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.


The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The CEO of the New York Times and the former director general of the BBC, takes a look at the public discourse in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and in the Brexit campaign, and finds some troubling changes. The use of words that can eaily be picked up by Twitter and social media to attack opponents, the complete disregard for facts, and outright attempts to denigrate and destroy using rhetorical tactics, and a section of the public that has turned away from the facts or is disinterested in facts, is deeply troubling for Mark Thompson. When the public discourse fails, then the politics as a whole starts to collapse, says Thompson. We are children of the enlightenment, says Thompson, and were taught to look underneath statements to discern the truth. This is a crisis in public discourse. Worse it is one in which truth telling by people who say they are outsiders and tell it like it is, is not about telling the truth. Which is what makes it so dangerous. Thompson cites the statement by Michael Gove that "people in this country have had enough of experts," as another dangerous sign. He says it is time that experts make themselves understandable and talk in a way the public can understand. The media needs to explain issues in clear ways, and professional policymakers language of discourse needs to be conveyed in better ways that the public can grasp, in which the Brexit Remain campaign failed, says Thompson. Its important to acknowledge the problem, as the health of our democracies depends on finding solutions to what has happened in 2015-2016 to change the public discourse and let it deteriorate to unimaginable levels.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
No country benefited more than first Japan and then South Korea till 2000, and now China till 2022 from the trade and sharing of industrial technology enabled by the American backed system of trade and industry. Walter Russell Mead says in WSJ that China has chosen to challenge the system through which it developed into an industrialized nation with the US running huge trade deficits, sharing its technology and letting Chinese manufacturing displace American local manufacturing. China is seen as challenging the system. Yet what has happened is that this process of displacing American manufacturing and industry was not sustainable anyway and continued for a decade longer than it would otherwise have lasted because American industry could not easily reverse a course it had set of setting up manufacturing in China, once that manufacturing base had already been transferred from the US to China and American companies had grown accustomed to a new state of affairs of making overseas in China. Not much thought was given to how American workers would react to that situation as companies and industries making that transfer made independent decisions. This led to the election of Trump with wins in midwestern states that had suffered from loss of manufacturing communities.  The Trump tariffs on Chinese goods and the Biden administration lining up completely behind American workers and families for the first time for Democrats has sent the signal to China that it finds the situation of China's dominance in the trade system unacceptable. The document of "China 2030" of the Chinese Government with planned dominance in key sectors and industries was met with alarm across America in all parties. The paradox of Apple as a key sector in Chinese manufacturing and the largest American company is the result of policies pursued by America without realizing the true cost of shipping manufacturing out of the country. That process is now being reversed with change of management starting at Intel Corp. and other companies to bring the manufacturing base back to the US. This policy is being resolutely pursued by the US and will speed up following the pandemic which has further demonstrated how much of a mistake the policy of sending out manufacturing in critical areas such as health could be. This is the reality behind the rhetoric and verbal exchange between China and the US. With the rapid growth of Chinese manufacturing countries such as India were put in a difficult situation  as this was preventing the local industrial base developing in India with Chinese imports in the same way as it had damaged that of the US and the EU. Worse it led to the use of US and European technology in China's defense industrial base including aviation and other sectors that threatened India's borders with repeated Chinese incursions in the Himalayas, from the Pakistan western Himalayas to Ladakh and the eastern Himalayan mountains. That situation existed long before the Trump and Biden administration and the Modi administration called for a return to America of its industrial manufacturing base and its technological leadership. Both the Bush and Obama administrations and the Indian Congress administrations failed to realize the dangers of letting the US, European and Indian industrial base wither. India is not just a country but a culture that extends from the Himalayas all the way across Bangladesh to the Indonesian islands which shares a common cultural history of Buddhism and the Vedanta. This is a region that has a population of about 2 billion people. In a larger sense the cultural history extends to  Vietnam and Japan with its Buddhist culture whose origins go back to India, and also of China itself. In the larger sense this is a population of close to 3 billion people. The economic development of this region and learning from the parliamentary traditions and scientific discoveries of the modern period since 1700 is a task for both the US, Europe and the people of the region.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The new faces in the Biden administration on economic policy are Janet Yellen, as head of the central bank, the Federal Reserve, and Cecilia Rouse, a Princeton labor economist, as head of the Council of Economic Advisors. In this report WSJ looks at the economic policies of the new administration after Mr. Trump rejected globalization and international trade agreements that were not in America's interest or that hurt American workers.  