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
Protests over efforts to change laws for public workers collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin.
Council on Foreign Relations Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The issues related to India's borders all hinge on Tibet says the Council on Foreign Relations. Sardar Patel and Nehru had differences of their own on whether the McMahon Line set by the British in a treaty with Tibet as an independent country was the border with Tibet or the border with China.  Between 1913 and 1950 Tibet was an independent country, with an Indian High commissioner in Lhasa between 1947 and 1950. After the Cold War set in and China and the Soviet Union fought to defend the rights of colonial peoples the U.S. and Britain did not recognize Tibet as a part of China. Nehru simply remained with the British status quo of the McMahon line as the Indian border with Tibet, without any clear acceptance  of the invasion of Tibet in 1950 by China, yet accepting the new status quo after the invasion, differing from Sardar Patel on the issue. This is why no clear picture emerges from looking at the official positions of the two countries, and a better understanding can be gained by looking at the border issue from the Council of Foreign Relations in the U.S.   Essentially the border issue is not beneficial for what it gives back to each of the two countries. China sees itself rejecting the period of its weakness during the Japanese invasion so that it reasserts its position to borders that stretch outside where Chinese people live. India sees itself rejecting the weakness during the British period and the early post British period during which India was occupied with the issues relating to partition of British India and the partition of Kashmir. This is why the Council on Foreign Relations can provide a better understanding from and independent perspective.  Both sides have little to gain. China by being at the Tibetan border puts itself in a position where it has little to gain being on the border with a large rapidly industrializing country with a population of over 1 billion.  At over 4000 metres or 20,000 feet the territory and landscape is not one that humans can adapt too in any way, except for a few military personnel doing their term of duty of 6-12 months from India or China. China is even further away from the border as it is a remote border from Beijing, Shanghai, Canton or Chengdu, thousands of kilometres when it is just 8 hours from Srinagar by highway to Leh, Ladakh, and the Nepalese border very close to the Bihar state in India. The very distance suggests remoteness, with customs traditions in the region very different from that in China, suggesting very little connection between Beijing near Mongolia and Tibet or Ladakh very close to India by road or rail. To get some idea how close the Tibet border is to India consider that Rasuwagadhi Fort border point between Nepal and Tibet is only 127 miles by road from Kathmandu. The distance by rail from the Indian border in Bihar to the Nepalese border is only 34 kilometres with a new upgraded rail connection. Being this close India is likely to upgrade infrastructure throughout the northeast region as it upgrades infrastructure, roads and bridges and rail throughout India at an accelerated pace for economic development.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The difficulties the new U.S. Treasury Secretary faces as she tries to navigate the politics in Congress and the tries to reach out to moderates and progressives within the Democratic party. All have different views on spending, and where stimulus money should go in a second stimulus. Her long experience with the Fed is seen as not preparing her for the political role of evaluating different opinions that are described by some experts as ten times more political than anything going on in Fed meetings. As a student of Prof. Tobin Yellen sees government intervention as needed in times of economic crises. Twice in ten years the U.S. and the rest of the world has been struck by economic crises- the bank leveraging behaviours and poor lending practices that induced the 2009 financial crisis and in 2020 the coronavirus pandemic. Lessons learned Yellen says about the 2009 recession are that not enough stimulus was provided after the initial stimulus to get a strong enough recovery. Democrats are eager to spend over $2 trillion in a second stimulus. Republicans much less so particularly with a new president. Even under Mr. Trump spending was set at under $700 billion by Republicans for a second stimulus. Another economic crises is one of the U.S. strategic economic position in the world. On this issue of trade Yellen's husband George Akerloff, also a economist is more skeptical of the value of free trade. The failure of the World Trade Organization to ensure a level playing field as China subsidized key industries, and the loss of America's manufacturing advantage over three decades is now the defining issue in American politics. It takes the shape of manufacturing communities that were once a part of Democratic party support shifting away after devastated local economies from the loss of manufacturing plants to China. It takes the shape of a Republican party that is committed to bring back American manufacturing, and a Democratic party that under Biden is seeking the same result. How much each party will invest in terms of making things happen