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
The U.S. government sold its last remaining shares in auto company GM booking a loss of $10.5 billion- a recovery of $39 billion dollars of the $49.5 billon dollars given to GM. The Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., points out that the cost of bailing out GM and Chrysler was about $13.7 billion. The benefits were 1.2 million jobs protected in 2009 during the depths of the financial crisis. It also preserved $39.4 billion in personal and social insurance tax collections in 2009 and 2010. The Treasury Department estimate of the cost is about $15 billon, including money invested in GM's former finance arm Ally Financial Inc. President Obama says the effort helped create 372,000 new jobs in five years. Treasury Secretary Lew summed it up by saying "it helped stabilize the auto industry and prevent another Great Depression." Other intangible but larger benefits in the long run were building up the companies anew with new pay structures the auto companies could support in a globalized economy, bringing in new management and discarding of old mindsets and culture, new relationships with unions and customers, committment to achieving fuel efficiency targets with new technologies in cooperation with the U.S. government guidelines, and renewed confidence of millions of employees in the U.S. auto sector. It is also the one area in which the Obama administration scores a clear win, and in which president Obama took the greatest interest as senator. That the public did not fully appreciate the significance of the step is more a reflecion of public frustration with how the companies were run by the old management, and a continual reminder of the importance of good management for the U.S. industry and economy....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Michael McConnell, was Assistant General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget from 1981-1983. He is now a professor of constitutional law at Stanford University. Here he tries to throw light on how the budgetary process that is required by law, and which makes the formal budget proposed by the president available for public scrutiny, was circumvented through a sequence of events starting in February 2011. The Budget Act of 1974 sets specific deadlines and a process for generating revenue, setting spending priorities, and setting the debt limit. The President first submits his administration's budget by the first Monday in February. The Congressional Budget Office has until Feb. 15 to score the budget using identical metrics for all proposals for a consistent scoring. The budget President Obama put forward in February did not take into account the growing deficit and was rejected by the Senate 97-0. The President proposed a new plan in April 2011, but the proposed budget was so vague that CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said he could not score it. The subsequent efforts in June and July 2011 were carried out in closed door negotiations between senior Republican leaders and the Obama White House. This subverts the original intention of the law. The Budget Act says that both the House and Senate hold hearings on the proposal, with testimony from the administration, "national organizations" and the "general public." Transparency, openness and accountabilility are key aspects of a proper process that is democratic and prevents the parties from engaging in blame and competing claims. The closed door negotiating sessions and the lack of a concrete written budget proposal from the President has turned the current budget process into an effort by each side to see how it can best position itself for the 2012 presidential election. ...
Detroit News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Clinton backs Obama, with a "No Way, No How, No McCain" call at the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado, on August 26, 2008.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report says Biden and other G7 leaders toured the Hiroshima Museum but does not say that they visited the East end of the Museum shown in an NHK documentary where most of what happened, of people who lived and died in Hiroshima on that day, are shown. It is not shown that Mr. Fumio Kishida is himself a cousin once removed of a 4 year old boy whose remains are shown at the museum. Mr. Obama also has not visited the East end of the museum according to reports. Lyrarc.com has suggested that the NHK documentary that was broadcast in Asia last week should be shown to G7 leaders if they have not actually seen that part of the museum that shows the lives of the people on that day. The point is not to see the dead as from one nation but as people who could be from any other nation in a different conflict with different countries, the responsibility of any one nation or of nations on opposite sides should not obscure the importance of seeing the dead as just human beings- without nationality.     ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama's speech announcing the details of his executive order on immigration on Nov. 20, 2014, starts by saying he is not bypassing Congress or the Republicans. He says Republicans had the opportunity to pass legislation in the House that passed the Senate, or come up with their own bill. And still have an opportunity to come up with a bill he could sign into law that address the shortcomings of the current immigration system. In selling the bill to Americans he points out that this is not an amnesty, that the current system which allows immigrants here to stay illegally without paying taxes or any accountability is an amnesty. He points to deportation of millions as not an option, an out of the character of America. That deportation of criminals will continue and is up 80% in his administration, without mentioning that deportation under his administration for ordinary undocumented immigrants without any criminal record