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 ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Sim Shagaya and his online internet sales business DealDey in Lagos, Nigeria. He started with cupcake sales, a status symbol in Lagos. Because of online fraud most people in Lagos will not give out their credit card numbers. Dey gets around this by having motorcyclist riders deliver the goods and collect payment in cash. He has a 10,000 square foot warehouse near the Lagos airport, where motorcyclist delivery personnel take off for deliveries all over Lagos, with stalled traffic and delivery instructions like turning left where a lady sits with her plantains. He is planning a site that will be modeled on Amazon. Germay's Rocket Internet also plans to launch soon in Lagos, after opening in India, China and Brazil. Shagaya left Google S. Africa to start the business in 2005, initially starting a site based on the Groupon type business of selling vouchers. Items that sell well and are not returned are books, movies and videogames. Shagaya hopes to increase customers from the current 150,000 to 1 million for a Lagos population of 15 million, of which 5 millon are online on phones and computers....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Dodd-Frank legislation has a provision requiring U.S.- listed oil, gas and mining companies to disclose payments to governments for access to mining and oil resources. The S.E.C. will decide how to implement this rule which goes into effect in 2012. This has a severe effect on the economies of developing countries as it siphons away significant part of revenues for the resources into the hands of government officials. From Nigeria to Equatorial Guinea in Africa, and in other parts of the world in Latin America and Asia, this is a serious problem and results in underdevelopment and retarded societies.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Obama vists Acrra, Ghana, July 11, 2009. It is an emotional moment for Obama, and for Ghana and the African continent as a whole. It seems the whole nation was out on the streets,on crowded rooftops, packing balconies, leaning out of windows, to get a glimpse of Obama. Particularly emotional is the moment when he stood at the Door of No Return at Cape Coast Castle, a notorious slave port perched on the ocean. He spoke about the existence of "evil" that he had seen at Buchenwald, and here again. He spoke up against the poverty of Africa that is compounded by the greed, corruption and the lack of responsibility of the elites in African countries. Obama said "Africa doesn't need strong men, it needs strong institutions." He talked about his personal experience: "I have the blood of Africa within me, and my family's story encompasses both the tragedies and triumphs of the larger African story. Some of you know my grandfather was a cook for the British in Kenya, and though he was a respected elder in his village, his employers called him boy for much of his life." See the related story on Nigeria, which was avoided by the President on his visit. And where because of the corruption and lack of responsible government, influential Nigerian voices themselves feel this was the right thing to do. This is one area in which Obama picks up from a strong effort by President Bush. Bush tried to frame policy by rewarding good government and building institutions through programs like the Millenium CHallenge Corporation, an antipoverty effort that gave Ghana $547 million in 2006. Both Bush and Clinton visited here....
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The issues China faces as it plans the next phase of massive urbanization. Urbanization is a major priority of prime minister Li Keqiang, which was also the focus of his postgraduate work in his student days. In the early 1980's about 20% of China was urbanized, this has changed over three decades to where the figure is 47%, plus 17% for workers working in the cities but classified as rural, a total of 64%. China's plan is to fully integrate 70% of the population or 900 millon into cities by 2025. In 2013 only 35% of the population has a urban residency permit, or hukou. The permit is needed for residents to register their children in local schools or qualify for medical programs in urban locations. One of the problems is the huge cost of doing this which it is feared could lead to inflation and higher debt levels. Currently local governments bear these costs using land sales, and central government transfer payments, but without added financing and unable to issue their own bonds, the local governments strictly limit the use of local school and health services to their own residents keeping out rural newcomers. Local government taking over farmer plots, often without enough compensation is highly unpopular in China. Other problems are- providing a steady stream of earnings for new urban residents from farms, if no employment can be found. So they can sustain themselves- especially as they get past 40 years of age when factory employment is harder to find. The government planners see the larger urban population as a way to shift from a largely export based economy and slowing growth, to a consumption based economy. But critics say the risk is that for this to happen new residents from the farming villages have to find jobs, something the government will have difficulty accomplishing. A permanent underclass of unemployed and other financially strapped citydwellers living around major cities, as has happened with the progress of urbanization in Brazil and Mexico, is something the government would want to avoid. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
BusinessWeek Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A biographical account of Nigeria's acting president Goodluck Jonathan, who brings an academic background as a biologist with a doctorate in zoology and is a former environmental official. Nigeria faces huge problems of corruption, north-south tensions, and lacks basic infrastructure especially power generation capacity. He brings humility and is associated with environmentalists. He was selected as vice president because of his clean government credentials.
