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 New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The new South Korean government proposes a resumption of military dialogue with North Korea in an effort to bring down tensions in the region. A military hotline existed between North Korea and South Korea till early in 2016. North Korea cut off the hotline after relations with the South Korean government of President Park Geun-hye deteriorated following a missile test in January 2016 by North Korea. By May 2016 the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un proposed military dialogue and talks, an offer rejected by the Park government. With the impeachment of president Park the newly elected government of president Moon proposed improving relations. The recent series of North Korea missile tests was a setback for that effort. With China the new U.S.missile defense system called THADD that was installed in 2016 for South Korea was seen as a setback for China-South Korea relations. As a result the tensions are high in the region. The rhetoric and tone deteriorated after the Trump administration took office in the U.S. in early 2017. After the last missile test the South Korean government of president Moon is now reaching out to the North especially for restoring the hotline that connects the two governments in the event of a crisis, so that a disaster can be avoided on both sides. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Missourians get it they supported raising minimum wage to $15, and said no to Harris. Nebraska approved minimum wage increase and sick leave by 75% , and said no to Harris. Harris did not mention both in her closing messaging or make it a major part of her message. Harris muddled economic message is attributed to influence of Tony West, her brother in law, legal counsel for Uber, and by her efforts to avoid the label placed on her by Wall Street interests that she was "communist" by moving closer to corporate interests. President Biden ran his campaign and presidency entirely with a single theme- against trickle down economics, saying it did not put much on his father's table, and "the middle class built America, not Wall Street, winning 82 million votes more than the 74.3 million for DJT in 2024, 12 million more than Harris, 8 million more than DJT.  This simple Harry Truman like message carried the day in 1948 against Republican Dewey's increasing popularity after weariness over FDR long run in office, and got Biden 12 million more votes than Harris in 2024 or 8 million more than Trump in 2024- 82.3 million votes for Biden 2020. DJT was elected in 2024 with a fewer number of votes than he got in 2020- 74.3 million votes in 2024 and 75 million in 2020. Bernie Sanders, Congressman from Vermont says- "People want to understand what’s going on in their lives. Trump gave them an explanation,” “He attributed all of our problems to undocumented immigrants. What is the Democratic explanation for why the gap between the rich and the poor is getting wider and working-class people are struggling? You tell me.”   ...
CNN Original article ›
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The increase in economic sanctions in response to missile testing is seen by North Korea as "a violent violation of our sovereignty." The sanctions would cut the export revenues of North Korea by one third, further damaging a fragile economy. The North Korean communist government sees a nuclear capability as the only way to maintain its survival. The rhetoric between the U.S. and South Korea with the North Korean government takes place during military exercizes by the U.S. and South Korea. The tweets by president Trump and the missile tests of the North Korean government have escalated the situation to where everything about this is in uncharted territory in 2017. China backs the sanctions as it has increasingly lost control of the North Korean government's actions, even though it sees the North as a buffer zone in relation to the U.S. alliance with South Korea. South Korea's major city Seoul is only 50 miles from the border, making South Koreans play down any confrontation with the North.  ...
The Guardian Original article ›
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. ...
dw.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Compared to chancellor Scholz Merz sets his goals and is clear about his goals. His active style is different from previous chancellors. His first meeting with Trump showed this personal style which is proving to be more effective than Merkel or Scholz. Merz had to wait for a long time in the private sector till Merkel retired to come back to politics. During Merkel's early years Merz challenged Merkel for leadership of the Christian Democrats party. Merkel's policy on migrants has proved to be a failure, and Merz is now in a position to take the CSU in a new direction closing the border and working closely with the US and Britain, Italy, on border enforcement. Merz is also unique and very different from the disinvestment period under Merkel which let German infrastructure deteriorate and fall apart, another failure of Merkel's years as chancellor. Merz's first action was to get close to a trillion dollars of new funding to rebuild defense and infrastructure over the next decade. Merz is head of a coalition with the SPD with SPD's leader Lars Klingbeil as finance minister. Scholz headed a coalition that was dysfunctional as the Free Democrats Lindner was opposed to investment in German economy from the outset. Under Merkel the Christian Democrats took no action to rebuild Germany, and were preoccupied with eurozone finances. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US has expanded access to products from China and other countries gradually leading to a loss of US manufacturing over 2 decades. Today both Republicans and Democrats see the dangers of such economic policies for American workers and families. Mr. Trump first raised this issue that has been raised for a decade or more. Mr. Biden realizes what this means for the future of the Democratic party with the loss of manufacturing communities in the US. For this reason the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and new economic alliances in Asia are being built in a different way. This may not seem much today but as the US shifts its investment, and the European Union shifts its investment, to home countries and countries in Asia and Latin America, Africa, till 2030- 2040 over two decades this will create huge opportunities for the US, Europe, India and other partners in the free world. It is a mistake to think that a better life for the people of the free world can be built on the mistaken idea that the loss of American manufacturing communities was somehow acceptable. The sudden failure of the trade policy with China after the loss of so many American manufacturing communities shows that in the long run only policies that benefit both American workers and foreign workers will work and deserve support. The return of US manufacturing and European manufacturing to US and Europe must therefore be the very foundation of our effort and with it can evolve the building of manufacturing communities in friends in the free world such as India and other Asian, Latin American and African countries.  