had reached a high of 400,000 a year under his administration, higher than under the Republican Bush administration. In fact it had reached such levels that Hispanic groups stated they would sit out the midterm 2014 elections and not vote for Democrats or Republicans, after providing a significant part of the winning margin for Obama in the 2012 presidential election. President Obama says he has the legal authority to prevent deportation, and that this is essentially what this executive order does- providing a temporary right to stay and work in this country to undocumented immigrants here living in the shadows who are here for more than 5 years, not a permanent status or citizenship. He cites other presidential decisions of the last 50 years, Republican and Democratic, that have integrated large groups of undocumented immigrants, including an executive order by President Reagan. And he refers to the Bush presidencies 41 and 43, where both father and son, considered Hispanic Americans "a part of American life," as good hard-working people deserving a chance to be Americans. The speech ends with an appeal to the compassion of Americans urging them to look at their own individual stories going back one, two or several generations, or Ellis Island where the early waves of European immigrants entered the country in the 19th century, and to immigrants from the period after the early British settlements in the 18th century. This is typical Obama, as much as the calculated decision to pursue a aggressive deportation policy was for the first 6 years of his administration, including the decision for "Dreamers" or young people before the 2012 election. "Scripture tells us, we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger. we were strangers once, too. And whether our forbears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here because this country welcomed them in." Over 2 million deportations in one of the most aggressive deportation policies of any administration, followed by an effort to stop deportations before the next presidential election, when the NYT had called his deportation policy "infuriating." ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Seib points to the part of the president's inaugural speech that said action must be taken even if victories are partial, that the debates over the role of government could go on for all time, but action however imperfect needs to be taken in this time. There is a sure willingness to engage in more partisan fights with Republicans and a broader list of issues from climate change to immigration, gender equality and curbing guns. The diffusion of the pent up purposes- pentup by the first term economic and healthcare issues- and the short time during the second term of 2 years to accomplish this, adds to the urgency for the president Obama.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Fomer Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says America needs to take up a vigorous foreign policy in his book "Worthy Fights." Both Panetta and Hillary Clinton, and Gen. Dempsey of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Petraeus of the CIA, supported U.S. taking a strong stand in Syria by supporting Syrian opposition forces in the summer of 2011 and were overruled by president Obama and his election advisers because of the approaching 2012 election. Here Mark Landler provides more insights into Hillary Clinton's deeply held belief shared with Panetta that the U.S. had to take strong action where necessary to deter foes, to get into the ring to use Panetta's expression. The U.S. support for action in Libya to support Britain and France comes from the efforts of Clinton, and any lack of followup one of president Obama's errors in foreign policy. In April 2016 president Obama said that he considered his failure to followup in Libya to help the new Libyan government his biggest mistake in his presidency. Here Mark Landler looks at Hillary Clinton's entire career as showing a conviction and belief on the need for action where necessary in the U.S. global engagement. Compared to the bluster of the candidates Trump, Cruz and Sanders, with little experience to back this up in their careers in real estate, law or the Senate , Landler says Clinton is the last remaining hawk. Here he describes Hillary Clinton's contact and empathy for the troops from her trip to the American base in Tuzla, Bosnia, in March 1996. In fact many have forgotten that Yugoslavia is what it is today after the Milosevic years and the ethnic wars with Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, members of the EU and Serbia negotiating to enter EU, because of the bombing campaign taken by Bill Clinton through NATO in 1999 to prevent ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, and peacemaking following the Bosnian War using diplomat Holbrooke to negotiate the 1995 Dayton Accords. Here Landler describes the meetings with Gen. Keane who pushed for the troop surge that worked in Iraq under president George W. Bush. Clinton supported Keane's proposal made in April 2015, for a no-fly-zone in Syria that would help opposition forces till a settlement could be negotiated. Keane pointed out to Clinton that there was a flaw in Obama's policies- that negotiation would work only if the no-fly-zone was used to support opposition forces. By the end of 2015 Hillary Clinton publicly adopted this position. During a period when Americans are weary of foreign entanglements but understand the need to provide leadership where needed, Hillary Clinton, provides a balance between the pendulum swinging too sharply in one direction in the Bush years and in another direction in the Obama years, says Landler. A view also articulated by Leon Panetta, who was chief of staff for President Clinton during the Bosnian conflict and the Dayton Accords, where the U.S. showed strength of purpose in war and also in negotiating the peace without major entanglements....
