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.


Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany went through a period of stagnant growth and persistently high unemployment leading to reforms of the welfare system and entitlements under the Schroeder administration. The reforms led to lower unemployment benefits and an effort to get the unemployed take up jobs. Instead of unemployment benefits that amounted to half the salary indefinitely, unemployment benefits ended in 12 months under the reforms, and workers were forced to take up jobs or dig into their savings. The cuts to benefits led to more of the unemployed taking jobs that were not their first choice with lower incomes. Unions agreed to defer wage demands and wages remained relatively flat for a long period. The "kurzarbeit" system of government subsidizing employers to retain workers during economic downturns, helped cushion the workforce from ups and downs in the economy. Unemployment which was in double digits a decade ago, is now 6.1%. The system still preserved some other aspects of generous benefits- parental leave of 14 months at two-thirds salary, vacation time and publicly sponsored health insurance. Recent changes include raising the retirement age to 67 from 65. The Organization of Economc Cooperation and Development estimates that the 200,000 jobs saved in Germany during the recession of 2008-2009 cost the government $7 billion. Government funds helped companies retain workers by paying a portion of worker salaries and averting layoffs.This comes to $35,000 per job. Compare this with the $38.9 billion allocated to a loan program at the Energy Department under the U.S. stimulus. 8050 jobs were created under this program according to the Washington Post- for the money spent so far in Sept 2011- 2 years into the loan program, of $19.3 billion. This comes to $2.4 million in government guaranteed loans per job. The Energy Department says that 33,000 jobs were saved under the $5.9 billion that was given to the auto industry under this program for investments in manufacturing to improve fuel efficiency. This comes to $178,000 per job. The Energy Department and Congress estimated a 5%-10% loss on the $38.6 billion loan program for loans that go sour, such as the Solyndra solar company $535 million loan. This comes to $1.9 billion at 5% loss and $3.8 billion for a 10% loss. The purpose of these figures is to show the cost of programs when the programs fail to achieve job goals or produce too little for the investment. The $3.8 billion loss under the program is over half the $7 billon Germany invested for the 200,000 jobs saved as estimated by the OECD. That ranks as a far superior investment than the Energy Department program. For the U.S. there are aspects of German reforms such as "kurzarbeit" that bear emulation, with serious questions about the effective use of the U.S. stimulus funds. For the rest of Europe the stingier unemployment benefits, raising the retirement age to 67, and other reforms send a different message. From the average German the message is: we made the tough changes, the rest of Europe cannot expect Germans to pay higher taxes while they put off similiar changes. Italy needs to change its retirement age, just as the Germans have done. As Chancellor Merkel puts it: "People in countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal shouldn't be able to retire earlier than in Germany. It's important for everybody to put in effort to make it roughly equal. Germany will only help when others really make an effort." Which is why Greece, Spain, Italy, even France are faced with making serious changes. This isn't stalling when it comes to euro bonds, from the German perspective. And it isn't about the lack of committment to the idea of a European Union, as all major political parties in Germany, the CDP, the SDP and the Greens, all strongly support the idea of a European Union. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Systemic risks from "too big to fail" and the pushback on capital reserve requirements that leave banks with lower reserves. Ewing describes the role of the president of the Swiss Central Bank, Mr Hildebrand, in setting rules for higher capital reserves for Swiss banks than that of other countries and the pushback from the banks resisting the new regulations. "He will never find another job in Switzerland," a Swiss newspaper Der Sonntag quoted one banker saying this about Mr. Hildebrand. Losses at Swiss bank UBS during the financial crisis and the $2 billion loss at a UBS trading desk in 2011 have created a new awareness of systemic risk at banks. During the financial crisis banks used an optimistic estimate of "risk weighted assets" which led to insufficient capital reserves in a crisis even as the banks were shown to be well capitalized. A sense that banks in Europe and the U.S. will continue to have insufficient capital reserves at 3-4% of assets under new rules and with the longer phase in times for the new Basel III regulations of reserves at 7% of assets to after 2016....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman comments on Governor Jindal's remarks at a post election Republican gathering. Jindal told Republican leaders: "We must not be the party that simply protects the well off so they can keep their toys. We have to be the party that shows all Americans how they can thrive." Jindal's policies do not match this rhetoric, says Krugman. He cites Jindal's push to eliminate the state income tax in Louisiana and make up lost revenue by increasing sales taxes, which fall more heavily on the middle class and poor.
