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
Dionne,Jr., says the failure of the "supercommittee" to reach a deal would not be a failure at all if it leads to a flawed deal that does not generate enough revenues, such as the $300 billion in tax increases proposed by Jeb Hensarling. If the deal also makes 90% of the Bush tax cuts permanent this would make deficit reduction harder. Under such terms not reaching a deal, and having automatic reductions triggered by that outcome may be the preferred outcome, says Dionne,Jr.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Republican move for a 3 month extension of the U.S. debt ceiling to provide time to reach a negotiated deal with Democrats.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Congressional investigation shows the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) missed two opportunities, one in 2007 and another in 2010, to launch formal probes into whether the 2003-2006 Chevrolet Cobalt and the Saturn Ion had a defect leading to non deployment of airbags. In 2007 the head of the NHTSA's defect assessments division emailed other officials in the Office of Defects Investigation recommending an investigation be launched. Yet no action was taken.
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Pew Research poll shows Democratic voters now favor a bold ambitious agenda by large margins. Voters seeking compromise swung sharply going downwards from 69% to 46%. Many are calling for Medicare for All. In the Republican Party the shift is slight from 46% to 44%.

In the House the Congressional Progressive Caucus now has about 90 members. Of the 50 newly elected members who are House Democrats 20 are part of this Caucus pushing for bold action.

New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Following the record fundraising by U.S. president Obama in the 2012 presidential election, outspending Romney at a critical point in the campaigning in Ohio, Republicans and right wing groups are making their own effort to raise fundraising levels. The spending goals set by David and Charles Koch at the winter retreat in Palm Springs is $889 million to be raised from Koch and 300 other donors. Hillary Clinton's Super PAC plans to raise $300 million. The Republican total spending in the 2012 presidential election was $657 million. Koch's 2012 organized donor effort spent $400 million for the 2012 elections.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson points to the risks to the American economic growth from excessive health care costs. This is hurting take home pay and shows up in consumer spending. It is hurting government spending in other areas such as needed infrastructure spending and efforts to reduce the deficit. This hurts private capital investment to create jobs because of lower demand from constricted consumer spending. The U.S. budget has as its largest single expense 27% on health care compared to 20% on defense the next largest expense, with growth in health care spending taking this to one third of the budget in coming years. Without addressing health care, says Samuelson, the Supercommitte in Congress even if successful at deficit reduction will basically have failed to do its job, and it did not have the time, resources or conviction to do this. According to a new study from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), U.S. healthcare spending per person is $7,960 per person in 2009. This compares with Norway $5,352, Britain $3,487, France $3, 978, an OECD average of $3,233. Life expectancy in the U.S. is 78.2 years, compared to Japan 83 years, OECD average of 79.5 years. Chile and the Czech Republic have life expectancy equal to the U.S. Except for cancer care where the five year survival rate is 89.3% in the U.S. and the OECD average is 83.5%, the U.S. lags far behind in much needed critical areas such as diabetes and asthma. Rates of emergency hospitalization for asthma are 3 times that in France and 6 times that in Germany and Italy. The U.S. has fewer doctors per thousand population and higher cost per medical procedure- with more frequent use of the costliest procedures- creating a supply shortage that induces higher prices, and less preventive and early action care through physician visits. The number of practicing U.S. doctors is 2.4 per thousand population in the U.S. compared to 3.1 per thousand for the OECD average; and number of annual doctor consultations 3.9 per capita in the U.S. versus 6.5 for the OECD average. Appendectomy cost $7,962 in the U.S., $5,004 in Canada and $2,943 in Germany. Coronary angioplasty cost $14,378 in the U.S., compared to $9,296 in Sweden, and $7,027 in France. Knee replacement cost $14,946 in the U.S., $12,424 in France, and $9,910 in Canada. Knee replacements, angioplasties and MRI exams are twice as common in the U.S. compared to the OECD countries. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tom Keene of Blomberg BusinessWeek talks to a panel of experts about the future prospects for the US and the global economy. The discussion was spurred by Carmen Reinhart's paper at the central banker's Jackson Hole, Wyoming, conference. This paper forecasts high unemployment, low housing prices and very low growth in the US upto 2017. Shiller, Calomiris, Orszag, Kaufman and Bill Gross are part of this panel. Shiller's to do list main item is to get help to local and state governments by restoring general revenue sharing arrangements. Gross would focus on jobs that can hold up in a competitive economy, and put back some of the production that is taking place in the developing countries back into the developed countries, as part of a rebalancing; through a currency realignment. Kaufman would like to see a capital expenditure program by the US government, including infrastructure and education. Calomiris would like to see a setup of a new Republican Congresss to set the stage for post 2012 efforts. Calomiris favors cutting entitlements, cutting payroll taxes, but is not clear how this would help lower the deficit. Orszag points to feedback from business leaders suggesting a lowering of payroll taxes will not spur hiring, as the real reason for not hiring was low 1-2 % expected growth. Shiller, Kaufman and Gross see government efforts as realistically needed in the current situation....
