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.


FRANCE 24 Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a policy unchanged since 1950's women in China retire at age 50 and men at age 60 years. China is aging faster than the US and it's population that is over 60 years is 20% of the population. Over the 5 years to 2025 about 40 million people will retire, about the size of the population of Canada. There will be 36 million fewer people in the working age population ages 16-59 to support them. Chinese migrant workers and families work longer hours than white collar workers making it difficult to raise the retirement age to European levels in a short time. The government's approach is to get public support by creating awareness about the problem and change the retirement age gradually over a longer period. The first step will be bringing the retirement age of women to the level of men. The 10 year gap in retirement age of men and women is not found in any advanced economy.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With China's economy slowing, fewer jobs for college graduates in the cities, what is president Xi- who is visiting San Francisco this week- doing to tackle this problem? Even in Guangdong province with cities like Shenzen, it is very, very, very rural says Brian Spegele in this WSJ discussion. He talks about widespreard rural poverty. From his own experience spending time in the countryside in the impressionable years Xi has put this task to revitalize the rural areas to young people. In Guangdong alone about 300,000 youngsters will be given the opportunity to improve their credentials for future government work by going to the rural areas to bring talent that was drained from the 20 years of free market hypergrowth and urbanization. China is about 40% rural in 2023 and these regions have suffered badly, and Xi's efforts to revitalize come at a time after the pandemic when it makes little sense to continue urbanization as the only solution to problems. ...
Hindustan Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Modi refers to an ecosystem that continuously shrinks the pool of capital from government revenues, revenues intended to fund development roads, bridges and other infrastructure illegally siphoned away, that stalled and suffocated rapid development in India for 75 years. Without foreign investment there can be no rapid development in India. Without strong and efficient institutions foreign investment has not come to India in the last 30 years in the way it has come to China. These institutions of good governance that prevent such siphoning away of revenues enable 100% of every dollar or rupee of taxes to go into development essential for funding infrastructure, climate infrastructure, logistics and the other inputs of capital, labor, energy and land to build manufacturing capabilities. An ever widening pool of the inputs of capital, labor and land year after year- a process that Japan, then South Korea, then China has accomplished is possible. I It is only now taking place in India. What Mohandas Gandhi, Nehru and Sardar Patel failed to grasp in the 30's, 40's and 50's is that it was possible to have an independent India and still remain a backward undeveloped nation for a staggering period of 75 years or almost half of the period the British ruled India. What Mao failed to grasp in China and which was corrected by other leaders to make China an advanced economy able to fulfill the aspirations of the Chinese people, is also the situation that prevailed in India. Post independence leaders in China and India both isolated their economies, both limited human potential, both let institutions fail in good governance.  It is only now moving India into the process of developing an advanced developed economy by 2040, able to fulfill the aspirations of a youthful population of 1.2 billion people. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NYT says DJT would use tariffs "as a economic sledgehammer to nations that refuse to meet his demands" and claims not to know what they are. Saying further that DJT has been far less clear about what those demands were. NYT has clearly not followed what DJT has said time and again. It is OK to use economic power when Canada and Mexico, and China have not taken the action they could have taken a long time back that they are now taking, and will take, after years of acting as if they could not see the fentanyl flows across its borders destroying America. These countries two land neighbors of the US and the last a country which from the open door policy against European colonial Empires and through the Joe Stillwell years in the War against Japanese colonialism in China, and in the years of China's building its economy in the 1990-2010 period, offered a helping hand. It makes the victim -and one that had reversed TR's advice about carrying big stick and speaking softly to its bitter regret- the bully, in the words of the NYT.   ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's central bank, the People's Bank of China, reduces the capital reserve requirement ratio for the largest banks by 1% to 18.5%, on April 19, 2015. This move is expected to free up $200 billion for new lending by banks. China's securities regulator also acted to curb margin financing, the using of borrowed money to invest in the stock market which faces bubble conditions. China's economy is reported to be slowing making it uncertain whether the 7% annual growth target can be met.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Zero covid lockdowns have added to the sentiment seeing China as a less attractive location for foreign investment. American companies are seeing staff resign due the lockdowns and zero covid policy. About a fourth of companies in a US Chamber of Commerce survey see a 20% drop in sales in 2022. A similar situation is being seen for European companies in China. The other area of growth from property sector is not working anymore as there is a 59% drop in demand for new property units. Investors in the property sector fear  another situation like that of property developer Evergrande's collapse.  Similar to Japan by 2000 a lot of the government infrastructure for roads and rail and automobiles has already been built leaving less room for this sector to kick in. Investments are possible in AI, renewables, electric cars, and advanced technologies, with limited potential to tackle loss of jobs in other sectors such as construction and government financed infrastructure spending and in retail stores. Retail sales are hit by inflation and high gas prices. The result is that China's GDP may fall by 1% according to one estimate for this quarter from the previous year. For growth and foreign investment look to India where a surge in government financed infrastructure in construction of roads and rapid transit, fast rail, construction of housing, and rapid increase in use of mobile phones, automobiles, and appliances is taking place. A new logistics system is being built with a Master plan for the whole economy under Gati Shakti creating a whole new place for foreign investment in a country of 1.3 billion. With Indonesia and Bangladesh closely related to India this is a market of 1.8 billion people far surpassing China and built on values of democracy ingrained over 100 years since the experiments under the British of elected state assemblies. This happened under limited Hind Swaraj since 1930's when India was led by Mohandas Gandhi in these early experiments with democracy. Germany, France and the US have a lot in common with India and the ground is being prepared with improvements for extensive German, US foreign investment by the Modi administration.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
There is a price for a socialist state run society adopting capitalism without understanding it. Russia experienced this in the 1990's as the Soviet system collapsed and the capitalist system took its place by 1990 with flagrant abuses. Only to be stabilized in the Putin years till the war in Ukraine affected the Russian economy. China avoided this fate by continuing its accelerated path to industrialization till the 2009 financial crisis. But hidden in its seemingly successful modernization effort was the role of LGFV's and selling of land to support the LGFV's. Local governments did not take on debt themselves, they passed on the debt to Local Government Financing Vehicles LGFV's- about 8 trillion dollars of debt 80%-90% not serviceable for interest payments, zombie status requiring borrowing for annual spending.  Most city councils or mayors did not understand these vehicles were debt and some even asked "do we have to pay it back?" LGFV's were not understood by mayors and city councils brought up under a socialist state run economy. They used it to follow the central government in Beijing's orders to come up with projects to boost growth year after year to rates of growth of 10% in the 1990's and 2000's, heedless of the risks because they never really understood the capitalist system and its pitfalls.  As long as land could be sold there was some revenue for local governments and room for shifting $8 trillion in debt to other LGFV's. Once the construction industry collapsed and companies went bankrupt their were few buyers for land. The central government cannot take on some of this $8 trillion in debt. As a result China is now facing what the Russians faced - a crisis from lack of grasp of the severe pitfalls of capitalism when its risks are not understood for economies that were in the 20th century experiencing upheavals, wars and then socialist state run economies. What this means is that the Chinese economy will slow, has no choice but to slow down for the next decade to find solutions to this debt overhang over its economy and industrial plans. It also means China's support for Russia in the Ukraine conflict is also problematic for China's internal growth to meet the aspirations of its people. As long as the administration in the US continues to pursue its own economic policies for growth as Biden has done by investing in the American economy, it will have the opportunity to lead the free world and be able to hold out hope for aspirations of countries and regions such as India, Africa and Latin America. ...