Informal conversations with experts suggest WSJ says, that globalization is now suspect as a way that benefitted China and other countries including Germany, and hurt the U.S. France, Britain and other countries in Europe that were not strong exporters. This hurt their industries which were eroded by imports resulting in the three decades long destruction of communities across these countries that depended on manufacturing. It has also hurt countries like India that let their markets be dominated by Chinese imports, with a reversal of policy in 2020 with self reliant economy under "Atman Nirbhar" policy as the new goal. Mr. Trump's tactic in this trade war was to fight back to regain America's position in manufacturing with tariffs on imports. The trade deficit had to come down with China just as it had done with Japan decades earlier. This was starting to happen. One problem in bringing down the imports was the increase in the value of the dollar, as Janet Yellen has noted. The new policies will look at what the effective policy will be while keeping this goal in mind.  Both Yellen and Ms. Rouse have spent years studying labor markets and Ms. Rouse is quoted here as saying: " With open trade there are winners and losers. The losers are really losing, and we need to take care of them and take on more nuanced models of international trade as a result." Other experts from the earlier Democratic administrations such as Prof. Frankel at Harvard say that there needs to be increased focus on American workers left behind by trade, technology and unequal education, with more spending on preschool, infrastructure and health. All this suggests that there will be a continuation of U.S. policy in challenging Chinese use of globalization to advance its interests, chastening Americans on the use of the very word globalization which can mean different things to different people based on how they can gain advantage. The word may even be entirely dropped in favor of what the policies are and what they do for the American worker, American communities including small towns, and the American people, spelling each of these out every time supply chains and the global economy is mentioned. The new administration will get an opportunity to show that it too can come up with new ideas and action plan to strengthen American manufacturing and jobs. It will also have to show substantial results as people have lost patience with Democrats and Republicans on the lack of progress in rebuilding America's leadership role in the world economy, and in defending American workers and factories. Clinton, Obama and Bush all offered false promises on trade with China ignoring the damage this had done to American leadership in the world economy. Clinton with support for China's entry into the World Trade Organization, Bush with foreign wars and costly diversions and regulatory failures with banks that led to the 2009 deep recession hurting Americans, and Obama with the lack of will and interest in America's leadership role in the world as the dominant nation in manufacturing,   ...
Tech Policy Press Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Issues raised by the huge mismatch between revenues and investment for AI. $400 billion estimated investment by 5 Tech firms in 2025 alone with revenue of about $40 billion and huge uncertainty about when AI will produce returns. Articles seen this week of November 17 in the WSJ and NYT on this issue, podcasts, discussions in other media outlets. Could this lead to a dot com bubble type economic crisis? Could that lead to a recession? Alongside these articles another article in the WSJ on Nov 17 shows the benefits small firms get by using AI, benefits which are on the fringes of their business, not essential but with some experimenting firm owners/managers able to tweak AI information for use in business. Nothing significant which firms will pay much money for. The uncertainty is a major factor. Should geopolitics trump all these concerns? Is the competition with China require this scale of investment, and is China following a more utilitarian approach as reported in a WSJ article this month, of investing in AI in a utilitarian way targeting its use in improving manufacturing, improving infrastructure, and not wildly throwing money at experimental uses that are unlikely to yield much result. In geopolitical sense would the country that not only promoted AI but used it efficiently and cost effectively, used it in ways that promote the overall public good, get the WIN. In short it behooves everyone of us to ask hard questions of AI, to dehype the hype, to look for the public good that comes out of this from it's efficient use. To ask the tough questions when $400 billion generates only $40 billion in 2025 and the $3 trillion planned investment over 5 years is half unfunded, is it going to crowd out energy needs for homes and business, push renewable energy targets back, crowd out essential investments in the crumbling aging infrastructure of the US and Europe, crowd out essential investments in education, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, and manufacturing, that hold better promise for our People. Will it also put retirees at risk when corporate bonds from retirees money fund the unfunded portion of AI? This means making the political dimension not about migration, settling the illegal migration issue that was meant to be settled a long time back, or about cultural issues that have little day to day impact on our lives which are about groceries, childcare, housing that are non ideological. Making the political dimension not about remote countries that one knows little about except when it affects public safety and health as with fentanyl. Capital allocation decisions to the vital needs of America can then be free of politically induced error, so that it can be subjected to the test of how best it serves the public interest and the people of the Nation. