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 ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This election is seen as a turning point for Britain. The Liberal-Conservative coalition has come up with a radical plan to cut spending and decentralize services in the areas of education, policing and health care. The plan is to cut the deficit quickly from 11% of GDP in 2009-10, to 2.1% in 2014-15. By comparison the outgoing Labor government's plan was to balance the budget by 2016-17. And the fiscal impact of Labor's budgets would have been 4% by 2014-15, compared to the Cameron government's looking at 6.3%, with larger and accelerated cuts in spending. It is something of a gamble by the Tory-Liberal government. If the severity of the cuts in spending stifle growth, then Plan B will be needed. The size of the cuts are not seen as feasible. With growing interest payments with the large borrowing by the government, and no real cuts in healthcare spending, departments delivering public services in Britain face cuts of 25% by 2014-15. With defense and schools limited to cuts of 10%- other departments would face cuts of 33%. According to the Institute of Fiscal Studies one way to reduce the severity of these cuts in department budgets, would be to find additional savings in the welfare budget. In June, Mr Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, announced 11 billion pounds in savings in this area (with half coming from using a different measure for inflation in calculating benefits). Additional savings of 14 billion pounds in welfare budgets, can reduce the size of the cuts needed in departmental budgets to 20%. One example cited is means-testing payments that go to the affluent as well as to poor people, such as child benefits, and cutting winter-fuel payments. Tories and Liberals agree on the need to decentralize government and services in the areas of schools, policing and the NHS. In schooling the idea is to give more choices to parents and children. Current schools can apply for academy status and new "free schools" will be run be non-profits, charities, churches, and parents. These schools will have freedom to set pay, select curriculum, and still receive state funding. In policing, the idea is to have directly elected police and crime commissioners for every constabulary in England and Wales. The elected commissioners would appoint constables and determine budgets and priorities. For the National Health Service the move is to give groups of general practitioners a significant role in the delivery of health care. ...
BBC News Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The tough job President Obama faces as he faces opposition from politicians who have interests to protect, and healthcare businesses with interests to protect. The President has to come up with a plan that is deficit neutral, because financial markets could see a healthcare bill that further widens the deficit as a signal for higher interest rates that would deepen the recession. At the same time each of the three sources of revenue puts him at loggerheads with political leaders in Congress or groups with interests to protect. Limiting income tax deductions for high earners could raise $267 billion in 10 years. It would require taxpayers in the top tax brackets deduct their mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable donations, at the 28% tax rate instead of the 33% and 35% tax rates. The opposition is with democratic leaders that it would hurt charities, universities that depend on tax deductible donations, and taxpayers in high tax cities like New York city that are the home base of Democratic leaders. Yet only 1.4% of households would be affected says the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, says charitable giving would decrease by 2%. The other opposition on this comes from the preference of Senators Baucus and Grassley, who head the Senate Finance Committee, for tax increases or cost savings to come from the health sector. Specifically they want to see the value of workers' employer provided health benefits subject to income taxes. It is a situation in which every sensible person admits the need for healthcare reform and would see the current pace of healthcare costs as unsustainable and dangerous; and after that will just go back to his group and try to preserve as much of the status quo as possible, so as not to disturb by much the benefits or compensation they have secured from the system over the years. Then there are political leaders in Congress with their own preferences, and Congressmen who are the subject of heavy lobbying by these interests. The administration and the Presidents job is to navigate this stream with a workable deficit neutral plan, without any requirement for any group to make sacrifices, and in some situations even small sacrifices for the public interest. Would charitable institutions be hurt that much, what if charitable institutions were exempted, why would other interests the try to obtain the same exemption. Its like the unions trying to keep the old unsustainable goldplated healthcare and other benefits at GM even as the ship was going down. Taxing employer provided employee health benefits as income would raise $2.5 trillion over a decade. The opposition here is from unions which are a force in the Democratic party and which count tax free health benefits as a legacy of the labor movement. Employer provided health insurance covers 160 million American employed and their dependents under the age of 65, so it has a wide impact. Yet most economists favor ending the tax break. They say it mainly goes to upper income taxpayers, and discourages cost consciousness among consumers of health care, thus encouraging excessive spending and surging health care costs. Senior