The New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan's early years in Washington D.C. working for Senator Robert Kasten as an intern and on his staff, at Empower America for Jack Kemp and in other jobs.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein's thoughts in April 2009, on Treasury's Public-Private Investment Plan. First, he says this plan will only remove $500 billion of impaired assets. The banks he says now own $3 billion of residential mortgages, $1.5 trillion of corporate real-estate loans, and $1 trillion of consumer debt. Not all of this is impaired but the banks will have to sell much more than $500 billion to regain confidence in their solvency. And with one third of all residential mortgages exceeding the value of the houses, and thie many homeowners under water, likely to default, the negative feedback loop of foreclosures begetting falling prices begetting foreclosures, threatens the whole effort to shore up the defences. If no workable solution is executed quickly to prevent this then even larger pools of mortgage debt will be impaired irretrievably. Feldstein suggests that the Obama administration seriously look at his plan suggested in March 2008 to provide government loans at low rates of interest like 1- 2% for 20% of the principal amount of the mortgage and then reduce the mortgage principal by 20%, thus keeping millions of homeowners above water. But this needs to be done quickly. All voluntary efforts have failed and have become asmokescreen for banks and lobbying groups with support from Congress to make it appear that this problem is being addressed. Thirdly Feldstein says that if banks sell these impaired mortgage assets at a loss- say 40-60 cents on the dollar on the upside with government and the FDIC picking up alot of the risk and financing for private investors under the new plan- they will now have to show the loss whereas they could have previously shown these assets at unrealistic price levels but still not taking losses. This might push banks into insolvency, so banks will need more injection of capital by the government to make this possible. What are the risks in this situation? Without an effective plan to prevent the negative feedback loop of foreclosure waves and falling houseprices, the quantity of impaired assets will simply grow larger. In effect even if some private investors take out some of the impaired assets from the banking system, it is possible that a new set of assets equal to or larger than these assets that are taken out are added to impaired assets in the banking system as house prices fall steeply from new foreclosures. That only means the economy is in the same hole as before, or in a slightly larger one, even with all the well intentioned steps. At some point the private enterprise argument has to be seen in the correct light. It is not that there is any argument that private enterprise can function better or far superior, it is only that the banks as private enterprises are in such an enormously stressed situation that the bank executive's cannot execute a way out of this mess. ...

