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.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Fisher and Taub of the NYT look at the populist politics in Europe and the U.S. following the French election first round. Trump won in the U.S. with the deep polarization of politics in the U.S.- leading to the Republican Party to decide to support him to avoid the result of four more years of an administration led by Democrats, and with the support of discontented voters in midwestern states with falling living standards. The situation in Europe is different as the mainstream parties have united in the past to block populist politicians with negative messages on immigration and an open economy. This happened in the Dutch election, by the co-opting of the nationalist message of populist politicians by mainstream parties and mainstream politicians, and is likely to continue in the French and German elections in 2017. Fisher and Taub point to another development that is happening- shifting the debate to ethnonationalism vs. open economies, which has happened with Brexit and the UK Independence Party. They cite the 2015 British elections in which UKIP won 13 percent of the vote, as having influenced prime minister Cameron to call for a referendum on Brexit, in a effort to revive the fortunes of the Conservative Party. In the end this resulted in the 52 percent vote supporting Brexit.  Another way of looking at the populist movement is that with Trump it called attention to trade and the way working class Americans were being marginalized especially in the industrial midwest. With this problem being addressed in a Trump administration and a reviving economy, the mainstream parties have an opportunity to reassert themselves. In Europe the AfD called attention to immigration issues, and the Merkel coalition government of CDU and SPD by making changes such as the deal with Turkey, and returning economic refugees, is able to assert the role of mainstream parties. In Britain the situation could be a result of a brash decision by a Conservative prime minister Cameron, in making a bad miscalculation, that has put Britain on a course that is likely not in its best interest. The Brexit referendum yes vote galvanized opinion by showing an endless stream of refugees in their advertising- a development following the opening of borders by Germany and Austria to address the plight of Syrian war refugees. That situation has passed and is unlikely to happen again as both the SPD and CDU parties in Germany have pointed out that this was a one time situation that they responded to following the exodus from Keleti rail station in Hungary under special circumstances. With this kind of perspective populist politics can be seen as reflecting other voices in a democracy, that are heard and responded to, yet keeping the sense of balance and openness necessary in today's global economy and societies. This is also the perception of Germany's outgoing popular president Gauck in his final address, pointing to the need to listen to other voices in a democracy, and the need for openness in a democracy, as well as democracies always in the process of Becoming and evolving to adapt to new situations in economy, society, and politics.     ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
An exceptional editorial on the steps taken since bankruptcy for reviving Detroit -with all the numbers one needs to know for how this was done and is progressing. The editorial gives credit to Michigan Governor Snyder and Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr for having the courage to guide Detroit through the bankruptcy. It sees the outcome emerging, including treatment of bondholders, pension funds, and city workers, as fair considering the problems involved. The steps are also being taken to correct the deep seated problems that caused the crisis.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
XI Jinping tells China's National People's Congress that "western nations- including the US- have implemented all round containment, encirclement and suppression against us, bringing unprecedentedly severe challenges to development." Addressing the private sector Chamber of Commerce representatives which create significant number of jobs in China he said the Communist Party "has always regarded private enterprises and private entrepreneurs as our own people, and will always support them whenever they run into difficulties." Job creation in China is a challenge with high youth unemployment estimated at about 20%. The pandemic worsened the situation for state finances and for unemployment for migrants, the construction slowdown has added to this. The burden of trillions of dollars of local government debt increased during the pandemic with the central government lacking the resources to help, creating problems in the local economies.  