World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In the current situation where the "too big to fail" problem for banks has only worsened since the crisis with the remaining banks even larger after mergers, and no dividing wall between speculative trading in securities and the utility banking of collecting deposits and making loans, the country depends on regulators to do the job of supervision. Regulatory reforms have faced resistance from the banking industry and the reforms have been watered down in Congress. It is in this environment that Patrick Parkinson takes on the job of head of bank supervision at the Federal Reserve. He will work with Daniel Tarullo, the Fed governor who heads the committee of governors overseeing bank supervision. But he is also one of the old faces at the Fed when the Fed failed in its role of bank supervision. From 1993 to 1998 he was the top staff advisor to the Fed chairman, for matters considered by the President's Working Group on Financial Markets.
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Basel 3 Rules and the extra capital cushions required by 2019, will double the amount of core equity a big bank holds as a proportion of assets. This is happening earlier because markets are making banks increase their capital cushions. But more needs to be done to make "too big to fail" banks in the U.S. and Europe safer, says the Economist in a May 2011 special report on international banking. An independent commission in Britain has suggested an additional equity buffer of 3%. The Economist says the Basel committee should consider similiar rules for the largest banks. Another proposal is being considered by Swiss regulators who want to see their banks holding the equivalent of 9% of their risk weighted assets in convertible capital. This kind of buffer is considered essential to prevent the kind of sudden collapse of the global financial system that was seen in late 2008.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report by Martin in the NYT points out that Ohio no longer plays a critical role in U.S. presidential elections. It was critical for a Bush win over Gore, and president Obama carried it by 2 points against Romney in 2012. It is critical for Trump to win. For Hillary Clinton other states are gaining importance as they better reflect the demographic changes in the U.S. and the mix with minorities- states such as Georgia, N. Carolina, Colorado and Florida. Ohio has not seen an influx of Hispanics as other states, and is now more white, more evangelical voters, and reflects a mix that was prevalent earlier. 

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This New York Times editorial says the U.S. Obama administration and its Housing Secretary Donovan should stop pretending that its settlement is the best way to help homeowners under water. The editorial asks the serious question- how far would the $20 billion settlement the banks would provide under the deal help, when 14.6 million homeowners owe $753 billion more on their mortgages than the value of their homes? The Obama administration is pressuring New York Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, to accept the settlement with the largest U.S. banks for questionable foreclosure practices, including robo-signing. It asks Schneiderman to resist these pressures and not support the settlement. Schneiderman has resisted this pressure because he and other prosecutors would be restricted from pursuing their investigations into wrongdoings in housing mortgages. The proposal from the Times to the Obama administration is to make principal reductions for underwater homeowners who are currrent in their payments through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The proposal to help homeowners uner water on their mortgages was first proposed by Martin Feldstein during the mortgage financial crisis in 2008-2009 with repeated op-eds in leading newspapers including the Wall Street Journal. Paul Krugman called attention to the failure of the Obama administration on this issue in recent op-eds. Peter Coy of Business Week pointed to some form of loan forgiveness as an essential part of restoring the economic health of the U.S. and Europe in the August issue of Bloomberg Business Week. Higher unemployment has made the foreclosure crisis worse, and has created a strong headwind for the U.S. economy by erasing chances of an early recovery in American housing markets. The Obama administration's Home Affordable Modification Program has been a dismal failure in helping homeowners facing foreclosure and was a huge missed opportunity to take the correct action early....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that about 13 million Americans without insurance gained health insurance under the Obama plan. He says if it is turned back 8 million whites without a college degree in that 13 million will lose health insurance. Of these eight million about two out of three voted for Trump, so that 5 million Trump supporters could now lose health insurance even though they are older and have more health conditions. Krugman says this aspect of the election campaign was not covered well in the misinformation and social media information of the 2016 campaign, and the lack of media focus on the important issues in the election. On manufacturing jobs he says most of the jobs lost are not returning, and only token jobs such as at a Carrier plant in the news will take their place.

