LyrArc Article Gist
Ryan Tracy and Anthony DeBarros try to address the question of patchy internet service for America's heartland, rural areas from the prairies of Iowa to the west, and in the south and southeast. Public funds were allocated through the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund for broadband service with the latest optic fiber technologies in 750,000 census blocks in all states except Alaska in the US. This was supposed to bring digital internet with fast speeds enjoyed by urban users to every American home. Instead after this and another program the Connect America program why is internet service serving some customers and not others in rural areas, with patches of areas in each rural part of a state without internet service at the speeds one should expect for streaming and other uses? This WSJ research looks at data and conducted interviews on this important issue and found that internet service providers were given public funds by the FCC yet allowed to pick customers leaving some customers out. FCC rules till 2021 did not require service for all customers equally as long as they provided service to a minimum number of locations statewide say former senior FCC officials. One senior former FFC official says it is not surprising that companies made the decision to do the bare minimum required.  In Heavener, Oklahoma this meant that during the pandemic and lockdown when schools were closed the lack of good internet service affected learning from home. Many students could not get online from home. In 2021 another effort was made. This time funds will not go through the FCC but through the states. The Biden $1 trillion infrastructure spending for workers and families includes $42.5 billion for a rural broadband program in America. This WSJ report does useful service to America by putting the spotlight on one of the issues that divides America today the gap between the quality of life in rural vs. more affluent areas of urban America. It also shows that it is the federal bureaucracy that is at fault in this case for poor internet service in rural areas. Careful attention to this is needed so that rural America gets the attention it deserves from the prairies of Iowa to the mountains, the breadbasket of the country, and the heartland.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
DW.com looks at what it means for first Finland, and then Sweden joining NATO. For Finland the invasion of Ukraine where people speak Russian and have close cultural ties comes as a reminder of past history. Under the treaties that ended the war with Napoleon in 1815 after the Congress of Vienna, Finland was given to Russia and Norway wrested from Denmark was given to Sweden. Jens Stoltenberg now head of NATO is a former prime minister of Norway. Russia invaded Finland in 1940, and Germany invaded Norway during that war. As a result there are historical reasons why 62% of Finns support joining NATO.  What this means for NATO- This means NATO's border with Russia will double from 1300 to 2600 kilometres. Finland would be different alone compared to being part of the NATO alliance. For NATO this means 280,000 Finns in its army if mobilized under Finland's compulsory military service would be added to defending the border. Finland already is training with US equipment and training since 2015 and is in a joint defense plan with NATO. Sweden's situation is quite different. It has benefitted from neutrality and never been occupied by any power in the 500 years of European wars for balance of power in the region. In the last 200 years Sweden has acted as a neutral state and stayed out of 2 world wars and other conflicts. For Sweden to join NATO it has to change this historical neutrality and has to be convinced that the invasion of Ukraine and the immense destruction in Ukraine with over 4 million refugees mostly women and children is an event that has changed everything. If Sweden were to join NATO not much could be expected for ground forces as Sweden has a small army. Sweden also has no land border with Russia. Sweden is on the Baltic Sea which is also a border for Russia. Sweden does bring 100 modern fighter aircraft and 8 modern submarines that would secure the Baltic Sea.  If one or both countries were to join NATO this would happen by June and both countries would join NATO immediately after 30 NATO member countries approve this.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This France24 report looks at the question of whether the policies of four term German chancellor Angela Merkel emboldened Russia under president Putin to launch the invasion of Ukraine. FR24's interview with the vice president of the German Marshall Fund and head of its Berlin office, Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, shows there are many reasons why Merkel's policies were serious errors that ignored caution from past experience and from other western leaders in the US and Eastern Europe. Kleine-Brockhoff says that "Europe did not go wrong, Germany and France did. France and Germany tend to speak for the rest of Europe. Bit these mis-assessments were made in Paris and Berlin, not elsewhere. Eastern Europe didn't go wrong. Northern Europe did'nt go wrong."  Kleine-Brockhoff says the war in Ukraine calls for an urgent re-assessment of the German and French policy towards Russia. "Not only is the post Cold-War order crumbling before our eyes, so are the strategies employed by Germany and France." Under particular scrutiny comes Merkel's policy, and policy supported by Steinmeier of the SPD, that took German dependence on Russian energy supplies from 36% during the annexation of Crimea to 55% in March 2022 with the invasion of Ukraine. Germany's conservative Die Welt has this to say- "What Germany and Europe have experienced over the last days is nothing short of the reversal of the Merkel policies of guaranteeing peace and freedom through treaties with despots," describing Merkel's policies as "an error." About France Kleine-Brockhoff says there were lofty ambitions under Sarkozy and Macron of European strategic autonomy, which did not correspond to reality, to fantasies of European armies when there was nothing but NATO. It is not dialogue with Putin and Russia that was a problem, says Laure Delcour, international relations expert at the Sorbonne Nouvelle in Paris. Some form of dialogue is necessary she says, but the dialogue has to have clear objectives. We must not confuse cause with consequence, she says. We know  that NATO enlargement had a big impact on Russia's perceptions, but the real problem is how Russia responded to enlargement. "In this case the problem is the consequence."  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The failure of the Supercommitte in the U.S. Congress by the Thanksgiving deadline will not have any immediate consequences. This is because automatic spending cuts that are supposed to go into effect if the Supercommitte fails, do not go into effect till Jan 2013. This gives Congress another year in which to come up with necessary deficit savings. This is a major reason the two sides divided on major issues from the extension of Bush tax cuts and tax increases, and facing pressure from their party's interest groups and voter support groups, have no special incentive to reach a compromise. Such a compromise also means politicians taking the political risk of not being reelected. Another dynamic that is in play in November 2011 is that interest groups in the Republican and Democratic parties both now see the "sequester," as the automatic cuts are described, as a better alternative than any bipartisan agreement that cuts health and retirement programs. For anti-tax groups, the automatic cuts are better than a deal than includes tax increases. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) says: "We promised tax cuts. And I think we need to have cuts." For liberal groups, the trigger or sequester for the 2013 automatic cuts is better than a deal that cuts health and retirement programs. The trigger for automatic cuts will cut agency budgets, but spending for the poor and the elderly -including food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare- is exempted. Eric Kinson, co-director of the Strengthen Social Security Campaign, says no deal is better than one that is flawed, the extra time gives the country time to pause and think about the alternatives....