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's social-affairs minister, Ursula von der Leyden, presents the "fourth poverty and wealth report," in March 2013. The issue of inequality is arousing public sentiment in Germany with this becoming an election issue along with the euro crisis and energy reform. The term Gerechtigkeit means "justice" in German and is associated with the idea of equality. The Social Democrats Party and the Greens talk about this in terms of "social scissors" opening wider. The Minder Initiative which passed in Switzerland enabling shareholders to restrict executive pay has led to public discussion in Germany for a similiar approach to be adopted by Germany. The ruling Christian Democratic Party (CDU) of Angela Merkel and the Bavarian Christian Social Union (CSU) party are different from other parties in Europe because of their Catholic and Lutheran roots which favor social solidarity. The FDP party in the ruling coalition supports free market principles but lacks popular support. The Economist cites the work of the German think tank DIW on inequality, which shows inequality showing sharp rise after German reunification around 1991, especially in East Germany. The situation moderates with improvements in inequality in East Germany and a slight improvement in West Germany after 2005. Both East and W. Germany have moved up overall in the Ginni coefficeint which measures inequality from about 0.4 in 1991 to about 0.5 in 2010, showing that the situation has stabilized at a higher level of inequality. Part of this could be because of the shift to temporary workers at lower wages about this time as German industry made efforts to keep wages down and improve competitiveness, even as overall conditions in the economy improved in the last decade. The Economist cites another study by the Initiative for a New Social Market Economy, a German think tank, which compares Germany with other members of the OECD. Germany ranks closer to Scandinavian countries in seventh place in this study, but does poorly in equal oportunities with 14th place. Germany lags behind other OECD and European countries in opportunities for women to work full time. Germany lacks enough daycare facilities for small children so that their mothers can work full time. There is a shortage of about 150,000 for preschool daycare openings in Germany, acccording to information cited by Deutsche Welle from government sources....
Economist Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Columbia University Professor and Nobel Prize winner, Edmund Phelps, gives suggestions for reviving the economy. He sees structural problems in the economy and recommends more inclusion. Higher employment, he says, will require a higher level of investment activity, higher business investment and new technology and products. Inclusion will require more attention to jobs gained at all levels. He suggests a program similiar to Singapore's, with a program of tax credits for companies employing low-wage workers.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, is coming under increasing criticism for supporting the Conservative-Liberal coalition government's austerity plan, and for lack of efforts to fight inflationary pressures. On a major issue on which King has taken a clear stand- that the largest British banks should increase capital levels exceeding the international standards- not much has happened. Consumer prices in Britain were up at a 3.7% annual rate in December, and the government's austerity policies will also cause pain. In a recent speech King said that the Bank of England had limited ability to fight the higher unemployment and increased inflation. It was an admission of the limits of central bankers in the current situation. King said "a squeeze in living standards is the inevitable price to pay for the financial crisis and the subsequent rebalancing of the UK and world economies.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
John Bolton looks at the continual dithering behaviour of the U.S. president in the Middle East- Iran, Libya, Syria, Iraq in sequence- and provides some insights into the president's behaviour. He says it comes from Obama's distrust of the U.S. role in the world as a positive factor, and a deterministic view of the "arc of history" bending towards outcomes he finds ideologically acceptable. This coincides with a different public perception of America's role in the world, not so much of mistrust and skepticism, as of indifference and focus back on domestic issues following the event of the first war in Iraq and of the 2008-2009 financial crisis. The two are different in nature as the public including women may not share the ideological frame of mind of the president that the U.S. is not overall a serious positive factor in the world through the presidencies of TR, Wilson, FDR, Truman, Ike, to Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton, from the Russo-Japanese war, through the First and Second World War, the Berlin Airlift and the Korean War, to the Balkan conflict. Bolton writes at a time when the two perceptions are about to diverge as the U.S. returns to its normal role of positive and constructive engagement with the world....
