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.


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....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The German Constitutional Court established the legality of the eurozone bailouts under German law. It also stipulated that future bailouts would require the approval of a parliamentary committee. The Court ruled out any proposal that would pool Germany's debt with that of other countries in the eurozone. This rules out the issuance of eurobonds that are supported by the pooled resources of all EU countries. With no mechanism for firm budgetary discipline in place under the current structure of the EU, this is seen as an absolute no in Germany, and is opposed by all German political parties including Chancellor Merkel's Christian Democrats. ECB president, Jean Claude Trichet, is a strong supporter of the European Union, who actively participated in its creation over three decades. He insisted on budgetary discipline for all EU member states in his recent speech at a conference in Lake Cuomo resort in northern Italy. By leaving open other solutions over time that would still move forward the idea of a united Europe, the Court's view on this point coincides with that of Merkel and the ECB's current and future presidents, Trichet and Draghi. Merkel told the German parliament on Sept. 7, 2011: "Europe must come out of this crisis stronger than it went in, just as Germay came out of the crisis stronger." Merkel compared the difficulties today with the difficulties Germany faced as it tried to rebuild after World War II. Others have compared the difficulties to that of reuniting East and West Germany with their disparate and different ecoomic structures, attitudes and demographics....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Obama's Cairo speech to the Muslim world on June 4, 2009. He tried to reach out to the Muslim world. Did not use the term terrorism but used instead "violent extremism." He emphasized that most of the differences between the Muslims and the West can be eased by "a sustained effort to listen to each other, to learn from each other, to respect one another, and to seek common ground. " As one Arab leader put it, its a fresh voice only a short while after some were talking about the "clash of civilizations." He also avoided the idea of us vs they of the Bush administration, of moderates allied with the USA and the extremists gouped together with Iran. He called the denial of the Holocaust as "baseless, ignorant and hateful." And touched on the problems facing the people of the Middle East who were trying to find a voice in their own countries. See the link to Iran's election debate between Moussavi and Ahmadinejad in which Moussavi described Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust as underminig Iran's dignity and harming its standing with the rest of the world. Obama's reference to his own personal encounter with Islam in his life, and being the American President, has to have created a climate in which Moussavi could engage in the intense debate with Ahmadinejad and win conservatives over to his side. Moussavi said Ahmadinejad had "exhibitionist, extremist, superficial, adventurist, foreigh policies," based on "illusional perceptions" that the US, Israel, France and the West were collapsing....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gerson describes Obama's failure to connect in 2012, compared to the 2008 campaign. What is left is more of the politician from the South Side of Chicago, the idealism of an earlier campaign is gone. What is left is a supposed ruthlessness that is opportunistic at every turn, says Gerson.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Union leaders at plants more receptive to the VEBA, Voluntary Employees Benefit trust.Trust funding at discounted rate an issue. The VEBA could work both ways if its short on funds GM could step in, if it has more funds due a national health care plan being passed then GM could have access to liquidity from the VEBA. Meanwhile Clinton speech in Des Moines, Iowa on new Health Plan addresses the burden on GM to fund retirees health and other costs in the range of 1600 dollars vs Toyota's 200 some dollars. Senator Clinton offers for Governnment to take up the burden of catastrophic coverage for the large companies like GM in her Plan. She also cites the Mayo Clinic study as example of a consensus on the need for action on health care.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ report shows how the debt ceiling negotiation were conducted and the process that made it possible to reach an agreement since the State of the Union address by president Biden on February 7, 2023. It started with Biden getting unanimity right on the floor of Congress during his speech about protecting Medicare and Social Security. The Republican strategy was to pass the legislation on spending that did not specify where cuts were to be made yet used 2022 spending levels with a 1% increase. The deal was to be for three years and passed the spending bill with an increase inthe debt ceiling. Till that time the Democrats decided to not enter negotiations.  Biden and McCarthy then had to choose who would represent their side in the long negotiation process that lay ahead till June 5. Progressive Democrats called for invoking the 14th Amendment that allows the government to continue functioning and pay its bills. Biden chose not to take that route. Respect for the other side, a prepared script are an important point in negotiations. To get results something even more important is essential flexibility and a plan, Plan B. Trust began to develop between McCarthy and Biden. Biden and McCarthy did not any time engage in acrimonious description of the other side. At one point when Biden was in Hiroshima for the G7 meetings Ricchetti on the Biden side and Graves on the Republican side began to feel the frustration. Biden decided to fly home early from Hiroshima. He was constantly in touch with his negotiators Steve Ricchetti, a trusted aide, and a cabinet official the Budget Director Shalanda Young. Graves a long time trusted adviser of McCarthy headed the negotiations for McCarthy.  Shalanda Young and Garrett Graves are both from Louisiana and Graves says he used to work out with Young's dad in the same area. This had a positive effect. It also reduced the tensions in the negotiations so that it could be said this was the calmest negotiation from either side that has been seen in the US  for a long time and bodes well for America's future and for its people, far beyond any concessions made by either party.  