Obama advisors, Peter Orszag, the budget director, and economist Jason Furman favor this approach. So do Republicans in Congress. Senators Baucus and Grassley are not asking for the complete removal of the tax break, what they want to see is capping the value of benefits that go untaxed. If the tax-free limit is $13,000, a policy worth $15,000 would pay income taxes on $2000. A third spource is to spend less on Medicare. About two thirds of the $948 billion in savings Mr Obama has proposed over 10 years comes from a number of reductions in Medicare spending. $177 billion comes from insurance companies bidding for government reimbursements for offering private plans to seniors. $106 billion comes from cutting the subsidies to hospitals serving the uninsured as universal coverage should remove this need. And $110 billion in reduced payments to hospitals and doctors because of productivity gains. A range of industries insurance companies, hospitals, doctors drugmakers, nursing homes, home health care companies and medical device makers, all stand to lose from reduced payments from Medicare and Medicaid. And these groups with interests to protect are another factor in this process of working out a healthcare plan. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Hispanic immigrants make up a big part of the construction industry and a big part of industries like carpet making in Georgia. This has been hit hard and jobless rate for Hispanics is 6.9% according to the Labor Department up from 5.5% in April 2007. States with expandig Hispanic populations like Florida, California, Georgia and Nevada are hit hard by Hispanic job losses. Overall the jobless rate has gone up from 4.5% last year to 5% during th same periodand when one takes out the Hispanic component the jobless rate is down much less, which also tell us something about why the pace of the economic downturn is felt less among the whites and the rest of the population, because the construction industry got hit the worst and the Hispanics especially immigrants who dominate the construction industry are taking the brunt of it. The subprime story plays up here as well. From 1994 to 2006 the rate of Hispanic homeownership climbed to 50% frm 41% according to census data, at a rate more than double for the increase amon non-Hispanics. By 2006 47% of the loans issued for home purchases by Hispanics were subprime or loans with poor credit histories, double the rate for non-Hispanic whites, according to a paper by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, only exceeded by African Americans. In 2006 homeownership fell among Hispanics and one in 12 mortgages made to Latino households in 2005 and 2006 is likely to fail according to Catherine Singley, a policy fellow at the National Council of La Raza, an advocacy group in Washington. Georgia has one of the heavy concentration of new Latino immgrants, with a 70% increase in the state's Hispanic population between 2000 and 2007, according to census data. From one fifth of the construction work force in 2000 Hispanics made up one third by 2006 according to the Economic Policy Institute. Among foreign born Hispanics construction was responsible for 46% of the growth in employment from 2004 to 2006 according to Rakesh Kochhar, an econist at the Pew Hispanic Center, which tells us that the new Latino immigrants dominated the construction industry in places like Atlanta and in the rest of the country and are now getting hit the worst. Not only construction but industries that parallel the growth in construction like carpet making based in Dalton, Georgia, were dominated by Latino immigrants, so that as construction fell these towns and Latinos there are hit hardest. Investment manager El-Erian of Pimco points to employment as the key the critical thing to watch for the next 6 months and its useful to see that unemployment has increased by about half a percentage point to 5% from 4.5% April 2006 to April 2007 according to Labor Department data. As most of this unemployment has probably been taken up by the new Latino immigrants to the USA its probably not changed much excluding that component, which is possibly why the economy has not felt like it is in a recession when all around the signs of recession or what causes a recession are evident around us. Another way to say this is that there are built in hidden mechanisms of the American economy in its present form such as immigration, and possibly others that act as delay mechanisms that throw the recessionary impact back by anywhere from 6-18 months depending on how they operate and can blind one about the reality of oncoming storms. This was to be seen in 2005 for the economy with consumption spending and mortgage industry excesses, and which is why Pimco decided in 2005 at its spring meeting, that the big secular story was about the economic downturn. It actually took until 2007 for this to occur because of similiar things to what we are seeing now in terms of recessionary pain, then the new structured investment vehicles and other ingenious innovations in the mortgage industry may have extended the boom and delayed the economic downturn being felt till 2007. There is a lot of grief among Hispanic people. The numbers tell the story. For the 19 million Latino immigrants in the USA...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The European Central Bank left all its interest rates unchanged on September 7, 2016. No changes were made to asset purchase program, which will run until March 2017 or beyond as needed. The ECB left interest rates at 0% for its lending operations, and for overnight deposits at 0.4%.  Inflation is a special concern, as inflation was at 0.2% for August. Business activity and investment in the EU and in the U.S. is weak, and Brexit is still a concern.