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US Senate filibuster rule that requires 60 votes for the budget to pass is a relic of the civil rights days, today it prevents Republicans from ending the shutdown by majority vote. Republicans used it when Democrats controlled the House and Senate and Senate Majority Leader Thune does not want to drop the filibuster as it acts to ensure no hasty legislation or budget is passed without some form of overall consensus. It also means that situations such as a government shutdown can happen when the opposition party in the Senate uses it to make it demands be met. In this case Democrats Schumer and Jeffries are asking Republicans to include money for subsidies for the Obama Affordable Care Act enrollees- about 22 million people signed up for this part of the ACA to receive generous subsidies for healthcare. These subsidies are not part of the Big Beautiful Bill of DJT that passed Congress and was signed into law. Unions and airline executives are calling on Democrats to end the shutdown as it disrupts air traffic at airports, and leads to cuts in SNAP and other benefits, and to lack of pay checks for government employees. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Rich calls Obama's speech for all its apparent thoughfulness and logic, a failure in its mission of coming up with a way to tackle Afghanistan and Pakistan. It did not grapple with the real issue and complexity of these places. He says the rigorous analysis failed and what Obama is ending up with is a too clever by half holding action which lacks credibility becuase the Karzai regime lacks credibility, and the American people have serious doubts of the wisdom of increased involvement. Worse it lacks acredible exit strategy for all the emphasis on early withdrawal. Making some calculations with Petraeus's field manual Rich comes up with a force of 586,000 that would be needed for a proper counterinsurgency in Afghnistan for its population of 28.4 million. But America still would have only less than one fourth of this number in the vast mountainous terrain of Afghnistan, especially when the government it is backing has seriously alienated its own people. So isn't it just as possible that McChrystal and Gates have made a serious error, that the surge that worked in Iraq was based on apeculiar topography that is absent here, which means even more troops not awithdrawal is likely a year from now? He points out that, as Fred Kaplan had pointed out in Slate, that the idea that the coaltiion partners are increasing their share of the burden is an illusion, as America's new share of allied troops with the surge will be 70% compared to 50% when the Bush administration left office. But what he finds most disingenuous is the idea that there will be no sacrifices in economic terms for America, that life can just go on like before, even as the cost of the war will shortchange urgent economic priorities at home and even gut alot of the domestic needs. This was missing in the Obama presentation....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Joint Editorial by U.S. president Barack Obama and India's prime minister Narendra Modi in the Washington Post on September 30, 2014. Strobe Talbot, a former deputy Secretary of State says he does not remember a situation in which this type of joint editorial was put out by two heads of government. Speaking on Indian television "Times Now" with Arnab Goswami, Talbot says this is a result of intense advance preparation on both sides that he is personally aware of from his contacts in the two governments. The editorial says the two countries are "natural allies" using the words of former BJP Indian prime minister Vajpayee. It emphasizes the fact recognized by both sides that the true potential of the relationship has not been realized. It sees the election of a new government in India (with a decisive mandate) as a natural opportunity to move the relationship in line with India's rapid development agenda, and the U.S. own need to generate economic growth. Specifically Modi and Obama plan to discuss building up Indian manufacturing, and expanding affordable renewable energy including nuclear. The "Clean India" program is received with particular enthusiasm and an area of collaboration for improving sanitation and hygiene throughout the country. The relationship is viewed as bigger than projects and investment, in that it can add to helping build a more peaceful future for the global community- with the two countries tradition of interest in peaceful development that benefits all nations....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Glenn Hubbard describes how the difference in approach between Romney and Obama matters, as it did between Carter and Reagan. The basic difference being the importance of getting long term policy on the right track. See the Reagan memo in Groups for the importance of setting the right tone and emphasis on a consistent long term direction, which was advice given in the memo by Shultz and other advisors to Ronald Reagan. The belief in growth from private sector investment and job creation and putting the right policies in place is a distinct difference between the Romney and Obama plans.