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.


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
Xi Jinping is seen in this WSJ report as putting China on a course as a competitor of the US compared to other leaders such as Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin, yet these prior leaders faced a enoromous gap in technology and capital to make it ludicrous. The shrinking of this gap is a result of free markets theory that took no account of the national interests of the US or of the European Union in shifting manufacturing lock stock and barrel to China.  A deeper look at China requires looking at it from putting oneself in China's situation since the period of the 1912 revolution and the 1919 May 4th movement for Science, Modernization and Democracy, to better understand its motives and realities. Jiang Zemin could not pose the question of competing with the US at the time because China's per capita GDP was less than $100 in 1990 and by 2000 during Hu Jintao's term still about a tenth of American per capita GDP.  Even today with population in North America of about 500 million in the economies of US, Canada and Mexico, China lags far behind in technology and capital resources. The Biden administration does not believe in this idea of free markets theory, wrong from the beginning that prevailed incredibly and puzzingly for too long, that it does not matter where you make as long as it is made at the least cost anywhere. It ignored what China and the US under Biden both believe for the US or China that the US is its people and the people is the country. For the US the Civil war itself as Lincoln said in rallying people to the Union, was fought because labor was more important than capital. When looked at the situation in China as stated by Xi at the party congress recently is for having made progress for the overriding goal of Modernization to build a moderately prosperous socialist economy. Huge problems in China remain hidden- ensuring self governance that is honest and accountable to the people, creating jobs and opportunities for hundreds of millions of young people even as supply chains shift after the pandemic in Europe and the US, India and other countries to their home countries for Made In USA, Made in Europe, and Made in India. China is not such a believer in the flawed free markets theory of the non existence of national interest to not grasp the natural aspects of the US and EU, India wanting to build their own manufacturing up again to the fullest. In this situation it also probably realizes the need for a pause to the rampant free markets type of growth that has damaged China's water, air and environment as much as it has damaged the world through climate change. Quality of growth is the new ethos and this gives the US and China, India, the EU and other countries a common frontier to shoot for. The nuclear aspect is also there and managing this well is a common interest for all countries exercizing responsible leadership. ...
International Monetary Fund IMF Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the statements on the IMF Blog on Inclusive Growth raises the question-Does the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, as an American institution funding developing countries, and economists, grasp what people find troubling in 2022? One of the lessons of the economic crises for families and workers in the US and other countries is that wisdom, a grasp of the soul of a country and its people through the thinking of its founders, and common sense, should drive managing of economies, with a knowledge of how economies work- not economists. Some of that is already happening. America's central bank is headed by Jerome Powell who has wide experience and has knowledge of how the economy runs, is not an economist. He was chosen by president Trump and continues to have the confidence of president Biden for this very reason. Some of the statements on the IMF economic blog are- "Why jobs are plentiful and workers are scarce" Jan 2022 "In the US and UK recent labor market the puzzle, can be partly explained by mismatch, the pandemic's effect on women and older workers leaving the work force." The Reality Wages for teachers are depressed compared to workers in the financial and economics industries, in a frighteningly disproportionate way. When it comes to logistics, hospitality, leisure and restaurants industries workers were paid poorly for what is hard work and long days. In case the IMF economists, and economists at companies, missed this it was called the Great Resignation, people simply choosing to reject the conditions that were handed down to them by the financial industry and economists who built the economic structures of recent decades. Women leaving the workforce are faced with issues of mental health coping with added responsibilities of children at home for the two years, loss of income and widespread mental health problems. The word mental health may be beyond the grasp of economists and the financial industry, yet it is the one of the biggest problems for people. Another pernicious effect noted on the pages of the WSJ is that young white men are dropping out after school because they cannot afford college in alarming numbers. Leading to the kind of discontent for workers and families that president Biden is struggling to address. On IMF Blog- "IMF Podcasts: The Year in Review" Dec. 2021 "The past year has brought us new challenges even as the old ones persist. If anything, the ongoing pandemic has taught us to think differently abut tackling the challenges and questions when it comes to thinking about big issues such as climate change, gender