ObamaCare's Reality Deficit

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the true cost of the Obama health care legislation and the assumption that the legislation cuts the deficit by billions of dollars. This WSJ editorial says one has to look at this closely, and not merely look at CBO projections, which may be based in a certain context and not reflect the true costs, especially because many accounting gimmicks and use of numbers to present a particular picture is taking place. The information this editorial cites is that: it uses 10 years of taxes to fund six years of subsidies, Social Security and Medicare revenues are double-counted to the tune of $398 billion, a new program funding long-tem care frontloads taxes but backloads spending, and the assumption of an automatic 25% cut to physician payments that Congress is unwilling to authorize. Rep. Rand Paul has tried to present an alternative view which needs to be studied just as closely, because of the enormous impact of a jump in spending at a time when the public finances are fragile. WSJ also cites the work of Richard Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, as an alternate perspective of how things could turn out, Doug Holtz-Eakin, and Eugene Steuerle. It calls for common sense in evaluating programs, entitlements, defense or other government spending. They not only cost money, but costs escalate over time as history has shown over decades, till they eventually are discovered to be not affordable unless the middle class is willing to dig deeper into its finances to pay for them. Alternate perspectives from a range of informed opinion, Howard Dean, Martin Feldstein, and the head of Harvard's Medical School show that the issue needs to be looked at closely and carefully and cannot be something in which CBO numbers can be trusted to tell the whole story. Especially when common sense, history, and informed opinion across a spectrum of thought advises caution, and fragile public finances also suggest caution. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont, says the health care bill is not real reform, and may do more harm than good. He says in a Washington Post article, December 17, 2009, the Obama health care bill does not insert competition into insurance markets, does not significantly reduce costs, and does not improve the delivery and use of health services. It was he says done with a political calculus and crafted for votes not real reform. Jeffrey S. Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School, gave the Obama health reform bill an "F" grade, saying in a Nov 18, 2009, WSJ article, that it was disingenuous to call this reform, Congress and the White House were simply deceiving the public. He said the bill will accelerate US health care spending, postpone most of the major health care problems, expecially the ones that drive cost, including the "fee for service" system and delivery of health care. He says in his discussions with economists and other health care leaders the opinion was unanimous that the bill will accelerate health care spending. He cites Massachusetts as an example, where access to care was expanded under the same dysfunctional system, and spending went up, and it doesn't work. Feldstein, who in early 2008 suggested proactive solutions to the mortgage debt crisis which were never adopted, says that the Obama health care law means higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of health care for the uninsured group over 10 years. Feldstein says that the Obama plan is to cut Medicare to cut spending, and will reduce the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reducing payments to providers. And he asks if the cost reductions are weighted too heavily towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers ,would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% of the American people who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Information provided by experts suggest that the government plans including the public-private partnership with $1 trillion committment to absorb the bad assets in financial institutions, offered as a general solution without specifics by Treasury Secretary Geithner, will be inadequate to cope with the growing bad debt. Nouriel Roubini at New York University says his analysis suggests that the USA financial institutions are already insolvent. The bad debts of banks he says now surpass bank assets. Roubini has been ahead of the curve in his estimates in 2008, and is respected for his prescient remarks about growing credit problems. In his latest report he says that total losses by American financial institutions and the fall in market value of the assets they hold will reach $3.6 trillion , up from his previous estimate of $2 trillion. Of the total he says American banks face half of this or $1.8 trillion, with the rest borne by other financial institutions in the United States and abroad. Mr Posen an economist at the Peterson Institute agrees. He says the liabilities of of American financial institutions far exceed their assets. The only qualification of this says Posen is whether this should be seen as a temporary panic, or whether the economic climate will improve and the value of bank assets recover from depressed values. Raghuram Rajan, of the University of Chicago graduate business school, agrees that if the banks had to sell these assets today at distressed prices then they are insolvent, but if there are calmer times say in ayear or so and values recover then banks may get anew lease on life. So much of this depends on market psychology, market confidence and the economic climate improving. The only problem here is that as happened in 2007 and 2008, the recognition, awareness and action has fallen behind the speed and accelerating manner of the downturn. The Bush administration, Congress, and the American public support, have all been lacking in providing the vigorous action needed, compared to the speed with which the crisis hit in the October 2008 to January 2009 period. The transition between administrations added to this effect. The total lack of any Republican support for the Obama administration's effort continues this effect. Now the Geithner plan with few specifics for a public private partnership for tackling the bad debt, and the lack of action on a bad bank solution with government takeover of certain banks as needed, continues this pattern. The constricted credit meanwhile continues to hit business with an additional hit from dropping sales, leading to layoffs across all industries, which simply worsens the housing crisis and growing foreclosures. So all across the spectrum government action is at worst very late as in the slow response to foreclosures, where the $50 billion proposed now should have come in early 2008, and the banks halting foreclosures and modification efforts proposed now should have come in early 2008 as proposed by Bair and Feldstein. And at best government is just catching up to the credit crisis as with the Fed and FDIC efforts to contain and stabilize it, with inconsistent results and the collapse of some financial institutions like Lehman Brothers. The lack of consensus in Congress and the inexperience of the new administration, means more valuable time will be lost in crafting an effective response in the manner of the bad bank solution. What all this means is that the overall response in 2009 as in 2008 will also lag behind, and the opportunity for a decisive solution is slipping away even as the cost of that solution is climbing, putting it further and further beyond reach. See the link to Hiroko Tabuchi's article titled In Japan's stagnant decade, Cautuonary Tale for America, February 12, 2009, NYT. Tabuchi touches on just this point, that the American experience in 2007-2009 is just like that in Japan where the response lagged the problem in strength and effectiveness till 2003, after years of wasted effort....