WSJ Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Applebaum provides an indepth look at the experiences and events that shaped the thinking of Janet Yellen, new chairwoman of the U.S. Federal Reserve in 2014. He describes the influence of Professor James Tobin of Yale on Yellen's thinking on how the government can influence the level of unemployment. A must-read for insights into the new Fed under Yellen.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›

Obama's war

Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
An overwhelming number of readers who commented on this article by October 27, 2009, were opposed to sending 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan. Looking at all comments in detail one finds that of the 64 readers commenting only a handful, about 8-9 supported sending these troops. Ninety percent of the comments to this editorial asking Obama to fight this war with conviction seriously questioned the wisdom of doing this. Many readers asked why aren't the Europeans putting thier lives at stake, and two asked how the Economist could with astraight face say that Britain's 500 troop increase was a welcome gesture. Readers questioned the assumptions and statements made by the Economist such as" letting the region "slip into amaelstrom of conflict," or "permanent cross-border instability," and "a terrible betrayal of the Afghan people, " in many of the comments. Readers seem conscious of the fact that its not a precipitate withdrawal that is being discussed, its a war for the long haul that it inevitably becomes as the US forces get deeper into the conflict in the mountains of Afghanistan. The discussion is not about the next 6 months but of next year and the year after that and the year after that. That is also what General Colin Powell advised President Obama. He asked Obama to think clearly about the clear goals of this mission. See the link to Powell. The question arises is whether the Economist sensitive to its readers thoughts on this subject, and it is how does it account for such an absolute majority of sensible readers having serious questions, doubts, and outright opposition to a deeper conflict in Afghanistan?...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How much is the drop in sales of light trucks, including truck based SUV's? Acttually not much so far, title is misleading! 2004- 55.7% of total vehicle sales 2005- 54.9% of total vehicle sales 2006 1st quarter- 53.8 % of total vehicle sales source: Autodata, NYT cite For GM in April 2006 situation according to GM figures Overall Light Truck sales up 1.5% Escalade up 127% Tahoe up 30% Overall GM down 7.3% in all vehicle sales in April source Ward's AutoInfo Bank But the mix weighted toward the Escalade, Tahoe, and new SUV's which are non-incentive and priced to meet demand, which mean higher profits to make up for lost volume in cars. This is occurring in the middle of bigger changes, and as GM moves to introduction of more fuel efficient cars with better quality and appeal to younger demographics. GM is restructuring to transform itself into a global company with growing Asian sales and shifting volumes overseas. It is shifting employee and capital base to more countries overseas to create new opportunities and make GM a new and different company, a global company. Incentives pay part of the gas price for buyers, and more fuel efficient SUV's also chip in to pay gas costs. Americans are not out to get off the SUV's just yet, as fuel effficiency standards go up.The investments oil companies are making are expected to provide a payoff in increased production by 2008-2009, and the new oil policy of Saudi Arabia kicks in (see Naimi at CSIS 2006 meeting). The situation eases up for families accustomed to carrying kids around or hauling stuff around. See also links to Tradin Frenzy (Mouawad, NYT, 4/29/06) speculators in oil markets cause 10-20% of price rise, could lead to drops later after ethanol part of spike eases, and if global demand drops with economies cooling off a bit. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Fred Hiatt of The Washington Post asks the question what would have happened if U.S. president Harry Truman had sounded the retreat for war weary Americans following the Second World War- as Greece floundered, during the Berlin Blockade 1948-1949 when Truman ordered airlifts to Berlin which totaled 200,000 in one year from the U.S. and allies, as South Korea was invaded by the Communist North in 1949 when Truman responded with the landing at Inchon. He cites an intervew with president Obama in the Atlantic magazine of Jeffrey Goldberg, where Obama's views after hours of conversations are summarized as being- that the Middle East cannot be fixed during the Obama years in office, and not for a generation, so that it would be better to simply do nationbuilding in the U.S. He points to Trump's interview with the Washington Post about pursuing a similiar policy because the U.S. is much poorer today than it was in the past. Hiatt says the U.S. GDP per capita was $27,000 in 1945, $62,000 today. And who would have thought in 1953 as the Korean War wound down and Federal Republic of Germany under Adenauer was emerging, Japan recovering from the devastation of the war, that South Korea, Japan and Germany, would one day be America's strongest trading partners and prosperous democracies. It was not about nationbuilding but lending a hand when needed, and the countries having to lift themselves up by the bootstraps- yet during a severe crisis as in Greece, Berlin, Seoul, in the 1950's when the post war Europe and East Asian countries were being established and needed help, the U.S. offered the early security and economic support needed to allow nationbuilding to happen by people in these places pulling themselves up by the bootstraps over a subsequent longer period. Truman did not shrink from the challenge and set the groundwork for today's European Union, and for today's Japan and South Korea. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Laurence Kotlikoff is a Boston University economist who calls the Obama administration's plans for fixing the financial system akin to "putting a Band-Aid on cancer." He outlines his own proposal in a book just out with the title: Jimmy Stewart is Dead. It calls for taking the risk out of the nation's financial system with "too-big-to-fail" banks, which threaten America's financial system, and may cost huge amounts of taxpayer money approaching by one estimate the entire unfunded liabilities of the Social Security System. He writes in the book that "the problem is the leveraging of the taxpayer by people with no formal training in finance or economics, no personal downside, an assortment of Napoleonic complexes, the money to buy ratings in New York and policy in Washington, and the ability to run circles around regulators." His proposal is to turn banks - intermediaries taking deposits and making loans- into institutions that connect borrowers and depositors with very safe mutual funds created for this reason. Each deposit would be pooled with other deposits in the new kind of mutual fund with all the money held in cash. These mutual funds would supply loans. This strips banks of their risk-taking function. It has attracted attention and support of Columbia University's Jeffrey Sachs and University of Chicago's Nobel Prize winning economist Robert Lucas. Most recently Bank of England's Governor mentioned Kotlikoff three times in a speech to Parliament as ideas worth looking at. With bankssstripped of risk-taking only one single Federal Financial Authority as the national regulator would be needed, instead of the myriad regulators in the current system that have failed in crises. MIT's Simon Johnson agrees that some strong action is needed and compares the need for action with what Theodore Roosevelt had to do to break up the once impregnable Standard Oil. By 1911 the Supreme Court had broken up Standard Oil into 34 companies....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Scotland joined with England and Wales to form Great Britain in 1707, at a time of increasing opportunities for Scottish people in the expanding British Empire. Britain's shipbuilding industry had a major base in Glasgow. During the Thatcher Conservative government Scotland suffered, and decades of globalization led to gradual deindustrialization for Scotland, the demise of the shipbuilding and other industries. The Labor Party under prime minister Blair pursued a "devolution of powers" policy, creating the first Scottish parliament following a referendum in 1999. Ironically this has changed the fortunes of the Scottish Nationalist Party led by Jack Salmond, a economist first elected to the British parliament in 1987. Salmond became head of the party in 1990 and led it to second place in 1999 elections, followed by a win in 2007 and 2011 elections. Salmond is seen as a vigorous campaigner, who can speak above others and not seen as a good listener. The party gained the confidence of Scottish voters by running a competent administration led by businessmen who were well aware of problems in local communities. Programs such as free prescriptions for medicines were popular with voters. The Labor Party stands to lose its voter base in Scotland (former Labor prime minister Gordon Brown is from Scotland), and the Conservative Party will also suffer a blow with a yes vote to independence. Polls show voters don't fully trust Salmond, but a majority 39% support an yes vote to 38% no vote, with 23% undecided. Britain just emerging from a deep recession would lose Scottish oil revenues of about 6 billion pounds, and the economy would suffer as business waited to see how things would turn out before making investments. Scotland now manages health, education and transport. Even without independence Scotland now stands to gain more powers and control, and control a higher percentage than the 60% of Scotland's budget that the Scottish government manages today. Scotland represents about 148 billion pounds or 9.2% of the UK GDP....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's State Internet Information Office chief Lu Wei, 54, is a Communist Party official who assumed office in 2013. He attends many of the internet conferences and gatherings in China and overseas, loudly explaining China's Communist Party line that "respect for national sovereignty" on the Internet should be adhered to. Mozur and Perlez reveal the vigorous personality of Lu Wei as he argues for this view of the Web at gatherings, in sharp contrast to the way younger generation social media users and business users see the internet. Lu Wei spent his early years as bureau chief of the state owned Xinhua News Agency in southern Guangxi Province. He was promoted to positions as secretary general and vice bureau chief at agency headquarters, and to vice mayor of Beijing in 2011, chief of the city's propaganda department. He came into prominence following an article in the Communist Party journal "Seeking Truth," after pointing out that China needed to manage the way