equality, inflation and economic measurement." The Reality Climate change lumped in with economic measurement and inflation. The floods, fires, river and reservoir water levels affecting access to basic life supporting water, drought, all over the world are of a magnitude that is missed entirely.The response to a challenge of this type requires the kind of leadership that president Biden has provided for the world with his $360 billion climate change bill as just the first step of many, and  comprehensive policies covering all aspects of the climate crisis. ON IMF bog- "How Domestic Violence is a Threat to Economic Development." "Stopping violence against women is not only a moral imperative, new evidence shows it can help the economy." The Reality Domestic violence hurts children growing up in such households. It is not so much a moral imperative as it is bad for men, women and children. So many things are wrong about it and it is made worse in conditions of low wages and poor working conditions in poor neighborhoods lacking education. These neighborhoods are also affected by lack of healthcare and the opioid crisis and mental health issues. Not investing in education and healthcare in these communities is what is simply wrong, and which the founders of America as a nation, particularly Lincoln, would find appalling.   Relationship between Capital (the Financial Industry) and Labor (Workers and Families) On the basic issue of the relationship between capital and labor, the IMF and the financial industry, economists, and the economic structure they built in recent decades, have simply got it wrong. It violates both common sense and wisdom, and violates the spirit of the founders particularly Abraham Lincoln. This is what Abraham Lincoln had to say on Upward Mobility, the ease with which each generation can do better than the one before it, as critical in the fight to save the Union. This is from the Annual Message to Congress Dec. 3, 1861, at the start of the Civil War. That upward mobility has been lost in the US with ideas that "place capital on an equal if not above labor, in the structure of government," for the last three decades in the US after the early post war period of Truman and Eisenhower, Kennedy-Johnson.  And Lincoln says this about a hired laborer being fixed in that condition for life, or of future generations of that hired laborer facing disabilities and burdens, similar to the loss of upward mobility for the people today. "Now there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed, nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false, and all inferences based on them are groundless." "Labor is prior to, and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed, if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are worthy of protection as any other rights." "Again: there is not, of necessity, any such thing as the free hired laborer being fixed to that condition for life. Many independent men everywhere in these states, a few years back in their lives, were hired laborers. The prudent penniless beginner in the world, labors for wages awhile, saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself, then labors on his own account another while, and at length hires another new beginner to help him. This is the just, and generous, and prosperous system, which opens the way to all- gives hope to all, and consequent energy, and progress, and improvement of condition to all." Lincoln even offers this warning- No men living are more worthy to be trusted than those who toil up from poverty- none less inclined to take, or touch, aught which they have not honestly earned. Let them beware of surrendering a political power which they already possess, and which if surrendered, will surely be used to close the door of advancement against such as they, and to fix new disabilities and burdens upon them, till all of liberty shall be lost." US president Biden has these ideas in mind as he struggles with one piece of legislation after another to restore what once was, to open the door of advancement, to remove these disabilities and burdens that Lincoln speaks of, and in so doing restoring liberty.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Schumer calls it a "momentous 24 hours here in the US Congress, a legislative one two punch that you rarely see." Schumer negotiated a major climate change action bill for $369 billion in the Senate, that also covers tax changes to cover costs, and helps cut drug and health care expenses of Americans. The second quarter shows healthy job gains of average 375,000 a month and unemployment at 3.6%. The economy declined by 1.1% but much of this was from a slowdown in home and business construction sectors sensitive to higher interest rates and from higher inventory. Consumer spending increased by 1% during the quarter. The Fed's series of 0.75 percentage points interest rate increases had softened inflation expectations before they get entrenched in the economy. This makes it possible for Democrats to present a message to ordinary Americans that president Biden is getting things done with 2 legislative achievements. A $280 billion bill for investment in the semiconductor industry in the US. And a huge win on climate change with the $269 billion Schumer is negotiating in the US Congress. It is the opposite of what Republicans are saying is Biden's failure to tackle inflation. Appropriately Biden and Schumer are calling this the bill the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. How did Schumer get this done? After the Ukraine war and EU decision to shut down Russian oil supplies, cut oil and gas use by 15%, and the climate change action inducing fires and floods, there is increasing awareness about climate change action as vital for our future all over the world. This gives more confidence to Democrats to negotiate a temporary continuation of oil and gas, with increased exports of US LNG to Europe. Senator Manchin from an energy producing state of West Virginia was brought over to Schumer's side with this idea. What Biden gets is a 40% reduction of US carbon emissions over 2005 levels, enough to get within reach of the 50% he promised at COP26 in Glasgow. It is a win-win for all sides and for the American people, and shows that patience and hard work, and persistence in the face of adversity can bring results. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
