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
Central Huijin, part of China's sovereign wealth fund, China Investment Corporation, bought shares of China's four major banks in October 2011 to prevent steep price declines. China's bank stocks have lost about a third of their value in 2011. The four major banks- China Construction Bank, Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of China, and the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China- control two-thirds of the banking industry in China. In China's interlocking system of relationships between the state, the banks and the state controlled industrial companies, Central Huijin owns 35.4% of Industrial and Commercial Bank, 67.6% of Bank of China, and similiar stakes in the other 2 banks. It was created in 2003 to bail out China's banks after bad loan losses, and was transferred to China Investment Corporation in 2007. As part of the 2007 move bonds were issued by CIC to compensate the central bank. This means the banks pay dividends to CIC so that it can make payments on the bonds. Today the 4 major banks pay half of their earnings in dividends to CIC. CIC chief Lou Jiwei, says Central Huijin needs 300 million renminbi a day, or $47 million to pay interest on the bonds to the central bank. The 4 major banks are also under pressure from China's regulators to increase their capital reserves, because of large bad loans to local governments after the global financial crisis of 2008....
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Moore points out that there are twice as many people working for the government in the U.S. (22.5 million) than in manufacturing (11.5 million). In 1960, the situation was quite different, there were 15 million workers in manufacturing and 8.7 million working for the government. More workers in the U.S. work for the government than in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilites put together. Every state in the U.S. has more people working for the government- except for Indiana and Wisconsin- than people in manufacturing industrial goods. And California has 2.4 million government workers, which is twice the number in manufacturing in that state. New York and Florida have a 3:1 ratio, and New Jersey a 2.5:1 ratio of government workers to workers making industrial goods. Part of the reason for this is the huge increase in productivity and the advances in technology that make it possible to have higher production with fewer workers. This kind of productivity is missing in the government sector. And efforts to improve productivity tend to be blocked by the unions who favor the status quo....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Inflation in China and rising wages are pushing up costs for American manufacturers. The pressure on China, most recently in Congress, is helping to push up the value of the yuan. This combined trend is making it attractive for some manufacturers to bring factories home to the U.S. A trend in the U.S. towards non-unionized labor and the new trend to a two-tier wage level- with lower wages for entry level workers- and the shedding of legacy health care costs, is creating a more cost competitive labor force in the U.S. This extends from older industries such as furniture and auto components to newer industries and technology. The new factories setup in the U.S. use technologies that require a smaller number of workers, in most cases less than half the number of workers that were employed earlier. This adds another element in cost efficiency, though it means fewer jobs are created with new plants.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ma Jun, economist who worked for the IMF, World Bank, and Deutsche Bank is the Chief Economist of the People's Bank of China (PBOC) in April 2014.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts by homebuyers in China to evade government restrictions designed to control rising prices.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Davies points out the dire situation of Greece's banks as the negotiations are called off and Greece calls for a referendum on July 5, 2015. In the week before the referendum if Greeks take out the 60 euros a day that they are permitted to withdraw from banks, the banks may have barely enough cash for the 3.5 billion dollars needed to do this. Only the emergency funding line from the ECB stands between Greece and the collapse of its financial system, says Davies. He says full banking union with depositors insurance, resolution authority, and other changes are needed to protect weaker banks in the eurozone. Contagion effects could affect Portugal's Banco Commercial Portugues, Italy's Monte de Paschi, and Austria's Raiffieisen bank, says Davies.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Chinese government is concerned that lack of a safety net, fears about a general access to health care, and lack of other assistance for the farmers, elderly, rural poor, lack of unemployment protections and welfare, all are making Chinese to cramp up and spend less. Chinese households save a quarter of their income in normal times, now unless the government steps in a big way, which it has done only in small faltering steps, savings will increase even more in response to fears about the future. Lu Mai, secretary general of the China Development Research Foundation, says China has reached a point where it has to make a big decision, does it spend more on security and the police or on social benefits. He put out a report last week which estimates the government needs to spend 2.6 trillion yuan or 380 billion dollars by 2012 for the first phase of a social safety net. With a further spending of $838 billion dollars by 2020 to complete the improvement of health care, education, pensions for the elderly, low income housing, disability benefits, unemployment protections and welfare for the poorest. And these estimates may be low depending on the assumptions made, as the situation has taken a steep descent from the time these estimates were probably made. In the last few months tens of millions have been added to the jobless, and the severe drought has created a difficult situation on the farms in rural areas, even while millions of migrants return to these rural areas as businesses dependent on exports collapse in cities in coastal areas. What is the government allocation at this time? A target for health care overhaul of $124 billion was set recently. But the actual stimulus package is heavily skewed in favor of infrastructure and investment in construction. About 1% of the big stimulus package that was announced goes to health care and 7% to public housing. Says Zhuang Jian, an economist with the Asian Development Bank, this excessive investment in infrastructure, heavy industry and manufacturing will cause serious problems, if there is not strong consumption to match it. And Eswar Prasad of Cornell University, who was head of the China division at the IMF, says that an ambitious agenda is needed for higher social spending to take away the fears of average Chinese about the future. Chinese premier Wen says the government needs to do more, but the instincts of China's planners, and decades of development with built in incentives for promoting investment in construction, infrastructure and industry, have left China with huge unsustainable underinvestment in basics like education, health care and social benefits....