This WSJ report says Xi's speech seeks to present his government's performance in the light of these challenges and future challenges as growth slows in China. The trading relationship with US-EU added to employment and income problems for China's economy and people, yet it had one weakness an over concentration in manufacturing in one country that European and US business placed in one country. The building of a  new supply chain that creates manufacturing in other countries to reduce this concentration, and the limits placed on access to western technologies by China to protect US-EU in competition, places new development challenges for China, which Xi alludes to. In the past China was able to use huge stimulus to tackle its debt by creating more growth that supported this debt creation. The pandemic may finally have reversed this as trillions of dollars of debt have built up, and construction of homes and infrastructure has reached a saturation point. This is the kind of situation that Japan entered in the 1990's after three decades of torrid growth and development rates. History is being repeated as China like Japan is entering a new phase of an aging society. In this sense the challenges China is facing are very different from that of Russia. Creating jobs is a perennial problem in India and China with their large populations and rising aspirations of people after centuries of underdevelopment, something that Europe including Russia does not face in anywhere to a similar degree. in this sense there is more in common between the EU and Russia even when they are in a war, than Russia and China, and China has more in common with India. The struggle in Europe as Cambridge historian Brendan Simms has pointed out in his History of Europe, is more about the balance of power which is the story of European history since the 1450's where no one country has been allowed to act with impunity in invading its neighbors and other countries formed a concerted group to prevent this. Be it France, Austria, Britain or Russia that acted seemingly with impunity. China has little to do with it or Europe's history. President Biden is right to say that the US only competes with China in the economic and business fields, and seeks to find common ground on climate change and food insecurity. The US has supported China throughout the twentieth century since the time of Woodrow Wilson in 1913, around the period when Tsinghua University was established with US help. The US helped China during the Japanese invasion and the Cold War period ended with renewed relations.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The is WSJ report points out that there were differences between the president and his defense secretary Mr. Esper, over the issue whether active duty military should be sent in to control protests in Washington D.C., Minneapolis and other cities in America. On May 25 president Trump considered firing Mr. Esper who said at a Pentagon press conference that he opposed bringing in the military to cities to quell domestic protests. Mr. Esper stated "The option to use active duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort. And only in the most urgent and dire of situations. We are not in one of those situations now."  Military and defense officials were very much opposed to this as fundamentally contrary to military values.  Mr. Trump consulted several advisers who told the president that this was not the right thing to do. Mr. Esper for his part also was making his own preparations to resign and here again his advisers persuaded him to not do this, says this report in WSJ.  The incidents happened as protesters crowded Lafayette Square, the park across from the White House, and the president believed that violent protesters were making it difficult for National Guard troops to maintain control. Mr. Esper is a West Point graduate and former Army officer. The president's advisers from the military included Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Mark Milley. Milley and Esper discouraged the president from invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807 and calling in army troops to the cities. Mr.Trump later visited the area around the church near Lafayette Park. The advisers consulted by the president on May 25 were Mark Meadows, White House chief of staff, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, David Urban, and two senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas and James Inhofe of Oklahoma. Mr. Cotton, a first term senator from Arkansas, later wrote a article in the NYT opinion pages on June 3 supporting use of the military. That article had the title "Send in the Troops- Tom Cotton" which NYT says was placed by editors, and appears baffling, considering the importance that this matter presents for the military and the nation. The NYT later stated with the article that it did not reflect "a thoughtful approach"  and lacked the "additional context" that would let readers be informed and think carefully. The essay also had a reference to the constitutional duty to the states from the federal government that could be misinterpreted, and without context. Mike Pompeo, one of the president's close advisers is Secretary of State. He is a West Point graduate, standing first in his class from the U.S. military academy in 1986, served 5 years in Germany in the 4th Infantry Division, before being elected to Congress from Kansas. The other key adviser in the decision Mr. David Urban headed the Trump campaign effort in a key state Pennsylvania. Both appear to be sensitive to public opinion and the thinking in the military.  By June 6 the White House press secretary said that Mr. Esper was instrumental in bringing calm to American cities after a week of protests following the death of Mr. Floyd in Minneapolis. For both Mr. Trump, Mr. Esper, senior White House officials, and the nation, moments for reflection and a sense of gratitude that calmer minds prevailed. ...