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street Journal/NBC poll shows that 58% of people polled want the President to worry more about keeping the budget deficit down even though this may mean alonger recession and asloer recovery. Only 35% say they favoring boosting the economy. What may be vague here is what a longer recession here means, its length from 1 to 2 years or 3-4 years, and what boosting the economy means; when the stimulus package has already been passed and its impact has still to be felt as a lot of the money is not yet spent. Democrats are evenly split with 50% favoring boosting the economy, and 42% urging a deficit focus. Republicans overwhelmingly are worried about the budget deficit. Independents by 2 to 1 also are worried about the deficit. Overall 31% of those polled say job creation and economic growth should be the highest priority for the government. And 19% say deficit and government spending should be the highest priority. About 16% say they see health care as the biggest priority, and 14% said national security and terrorism should be the highest priority. This means that the Obama administration will have two conflicting concerns throughout the early years in keeping the stimulus measures in place, and at the same time paying attention to the budget deficit....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says only now are European leaders realizing the errors made in leaving the Middle East to its own problems, and not intervening where necessay. It says the risks of not intervening are often higher than of intervening as is being proven in this situation after years of inaction and withdrawal in the Middle East. It points to the difficulties experienced by the Bush administration in turning things around in Iraq, but says by the end of the Bush administration in 2008 things were gradually returning to normal in Baghdad. With the withdrawal from Iraq and no action in Syria under the Obama administration policies of withdrawal from the Middle East, the entire region is unravelling. Europeans and Americans would prefer that what happens in North Africa remains there, says the Journal, but that is not the way it has worked out -with millions of refugees now making their way first to Turkey, Jordan and now to border countries Serbia, Hungary, Greece, overwhelming their resources. Germany's acceptance of 800,000 refugees is a great effort but it too faces the challenge of doing this without creating more anti-immigrant sentiment....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial describes the errors of the Obama administration in its policies for Syria and Iraq. The failure to maintain a troop presence in Iraq, a premature withdrawal which has led to the fall of Mosul to Islamic extremist ISIS. WSJ describes the significant improvement in Iraq at the time the Obama administration assumed office, and the deterioration since with withdrawal and increasing sectarianism. Obama administration policies and failure to actively support moderates of the Free Syrian Army in Syria have led to the return to extremism and terrorist control of large parts of Syria and Iraq. It has also led to worsening of relations with allies Saudis and Turkey who called for a more active U.S. support of moderates in Syria. In the process what was supposed to be an Arab Spring has turned into a return of extremism and dampening of the hopes of the people in the Middle East for economic progress. After a trillion dollars spent in Afghanistan and Iraq and large sacrifices by the military letting the situation unravel in this manner is incomprehensible....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krauthammer says he favors the Boehner Plan because the two stage debt ceiling hike will give time for negotiations and public scrutiny of plans for entitlement and tax reforms. He is critical of the Reid Plan because more than half of the $2 trillion deficit reduction under the plan comes from not continuing surge spending in Iraq and Afghanistan for the next 10 years, which he calls outrageous and fictional savings. The lack of Obama's own plan even after setting up and receiving the report of the Bowles-Simpson deficit commission is a sore point for him and other observers, demonstrating a stark failure to lead. Tea party advocates will need a new mandate in 2012 where they control more than just the House of Representatives to push for their plan of aggressive deficit reduction and a balanced budget. Krauthammer sees the Obama stimulus, auto bailouts, health-care reform, financial regulation, and the current battle over deficit spending as a large Keynesian gamble which has failed to revive the economy. A choice on limiting government or a different set of policies should now be left to voters to decide....