New York Times Original article ›
http://www.hindustantimes.com/ Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The leaders of Republicans and Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker Boehner, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and Minority leader Harry Reid, reached a budget compromise with the White House in October 2015 after long closed door negotiations, following years of deadlock in previous years. The compromise lifts sequester spending caps agreed to previously in a previous settlement of differences, and lifts the budget ceiling till March 2017. Speaker Boehner said it was time to "clean out the barn," as he did this over the opposition of Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz from the right wing of his party who opposed his efforts to compromise with Democrats. On October 28, 2015, the House of Representatives passed the two year budget agreement 266-167, and the following day Speaker Boehner passed on the Speaker's position to Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. On Oct. 29, 2015, the Senate voted 64-35 to pass the budget compromise agreement. The agreement increases discretionary spending by $80 billion over 2 years, giving half to defense spending with the increase in military threats overseas, and the other half to domestic spending programs. The domestic spending goes to limit premium increases for some Medicare Part B beneficiaries, and a prevents a 20% across the board cut to Social Security Disability Insurance benefits, set for 2016. This removes the uncertainty posed by threats of a showdown on the budget ceiling and threat of defunding Planned Parenthood posed by right wing Republicans in Congress, which were bad for the economy at a time when the U.S. and Europe faces increasing threats overseas. Without a budget agreement the U.S. Treasury Department would have seen its borrrowing authority expire on Nov. 3, 2015....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
At the end of the 2012 Communist Party Congress in Beijing, Xi Jinping assumes the post of chief of the Communist Party of China. He also assumes the post of head of the Central Military Commission, which makes him head of the armed forces of China. Li Keqiang, the incoming prime minister, is the only member of the party Politburo Standing Committee selected by current president Hu Jintao. Jinping is supported by Jiang Zemin, former president. Four of the other five members are older party leaders placed in these positions by former president Jiang Zemin, who succeeded Deng Xiaoping and started China's three decade long modernization. The seven member Standing Committee governs China by consensus. This will limit the room for change, especially as the other five members are in their mid 60-s and favor the status quo. Xi Jinping is 59, Li Keqiang is 57. Xi becomes president in the spring of 2013, and Li becomes prime minister to run the government ministries. The optimism for Li who is the best educated of China's leaders, holding a doctorate in economics from Peking University, and an early interest in constitutional law, is restrained by the institutional arrrangements that favor the status quo. Some experts in China see the new leaders likely to make major changes only if confronted by a crisis. In his live television acceptance speech Xi focussed on China's "rejuvenation," with improvements in the party bureaucracy, tackling corruption, and improving the lives of ordinary people, for better schooling, jobs, incomes, health care, better housing conditions, social security and the environment. From the rush to modernize and build infrastructure attention is now shifting to creating better conditions for the Chinese people....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The gridlock in Congress and the housing crisis could postpone an overhaul of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for another two years. The housing crisis of 2008 has created a situation in which 9 out of 10 housing loans are guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie. The two agencies were created to buy mortgages from the banks, freeing the banks to make more loans. Fannie and Freddie gurantee the loans and then sell them to investors as securities, a process that lowers borrowing costs and makes 30 year mortgages more easily available to homeowners. The Obama administration and the Democrats want to continue some form of government guarantee, and continue government support for the 30 year fixed mortgage. The Republicans oppose any government guarantee because of the losses imposed on taxpayers by the way these agencies operated in the past, with the government guarantees providing the wrong kind of incentives in a housing market prone to bubbles. The fragility of housing markets means anything that raises borrowing costs could put downward pressure on housing prices. As a result the restructuring of the two housing agencies is in limbo. Republicans who want aggressive changes may wait for housing markets to stabilize, making the overhaul a multiyear process. Meanwhile the US Treasury has promised to inject unlimited sums into the mortgage giants through 2012 and nearly $300 billion after that, so that Fannie and Freddie have positive net worth and not go into receivership. The total cost to taxpayers beyond the $134 billion already incurred, is additional capital injection of $146 billion (for a total of $280 billion), because of further problems in the housing market in future years, and another $400 billion to adequately capitalize the entities that replace Fannie and Freddie, according to Standard and Poor's estimates....

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