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.


The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What were the stories in the Economist magazine that were the most read stories of 2019? Not on president Trump. On Malaysia, China under Jinping, and exodus from San Francisco and Silicon Valley. The most read article was on the newly elected president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro. The mismanagement of the economy particularly extravagant state spending on the Olympics and soccer stadiums for the World Cup at the expense of basic sanitation services, bus and transport services, health services, led to the result of a majority of Brazilians rejecting the Workers Party and its leader former president Lula. Unfortunately most of the media including the Economist did not draw attention to this gap. During a period in which income from mining with export of iron ore, and soyabeans to China, enabled Brazil to live beyond its means, there was no effort to draw attention to glaring gaps in development of public services such as sanitation, bus services and transport, lack of building infrastructure other than to support mining. Glaring gaps in education and health services made the situation worse. The second most read piece in the Economist  was on March 10th- Malaysia's PM is about to steal an election. Here the Economist magazine joined the Wall Street Journal which originally broke the story on the 1MDB fund and irregularities in Malaysia where a development fund was misused by the government. Najib actually lost that election and the WSJ covered the story of the developments that followed in which Malaysia's new governemnt led by a returning former prime minister in his nineties Mahathir Mohammed, ousted his own protege Mr. Najib.  The third most read piece in the Economist magazine was - How the West got China Wrong.  Unfortunately the Economist magazine and most of the media covered China in the two decade long boom years without covering the other emerging story as well in which Mr. Lighthizer (now president Trump's top trade adviser) and others questioned the huge unsustainable trade surpluses in U.S. trade with China. With the economy facing huge downside risks and rising trade tensions with the U.S. Chinese president Jinping's move to remove the limit on terms in office in the Constitution was considered a shift from the notion that China was likely to turn into a democracy. Mr. Jinping had already completed his first term in office and the anti-corruption campaign, managing the economic boom for a soft landing, was carried out with the central leadership of the party, after the destabilization evident in the early part of Xi Jinping's first term. Much of China's path was predictable and rational behaviour in its national interest, what was not clearly defined or defended was the way the U.S. could sustain the trade deficits that had reached a billion dollars a day. Leading to Mr. Trump seizing on this as an election issue to form a bloc of voters separate from the two main parties, the Republicans and the Democrats. The fifth most read piece was on Oct 11, 2018- the next recession. It pointed out that with low interest rates central banks in the U.S. and Europe and America could not cope effectively with a recession. The sixth most read piece was on June 29, 2018- Bullshit jobs and the yoke of managerial feudalism. It cited Prof. David Graeber of the London School of Economics, who wrote a short essay that went viral on the prevalence of work that had no social or economic reason to exist, work he called "bullshit jobs". Graeber said people want to feel they are transforming the world around them in a way that is leading to a positive difference. No. 7, 8, 9, were on Bitcoin, Netflix and programming language Python. No. 10 most read was on Aug. 30, 2018- Why startups are leaving Silicon Valley. It showed that in 2017 more people left the county of San Francisco than entered. The main reason the cost of living was burdensome and out of control. As Amazon shifts attention to India and Brazil, and Apple pulls back from India, social media companies coming under fire for disinformation, this period of Tech is making way for a shift in a new direction. A direction that focuses on people's lives, wages, spending on much needed infrastructure and services. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Kazakh oil project that is $30 billion over budget, with no oil produced years after the project was started in 2005, is an example of what western oil companies can run into when tackling complex projects with many partners. It also shows why oil is becoming more costly to produce, keeping upward pressure on oil prices. The project is already costing western oil companies over $50 billion. This includes Italy's Eni, Shell, Total SA, ConocoPhillips, and Exxon. The project started in 2005 with collaboration between the state oil company LMG and the western companies led first by Exxon, and then as a compromise by Eni. Part of the problem is the requiredment of the Kazakh government to hire local employees who lack the necessary experience. The gas from wells has 17% hydrogen sulfide and it took 2 years to adapt infrastructure to this type of well. Housing for staff delayed the project for a year. In 2008 a target date of 2013 was set. In 2013 the project was stopped because of pipeline leaks which have still not been fixed. Causes relate to defects in pipe and in the way the pipe deteriorates in contact with the hydrogen sulfide. Kazakh government officials have responded to the delays by adding fines for the western oil companies, including a $735 million fine related to the pipe failure and gas burning. This may have reduced the motivation of the oil companies to give priority to tackling the issues. On the Kazakh side the problem is seen as being on the outside and lacking participation in the management of the complex project....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
