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 ›
New York Times Original article ›
Economist Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Fuel efficiency rules require average fuel efficiency in the U.S. of 35 mpg by 2016. The debate is now on what to do for 2017 to 2025. New technology such as the P2 systems for hybrids already used in VW, Nissan and Hyundai vehicles makes a 20% increase in fuel efficiency possible. Large investments are being made to bring new technology to bear on increasing fuel efficiency significantly. Government agencies are looking at different scenarios by which the new fuel economy standards beyond 2017-2025 could be set between 47 mpg and 62 mpg. An additional factor is the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions- at 47 mpg the reduction would be 3%, at 62 mpg the reduction would be 6%. Another factor is how much the impact is on the cost of vehicles and reduced cost on gasoline. Here there is a wide range in the numbers for average mpg rules at 62 mpg- with EPA estimates at $2800-$3500 increase in vehicle cost and $5000 savings in fuel cost, Centre for Automotive Research estimates at $9790 increase in vehicle cost. The 62 mpg translates into "real world" actual efficiency of 45 mpg. In April 2011, 17 senators put out a letter of support for the 62 mpg proposal. There is a public value involved in this that is also significant- the reduced dependence on foreign oil means savings in defense expenditures in parts of the Middle East, and an economy that is less impacted by volatility in the price of oil. As this aspect of public value or benefits cannot be quantified easily even though they are significant, this may tend to be lost in the debate and the politics of fuel efficiency. For automakers there is significant marketing value in having a visible and strong presence in fuel efficient vehicles because of perception as forward looking- something that hurt Detroit carmakers in the last decade. During periods of gasoline prices at $5 a gallon this provides carmakers with an extra cushion of safety in securing car sales. Carmakers in one country such as the U.S. also have to worry about what carmakers in other countries such as Japan and Germany are doing- if the standards in the U.S. develop a gap compared to other countries developing advanced fuel efficiency technologies this poses significant risks because of the global nature of the automobile marketplace. See the group "Asleep at the Spigot" for more details on this. Many of these less quantifiable factors do not get the attention they deserve because they are significant from experience but not easily quantified. Throw into this the large unknown of what new technologies not yet developed lie ahead with a burst of effort by one country or another, which bring cost reductions at the same time - and the debate requires as much a good sense of what is the path offering the greatest advantages in years ahead than a pure exercize in numbers. ...
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ian Talley provides this excellent account of how this drop in oil prices is likely to add to economic growth in major world economies, removing any ambiguity about the positive effect on the global economy. West Texas Intermediate crude dropped to about $65 from $105 between June and December 2014. The IMF estimates growth in 2015 will increase from 3.1% to 3.5% largely because of the lowering in energy costs. JP Morgan Chase economists see an addition of 0.7% points in global growth in the first half of 2015. ECB president Draghi sees the lower oil prices as an unambiguous positive. Estimates from Rhodium Group show major oil importing countries seeing import bills cut by $500 billion if prices remain low for 6-8 months, with $90 billion going into the U.S. economy. IMF estimate is that only 20% of the drop in oil prices is from lower demand, about 80% from higher fuel efficiency, increased supply using new technologies, decisions by OPEC to lower oil price, increases in supply. Based on estimates by the Rhodium Group, IEA and the IMF, the extra money flowing into the economies of the U.S., Asia and Western Europe from reduced oil import bills, as measured in percentage of GDP is: the U.S. 0.5%, Germany 0.8%, Japan 1.2%, China 0.8%, India 1.8%, South Korea 2.4%. Italy and France and other oil importing countries benefit. The impact comes at a time when Japan, China, India and eurozone economies badly needed a boost after significant slowdown in growth in 2014. It could not have come at a better time and because it is technologically driven as in the case of highly fuel efficient automobiles and new oil exploration technologies, a self sustaining process. The corresponding impact for oil exporters is: Russia -4.7%, Nigeria -5.4%, Venezuela -10.2%....