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Progressive caucus in the US House of Representatives led by Pramila Jaypal, a first time Indian American Congresswoman defeats an attempt by Josh Gottheimer of the Problem Solvers caucus to separate much of the president Biden's agenda in health, education and social policy and risk it being defeated by Senators Manchin and Sinema in the US Senate. Without the efforts on child care, education and health, climate change and social services part of the Biden Workers and Families Plan much of the Biden agenda would remain unfinished and Democratic party promises not kept. This also means that Manchin a Senator from West Virginia with a population of 1.8 million and Arizona with a population of 7.2 million, both conservative leaning Democrats could sink the entire agenda of president Biden to support American families and workers for a population of 331 million people. That two states with a population of less than 3% of the American population could sink the entire agenda of president Biden shows how fragile a situation has been created within the Democratic party to support workers and families even during the pandemic following the leadership of Carter, Clinton, and Obama Ms. Jaypal, a three term Congresswoman from Seattle, Washington state, was first elected in 2016 with an endorsement from Bernie Sanders who was the Democratic Party's leading candidate for president till the late stages of the 2020 US presidential primaries. Bernie Sanders says of Jaypal- "I think she is doing an extraordinary job. And I think the Progressive Caucus is doing an extraordinary job." Sanders founded the Progressive caucus after getting elected to the Senate from Vermont 30 years ago. Even though it is hard to imagine the Democratic party being the Democratic party without bold policies in climate change, affordable housing, reducing income disparities,  investing big in childcare, education and healthcare, attempts were being made to sink the entire Democratic party and national agenda going back to Franklin Roosevelt. Jaypal is described in the WSJ as diplomatic and firm, saying "I am so proud of our caucus; I have never seen our caucus so strong. And I am a very good vote counter also." Fifty members of the 100 member Progressive Caucus held firm in support of president Biden's original agenda without which the president would have little to show in keeping promises he made to the American people in the election and little to differentiate him from Mr. Trump who also supported infrastructure spending. Separating the infrastructure bill would have risked sinking Mr. Biden's plan for recovery of America from the pandemic and the devastating policies pursued by American presidents in the last two decades. Policies by previous presidents that have impoverished the country, created huge income disparities, weakened America in the world in trade and technological leadership, and wasted resources in foreign wars. There are no centrists or far left- these are just labels. When Ms Japal said "Let's just remember the Speaker (Nancy Pelosi) is a great champion of this agenda. I think she was trying to do as much as she could to get this done," she could have said it is Mr. Biden's own agenda pushed forward with conviction to help workers and families during the pandemic, and build a solid American recovery, restore American leadership in the world. Pramila Japypal is the first Indian American woman in the US Congress, and one of only two dozen naturalized American citizens in the US Congress. That she could play such a critical role for good in the US Congress shows that with the right convictions, determination, experience, much can be done for the common good in America and the world.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
There are differences between the governors of 10 worst hit states and the president of the U.S. on when to reopen the economy. The seven on the East Coast including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and three on the West Coast including California and Washington, all but one have Democrat governors and want to wait beyond May 1, till it is believed to be safe to reopen.190,000 of the 592,000 infected cases and over 10,000 of 25,000 cases of deaths are from New York alone. This is as though a third of the problem is in one state. The feeling in New York is that it should be the last to reopen, other states can go first in the middle of the country. The position in the U.S. Constitution is for states to maintain public order and safety. This was the basis of the president's position to work with the governors and continues to be the case, though there is pressure from economic advisers to the president to reopen earlier balanced by the opinion of health experts around the president.  Some states are taking action to reopen because the virus has not severely affected these states. President Trump says it is for governors to decide what is best for each state in consultation with the federal government. The U.S. government would step in if a state is taking risky action with the coronavirus. On the issue of whether the president could have acted quickly in February following his decision to stop flights from China and set up quarantines in January, the BBC has this to say. Dr. Fauci, the president's respected health expert was one of many public officials who did not see the magnitude of the crisis evolving with lack of good information from China. BBC North America Editor Jon Sopel cites Dr. Fauci's comments on February 13- that the coronavirus danger is "just miniscule" compared with the "real and present danger" of flu. As it happened the president acted alone in his sense of the danger from the outbreak in China through incoming flights and not relying on others. Here is what the situation of each country on reopening is- India -  has extended the lockdown to May 3. France - has extended the lockdown till May 11. U.S. - has extended the lockdown to May 1. States are taking the responsibility. UK - continues lockdown restrictions till May. The French president Macron had a simple answer to the question " when will we be able to get back to a normal, prior life?" Macron said "Quite frankly, humbly, I have no definitive answer to that." Some nurseries and schools will reopen May 11. Not restaurants, hotels, museums and theaters. By May 11 France will be able to test and quarantine anyone with symptoms and general public masks will be available to all. This is what Dr. Fauci in the U.S. also wants to see before being able to reopen, that testing and tracing, isolating, procedures be efficient and reliable. ...