India like China is more interested in modernization that brings equality with Europe and America so that the period of misfortunes that struck India and China- as a result of the vastly superior technology and force of Europe as it found a passage to the East around the Cape of Good Hope- is over.  Think about this. If anything happened to democracy and pluralism in the US Indian democracy and pluralism would still be standing a hundred years down the road or the next hundred years after that. What does that say about India? Why? Because India has learnt its lessons under Vivekananda, Tilak, Gandhiji, Modiji, and understands the need for technology, trade and modernization, which is what Modi as a Gujarati with the trading mentality like the British is really after. The so called Hinduism as it is really about the Upanishads and the Gita and the Buddha, and Communism, are really not the driving force in India or China.The Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita like the Bible offer a way an ethos to resolutely fight the corruption and leakages of funds that take the investments out of modernization leaving everyone poor. And India also benefits when democracy works and acts as an enabling force for a modern economy that creates "a rising tide that lifts all boats" (people). Democracy is the tool for development and to tackle diversity of 1.4 billion people. Adam Smith was right writing then in the 1780's around the French revolutionary period and American independence - "Hereafter perhaps the natives of these countries (India, China, Indonesia) may grow stronger, or those of Europe grow weaker, and the inhabitants of all the different quarters of the world may arrive at the equality of courage and force, which by inspiring mutual fear, can alone overawe the injustice of independent nations into respect for one another." India's leaders fought hard after the 1700's for preserving independence from the Portuguese, the Dutch and the British, only they were divided. Ranjit Singh in the north fought the Mughals and the British in the Punjab. The Marathas on the western front fought the Mughals and the British. The result as Gandhi points out in Hind Swaraj in his question "who made the British Company Bahadur?" It was Indian princely kingdoms vying for support from the armies of the British East India Company interested in profits from seizing Indian princely treasuries and trade. Note that Sri Lanka or Ceylon fell to the Portuguese in 1505. The technology gap between Europe and Asia had opened up even that early by 1500's in ship building, in warships and use of maritime navigation technologies. Consider that in 1534 Jacques Cartier was out on his first trips from St Malo, France across Atlantic to explore past Newfoundland to the mouth of the St Lawrence river. The Portuguese and then the Dutch had already beaten the British and the French by 100 years- Britain's exploration of India through East India settlements in Bengal began much later in the 1600's. India like China built around river based civilizations as Adam Smith points out in his Wealth of Nations, Chapter 7, Part 3, America and East Indies-of the natives of India and China Smith says their struck "a dreadful misfortune" that arisen more by accident, that "the superiority of force seemed to be so great on the side of the Europeans, that they were able to commit with impunity every sort of injustice in these remote countries." Every Indian or Chinese will agree with this so great was the misfortune for India and China from the injustice of European nations in the 19th century so much so that Cordell Hull speaking for Franklin Roosevelt and all Americans broadcast to the world in the throes of World War II in 1942 America's call to the world for a new world order based on freedom and development for all nations of Asia, Africa and Latin America. America's Secretary of State Cordell Hull said: "In this vast struggle, we, Americans, stand united with those who, like ourselves, are fighting for the preservation of their freedom; with those who are fighting to regain the freedom of which they have been brutally deprived; with those who are fighting for the opportunity to achieve freedom."     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Elsa Fornero is an economics professor who is Labor Minister in the government of Mario Monti. After several decades Italy has finally tackled the much needed changes to the 1970 Workers' Charter that forms the basis of Italy's labor laws. The Charter protected workers jobs but was designed during a different period and had long since lost its relevance in a modern economy. The laws led to Italy losing its competitiveness and entrenched small family firms in the economy. The new labor law protects the individual instead of jobs, by increasing the safety net to cover unemployed workers for shorter periods and lower benefits, and makes it possible for firms to layoff employees for economic reasons. Fornero says Italians need to recognize that work is not a right to be enshrined in laws but something that is earned through hard work. Article 18 of the Worker's Charter was originally intended to remove discriminatory practices in the workplace, but was enlarged to provide blanket protections to workers so that companies could not fire workers and avoided hiring. Under the new law discrimination is illegal, but now companies can layoff employees for economc reasons and not face long legal disputes and be forced to rehire the workers. The new law will increase productivity says Marcello Giustiniani, a labor specialist at Milan law firm Nonelli, Erede & Pappalardo. Italy's productivity gap with Germany has widened to over 30% since the introduction of the euro. The ASPI, new unemployment insurance plan, goes into effect in 2013, older programs will be phased out by 2017, giving time for the culture change in Italy for workers and business. Another major change is designed to help 2 million workers earning less than 18,000 euros. Businesses will have to give these workers proper contracts. Fornero's effort to tackle the pension system also includes linking retirement checks to how much is contributed over the lifetime- a practice common in other countries- not the final and highest salary. This simple change was not not implemented by 10 governments since a law was passed in 1995, showing why the Monti government was needed to get things done....