The Indian Express Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman announces the details of the $280 billion (20 lakh crore) economic package and action being taken to help (MSME) small and medium size enterprises in India. About 3 lakh crore or about $40 billion will be for support of the MSME enterprises. The MSME sector in India cover millions of micro, small and medium size businesses that support the economy. By increasing the size of the market by 2000 crores rupees through avoiding foreign tenders the government wants to give more scope for growth and investment to this sector. Some imports from China and other countries could now be manufactured in India as part of the push to be local and self reliant, as well as provide room for robust growth in the future after the blow from coronavirus.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Autor at MIT authored some of the first detailed studies about the severe disruption in U.S. communities from the trade with China following China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. The sheer size of the impact now appears to have been underestimated by economists and other experts. It was believed says Hilsenrath and Davis, that the U.S. having absorbed the impact of trade with Japan in the seventies and eighties, and with Mexico following NAFTA, could do the same with China. That turns out to be false. Much of 2016 election season has been spent seeing the rise of anti-trade movements led by Trump and Sanders, and reveals a deep discontent with job shifting overseas, and disruption of communities across America by trade patterns. What happened? In 2015 China's exports to the U.S. reached 2.7% of U.S. GDP. Hilsenrath and Davis say it was about 1% less with Japan and Mexico when their exports surged. The rapidity of the impact is another problem. It took 12 years following Japan's emergence as a major supplier, to reach the same level of impact that China had only 4 years after China's entry into the WTO in 2001. A similiar situation of 12 years happened with Mexico after NAFTA. Another problem is that Japan's exports impacted mostly steel and autos, China's exports impacted a whole range of industries. The speed with which China's planners sought to change and modernize their manufacturing  base is unprecedented in history, and has an impact not only on the U.S. as a recipient of low cost exports, but also on China as it struggles with bad debts and job losses today, that are a legacy of that too rapid move. This was part of the drive to urbanize China rapidly by shifting agricultural workers to factories in the cities, at a pace unprecedented in history. Another factor not mentioned is the global financial crisis of 2008-2009 that hurt U.S. manufacturing in the auto and other industries, and the wide impact this had in loss of jobs and decline in wages. By 2010 the tide of public opinion had shifted. The WSJ/NBC poll of September 2010, cited in detail in WSJ 10/2/2010 under "Americans Sour on Foreign Trade" shows over 80% consistently for all levels of income, over $75,000 and under $75,000, Republicans and Democrats, working class Americans or well educated Americans, saying that Americans were struggling and there was less hiring, because of how trade had impacted their communities. Lyrarc covered this in considerable detail since 2006. All political parties, business leaders, ignored the implications of this huge change, the media covered it but assumed it would take care of itself as trade with Japan had done previously, and it was left to Trump and Sanders as outsiders to call it like they saw it 5 years later.  Economic inequality has widened in China to the point of it becoming unrecognizable as a former socialist economy. Now both countries are faced with the job of picking up, chastened by the experience, and hoping to limit the political fallout to achieve economic recovery. The very open trading system that had generated prosperity since World War II was being put at risk by a lack of awareness that trade brings with it changes, winners and losers, and manufacturing jobs moving overseas on a scale and speed unprecedented in history, was something that no one could cope with. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bradsher, Tankersley and Cohen say in this NYT report- US industrial policy under president Biden corrects the failures of the past. Chinese experts in Hong Kong say the US and Europe deindustrialized their economies with pursuing of policies called "neo-liberal" but basically Reagan era policies that Democratic presidents Clinton-Obama imitated. As they deindustrialized it created disaffection among the struggling lower and middle income classes making $35,000-$106,000 that were big losers in the process, creating threats to democracy as financial and tech, plus pharmaceutical sectors took control of the economy. China's success comes from three decades of mastering the ways of practicing industrial policy that it can support private companies with low cost land, additional subsidies that reduce the cost of production and provide a buffer to absorb losses so that it could dominate key industries. Policies where textbooks and economists trained in the US failed utterly and completely leading to dangers to US democracy that we see as opportunities for good paying jobs in manufacturing disappeared for middle and lower income households from 1980 to 2020. These economists trained in the US always said see lower cost Chinese made goods means lower and middle income people pay less, never saying that this means all opportunities for better paying jobs in manufacturing will be lost for these classes in society. The tech and financial sectors had close ties to the new arrangement that turned manufacturing over to China from the Reagan era to the Obama and Trump era. Apple and Tesla and many industries benefitted from manufacturing mostly outsourced to China. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even though volatility is high in stock markets, the U.S. stock market has rebounded to levels in August 2019. The level on March 10, 2020 after effects of the coronavirus on the global economy was for the DJIA average in the U.S. to be at the level it was on August 14, 2019, as shown on the graph in the WSJ, in the neighborhood of 25,000. In the last quarter of 2019 there were steep gains in the Dow Jones averages that could not be fully explained, these gains have disappeared. Considering the suddenness of the crisis from the coronavirus in China, and the double whammy of impact on global manufacturing supply chains of first the tariffs on Chinese exports to the U.S., followed by the coronavirus, the impact on stock markets seen in this overall context is comprehensible. Particularly the sharp gains in the last quarter of 2019 which now appear to be muted. There is also some good news for economies such as China and India, which are large oil importing countries, and the rest of Asia, in the sharp drop in oil prices that helps cushion some of its impact on the global economy. For the U.S. this also happens at a time when the economy is in much stronger shape than at any time in the last ten years. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Savings for China and Japan by increasing oil imports at low prices could amount to about 1% of the economy for each country. Japan imports of oil are one tenth of total imports, and amount to $75 billion. At prices half of what they were before coronavirus the savings are about $40 billion a year. This will offset some of the drop in economic growth of about 3% in the year ending March 2021.