to get this done is one of the issues facing all parties, Congress, the administration, Ms. Yellen, and the new president. Economics does not have the answers. As economists could not have predicted the increase in women participation in the workforce, the drop in Black and Hispanic unemployment rates under the Trump administration. The lack of moral will to get trade to work for the American worker was more of an issue under Democratic and Republican administrations for the last 2 decades, so that issues of growing inequality were never better addressed by any party. It depended more on focus of the president elected to help American workers, and to avoid the cost and distraction of foreign wars when American interests could be protected in other ways. Yellen was not able to make a difference at the Fed because of these reasons and low interest rates have both helped and hurt the middle class, as low interest rates meant Americans were less able to accumulate savings for retirement since 2000. Determination and action counts for more than ideology or policy is the lesson learned in building strong economies and manufacturing.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Fisher and Taub of the NYT look at the populist politics in Europe and the U.S. following the French election first round. Trump won in the U.S. with the deep polarization of politics in the U.S.- leading to the Republican Party to decide to support him to avoid the result of four more years of an administration led by Democrats, and with the support of discontented voters in midwestern states with falling living standards. The situation in Europe is different as the mainstream parties have united in the past to block populist politicians with negative messages on immigration and an open economy. This happened in the Dutch election, by the co-opting of the nationalist message of populist politicians by mainstream parties and mainstream politicians, and is likely to continue in the French and German elections in 2017. Fisher and Taub point to another development that is happening- shifting the debate to ethnonationalism vs. open economies, which has happened with Brexit and the UK Independence Party. They cite the 2015 British elections in which UKIP won 13 percent of the vote, as having influenced prime minister Cameron to call for a referendum on Brexit, in a effort to revive the fortunes of the Conservative Party. In the end this resulted in the 52 percent vote supporting Brexit.  Another way of looking at the populist movement is that with Trump it called attention to trade and the way working class Americans were being marginalized especially in the industrial midwest. With this problem being addressed in a Trump administration and a reviving economy, the mainstream parties have an opportunity to reassert themselves. In Europe the AfD called attention to immigration issues, and the Merkel coalition government of CDU and SPD by making changes such as the deal with Turkey, and returning economic refugees, is able to assert the role of mainstream parties. In Britain the situation could be a result of a brash decision by a Conservative prime minister Cameron, in making a bad miscalculation, that has put Britain on a course that is likely not in its best interest. The Brexit referendum yes vote galvanized opinion by showing an endless stream of refugees in their advertising- a development following the opening of borders by Germany and Austria to address the plight of Syrian war refugees. That situation has passed and is unlikely to happen again as both the SPD and CDU parties in Germany have pointed out that this was a one time situation that they responded to following the exodus from Keleti rail station in Hungary under special circumstances. With this kind of perspective populist politics can be seen as reflecting other voices in a democracy, that are heard and responded to, yet keeping the sense of balance and openness necessary in today's global economy and societies. This is also the perception of Germany's outgoing popular president Gauck in his final address, pointing to the need to listen to other voices in a democracy, and the need for openness in a democracy, as well as democracies always in the process of Becoming and evolving to adapt to new situations in economy, society, and politics.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As the deadline of July 22 approaches for the 160,000 members of the UK Conservative Party to elect a leader, former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and the current Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt are running for the leadership position. Boris Johnson has 68% member support with Hunt at 23%, according to YouGov survey. Both candidates are in favor of Britain leaving the European Union without an agreement. Hunt has stated he would cancel leave for Britain's 16,000 civil servants in August to prepare for the departure of Britain from the EU by October 31.  