For India this is the kind of policy that Mohandas Gandhi would have chosen because of his broad and deep knowledge of the world and how it works best, he would have seen policies that benefit American manufacturing communities needed as much as building manufacturing communities in India. The ripping up of manufacturing communities in the US and Europe and what it has done to American and European workers and families, as has happened with globalization, would have been abhorrent to Mohandas Gandhi. This is why the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and economic alliance in Asia starts with the right principle even in its basic form, with the hard work of all and creative ideas creating the right solution for the Free World as it evolves to 2040. With respect for all, opportunity for all, confidence of all, efforts of all. ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
What were the stories in the Economist magazine that were the most read stories of 2019? Not on president Trump. On Malaysia, China under Jinping, and exodus from San Francisco and Silicon Valley. The most read article was on the newly elected president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro. The mismanagement of the economy particularly extravagant state spending on the Olympics and soccer stadiums for the World Cup at the expense of basic sanitation services, bus and transport services, health services, led to the result of a majority of Brazilians rejecting the Workers Party and its leader former president Lula. Unfortunately most of the media including the Economist did not draw attention to this gap. During a period in which income from mining with export of iron ore, and soyabeans to China, enabled Brazil to live beyond its means, there was no effort to draw attention to glaring gaps in development of public services such as sanitation, bus services and transport, lack of building infrastructure other than to support mining. Glaring gaps in education and health services made the situation worse. The second most read piece in the Economist  was on March 10th- Malaysia's PM is about to steal an election. Here the Economist magazine joined the Wall Street Journal which originally broke the story on the 1MDB fund and irregularities in Malaysia where a development fund was misused by the government. Najib actually lost that election and the WSJ covered the story of the developments that followed in which Malaysia's new governemnt led by a returning former prime minister in his nineties Mahathir Mohammed, ousted his own protege Mr. Najib.  The third most read piece in the Economist magazine was - How the West got China Wrong.  Unfortunately the Economist magazine and most of the media covered China in the two decade long boom years without covering the other emerging story as well in which Mr. Lighthizer (now president Trump's top trade adviser) and others questioned the huge unsustainable trade surpluses in U.S. trade with China. With the economy facing huge downside risks and rising trade tensions with the U.S. Chinese president Jinping's move to remove the limit on terms in office in the Constitution was considered a shift from the notion that China was likely to turn into a democracy. Mr. Jinping had already completed his first term in office and the anti-corruption campaign, managing the economic boom for a soft landing, was carried out with the central leadership of the party, after the destabilization evident in the early part of Xi Jinping's first term. Much of China's path was predictable and rational behaviour in its national interest, what was not clearly defined or defended was the way the U.S. could sustain the trade deficits that had reached a billion dollars a day. Leading to Mr. Trump seizing on this as an election issue to form a bloc of voters separate from the two main parties, the Republicans and the Democrats. The fifth most read piece was on Oct 11, 2018- the next recession. It pointed out that with low interest rates central banks in the U.S. and Europe and America could not cope effectively with a recession. The sixth most read piece was on June 29, 2018- Bullshit jobs and the yoke of managerial feudalism. It cited Prof. David Graeber of the London School of Economics, who wrote a short essay that went viral on the prevalence of work that had no social or economic reason to exist, work he called "bullshit jobs". Graeber said people want to feel they are transforming the world around them in a way that is leading to a positive difference. No. 7, 8, 9, were on Bitcoin, Netflix and programming language Python. No. 10 most read was on Aug. 30, 2018- Why startups are leaving Silicon Valley. It showed that in 2017 more people left the county of San Francisco than entered. The main reason the cost of living was burdensome and out of control. As Amazon shifts attention to India and Brazil, and Apple pulls back from India, social media companies coming under fire for disinformation, this period of Tech is making way for a shift in a new direction. A direction that focuses on people's lives, wages, spending on much needed infrastructure and services. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Donald Trump's remarks at a Wilmington rally that caused a storm- "Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks. But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know." The second Amendment in the U.S. Constitution gives people the right to bear arms. Some newspapers saw it as threat, especially considering the heated rhetoric in Trump's other remarks in his campaigning. Speaker Paul Ryan called it a joke gone bad, and that the Second Amendment should not be talked about in this way.