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One of the quirks of the unemployment rate released by the Labor Department is that it is declining- declined to 8.1% from 8.2%, from March to April 2012- even though the number of unemployed may be increasing. When adjusted for the discouraged workers who would be working today in a more normal environment the unemployment rate today would be around 11%. Crucial in grasping unemployment numbers is the labor force participation rate- showing the number of working age Americans with jobs or looking for jobs- which is affected by the number of baby boomers retiring and leaving the work force, and by the number of workers who are too discouraged to look for work. The long term unemployed currently form about 40% of people unemployed in the U.S., which is quite high and cause for concern for Fed chairman Bernanke. Many of these long term unemployed it is feared will permanently drop out of the workforce, causing a drop in the productive potential of the economy and lowering economic growth. Already many have dropped out of the workforce, causing the labor force participation rate to decline faster than the gradual decline seen in the last decade as baby boomers retire. Between 2009 and 2012, a three year period, the labor force participation rate dropped about 2% to 63.6%, compared to the normal drop of 1.3% over a seven year period from 2000 to 2007. Combining the impact of the two trends, one demographic and the other a result of the 2008 global financial crisis and excessive risks in the U.S. banking system, leads analysts to to lower the longer term economic growth forecast for the U.S. to 2%, compared to the U.S. Fed's forecast for 2.3-2.6% growth....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A shakeout for manufacturers in the solar industry is developing in 2011-2012, as prices of solar components drop sharply. There is slowing growth for solar products in 2012. Seven solar power manufacturers have filed for bankruptcy or insolvency in 2011, including two German companies Solar Millenium and Solon SE, and Solyndra LLC of the U.S. Debt exceeds market capitalization for the 10 largest publicly traded solar companies. A major reason is the subsidies offered by governments in Europe, the U.S. and China, which resulted in a glut in manufacturing capacity and falling prices. Chinese banks encouraged by the Chinese government have given $43 billion in credit facilities to Chinese renewable energy companies, according to Bloomberg Energy Finance. Prices of solar panels at $1.60 per megawatt in 2010, dropped to 90 cents per megawatt in 2011. Another problem is slowing demand. In Europe banks are reducing funding. Installations doubled for solar energy in Germany in 2010, and dropped 29% in 2011, according to Jefferies. Germany is the largest market for solar energy in the world....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A slight shift in American opinion favoring a deal with Iran is shown in a WSJ/NBC poll in July 2015 compared to the poll in April 2015. Support for reaching a nuclear deal with Iran remains stable at 36% in both polls, the opposed drops by 6 percentage points to 17% from 23%, and the percentage of people who say they do not know enough to formulate an opinion goes up to 46% from 40%. The intricacies of a nuclear technology deal and the sites involved lead to a high percentage of don't know enough to give an opinion. Factors hindering a deal include inspection of military sites, and Iranian intentions. Factors favoring reaching a deal now is the risk that this would mean Iran would go back into isolation and the opportunity to work with moderates might be lost. The Rouhani administration was an effort by voters to elect a government that could ease or remove sanctions to improve the economy and living conditions- its failure would lead to Iran losing an opportunity to open up to the world. The pressure from the U.S. Congress and Israel served to push for a verifiable and effective agreement to control development of nuclear technology for weapons systems. Behavioural factors involved are the very young population in Iran which has no memories about the period before the revolution in 1979- 70% of the population of 74 million are people under the age of 35. This group is eager for ties to the outside and could change Iran's outlook and policies int the future towards moderation. Risks in not reaching a deal also include the possibility of the Saudis developing nuclear technology and nuclear proliferation. Winners from a deal because of the flow of Iranian oil to world markets and a period of extended low oil prices are the U.S., Europe, China and India. Germany gains new markets to replace the growth in the Russian market after sanctions. Lifting of an arms embargo, an added risk in the last days of the talks, would be mitigated by making the lifting of that embargo very gradual....