XI Jinping tells China's National People's Congress that "western nations- including the US- have implemented all round containment, encirclement and suppression against us, bringing unprecedentedly severe challenges to development." Addressing the private sector Chamber of Commerce representatives which create significant number of jobs in China he said the Communist Party "has always regarded private enterprises and private entrepreneurs as our own people, and will always support them whenever they run into difficulties." Job creation in China is a challenge with high youth unemployment estimated at about 20%. The pandemic worsened the situation for state finances and for unemployment for migrants, the construction slowdown has added to this. The burden of trillions of dollars of local government debt increased during the pandemic with the central government lacking the resources to help, creating problems in the local economies.  This WSJ report says Xi's speech seeks to present his government's performance in the light of these challenges and future challenges as growth slows in China. The trading relationship with US-EU added to employment and income problems for China's economy and people, yet it had one weakness an over concentration in manufacturing in one country that European and US business placed in one country. The building of a  new supply chain that creates manufacturing in other countries to reduce this concentration, and the limits placed on access to western technologies by China to protect US-EU in competition, places new development challenges for China, which Xi alludes to. In the past China was able to use huge stimulus to tackle its debt by creating more growth that supported this debt creation. The pandemic may finally have reversed this as trillions of dollars of debt have built up, and construction of homes and infrastructure has reached a saturation point. This is the kind of situation that Japan entered in the 1990's after three decades of torrid growth and development rates. History is being repeated as China like Japan is entering a new phase of an aging society. In this sense the challenges China is facing are very different from that of Russia. Creating jobs is a perennial problem in India and China with their large populations and rising aspirations of people after centuries of underdevelopment, something that Europe including Russia does not face in anywhere to a similar degree. in this sense there is more in common between the EU and Russia even when they are in a war, than Russia and China, and China has more in common with India. The struggle in Europe as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms has pointed out in his History of Europe, is more about the balance of power which is the story of European history since the 1450's where no one country has been allowed to act with impunity in invading its neighbors and other countries formed a concerted group to prevent this. Be it France, Austria, Britain or Russia that acted seemingly with impunity. China has little to do with it or Europe's history. President Biden is right to say that the US only competes with China in the economic and business fields, and seeks to find common ground on climate change and food insecurity. The US has supported China throughout the twentieth century since the time of Woodrow Wilson in 1913, around the period when Tsinghua University was established with US help. The US helped China during the Japanese invasion and the Cold War period ended with renewed relations.  ...
The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The firing of John Bolton as National Security Adviser opens up the possibility of a meeting of Trump with President Rouhani of Iran. There is a need for both sides to begin talks on a nuclear deal that would replace the one Iran signed with president Obama to address issues raised by Mr. Trump and Republicans. Iran and countries that buy oil from Iran such as India, China and Japan have an interest in relief from sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on imports of Iranian oil. The European Union is keen to preserve aspects of the nuclear deal. Relief from sanctions is critical for Iran to develop its economy. The last two decades have seen Iran struggle to develop its economy with the sanctions imposed by  different U.S. administrations.   President Trump expressed flexibility on sanctions saying "we will see what happens. I think Iran has potential. They are incredible people." President Rouhani urged Mr. Trump "to put warmongers aside." Mr. Trump told reporters that he had resisted Mr. Bolton's opinions on issues and realized he had moderate views when compared to someone like Bolton.  