New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NYT exhortation for Congress to resist the lobbying pressures of the banks to weaken regulation for a Consumer Protection Agency and derivatives trading on exchanges. The first by amending legislation for a Consumer Protection Agency so that no states can pass tougher consumer protection laws, something that prevented states from protecting consumers from abuses in the mortgage business. The second to propose legislation for derivatives trading that allows corporations and hedge funds to trade derivatives privately. NYT editorial says Congress should require all derivatives dealers and users -banks, hedge funds and corporations- conduct their trades on exchanges where they are reglulations and public scrutiny. NYT responds to the banks and corporations that say this would raise their transaction costs to hedge any given risk, by saying that this is debatable. Greater transparency should reduce costs but even if there were some higher costs it would be outweighed by the larger benefits to the banks themselves and the country through the lower systemwide risks. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How Obama's new selection for Fed governor, Daniel Tarullo- who taught banking law at Georgetown University- is shaking things up at the Fed. He is in charge of regulation of the banking system at the Fed. He has instituted a review of bank review practices and supervision at all of the regional Federal Reserve banks. With many banks failures in the south, the Atlanta Fed came in for serious review, and regulators from outside the area were sent to the Atlanta Fed. Tarullo did not hesitate to make new appointments for serious oversight, as regulators had simply become lax. Tarullo has brough in economists to take a fresh look at how the banking system would perform in the event of another crisis, and what action needs to be taken. This compares to individual bank examiners having alimited perspective what damage the overall banking system could do with lax regulation. He has also asked the Fed regulatory staff to look closely and hard at the troubled commercial real estate loans and toughen regulatory measures. Welcome and overdue as this is, in another banking crisis this could be too little too late. Congress has weakened regulatory reforms proposed by the Obama administration, and the Obama administration itself has not the will to address the tough issues raised by the banking crisis. Both have buckled under pressure from the lobbying of the banking industry, and the close connections between some banking executives and the administration. This has raised the level of urgency felt by Tarullo, Volcker, Mervyn King and some in the financial industry itself, with the issue of "too big to fail" and breaking up the larger banks into smaller ones, moving to the top of everyone's agenda. With the simple fact that if banks were "too big to fail" before the crisis, then they are much bigger now, and the question of what action must be taken shoved aside as too big to tackle....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ reporters Corkery and Yoon give a remarkable account of the individual homeowners and investors inside one toxic subprime mortgage security from Countrywide Financial Corp. named CWABS- 2006-2007. There is Amanda Gavini of Fort Myers who continued making mortgage payments against the odds after a illness and death in the family. And a couple Donald Mudd- Patricia Starr who were approved by Countrywide for a $171,000 adjustable rate mortgage loan at 8% with a $10,000 down payment for a home in Port Charlotte, Florida. The approval came only 3 months after the couple emerged from personal bankruptcy in 2006, and by 2009 Mudd was missing payments. Other borrowers such as Mrs. Gavini in Florida took out two loans at 7% and 11% in 2006, have continued making payments and are still unable to refinance under the HAMP or HARP government programs. It is because of these homeowners who continue to make payments helping the security price recover, that one of PIMCO's funds which owns a stake in this security has made good returns. Hedge fund Marathon Asset has also made good returns on this security because of the U.S. government's Public Private Investment Program to help banks recover by providing government incentives for purchase of these securities from banks. This was a way to get banks holding these subprime securities to resume normal lending in financial markets....
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Italy's prime minister, Mario Monti put it best when he said in a speech in Brussels in April 2012: "If a country becomes more productive and competitive, but there is no demand for its products domestically or around it, growth will not materialize." There is a new shift in opinion towards a balance of fiscal discipline with growth measures to get Europe back on track. The feeling in different parts of Europe is that the German view of austerity alone will not work for Europe. And the view is coming from the far right to the far left, from Marie Le Pen, far right presidential candidate in France, to the far right leader whose move to withdraw support to the government in Netherlands on the issue of austerity measures led to its collapse. Geert Wilders, leader of the Freedom Party in the Netherlands, said: "we don't want our pensioners to bleed just to meet the dictates from Brussels." The IMF has put out research that questions what is now called "the German hypothesis." The "German hypothesis," is based on the unique experience of Germany with the Hartz reforms under chancellor Schroeder which were based on wage restraint by workers, the German "kurzarbeit" program of government support for retaining workers with lower pay during cyclical downturns, improving competitiveness of German companies, and conservative budget practices. There appear to be two exceptions to this. One is that demand has to be strong outside or domestically for