The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this thoughtful essay Bob Davis of the WSJ asks whether the decision of the Clinton administration to admit China into the World Trade Organization was a bad one for the U.S.  Mr. Clinton in 2000 tried to persuade Congress citing words of president Woodrow Wilson that of a dream "of a world full of free markets, free elections, and free peoples working together."  Every year China would have its most favored nation status renewed with help from supporters in Congress. After WTO entry this was not necessary. Chinese leaders saw the entry into WTO as a way to knock down trade barriers, to act a wrecking ball for the planned economy, to give the economy a big boost.  In 1994 China was a relatively backward economy with 60% of the population living on less than $1.90 a day. Hard to imagine today.  Not everyone was convinced that it was good for the U.S. This included a trade attorney who had tackled a huge trade deficit with Japan in the Reagan period- Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer was Deputy Trade Representative negotiating with the Japanese. His prediction was that no job in America would be safe once China entered the WTO, that China would become a dominant trading nation.  Robert Cassidy, 73, trade negotiator for president Clinton looks back on that time and says that he regrets what has happened, that all his work night and a day only benefited business and hurt workers. David Autor, MIT economist and his colleagues,  in a later study documented loss of 2.4 million jobs to Chinese competition between 1999 and 2011, in many manufacturing towns dotting the landscape of America, particularly in the midwestern states. And the expectation that the higher economic growth would lead to less political control did not turn out to be true.  In the process multinationals rushed to China after WTO entry and China became the world's manufacturing floor. By 2013 China's per capita income reached $7000, after years of fast GDP growth approaching 10% a year.  About 400 million Chinese were lifted out of poverty from living on less than $1.90 per day from 1999 to 2011, according to the World Bank. A big problem was that the U.S. did not plan for the change from WTO entry. No resources were allocated for the plan to let American workers adjust through worker retraining and special trade handicapped income support, to allow for a slow planned shift. Instead the pace of growth was faster than that which the U.S. faced with the Japanese export offensive in the eighties. China experienced double digit growth after 2000. The irony is that the Republican administrations that followed Clinton followed a policy of free trade to the advantage of China's state run economy when working class Americans voted mostly for the Democratic Party. Little was done and little said in the media from Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the establishment during this time even after Mr. David Autor documented the effects of trade in the U.S.  Till Mr. Trump recognizing the alienation in communities hit by job losses from trade upended American politics, shifted this part of the electorate to the Republican base. Mr. Lighthizer's view is that complaints about China should be left out of WTO because it is naive to tackle it that way. With a $375 billion China trade deficit for 2017 the challenge has to be met in a different way, and the U.S. has to rely on regaining its economic strength within a fair trading framework. Having negotiated with the Japanese Mr. Lighthizer sees the approach adopted then as the one right for today. During the long negotiations Lighthizer is said to have received many negotiating positions of the Japanese signifying no change in long sessions. He once simply made a paper plane and sent it right back, in one of these sessions. He meant that the U.S. was serious about reversing the imbalance in trade. ...
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,   ...
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.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tensions rise in the Korean peninsula after the launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile by North Korea that could reach Alaska. U.S. General Brooks says only "self-restraint, which is a choice, is all that separates armistice from war." The 1953 armistice never really ended the war between the North and the South on the Korean peninsula. The Kim regime in Pyongyang sees its missile systems and nuclear weapons as the only way for it to survive. For the U.S., Japan and North Korea, the situation is getting graver by the year, each year that North Korea develops its missile systems. The U.S. conducted its own military exercize with South Korea off the east coast, firing a number of missiles into the sea. Japan is now considering the Thaad missile defense system for its own defense. That missile defense system was put in place in South Korea by the U.S. in 2016. In a separate analysis David Sanger of the NYT says U.S. options are limited. After the collapse of the Gaddafi regime in Libya which gave up its nuclear weapons capabilities, other regimes see the nuclear weapons as a way to survive, which is why the North Korean regime puts emphasis on its nuclear program. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ reminds readers that it has not endorsed a presidential candidate since 1928. That it is not about to do it with the two candidates Biden and Trump. It sees many liabilities in the Republican candidate and does not see the future of America in what it calls four long years of political trench warfare. WSJ does not see a reinvestment in the economy, rebuilding of its infrastructure and preparing the transition to clean energy as two overriding priorities as do Democrats under leadership of Biden and policy being shaped by Sullivan after much study and reflection shown in speeches at Brookings and CFR. As a result it punts at the very time it should be looking to the future with confidence in the principles that built this nation as JFK has shown in his Profiles of Courage (1952) of senators and Congressmen who looked into their souls for the courage needed to face the future. It says Trump has been the greatest Democratic turnout machine since FDR, and Obama, with underperformances since then. It also refers to the court cases and says one third of Republican voters in Super Tuesday polls this week in March 2024 find that a conviction would be disqualifying. WSJ Editorial Board also says the Trump Presidency was a stress test for US institutions, that the checks and balances held. It sees no hope of political realignment in a Trump restoration, it sees only "four long years of political trench warfare. ...
