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 ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
King Charles 3 day visit to Germany. It is the first state visit by a British monarch in 8 years and the first for Charles. There is a ceremonial welcome at the Brandenburg Gate, a first in Germany. In Hamburg he visits St. Nikolai Church, a ruined church kept in that way as a memory of the Allied bombing of the city in the war. It was designed by an English architect George Gilbert Scott. This is the serious kind of role the king might enjoy says the BBC. It is being compared to Queen Elizabeth's visit to post independence India in 1961 and her visit to post apartheid South Africa in 1995, Ireland in 2011. It brings the message of Britain through Charles showing its connection to Germany and to the European Union at a time when the US and the European Union are coming closer together with the shared values, and the common history, systems of representative democracy founded in Britain.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
During the presidential debates Donald Trump was asked about his proposal for a 45% tariff on imports from China to the U.S.. Trump's response was "if they don't behave." he would use this as a negotiating tactic against China. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas responded by reminding viewers of the high tariffs under Smoot-Hawley legislation that were one of the factors that created the Great Depression in the 1930's. Economist and former Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke is a student of the Great Depression, and says "it was highly counterproductive, it lengthened and deepened the Great Depression." Economist Peter Petri of Brandeis University in his study cited in this article, says that the tit for tat that starts with such a move could eventually cost the U.S. 1 million jobs. It might fix one problem the one of imbalanced trade with China his figures show, and create another huge problem the loss of markets for U.S. goods all over the world. Overall a 45% tariff would reduce U.S. merchandise imports by $383 billion and reduce U.S. merchandise exports by $658 billion, says Petri. Gordon Hanson, economist at the University of California, San Diego, who has actually shown how trade has affected different counties in the U.S., leaving some dependent on government assistance. Hanson sees this tariff as counterproductive, it makes the U.S. more self-sufficient but hurts U.S. exporters, would significantly hurt the tech boom, and reduce America's standard of living. The problem is that everybody can get into this in a tit for tat. France did this even before the Smoot Harley Act of 1938 was passed in 1930 with 60% increase in tariff on individual items, by higher tariff legislation in 1928. Close allies Canada followed quickly after Smoot Hawley increasing its tariffs, so did Great Britain. Unemployment went up significantly after 1931, worsened by weak banks and lack of support from the Federal Reserve. Trade with Mexico would come to a halt Petri shows, and the result would be more Mexicans trying to cross the border turning a relatively non existent problem of immigration in 2015 -with Mexicans preferring to remain home and net immigration dropping significantly following the 2008 financial crisis and the strict Obama policy of deporting illegal immigrants- into a real one. Trump says its just a threat, but it is likely to lead to a tit for tat response by China, then by U.S. allies, other trading partners. Consider that president Herbert Hoover opposed the Smoot Hawley bill for raising tariffs on industrial goods, and only proposed adifferent legislation reducing tariffs on industrial goods and increasing the tariffs on agricultural goods to give relief to American farmers. Politics intervened as Smoot from Utah and Hawley from Oregon, from mountain and agricultural states with a lack of understanding of how the international trading system works but as heads of two influential commmittes, the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, let politics overrride and pushed their legislation through Congress. In 1932 Smoot and Hawley were defeated for reelection, but the damage had been done, and promises of better conditions for workers and farmers never kept. A significant reason for the U.S. standard of living is that it is a leader in the global trading system. Even in 1945 and the years following the end of the war tariffs were higher in Britain and other countries. In return for this leadership the U.S. enjoys the advantages of the dollar being the main global currency, and the advantages of a world leading technological sector that has large global markets. Hanson and Autor have pointed out how imbalanced trade has hurt some counties in the U.S. This is a very real problem for workers in the manufacturing sector, as shown by elections in the midwestern states, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois and other parts of the country. The problem is compounded by the tech sector looking out for itself, the financial sector looking out for itself, and forgetting that we are all in the same boat. And that includes the Chinese who are in the same boat. China is doing a major shift in policy towards a consumer driven economy, and this needs to be accelerated for the benefit of ordinary Chinese. This makes the policy of a 45% tariff by the U.S. doubly unproductive because it hopes to add urgency to the problem of the U.S. trade deficit and manufacturing workers, but takes an approach that risks ending up damaging the global trading system by setting in motion a process that no one controls or can foresee the destination....
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The election strategies of the ruling Congress party and the opposition BJP party in India for the 2014 general elections.