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
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."     ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Efforts by the new petroleum resources minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke, to increase Nigeria's oil quota, and pass a bill in Parliament to increase taxes on foreign oil companies to take a bigger share of profits in joint ventures. She is undertaking a government effort to allocate 10% of oil revenues to the Niger delta.
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama in his speech at Georgetown, April 13, 2009, describes the thinking behind the decisions made in the first 12 weeks of his administration- why the actions are not aggressive and overreaching as some critics say, and why they are not timid as other critics have said. This was not a typical downturn of the business cycle, but a perfect storm arising from irresponsibility and poor decisionmaking in Washington, Wall Street and Main Street- in effect several crises colliding for something like an explosion, if not dealt with at once, and with strong action. He says "the key to dealing with our deficit and debt is to get a handle on out-of-control health care costs, not to stand idly by as the economy goes into free fall." The recognition that the crisis itself brings with it new possibilities, the opportunity for coming to grips with and forging a good solution to health care, energy and education issues that were neglected while Wall Street directed investments to areas other than investment in building for the future. To the critics like Krugman, Rosenfeld and others who say that the takeover of insolvent banks should be done quickly before the situation worsens, he says it is not because of any ideological or political judgement he has made about government involvement in banks, but because it is more likely to undermine than create confidence at this point. He goes on step by step, through the process of decisionmaking, first to step in and boost spending vigorously, second to get lending flowing again to businesses and families, strengthening the non-bank credit market for consumer purchases and loans, the housing plan, the auto plan, and the work at the G-20. Then President Obama goes on to project his vision and the road to getting there. The five pillars he sees for the future are: redirecting Wall Street and banking to constructive investments for the future, investments in education, investments in renewable energy and technology to create new industries and new jobs, investments in health care to cut costs for businesses and families, and new savings in the federal budget to bring down the deficit. Obama says he will look for savings line by line in every corner of the budget, and has already identified two trillion dollars in deficit reductions over the next decade. And the goal is to reduce discretionary spending for domestic programs as share of the economy by more than 10% over the next decade. Procurement reform will greatly reduce no-bid contracts and save $40 billion. Secretary Gates is attacking th problem of hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and cost overruns that have bloated the defense budget, without adding to the nation's safety. And education programs that don't work will be removed, and waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare program will be controlled. Finally, Mr Obama points to the nation's political system as one more reason we are in this perfect storm- "a fundamental weakness in our political system." He cites the putting off hard decisions for another day, scoring political points instead of rolling up up sleeves to solve real problems, an impatience that is only worsened by the 24 hour news cycle, and a short attention span that focusses on the immediate results and on poll numbers. And there is too much responding to the "tempest of the moment until the furor has died away and the media coverage has moved on, instead of confronting the major challenges that will shape our future in a sustained and focussed way." After these 12 weeks President Obama says, for the first time there are glimmers of hope, and way off in the distance can be seen a vision of America's future that is far different than its troubled past. And citing the parable in the Sermon on the Mount about that "house built on a rock", he sees America's house built on a rock, a house for which we use this moment to lay a new foundation, come together and begin the hard work of rebuilding, persisting and persevering in the face of disappointments and setbacks that surely lie ahead. Then he has no doubt "that this house will stand and the dreams of our founders will live on in our time." Its a remarkable speech in its directness, its simplicity in approaching the subject, and its borrowing from the Bible for that story of that house built on a rock, and its Lincolnesque reference to the house that will stand. And more than a speech, it describes a vision, and the set of actions and steps taken and to be taken to get there. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The IMF extends $100 billion in loans to countries that have healthy economies but need temporary help, such as S.Korea, Brazil, Mexco and Singapore. Some of these countries have borrowed heavily in other currencies and the drop in the value of their own currencies makes repayment difficult. No strings such as requirements to raise interest rates and to cut public spending are attached to this program. Under this program countries could borrow five times the amount they are normally entitled to, $25 billion in Brazil's case, without the strict conditions that normally accompany such loans. Nobel Prize winner Stiglitz was chief economist at the World Bank. He said the funds use of the words restore confidence itself could make a lot of countries nervous. That is because in the Asian and Latin American crises in the past, the IMF set strict conditions to increase interest rates and cut public spending and food subsidies at a time when the poor especially and the rest of the people, all needed help, thereby increasing public distress. In the developed countries stimulus packages and infrastructure spending goes up to support employment and incomes, but the IMF has advocated quite the reverse in the case of the developing countries, with the US Treasury a key factor in IMF support and ideology. Which is why countries in Asia like South Korea see a stigma attached to the IMF and are refusing IMF help. In Pakistan also the IMF support is a last resort or Plan C. Iceland for instance raised rates in return for IMF help from 6% to 18% to try to stabilize the currency. The IMF was created as part of the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944 when the Allied Powers USA and Britain and other countries that sent representatives met in New Hampshire for a postwar economic system. Japan, S. Korea, India and China and many other countries were not part of it because of the war or colonial empires....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Britain's GDP declined by 0.7% in the second quarter of 2012.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US needs good manufacturing jobs for the jobs and income that it brings into communities, and also because of the tax revenues from the companies making products in America that provide the basis for local governments to provide good public services in healthcare, education, and transportation. To say comparitive advantage that helped first Japanese and now Chinese manufacturers is real and how society gains is to deny some basic facts that are self evident from observation that contradict textbook ideas in economics. Comparitive Advantage is a textbook economics concept that says countries are proficient in what they make best and should specialize in that product. But it is a static concept that exists only in textbooks. If Japan in 1960, China in 1980 and India in 2000 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making steel and remained makers of lower end products such as footwear and textiles. If Japan in 1980, China in 2000, and India in 2020 were each presented with this idea they would have turned down the idea of making semiconductors and remained makers of lower end products such as steel. A senior vice president of US Steel in the late 1960's even told this writer a graduate student at Northwestern in Chicago- as the US can make steel better than India or China let us keep making it for you. He and much of the business faculty at Northwestern also could not understand in 1970 why Airbus was being setup to compete with Boeing who by the concept of comparitive advantage should have had the whole market to itself for commercial aircraft . By this kind of thinking Airbus would not exist today because it did not have the lowest cost or the manufacturing technologies Boeing had through its vast manufacturing operation. America would be still the only one making aircraft in 2023 if textbook concepts ruled the day. By indirect methods such as hidden preferential arrangements, provision of inputs such as land, capital and labor, tax relief, the costs can be represented in a way that shows it is cheaper to manufacture overseas. The lack of a level playing field is what president Biden is correcting by doing what first Japan, then South Korea, then China and now India are doing since the 1960's. By 1974 in four years after its founding in 1970 Airbus came up with its first model the A-300 using advanced technologies. America will regain its leadership in the cost and manufacturing of many products through Biden policy and the efforts of American companies by 2030, and do this in a transformative way that will benefit the world as a whole.  It is an enormous error to say the US does not need good manufacturing jobs, that local governments do not need the tax revenues from manufacturing plants to build services for communities where manufacturing workers live, and the US does not need the manufacturing experience curve that leads to reduced costs. It is this loss of the manufacturing experience curve that is the most vital aspect for understanding the need for the US government to compete effectively with the governments of Asian countries to keep manufacturing healthy and strong at home. Economics experts ignorant of how important this science and engineering principle is fail to grasp this. Related to this is the idea of a virtuous cycle in manufacturing- whoever braves the hard years of moving up the learning and experience curve gets rewarded because once that country has mastered that skill it gets better an better as the technology advances- making it harder and harder to prevent a new monopoly in manufacturing by the country (Japan, China or Taiwan) that had the highest costs and the least advantage ten or 20 years earlier but just persevered through it all with the government's help to gain cost competitiveness. This part does not make it into the economics textbooks which are mostly theory