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Barry Schwartz, a Psychology Professor at Swarthmore College, and author of Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less, points out that the 35 years of research shows that you get exactly what you pay for, but it turns out to be the opposite of what you want, and there are a lot of ways that incentive based compensation can go wrong. In theory choosing a parameter like share price and creating incentives to promote shareholder interests through higher share price as a measure of executive performance is reasonable, but it assumes that there is no manipulation of share price, or other external factors do not distort the measure of performance. In reality you get a situation like Merrill Lynch and other financial firms that gave out huge bonuses and executive pay even while bad decisions- that were later to sink the firms- were being incentivized. Schwartz points to research worldwide by Bruno Frey, Oberhozer-Gee, Uri Gneezy, James Heyman and Dan Ariely, that shows that incentives tend to remove the moral dimension from decisionmaking. Heyman's reaearch showed that when people offer passers by a token payment for help lifting a couch from a van, they are less likely to lend a hand when they are offered nothing. The question people ask themselves he says when money isn't part of the equation is very different he says: what are my responsibilities, what should I do that will fulfill these responsibilities to other people and to my country? In his view even though we put a lot of faith in incentives as a society to influence behaviour in a positive way, they actually do the reverse. Even if they work for some time, after a while some people who have fewer scruples learn ways to game the system and gradually distort the way it functions, leading to perverse results endangering all....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Places like Rapid City, South Dakota, and Topeka, Kansas, where people are choosing to live because of the affordability of homes. Average 30 year mortgage jumped from 3.1% at the end of 2021 to 5.0% by April 2022. High housing prices in coastal and mountain region cities and remote work flexibility are reordering where people choose to live. Rapid City, South Dakota is near the Wyoming border, here you are in what was once the Wild West of Teddy Roosevelt, a western wilderness found in an 8 hour drive to Grand Teton National Park. Nearby to this 145,000 population city are Mount Rushmore and the Black Hills mountain range.

Other cities that are getting attention from younger buyers are Santa Cruz, California, Santa Rosa, California. These are smaller towns of less than 600,000 population with outdoor recreation opportunities and small city feel, and are also attractive to retirees.

The New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A slight shift in American opinion favoring a deal with Iran is shown in a WSJ/NBC poll in July 2015 compared to the poll in April 2015. Support for reaching a nuclear deal with Iran remains stable at 36% in both polls, the opposed drops by 6 percentage points to 17% from 23%, and the percentage of people who say they do not know enough to formulate an opinion goes up to 46% from 40%. The intricacies of a nuclear technology deal and the sites involved lead to a high percentage of don't know enough to give an opinion. Factors hindering a deal include inspection of military sites, and Iranian intentions. Factors favoring reaching a deal now is the risk that this would mean Iran would go back into isolation and the opportunity to work with moderates might be lost. The Rouhani administration was an effort by voters to elect a government that could ease or remove sanctions to improve the economy and living conditions- its failure would lead to Iran losing an opportunity to open up to the world. The pressure from the U.S. Congress and Israel served to push for a verifiable and effective agreement to control development of nuclear technology for weapons systems. Behavioural factors involved are the very young population in Iran which has no memories about the period before the revolution in 1979- 70% of the population of 74 million are people under the age of 35. This group is eager for ties to the outside and could change Iran's outlook and policies int the future towards moderation. Risks in not reaching a deal also include the possibility of the Saudis developing nuclear technology and nuclear proliferation. Winners from a deal because of the flow of Iranian oil to world markets and a period of extended low oil prices are the U.S., Europe, China and India. Germany gains new markets to replace the growth in the Russian market after sanctions. Lifting of an arms embargo, an added risk in the last days of the talks, would be mitigated by making the lifting of that embargo very gradual....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The director of research at one of two cybersecurity companies that monitors disinformation used by the Senate Intelligence Committee to analyze and give reports on the Russian disinformation activities 2014-2017, shares her conclusions. Information from Facebook, Google and Twitter was turned over to the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, which in turn handed it over to the two cybersecurity companies for analysis and reports. The Russian disinformation activities have continued in 2018, according to DeResta. The domestic propagandists and actors have taken these methods and used it to target sub groups, expanding the scope of these activities. The advertising related segmentation provided by these companies gives a ready made tool to easily target subgroups in the U.S. population. The viral activity arising from this means the message is carried over to other groups. As a result many groups are affected, affecting how democracy works through vigorous, yet intelligent debate. Explicit bias happens in election campaigns yet this is not spread through anonymous sources that are not identified and whose interests are known, as in disinformation efforts in a medium that spreads information quickly and without any depth whatsoever. For some minority subgroups the effects as ubiquitous, says the report. This report concludes that it is the responsibility of government, private organizations and individuals, and the tech companies combined to tackle this, as tech companies do not have the resources to deal with it. Its not enough to adjust how you sell advertising as tech companies are doing, says the report. The whole ecosystem of information is being compromised in multiple and still not fully understood ways, making it essential that a comprehensive solution with multiple combined efforts address it effectively. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Andrew Rosenfeld, a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, and chief executive of an investment advisory firm, says the Public-Private Investment Program proposed by Secretary Geithner has serious flaws. It risks government money, and expects too little from private investors. The government will essentially finance the private investor's purchase of these toxic assets at an auction, with the private investors putting some money of their own, to buy these assets at prices emerging from the auction. It runs right smack into the problem that Secretary Paulson under President Bush faced when he suggested the auction plan as a way for these toxic assets to be sold off to buyers. It was never clear how shuch an auction would work, and whether it would work at all. Meantime the worsening credit crisis required direct injection of capital into banks. Now Secretary Paulson's abandoned effort has been essentially revived in the Geithner program, with the same problems but with the carrot of government taking up most of the risk with its financing. Rosenfeld argues that under this plan the government assumes all the risk of losses, and if private investors make too much money off of it it will create a public outcry and the risk of an AIG type situation. This might lead to lower bids and the money generated for the banks might end up being too small to make a difference. There is a better way he says, and this is for the government using existing authority to seize banks that look insolvent. Its fairer because the government will own the toxic asets, and the bank, and the proceeds for the sale of the bank, and these would be offsetting the cash that it would inject to recapitalize the bank. The way it would do it is to inject cash in the form of Treasury notes as equity in the bank, and at the same time remove the bank's toxic assets and place them in the basement of the Treasury building, while it waits to see what they turn out to be worth. Bank regulators would swap Treasury securties for the toxic assets "at par," which is at the amount of the original purchase price of assets removed. Within a short time, a month or a few months, the bank could be sold to private investors. This is sounder because it takes away the pricing problem which looks like its never going to be resolved, as banks and investors are never going to agree on toxic asset price. And the new bank could start clean and start lending flowing in the economy. If the bank turns out to be so badly managed and with so many bad bets that it cannnot be sold, its essentially insolvent and irrecoverable, so it should be liquidated. Nobel winner Krugman says some of the same things in his columns in the NYT. He has a sense of despair seeing the return of the failed Paulson solution of auctions with a new twist, even as the economy is flailing in the wind, with job loss numbers over 600,000 and jumping each month....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
King Salman appoints Mohamed bin Nayef, 55 years-old, as the deputy crown prince in Jan. 2015. The crown prince is Muqrin Abdulaziz, 69 years-old. Mohamed Bin Nayef is the son of the Interior Minister, who worked under his father from 1999 till he became the new Interior minister in 2012. Nayef has pursued an aggressive program to remove Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. By taking action against all dissent inside Saudi Arabia Nayef has also jailed human rights activists, including the flogging of a blogger critical of the government. The defense minister Prince Mohamed bin Salman, is a son of King Salman. King Salman was defense minister till he succeeded his half-brother Abdullah. Ali al-Naimi continues as Oil minister, a position he has held for decades. Saudi Arabia established a panel in 2006 to work with future kings after King Salman to appoint an heir to the throne. Even with the appointment of Nayef, a grandson of Saudi Arabia's founder, Abdulaziz ibn Saud, as deputy crown prince, the leadership of the country remains within a small number of princes of the royal family. Under the Obama administration the relations between U.S. and Saudi Arabia have become strained with president Obama's failure to intervene in Syria. The Saudi have pursued their own policies since then, in first Bahrain and then Egypt the Saudis supported the monarchy and the military respectively to maintain power in the face of the Arab Spring. The danger is that Saudi policies may be contrary to the U.S. position supporting freely elected governments and basic rights, particularly when it comes to suppression of all dissent including peaceful dissent and normal criticism of government, and yet with the rise of Islamic State the U.S. puts itself inadvertently behind these very policies. The Saudis would say this has happened because U.S. president Obama failed to support the effort for freedom in Syria and a transition in Libya and Iraq (with the added complication of Maliki's sectarian policies), creating a war torn neighborhood in which the Saudis had to act on their own. These are the hidden costs of the policy of the U.S. president for the U.S. and for the Middle East- more sectarianism with Shiites and Sunnis openly in conflict, reversal of hard won gains in Iraq, reversal of the Arab Spring except in Tunisia, war torn Libya and Iraq- with a withdrawal that never truly happened because it required a firmly guided transition period of support in the region with lower cost and involvement of an extended period leaving no room for reversal of gains. It leaves both the Saudis and the U.S. in a more precarious position than a decade ago....