Biden made clear at the outset what he could accept without leaving it hidden- he would agree to some work requirements, he would not agree to work requirements for Medicaid. Others in the Democratic party conveyed how distraught they were with efforts to impose stringent requirements for federal food aid during a cost of living crisis when the Republican positions ruled out any new taxes on the wealthiest Americans. In the end Republicans agreed to keep spending limits for 2023 for two more years into 2025 when they would be increased by 1%. Democrats offered to cut (Income Tax) Internal Revenue Service (IRS) spending to increase IRS staffing from $80 billion to $70 billion. Biden said "nobody got everything they wanted." It would have to be passed in Congress with the support of moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans, with members holding extreme positions among Republicans and Democrats opposing. The two parties coming together after a long time to meet the real challenges ahead for the American people. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the New York Times is strongly critical of former president Barack Obama for accepting $400,000 in speaking fees from Wall Street for a single speech. It says the news is causing people to question the ideas and words presented by Obama in his books about the dangers of losing sight of the interests of ordinary people. It gives the impression says the NYT, that Obama is cashing in like everybody else, and that his talk was empty. The editorial says the millions raised by Hillary Clinton led to her defeat in the election. Obama is reported to plan a foundation with the work of training a new generation of political leaders. This NYT editorial says it would be better to stay true to vision and purpose, to walk the talk for president Obama, especially now that a recent poll shows two thirds of voters, including about half of Democrats say that the Democratic Party is out of touch with the interests of the American People. By associating this closely with wealthy donors leading Democrats contributed to this. During a period when some of the remarkable achievements of the last fifty years such as the European Union are being called into question, when ordinary working people, young people and older people are struggling, this is all the more a tone deaf approach by politicians. The idea of helping train a new generation of political leaders through a foundation sounds bizarre in this context, and seems to suggest politicians believe there is always a solution through marketing their audacity and money.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Freeman contrasts the speeches given by Obama and Trump, one in Cairo after becoming president, and the other in Riyadh. Freeman says Obama did not give enough credit to American leadership and progress on women's rights, and was not critical of Iran during a period in which sectarian strife has led to the situation in Syria and Iraq. 

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Volcker was Fed Chairman from 1979-1987 and is now 81 years old. He is best known for taming the runaway inflation of that period. He is now the senior economic advisor closest to Obama and they have a developed a sense of rapport and trust through frequent discussions and meetings in which Obama has sought Volcker's advice, especially at critical junctures of the present crisis. So close is the association that Volcker now keeps a cellphone with him at all times and he has gotten used to Obama's messages at all times. And this week he is due to appear on the campaign trail with Obama for the first time. At a round table discussion with voters in Lake Worth, Florida, he will give his view on the state of the economy and the credit markets. This puts the 81 year old Volcker on the campaign stump for the first time. In his debate with McCain at Hofstra University Obama said "let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed chairman Paul Volcker, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House." Obama is increasingly relying on Volcker. His staff now routinely reviews policy proposals and speeches wit Mr. Volcker. And conference calls and face to face meetings of economic adviers are increasingly organized to accomodate Mr Volcker's schedule. When there is a discussion of the financial crisis Jason Furman the campaign's economic policy director says the most important question for Obama is "what does Paul Volcker think?" It all started when Obama sought advice from Volcker through his economic adviser Austan Goolsbee, a 39 year old University of Chicago Professor. The bond between the two started with a dinner invitation in June 2007, when Obama was still a long shot candidate, setup by Mark Gallogly, cofounder of Centerbridge partners, a New York private investment firm. He invited a number of financial executives like Gary Cohn of Goldman and Fleming of Merrill and Mr. Volcker. At a private dining room in a Capitol Hill restaurant Volcker was seated directly opposite Obama. That night on a return flight to New York Volcker told the group that he "was genuinely impressed" by the Senator from Illinois. When this was passed on to Goolsbee his reaction was- "Volcker is a legend.. we want to pick his brain." Since late summer 2007 Goolsbee had regular discussions with Mr. Volcker. Some of them were about including Volcker's ideas that the housing downturn would snowball into a larger financial crisis into Senator Obama's policy positions. A September 2007 speech by Obama to Nasdaq stated that the oversight lapses and abusive practices would cause the markets to "be ravaged by a crisis in confidence." Since then at almost every turn of the crisis after Bear Stearns collapse, Obama and Volcker have consulted together....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Vice President Biden says "I would not refer to Mubarak as a dictator," showing a lack of sensitivity and understanding of the Egyptian people's demands for freedom of expression, human rights, and democracy. Harshaw says that its clear the Mubarak regime has been wounded at the core. In the light of this the Obama administration's hesitant and timid response to the protests against 30 years of one party rule under Mubarak is baffling. It means the US will have to bear the costs of being on the wrong side of public opinion in the Arab world says Harshaw. And President Obama has failed to bring the much needed change that he promised for US relations with Africa, the Arab world, and the developing world. Apart from improvement of relations with Turkey, the failure of the Obama administration to grasp opportunities for forging a new era of relations with the Muslim world.