Trump told Iran "We are not looking for regime change. We hope we can make a deal and if we can't make a deal thats fine too. But I think they have to make a deal." Helping the U.S. and Iran come to talks is president Macron of France who hopes to setup a meeting at the UN General Assembly which meets next week following his efforts at the G-7 meeting in France last month. In the past when tensions were high in the Straits of Hormuz President Trump refrained from aggravating this by saying actions that are "disproportionate" should not be taken and respected Iranian intentions. The tone of the conversation between the two sides has moderated to the point where both sides realize the need for coming to some compromise. This is in sharp contrast to the period a few months ago with rising tensions in the Straits of Hormuz and the seizure of an Iranian ship. Bolton's opinions were not the only issue for president Trump. He was also seen as the source of leaks including one that said Mike Pence, the Vice President, had opposed Mr. Trump's plan to bring the Taliban to Camp David. Also contributing to the new climate for talks is Mike Pompeo the Secretary of State, who has promoted the idea of talks with Iran. He told the media about such a meeting at the UN General Assembly in New York- "Sure. The president has made it very clear that he is prepared to meet with no pre-conditions." The willingness to try new ideas even contrary ones to policy pursued only a short while ago as long as the desired goal is reached is a feature of this presidency and key advisers. From the beginning of the Trump administration there is a firm sense of the need to end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. and reduce foreign entanglements that have dragged on wasting resources and destroying priorities. With a willingness to try all sorts of approaches even ones that appear to be contradictory always keeping the end goal in sight. ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Awareness about climate change is increasing. A poll in 2017 shows 61% of people in 38 countries seeing it as a big threat. Only terrorists inspired bigger fear. Even with the U.S. withdrawal from the climate change agreement many cities and states in the U.S. including California and New York are committed to the goals set in the Paris Accords. China is making a shift away from coal and fossil fuels. Yet the huge demands in Asia, particularly India as it shifts from a rural to an urbanized economy, mean that the shift away from fossil fuels is going to be very difficult. In the last decade 2006-2016 energy demand in Asia increased by 40%, according to the Economist, oil and coal use increased by about 3% a year and natural gas at 5.2% a year. Solar energy and wind power use is increasing and solar becoming cost efficient. Yet Asia still depends on fossil fuels. Even the use of electric cars in China as it pushes for higher numbers of electric vehicles means use of energy coming from a electricity grid powered two thirds by coal, producing more carbon dioxide than some very efficient gasoline driven car models. There are short term costs in the shift from coal but this comes with a better cleaner air demanded by urban residents, and less costs in health. In certain countries like India the costs are to be balanced with the need to tackle rural poverty.   ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This leader in The Economist reviews an essay in the magazine's October 8-14th, 2016 edition by U.S. president Obama. In it Obama points to the unfinished tasks of his presidency and what comes next as tasks to be done for the U.S. economy. The Economist points out the problems in the 2016 election campaign where there is a lack of discussion of economic issues as a serious problem. Obama lists as priorities efforts to improve conditions of people left out in the recovery, reducing inequality, offering more job opportunities, and increasing productivity.

The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Thomas Friedman of the NYT sees a climate change as an area in which Trump has ignored the information of eminent scientists. He sees a weakness of the Trump administration in Trump's putting no importance to briefings by experts from climate change to national security briefings. Friedman sees Russia and hacking as a major issue facing the new Trump administration, including the new hearings in Congress from leading Republicans on the cyberattacks.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The International Energy Agency says China used 2.252 billion tons of oil equivalent in 2009 compared to the 2.170 billion tons of oil equivalent used by the USA. This oil equivalent measure covers crude oil, nuclear energy, coal, natural gas and renewable energy like hydropower. To give an idea of the scale of the increase- China's total energy use was only half of that of the USA in 1999 ten years ago. China plans to reduce emissions by cutting the carbon dioxide per unit of GDP by 40-45% from 2005 levels by 2020. But China looks at higher energy use in the years ahead. Much of the energy use is propelled by infrastructure building and energy intensive use in industries.