a country to reduce unemployment and improve productive capacity utlilization as it increases competitiveness. This was the case as Germany made the Hartz reforms under Schroeder. Wage restraint acts as a form of devaluing currency for reducing the cost of its products to improve exports. All leading parties and the unions are now in favor of wage restraint and lowering wages to preserve jobs to improve France's competitive position. Germany had the benefit of a decade to implement these reforms to reduce unemployment, because demand was not declining domestically or around it during its reforms. The situation is different in Spain where in all likelihood demand would shrink further with unemployment rising from 25% to higher levels, and higher sales taxes. This is why Francois Heisbourg, special advisor at the Paris based Foundation for Strategic Research, says about the current situation in Europe, that destroyiing Greece with strict austerity alone wasn't something the EU can look back at with the sense of having done the right thing, for Spain it appears misguided and lacking careful thought. The editors of the Wall Street Journal expressed the same sense when they described the March 2012 bailout of Greece as a tragic sideshow, because the main purpose was to buy time and insulate the other larger economies in the EU by giving the French, Spanish and German banks time to improve their financial position. The Journal called it bad for Greece leaving it with debt at 120% of GDP till 2020 and no economic growth, and bad for democracy as it was done against overwhelming Greek public opinion- The Tragic Greek Sideshow, Feb. 22, 2012. Volker Perthes, director of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, a Berlin think tank, says the Germans have always viewed German leadership in Europe with discomfort, and would prefer a leadership where several states, France, Italy, Spain, and other countries in the EU coalesce around consensus positions. This is historically true for the German position since chancellor Adenauer. With the Free Democrats in decline, and the Social Democrats and the Pirate party doing well in recent German elections and favoring consensus in Europe, Merkel's Christian Democrats need to rethink their policy to give greater weight to economic growth for a consensus position in Europe. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The caretaker government of prime minister Mark Rutte in the Netherlands will commit to following austerity plans in its Stability Program report to the European Union. Elections are now set for September 12, 2012. The government was able to get the support of two smaller left-leaning parties to austerity plans. Opposition parties have questioned the policies and said they will reverse them if elected. Rutte's Liberal party and Jaeger's Christian Democrats, with the help of the Christenunie, D66, and Groenlinks, now hold a slim 2 seat majority in the 150 seat Dutch parliament. The Freedom party that had previously supported Rutte withdrew support for austerity policies that it said would hurt pensioners. The moves help avert a credit ratings drop by the credit ratings agencies leading to a loss of the Dutch triple A credit rating. The measures will increase the sales tax from 19% to 21%, make health care spending cuts and impose a pay freeze on civil servants. Savings achieved will be 11 billion euros. Rutte described his actions as: "the government's respose to the acute crisis in confidence in the financial markets." Earlier in the week Fitch Ratings had threatened to lower the Netherlands credit rating. The measures will reduce the Dutch deficit to 3% in 2013 from 4.5% in 2012 to meet EU fiscal compact rules. The changes to the health system are part of changes advocated by the OECD and the IMF because of surging health care costs for an aging Dutch population. There is concern about the sales tax increase because of its effect on consumer spending, and recent comments by S&P managing directors and others in financial markets emphasize the need for economic growth, as austerity measures by itself are inadequate solutions....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff was critical of the S.E.C.'s practice of entering into consent judgements which allowed defendents to not admit to wrongdoing. In his order Judge Rakoff rejected a $285 million settlement with Citigroup for a mortgage-bond deal. In his order he said such settlements are viewed by the business community as "a cost of doing business." He found it hard to discern what the S.E.C. would be getting out of such a settlement "except a quick headline." Rakoff summarized the problem with such settlements and the S.E.C.'s practices when it comes to the public's interest: "In any case like this that touches on the transparency of financial markets whose gyrations have so depressed our economy and debilitated our lives, there is an overriding public interest in knowing the truth. In much of the world, propaganda reigns, and truth is confined to secretive, fearful whispers. Even in our nation, apologists for suppressing or obscuring the truth can always be found. But the S.E.C., of all agencies, has a duty, inherent in its statutory mission, to see that the truth emerges; and if it fails to do so, this Court must not, in the name of deference or convenience, grant judicial enforcement to the agency's contrivances."...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bernie Sanders points out in this NYT op-ed the idea that Donald Trump could benefit from the same discontent among working class voters that helped the Leave campaign is a wake up call for the Democratic Party. He calls for global trade and a global economy that works for working class, middle class Americans.  Sanders is pushing for a Democratic Party that embraces the concerns of working class Americans, that understands the impact of factory closings and loss of jobs, of economic uncertainty, of declining incomes and shrinking opportunities.