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Rosa Ines Rivera, a cook at the cafeteria for the Y.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, with 2 small children, describes the protests over the increase by Harvard administration of the premiums charged on health insurance that now take up over 10% of the income. She says she lives in public housing with her parents as she lost her apartment because she is behind on the rent, and now cannot afford to pay the increase in premiums. About 750 workers at Harvard are on strike on this issue. She says dining hall workers want the current pay of $31,193  a year increased to $35,000 to provide a living wage that helps them afford medical care, because of the high cost of living in Boston.  To get some idea of the plight of workers who provide the kind of nutritious meals that a lot of students depend on for healthy living- Rivera says she takes in about $450 a week after taxes, or about $1800, rent is $1150, which leaves $650 for herself and two children for all food, and expenses in Boston. The $4000 in premiums for health insurance would be about 330 per month, leaving her about $320 for food and living expenses with 2 children. Why the need to bring up children in poverty in America, for generation after generation, after putting in a full day of work? ...
Washington Post Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Harold Meyerson poses some difficult questions for those who like Mitt Romney say America's choice is between the merit based society Romney sees and the "European social democratic vision." In Romney's words- "a merit-based opportunity society- an American-style society- where people earn their rewards based on their education, their work, their willingness to take risks and their dreams." Meyerson cites several studies to show that European societies today are more dynamic on several measures of performance than America's. In intergenerational mobility he cites a Brookings Institution study by Julia Isaacs, that shows incomes are three times more likely to remain the same in America compared to Denmark, Norway and Finland, and one and a half times more frequently than in Germany. Another measure evident from Germany's experience is the degree of union-company-government cooperation to worker retraining, corporate boards that have representatives of workers and management, the "kurzarbeit" program of retaining employees to smooth out impact of cyclical swings in the economy on workers and companies, and worker's willingness to show restraint on wages especially because management wages are not way out of line as in America. Meyerson reminds readers that the U.S. had a more merit based society in terms of upward intergenerational mobility, distribution of rewards of work between workers in manufacturing and service sectors and management, educational mobility with the G.I. bill, in the first 30 years after the Second World War. In a separate article in the Washington Post on Jan. 5, 2012, David Ignatius poses questions about the effects of globalization in shrivelling the middle class. The access to lower wage manufacturing in China, India, Mexico, and other countries, and lowering of wages in the U.S. to be competitive, was part of globalization. The two tier wage structure in the U.S. automobile industry is one example, making middle class wages a thing of the past. Globalization opened up new markets for American companies. Yet many of the gains in employment were made in emerging markets, as the example of GM's expansion in China showed, with automobile manufacturing expansion inside China....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Harold Meyerson looks into the causes of the decline of white working class Americans by 2015. A whole section of society that was helped by the work of FDR is being undone by a combination of forces, from the decline in working class wages and jobs through globalized business, social structures unravelling, and support structures weakening. Meyerson refers to the Deaton-Case Princeton study on increasing death rates for this group. The white working class is much smaller now than in 1940 when he says 82% of Americans over 25 had only an high school education, down to 29% in 2007. The result is that it has less power to affect policies, yet is close to one third of Americans. Economic recovery, the American dream, all remain hobbled without efforts to tackle this problem. Trump's effort to appeal to this class, Meyerson points out, is similiar to the National Front's effort in France, making the political dialogue even more divisive by targeting immigrants.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

The Emperor Creates No Jobs

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