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WHO, World Health Organization, comes under criticism for failing to warn about the pandemic. President Trump says the U.S. finances the WHO with $450 million but the WHO has opposed some of the basic common sense approaches to the virus such as early quarantines and suspension of flights from virus hotspots. Including opposing the U.S. action taken by president Trump on January 27, 2020 to close all passenger flights between U.S. and China. A 14 day quarantine was put into effect for Hubei province. About 8.5 million passengers visited the U.S. from China in 2018 according to the U.S.Transportation Department. Reports show Chinese cities deserted on NYT January 30, but infections only 1300 a week earlier going up to 12,000 and only 259 deaths. President Trump says the world was misled by the WHO on the extent of the crisis developing in China, as he sets up a review of the WHO's role in the crisis and on funding by the U.S. President Trump says the crisis in the U.S. would be much larger if some of the 8.5 million passengers from China arrived in U.S. cities. He also says the decision was his own intuition about what was happening with health experts not realizing the extent of the crisis as there was very little data on the crisis. Most of the experts Mr. Fauci and Dr Birx were also not aware at the time of the gravity of the crisis, and some leading epidemiologists at American universities even called it an emotional reaction. ...
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
DW.COM Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This article in DW.com cites experts who point out that the Republican Party always had tensions within it because of the diverging interests of three groups that have allied together to form the party- Wealthy businessmen and corporate interests, evangelicals, and white working class people who have seen their incomes decline for several decades. The interests of each group have some overlap, are sometimes masked but frequently they diverge. Nigel Bowles, former director of the Rothermere Institute at Oxford University, says there is no particular reason that this coalition would hold together, that it was unstable to begin with, a wonder that it did not split up earlier. Scott Lucas, an expert on American Studies at the University of Birmingham, says that Reagan showed great skill in holding this coalition together, and Donald Trump has taken it apart by mobilizing only one constituency of white working class voters and leaving out others. The break between Republican party leaders Ryan, McCain, and state party leaders, with Trump is unprecedented in post war American politics, and putting it back together now looks like a lost cause in the medium term.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The stimulus checks in government pandemic aid packages are being spent prudently in the US. Government aid checks were sent out in the first wave since March 2020 and now again in the second wave in 2021. The stimulus pandemic checks are being allocated wisely. A Federal Reserve Bank of New York study shows that Americans saved about 36% of the first stimulus payment checks, 29% was spent, and 35% was used to pay down debt. For the second stimulus payment underway in 2021 this survey also shows Americans are expected to spend even less and use even more to pay down debts. With stores mostly closed, travel restricted, and consumers not having the opportunities to spend, and the sense of insecurity, additional income from unemployment checks, saving has increased. Americans saved $1.4 trillion in the first 9 months of 2020 compared to half that in the same period in 2019, according to analysis by Berenberg Economics. That amount is about 10% of household spending. The tight spending during 2020 means, say economic researchers, that spending will jump in 2021 after the vaccination drive. The trend is positive in that Americans tended not to save enough. People in China and India, tend to save more giving government a larger pool of savings to draw from in national infrastructure spending. In November 2020 Commerce Department estimate is that saving in the U.S. was 12.9%, up from 7.5% in November 2019. Anecdotal evidence shows U.S. savings accounts for people at the lower end of incomes have been depleted for years, hit by the unemployment of the 2009 recession. This was caused by errors by the banking community and business. To this is added people in arts and culture, people in professions involving contact, travel and leisure, food, during this pandemic ten years later. National priorities need to be set to bolster this part of American society and its core social fabric. The steps to bring home manufacturing jobs under Mr. Trump and the "Buy American" initiative under Mr. Biden is just the first step. More steps are needed and the resources, implementation and drive to bring America back to the healthy society of social cohesion and upward mobility aspirations under presidents Truman and Eisenhower in the 1950's. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Amy Chozick of the NYT describes the puzzling idea of a Methodist do-gooder, with serious concern for injustices in the South, making an effort to accumulate money. Especially considering that Hillary Clinton must have known that speechmaking fees would come up in a presidential election campaign. Chozick describes in some detail the two years Hillary tried to shore up the family's finances after Bill Clinton's defeat in the 1980 election for Governor. Following the defeat Bill Clinton went back all over the state to voters to hear their complaints, sometimes for hours at a time. It was upto Hillary to shore up the family's finances. Hillary had to stretch to buy a $112,000 home in a better residential neighborhood. Family friends say Bill was never that interested in money, and never worried about the family's finances. Things were so bleak according to this account that Hillary worried about how they would pay for daughter Chelsea's college tution, as her own mother's experience has always remained with her of being denied a college education because of lack of money. During the Democratic Convention this comes up in the video introduction, something that most people are unaware of, which must have been difficult for an intensely private person like Hillary. Her mother is described in that video as having to go to the corner grocery store as a child with coupons for food. The income of the Clintons as professors in the years around 1975 was $18,000 each. As governor Mr. Clinton earned $33,519 in 1978 with combined income at $51,173 adding Hillary's work at the Rose law firm. A one time deal in the commodities market made 100,000, and an investment in land in the Ozarks led to losses- all at a time when other highly educated people in Arkansas were doing extremely well, including the Walton family. It wasn't until 1992 when Bill Clinton was running for president did the couple make higher income of $297,177 reported in 1992 tax returns. At this time entering the White House, of recent presidents only Harry Truman had lower net worth. Hillary donated her book proceeds for "It Takes a Village," to charity, and turned down an advance. By the time they left office the couple were faced with legal debts, owing $5 million in legal fees- Hillary Clinton saying they were "Dead broke." The former president now sought help to buy a Dutch Colonial in Chappaqua, New York, for $1.7 million. President Jimmy Carter was also facing large losses in his peanut business in Georgia when he left office, only to turn to writing books to salvage his finances. Hoover, FDR, Kennedy, George Bush, George W. Bush, were from families with great wealth or built their fortunes, including candidate Trump, sometimes using influence or connections or in the case of Kennedy's family gaining from the end of Prohibition. Eisenhower, Reagan, Carter were of more modest wealth. Only Harry Truman remains the awesome exception of dignity with extremely modest wealth, a small house in Independence, Missouri, no presidential pension, only an army pension of $112.56 a month in 1953. Truman's story also offers another aspect of public service of an exceptional kind and its value to the country for people to reflect on. A presidential pension of $25,000 was set up one year after Truman left office.  Experts say Truman's Senate Committee over 8 years 1941-1948, helped save billions of dollars in waste, fraud, and in faulty airplane as well as munitions development during the war effort, including saving thousands of lives.  In his farewell address in January 1953, Truman said he had spent 17 hours a day for eight years with no payment for overtime. In the address he correctly predicts that the Cold War would be won and he set the course. It also happened as predicted in that address with changes in the Kremlin and failure in the satellite states. Hillary Clinton put in these 17 hours and gained unmatched experience as Secretary of State, and is in a positon to set the course ahead in a manner that Truman once did in a complex world where careful policy, good judgement and in some situations strong action is needed. Such invaluable public service has never really been rewarded in the way business leaders are, not by a small fraction - too long simply taken for granted.  Considering her life story Hillary Clinton appears to have struggled with this all her life, to create a safety net that too often cracked, sometimes suddenly and unexpectedly. Has this concern sometimes gone too far, could better judgement be exercized. Perhaps or probably. Should it be seen in the context that Truman's situation reminds us. Probably.         ...
