LyrArc Article Gist
Brazil held the Olympics and the World Soccer Cup, building new stadiums and living off the boom in oil and metals prices under previous governments. Today not only is there a lack of funding for infrastructure, healthcare, education and transportation.   This is now leading to lack of investment in healthcare services in a shocking way. The first full blown epidemic of yellow fever is hitting Brazil's cities of Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo. Officials fear that it will spread in an area that has 23 million people if it hits the slums where A.aegyoti mosquitoes are to be found in swarms. Rio and Sao Paulo are trying to tackle it by vaccinating 23 million people. Yellow fever kills about 3-8% of people affected. The economic crisis with lack of funds, and the political crisis that has affected Brazil with corruption scandals has led to a delayed response, according to experts at UCLA infectious disease center.  The disease is traced to loggers and monkeys in the Amazon region which usually remains contained in that region. SInce 2016 the lack of a strong official response has led to the crisis where monkeys carry it a mile a day all the way south to the Rio and Sao Paulo region. A effective government response would have included the use of media to educate people on the need for vaccination for all except newborns and pregnant mothers. Instead social media Facebook and You Tube spread the idea that the vaccination was dangerous, anti vaccine persons who normally got no audience trashed the vaccine. So that today public health authorites have to deal with this problem. The vaccination is highly effective and invented in the 1930's, was not started till November 2016, even though the spread southward from the Amazon region started in 2016. In fact says Dr Marquez, an expert at the University of Pittsburgh, only one in 100,000 gets a reaction and one in a million dies. He says compared to this 6% of 30 million people in the region affected could lose their lives, or  2 million deaths. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The system of using performance evaluations for "forced" or "stack" ranking of employees started with Jack Welch at General Electric. Microsoft adopted the system under Ballmer till 2013, when it decided that the need for teamwork was more important and discontinued the practice. Welch used it to get rid of "underperformers" or managers who did not conform to his requirements when he became CEO of General Electric. It was his personal style and way of bringing change to GE. The practice of "forced" ranking increases competition inside the company instead of teamwork, say managers, and leaves a lot to the caprice of individual managers. In December 2013 Ballmer facing criticism from his Board for missing some of the disruptive technologies in the information tech business and falling behind Apple and Google, sought the advice of Alan Mulally of Ford Motor Company. Mulally had to fight entrenched Japanese competitors and pull Ford out of a crisis in which even Ford's logo had been put up as collateral for loans. Meeting for 4 hours on Mercer Island in Seattle Mulally told Ballmer that he focussed on teamwork and simplifying the way Ford did things. Ballmer phased out the "forced" ranking system as one of the last major steps before he leaves Microsoft. In today's environment for tech companies of intense competition worldwide and disruptive technologies without teamwork and employees looking to come up with new and exciting products the future is surely lost. Having the "bottom" 50% of the employees compete for limited positions can be dangerous or suicidal without the dominant position in markets that GE and Microsoft had. It also makes no sense to substitute internal competition and capricious manager behaviours for teamwork. It is the responsibility of managers to do as much as possible to make good hiring decisions, and then motivate and help employees to achieve their best performance with frequent helpful feedback, and to promote teamwork. This is the lesson Ford learned through its crisis and Microsoft is now learning....