WSJ Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Considering the fines and sanctions by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, during the time Mary Schapiro headed the organization from 2007 -2008, it did not take a serious watchdog role over the brokerage business that it was expected to supervise. NASD which she formerly headed, and FINRA, did several examinations of the brokerage business of Mr Madoff who ran a$50 billion Ponzi scheme, but failed to find anything wrong. Her agency in 2007 concluded that Madoff's firm had only violated some technical rules. Also fines and sanctions assessed by FINRA declined during the time she headed it. Fines levied by FINRA declined from $148 million in 2005, the year of her predecessor, to $40 million in 2008. Ms. Schapiro headed NASD regulatory arm in 1996, NASD itself in 2006, and FINRA after its creation in 2007. FINRA is a private agency set up by Wall Street to regulate itself. As the prevailing opinion at the time, with the SEC severely understaffed, was that Wall Street could regulate itself, agencies like FINRA had a bigger responsibility than was realized by Ms Schapiro and others. One securities lawyer who represented firms examined by FINRA, says FINRA should at least have asked more questions about the Madoff operation. In a November 2006 speech to the Securites Industry and Financial Markets Association, Mary Schapiro says, "we remain utterly committed to our regulatory mission but we should be also committed to doing no unnecessary harm or restriction to innovation in the industry and markets". Some of the stuff that went on in the name of innovation went against some basics and commonsense, and the failure to follow tested old good financial practices to separate sound innovation from unsound innovation, was a failure of that period. Schapiro's statement seemed to be a contradiction of a severe nature when examined closely, because how could she remain committed 100% to the regulatory mission if she made strong exceptions for innovations whose true logic and effectiveness only time could tell. The element of caution that should be a key part of the regulator's temperament and mental build was entirely missing. See the link to financial regulators in India, and of how this task was handled with that element of caution and skepticism of prevailing opinion. Other failure of FINRA is that it lagged behind state regulators in catching upto the mess resulting in afreeze up of auction rate securites markets. In June and July 2008, Massachusetts and New York securities regulators filed fraud charges against big firms in that matter. Another failure was the failure to look into the mortgage securites that were held in brokerage accounts and see that the valuations of these securites are sound. Finra only filed small cases against Lehman Brothers, with a fine of only $125,000 for failing to keep accurate books and records. As late as May 7, 2008 in speaking at the Financial Services Institute meeting, Schapiro was asked about what FINRA was doing to regulate complex packaged products like mortgage securites. And even though credit rating agencies had by this time been exposed as having failed, Ms Schapiro would only say, according to a financial advisor who asked the question, that "we have credit rating agencies that rate them." A pretty hands off view for a regulator when the cracks in the system were already exposed in mid 2008. Another facet of this is the high levels of compensation especially for a regulator. For her job at FINRA she received pay of $3.1 million a year including $2.5 million in compensation and $615,000 in benefits and deferred pay. In 2007 she also earned $449,000 in cash and stock grants as director of Duke Energy and Kraft Foods. All of which means that it is straining credulity for Obama to suggest that Mary Schapiro is the best person the Democrats could find for this critical job, in which the record has been severely impaired....