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ says 4 months before becoming China's president in 2012 Xi Jinping issued a Communist party directive as head of the party committee overseeing the former British colony. The directive cautioned officials about a growing separatist sentiment in Hong Kong. It said "we must dare to struggle and be good at fighting," a retired official describes as Xi's approach. Another facet of Xi's views on Hong Kong are that his father as a party leader for the southern province of Guangdong in 1978 to 1980 near Hong Kong was the first after the Cultural Revolution to set up ties between the mainland and the British colony of Hong Kong. China was experimenting with a different model for the economy and Xi's father set up the early links with Hong Kong so that the flow of economic refugees from mainland China to Hong Kong could be reduced and the gap in living standards could be narrowed. He set up the first "Special Economic Zone" and met delegations to start the Sino-British talks on Hong Kong's future. Xi Jinping grew up in the turmoil of the Cultural Revolution. His father Xi Zhongzun, was jailed in 1962 in internal party struggles, and his family was persecuted during the Cultural Revolution that started in 1966. The Cultural Revolution that went on till 1976 ironically was an attempt to stamp out possible capitalist or imperialist influences from the colonial period and the opium wars with Britain. He was later rehabilitated under premier Deng. During the turmoil Xi with some difficulty was admitted to University after spending some years in the countryside. His father remained loyal to the ideals of the Chinese Revolution even though he had suffered from the internal party struggles, an experience remains a strong memory for Xi Jinping. It is as if the period is seen as a period of experimentation and failure for the party not for its ideals of China rising from the colonial period after its failure to engage with the world before the colonial period leading to backwardness. The unity of the country had to be maintained bringing Hong Kong and possibly Taiwan together with the mainland. Rejuvenation was happening and stability was essential for Chia to grow and emerge into the "China Dream" a word coined by Xi for its emergence in the community of nations as an equal to western powers after the colonial period of oppression and cultural backwardness. In this way he is different than other leaders before him who followed premier Deng who started the experimentation with markets and economic structures. The leader preceding him was party secretary in Tibet with a prime minister who was an engineer working on public projects, in sharp contrast to Xi who had the the sense of authority from seeing different phases of Communist party experimentation in his early years. The Bo Xi Lai incident during the transition before 2012 also influenced Xi. This was an attempt similar possibly to the attempt by Lin Piao under Mao to subvert Communist Party leadership into a new direction bringing China under Soviet influence after the break by Mao. Bo Xi Lai, a party secretary for an interior less developed region Chongqing, who rose from being Mayor of Dalien to governor of Liaoning province. Bo Xi Lai attempted to subvert the process operating since the Cultural Revolution of leadership by consensus within the party ensuring stability and continuity needed for development and pushing the trauma of the Cultural Revolution out of memory. He did this by seeking high party office for his own ambitions not for the party and China's interests that guided leaders after the Cultural Revolution. This incident and the period of two decades of growth of market economy had led to growing corruption and Xi was convinced that "corruption would doom the Communist Party and the State" and the resulting instability was bad for China. During this period in 2012 Xi Jinping said that it was necessary to remove "tigers and flies" who could endanger the party's ideals and the future growth and stability of the country.  About 10,000 party officials were removed for corruption, and the rule of Politburo Standing Committee immunity (PSC) of the party operating after the Cultural Revolution was removed. The PSC is the body that at the top of the organization structure that runs China. On Hong Kong Xi now believes that the problem is best tackled by the Hong Kong government not by intervening from Beijing. There is increasing perception in Beijing and Hong Kong that the local government, business leaders have messed things up, by getting into the habit of telling Beijing planners what they wanted to hear, and failing to communicate with the 7 million people of Hong Kong. These leaders are also in a bind because Xi believes that Beijing exercized "overall governance authority" over Hong Kong. A 2014 government white paper warns against "confused or lopsided perceptions" of Hong Kong's status, saying that its partial autonomy comes "solely from the authorization of the central leadership."     ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Report from the ground giving an unbiased account by a captain in the army who served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. He spent 7 months as aspecial advisor to the NATO director of communications. He avoide the official tours through the countryside and tried to see and hear what ordinatry Afghans were saying. He says the outbursts against the corruption in the Karzai government reveal a level of distrust that is so great that it greatly diminishes the credibility of the American effort in Afgahnistan, and increases the difficulties of the mission there. He suggests ombudsmens committees to handle complaints of corruption, and the withholding of funds to districts and government agencies that do not meet transpanrency and accountability goals.
WSJ Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One in six dollars generated by the U.S. economy goes to pay for health care, almost twice the average for rich countries. It hurts America in many ways; by being a burden on the taxpayer when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid paying for the poor and the elderly, on companies being one reason GM went bankrupt, it eats up federal and state budgets, rising costs make any form of future coverage for all unsustainable, and it robs other priorities such as infrastructure building and other national scale investments. The Economist says that if it had to design a system from scratch, it would go for a system based mostly around publicly funded health care. For the uninsured the solution of an employer mandate is now well accepted, so this is not an issue. What is an issue is how to make the new system affordable? Here the Economist says that whether in stages or in one move, the tax deductability of employer paid health insurance, which is costing the U.S. government $250 billion ayear, has to go. It is necessary to remove this deduction, and its something all interests involved will have to swallow, as other savings are smaller and will not be adequate. The deductability of insurance makes the true cost of insurance transparent, so it supports gold plated insurance. This does not make cost control