LyrArc Article Gist
Reading the AI summary of this simplistic editorial- taking the first 50 of the 258 comments as a sample shows about 95% of the Comments are strongly critical of social media companies, and support a ban on social media for under 16 year olds, for the safety and education of children. Most consider this Editorial as poorly written, simplistic and many say it could have been written by the social media companies.  They question the motives as Amazon founder is owner of the Washington Post. A look at the AI Summary of the Comments itself show why AI is good for routine tasks processes where no intelligent thinking is involved. On something involving risks to children, risks to society, AI is the wrong tool and can lead to disastrous decisions as it cannot understand the dangers and what is being discussed, its implications for children and education. It serves as an eye opener of why AI should only be used very carefully because of serious risks when used in an indiscriminate manner. The list of countries in Europe pursuing the bans show Canada following Australia and Britain, France, Greece and Spain, a big part of Europe imposing social media bans for under 16's. Indonesia, Brazil and China itself (by limiting its use with strict controls possible in a society like China's) are also doing the same. These countries have not arrived at this conclusion without months and years of discussion- none of this is even considered in this editorial by Washington Post Editorial Board. Another factor that is not put to the forefront is that over time the advantages of the US and Europe in education are being eroded because social media takes time out of education and study so that it handicaps US and European societies which leads to gradual decline. On the 250th Anniversary everything the founders did, and the vision of the founders for America is put at risk by not educating the next generation of Americans in the best possible way, and this means sticking to binders and books, pen and paper for schools not even using electronic means such as iPads or laptops. This is the view of one of the most carefully thought out education centers in the world. For years Sweden across all segments of society and experts in different fields studied the poor performance in reading comprehension, writing and other educational skills from the use of screens instead of pen and paper. Sweden now is implementing a program that is removing all screens in schools and replacing it with binders that have pen and paper and book lists, and hard copy books in libraries to read holding them in ones hands as has been done for centuries of western civilization. Forget about social media screens one of the smartest countries on the planet is thoughtfully getting out of screens altogether. Lyrarc.com has covered this Swedish example. Sweden is fighting back. European societies are fighting back  one by one. And the US to be great again and not to fall into decline the way it has in world trade- that was misunderstood by sticking to what economists told different administrations which turned out to be wrong- should be careful every step of the way and study diligently what other countries in Europe and Asia are doing, not to fall behind. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A shift in priorities away from focussing on high growth to lower sustainable growth was announced by China's premier Wen Jiabao at the National People's Congress, China's parliament, in March 2012. This shift will reduce investment in infrastructure, power generation and exports, which will affect the level of imports of commodities from commodity producing nations in the Middle East, Australia, Canada and Brazil. It should increase imports of software, computers, entertainment, tourism and high tech goods from the U.S. and Europe. Chinese leaders have said they would make this kind of shift for some years now but growth has consistently increased more than the target rate, and domestic consumption as a percentage of the economy has actually decreased in the last decade. Now 9-10% growth rates may be a thing of the past and the target of 7.5% set this year may be actually closer to the real figure. The Chinese leaders have belatedly realized the need to make these changes now because slowing markets in Europe -which is seeing declining growth and high unemployment- and in the U.S., make the issue impossible to avoid. Wen told the Congress: "Accelerating the transformation of the pattern of economc development... is both a long term task and our most pressing task at present... Domestically it has become more urgent but also more difficult... to alleviate the problem of unbalanced, uncoordinated and unsustainable development." This is his way of saying that its unavoidable and better to start in earnest now, and at the same time recognizing the resistance to change from the stateowned companies and the other interests who have benefitted from surging growth, and now occupy a central role in the power structure. An opinion article in the People's Daily, China's official newspaper, said: "imperfect reforms are to be preferred to a crisis caused by no reforms." The World Bank's president Zoellick is respected by the Chinese leaders. He also urged them to make changes now. The recent report of the DRC, China's planning research arm, and the World Bank, also laid out the new direction away from a focus on infrastructure to domestic consumption. The fear is sudden deceleration in the absence of policy action. The impact of this will be negative for commodities over time, leading to slower growth in Australia, Brazil, and Canada. It should boost imports from Europe and the U.S. of high tech, consumer, pharmaceutical goods over time....