New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NATO was formed in the days of the Truman administration on 25th July 1949, following the Berlin Blockade, the coup in Czechoslovakia by Soviets, and the efforts to set up pro soviet governments in Turkey and Greece. It accomplished its purpose by pushing back against the Soviet effort securing democracy in Greece and Turkey in the 1950's. Much of this was achieved under Heads of NATO from the US- Gen. Eisenhower, Gen. Ridgway, Gen. Guenther and Gern Norstad proteges of Ike all from West Point by 1964, when Brezhnev was new head of Soviet Union and by 1991 Warsaw Pact of Soviets setup in 1955 was dissolved yet NATO was not. The US interests shifted to Asia - Gen MacArthur leading a UN effort in Korea and the US leading its own effort in Vietnam in the 1960's. The Soviet threat actually receded after 1964 when Brezhnev became head of Soviet Union till 1982. During that period in the 1970's till today the face of NATO as today was from a series of heads of governments of Dutch Stikker in 1970's or other small European states such as Norway Stoltenberg and Rutte Netherlands again in 2025. It could be said that none of these leaders  of small EU countries represented US interests- or even European interests- a point the DJT administration is trying to make. It hurt the US in Venezuela as Russia propped up a regime which led to millions of refugees entering the US illegally. And it hurt Europe as Russia propped up the Syrian regime with millions of refugees entering Germany and destabilizing its political structure. Going back if a new defense institution was set up to replace NATO by the Europeans in 1970's this would have been the right step which would have not led to Russia propping up regimes in the Americas or the Middle East. A goal that is being discussed with Russia by the DJT administration to refocus American efforts in a new direction and pause not just the Ukraine war but also put the US  and Russia in a new direction with the new competition from 3 billion people in China and India. WSJ Editorial Board takes the British position on the Ukraine peace proposals with centuries old skeptical attitude on Russia's intentions. The US government position put forward by DJT is that there are constructive discussions with Russia, and the need to settle the underlying issues behind the conflict. This includes NATO's future. NATO setup in 1949 for Soviets,  on the borders of Russia in 2025 after the end of the Cold War when its rival the Warsaw Pact set up in 1955 of the Soviets was disbanded in 1991. The British position comes from centuries of conflict in Europe and its interests in protecting its Empire till the 1950's remaining unchanged, and cannot reflect American interests in the 21st century as its economy competes with China and India and the EU, and seeks to do this by keeping former colonial powers out of the Americas including Russia, and China.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Xi Jinping, president of China says at the Davos Forum that world leaders should "join hands and rise to the challenge" from protectionism coming from the new U.S. administration. He called on world leaders to support the Paris climate accords- "to stick to it instead of walking away from it."

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
French officals are pushing for a new eurozone architecture to address many of today's problems. This includes setting up a pathway that leads to the joint issuance of eurobonds. It also would include coordination of monetary policy with the budgets and fiscal situation in the eurozone. French officials see the lack of this as the cause of many of today's problems.
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University economist, author of the well researched book on the 2008 financial crisis, "This Time Is Different," gives his thoughts on the economic prospects for the U.S under the new Trump administration. He says 4% GDP growth and 3% inflation is possible temporarily for a while with stimulus policies, less regulation, and increased private investment. After 8 years of not investing in much needed infrastructure because of concerns about the deficit, the timing is right for such investments, especially as the economic effects of the crisis of 2008 gradually fade.  This is about taking advantage of ultra low interest rates to invest in infrastructure. He says it helps that Trump policies are pro-business. He sees drawbacks as the stimulus program adds a 25% increase with extra debt, adding $5 trillion over 10 years, but adds that for many years Nobel prize winning economist Krugman and others have said that there is good reason to increase borrowing to invest, and this is now being tried. Inflation remains an uncertainty- if there are large quantities of underutilized and unemployed resources it would raise prices less than its effect to increase output. The reverse would apply if the U.S. economy is closer to full capacity. One factor that would help- increasing confidence for business and increasing investment. Against this what he calls optimistic view or spin, is the idea of mistakes under a Trump administration, errors made and a degree of incompetence which he says is a real possibility. Overall his view is that some risks are appropriate now, and from his deep study of financial crises sees the slow growth of the last 8 years a result of a financial crisis that now begins to fade, creating the possibility of higher growth under prudent policies.  ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Calls at the BRICS leaders New Delhi summit for a change in quotas for the World Bank and the IMF, and a more open merit based selection process for heads of the two financial institutions. According to the Economist Belgium has a larger quota than Brazil at the IMF.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Production declines by a steep 80% in the first half of 2014 in Venezuela's auto industry. Ford, GM and Toyota cut production and leave facilities idle with a lack of parts supplies and other problems.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Leibovich gives a detailed account of David Plouffe, one of President Obama's close political advisors, who has Obama's confidence on campaign and political issues. Leibovich says Mr. Obama has always been attracted to people who are loyal and act as fixers. He cites the film "The Godfather" as Obama's favorite movie, and Plouffe as the unyielding cop in a mob film "The Departed." Characteristics of Plouffe described by colleagues are extreme competitiveness, extremely unsentimental, extremely data driven. In a way the President's closest advisors offer clues to the nature of the President's style, approach to politics, and the conduct of the U.S. presidential office during this Presidency, as in others. Plouffe is described by colleagues as most in sync with Mr. Obama. And William Daley, the president's former chief of staff, says the Plouffe and Obama relationship is extremely private- using 6 very's to accent this. Issues relating to the shrinking middle class are coming to the fore in this election. A friend of Plouffe's, Steve Elmendorf, describes him by saying that he isn't sure whether Plouffe has any convictions about the middle class, its mostly a passion for winning and putting together the outfit to do this. For the bigger vision things Plouffe's colleague, David Axelrod, another campaign advisor has put together the themes and lofty phrases that President Obama has supported. The sense given by Mark Leibovich is of some wonderfully good packaging with a steely attitude. ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in The Economist magazine points out that the doggedness of prime minister Theresa May now looks like pig-headedness. The crisis is of poor leadership. It also exposes two deeper problems in the Leave campaigns distorted message that it is possible for Britain to leave the EU, "to take back control" without making it harder to for British business and the economy to trade with its partners in Europe. It also exposes concerns of democracy that see the referendum as the only message from the people- the general election of 2017 brought Conservatives to power without a majority in parliament changing the picture about the referendum's message. Particularly since the referendum Leave campaign presented a distorted  message leaving out what the cost would be for Britain.  Ejection from the single market, decline of industy from finance to carmaking, destablisation of Northen Ireland peace agreement, exit bill of 50 bill euros was not advertised in the Leave campaign. Buses with posters of immigrants streaming across borders in Europe presented an emotional message recklessly sold to voters. Representing the will of the people can be claimed now by all sides, says the Economist. Leaving Europe on March 29 deadline with no deal would be bad for Europe and economic upheaval for Britain. Discerning the will of the people should not be the work of squabbling MP's or backbenchers in parliament. The only practical and sensible way out of this mother of all messes is to go back to the people and get a new opinion with broad daylight thrown on the realities facing Britain.   ...