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a shift from statements at earlier summits which focussed on fiscal restraint, the Camp David summit continued the "firm committment to fiscal consolidation," yet emphasized jobs and economic growth as "imperative." There is new flexibility to address needs for economic growth and no specific timetables for fiscal balance as in previous summits. Obama had many one to one encounters with the other leaders. He discussed the euro crisis with Cameron while working out on a treadmill, and watched the Champions League soccer final between Chelsea and Bayern Munich with Merkel and Cameron. Each leader of the G-8, Harper of Canada, Monti of Italy, Hollande of France, Medvedev of Russia, Cameron of Britain, Noda of Japan, Merkel of Germany, was assigned a cabin in the rustic wooded setting of Camp David's mountains. A special effort was made to see that Germany's Merkel did not feel isolated in the setting because of the growing sentiment that austerity policies pushed by Germany are not working. On Iran, Obama stated that he was "hopeful that we can resolve this issue in a peaceful fashion that recognizes their sovereignty, but also recognizes their responsibilities."...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman questions whether the assumptions behind the austerity policies are true- that they would inspire confidence in economic recovery, or that in the absence of austerity policies borrowing costs would go through the roof. The recent events in Holland with the collapse of the government in the Netherlands- when a party leader supporting the government said he did not want to hurt pensioners in the Netherlands just to satisfy German opinion- and the mood in France with economic anxiety vote going to Marie Le Pen and Francois Hollande in the first round of presidential elections, shows that very little confidence has been created. High unemployment and economic anxiety are leading to a reappraisal of austerity cuts that depress the economy and reduce tax revenues, but Krugman says no changes are taking place to correct these policies. This is true for Spain with its high unemployment, and Britain which now has two quarters of negative growth.
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In its May 2011 special report on international banking the Economist points out the need for banking regulators to take stronger action than they have so far. What it calls "pre-emptive insurance" it says is needed - stronger regulation, larger capital cushions, and some form of separation of different kinds of banking. Without this the dangers of excessive risk taking and banks that are "too big to fail" will continue to threaten the world's economy. Banks that are smaller and better capitalized says the Economist can fail more gracefully than the large mega banks that exist at this time. In fact the banks today in the U.S. are larger than at the time of the 2008 crisis. Other analysts also point to the lack of major changes in banking and financial structures today compared to the situation before the 2008 crisis, both in Europe and the U.S.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A new West Coast Model is emerging with ballot measures in the states of Washington, California and Oregon. The model is to make up for decades of faulty income distribution which favored tech communities in west coast states leaving behind people from minority communities and the working class outside tech hubs such as San Francisco, San Jose and Seattle. During this period budgets for education and healthcare, social services and essential infrastructure suffered as budgets were squeezed for local governments. Minimum wage also lagged behind and communities struggled to keep up. Washington votes for a ballot measure that raises the minimum wage to $13.25 statewide and mandate paid sick leave for workers. In California a ballot measure makes permanent an income tax surcharge on millionaires to use these funds for education. In Oregon measure 97 places a gross receipts tax on corporations with annual sales in Oregon over $25 million, raising $3 billion a year for schools, health care and other programs. The California and Washington measures are likely to pass, Oregon uncertain, say experts. And even in Oregon supporters have learned from the experience to put forward new proposals on the ballot. The Washington measure is supported by Nick Hanauer, and Zach Silk, president of Civic Ventures in Seattle, who say it is essential to put more money in workers wages to increase growth and to bring better lives outside the tech hub areas. Most of the tech booms of the last two decades have not touched the areas outside tech hub metropolitan areas. The conservative approach adopted in Louisiana and Kansas of reducing taxes first and then when holes in state budgets developed to cut education, health and other service expenditures has not worked, and it has led to the backlash in the form of the new West Coast Model, which is expected to be brought up in other states in the east and midwest. The tech hub areas have grown with the boom in tech but this has largely ignored the rural areas, communities just outside of the tech cities, and led to uneven and distorted growth shortchanging the working class and the middle class, and hurting investment in education and healthcare across each state. Bill Whalen, a research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution conservative think tank ,says that its hard to deny that the balanced growth for all communities across the state has lagged far behind as the tech booms boosted growth in the economies of California, Oregon and Washington. An article in the German online site Zeit on Silicon Valley described this vividly showing how this can happen in communities sitting side by side in the San Jose area, with minority Hispanic communities and working class communties seeing very little of the benefits of growth. ...