The Times of India Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Indian prime minister's speech in the Rajya Sabha, India's upper house of parliament presented the government's ideas behind the reforms in the agricultural farm laws. He made the point that the mandis for minimum support price or MSP will always be there, so that farmers looking for MSP would always be covered. "MSP tha, MSP hai, MSP rahega,"  his words in Hindi. Some of the main points are covered here in The Times of India. Many governments in India in the past have talked about reforming Indian agriculture. During the administration of Lyndon Johnson after famines and food shortages in India effort was made for the Green Revolution. Lal Bahadu Shastri, prime minister took up the work of the first development phase in 1965 to benefit Indian agriculture. The speech cited the work of Shastri for the Green Revolution that made India self sufficient in food grain production. India benefitted from American scientists mainly agronomist researcher Norman Borlaug. The prime minister cited the words of Manmohan Singh, Congress party prime minister preceding him, who had emphasized how important it was to bring changes to Indian agriculture. "Modi implemented what Manmohan said, You should be proud."   Manmohan Singh had said- "There are several rigidities in the whole market since the 1930's which prevent our farmers from selling their produce where they get the highest rate of return. It is our intention to remove all the handicaps that come in the way of India to become one large common market."  Other parts of the speech said about the new agriculture laws- "There are many laws. every law is amended in a few years. We are not static. Change is tradition. We should talk to the protesters, implement the changes. I will take the abuses. You take the benefit from the new laws. We can move ahead together... There are old people sitting in the cold, it is not right." The government has stated it will hold the new agriculture laws for 18 months and the Supreme Court has appointed a committee on the laws. In his speech Mr. Modi said that there was nobody to look after the small and marginal farmers, and asked who will speak for the 12 crores or 120 million marginal farmers who own less than 2 hectares of land.  In fact it was a call from these small and marginal farmers that led to Jawaharlal Nehru, son of a British trained lawyer Motilal Nehru, to join the struggle for Indian independence. This is shown in his autobiography written from jail in 1934-35.  At the time the British simply used the Indian police trained and run by the British Army to silence farm or agrarian unrest from small farmers. Nehru was asked in a phone call to come to one of the locations of the unrest during the early years. The bedrock of Gandhi's movement for independence was villages in which marginal farmers lived lives without making enough. When Vivekandanda talked about India's hundreds of millions living in poverty he was speaking of small farmers who then were a majority of the population of the country. Charan Singh, a former prime minister in 1970-80,  said that 68% of farmers were small and marginal farmers who owned less than 2 hectares of land. The government crop insurance scheme was changed to make it farmer friendly, PM Kisan scheme to empower the farmer. The Indian Rails initiative is intended to speed agricultural produce to locations throughout India taking produce from locations in southern India to places as far Kolkata. This is opening up new opportunities for farmers to increase incomes.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Nikki Haley is doing what has happened before, fighting for principles in her party and showing that a fully significant 40 percentage points of her party believe in the old conservative ideas, of the Republican party. That of the country club type, the everyman who happens to be conservative the core of the party, small and large business owners. The situation is analogous to the intraparty struggles that beset the Democratic party after the abrupt end after 1000 days of the John F. Kennedy presidency and administration. Since the 1920's and two periods of rising inequality accompanied by technological change from the 1870's that ended with the Great Depression, the US had experienced a great revival under Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Eisenhower. In 1960 a new future was articulated by Kennedy of the new world that lay ahead, one he had seen upfront in Asia before, during and after the war. How would we bring the post colonial world of billions of people into the modern world. Since then both a modern China and now modern India are part of this change. "Today our concern must be with that future. For the world is changing. The old era is ending. The old ways will not do." Acceptance speech for the Democratic nomination for President, July 15, 1960. It was interrupted after the intraparty disputes that began in 1968, Robert Kennedy challenging LBJ, leading to Richard Nixon, and Edward Kennedy challenging Jimmy Carter leading to Ronald Reagan. John F. Kennedy had articulated a vision that still is alive today based on an understanding of how America's needs fit into all humanity's needs.  In some ways the situation after 2024 or 2028 still goes back to the vision of a new order of the world with emerging nations in Asia with 3 billion people, and additional billions of people in Africa, Latin America. The Arms buildup promised by Reagan in 1980 has yielded little about 50 years later, not even the fall of the Berlin Wall which today has been replaced by another struggle in Eastern Europe in 2024. Truman tackled the Berlin Blockade,  Eisenhower had faced upto Soviet tanks in Budapest, Kennedy had faced the Berlin crisis in 1963 his ich bin ein Berliner (I am Berliner). What purpose would an orbital weapons program serve- and could the US ever be or even want to be  "only one superpower in a safe world," with an orbital weapons program as Reagan and Weinberger went out to do and failed completely. America faces a situation analogous to 1920's with increasing inequality and weakness in the social fabric, as a result of four decades of rising inequality accompanied by technological changes, and misguided Reagan programs that diverted from John Kennedy's vision that the "old era is ending, the old ways will not do."  The vision put forward by John F. Kennedy has more relevance today for the future. That vision he articulated in the First Inaugural Address in which he also said that this work may not be accomplished "in our lifetime on the planet." It is important to remember that John F. Kennedy connected his vision to FDR when he said in his State of the Union Address to Congress in Jan. 1961- In the name of a great President whose birthday we honor today, closing his final State of the Union Message sixteen years ago. "We pray that we may be worthy of the unlimited opportunities that God has given us." This is the vision that stands before America even today in 2024.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This New York Times editorial asks whose side the Republicans are on when they try to water down needed financial reforms. Are they simply speaking for the banks who stand to lose billions of dollars in profits through unregulated derivates trading but increase systemwide financial risk. The NYT supports senator Blance Lincoln, an Arkansas Democrat who is chairwoman of the agriculture committee, and who took a strong position in favor of controlling derivatives. Her proposal requires nearly all derivatives be traded on exchanges with exemptions only for unique contracts which would be supervised by regulators, and for a strictly defined group of companies with specific purposes.