The Guardian Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street Journal report -after interviews with former TEPCO engineers and executives- throws more light on the failure of power and cooling at certain reactors in Fukushima Daiichi that led to the nuclear meltdown. The difference not grasped at the time turned out to be the critical difference between the reactors where electricity to cool the reactors worked and where the the electricity failed. Of the 10 nuclear reactors at Fukushima, only the 4 with the earlier Mark 1 design failed. These reactors were the earliest reactors installed by G.E. beginning in the 1970's. The Mark 1 reactors were serviced by an American engineering firm called Ebasco. Ebasco designed the reactor buildings really small so that they would be compact and economical. Because of the small size of the reactor buildings the generators providing the electricity supplies to the Mark 1 reactors could not be installed inside the reactor buildings made of fortified concrete and were installed in buildings outside lacking similiar protection. These outhoused generator buildings could not withstand the tsunami, resulting in the loss of power and cooling for these reactors, and leading eventually to the meltdown. The reactors with the Mark II and later designs were installed along with the generators in the same fortified concrete buildings, and these survived the tsunami without disruption in power supplies and cooling. This critical difference was noted by older TEPCO executives who were intervewed, but nothing was done about this because of the added cost of making the major modifications that would be needed. The regulatory system also failed to catch the problems with the original blueprints and design for housing the reactors and generators for cooling reactors. In 2001 the original 30 year operating permit for the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactor was renewed, and again in 2011 for another ten year period. Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency is part of the industry ministry, and not kept separate and independent from the nuclear industry, a structural flaw. The ministry considered its job to be promoting nuclear power, and increasing nuclear power from 30% in 2010 to 50% of Japan's electricity output. One inspection official says fundamental design and construction of the reactors from a 30-40 year old design were never looked at in safety reviews by regulators approving the extensions. He even goes to the point of saying that the reviews focussed on things like pipes and fittings, missing entirely the safety of the outhouse buildings housing the generators. One of the top TEPCO engineers says this difference stood out like a sore thumb when did a walk through during inspections. He failed to get the support from fellow engineers and Tepco executives for changes that would add to the cost....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A couple of things can be noted about the burgeoning Chinese market for cars. Most car buyers are first time buyers. But that is to be expected as China started with a small bases of cars to begin with. What is interesting about these first time car buyers is that they ask a lot of questions do their research and are looking for the best car for the money in terms of features, safety, reliability. So its also a sophisticated first time buyer that carmakers are dealing with. This car buyer is also looking at waiting to save enough to buy a better car as far up the ladder as the car buyer can go in terms of features and value in safety, reliability, design, even if this means waiting longer and saving for longer periods.In this sense the Asian car buyer may be different and less bent on instant gratification to get into a 4 wheeled vehicle. What this is doing is putting the domestic manufacturers under a lot of pressure to match the overseas manufacturers. Geely and Cherry the larger domestic makers have to come up with just as good or better a product to get new customers. At this time the overseas makers of cars like the Buick Excelle, the Toyota Camry and the Volkswagen Jetta have the advantage as they are established brnads. Its interesting to compare this with the experience of japan the other large Asian carmarket. In Japan Toyota, Nissan and Honda were the only carmakes available because of trade barriers in the Japanese market in postwar Japan. China is a relatively open market and China's approach seems to be to get the Chinese carmakers to do better in an intensely competitive market as opposed to giving them favorable treatment. Another aspect of this first time car buying in a country where car sales have increased eight fold since 2000 and now exceed sales in the Japanese market, is that this market is abit precarious as the example of the Li family shows. Li Rifu purchased a Geely for $9000 but later after he contracted cancer and had $40,000 in medical bills had to sell the car. China has no social safety net so that if there is a medical or other emergency or crisis in the family there is nothing to fall back on and the family ends up selling the car to pay for expenses....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A new study by the Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation shows partisan politics will affect the new president in the U.S. in 2013, to the point of making it difficult to govern.

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