the pressing priority it needs to be. So the deducatability of employer paid health insurance hurts both ways. The other necessary action is in the area of moving out of the current culture where most doctors work on a fee-for-service basis, where the more tests they prescribe or procedures they perform the greater their incomes. This acts as a perverse incentive, and has aruinous effect in mushrooming health care costs in America. Cutting back on unnecessary tests and procedures, and prescriptions , would save 10% to 30% of health costs says the Economist. And it says this has been proven with the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and Kaiser Permanente in California showing that cutting back doesn't hurt care and outcomes., so much so that cutting back would occur along with improved outcomes. But Americans with employer paid insurance just take things for granted as its not much out of pocket expense for them. THis creates the lack of a force for controlling costs even as employers are shouldering abigger and bigger burden, and the employee who thinks he is doing fine actually is seeing more of his salary dollars going to pay for his health insurance. In a way the consumers of health care are stuck with the perception that they are not somehow paying for these mushrooming costs and too manytests, procedures and prescriptions. This perception leads them a false sense of comfort with the system they are in, and a fear of something new fanned by the medical lobbies, that any change will impact users negatively. This makes the whole discussion on health care or the process of finding solutions to become an exericize in which terms like "rationing" and "choice" play a distorting role. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Only a few thousand people turned up for president Obama at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin on June 19, 2013, compared to the 200,000 people who turned up there for Obama in July 2008. This shows how much German opinion has changed in less than 5 years. The early enthusiasm about Obama has faded, says Greens Party leader Malte Spitz.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Zara which started with one store in La Coruna aport town in a remote part of northern Spain is the second largest retail clothing chain after Gap Stores now has3691 stores in 68 countries, adding 560 stores in the last 12 months and entering new markets in places like Croatia, Columbia, Guatemala, and Oman. Its best known for fast fashion and updating fashion frequently with new fashion clothing coming in twice a week. Lower volumes mean they sell out fast and don't require writedowns and fashions that fly can be resupplied quickly because Zara does most of its manufacturing (two thirds) in Spain or in countries nearby like Portugal, Morocco and Turkey. The closeness of manufacture and the logistics are set up such that the orders can be made quickly with sales monitored constantly on computers at La Coruna HQ and at stores locations and the manufacture and shipping can be done speedily. Not requiring writedowns and selling lower cost fashion at higher prices especially outside Spain where prices are higher (40% higher in New York for instance) and having an efficient system with costs weeded out and focus on building the brand and pleasing customers to command good profit margins enables Zara to continue manufacturing in Spain where costs are not what they would be in China or Vietnam. As other stores are learning from Zara and doing this in their stores Zara is working on refocussing its formula and fine tuning it to stay ahead of competitors. For example its making sure costs do not rise faster than sales, for first half 2007 costs went up 16% and sales went up 19%. Staff is being scheduled using new software based on sales volume at differen times, so that more salespeople work at peak times such as lunchtime or early evening, which enable Zara to cut 2% of hours worked. Alarm tags are attached at the factory, and the newest collections get labelled NEWC and are rushed to the floor on plastic hangars and only later switched to wooden hangers, and store managers now use handheld computers to sho garments ranking by sales so reordering can be done quickly in less than an hour....

Egypt's Economic Apartheid

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hernando De Soto, a prominent economist, heads the Institute for Liberty and Democracy. He has an intimate knowledge of the workings of the Egyptian economy, and describes the socio-economic marginalization of large parts of Egyptian society as Economic Apartheid. Simply put Egypt has fallen behind the times, way behind the economic progress in large developing countries.The Institute was hired by the Egyptian government in 1997, with the financial support of the US Agency for International Development, to look into what reforms were needed. It presented its 1000 page report in 2004- after years of work involving 120 Egyptian and Peruvian technicians, participation of 300 local leaders and interviews with thousands of ordinary people- to the Egyptian cabinet. The then Finance Minister Hassanein supported it and the cabinet approved it. What followed was a cabinet shakeup, and blocking of any reforms by hidden interests wanting to protect the status quo. De Soto's objective was to find out how many people were marginalized in Egypt, and how much of the economy operated outside the legal system- small business that did not have the protection of property rights or access to normal business tools and credit, that makes businesses grow. He found that 9.6 million people were employed in this sector operating "extralegally" with no protections. This being the largest sector of employment in Egypt. His action plan was intended to remove the legal impediments to these people and businesses urban and rural, so that they could grow. He says the value of these businesses outside legal protections is $248 billion or 30 times larger than the total value on the Cairo stock exchange, and 55 times greater than all the foreign direct investment in Egypt since 1800 including Suez Canal and Aswan Dam. De Soto says that because of burdensome, discriminatory and bad laws it takes 500 days to open a small bakery, getting a legal title on a vacant piece of land would take 10 years of red tape. This barrier of bad laws, poorly trained bureaucrats, inertia of the status quo, prevents people from legalizing their property and business. As a result whereas one of these types of small businesses is now India's largest company called Reliance Industries, and another Infosys is the second largest software company, most Egyptian enterprises are stuck being small and relatively poor, and do not generate jobs for the demographic surge of young people. De Soto's point is that Egypt will need good leadership to pull off this task of legal reform, and democracy alone will not be enough. Empowering the large majority of the Egyptian people operating outside the legal protections will mean giving property rights for $400 billion of assets, De Soto says. And this would unlock an amount of capital hundreds of times larger than what foreign direct investment and aid has brought to the country....