Only 27% of Conservative Party members believe Mr. Hunt can do the preparation needed for an abrupt exit after 45 years of economic integration with the European Union. By contrast 90% of members think Johnson would do the preparation needed. Preparation is needed because of food and medical supplies trucks and in flights awaiting customs at border points. The result could be chaotic without adequate preparation. Under a Johnson government many ministers would leave the government including Mr. Hammond who runs the finance ministry. He is expected to join rebel ranks in the Conservative Party that does not think an abrupt exit like this is good for Britain. If these members in the House of Commons join Labour party members they could vote to block this from happening. Britain's opposition Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn has finally decided to call for a second referendum if Johnson pushes to leave the EU abruptly, and to campaign wholeheartedly this time for staying inside the EU. During the last referendum Labour leaders did not push hard for Remain, and David Cameron as prime minister and head of the Conservatives proved to be a weak and ineffective leader using the promise of a referendum as a ploy to win votes for the Conservatives in an earlier election and then finding himself stuck with promises made in the election with his party's right wing led by Johnson. Years of austerity policies promoted by Germany in the EU after a flawed entry of southern European countries with faulty not transparent finances such as Greece too early  into the eurozone had soured Britons on the EU. The friendly migration policies of German leader Merkel for economic as well as war torn country migrants from North Africa finally not just soured Germans on Merkel policies but also soured British working class families struggling to make ends meet and seeing migration as taking British resources that were needed at home. This has split most of Europe including Britain along lines of the major cities and the rural areas plus smaller towns, and in Eastern Europe, East Germany region along the lines of the old Soviet bloc countries which with deeply conservative thinking do not favor such migration policies. These divisive changes have taken place over along period of decades and will take time to heal through economic recovery and a fairer distribution of wealth, better investment in infrastructure, health, education, public services, neglected during the Tech driven flawed investment diversion of economic resources. Yet the hope of this type of change if grasped by Britons as well as Europeans could bring new life and revive the vision of a Europe with shared benefits for all Europeans, not just a French-German project. For this to happen new leaders have to rise to the challenge inside Britain and the rest of Europe.      ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the Washington Post uses Frequently Asked Questions to give readers an understanding of the India China border conflict. The roots of the conflict lie in  China's claim to Tibet based on Chinese troops going to aid Tibet in 1792. This based on the Qing dynasty sending troops to aid Tibet after a Nepalese invasion of Tibet. Tibet and Nepal are neighboring countries in the Himalayan mountains,  Nepal has a border with Indian state of Bihar, and Tibet is north and northeast of Nepal, all in close proximity of several hundred kilometres from India but four thousand kilometres from Beijing near Korea and Japan. The Sino Nepalese war, called the Gurkha war in Chinese, was the result of a dispute between Nepal and Tibet over debased silver coinage supplied by Nepal to Tibet and Tibet's demand for compensation, as well as a dispute about salt supplied by Tibet to Nepal. Chinese forces were repelled by  the Nepalese Gorkhas, and eventually the conflict was settled with a peace treaty between Nepal and Tibet with Chinese mediation for the Tibetan side. When the British East India company intervened in the region in 1815 China was not present, and when Nepal and Tibet had another war in 1855 China was not present.  For the first half of the twentieth century Tibet printed its own stamps and was an independent country negotiating treaties with Britain. China's brief intervention in 1792 is the fact cited by China for its claim to Tibet. Crossing the high mountains to get to Tibet from China's western frontier was for most of history and during this 1792 intervention, a journey that took 3 or 4 months with yaks and mules. Because of the sheer logistics China was present only in a symbolic way in Tibet or Nepal, both regions far more autonomous and remote from China than say a Finland near Russia. It takes 5 hours to go from Helsinki to St Petersburg in Russia. This is about the distance between the border with Nepal in Bihar, India, to Tibetan border with Nepal. By contrast it takes four thousand kilometres journey from Beijing to Tibet and over steep mountain ranges and rivers which would took months of journey with mules and yaks all the way into the twentieth century.  Finland was part of Sweden till 1809 when it became part of Russian Empire, till 1917 when it became an independent country. The Soviet Union invaded Finland one more time before World War II and was repelled, but this is attributed to Russian fears that Finland could be used as a base for an invasion of Russia. Tibet was a buffer between the British Empire and China. Chinese Nationalists party and Communist party thinking may have changed after Japan's invasion of China in the thirties, making extending China's western frontiers to the borders of India as part of the new nationalist idea.  How else can one see Beijing in East Asia throughout its history suddenly at the border with India after its takeover of Tibet in 1950. The period in 1950 when India was just coming out of the partition and tackling millions of refugees on the border with newly created Pakistan.      ...