WSJ Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The difficulties the new U.S. Treasury Secretary faces as she tries to navigate the politics in Congress and the tries to reach out to moderates and progressives within the Democratic party. All have different views on spending, and where stimulus money should go in a second stimulus. Her long experience with the Fed is seen as not preparing her for the political role of evaluating different opinions that are described by some experts as ten times more political than anything going on in Fed meetings. As a student of Prof. Tobin Yellen sees government intervention as needed in times of economic crises. Twice in ten years the U.S. and the rest of the world has been struck by economic crises- the bank leveraging behaviours and poor lending practices that induced the 2009 financial crisis and in 2020 the coronavirus pandemic. Lessons learned Yellen says about the 2009 recession are that not enough stimulus was provided after the initial stimulus to get a strong enough recovery. Democrats are eager to spend over $2 trillion in a second stimulus. Republicans much less so particularly with a new president. Even under Mr. Trump spending was set at under $700 billion by Republicans for a second stimulus. Another economic crises is one of the U.S. strategic economic position in the world. On this issue of trade Yellen's husband George Akerloff, also a economist is more skeptical of the value of free trade. The failure of the World Trade Organization to ensure a level playing field as China subsidized key industries, and the loss of America's manufacturing advantage over three decades is now the defining issue in American politics. It takes the shape of manufacturing communities that were once a part of Democratic party support shifting away after devastated local economies from the loss of manufacturing plants to China. It takes the shape of a Republican party that is committed to bring back American manufacturing, and a Democratic party that under Biden is seeking the same result. How much each party will invest in terms of making things happen to get this done is one of the issues facing all parties, Congress, the administration, Ms. Yellen, and the new president. Economics does not have the answers. As economists could not have predicted the increase in women participation in the workforce, the drop in Black and Hispanic unemployment rates under the Trump administration. The lack of moral will to get trade to work for the American worker was more of an issue under Democratic and Republican administrations for the last 2 decades, so that issues of growing inequality were never better addressed by any party. It depended more on focus of the president elected to help American workers, and to avoid the cost and distraction of foreign wars when American interests could be protected in other ways. Yellen was not able to make a difference at the Fed because of these reasons and low interest rates have both helped and hurt the middle class, as low interest rates meant Americans were less able to accumulate savings for retirement since 2000. Determination and action counts for more than ideology or policy is the lesson learned in building strong economies and manufacturing.   ...
CNN Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Huawei executive, Meng Wanzhou, is released after agreeing to a deal in a Brooklyn court hearing. Meng Wangzhou, chief financial officer of Huawei Technologies, admitted to wrongdoing in a fraud case. The Biden administration acted to remove a friction point with China, and China released 2 Canadians held by China since 2018, following Meng's release.

Meng is daughter of Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei. She was arrested at Vancouver International Airport in December 2018 at the request of the United States. The US Justice Department during the Trump administration had accused Meng and Huawei of a decade long effort to steal trade secrets, and evade Iran sanctions. In retaliation China arrested 2 Canadians who were released after Meng's release, after a long period in detention.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Noonan of the WSJ says it is important that cooler heads prevail in the Korean missile crisis. She says it is important that cool and calm voices prevail for the U.S.- the voices of the generals surrounding president Trump- McMaster, Kelly and Mattis. The statements by president Trump are seen as reckless. Any comparison to the Cuban missile crisis with rational players on both sides is refuted by Noonan. Krushchev and Kennedy cannot be compared to Trump and Kim Jong-Un. The U.S. had conversations with Ambassador Dobrynin and Foreign Minister Gromyko of the Soviet Union at the time, the U.S. has no contacts with the North Korean government. The situation is vastly different and as retired Gen. James Thurman, head of U.S. forces in South Korea 2011-2013, points out in a NYT report, the dangers of miscalculation are high.

DW.COM 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