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Vehicle sales in the U.S. market went up by 18% in April 2011. There was a significant shift fuel efficient vehicles and small cars with gasoline running at over $4 per gallon. Sales are running at an annual rate of over 13 million vehicles for the February-April 2011 period. Helping sustain sales momentum is the aging of the U.S. vehicle fleet- average for vehicles in the U.S. is above 10 years according to G.M. vice president, Don Johnson. GM sales were up 27% in April 2011 over the prior year- with only a 2% increase for pickup trucks and a 50% increase in sales for passenger cars. There was strong demand for the Chevy Cruze compact and smaller fuel efficient sport utility vehicles. Ford had a 16% increase in sales, with strong demand for the new Fiesta, Focus small cars and the new lighter version of the Explorer SUV. Ford's Ken Czubay, head of sales and marketing, says dealers are selling the Focus right off the convoy truck, which gives some indication of the shift in consumer preferences. Chrysler vehicle sales increased 23%, with car sales up 41% in April over the prior year. Some indication of the shift can be seen in the incentives dollars- the largest rebates of $3200 were given for large trucks, according to Edmunds.com. At the same time overall dollars per vehicle for incentives dropped from $2600 in April 2010 to $2100 in April 2011. Toyota sales increased by only 1% because of shortages as a result of the earthquake, especially for the smaller cars like the Corollas and the Prius....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As Japanese prime minister Noda prepares to restart the Oi nuclear plant in June 2012, former prime minister Naoto Kan, who was premier during the Fukushima nuclear disaster, answers questions in a parliamentary inquiry. He says he realized how dangerous nuclear power can be when it got to the point where the evalcuation of Tokyo was being considered, Japan was then on "the verge of national collapse." His fears were that a number of meltdowns could together " release into the air and sea many times, no, many dozens of times, many hundreds of times the radiation released by Chernobyl." The Japanese public has focussed on the parliamentary hearings because the previous inquiry is thought to have been perfunctory, and not really examined in depth all the issues the Fukushima disaster had raised, and the general feeling is that a proper public dialogue had not taken place. In contrast in Germany the issues had been discussed openly, and the Angela Merkel government which had been receptive to nuclear power reversed its stand on nuclear power. Germany is phasing out dependence on nuclear energy. Kan pointed out that the "nuclear village," the network of nuclear power companies, bureaucrats, and researchers, had hijacked national nuclear policy and was putting Japan back on the same path. He went so far as to compare it with the situation facing Gorbachev in Russia after Chernobyl: "Gorbachev said in his memoirs that the Chernobyl accident exposed the sickness of the Soviet system. The Fukushima accident did the same for Japan." In his assessment of what happened Kan said: "It is impossible to ensure safety sufficiently to prevent the risk of a national collapse. Experiencing the accident convinced me that the best way to make nuclear plants safe is not to rely on them, but rather to get rid of them."...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Auto sales for 2010 are expected to come in at 11.5 million, a significant drop from the 17.5 million in 2000. A better job market expected to push the unemployment rate down a bit to 9.7% from 9.8% in November will help, but not by enough. Credit Suisse analyst Christopher Ceraso says each percentage point that the rate is above normal ( about 5%) keeps sales back by about a million auto sales on an annual basis. To get sales back to a 16 million range this would require an unemployment rate of 6%. Economists expect a better US economy in 2011 but the prospects remain uncertain for 2012, bringing unemployment down to about 8-9% if hiring picks up. The other concerns are high consumer debt and a rise in gasoline prices. If gas prices rise and buyers shift back to smaller vehicles, as they did in 2008, this would squeeze margins and profits. This is especially a concern as automobile companies have increased profits with a larger truck and large size vehicle component of sales, in a reverse shift after the shift to smaller cars in 2008-2009. Ford Motor is one example of this. It helps Ford use the extra profits to reduce its debt load but automakers have to be prepared for a sales shift to smaller cars in the face of higher gas prices....