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Julia Preston of the NYT looks at Mr. Trump's speech on August 31, 2016 in Pheonix, Arizona, and compares what one can discern about the Trump policies on immigration with that of president Obama. She points out that it is similar to the deportation that was conducted under president Obama in some ways, but is more extensive in its dimensions. It includes sanctioning sanctuary cities, expanding the deportation law enforcement personnel, and deporting about 2 million people with criminal backgrounds. The estimate under the Obama administration is for about 176,000 people with such backgrounds. The Trump estimate appears to include people with minor offenses says Preston, because it is so much higher. As a result this could also include people who have no criminal background and disrupt families on a large scale, with hundreds of thousands of longtime residents and families deported. Under the sanctuary example of Trump, Denver, New York and counties in California would be places where Trump would cut off federal funding. On the wall itself, Mexico's president Nieto says he told Trump Mexico would not pay for the wall, and Trump says exactly the opposite that Mexico would pay for the wall in his speech to supporters.  A Gallup poll shows that 76% of Republicans, 91% of Democrats favor a path to citizenship for those here in the U.S. illegally. For the whole population only 15% oppose giving illegal immigrants a pathway to citizenship and 84% support doing this. Which suggests that Trump is only appealing to his base of support, not adding to it, as Cillizza points out in the WP fact check.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gage points out that crime in America is about half what it was in 1991. She traces the calls for law and order in American politics back to Coolidge and Nixon. Trump's reference to restoring law and order is about checking the calls for correcting social injustice, movements for gun control, and public protest such as "Black Lives Matter," not just criminals, says Gage. In fact strict deportation has been the policy in 2 terms of the Obama administration, with immigration from Mexico at an all time low, another of the paradoxes in relation to the Trump calls for a wall with Mexico that would cost $23 billion. 

BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Laurence Kotlikoff is a Boston University economist who calls the Obama administration's plans for fixing the financial system akin to "putting a Band-Aid on cancer." He outlines his own proposal in a book just out with the title: Jimmy Stewart is Dead. It calls for taking the risk out of the nation's financial system with "too-big-to-fail" banks, which threaten America's financial system, and may cost huge amounts of taxpayer money approaching by one estimate the entire unfunded liabilities of the Social Security System. He writes in the book that "the problem is the leveraging of the taxpayer by people with no formal training in finance or economics, no personal downside, an assortment of Napoleonic complexes, the money to buy ratings in New York and policy in Washington, and the ability to run circles around regulators." His proposal is to turn banks - intermediaries taking deposits and making loans- into institutions that connect borrowers and depositors with very safe mutual funds created for this reason. Each deposit would be pooled with other deposits in the new kind of mutual fund with all the money held in cash. These mutual funds would supply loans. This strips banks of their risk-taking function. It has attracted attention and support of Columbia University's Jeffrey Sachs and University of Chicago's Nobel Prize winning economist Robert Lucas. Most recently Bank of England's Governor mentioned Kotlikoff three times in a speech to Parliament as ideas worth looking at. With bankssstripped of risk-taking only one single Federal Financial Authority as the national regulator would be needed, instead of the myriad regulators in the current system that have failed in crises. MIT's Simon Johnson agrees that some strong action is needed and compares the need for action with what Theodore Roosevelt had to do to break up the once impregnable Standard Oil. By 1911 the Supreme Court had broken up Standard Oil into 34 companies....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
GM CEO Wagoner was asked to resign by the Obama admninistration. The news was given Wagoner by Steven Rattner, who heads the auto industry task force setup by President Obama, at Rattner's office at Treasury. Mr Henderson, GM's Chief Operating Officer will fill in for Wagoner. When Wagoner assumed office in 2000 GM's stock price was $70, now it is $3.62, and GM capitalization is $2.21 billion in March 2009. Since 2004 GM has not earned aprofit, and has logged $82 billion in losses. Right upto the end the board of directors and lead directors backed Wagoner, even when the company was short of cash in the waning days of the Bush administration, and public opinion was very critical of the way management and unions had driven the company into the ground, all through this they held on, showing how hard it is to get an entrenched board and management doing things the wrong way. Now the Obama administration has taken years of festering issues in the auto industry and at auto companies head on. Not only Wagoner, the task force is working with GM to replace a majority of its directors. Kent Kresa a longtime director is to serve as chairman of GM. The President in a speech today on the auto industry said that he was rejecting the plans for restructuring provided by both GM and Chrysler. He is giving GM 60 days to come up with a new plan. The government would provide suffficient working capital for the next 60 days, during which time a revamped board and top management would have to come up with new restructuring plan. Obama made it clear that an expedited government sponsored bankruptcy was a clear option. And officials said that the inordinate amounts of debt at both GM and Chrysler have to be scrubbed, and bankruptcy would be "quick rinse" to rid the companies of much of their debt and contractual obligations. And the government would stand behind the warranties of both companies. For Chrysler the government is giving 30 daysto come up with a new plan, and time to reach an agreement for Fiat to work to revive Chrysler. And Obama reassured the public that FIat would have to repay the government before it could take money from the new Fiat run Chrysler out of the country. If Fiat and Chrysler reach an agreement and only then would the government step in with $6 billion in loans. If not Chrysler would be allowed to collapse....