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Rep. Ron Paul, assumes chairmanship of the House sub-committee that will oversee the US Federal Reserve. He is the author of the 2009 book "End the Fed." He is critical of the Greenspan-Bernanke Fed policy on interest rates, calling it an inflation of the money supply, penalizing the thrifty and cheating those who save, promoting consumption and spending over saving and investing. He views it as economically destructive. He views Fed policy in other areas as immoral, such as what he calls a counterfeiting operation-creating new money out of thin air- to sustain monopolistic financial cartels.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This view in the Economist shows that president Trump actually represented the instincts of the Republican party base by 2018- anti-immigrant, anti-elitist, and to the right on social issues. As a result it says it is no surprise that he has taken over the Republican party. As the elections for Congress get closer most candidates are trying to get Trump's support and many of the older senators and Congressman from the earlier period of the party are retiring. It cites polls showing Trump has support of 85% of the Republican party base. In 2018 Mr. Trump appointed new members of his cabinet who more closely represented his views on China, Iran, NATO, and business issues. Remaining party leaders such as Mr. Romney running for Senate seat from Utah are now seeking and getting Trump's endorsement. The Republican National Committee is also run by Trump supporters. On issues of foreign affairs Trump has combined alternate shifts between demands and pragmatism in relations with China, Iran, and other countries on trade, politics, coming up with a new way international relations are tackled. Part of the reason for their appeal is the nature of the intractable problems such as the imbalances in trade, nuclear weapons, and the idea that an alternative approach might work when other approaches have failed.  On social issues such as issues facing workers in globalization and free trade the parties to the left in the U.S. and countries in western Europe have failed to deliver, leading to the appeal of Mr. Trump, Brexiters, National Front in France.  The immigration issue has also worked against the socialist parties.  In Britain dissatisfaction with Theresa May and hard core Brexiters is growing, leading to Labor Party getting 40% of the vote in the recent election. Suggesting that the changes induced by the Brexiters and the Trump administration may lead to other changes in the future that may shift the focus back to basic issues and delivery on infrastructure, health and education which are fundamental for the future.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
BusinessWeek Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The consumer price index in China was 4.9% year to year in January 2011. The one year deposit rate was 3%. This means a negative interest rate of 1.9%. The real interest rate for China was an average of negative 1.1% in 2010.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Feldstein says GDP growth was smaller than the 1.8% that was reported for the 1st quarter of 2011, because two thirds of that 1.8% went into business inventories and not for sales to consumers or final customers. This means final sales growth at an annual rate of 0.6% and actual quarterly increase of 0.15%. With mostly inventory investment and not much response from the consumer he says business cannot be persuaded to hire and invest. A closer look at the numbers shows the growth was in February and March, with declines in April for real wages, durable goods orders and manufacturing production, existing home sales, and in real per capita disposable incomes. Feldstein sees the Obama administration's failure in several areas. The stimulus could not make up in size and structure for the loss of annual consumer spending of $500 billion and loss in housing construction of $200 billion. At $300 billion in 2009 and $400 billion in 2010 it was not enough to fill the huge gap presented by the financial crisis. President Obama allowed the Democratic leadership in Congress to put together a package that while adding to the deficit added less than a dollar to GDP for every dollar of stimulus. The stimulus lacked punch for economic growth as it consisted more of transfers to state and local governments, transfers to individuals, temporary tax cuts for low income people etc. The lack of a plan to reduce the deficit by creating higher uncertainty about future tax rates and interest rates has hurt the economy. The President's health legislation with the cost of $1 trillion over 10 years diverted much needed time, attention and bipartisan goodwill from the core issues of unemployment and the deficit. The Obama administration also did not tackle the housing issue as suggested by Feldstein with specific proposals in the first year of the Obama administration, with very little done to reduce the millions of foreclosures that have kept housing in a prolonged slump. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration's $38.6 billon loan program using Stimulus funds was intended to create 65,000 jobs. Two years into this program, with half the money disbursed, the program has created a mere 3,545 new permanent jobs according to Energy Department figures. The Energy Department claims its $5.9 billion loan guarantees to Ford Motor Company to produce energy efficient vehicles by upgrading plants in 5 states saved 33,000 jobs. Brookings Institution analyst, Mark Muro, says the administration appears to be counting all the workers at these plants and not the jobs saved. 33,000 is close to half the Ford hourly and salaried U.S. employees. Harvard Business School professor, Josh Lerner, says there is a tendency to do a lot of fuzzy math in these figures. Muro points to the need to set large expectations for short term political calculations. The Energy Department's own figures show 20 "green tech"companies won loans so far under this project by negotiating with the Energy Department. If these companies hire the people they agreed to they would hire 8,050 new permanent workers. Only 10 of these companies have created or saved jobs so far. Of the other 10 some won loan approval only recently. The whole process is time consuming. Even if the Energy Department were to create the 60,000 jobs under the revised estimate, each job saved or created would come at a cost of 640,000 dollars in loan guarantees. Using the figure of $19.3 billion disbursed 2 years into this program (half of the $38.6 billion) and 8,050 jobs created, would give a cost of $2.4 million in loan guarantees for each job created- an astoundingly high figure. Other factors to consider are the additional jobs created downstream by suppliers to these companies as the administration states, and the cost of loans if as in the case of Solyndra a company goes bankrupt. Solyndra received a loan of over $500 million and represents 3% of loan guarantees. The administration and Congress assumed a failure rate of 5-10% for this program. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gretchen Morgenson of the Times distills key insights from 633 page report by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. Morgenson points to the role of the Federal Reserve in Washington and New York in being as she describes it, defiantly inert and uninterested in controlling the mortgage bubble even when it had grown to enormous proportions.The problem now is that the same Fed has received more regulatory powers under the Dodd-Frank law. The same Fed repeatedly did not exert its authority on predatory lending. Page 94 of the report cites a total of only three institutions referred to prosecutors by the Fed from 2000 to 2006. Page 164 shows why there have been so few prosecutions for mortgage fraud from the bursting of the mortgage bubble. William Black, a former fraud investigator and professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, says the FBI has received virtually no assistance from the regulators, the banking regulators and the thrift regulators. The report contains some outrageous comments by one of the key players in fueling the mortgage bubble, Angelo Mozilo of Countrywide Financial. Morgenson describes him as a lender that roped unsuspecting borrowers into poisonous loans. Mozilo says in an interview on page 105 that his company prevented "social unrest" by providing loans to 25 million borrowers, many from minority groups. Never mind that this wave of poisonous loans has clogged the arteries of the nation's financial system, and resulted in foreclosures for millions of homeowners, creating a troubled housing market that hobbles the economy. Neil Barofsky, special inspector general of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, sees further bailouts ahead. He said in a report to Congress in late January 2011: "Unless and until an institution like Citigroup is either broken up, so that it is no longer a threat to the financial system, or a structure put in place that it will be left to suffer the full consequences of its own folly, the prospect of more bailouts willl potentially fuel more bad behaviour with potentially disastrous results." ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As Washington Post writer points out from personal experience- he is one of those who put up 15% to buy ahome inDenver at the top of the market and now has negative equity as prices drop- negative equity is one of the most serious problems facing the US economy. It has the potential to undo many of the encouraging things from the stimulus, as rising foreclosures continue to act as adrag on the overall economy. As he says about one fourth of Americans with home mortgages, or about 11-15 million people, owe more money on their homes than the market value of their homes. As Hoffman says the administration's approach has been a Band-Aid at best for a serious injury. The Obama administration set aside only $75 billion to get banks to