WSJ Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Ben Inker of Grantham Mayo sees profitability at U.S. companies at a high because of savings in labor costs while consumption has not declined because of government transfer payments and fiscal policy. He sees profits of U.S. companies declining in 2012-2013. This makes the U.S. stocks less likely to perform well in the future, especially the stocks outside of the blue chips which he sees as highly overvalued. A better choice in his view is in Europe and Japan which are undervalued. His funds have 39% in U.S. stocks and most of it in blue chip stocks. His view is that interest rate policy will not have a large effect as the changes will be very gradual, and going from zero percent interest rates to one percent interest rates will not lead to much change in economic activity. From his point of view the largest risk is in shrinking of profits at U.S. companies as the deficit comes down, because today workers are able to maintain consumption because of fiscal policy and companies are able to cut costs. In Europe the austerity cuts are being taken seriously and this will impact profits, so the U.S. will look better in 2012. But value will prevail in the long run as European and Japanese stocks are undervalued and the U.S runup leaves stocks overvalued in terms of future stream of profits....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A major shift in foreign investment may be taking place as the 2014 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum takes place in May 2014. Russian policy in Ukraine and tensions with the U.S. and Germany could lead to a shift in investment to other emerging market countries. China's tensions with Japan could lead to a similiar shift of Japanese foreign investment. At the same time India has elected a new government with an absolute majority and an overwhelming mandate from young people to accelerate development. The new government under the BJP party's Modi has a decade of experience attracting foreign investment in western India. Indonesia, Vietnam, Africa and other emerging market countries, could benefit from the shift in investment. Investment could also return to the home countries with lower labor costs in Southern Europe, lower labor/energy/transport costs in North America. For Russia the debate at the St Petersburg Economic Forum was about pursuing one of three policy paths with some riskier than others, or some combination also risky and uncertain- depending on state banks and oil windfall funds, increasing ties with Asian countries, continuing on the current path with lower foreign investment and continued capital outflows. The failure to use the time wisely to diversify the oil based economy which could have been better accomplished in an economy not overly dependent on crony capitalism and centralized economy, both current characteristics, will affect future progress. A key weakness for Russia compared to China is the centralization under one person Putin, more so in the third term. In China the two man team Keqiang and Jinping is part of a larger team chosen by consensus and negotiation and part of a rotational scheme. It has senior leaders who initiated the changes to a market driven economy in the nineties determined to see China on track....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Kessler in the WP corrects Obama's claim that he created 800,000 jobs. He says this is clever arithmetic as it takes a low point in Feb. 2010 following the financial crisis. Kessler points out that according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. manufacturing jobs were 12.56 million in Jan. 2009 when Obama became president. In Nov. 2016, early estimates show there were 12.26 million manufacturing jobs, a loss of 300,000. This loss does not reflect the problems in the U.S. auto industry and older industries in the midwestern states as a result of trade and globalization that speeded up with the rapid industrialization of China. And led as Greg Ip pointed out in a recent WSJ report to a rapid acceleration of job losses in a decade that did not happen in the same scale during Japan's industrialization and urbanization in the sixties. This aggravated the situation in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Pennsylvania, and was met with a feeble response from Democrats. Even a economist like Krugman favoring the Obama administration's efforts came to the conclusion that TPP did not add much to gains from trade as most of the gains had already been realized. More of the gains went to tech and IT in California, at the expense of the auto industry based in the midwest. A report in WP show a president too close to IT in California and failing to grasp the situation in the midwest. Voters punish whoever is in power, regardless of being Conservative or Liberal, in Canada the hollowing out of manufacturing under Harper in Ontario and Quebec led to the win by Trudeau's Liberals.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial says president Obama's second inaugural address missed the opportunity to bind old wounds with a reference to King on Martin Luther King day. The president chose to set forth a broader liberal agenda including climate change. The editorial points to the tone of the inaugural as setting the tone for the rest of the term and the possibility of return to the rancor that characterized the first term. "We the People" from the Consititution was mentioned several times in the sense of "collective action" that defined this text as government action. The programs of Medicare Medicaid and Social Security as "committments we make to each other." And the programs "do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great," which are seen by the Journal as not appropriate for an Inaugural address that rises above the fray of politics.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal 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