For countries where the coronavirus has been relatively controlled with manufacturing and infrastructure projects ready to go ahead the benefit is greatest. China expects to see about 7% decline in GDP in the first quarter resulting in minimal growth for the year as long as export markets in the U.S. and Europe remain weak. For India it depends on how long the lockdown continues and how quickly economic activity can resume under new conditions. 

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Even China has not campaigned the way Canada, Mexico and British, American media have against DJT Tariffs because China knows it is basically about getting an even playing field when it is the only country with $1 trillion in trade in its favor in 2024, 12 times the Japanese high of $82 billion trade surplus in 2007. But why should China campaign when the American and British, German media are going to do the job for China? A simple quiz to K-12 would ask school children when is the last time a country has a $1 trillion trade surplus? Answer: Never. Greg Ip has written a few years back that the devastation of China outshoring of American factories and jobs was unlike the 1980's Japan trade invasion because of first China's size, second by the speed with which it happened at 10-14% Chinese GDP growth. There is a third Japan was an ally needing US for security and backed down, China's case is different it is challenging the US for control of the world economy and will fight this one over the long haul. Greg Ip of WSJ on the 53 countries asking to negotiate US Liberation Day April 2, 2025 Tariffs. These countries include Allies of the US in full support asking to negotiate Israel, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India Allies of the US in partial support asking to negotiate Britain Allies of the US not in full support asking to negotiate Germany, France Allies of the US in the past campaigning against the US, asking to negotiate Canada, Mexico Not Allies of the US, not in full support, not campaigning against the US China A look at his list tells one only one thing, mostly all trading partners except for the $146 billion exports of the US which represents exports to China are the exports that are at risk if things don't work out on tariffs. This is what the media today WSJ added this last week to the NYT, Wash. Post and the BBC, Guardian of UK, German media will not tell the reader.  The DJT Tariffs and Tariff negotiations are Lighthizer Tariff negotiations which won the fight with Japan in the 1980's over unfair trade and gaining a level playing field. Lighthizer as Deputy US Trade Representative conducted the tough negotiations with Japan. He was USTR in 2016-2020 and his Deputy Jamieson is now USTR in 2025       ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The US and Japan are coordinating efforts to limit transfer of sensitive technology to China and increase trade and cooperation within the G-7 in high technology sectors. Efforts are being coordinated with South Korea. Janet Yellen says the IMF has overblown the effects on the world economy from the US decoupling from China. IMF reports have also in addition presented India incorrectly as a non aligned country, when it is a close partner of the US. In 2023 US is the largest trade partner of India.The US position is to limit flows of technology in sectors considered vital, and continue world trade in other areas with China. US is committed to friendshoring to India, Vietnam and other countries. Germany's three parties CDU, Greens and SPD are reversing close trade and technology links with China. This is also the policy of the Modi administration which seeks close trade and technology ties to US and EU. The shift is in response to what is really an overconcentration of the supply chain in China that happened as business in the US and EU and the Merkel and the Bush-Obama-Trump administrations failed to see the risks of overconcentration. And carried out misguided policies in trade and investment that are now being reversed by US president Biden, Kishida in Japan, and Modi in India. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mercedes is seeing signifcant sales growth in China. It is Mercedes's third biggest market with sales of 100,000 cars compared to 67,000 in 2009. Daimler CEO Dieter Zetsche says that given no downturn in the world economy Mercedes-Benz cars should reach its target for return on sales of 10% by the second half of 2012. He predicted EBIT of 2.5-3 billion euros for 2010, and plans to boost expenditures for R&D in fuel efficient technology and capital investments in new vehicle models in the second half of 2010. Analyst Warburton at Sanford and Bernstein, writes that Mercedes is likely to pass 7% margins in the first half of 2010, and will get a boost from a weaker euro plus strong sales in China. The only question is, as Dieter Zetsche noted, prospects depend on no downturn in the global economy. China's economy is growing too fast to be sustainable growth and a property bubble is developing, and its not certain how long strong sales in China will last. There are other signs of a slowdown in the global economy. See global economy....