LyrArc Article Gist
Infratest Dimap polling institute is commissioned by DW.com to find out what Germans think of the refugee policy of chancellor Merkel one year later. In summer 2015 Merkel said on Aug 31, "We can do it." Costs related to the refugees are about $17 billion, do Germans think services are overstretched for education, healthcare housing and other services. On the other side German society is aging and for every 100 unemployed people there are 200 open positions for skilled personnel. But the refugees who are accepted do not have the skills required and have to acquire the skills or given training and education. On this issue DW.com asked the question whether it will strengthen the German economy. About 51% agree and 45% disagree on this question, and about the same number agree and disagree on the question that Germany will be overstretched providing the services for housing, education, healthcare and other services. The higher educated and young are more favorable to accepting refugees, with those over 50 and basic schooling unfavorable. On the AfD side most people are unfavorable, and in the Greens party most are favorable. On terrorist incidents probability, over 58% think this is more likely, 38% disagree. On the question of whether this will make Germany more diverse 56% agree, 40% disagree. Overall the situation appears to be balanced, with a range of views expressed, and the positive and negative sentiment "evenly balanced", says DW.com.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Economist Paul Krugman points out the risks of a trade war in the tariffs announced for steel and aluminium by president Trump. Yet he accepts that he advocated stronger action on China's currency in 2009-2010 when the U.S. economy was weaker. In the past on the TPP agreement proposed by president Obama, Krugman said that it would have an insignificant impact as most of the gains on trade were already made. Here Krugman is critical of the language used by president Trump about trade wars being "easy."  This is taken out of context though as president Trump is saying that it is easy in the context of a country enjoying a $100 billion surplus with the U.S., because that country is going to have incentives to maintain a good trading relationship with the U.S. Essentially this means that the steel industry in the U.S. benefits. China also benefits as it closes many of the older steel plants that led to overproduction. This would reduce overcapacity in China's steel industry, a problem China's economic planners see as a priority. China already is making the shift to higher technology products and this process will be accelerated, as it puts less emphasis on steel and metals as it did in its earlier stage of development. As a result contrary to textbook economics this has the potential to be a win-win solution for the U.S. and China in the long run. So little was done under the Bush and Obama administrations to manage trading relationships with other countries so that the interests of small communities across the U.S. were protected from unfair trade- that Reagan administration trade expert Robert Lighthizer took up the cause of the U.S.,workers in these communities. Surveys showed U.S. public opinion also had shifted among educated, professionals and middle class on this issue by 2015, against unfair trade that hurt U.S. interests. Robert Lighthizer is now the Trade Representative for the U.S. in the Trump administration. Reports in the WSJ about the discussion within the Trump economic council, show Gary Cohn favored not imposing the tariffs on steel and aluminum. Lighthizer advocated the tariffs and was able to convince the president.  For Trump this presents a win-win situation, as a mild response by China -and other trading nations that have enjoyed a favorable situation in the past -with its huge surplus and favorable trading relationship with the U.S. would present a win for the president. Economist Krugman accepts this when he says tariffs in the current context of the trading field- that is more favorable to other countries- are not such a big deal, only the use of such policy that is likely to endanger world trade.  As in much of the debate that takes place this adds to the headlines today yet provides delayed and limited relief to communities across the U.S. devastated by world trade as documented by experts who studied trade patterns and their effect on regions across the U.S.  As the WSJ points out in one report the trade deficit itself may continue to grow under president Trump because of other factors. The U.S. dollar surged 8% during the last 2 years of the Obama administration with the economic recovery underway. With Trump's election win the dollar surged another 3%. This may play a bigger role in the direction of the trade deficit than the new steel tariffs announced by president Trump. Workers and unions matter. As TPP pushed by Democratic party president Obama was opposed by the unions, and by the auto industry (workers and auto companies) in the midwestern states which suffered a hollowing out in the last decade. A WSJ survey after the election showed Clinton received 56% support from union workers in 2018 compared to 65% for president Obama in the 2012 election. Some of that erosion in support may come from Obama's TPP stand fervently opposed by the unions and workers in the auto industry. A similar situation took place in Ontario with hollowing out of the auto industry in this large industrial state in Canada and led to the rejection of the Conservative government and election of the Liberal Party under Justin Trudeau. This lesson is so far lost in the Democratic Party's debate.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts to boost the share of national income that goes to rural households and workers in China. The share of income taken by state owned enteprises and taxes paid by the enterprises would have to change for reducing the gap in incomes and reducing inequality in China.

LyrArc Article Gist
The UN Refugee Agency says 7.6 million Syrians were displaced and refugees in their own country, 3.6 million Syrians are in other countries as refugees. Worldwide it says about 60 million are refugees. About half of the refugees are children. Of this about 14 million people were displaced in 2014, with 11 million of this displaced in their own country. Fighting in Iraq, Syria and Libya, appear to be the main cause of displacement in 2014. Never before in the agency's 50 year history are there so many displaced people in their own countries.

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...