France's central bank chief Christian Noyer, says public spending to create jobs has the drawback of creating yesterday's jobs, but lasting job creation has to look at today and the future for effective job creation. Once government spending crosses a certain level, about 55% of GDP, a level France has crossed, further spending becomes counterproductive, reducing public confidence in the economy, as higher future taxes are anticipated canceling any benefits.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Matthew Curtin reminds readers about a couple of facts about Germany. There has been a leftward movement of the Christian Democrats which has supported social protections in the global financial crisis. During the crisis collapsing exports that hit Germany hard. The Free Democrats as a result are the only party campaigning for reforms and lower taxes. The Christian Democrats think some of the Free Democrats plans are unrealistic. There is heavy public questioning of free market economics, and the reason the Social Democrats did so badly with only 23% of the vote is that it supported pro market reforms and lost some of its working class base. As the work subsidies expire in 2010 unemployment could hit 11%. So he says don't expect much in the way of reforms just because the Free Democrats got 15% of the vote and are in the coalition with Merkel.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
During the presidential debates Donald Trump was asked about his proposal for a 45% tariff on imports from China to the U.S.. Trump's response was "if they don't behave." he would use this as a negotiating tactic against China. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas responded by reminding viewers of the high tariffs under Smoot-Hawley legislation that were one of the factors that created the Great Depression in the 1930's. Economist and former Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke is a student of the Great Depression, and says "it was highly counterproductive, it lengthened and deepened the Great Depression." Economist Peter Petri of Brandeis University in his study cited in this article, says that the tit for tat that starts with such a move could eventually cost the U.S. 1 million jobs. It might fix one problem the one of imbalanced trade with China his figures show, and create another huge problem the loss of markets for U.S. goods all over the world. Overall a 45% tariff would reduce U.S. merchandise imports by $383 billion and reduce U.S. merchandise exports by $658 billion, says Petri. Gordon Hanson, economist at the University of California, San Diego, who has actually shown how trade has affected different counties in the U.S., leaving some dependent on government assistance. Hanson sees this tariff as counterproductive, it makes the U.S. more self-sufficient but hurts U.S. exporters, would significantly hurt the tech boom, and reduce America's standard of living. The problem is that everybody can get into this in a tit for tat. France did this even before the Smoot Harley Act of 1938 was passed in 1930 with 60% increase in tariff on individual items, by higher tariff legislation in 1928. Close allies Canada followed quickly after Smoot Hawley increasing its tariffs, so did Great Britain. Unemployment went up significantly after 1931, worsened by weak banks and lack of support from the Federal Reserve. Trade with Mexico would come to a halt Petri shows, and the result would be more Mexicans trying to cross the border turning a relatively non existent problem of immigration in 2015 -with Mexicans preferring to remain home and net immigration dropping significantly following the 2008 financial crisis and the strict Obama policy of deporting illegal immigrants- into a real one. Trump says its just a threat, but it is likely to lead to a tit for tat response by China, then by U.S. allies, other trading partners. Consider that president Herbert Hoover opposed the Smoot Hawley bill for raising tariffs on industrial goods, and only proposed adifferent legislation reducing tariffs on industrial goods and increasing the tariffs on agricultural goods to give relief to American farmers. Politics intervened as Smoot from Utah and Hawley from Oregon, from mountain and agricultural states with a lack of understanding of how the international trading system works but as heads of two influential commmittes, the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, let politics overrride and pushed their legislation through Congress. In 1932 Smoot and Hawley were defeated for reelection, but the damage had been done, and promises of better conditions for workers and farmers never kept. A significant reason for the U.S. standard of living is that it is a leader in the global trading system. Even in 1945 and the years following the end of the war tariffs were higher in Britain and other countries. In return for this leadership the U.S. enjoys the advantages of the dollar being the main global currency, and the advantages of a world leading technological sector that has large global markets. Hanson and Autor have pointed out how imbalanced trade has hurt some counties in the U.S. This is a very real problem for workers in the manufacturing sector, as shown by elections in the midwestern states, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and other parts of the country. The problem is compounded by the tech sector looking out for itself, the financial sector looking out for itself, and forgetting that we are all in the same boat. And that includes the Chinese who are in the same boat. China is doing a major shift in policy towards a consumer driven economy, and this needs to be accelerated for the benefit of ordinary Chinese. This makes the policy of a 45% tariff by the U.S. doubly unproductive because it hopes to add urgency to the problem of the U.S. trade deficit and manufacturing workers, but takes an approach that risks ending up damaging the global trading system by setting in motion a process that no one controls or can foresee the destination....

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