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China raises the inflation target from 3% to 4% in December 2010, accepting some of the inflationary pressures in the Chinese economy.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The 28 Point Peace Plan offers a basis for further work to arrive at an agreement acceptable to Ukraine and to the European Union, is the view emerging at the G20 talks in Johannesburg, South Africa. The leaders of Finland, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Italy and Spain met on Saturday, November 22 2025. Separately Leyen and the EU council president Costa meet with Meloni of Italy and Macron of France on Saturday after conversations with Zelensky on Friday.  British prime minister Starmer has this view of the 28 Point US plan negotiated with Russia-  “There is only one country around the G20 table that is not calling for a cease-fire, and one country that is deploying a barrage of drones and missiles to destroy livelihoods and murder innocent civilians.” Ms. Von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, says-  “Ukraine can count on us because this is not only an aggression against Ukraine, but it is an aggression against the principles of the U.N. charter." “It’s on European soil. Therefore, we will support Ukraine for as long as it takes.” Macron of France commended American efforts to reach a peace deal but said EU nations would work with Ukraine to map out a plan for way forward in 48 hours.  "What is at stake is Ukrainian sovereignty and European security.” It is this aspect of European security that may be the reason the EU and Germany may decide to modify the plan to offer a counter proposal on several points. One on limits to the size of Ukraine's defense forces to ensure its defense. Another on the stationing of forces by NATO in a peacekeeping role in Ukraine as proposed earlier. Third on the ceding of territory now in the hands of Ukraine so that these parts of Ukraine can remain independent after 4 years of ragged defense. Germany under CDU Merz and with Pistorius of SPD at Defense in a strong coalition government may be the deciding factor as Merz has already set the goal for the Bundeswehr to become the strongest army in Europe, with plans and action to prepare for this transition to defend European interests. It is true that Ukraine is at a difficult point yet if the Europeans see this as a "capitulation" and a US DJT deadline of one week to push this through Europeans may come up with a counter offer that includes these points that would make it clear that they are not an obstacle for peaceful resolution of this conflict. The history of Europe shows that in such situations with most of Europe on one side and Russia or some other major European power on the other side, eventual settlement ends up with all sides making some concessions, and in no way seen as "capitulation." Asian powers China and India have been pulled out of the conflict to a large degree in 2024-2025, with US shifting to a neutral position. Making this a purely European conflict with the Russian economy mobilized for wartime yet facing all the nations of Europe led by Germany, France and the UK in a transition towards military preparedness and unwilling to see any form of capitulation. In such a situation the larger economies and resources of the EU could effectively counter a Russian threat leading to a settlement that is better for all parties to the conflict.   ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Extraordinary pictures taken by a photographer from Edinburgh who left Britain for Singapore and Far East in 1862 at the age of 25 years. He had worked as an apprentice with an optical manufacturer and learned photography. What is astounding is that this was the time when Japan was opening up to the ideas and technology from Europe with the Meiji restoration around 1871, China in transition under the Manchu dynasty which was to collapse in 1912 ending the monarchy. A major rebellion happened with the Taiping rebellion in southern China in 1854 that lasted till 1862. The Taiping rebellion was against the Manchu dynasty as a foreign dynasty imposed on Han people in China, and the result of famines, difficult conditions for peasants, opium addiction, poor economic prospects for a large population. Mao considered the Taiping rebellion as an unfinished revolution which the Communists continued this time against other foreign rulers the Japanese and European colonies in China,  and the Nationalist rule of Chinag-kai-Shek with corruption and wide disparities of incomes. John Thomson took pictures of China in the 1870's, now in the Wellcome collection and displayed in an exhibition at Heriot Watt University in Britain. Women and children in Guangdong, Canton and Beijing are shown in these pictures of China. Between 1872 and 1942 is a period of only 70 years with tumultuous events and huge changes in China. By 1944-1949 Communists controlled vast parts of China with Mao's forming of the People's Republic of China for the Chinese people, free of foreign influence, corruption, and opium trade of the British. And again 40 years later by 1989 China using a market