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S consumer spending declines by 0.9% in Dec. 2014 over the prior month, according to the Commerce Department. Consumer spending was up in Nov. 2014 by 0.4%. Excluding auto sales and falling gas prices the Dec. 2014 decline in consumer spending was 0.3%. This shows that consumers are saving most of the money saved as a result of gasoline at about $2 a gallon, or using it to pay off debt. Analysts had estimated a significant increase in retail spending which turned out not to be happening.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Sales of automobiles in China in July 2012 declined 12.6% from the prior month according to the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers. There are two parts of China's automobile sector, the foreign brands of GM, Toyota, VW, Ford and others, and the Chinese brands. There are 48 Chinese domestic carmakers for 30% of China's automobile market, with sales of 87,500 per brand on average, according to J.D. Powers. Many of these carmakers will not survive even with subsidies from local governments. China's car buyers prefer foreign brands because of the better quality and reliability. Foreign carmakers face an oversupply of cars as GM, Honda, Ford, VW have continued to add capacity. Total automobile manufacturing capacity is about 28.5 million cars and commercial vehicles. This is 9 million more than the expected sales in 2012, according to J.D. Powers. The most recent company adding large capacity is Ford Motor Company, which was relatively late in the Chinese market, and decided to boost capacity from 450,000 in 2011 to 1.2 million in 2015, to make it the largest manufacturing location outside of its home base of Michigan. This creates the prospect of foreign carmakers having to offer larger incentives and discounts to manage inventory and operating with higher levels of unused capacity, reducing profits in future years. Most of the plans to increase capacity were made when China's GDP growth was over 10%, it is now slowing to 7.5%....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This interview with Donald Trump by the publisher, editors and columnists of The Washington Post, Ryan Jr., Hiatt, Lane, Marcus, Diehl, Armai, Attiah, provides an exceptional insight into the views of Donald Trump on domestic and foreign policy, on his campaign for president. It is the result of an effort to get Trump to state his policies on different issues without the fuzziness in which Trump has carried out his campaign, often taking different sides of the same issue. In some situations Trump is pressed hard on his positions or controversial statements, to clarify what he has not clarified in the burst of media attention Trump received in the past 6 months, especially on television media. First some myths and realities. A recent March 19, 2016, issue of the Economist cites the Pew Trust in showing that only about 17% of eligible Republican voters voted in the primaries. A person watching television news media coverage on Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, would get the impression that the voter turnout was tremendous- this is not confirmed by the Pew Trust survey. The Economist points out that had the other eligible voters cast their ballots and even if Trump had a share of these votes, the results might look different. With a highly fragmented vote in the Republican primaries, and about half of the vote going to candidates other than Trump, Trump's voter support would add up to about 8-9% of eligible Republican voters based on the Pew Survey results. The question here would be is this a representative sample of the U.S. or of the Republican Party. And is one likely to make false generalizations about the nature of the Republican party from such a limited sample of voter opinion. Is voter sentiment inadequately reflected, and results hopelessly skewed because of the lack of good candidates in the Republican Party, and Trump's tactical rhetoric appealing to a group of working class Americans left out in the technological progress of the last decade. In the process is the hard work of the founders of the Republic, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and the framers of the Constitution being undone by a minority of disaffected voters with legitimate grievances on distribution of economic benefits of the technological progress, trade and global manufacturing networks- with a level of divisive rhetoric and decline in levels of public debate rarely seen. These are the clarifications sought from Trump and his response. Attiah raises the question of divisive rhetoric on minorities Hispanics and Black people- Trump says he is only talking about people here illegally, that he gets support from Hispanics here legally. He turns the question to Muslims and says there is a serious problem there that means being careful about how people are being admitted into the U.S. Questions about Trump's controversial statements about a wall with Mexico are not raised. Ryan pushes hard on the question of the libel laws standard that Trump says he is going to change, asking whether this would happen if Trump thinks the reporting "is wrong" but there is no malice. Trump wants the reporting to be fair for him, that reporters call him to check if he did this or that and why, before writing stuff about him, and he sees the reporting from the Post as very bad about him. He says his lawyers would have to tell the media, that he believes he should loosen up the standards so that this kind of coverage does not continue. On ISIS Trump pulls back when asked by Diehl about statements that suggested he would send the number of troops the generals wanted on the ground- estimated at 20,000 to 30,000- saying he would find it very, very, difficult to do that. On a nuclear option for ISIS Trump says he does not favor that. Suggesting that Trump like the other candidates in the election know there are no easy ways to tackle ISIS. Trump would rely on other countries in the region for help with troops on the ground, something that president Obama also favors, with limited results. Diehl also pushes hard on NATO- Trump says hundreds of billions of dollars are going to NATO and the whole burden for defending South Korea falls on the U.S. when it is not now a rich country that it once was. Diehl corrects him by saying for the public record that its not hundreds of billions, and South Korea, Japan pay 50% of the cost for defending their region. Trump wants to see 100% for the Korean peninsula defense borne by the South Koreans and Japan. Trump seees NATO as a good concept but needing more help from