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This is an indepth article on Donald Trump's financial holdings, looking at the debt that Trump has built up in his real estate dealings, by Susanne Craig of the NYT. To get a detailed look of this the NYT inquiry into the holdings engaged RedVision Systems, a national property information firm to search publicly available data. Much of Trump's business is shrouded in mystery. But it is well known that Trump has used debt to build his business in a way that is not considered good practice in business, having led to three bankruptcies. Trump says he "is the king of debt." And "he loves debt." The recovery of real estate values during a rescue effort for the country's financial system also helped Trump tackle debt in a way that was not available to other entrepreneurs who suffered from the oil price collapse- one of them McClendon also used debt aggressively and his business collapsed leading to suicidal car crash. You can love excessive debt only if the government supports you with some sort of financial guarnatee misplaced, or you are lucky to get away with it- just ask McClendon. The irony is that the rescue of the financial system led to the low interest rates that hurt savings of the middle and working class, and the lack of help to Main Street in the home foreclosure crisis also hurt the same people disproportionately. The Obama administration policies in this regard rescued the very same business interests such as the New York real commercial estate symbolized by Trump, that are now appealing to those hurt as president Obama worked to let the financial system recover. The intention was never to support excessively overleveraged banks or overleveraged real estate built on debt, but in reality this is what happened. A nation cannot run its financial affairs in this manner of overleveraging to extract high profits that an investment bank such as Lehman or Goldman Sachs does, or a real estate company such as Trump's does- if regulators let them do this. Normally after the financial crisis of such dimensions that it shook the world economy in 2008-2009 leading to fears of a collapse as happened in the 1930's, the same faces would not still be there. But this is a strange period or a transition period where things are being sorted out, and the same faces Blankfein at Goldman Sachs and Trump in New York commercial real estate are with us.  And though the bashing of Goldman Sachs connection to Clinton is evident in the campaigns of Trump and Sanders, the bashing of Trump real estate and finance companies with its overleveraging and bankruptcies is evident in the campaign of Clinton against one posing as a representative of the working class. John Paulson who benefitted by shorting mortgage securities that caused the financial crisis of 2008 is on Trump's top economic advisory team, including the hedge funds and financial interests on Wall Street that Trump is saying support Clinton. No one, not the NYT or WSJ, can answer this, its just the paradox of today's situation. Hillary Clinton can say she has learned her lesson, with her Methodist upbringing and her own supporters such as Robert Reich and others, and break with the past especially as it in no way contributes to her success as president, not one bit. In fact rebuilding the middle class and infrastructure require entirely different connections and views on life, a different imagination.  Trump has billions of dollars and a real estate business that is so complex that even the NYT and property information firms can only say that in the end it is shrouded in mystery. Companies owned by Trump says the NYT from this inquiry have debt of $650 million. Other Trump business activities through 3 passive partnerships owe an additional $2 billion. It is a lot easier for Hillary Clinton to put the speech fees behind her as they have little to do with what she is as a Methodist and a proponent of improving women's lives, than it is for Donald Trump- for whom his business is everything that he is including his art of the deal- to reject who he is. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The tax plan offered by Jeb Bush in September 2014 is based on simplifying the tax code to three rates, lowering the corporate tax rate to stimulate business investment and growth. It will pay for this by limiting itemized deductions to 2% of adjusted gross income, removing state and local tax deductions, by generating higher growth of estimated 0.5% per year which translates into higher tax revenues, and by increasing the deficit by $1.2 trillion. In the last tax debate economists such as Martin Feldstein and other experts proposed removing or limiting the itemized deductions. Simplifying the code and lowering corporate tax rates has been favored as a method to jumpstart growth by many experts, but was not taken up during the deep recession following the 2008-2009 financial crisis when the stimulus added to the deficit. The 3 tax rates changes the current 7 brackets to 10 percent, 25 percent and 28%, with the coporate tax rate lowered to 20%. The plan removes the alternative minimum tax, the estate tax, marraige penalty tax, leaves charitable deductions as now. To help the people at the lower end in incomes and the middle class- the standard deduction is doubled, the earned income tax credit expanded. Companies would be allowed to deduct capital investments, and there would be a gradual phase out of taxation on income American companies earn overseas. Hedge funds will not have access to a loophole called "carried interest." The plan comes as the American economy is in recovery mode, making it more likely that increased growth would generate extra tax revenues....
New York Times 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