ZEIT ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The home ownership rate for the U.S. in March 2012, is 65.4%, the same rate as in 1997 before the housing bubble, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The irony of this is that the housing bubble was inflated by politicians in Congress and mortgage lenders and purchasers of mortgage securities. Fannie Mae and Countryside worked together ostensibly to promote home ownership while pursuing profits. In the case of politicians they pursued goals of raising employment and growth without understanding the risks of artificially inflating home ownership, and without consideration for incomes of subprime borrowers. A less benign view of the interests and goals of politicians comes from reflections on the impact of political lobbying by Fannie Mae and other housing lenders in the U.S. Congress. The consequences in terms of foreclosures have been devastating for minorities as well as other middle class homeowners. It has also damaged the U.S. banking system, credit growth in the economy and prospects for recovery, which will take years to correct. The federal government is also saddled with large losses at Fannie Mae because of its quasi government agency role. That role led to inflation of the bubble. Most of the consequences will be borne by middle and lower income households in the U.S. The pass-through effects in a global economy affect Europe, and emerging market countries. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A report released by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows growing income inequality in 34 OECD countries. OECD Secretary General, Angel Gurria says: "The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries. This study dispels the assumptions that the benefits of economic growth will automatically trickle down to the disadvantaged and that the greater inequality fosters greater social mobility. Without a comprehensive strategy for inclusive growth, income inequality will continue to rise." Countries with the largest ratios between incomes at the top and the bottom, are the United States, Turkey and Israel, roughly 14 to 1. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have ratios of 6 to 1, with their ratios up from the 1980's. Gaps in Chile and Mexico are at 25 to 1. The study covers the period from 1980 to 2008. Overall inequality went up by 25% in the U.S. from 1980. In 2008 the top ten percent in the U.S. earned $114,000, 15 times than incomes for the bottom 10%. The top 1% of Americans saw incomes go up from 1980 to 2008, increasing from 8 percent to 18 percent. The richest 1% having $1.3 million in after tax income, and the lowest 20% making $17,700. The trends have accentuated an increase at the highest end- the top 1% and top 10% of the people- and a sharp decrease for the bottom 20%, which can be grasped from the $17,700 and the $1.3 million, both at extreme ends. The study attributes the rise in inequality to a growing gap in wages for highly skilled workers as technology advances, a surge in foreign direct investment and a looser regulatory regime that reduces employee protections leading to wage premiums for financial jobs and smaller incomes for workers at the bottom. Income groups and professions and sectors that had the greatest influence in government were able during this period to get the greatest protection for incomes, and able also to maximize their incomes. Incomes in the financial sector increased dramatically in the last decade, as a result of deregulation leading to higher risk and speculative activities in the financial sector, leading to the financial crisis of 2008-2009. Financial crises further depress incomes at the lower end. Similiar income inequality trends can be seen for India and China. China has a Ginni coefficient of 0.5 according to researchers at Beijing Normal University, up from 0.3 three decades ago- a Ginni Coefficient above 0.4 is considered destabilizing. Another factor that played a part in these countries is corruption and lobbying by special interests for favored treatment of sectors or groups. Austerity measures taken in Europe and in the U.S. are likely to widen income gaps by depressing the lower end income groups, creating social unrest, especially in the absence of efforts to stimulate growth....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman compares the anti-corruption movements in India and the U.S., the world's two largest democracies. The Occupy Wall Street anti-corruption movement in the U.S. focusses on the excessive influence of banks on lawmakers, regulators, and the government, through the use of campaign money, revolving door for government officials and regulators to join banks, and intense lobbying. The anti-corruption movement focusses on corruption in government at higher levels, such as the handling of government licenses, and at the basic levels of needing to bribe officials for something as simple as getting a birth certificate or other government document. Both have pernicious effects, in the U.S. excesssive bank influence leads to taking excessive risk for higher bonuses, putting the entire financial system at risk and creating a crisis in housing that delays the economic recovery. And in India the corruption leads to retarded progress, as funds to invest in infrastructure and development are siphoned off, business and entrepreneurs are required to pay bribes at each step, and ordinary people face the need to pay bribes for the most routine interactions with government officials. In the process this creates more unequal societies by skewing the distribution of benefits from wealth created to groups that are better equipped to game the system. The economic system once distorted in these ways has tendencies to take talent away from productive activity and innovation which create wealth, and direct it towards speculative activities....

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