Germany, Poland, Baltics. At one point the Washington Post journalists tell Trump this is a position he shares with president Obama. Trump responds to questions from Hiatt about how he would handle the situations in black communities such as Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland. Trump says he feels law enforcement is important and should play a big role in preventing the destruction of property from day one. He says jobs are what hurts inner cities but offers no solution about how to get the jobs lost in the steel industry for Baltimore, black neighborhoods sitting ironically next to the John Hopkins high technology university complex. Trump brings up the response that jobs could be created if the U.S. simply did not spend money on supporting nationbuilding overseas, a policy that president Obama has supported, and which the public has favored in the U.S. As Holman Jenkins brings up in a column on March 22, 2016 in the Wall Street Journal, these policies are being pursued today, and most of these jobs are not coming back so how would Trump bring them back or do anything about it, especially when Chinese workers in China's factories are being displaced by robotics in places such as Hon Hai factories. The more one thinks about it many of things Trump is saying are already being done, and there are no new solutions Mr. Trump has for today's problems of lack of upward mobility for the middle and working class- a priority for Sanders and Clinton also, not just for Trump. As a television personality and a candidate with a understanding of voter concerns, Trump artfully voices voter concerns of working class Americans for problems that defy easy solutions. Are there risks with Trump's approach that Trump has failed to think through or grasp? Does the unpredictable behaviour Trump suggests that would get allies thinking and trade partners responding lead to unpredictable consequences? Divisive rhetoric creates additional distractions in tackling the problems of the middle class and working class Americans. Divisive rhetoric within the NATO alliance would create additional distractions in tackling the problems of defending the European Union, such as using the very show of unpredictability. Diehl pushes Trump on this question. Would trade threats to China lead to a withdrawal from the Senkaku Islands by China? Trump says he thinks this would cause the Chinese to retreat . What if the Chinese see it differently, in their relations with Japan and South Korea, with a long difficult history, not necessarily in their relations with the U.S. Would a trade war hurt the global economy, and hurt confidence in U.S. fianncial markets just when the U.S. and European economies are staging a recovery, and when the economes of China, Japan and India are in a sensitive phase? These questions could not be raised because of time constraints, but must be on the minds of the editors of the Post and the WSJ, coming from different ends of the political spectrum. How would this help tackle the problem of upward mobility for working class Americans that all the candidates in the presidential election share? ...

The Chinese Disconnect

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that some depreciation in the value of the dollar is welcome because it would make US exports more competitive and reduce our trade deficit. He says China's policy of keeping the yuan pegged to the dollar actually devalues the Chinese currency and makes it possible for China to siphon off growth from other countries. So what should America do. By putting pressure on China to revalue the yuan upward would America be risking China responding by selling some f its $2.1 trillion in dollar assets. This would not be such abad thing if the Chinese sold some of their dollar assets says Krugman, as lowering the value of the dollar at this time is not such abad thing. Malpass and Alan Meltzer of Carnegie Mellon, point out the importance of maintaining the value of the dollar in a separate piece. There the idea is not to have sharp fall in the value of the dollar that could economic disruption because of loss of confidence in the currency as opposed to a gradual decline.
New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
"Progressive" is a misused word, people are just interested in the words "decent," "fairness," and "Christian" from the color of the heart.  It is just how Republicans see the contest for the US Senate  that reveals their sense of priorities for the Nation.The main concerns of Republicans, old traditional Republicans shown here in this WSJ Editorial are that somehow gains on the US Supreme Court could be reversed with retirement of Alito and Thomas in their seventies, and fears of the same policies that set up Medicare and Social Security- following the changes of the Industrial Revolution and dismal factory conditions and wages at the turn of the century- under Republican Teddy Roosevelt  (the incipient changes), Woodrow Wilson an academic from Princeton, and Franklin Roosevelt. A new version of old Tory politics still exists in the US. It is these industrial conditions rewritten with work safety laws, workmen's compensation, first 54 in 1918 after the Triangle Factory Fire,  then 40 hour week, unemployment insurance, worker union rights for fair negotiations on wages, that made the US a strong manufacturing nation and Industrial power, creating the synergies for worker contributions combining with technologies, managerial skills for a decent standard of living that surpassed all other nations. It is this achievement that was put at risk in the 21st century by shipping factories overseas and thoughtlessly sending the technologies with it, which happened under a series of administrations since the 1980's Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush Jr., Obama and Trump. Done thoughtlessly and recklessly. And the wars that started with president Reagan in Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan that diverted the two trillion dollars that would have rebuilt America's aging infrastructure. Biden was the first president to have a clear focus on the changes needed to rebuild infrastructure and manufacturing, technologies and science, and rural America, in a concerted push that has made gains that surpass any that exist in Europe or China. Restoring the US economy to No. 1. Harris in her own way offers the pieces of the puzzle to reverse the pandemic induced cost of living increases that complement the work of president Biden in 2024, continuing the work of rebuilding infrastructure and manufacturing for leadership in the world.     ...
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