10 years, taking action against companies that ship jobs overseas, a capital gains tax paln that encourages long term investments, supporting $15 minimum wage, making upward mobility a top priority, providing government financed access to public colleges for working class and lower income groups. Donald Trump's plan has suffered form lack of specifics, shifting comments, lack of careful study, and excessive use of slogans. Both candidates oppose trade agreements that shift jobs overseas. Trump's plan also suffers from lack of credibility overseas as this is important in a global business structure, with fears of protectionism increasing. and reminding people of the protectionism under Smoot-Hawley that increased the damage from the depression of the thirties. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post cites the Pew poll of September 3-7, 2015, on the Iran nuclear deal of July 2015, showing increase in skepticism about the deal's provisions by people who are informed to some extent (a little or a lot) about its details- 57% opposing to 27% supporting. The strongly partisan opinion on the issue, and the lobbying on both sides, including bringing Iraq WMD into the picture as noted by Dana Milbank in another column in the Washington Post, overstates each case. This draws attention away from the actual provisions. About 30% have no opinion it appears because the issue of this magnitude involving nuclear weapons proliferation has become politicized when it should be examined only on its merits, where public opinion would be shaped by the details of the deal itself, not who has negotiated it. The Pew Research Center poll shows 21% support the agreement negotiated with Iran, 49% disapprove, 30% offer no opinion. This compares with a poll taken 6 weeks before in July 2015 showing 33% supporting it and 45% opposing it. ...
New York Times Original article ›

Support LyrArc

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

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


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