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.

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.

LyrArc Article Gist
Milbank describes Jon Kyl's role in the U.S. Congress Supercommittee negotiations on deficit reduction.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Bank of England under Governor Carney cut interest rates 0.25% from a low of 0.5%, and suggested further cuts were on the way. This follows Brexit and action by the central bank to avoid a recession. The British pound fell about 1.6% to $1.3112 against the dollar, and euro 1.770 against the euro. Government borrowing costs declined, and the 10 year bonds yield dropped to 0.639%. Economic growth in Britian for the second half 2016 will be little or none. The GDP growth forecast for 2017 is now 0.8%, down from 2.3% before the Brexit vote. Bank of England staff say their calculations show Brexit vote has "conservatively" reduced growth by 2.5 percentage points over 3 years even after the rate cuts and stimulus action of the Bank of England, which other estimates show could add 0.5% over 2 years. This brings the Brexit impact to about 3% loss in GDP over 3 years, with these reliable estimates. Months after the Brexit vote the question remains whether Brexit supporters misled British voters, leaving the Bank of England to come up with a way to prevent a recession. After the austerity cuts since 2009 and the prospect of some improvement in the economy, this is a step backwards at a time when some of the working and middle class find themselves left behind. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
During the primaries Trump appealed to blue collar voters of a white working class that felt neglected by leaders and policies of both parties that did not seem to work for ordinary people. Having caught onto this early long before Republican candidates, Trump registered a series of wins in the Republican primaries. He continued this theme in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on July 21, 2016, saying- "The forgotten men and women of our country- people who work but no longer have a voice: I am your voice." The idea was to couple this with the theme of law and order and put perception of Hillary Clinton as part of the rigged system of the past that Trump would change, with Clinton's legacy described in terms of "death, destruction, terrorism and weakness." As a change agent Trump described his entering the political arena in terms of coming into this election only to help blue collar people "so that the powerful can no longer beat up on people that cannot defend themselves." The two themes for the rest of the election season- law and order, and blue collar lives- and who can best defend them a traditional Democratic politician with a fighting spirit for traditional Democratic values, or a blustery newcomer adept with slogans and the public mood and ironically representing the Democratic values of representing the working class to become the  Republican nominee, with the law and order theme thrown in. The voter or independent listening in to all this will hopefully ask what all this means. As the WSJ, July 19, 2016, pointed out in a recent look at economc policies under the two candidates- on Glass Steagall Act being reinstated to increase safety of the banking system that caused many of today's problems through the 2008 financial crisis both Trump and Clinton are similiar, on opposing trade agreements similiar except that Trump's bluster is a riskier approach, on infrastructure building similiar with Clinton's $275 billion plan spelled out out for source of financing and Trump's unclear as to source of financing. On immigration the candidates are different, on the minimum wage which impacts low income people Clinton supports $15 minimum wage and Trump has not taken a stand. On ISIS and the Middle East Clinton is in reality a hawk and not much difference in the candidates, on law and order more chance of divisions in the country with Trump than Clinton. Overall for the working class and blue collar voter his life will take a decade or more to rebuild, with both candidates commiting to go in that direction. And the bluster and ads to come- just that.  ...