information about the country and the Party is presented using the new information technologies. He also perceived the risks posed by distorted or incorrect information to financial markets, and economic security. This was confirmed the following year with the rapid spread of reports about a high-speed rail crash in Wenzhou, China, and in numerous other incidents following this, as social media reports that could not be confirmed spread quickly in out of control fashion. He now is the director of a new Central Internet Security and Informatization Leading Group, headed by president Xi Jinping, with the task of coming up with a policy for balancing views of openness needed for the economy with government views on internet oversight. This is not only a political matter, as Chinese officials face the challenge of how to get the public to vent views on critical matters such as public anger about pollution, food contamination, contractors and badly constructed housing in a recent earthquake, mismanagement in the railways ministry, and a whole range of issues related to economic development, health and public safety. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
New risks are emerging in the shadow banking system as regulators work to make the banks safer. Banks as deposit backed financial firms are different from mutual funds, private equity and other firms that are doing more of the financing for business and home loans in the U.S. financial system. As banks deleverage responding to tighter regulation by increasing capital buffers and reducing assets, it makes the financial system safer, yet creates new risks in the shadow banking system not subject to regulation and not supported by bank deposits the way banks are. A IMF report put out in April 2015 underlines these new risks in the U.S. and European financial system. Mutual funds and exchange-traded funds now rival banks in providing financing to companies with high debt. Total bond holdings worldwide in 2014 were $9.6 trillion, increasing 25% over 2008, and the mutual funds leveraged loans increased 60% to $151 billion in the U.S., 223% in the eurozone to $126 billion, according to the IMF. The IMF points out that these mutual funds and exchange traded funds favor emerging market and corporate junk bonds, and operate in a way where they mimic each others in their investments, creating contagion. With hard to sell securities and the rapid decline in these types of funds in a panic, the effect could be to create contagion across the funds. In the mortgage lending field a similiar process of deleveraging is happening. U.S. banks share of federally guaranteed mortgages from big banks down from 61% in late 2012 to 33% in 2015, other smaller finance companies taking up 51% increasing from 24%, according to an American Enterprise Institute report. Paul Tucker, former deputy governor of the Bank of England, points out the dangers. He says policy makers and regulators are playing catchup with firms in the financial services industry who are constantly looking for gaps in the rules, a game that policymakers and regulators are likely to lose at some point....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As she runs for president in 2016, Hillary Clinton faces a difficult challenge- to give Democrats a third term in the White House. Presidents elected for a third term such as Truman who followed Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and president George H.W. Bush who followed Ronald Reagan, were helped by the popularity of the president from their party who preceded them. Reagan's popularity rating was 57%, in the month preceding the election of George H.W. Bush, according to Gallop poll. Truman continued the popular policies of FDR, and took a strong foreign policy direction with the help of a capable team led by Marshall and Acheson in responding to the Soviets in the Cold War, before the 1948 election. In that election Truman upset political pundit predictions. He also brought an extraordinary tenacity in the rail tour across the U.S. and on the campaign trail. Hillary Clinton faces the 2016 election with president Obama's popularity rating at 46%, with only 32% saying the country is on the right track, in the WSJ poll. This means Clinton will have to distance herself from Obama to some degree. Other issues include her age 67 years, and the sense that she is somehow from the past in U.S. politics, offset by the experience she now brings. Hillary's popularity rating show 44% having a positive image in a WSJ-NBC poll of March 2015, down from 56% when she gave up her position as Secretary of State in the Obama administration. Her main Republican challenger, Jeb Bush, has only a 23% favorable rating in the same WSJ/NBC poll. Hillary's strategy for 2015 is to avoid large gatherings and try to meet people in small groups in this election campaign, so that she can bring a personal touch and come alive as a candidate relating to the everyday aspirations of working people. Hillary's election will depend on whether she can mount the kind of campaign Truman fought and relate directly to ordinary voters....