modify loans and also made this voluntary for banks to modify loans. Treasury Secretary Geithner testified in Congress: "This is a conscious choice we made, not to start with principal reduction. We thought it would be dramatically more expensive for the American taxpayer, harder to justify, create much greater risk of unfairness." But making it voluntary means very little of this $75 billion has gone to help achieve modifications- banks had no incentives to do this. Only 31,000 permanent loan modifications have been made. Of the 750,000 temporary loan modifications made as of Dec 2009 only 4% of homeowners signing up have qualified for permanent federal relief. See the links to Martin Feldstein's proposals for this on the pages of the Wall Street Journal in 2008 and 2009 which called for aggressive program of relief for the sake of the economy. With 2.4 million Americans likely to lose their homes in 2009 according to Moody's Economy.com estimates, following the 2 million in 2009 and 1.7 million in 2008, this may be a serious mistake of the Obama administration and drag out this recovery....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
There is over $150 billion of additonal spending on education in the Obama stimulus plan being worked on in January 2009. There are several important aspects of this plan. One action will prevent literally hundreds of thousands of layoffs of teachers, according to Education Secretary Arne Duncan, as revenues of local districts drop. In a response to requests from Democratic party governors Congress has allocated $79 billion to help states facing large fiscal budget gaps to maintain government services, and especially to prevent cuts to education services fro kindergarden to college. Another aspect is the effort to reinforce Title 1, a program of specialized classroom efforts to help educate poor children, by increasing 2009 fiscal year spending from $14.5 billion to $20 billion, and raise spending for disabled children from $11 billion to $17 billion. This helps meet the unmet needs of the No Child Left Behind program. Another effort on the stimulus side which would create jobs for construction activity and do this with spending that will bring benefits in future years for along number of years in the future, is the federal government now taking abig role in the building and renovation of schools. The federal government will now spend $14 billion for the renovation and modernization of elementary and secondary schools, and $6 billion for the same for higher education. The stimulus also has tax provisions under which the federal government will pay the interest on construction bonds issued by school districts. The Education Secretary says that the $20 billion for this will create a huge number of construction jobs because so much of the school system building infrastructure needs repairs. In the area of higher education the allocation for Pell Grants used for student aid is increased to $27 billion from $19 billion. These aspects of the stimulus program are ones that will pay off over a number of years into the future. ...

Failure to Rise

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman puts it best when he says in the NYT that he's got a sick feeling in the pit of his stomach. Its just that the Republican challenge of not a single vote in the House for the $789 billion Stimulus bill just makes it harder to go back for more money which most definitely will be needed. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that over the next 3 years there will be a $2.9 trillion gap between what the economy could produce and will actually produce. $789 billion won't be enough, and more so because the weightage shifted in the direction of tax cuts from the original version. And considering the accelerating nature of the crisis on the housing front and in layoffs and consumption, the absence of a clear action plan with specifics to deal with the bad debt in the banking system, is what gives this sick feeling in the stomach. Because as is stated on these same pages by experts from Japan on February 12, NYT, see the link, Japan went through this same soul searching, public anger, controversy, and political leaders were afraid to take strong action for years from the mid 1990's till 2003 after Koizumi's election. Each action or set of actions each year during that period before 2003 was behind the curve, and did not match what was needed. For the USA this has happened already for 2007, 2008 and is heading in that direction for 2009, with a lack of consensus for the strong action needed. Would 4 million new jobs be generated by the current stimulus if that is a measure of success, as Obama indicated at his first press conference? With less going into spending for education, infrastructure, energy and other green projects, in favor of tax cuts and the AMT, and the feeling that going to Congress for more money will be harder and a partisan affair, will this become difficult to achieve? ...

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