The New York Times Original article ›
France 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The treaty of handover by Britain of Hong Kong under one country, two systems was flawed in the way it was negotiated. French commentators looking at the problem say the city is caught between its past in the British Empire and the new monolithic state that China represents. Under the British French visitors looked at the city and wondered how there was freedom but no democracy, people were just selfishly just interested in making money. Chris Patten, Britain's administrator of the territory tried but failed to get democratic process, During the negotiations in 1984 for handover the chief British negotiator, Percy Cradock, a former ambassador to China, tells the Australian Broadcasting Corporation that - In Hong Kong where there is such a disparity in strength between the two sides, you go for the best you can get, I take the simple view that half a loaf is better than no bread." Britain had very little leverage to secure a separate future for Hong Kong because it was small compared to much larger China resulting unequal negotiations. The same is true today as the best Britain could do is to get out a joint declaration with Australia and Canada saying that it did not approve the new security law, that it violated the treaty signed by Britain and China. The French view expressed by the editor of La Croix is that hasty poorly planned British exits- as happened in British India -have led to crises and conflicts for postcolonial generations, a legacy of British colonial rule. India and Pakistan still sorting out Kashmir, and India and China still fighting about the McMahon Line border area. The situation is very different for the U.S. which now has to respond in some way, and this comes as trade tensions and coronavirus tensions about its origins in China and the failure of Beijing to allow quick entry for an American team into Wuhan. This being for 7 weeks between Jan 6 request and February 16 permission. America sees this as losing 7 precious weeks to make up its own determination of the dangers when every week health experts say means saving or losing tens of thousands of lives. With loss of 100,000 lives the Trump administration has a sense of being misled. This French report in FR24 points out that the lack of a strong response from the U.S. would be something similar to letting the Berlin Wall happen without a response. Both sides in a situation where the territory of Hong Kong remained mostly about money and with a disproportionate influence of business interests similar to its founding under the unequal treaties of the 1850's. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Kevin Maurer looks back at 15 years of covering Afghanistan since 2004, and asks was it worth it.  The conflict has cost 145,000 lives for the U.S. period of the war alone. Not counting the war in which the Russians were involved in the decade before the U.S. involvement. In fact the Russian involvement in Afghanistan was costly enough to hasten the collapse of the Soviet Union and bring Gorbachev to power to unwind the war and make the changes that led to the collapse of the Berlin Wall.  2400 U.S. servicemen dead and 20,000 Americans wounded. The cost to the U.S. is $737 billion for this war, according to a report in 2018 from Brown University's Costs of War Project. Just as the Soviet Union showed the damage from this war the U.S. has seen the cost of this war and foreign entanglement in another war that started accidentally with international interventions in the Iran-Iraq region as a cost that was borne with consequences. This includes the neglect of infrastructure and the damage to the middle class prosperity built up in the 1950's and 1960's after the Second World War. The U.S. got into this war with 9/11 attacks on New York City. By 2010 what began as a war fought by a few Special Operations teams turned into a war with troop levels reaching 100,000. Presidents Bush and Obama both failed to end the war by winning it. In 2014 finally combat operations stopped and American troops mainly conducted anti-terrorism operations and trained Afghan forces. In recent years the war has gradually disappeared from the national discussion in the U.S. and is barely talked about. President Trump wants to end the war even if it means talking to the Taliban and negotiations directly with the Taliban are ongoing.  One result of this war is the aversion to costly international entanglements and the highly unpopular nature of the conflicts. There are serious costs of the conflict in terms of neglected domestic priorities including infrastructure, loss of U.S. technological edge in key industries, and the competition from China, an the investments in health, education, services that were not made, the increase in inequalities and the diminishing of the middle class. The global financial crisis of 2008, the result of faulty banking, added an economic dimension through the loss of middle class savings in the U.S., worsening the financial situation of the middle class in the U.S.    ...