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Faces in the continuing foreclosure crisis in Spain in 2014 include Xacobo Rodriguez and his mother in Madrid. Foreclosures continued at a high rate in Spain into 2014. The Bank of Spain reports that 38,961 primary residence homes were foreclosed in 2013, a decline of only 1% from 2012. If second residences are included the number of foreclosed house increased by 11% in 2014. This is six years into the housing crisis in Spain with no end in sight. The government has declared a 2 year moratorium on eviction of families that meet hardship criteria- a member of household disabled, expired unemployment benefits, very young children. A Social Housing Fund with 6000 units which provide places to live was created but only a small number of units are given out so far. The social advocacy groups say not enough is being done. The government points out that 90% of houses taken by banks were unoccupied at the time. Bank Association spokesperson says there is an understanding of the depth of the crisis with 6 million people out of work, that action is taken to reduce the stress on homeowners. And point to the data showing only 1% of homes were taken by banks in 2013 of the 6 million home mortages outstanding, with one third of these done with an agreement to have debts erased for the homeowners. Women and immigrants are affected to a larger degree, according to Human Rights Watch. Social housing in Spain is only about 2% of the housing stock making things more difficult, by comparison it is 17% in France, 21% in the UK, 35% in the Netherlands, according to Human Rights Watch. Meanwhile the Spanish government of the Partido Popular under Mr Rajoy, continues a policy of trying to be responsive to the homeowner crisis, and at the same time helping the banking system recover following a $56 billion bailout loan taken by Spain from the European Union. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Japan's energy efficient industry is a role model for the western world and for India and China. For years Japan has had a national consensus on consuming less energy an industry has focused on developing energy efficent technologies and investing in it even when oil prices were low. Japan wants to now contribute to the world in this area at the G8 summit on the island of Hokkaido. According to the International Energy Agency in Paris, Japan consumes half as much energy per dollar worth of economic activity as the European Union or the United States, and one-eighth as much as India or China in 2005. According to the Japanese Economic Ministry data corporate Japan has kept its energy consumption annually at a billion barrels of oil since the early 1970's even as the country's economy doubled in size during the 1970's and 1980's. The Japanese steel industry invested $45 billion dollars between 1972 to 2006 in developing energy saving technologies, according to the Japan Iron and Steel Federation. By capturing heat and gases that go into waste JFE Steel at its Keihin mill on Tokyo Bay uses it to power generators that produce 90% of the plant's electricity. The Japanese government is now pushing an initiative that sets Japan's level of energy conservation as targets of global industries. For instance the group leader of JFE's climate change policy group says that by adopting Japanese conservation technologies the global steel industry could reduce carbon emissions by 300 million tons a year. The sector approach advocated by Japan means setting the same numerical goals for all companies in an industry, regardless of location. At next week's summit meeting Japan willl back an initiative that sets its conservation induced energy levels as the new standards for global industries. This will also promote the sale and use of Japanese energy saving technologies around the world....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Full Yield is a startup in Boston that is trying to help address the nation's obesity problem by introducing healthier foods and meals in cafeterias. It plans to introduce a line of Full Yield branded food made from fresh items and natural ingredients for sale in corporate cafeterias and prepared food sections of local supermarkets. It is based on a simple idea that if you eat healthier food you will be healthier. A study in the Jan-Feb issue of journal Health Affairs says 75% of the $2.5 trillion in health care spending deals with obesity, Type 2 diabetes, heart disease and cancer. And how much of this traceable to obesity and bad eating habits, smoking and lack of exercize? This study says most of the cases are preventable by changing these behaviours. Dr. Kenneth Horpe, chairman of the department of health policy and management at Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, shows that if trends continue U.S. annual health care costs related to obesity would reach $344 billion by 2018, which is 20% of total health care spending. In 2009 it accounts for 9%. Thorpe says if even the 1987 levels of obesity were reached it would free up enough money to cover the uninsured population today. For American companies the problem has grown to alarming proportions and yet no nationwide coordinated plan bringing together companies, government, universities, public interest organizations, and other groups exists in the U.S. The CEO of U.S. grocery chain Safeway, Steven Burd, says Safeway was spending $1 billion to cover health care insurance for workers by 2005, with costs rising 10% a year- this meant putting out twice in health care insurance than Safeway's earnings and hitting another $500 million by 2010. Between 2004-2009 the costs of insurance surged 31%, making this the fastest growing single corporate expense, according to Towers Perrin. This reduces incomes of workers as companies pass on part of the extra cost, and reduces the profits that can be put back in new investment for economic growth....

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