Le Monde.fr Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The failures of the two Bush presidents and Obama that are still with us in 2025 in the Middle East, in dragging out foreign wars, at the Border, and in letting outsourcing get out of hand with China, as the US struggles to rebuild the Nation and its communities, and a peaceful world.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The foreign policy establishment and the Obama administration is caught completely by surprise by the protests in Egypt against the 30 year rule of Mubarak. Secretary of State Clinton makes shifting statements on the protests. The WSJ editorial reminds the state department that support for democratic government worked in the Philippines and S. Korea. The Journal points to the state department realists who opposed President Bush's efforts to reach out to civil society groups inside Egypt. And refers to US Ambassador Frank Ricciardone's admiration for President Mubarak and his downplaying of US support to democracy for Egypt. The Wall Street Journal in this editorial concludes by saying it can't see how the US can walk away from supporting those who favor more pluralism in politics.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Barrack Obama made a memorable speech on March 18, 2008 in Philadelphia, on the whole race question and his relationship with Reverend Wright and the Trinity Church.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mubarak is 81, and there is no idea of who will lead Egypt after Mubarak. Picture of Mubarak with Obama in Cairo shows the President in frail health.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Obama fever and the toning down of it after the first Berlin visit, and the feeling that things are coming back to normality between Germany and the USA.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Making some territorial concessions appears to be the only way for peace talks to succeed. For a long time there was insistence on territorial sovereignty of Ukraine by EU and NATO leaders. This appears to have prolonged the war- with needless loss of life on both sides, and costly damage to Ukraine infrastructure, a population that had to face additional winters and hardship in war ravaged areas. NATO's Stoltenberg from Norway, leaders of northern Nordic and Baltic countries, the UK, could take that position without having to face the hardship of the war. NATO had to be re-formed under a new name and new structure  following the collapse of the Soviet Union, with wariness about the possibility of centuries old since 1700 UK and Nordic historical adversarial relationship with Russia casting a shadow over that organization, and embroiling the US in conflicts not of its own choice or of wise leadership. This is the root cause of the Ukraine war. It would have been best to completely restructure NATO and give it a new name without Northern European nations leading it. Principles matter once soviet communism was no longer there NATO formed for its expansionism in 1950's had served it's purpose. Rasmussen from Denmark and Stoltenberg from Norway led the organization for the last decade and half from 2009-2014 and 2014 to 2025, with backing from Obama/Merkel for most of the period of the war in Ukraine. Also most of the period NATO expanded to Russian borders happened under Northern European leaders from Spain, Britain and Nordics (Solana, Robertson, Scheffer, Rasmussen and Stoltenberg) and the organization NATO getting the northern European slant based on historical adversarial relationship of Britain and Russia since 1700- for no other reason than the British wanting to protect its large Empire and commerce in India which in the 18th and 19th century included most of Asia. Under Robertson the UK Defense Secretary much of this transformation into turning NATO into something anti-Russian happened which was primarily because of British and Nordic perceptions of Russia as an adversary. Robertson added the following countries at the Prague Summit in 2002 to NATO- the Baltics, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Russia faced internal upheaval in those years and Yeltsin in resigned in 1999, Putin was elected in 2000. It is clear that Russia had suffered severe economic hardship in that period and Putin's first goal in 2002 was to stabilize the economy.  It could be said that this turning NATO over to UK and Nordics was a huge mistake considering that Russia was still the largest nuclear power after the US, and British policy was now determining US policy. And Britain's Robertson/NATO should not have involved itself in the Afghanistan war using Article 5, as the US could have handled this alone and limited that engagement. It got US involved in another conflict, conflict with Russia that was to come in Ukraine on the side of the Baltics and Ukraine, without US clearly understanding what the roots of that war was about and implied confrontation with Russia 20 years after the Prague Summit in 2002 under George Bush junior. The incompetence of Bush and Obama/Merkel laid the seeds of the Ukraine war in 2022 following Robertson, Rasmussen, Stoltenberg, small Nordic nations and Britain creating a conflict that did not need to happen, with loss of hundreds of thousands of lives of Russian speaking fraternal peoples of both Russia and Ukraine. The Republican sentiment under DJT of the tragedy of such huge losses of young people, and desire to end this loss of life, can nowhere be seen in bellicose talk in northern European nations, that take the US for granted to fight their wars.  