economy to change China into a modern nation as advanced as Japan, Europe and America. For India the new People's Republic of China under Mao also brought the PLA army to the borders of India. In 1950 China invaded Tibet at Chamdo, and in 1951 annexed the country under a 15 Point Agreement making it a region of China. With that invasion India and China face each other for the first time in the Himalayas across a border stretching east to west for thousands of miles. A war in 1962 was followed by incursions across the border in 2020 in the Ladakh region. Both sides build infrastructure on either side of the Line of Control that stretches for 3500 kilometres. Most of the Indian people remain ignorant of the changes happening in China from the Manchus to the Communists. Most Chinese have little knowledge of the changes happening in India from British period to the post independence period under Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi , and further to the changes for modernization happening under Mr. Modi. Large populations of over 1 billion people facing each other but knowing little about each other in one of the strange situations in the world, and armies building infrastructure on either side of the line of control. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Cheap abundant coal supplies support the Australian lifestyle and standard of living. Australia is a big exporter of coal. Here prime minister Morrison is shown with coal in his hand in parliament lauding its benefits to the Australian economy as a source of its wealth. Only now with floods, drought and fires is the real cost of coal becoming apparent to Australians. In elections in 2021 Mr. Albanese of Labour party replaced Mr. Morrison and promised changes. Mining interests and jobs influence key swing constituencies in elections leading to the impasse on climate change action. As one of the windiest and sunniest places in the planet Australia says the OECD is in a position to play a large role in renewable energy. This suggests that policy so far has been shortsighted. Worse it may have fueled the rise of temperature on the planet by providing cheap coal for China to grow at rates close to 12% for decades.

Istoriya Ruskoi Armii Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Russian forces in Port Arthur (Dalian, Lushun) like the other European colonial powers in Tientsin took part in the joint operations of Japan, Britain, France, US, and Germany in the invasion of Peking in mid July 1901. Under the Soviet era China was an ally of the Soviet Union yet there was a strong sense of independent action that led to the breakdown of the relationship between Krushchev and Mao in the 1960's. This may be true also today as the European conflict in Ukraine may not be in China's interest of developing its economy and continuing on the path of modernity it adopted throughout the events of the 1930's to the 1990's to today. This report from that period shows the Russian army under Colonel Anisimov and General Stessel rescuing British admiral Seymour's force near Tientsin. The Russian forces under Russian Admiral Hildebrand played a leading role in the battle of the Taku forts that followed in late June 1901. The forces at Tientsin under Admiral Alekseev of about 8000 are mostly Russian. On 19 July 1901, Russia's General Linevich assumes control of the joint Japanese, Russian, British and French forces that conducted the campaign towards Peking.  The American version of the events in China in 1901 is given by Cornell University Prof. David Silbey in his 2010 book- The Boxer Rebellion, The Great Game in China. It shows the depressed condition of China at the time and the struggle to free China of the opium of British traders and conversions by Christian missionaries that undermined Chinese culture and society. The rebellion of 1901 is similar in China's history to the events of 1857 in India with the rebellion against British rule.    ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
There is concern that though President Da Silva has had success in his term in office, he is leaving problems for the new administration. One expert says he leaves a giant question mark behind him. One of the problems is high spending by his administration. After the financial crisis of 2008, the government flooded massive state run banks with cash, ordering the banks to to lend heavily to businesses and consumers. The government also increased its own spending on contracts and projects. Public spending has continued to grow since 2008, and federal expenditures as a percentage of the economy have doubled during Da Silva's term in office. In an editorial recently, the newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo, says the government should have used the high growth in the economy to cut public spending and improve the public finances. Because the Rousseff administration is a continuation of Da Silva's administration, and includes many of the same people, the daily asks if the Rousseff team's promises to cut spending in 2011 are believable. Inflation in 2010 is at 6%. The other serious problem is an highly overvalued currency, and volatile capital inflows from developed countries. The boom in China has helped Brazilian commodities and agricultural exports, a slowdown there would affect Brazil's economy. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Damian Paletta of the Washington Post says that credit goes to Gary Cohn a former Goldman Sachs president, and head of the president's National Economic Council for the way he has quietly built up a group of leading experts on major initiatives of the Trump administration such as tax reform, infrastructure plans. Compared to the infighting and other problems in the first 100 days of the Trump presidency, Cohn is credited with building a core of ideas and experts that bring Trump more to the centre and with the prospect of winning Democratic party support. He has helped shift the president to set up a more balanced approach, less confrontational with China and not calling China a currency manipulator, getting support for the Export Import Bank, and more receptive to the Federal Reserve led by Janet Yellen. This report says an alliance of moderates is centering around Adviser Jared Kushner, Cohn, and in other reports Tillerson in foreign affairs is seen as being part of this group. On NAFTA the president has moved to a less confrontational approach with Mexico, which has helped the Mexican peso recover and improved prospects for the Mexican economy.  On infrastructure new ideas to find financing are needed and a plan to tax carbon emissions is intended to draw Democratic support as well as provide some of the funding. About $200 billion in taxpayer money and $800 billion from private investors is being discussed at the National Economic Council. This report says Cohn suffered from dyslexia in childhood, graduated from American University, and joined Goldman Sachs in an unconventional way. He shares a passion for deal making with president Trump, yet at the same time values the views of experts he has brought to formulate concrete plans for the way ahead. About 25 experts with extensive experience in government helped put together new tax changes, infrastructure plans, and international trade deal plans. His predecessor at the NEC, Gene Sperling, gives him credit for quietly pulling together the experts and doing the planning that the Trump administration now depends on. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin in the NYT why the U.S. China Phase 1 Trade Agreement is more than a hill of soyabeans as he puts it, more than about all the soyabeans that the U.S. farmers can sell to China. China's economy was seeing the effect of U.S. tariffs. Additional tariffs to cover all imports from China to the U.S. would have worsened this. China avoided this by agreeing to Phase 1. The U.S. had looked for some enforcement mechanism based on China putting this down in a written agreement particularly for avoiding subsidies to state enterprises and improper access to U.S. advanced technologies. China's reluctance to do this led to Mr. Trump saying that China had reversed its position and Trump expanding the tariffs stage by stage. These issues are now set aside for Phase 2 still to be negotiated. Both sides taking what they could get. China relief from the threat of tariffs on all exports. The U.S. under Mr. Lighthizer's negotiating leadership retaining the enforcement idea through the tariffs that are still in place of 25% on half of China's exports to the U.S. The bonus for Mr. Trump is the goodwill China generates by agreeing to buy all the U.S. farmers can produce, farmers having not only stood behind Mr. Trump but also forming a key part of his support base. China will continue to compete in technological areas with the U.S., and the state enterprise model which worked for China as Mr. Xi tells visitors will continue. Phase 2 is just that Phase 2, when and if it can be negotiated between Trump with his negotiator Lighthizer and Xi with his negotiator Liu He. On key points neither side is budging. A key goal for Mr. Trump is to put the trade surplus China enjoys of $300 plus billion a year with the U.S. on a serious downward path, and bring so many of the jobs and manufacturing back home. On this trade data for 2019 and the plan for 2020 of both countries is clear. It should be down each year by 10-20% for the next few years, a major achievement of Mr. Lighthizer, who did the same with  Japan under president Reagan. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The surge in the value of the dollar is creating turmoil in the world economy. The dollar reached 1.04 to the euro and 118 Japanese yen by Dec. 15, 2016. This means Japanese and European exports will be more competitive and lower U.S corporate earnings.  Emerging market economies hold about $200 billion in dollar denominated debt and this will become harder to repay with the surge in the value of the dollar. China faces larger capital outflows and the Bank of Japan has to navigate a new situation. Some countries such as Mexico are raising interest rates to reduce inflation as the value of the peso drops. The prospect of trade wars is also another aspect of uncertainty with the new Trump administration in the U.S.


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