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.

LyrArc Article Gist
Hubbard and Erdbrink report on U.S. president Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia to begin a new chapter in relations with the Gulf nations and the Saudis. Under president Obama the U.S. distanced itself from the Saudis and the Gulf nations, preferring to pursue a policy of closer relations with Iran and signing the Iran nuclear deal. This included a policy of staying out of Syria to the point of turning down a decision to deploy U.S. airpower to maintain no-fly zones to protect refugees. Syrian government forces fighting rebels were supported by Iran. The new policy is dictated by the new conditions in the Middle East. The U.S. has sought since the presidency of Reagan to balance the power relations in the region. With the nuclear deal signed and Iran respecting the deal according to independent reports, the U.S. allied with Iran in the battle against Islamic State in Iraq,  a shift was needed to balance the support provided to Iran by Russia which worsened the refugee crisis in Syria. The Republican party and Mr. Trump were critical of the Obama Iran policy during the nuclear deal negotiations. The safety of Israel is also a factor as non-state actors were supported by Iran threatening Israeli security. For these reasons the shift is an effort to rebalance the relations in the region. The arms deal in its size and president Trump's statement that Iran had "fueled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror," can be seen as this rebalancing. A business aspect of the large arms deal is that it will promote job growth in the defense industry in the U.S.. Other countries including Germany have seen growth in their defense industry. This is not the best way forward for the Middle East, yet it is a way the U.S. and nations in the region are adjusting to realities- the collapse of the Arab Spring from within and without the help from outside, the sectarian conflict arising from the Shiite pushback from Iran following the Baathist and Sunni control of Iraq which collapsed with the U.S.invasion, where the majority of people are Shiite yet with a strong Sunni presence. Elections brought Shiites in power, leading to a Sunni response in the form of Islami State caliphate move into Mosul, Iraq's second largest city after Baghdad. A decade of conflict and the efforts by the Bush administration ended in failure and sectarian conflict, resulting in the U.S. policy of rebalancing in favor of Iran to negotiate the nuclear deal. In this sense the arms deal does not solve anything. A similar rebalancing under Reagan by arming one side, followed by arming the other, led to involvement with ground forces under president Bush. It only leaves the region poor after years of sanctions against Iran to the point where a NYT reporter was not sure whether it was safe to fly from Tehran to Mashad with Iran Air because of the lack of spare parts for the airline. War torn, with millions of refugees in Syria and Iraq, the region remains broken in many ways, waiting for a sensible non sectarian view to prevail in the interest of the people in the region. The election of Rouhani in Iran by 57% of the vote is only a sign that young people in the region given a chance would opt for a different course in future. The rest of Asia has moved forward and shows a path that can be followed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A fight in the U.S. Congress with an unusual alliance between the Obama administration, the Judiciary Committee, and Speaker Boehner up against Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell ends with the passage of the USA Freedom Act, which requires court approval for government to look at collected bulk data in phone calls. Republican Rand Paul fought hard against both factions to end the bulk surveillance altogether. The Act was passed in the House earlier. It cleared the Senate June 2nd 2015 with 67 in favor and 32 opposed.

LyrArc Article Gist
The British Embassy in Tehran is stormed on Nov. 29, 2011, by protesters from the student wing of the Basij militia, a volunteer militia organized by the Islamic government to protect the governing party loyal to Ayatollah Khamanei. This comes after Britain joined the U.S. and Canada in sanctions against the Iran for nuclear weapons development. The sanctions will keep Iran's banking sector out of the U.K. financial system.

LyrArc Article Gist
Limits of new tech devices without good intelligence or help and support from the local people.