Washington Post Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Republican says the party's failures to come up with alternative policies instead of simply opposing president Obama, has led to the atmosphere of negativism and anti-immigrant rhetoric that increases support for Trump in the party base. He cites as an example 2012 Republican presidential nominee Romney and his comments about "self-deportation." Other examples cited include pushing Rubio to where he repudiated his own immigration legislation just to maintain support in the party. He says this leaves him little option but to vote for Hillary Clinton.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The crisis in Eastern Europe where 13 countries have accumulated close to $1 trillion in collective debt to western European banks or in foreign currencies. The need for a fund like the one proposed by Hungary, with roughly $240 billion, to bailout the Eastern European countries.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Some of the optimism in race relations after the election of Obama as U.S. president in 2008 fades after the Trayvon Martin verdict.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times reports from the comments of current and former members of the Chase Chief Investment Office (CIO), that risk officers at Chase were ignored when they raised issues about the complex trades made by trader Iksil. Iksil's trades had the support of his manager Mr. Macris, and Ms. Drew who was in charge of CIO. The comments also indicate that at one point Mr. Macris brought in a Risk Officer with whom he had worked closely for many years. Risk Officers are supposed to be independent and their concerns seriously heard, with the authority to halt trades that pose excessive risks. Which made this kind of cozy behaviour in the CIO trading offices in London cause for alarm. These reports also say Mr. Braunstein, the new CFO at JP Morgan Chase, did not strengthen controls after he assumed office in 2010. Bank officials disputed this. The New York offices did not fully grasp the complex trades being made in the CIO London offices, and upper management let the CIO operate pretty much on its own, especially with CEO Jamie Dimon's confidence in Ms. Drew's management of the CIO. This led to another gap in the process of risk management. Dimon had other priorities and distractions, from problem mortgages coming with the acquisition of Washington Mutual, pushing back aginst financial regulation after the 2008 crisis, stress tests and others. At the same time the U.S. Federal Reserve, regulators, and Treasury's coordinated effort to merge failing banks with other larger banks- because of the lack of the process of unwinding failed banks provided later under Dodd-Frank legislation- created mega financial banks. Unlike what the U.S. under Treasury Secretary Rubin pushed for in the case of S. Korea during a banking crisis in 1997, Treasury under Geithner and Fed officials did not push for unwinding of failed financial institutions such as Countrywide and Washington Mutual in 2008-2009 Chase's own portfolio of assets under the CIO, increased by an astounding amount from $76 billion in 2007 to $356 billion in 2011. Even if Ms Drew had managed CIO well before, managing a portfolio of this size is most likely to have presented a whole set of new challenges and problems for which the CIO office was not prepared. Similiar concerns were raised by other Fed officials such as Fed governors, Hoenig and Fisher, who raised the issue that such mega-banks posed unacceptable risks and were too big to manage. Pressures to increase investing profits, growing complacency, relaxing risk management controls, led to the situation where a single trader Mr. Iksil, who had only joined the bank in 2007 according to other reports, could create large losses. This follows a situation at UBSin 2011, where a novice trader made bets that resulted in large losses....