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump signs an executive order on March 28, 2017, reversing the American commitment to the Paris climate change agreement. The executive order also lifts a moratorium on the sale of coalmining leases on federal lands. The Obama administration 2015 clean power plan was designed to restrict greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. It was blocked by courts in 2016. Trump says he is reversing president Obama's war on coal. Earlier he approved the Keystone pipeline for bringing oil from oil sands in Canada to the U.S.. Under the Paris agreement the U.S. agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions 26-28% by 2025 from 2005 levels. Market changes including the availability of cheap natural gas from technology advances fracking and hydraulic fracturing is leading a shift away from coal, apart from Obama administration regulations. Another factor is the long term trend towards cleaner energy, with large energy producers such as American Electric Power and other companies planning for the long term which is likely to be in the direction of cleaner energy. These companies see the Trump administration changes as a situation that may not be for the long term. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A native of Turin, who was a debonair lawyer then retrained as a physiotherapist, is beloved as "Alberto" to the Afghan people. He runs the Red Cross Afghan Rehabilitation Center in Kabul, and is the most loved westerner in Afghanistan. Its a visible location, but in all these years of war it has never been attacked. In the tradition of the Red Cross founded in 1860 as a neutral entity, the Red Cross's orthopedic centers make no distinction by political affiliation and help combatants on all sides because only the name is asked, as well as civilians who have lost legs to landmines. About 90,000 people have received new limbs since 1988, and 70,000 revisit the centers each year for replacement or adjustment of their prostheses, which last an average of 2 to 3 years for adults and as little as 6 months for children. All the treatments, including overnight stays at the centers that can run for weeks, are free. About 10 million mines were strewn across the landscape in the Soviet invasion from 1979 to 1988. Because most of these mines have been cleared by the UN and charities like the Britain's Halo's Trust, patients now recieve help for congenital deformities, polio, tuberculosis, and accidents as well as other war injuries....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A detailed account of how the American airstrikes in Farah province look from the ground. CIvilians who may not have much to do with the Taliban get caught in these strikes, and burned bodies of women, girls, children are to be found along with destroyed homes. It only creates new volunteers among the young for the Taliban and legitimizes anti-American feelings after bombings of this kind. Its also exactly as the Taliban intended it, as they hid among the civilians with this in mind. US soldiers outnumbered in difficult terrain and vast spaces call in airstrikes after ambushes and difficult fights. The US has to do some serious problem solving on this one, or risk losing the support of ordinary Afghans , and with it the war. These are some of the tough choices in this war, with what kind of air support to fight this war. One that is pinpoint and based on accurate intelligence and in skirmishes in the open, but avoiding the kind that gets close to civilian areas. And finding other ways to tackle the problems. Having popular support is critical, and providing security is critical, which calls for more feet on the ground, more aid workers on the ground, and more to show for these efforts in reduced casualties and better lives of the people in each area. ...

The Bush Who Got Away

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How the Bush presidency started with hopes in domestic policy that were never to come to fruition. Jacob Weisberg, editor of Slate, reflects on the promise of the Bush State of the Union address of Feb. 2001, and the compassionate conservatism it evoked- the Bush priorities of education, setting higher educaion standards, immigration reform, helping needy and at risk children, health care access. He recalls the words used by Bush in Spanish: "Juntos podemos," we can do it together. As governor of Texas Bush had focussed on racial disparities and gaps in education, winning 27% of black votes and a third of Hispanic votes. Then came 9/11 (2002), weapons of mass destruction (from 2003 onwards), which soon overshadowed the education efforts, grants to extend health insurance coverage, initiative to encourage mentring of at-risk children. The $10 billion program to fight AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean is a part of the Bush legacy, other areas were overcome by the distraction of wars in the Middle East....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ajami cites his own memories of Egypt's Gamal Abdul Nasser, who had a way with crowds and rhetoric in the Arab world, as giving him an insight into the way Barack Obama found his way into the American imagination as a popular leader in 2008. He points out that the coalition of black people who put their faith in him as one of their own, of white educated professionals who liked his cool image, of Hispanics who had hope for better immigration policies, and working class Americans who set aside reservations of elitism to give their support, was put together on the basis of hope and charisma and the uncanny ability of Obama to let himself be seen as all things to all people. Because of the way it was put together it was bound to come apart, particularly for a candidate without enough experience, says Ajami. The aloofness of the president, reliance on Congressional leaders Reid and Pelosi, and relying on a very small circle of advisors whose eyes were focussed on reelection, made this more so. He cites as one example, the controversial decision on Syria's chemical weapons made on a walk with chief of staff Dennis McDonough. Ajami gives a picture of how Obama may be seen from the outside, especially in the Arab and Muslim world- from Turkey and Egypt to Saudi Arabia- a sense of illusions. A European and particularly a German perspective also may have similiar sense of illusions about having gone for the ride and believing the image put out by image handlers. The lack of sensitivity to German sentiments about the tapping of chancellor Merkel's mobile phone- herself a former East German resident of the Soviet backed GDR- bringing this out. A similiar sense seems to have taken hold in Brazil, after Brazilian president Rousseff cancelled a trip because of lack of sensitivity to the tapping of her phone, as she is a survivor of brutal dictatorships in Brazil. This is ironically a full circle, as happens in these situations of euphoria encouraged by politicians inevitably followed by disillusionment, because Turkey, Germany and Brazil were some of the countries where enthusiasm for the new president was highest. More so because president Lula of Brazil, Merkel of Germany,and Erdogan of Turkey were leaders Obama seemed to relate to the most. This acts as a cautionary note for the future....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