and much of it outdated by the time they are written. Observation is the best teacher and guide as it is in science, to guide policy and action. Obsessive attachment to theory that ignores observation becomes the enemy of progress. Comparitive advantage is one concept that needs to be retired even from the textbooks. Overseas manufacturing then is a piece of the overall picture that fits into what is good for the US. Macroeconomic principles determine microeconomic outcomes as opposed to microeconomic principles with companies out on their own being forced to compete without a level playing field, or handing out technology for special status in a recipient country as some do putting the US at a macroeconomic disadvantage. This is also healthy for the recipient country overseas, as recrimination with loss of manufacturing jobs in the US inevitably leads to the kind of recrimination that does not serve either country well as in the case of China today, and worse still can lead to conflict, even war. After the egregious situation of loss of manufacturing communities across the US leading to destabilizing the social fabric, it is hard to see such thinking prevail about the US not needing manufacturing as a vital part of its social fabric and industrial strength. China, it can be said, would have developed, and developed well over the past two decades without overconcentration of US and EU manufacturing in China. Without aggravating the problems of climate change and contamination of air, land and water, and destabilizing the social fabric in the US hurting workers and communities across the US, if macroeconomic policy was made to manage this process in the US government without it being left entirely to individual companies to decide. Instead China faces today a difficult situation through events such as destabilizing the social fabric in the US (the Trump tariffs), advanced economies in G-7 resistance to sharing of technologies, the damage to its environment from microeconomic locally determined policy at individual companies, and the global effects of climate change from climate unsustainable levels of growth since 2000.  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In China since 1981 the poorest people making below $1.25 a day fell to 207 million in 2005 from 835 million in 1981. In India the number of people below $1.25 a day increased to 455 million in 2005 from 420 million people in 1981. The share of the people in poverty fell to 42 percent from 60 percent during the same period. Corresponding figures for East Asia including China show a drop from 80% of the people in poverty in 1981 dropping to 18% in 2005. The proportion of people living below the $1.25 a day poverty line worldwide fell over the nerarly 25 year period from 1981 to 2005 from 52% in 1981 to 26% in 2005. In subSaharan Africa, now the poorest region half or 50% of the people live under the poverty line of $1.25 a day in 2005 almost where it was in 1981. In absolute numbers the region had 380 million people living below the poverty line in 2005 compared to 200 million people in 1981. Note that the World Bank this year changed the poverty line from $1 to $1.25 a day, to make allowance for the inflation that is hitting the poorer countries. Is China a rich nation after the Olympics? Some parts of China, the coastal regions and the regions around big cities like Shanghai and Beijing are relatively affluent with pockets of poorer people but in the rest of the country there is poverty as defined perhaps in terms of deep poverty, poverty, poor middle class without health insurance or any kind of savings for emergencies. With 200 million people in 2005 below the poverty line a question could be asked how many people in China below say $2.00 a day which could be seen as being poor at a time when inflation in food and fuel costs has been significant in developing countries. If its somewhere in the range of 300 and 400 million people in China this explains why in relative terms China would identify with India and the rest of the developing countries and it also explains its stand in the WTO trade talks acting as a developing country protecting the rights of agriculture and farmers within China. And it also explains the reasons why China sees a long transition before it ceases to be a poor developing country and why there is real concern that these 300-400 million people as well as others adversely affected by the rapid industrialization and exercize of state authority, corruption and increasing gaps between rich and poor, adverse effects on environment, that these people adversely affected are listened to and accomodated in the interests of stable progress and fairness. Much of recent history has shown that countries open to foreign trade have done better given the right conditions and careful policy measures. China opened up around 1981, and India around 1991. Also progress and gains are more significant in infrastructure building and in poverty reduction in the latter phases of development as the synergies increase, capital pool increases, and the development accelerates, this shows why China's gains look significant compared to India's at this point in time. In ten years or fifteen years a better assessment could be made and then some points may favor China and some India, and the results will be a result of different history, experiences and problems faced and routes taken because of prior developments in each region and varying complexity. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us