Detroit Free Press Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Evern though the Detroit carmakers initial quality as measured by J.D. Powers Initial Quality Survey is slightly higher than Japanese carmakers in pickup trucks, the Japanese carmakers still have a lead in the more popular cars and in crossovers. The Prius is made in a factory in Japan which ranks as one of the highest in quality. Quality is higher at plants in Japan for Toyota cars, and a bit lower here in the states for Toyota plants. Its on a par with Ford for the Toyota cars made in the USA. As the quality gaps shrinks to near zero between the quality of American and Japanese cars made in the USA, Toyota continues to maintain its edge in quality for its plants in Japan over both the Americans and the Germans. And the one carmaker that intends to surprise is Hyundai which surpasses Toyota, Honda, Ford and Chevy in quality and does this with a lower price. Consumers are noticing and making the switch, as Hyundai's market share is increasing. See Hyundai link. Here are some of the results. First the plants that produce the best quality, as measured by the J.D. Powers Initial Quality Survey. A survey of 80,900 cars between November 2008 and February 2009, for the first 90 days thses cars were driven, using the number of problems per 100 vehicles. All numbers refer to problems per 100 vehicles. Toyota plants in Japn that scored highest- Higashi-Fuji at 29 making Lexus SC and Toyota Corolla, Fuijimatsu at 30 making the Prius, Kyushu at 34 making the Lexus ES and Highlander. At the next level German plants, Bremen at 40 making the Mercedes Benz Classes- C, CLK, SL, and SLK. Daimler in E. London, S. Africa at 38, and BMW at 40 in Dinggolfing, Germany. And a cluster of Japanese and American plants in the USA that produce cars of comparable quality. Honda in E. Liberty Ohio at 41, making the Honda Civic, CRV and Element. GM at Oshawa, Ontario, at 42 making the Buick LaCrosse and Chevy Impala at 42. GM at Bowling Green, Kentucky at 43, and Toyota, Georgetwon, Kentucky making the Avalon and Camry at 43. What is notable from the last survey in this highly competitive market is the following. 1. Hyundai at 91 problems per 100 vehicles surpasses Honda at 95. Better quality at a lower price, so its no wonder Hyundai is gaining market share and is the new carmaker gaining a presence in the USA. 2. Toyota is at 101, Ford at 102, Chevy at 103, so the difference now in carmakers quality is perception, perception, perception. Its about lifestyle, what you like to be associated with and what you want your friends and neighbors to think about you in your choice of car, younger buyers who are the next generation that makes or breaks your business, the new trendy things among younger people, and design that appeals to them. 3. VW is at 112. So even though there is aggressive marketing and VW is picking up some market share with the Jetta, it still lags slightly in quality. 4. The American car makers still lack consistent quality. You have the Buick at 117, GMC at 116. Ford with Lincoln at 129. The Koreans with Kia at 112. 5. Chrysler is at the bottom of the list. Dodge at 134, Chevy at 136, Jeep at 137. THe lack of resources, changes in management and ownership, and the distractions of bankruptcy and dealership closings, and most of all dire lack of resources including the layoff of large parts of its engineering talent, all hurt. 6. GM sold Saab, Ford sold Land Rover and Jaguar. The neglect of Saab shows with Saab at 138, and Ford's distraction during the last 3 years shows with Jaguar at 134 and Land Rover at 150. also. 7. In summary Ford has done well overall, Toyota is coming up short in the USA and resting on its laurels, GM has a perception gap with younger buyers, Hyundai looks like a winner with both price and quality, and VW has work to do. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Neil MacGregor, director of the British Museum, has a fascination with Germany. He helped arrange the recent exhibition on Britain's relationship with Germany at the British Museum. He now leaves Britain to help manage another project, the Humboldt Forum in Germany.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hyundai has gone from being seen as cheap to being an excellent value in this recession like environment. About 30% of buyers consider Hyundai for a purchase- the numbers are from Hyundai research. Globally Hyundai is now fourth after Toyota, GM and VW, and has 8% of the USA market. People are asking is a premium brand worth $5000 or more dollars extra. And Hyundai projects a wise decision by buyers. Even Cadillac buyers are seen shifting to Hyundai. Hyundai sales in August 2009 were 47% above August 2008, and for 2009 Hyundai and Subaru are the only 2 companies expected to increase sales in the USA. An Accent sells for base package at 10,000, luxury car Genesis at $32,000, less than competitors.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The SuperCommittee in the U.S. Congress for deficit reduction reaches an impasse a week before the Thanksgiving deadline on the issue of tax increases and the extension of the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts automatically expire in December 2012, an option that Democrats are willing to live with, but is one the Republicans find it harder to accept.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman says the failure of the Supercommittee would be a time to celebrate, better no deal than a bad deal. This is also what the Wall Street Journal said in an editorial on the same day, Nov. 18, 2011.
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Milbank describes Jon Kyl's role in the U.S. Congress Supercommittee negotiations on deficit reduction.
Washington Post 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