The wisdom of Washington, Lincoln and TR/FDR clearly caution in getting involved in European centuries old animosities. For the US it meant in practical terms that it could no longer carry out the Monroe Doctrine essential for peace and good governance in the western hemisphere as only a Russia desperate to make its views known about NATO would interfere in the western hemisphere against US assertion of the Monroe Doctrine with the US Navy. Instead drug trafficking gangs took over Latin American countries and created a flow of fentanyl and millions of people through migrant traffickers across the US southern border. As America has expressed its concern for loss of Russian and Ukrainian men in the war for the first time under DJT Russia has distanced itself from Venezuela, Mexico and Latin America. The loss of hundreds of thousands of young Americans to fentanyl is a shared tragedy with the loss of hundreds of thousands of young Russians and Ukrainians in the last decade. How reliable are Northern European countries when it comes to protecting the eastern seaboard of the US with the acquisition of Greenland? It is a policy pursued by presidents since the Alaska Acquisition from Russia. By Seward, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman and DJT. Denmark the land where NATO secretary general Rasmussen was from followed by Stoltenberg from Norway  (for 15 of the years of the war in Ukraine 2010-2025) the US efforts to protect its eastern seaboard are rebuffed by both Denmark and Norway, and the US presented in a negative light as an imperialist power in the face of Danish East India Company's  colonial attitude since 1700 clearly imitating the colonial British East India company.  It shows Northern European nations looking out for themselves not for the US, and embroiling the US in their wars at the cost of the entire western hemisphere being destabilized. The population of UK, Denmark and Norway, Baltics is far less than the Mumbai, Shanghai, Sao Paulo , Berlin and Tokyo regions. Should the views of a small population in northern Europe of 2% of the total determine the future of US, Europe, China, India, Brazil, and other parts of the world with 5 billion people the 98%, when issues of war and nuclear conflict, nuclear buildup, the western hemisphere destabilized with drug trafficking gangs running rampant in countries, divide the world in opposing blocs, when the wellbeing of most of the world's people in Asia and Latin America, Africa is at stake by establishing a essential degree of cooperation by all sides. The US under DJT has chosen a wise policy of cooperation over conflict -with China, with Russia, with all the major powers, and with smaller powers. Reading the wisdom contained in the writings of Washington, Lincoln, TR/FDR confirms it is clearly the wise choice. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Where do you place a winner of the Democratic primary in Maine, Graham Plattner, an oyster farmer who dropped out of college at George Washington University, served briefly in the Middle East wars of Bush and Obama, and had PTSD. Is he working class, middle working class or is he from a downwardly mobile professional class considering he has parents who are well educated and father a prominent lawyer in Maine? Plattner easily defeated a 3 term governor of Maine with his average working class demeanor and language. He is for universal health care, (Medicare for All) universal child care, affordable housing, affordable college. Politics in the US has been moving away from the simple divisions before 1950 created by the Industrial Revolution- the workers in factories and the owners of capital allied with the professional middle class. The few owners of capital mostly college educated allied with people from the non college educated workers in factories who are conservative in their values and beliefs and on the other side the college educated professional middle class now downwardly mobile because of the many recessions and high unemployment from frequent financial crises, with college costing $80,000 a year putting them in deep debt. There is today in the WSJ a story of a professional worker who at $194,000 a year salary is not able to payoff $15000 debt which owners of capital have set at 26% interest and is in downward spiral. Some of this comes from large college and other debt. There is says WSJ Analysis $1.25 trillion in credit card debt alone with highest delinquency rates in decades in 2026. Cost of living has only made things worse and some of this happened as Biden poured money into the economy to help people hurt by the pandemic, yet with some short run consequences with demand strong businesses including hotels, restaurants and grocery stores, auto dealers, jacking up their prices by over 20% in 1 year and Biden failing to respond, getting overwhelmed by open borders migrants under Mayorkas and Harris (also hit by a sudden Venezuelan migrant influx). This is the America one has today- a confusing mix. This in reality means Democrats may take issue with Democrats, Republicans take issue with Republicans, and Democrats join with Republicans on issue by issue basis. It might actually be rational than irrational. On cultural issues if the country has gone over its head and moved too fast on some issues that are not for the general public good, people of different backgrounds can come together to get the best path. On economic issues things are never so straightforward, there are unpredictable consequences and the rules of economics are really not so straightforward either.  