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times reports that comments from Obama administration officials describe an alarming loss of trust and confidence between China and the USA over the last two years. David Shambaugh, director of the China Policy program at George Washington University, says the administration had hoped to work with China on major challenges like climate change, nuclear nonproliferation, and a new global economic order. China, he says, has failed to step up and play that role. He describes the Chinese as responding as an increasingly narrow-minded, self-interested truculent, hyper-nationalist, and powerful country. Jeffrey Baker, a key China policy adviser in the White House, says China's responses reflected a sense in Beijing that China was a rising power and the USA a declining power, especially after the strong rebound of the Chinese economy after the 2008 crisis. The administration is determined to counteract that impression. Other factors complicate things. China is facing a transition to a new leadership in the next year. There are differences within the Chinese Communist party leadership ranks about the direction China should take. Trade and currency issues have come to the point where American public opinion is shifting greatly, with educated professionals changing their views on trade and currency matters. See the recent WSJ/NBC September 2010 poll on world trade, reported by Murray and Belkin in WSJ, Oct 2, 2010. The Obama administration cannot ignore the deep concerns of the American people on these issues. The House overwhelmingly voted in September to threaten China with tariffs on its exports if the Chinese currency, the renminbi, is not allowed to appreciate significantly enough (experts estimate that it is overvalued by 20%). It is not clear whether the Administration's rhetoric on this issue is to assuage public opinion in a business as usual manner, or expected to achieve substantative results to rebalance world trade. The G-20 summit in S. Korea leaves this change for well into the future- China with current account surplus of 5.8% of GDP in 2009 is expected to lower this to 4% by 2015. With the high jobless rate in the US and the large and rising current account deficit, the United States may have reached a juncture where this cannot be put off well into the future years. Other issues, the different foreign policy objectives, and differing perceptions of China and the US of each other, the relationship with US allies in the region, may create additional tensions. These tensions may be navigated by governments of both countries, but the shift in American public opinion on trade, currency and jobs issues will require tangible and real change. As trade tensions will only increase in the next two years with the lack of fiscal stimulus on the jobs front, and no significant change in jobs expected from the Fed's purchase af additional Treasury debt, and a sense that the mutual benefit in the trade relationship with China has been lost to America's serious detriment. China's position may be perceived as stronger than it really is from the faster rebound from the 2008 crisis, and may in reality not be as Jeffrey Baker sees it. As David Barboza has reported in the New York Times, and experts have pointed out, the huge amount of lending encouraged by the government has accentuated weaknesses in the Chinese economy. A significant amount has gone into real estate speculation and will only increase the bad loans on the books of China's banks. This happens at the very time that growth is expected to slow down and make it harder to absorb the bad loans, as was done in the past. ...
http://www.hindustantimes.com/ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Prakash and Ghosh in the Hindusthan Times remind readers that even though India has ambitious plans for renewable energy much remains to be done in shifting to clean coal technologies. An estimated 80% of India's coal plants use obsolete technologies, making this an obvious area for improvement. India plans to make solar the source of 100GW of 175GW it plans to generate in renewable energy by 2022. Yet it must not be forgotten that coal is a dominant source for the foreseeable future and shifting to clean coal technologies is an area that should get top priority from the government. Today India is the third largest in terms of carbon emissions after the U.S and China.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NYT fails to see the importance of delivering on infrastructure building in scale, reshoring, wages and jobs for workers, and climate change action that president Biden is achieving to build a better America. NYT looks at the 2023 and the midterm elections and points out a well known fact that women (and men) in the suburbs care about legalized abortion rights for women, and this extends to states that vote Republican in the south. No attention is given to the importance of infrastructure building, increasing wages and jobs for working class and middle class Americans, bringing factories and investment back to the US, three issues that brought Mr. Trump into office in 2016 coming out of nowhere. Mr. Biden is old is the refrain. Yet it is president Biden who has delivered on infrastructure where Mr. Trump merely talked about it -Building America Better- as Biden pointed out in the State of the Union address in 2023. Biden has delivered in support for wage increases for workers, even joining the picket line at the UAW auto workers strike in Detroit. He was able to do this because he has spent more years in Congress than any other senator, and like Lyndon Johnson for the Great Society programs and desegregation in the 1960's was able to win support from moderate Republicans. Being older, having the wisdom and experience was and is indispensable in the American project started by Washington and sustained by Lincoln, who nurtured wisdom, experience, fully comprehending the people's problems, and mindfulness in the way Mr. Biden does. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With Obama's popularity rating in 2016 similar to Reagan's in his last year in office at 51%, he announced his endorsement of Hillary Clinton for president. Obama is likely to campaign in 2016 for Hillary to reunite the Democratic Party, bring Bernie Sanders and Sander's supporters behind the Democratic nominee, including younger women.