High on the agenda for the G-20 Feb. 2013 meeting in Moscow is how to fund infrastructure projects in emerging market countries. About $191 billion in infrastructure investment is needed annually in South Asia alone, according to the World Bank. India's Economic Affairs Secretary, Arvind Mayaram, points to the need for finding innovative ways of funding and reducing the risks for private companies by some kind of joint effort from developed and emerging market countries. The needs are extensive especially in transportation, water, electricity, sanitation. Growth lower than potential is facing India- with estimates of growth at just around 5% for the fiscal year ending in 2013. This affects Europe and the U.S. as there is less demand for exports of developed countries. Transportation projects critical to easing congested overloaded rail lines in Jakarta and Manila could not get financing under existing arrangements, making this problem a serious priority.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mr Greenspan's libertarian views influenced by a novelist of all people, who is frail just like all of us however intelligent her views may seem, when taken as dogma. Taking his cue from Ayn Rand, who presented collective power as evil force set against the enlightened self-interest of individuals, he proceeded to let this enlightened self-interest run free in an ambitious American experiment devoid of all restraints and common sense. He came in in the days of Reagan and "the evil empire " and the philosophy of Milton Friedman of minimal government intervention in markets, and the view presented by Europeans like Hayek about the economy and freedom. But views become dogma and then defeat common sense. Buffett used common sense and always considered human beings and their frailties as part of the problem as well as the opportunity. Greenspan let these views of his defeat plain common sense and excluded the role of human beings and their weaknesses, in any scheme of things. This undid him and his reputation in the end as far as derivatives like mortgage securities are concerned. Plain common sense required as Buffett did- that as the risks of derivative contracts increased as they practically became the way risk was managed and distributed throughout the economy- to consider their opaqueness, and the way risk was distributed with the failure of one financial firm bringing down the others and the whole economy; with the way each were interdependent and tied up in the risk distribution for the capital that helped run the whole economy. Derivatives were created to soften risk or hedge against investment losses. For example some of the contracts protect debt holders against investment losses on mortgage securites. Their name comes from the fact that their value derives from underlying assets like stocks, bonds and commodities. What they allow to happen is the increase in leveraging and the taking on of more risk as for instance issuing more mortgage debt or corporate debt. As these contracts can be traded they enable companies to take on more risk by spreading the risk among more and more parties. The original issuer of this debt has the sense that somehow, as one expert put it, that by tossing this packaged as a complex derivative type security into outer space this risk would somehow disappear in that cosmos, so that more of the same could be done into infinity. Plain common sense like Buffett's would say otherwise and point to the danger when the whole scheme would get undone by the failure of some big financial firms, as the scheme becomes huge enveloping the economy, the very interdependence would bring down the whole economy. The very complexity of opaquenes of this way of dealing would make it impossible or difficult in the extreme to identify where the risk was lying, and take it out by firm governmental measures in an environment of fear. Requiring days not months for actions to work. This is what has happened. And the crucial weakness of overleveraged investment banking firms which depend on rollng over short term debt was not understood by any of the players, Congress, Greenspan, Summers, Rubin, Cox or Levitt or the quants on Wall Street with their elaborate models. All of these people worked to prevent Congress passing legislation regulating derivatives, or to silence the skeptics in Congress or government agencies as documented by Peter Goodman of the NYT. It was Chase's demand for more collateral of $5 billion to roll over short term debt of Lehman Brothers to pay for the perceived additional risk of overleveraged Lehman at 1:30 ratio of debt to capital, in an extreme risk averse environment, that led to the unraveling of that firm in a matter of days. Good common sense like Buffetts- who described dervatives like the mortgage securities as weapons of mass destruction, that were issued en masse and sent to remote corners of the world including a small town near the North Pole in Scandinavia- considered that this environment of fear of the unknown that brought down the investment banking firms in a matter of days, was also one face of the market. This had to be included in the arithmetic and understanding of the market. He also understood as plain common sense that there are no extraordinary theories and nothing extraterrestrial that will dispense with the basics and exercise of good sense That no matter what fancy name you put on it derivatives derived their strength from being less and less transparent and distribution and interdependence across a vast financial spectrum with higher and higher tight interlinking of financial firms to each other, with all their consequences in an unraveling making the ride down as painful and mass destructive as the joy ride on the way up. ...

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