Providing relief can mean the government shouldering the burden as during the pandemic which it should, yet with caution as businesses can use the excess demand to raise prices and one is back to square one with everybody worse off as happened with Biden. Migrant flows and fears of insecurity in public spaces can lead to a severe public "discomfort that can waylay the best intentions of a Harris or Biden, leading to public "backlash." In fact the title of a recent book is "Whiplash." Current books include Floridan Marco Rubio's "Decade's of Decadence- How our Spoiled Elites Blew America's Inheritance of Liberty, Security and Prosperity." Rubio means it. Its authentic because as Rubio says repeatedly, his parents could make a living in the 1960's working in a factory with decent wages, low cost of living and low cost of college, the arithmetic between salaries and what you needed for decent home in suburbs and sending children to good public schools, then to college, all adding up. The result is that Rubio could go to college and serve in the Florida legislature. Rubio says in 2026, after the elites under Bush and Obama and faulty economic theory shipped all of our factories to China, that the story of his parents and his education would simply be impossible. This is what he told people in India on his first visit last week. His parents were Cuban immigrants, yet he identifies with Spain and with western civilization, a devout Roman Catholic. Rubio is a Republican, and is in large contrast with Alejandro Mayorkas, also from Cuba, and Biden's Head of Homeland Security. This is the mix of people and representatives in Congress,  business people, small business owners, professionals, that we have today in 2026 in the US. Plattner and Rubio, one a Democrat and one a Republican- both have something in common. Plattner also has general disdain for "the corporate interests, the billionaires, the Washington DC elites, and the establishment politicians."  The winds are blowing in the direction of getting things right- remembering that Eisenhower continued the work of the Kennedy and LBJ administrations (Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System for instance, and LBJ gave America Social Security and Medicare). Before that Franklin Roosevelt a Democrat built on the work of his uncle Republican Theodore Roosevelt (TR gave America the idea of good governance and built the US Navy, FDR fought the Depression and stabilized a faltering economy after mistakes made by Republican Herbert Hoover could have happened even if Hoover was a Democrat. FDR was himself from a wealthy New York family and when he first met fellow New Yorker Frances Perkins before his struggle with polio, a haughty New York gentleman. That was before Frances Perkins as FDR's Labor Secretary joined forces with Roosevelt to give New York a modernized administration governance structure by 1940 that was applied to all 51 states after 1950. It allied labor with capital with fairness for all, and was the first such modern structure of this size the world had ever seen, which was the fundamental strength of the United States of America. It was imitated in Asia, first in the Shanghai region then China, and first in the Ahmedabad region and now India. The US is faced with the challenge of recreating and rebuilding this today, as first China, then India remind America of its roots which they have followed in their own style and culture.  First good governance, then good institutional structures, alligning labor and capital with fairness for all, strong affordable + accessible educational and healthcare systems, and investments of capital and labor for infrastructure + industrial development. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The lack of U.S. leadership and slow response by the Obama administration to the rapidly developing situation in the region risks spillover effects from Syria to affect the entire Middle East. Russia's stakes are minimal in the region because it is simply trying to retain some of its old influence in the region, yet it is having an outsized influence in the region through its early military assistance to the Assad regime. The stakes are much higher for the U.S. because of the decade spent and resources invested in Iraq, higher for Iraq with its need for civil harmony between Shiite and Sunni communities, for Turkey with its large Kurdish minority and flow of refugees from the border with Syria, for Saudi Arabia as a defender of Sunni interests. Without active U.S. leadership the situation is allowed to drift and young people of the Free Syrian Army are basically taking on the bulk of the role of resolving the situation. France's Sarkozy and Britain's Cameron offered this kind of leadership in Libya as Libya's young people struggled to resolve the situation there. ...

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. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mike Spence is Trump's selection for vice presidential running mate. He is expected to appeal to centrist Republicans and independents compared to other choices Christie and Gingrich. He also appeals to conservatives with strong positions on abortion, gay marraige and Obama health care law. Compared to Christie and Gingrich, Spence brings a calmer presence that Republicans see as moderating the ticket considering the aggressive style of Trump. Spence has said he is "a Christian, a conservative, and a Republican, in that order."


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