The way ahead

The Economist Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The moderate positions of both parties in political life in Australia and New Zealand compared to the U.S.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
India is an attractive place for foreign investors with the country moving up 23 places in the ease of doing business rankings of the World Bank. Growth is faster than China since 2015, and GDP is expected to double to $5 trillion by 2030, according to government think tank NITI Aayog. Corporate deal making from foreign investors exceeds that in China. Mergers and acquisitions targeting Indian companies reaching a total of $93.7 billion in 2018, up 52% from last year, according to Dealogic. Overseas purchases were $39.5 billion for India in 2018 compared to $32.8 billion for China. In comparison to China where trade tensions are increasing, India under the Modi government has improved the ease of doing business- implementing a new bankruptcy code, easing foreign direct investment rules, introduced a nationwide goods and services tax to replace a hodge podge of taxes in different states. In the consumer sector Unilever NV made purchase of a malted drink brand Horlicks from GlaxoSmithKline PLC as part of a $3.75 billion deal. Softbank led a $1 billion investment in OYO Hotels. In infrastructure Tata Steel made a $8.3 billion acquisition of steelmaker Bhushan Steel. Reliance Jio's aggressive push in mobile with low prices is leaving the telecom industry ripe for mergers and consolidation- Bharti Infratel acquired Indus Towers for $6.5 billion. Closely held family companies are also selling out their controlling stakes. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Brooks on the Obama inaugural address- what it said about America's progressive character and the need for collective action, and what it left out about the individual initiative and innovation that made America what it is today.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says president Obama's second inaugural address missed the opportunity to bind old wounds with a reference to King on Martin Luther King day. The president chose to set forth a broader liberal agenda including climate change. The editorial points to the tone of the inaugural as setting the tone for the rest of the term and the possibility of return to the rancor that characterized the first term. "We the People" from the Consititution was mentioned several times in the sense of "collective action" that defined this text as government action. The programs of Medicare Medicaid and Social Security as "committments we make to each other." And the programs "do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great," which are seen by the Journal as not appropriate for an Inaugural address that rises above the fray of politics.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Nicolas Tenzer, who teaches at Sciences Po in Paris, says that the new relationship between U.S. president Trump  and the French president Macron, is a result of Macron having the capacity to react quickly and follow his intuition. He says there is even a bit of seduction in this for the younger Macron to bring the older Trump back into the circle, knowing that Europe needed someone who could talk to the American president in a way that others did not choose to or just could not. This includes chancellor Merkel of Germany. The relationship started out awkwardly with Macron expressing some disdain after the Trump decision to withdraw from the Paris climate change agreement. Soon after the initial differences Macron's spokesperson Castaner said that it was an important task, that "of bringing the president of the United States back into the circle." It is an intelligent move and typical of Macron to move quickly and do things that make sense in the interest of the EU and America. On Bastille day the French are also honoring the U.S. for the sacrifices in two wars, and it made sense to bring the U.S. president in so that other differences could be set aside to work together on issues such as terrorism, mutual security, and trade. It is not uncommon to have seen such differences, and they were handled differently in the past. German chancellor Schmidt had a difficult relationship with president Jimmy Carter. Carter with his rural Georgia background as a peanut farmer was seen in the way Trump is seen in many parts of Europe. President Bush was also treated with skepticism in Germany, more for policies of going to war in Iraq.  For Macron it shows his uncanny ability to do things which for other people may not sound convincing. Being critical of the U.S. president may also have set the stage for a real relationship because it may have earned him the respect of being someone who had his views and was not hesitant to express them, just as he was on Algeria and other issues. And yet willing to have a friendly, open conversation with someone from a different background and with different views. At Lyrarc we singled out the Spiegel Macron interview on the fast train to Bordeaux, as something that showed him to be comfortable and calm  in unusual settings, and not affected by the magnitude of the task at hand or people's opinions. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A shift to a limited agenda based on increasing the minimum wage, immigration reform and use of executive orders to get things done.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

Support LyrArc

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

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


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