New York Times Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a factory the size of 5 football fields located in Gurnee, Illinois, Abbott Labs makes its BinaxNow Covid-19 home tests. Abbott turned out 1 billion tests in 2021 and at one point had 80% of the market. Along with Pfizer vaccine, BinaxNow Home covid-19 tests are a dominant product during the pandemic. Abbott generated a fifth of its $43 billion in revenue from these home tests. Abbott faced several hurdles along the way. It gained when the US government authorized it to make the test. Yet after vaccination took off by mid 2021 the demand for tests declined and Abbott nearly idled its giant factory in Gurnee. Delta and Omicron variants led to a sudden reversal and surge in demand. Abbott developed its test based on an existing design it used in the US for flu tests, by a company it inherited by acquisition called Binax. To do that test one sends a swab up the nose, add that sample and a liquid mixture to a rectangular paper card, and close the card shut. The liquid then travels up the paper strip, revealing one or two pink lines, one for negative, two for positive. This is done in 15 minutes and the simple design described as a lollipop shape, put Abbott far ahead of competitors. The US FDA authorized Becton Dickinson and Quidel to make the tests before it authorized Abbott, but these rival companies had a poor and complex design. The Trump administration gave Abbott a $760 million contract to buy 150 million tests for distribution to health departments, long termcare facilities, nursing homes, and schools. And by October 2020 Abbott was already making 50 million tests a month. When it comes to distribution Abbott tapped into its pharmacy connections for baby products such as Similac baby formula. This gave it an advantage over Quidel and others who also lacked the manufacturing knowhow for large scale ramp up. The BinaxNow in pharmacies was sold at $24 for a box of two tests, while government paid $5 for one test. Abbott says it makes $ 7 per single consumer test. Yet there was one problem waiting to hit Abbott in 2021- demand dried up as the vaccination campaign took off. In fact the plant manager, Mr. Rodriguez, planned to move to another job inside Abbott as production declined. Then came the Delta variant and he was asked to ramp up production again. With Omicron demand soared. The Biden administration committed $3 billion to help boost test production and asked Kroger and Walmart to sell over the counter tests at cost for 3 months. Abbott had to lure workers from Amazon at $25 an hour for the Gurnee plant expansion. What was learned by the government and Abbott from this experience? The US government now looks for ideas in meeting demand volatility, supply challenges and production needs,. Sustaining production capacity is important for future virus flareups- a new government-industry partnership is required for maintaining test making infrastructure. With government help Abbott plans now to keep the facility at Gurnee operating indefinitely. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ analysis of NatCen data from whatukthinks.org show much has changed since the last general election in Britain. Boris Johnson's popularity is at a negative 20% and Theresa May's at negative 35% in July 2019. By the time of the general election May's popularity was at negative 1%.  Another major change is that the popularity of Leave has dropped.  By July 2019 the situation is reversed Remain now has 52% support and Leave is at 48% support. During the referendum it was just the reverse.  Also significant is that some of the claims of Leave's Mr. Cummings that were used in the campaign such as $436 million going to the EU in Brussels that would be diverted to National Health Service are now not credible. The migration issue has also become less important as migration into the EU is now down to a trickle and Germany has reversed its policies to trying to keep migrants at home in Africa through aid and other means. The migration issue was played up in the campaign. Germany was seen as pursuing the austerity policies that hurt the working class as these policies made headlines daily for Greece and other countries during the period of Britain's referendum. In 2019 Germany is taking a less active role in the European Union and the leader of the CDU Kamprauer has openly called for Britain to remain in the EU alongside other Germans from all walks of life. In short the mood is now different in Europe as there is disillusionment with leaders from the far right or the far left and the centrists on the right (Merkel)and the left (Blair) who had used politics to stay in power instead of tackling the tough problems of wages, middle class decline, infrastructure and family friendly policies. The Irish backstop is now in the picture when Brexit comes up as Mr. Johnson wants to drop it. The Irish backstop is the term for the agreement reached with the EU so that Ireland's return to peace with open borders ending Catholic vs Protestant conflict would not be disturbed by Britain's leaving the EU. This could also swing voters who are undecided to maintain what has been achieved so far. The Labour party leaders who were fed up with the austerity policies of the European Union driven by Ms. Merkel and the CDU now have a situation where the issue of Brexit can be seen not in terms of the past- austerity, dependence on Brussels for Britain's economic future and working class decline. Other issues such as unity of the UK, the end to austerity policies in the EU and in the U,S. with the Trump economic policy of dropping deficit targets in budgetary outlays, also signal a different climate for the Labour party in which to campaign for remaining within the EU and continue Britain's policy of working to improve conditions for the working class and middle class after the Blair/Clinton/Merkel years.    ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The BBC looks at some of the claims made by president Trump about India's rapid progress in delivering services to the people in electricity, sanitation, roads infrastructure, cooking gas, internet connections. BBC confirms that the economy size is now 6 times that in 2000, as Mr. Trump stated on his visit to Ahmedabad. It was in terms of the total value of all goods and services in the economy or GDP at $477 billion (IMF figures) in 2000. In 2019  it is $2,940 billion.  270 million fewer people were living in poverty in 2016, this is confirmed in a UN report. Here is the list for services as checked by The BBC. 1. Providing electricity to every one of the 600,000 villages in India. By 2014 most of the villages were electrified- at 96%. It is defined as having schools, health centres and 10% of households having electricity in each village. 2. About 600 million people having access to toilets under the Clean India mission launched in 2014. 100 million new toilets were built. 3. 70 million women were given access to cooking gas. 80 million new connections were built. 4.  320 million new internet subscribers. The figure is low about 600 million total internet subscribers. 5. It is true that infrastructure building is moving quickly says the BBC. About 10,000 kms were built in 2018-19 double that in 2013-2014 under a previous administration. The Mumbai Metro is mentioned in the WSJ as a project that has made remarkable progress. A bullet train project is moving ahead with Japanese financing and technological help from Mumbai to Ahmedabad.  Access to banking accounts and direct deposit of government transfer payments to all Indians is another project. Healthcare access through health care payments directly for health care costs incurred for low income families is another more recent project to reduce the uncertainty and improve finances of poorer citizens. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This may be the most important work of the DJT administration by 2027 into 2028 elections.  WSJ calls it the soda wars, when it is the slow destruction of America. As JFK and RFK well knew when they made fitness a goal for America in 1960- health is not built on sodas. Today with such high obesity, sodas and its likes, it is about the slow destruction of America.  MALA make America Live Again starts here. “When a taxpayer is putting money into SNAP, are they OK with us using their tax dollars to feed really bad food and sugary drinks to children, who perhaps need something more nutritious?” Right now it is the biggest item for schools in most states for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Plan. Passed by Congress in 1964 the original bill for SNAP excluded sodas and luxury drinks, but had Sodas added back in by the Senate. By lobbyists even in 1964? SNAP schools program falls under the Agriculture Department. Democrats as well as Republicans appointed Agriculture Secretaries and not one took the action to get sodas excluded, to let states request sodas be excluded and approve it, not the Democrat a Carter, a Clinton, or an Obama, or a Republican a Reagan, a Bush, or a Trump (first term) took the necessary action. In 2025 Brooke Rollins is Agriculture Department Secretary. Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee has seen the damage sodas can cause in her family. Rollins on her first day in office has finally acted- after 61 years when the original intentions of the SNAP bill's creators were confounded in the Senate.  On her first full day in office, urging them to propose pilot programs testing changes to food aid. Rollins sent governors a letter to ask for the removal of sodas from schools food aid program.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The 1985 hit "Small Town" by John Mellencamp is about Seymour, Indiana. Republican State Representative Jim Lucas says the city of Seymour welcomes immigrants legally here who are properly vetted. The concern is about migrants not vetted and not legally here. At a recent city council meeting Lucas attended it was decided not to go ahead with an economic development agenda. Says Lucas- “However, Seymour has changed drastically in just the past few years, and many of us are obviously concerned about the direction we are headed,” he added. New immigrant cases or migrant arrivals for Jackson county, Indiana, where Seymour is located went up to 435 in 2024 from 66 in 2021. It is at that point that the welcome center idea ran into opposition in this small town in Indiana, an hour from Indianapolis population 21,000 in Jackson County. As the town's population mix changes - it was 1% Hispanic in 1990, then 5% Hispanic in 2000- jumping in two decades of Bush-Obama-Trump-Biden to 25% Hispanic, questions besides economic about the sense of uneasiness of resident came up. Also of cultural literacy of the state of Indiana, and of the history of the state within the Union forged by Washington and Lincoln, FDR and Eisenhower, and of Wendell Wilkie of Elwood, Indiana. Unemployment rate for Jackson County is 3.3%, median income $63,000, home ownership 57%. Issues were not about the economy alone, and about how many immigrants could be absorbed and the cultural and language literacy of arriving migrants. There were issues about the perceived crime rate (metrics show traffic related offenses were up), and about drawing too much of the school's resources as English learning went up slowing learning in the schools. Republican State Representative Jim Lucas says it is crowding the health care clinic downtown with immigrants. ...

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