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.


The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ Quiz on data centers- test your knowledge. Does China have the most data centers? No the US with 4000, followed by Britain with 515 and Germany with 500 showing that China is not in the AI craze the way the US is even though the idea of the US falling behind in AI is used to get trillions of dollars in AI funding. This only means infrastructure that is dilapidated and broken in the US will not be replaced, and that the US plan to reindustrialize to get jobs will lack funding as dollars are diverted from these essential and vital needs to AI. Eventually Asian countries with new infrastructure will find ways to get that US technology without having to pay for it. The American public will be paying for this AI craze. We at Lyrarc.com checked how many data centers China has built? The number is 250 data centers are operational and note this in the MIT Technology Review it says 80% of these data centers are not being used, there is 80% overcapacity in China. Because China's AI such as Deep Seek is designed so that it uses less computing power. What this means is that only the US will put over 3 times the combined data centers put in by China, UK and Germany for AI and US will put in 16 times the data centers China has put in. As China only needs or is using 20% of its 250 operational data centers or 50 data centers the US is putting in 80 times the data center capacity China is using in 2026. Why 80 times? Because China has a Plan and it can manage the supply to the need or demand. In the US each company is trying to put so many in so it can get the leadership position in the market. For example Amazon puts in $200 billion instead of the $100 billion it can afford simply to be in the leadership ranks. There is much wasteful spending in the US market system than China's coordinated effort in a new technology even though ideologues like to say the US system is superior, and a plan by the state is frowned upon in the US, costing the US dearly when it lost its entire manufacturing base to China while economists said everything was OK. Even the WSJ Quiz fails to ask the question we asked about China and how many data centers China has actually made operational, how much is overcapacity- 250 datacenters and 80% overcapacity. Showing how little the public knows and even WSJ has looked into, giving a few companies such as Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft and others the freedom to spend in a reckless way so that future infrastructure investments and reindustrialization investments will be crowded out in the US economy. And economists as usual will say its OK. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The dominance of trillion dollar companies, Apple at $2.4 trillion and Microsoft at $2.1 trillion, which make up 13% of the S&P 500 index during the regional banking crisis of 2023. The index was up 3.5% in March even as some banks were shut down by the FDIC. This has given these two companies the role of a safe haven in the crisis, along with chipmaker Nvidia. Not for the tech sector's other companies such as Google, Amazon, Facebook and others which are companies facing monopoly behaviour scrutiny and possible breakup by the Biden administration and Congress.

New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Corporate concentration with larger companies, each more dominant in its industry, and fewer companies controlling half of U.S. corporate profits, are trends economists say that hurt wages, create income inequality, shrink the middle class and lead to less consumer welfare. About 30 companies control half of U.S. corporate profits in 2018 compared to 109 in 1975, according to economists at the University of Arizona. Fewer companies in each industry mean less competition for workers, and less leverage for workers in setting wages. Apple Computer just reached the trillion dollar size and Amazon is close to doing this with its dominance in online shopping. Amazon is known for lower wages in its industry. Apple has some of the highest profit margins in  industry, and trends show the margins have risen between cost of making a product and price in an unprecedented way. The result is higher corporate profits and labor commanding a declining share of the nation's wealth. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bill Gates resigned his seat on Microsoft Board on March 13, 2020. This report in the WSJ looks at the situation at Microsoft in late 2019 when members of the Microsoft Board hired a law firm to conduct an investigation in late 2019 after a Microsoft female engineer's letter. This was a company that Gates founded and which expanded through acquisitions of other smaller companies.  The same day he resigned his seat on Berkshire's Board led by Warren Buffett. Mr. Gates started Microsoft in 1975, was CEO till 2000, and chairman till 2014. He then turned to work with his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.   Microsoft has market value of $1.8 trillion, Apple a value of $2.1 trillion.  The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has assets of $37 billion income of $53 billion, and the personal assets of Bill and Melinda Gates have an estimated value of $130 billion. One of the mistaken assumptions is that any one foundation such as the Bill Gates foundation has the resources, knowledge, technologies, expertise and leadership to tackle problems that confront large countries such as the US, India, or a bloc such as European Union. Imagine some billionaire taking on the role of a Franklin Delano Roosevelt in tackling the Depression or a billionaire tackling the problem India faces today in public health. It is only governments of the US, India and large nations such as the UK that can pull together the resources needed and the cooperation needed between its industrial base companies to achieve goals for public health. This type of effort can pull together resources of trillions of dollars that no one company or billionaire or group of billionaires can put together, and pull together massive resources of engineers, scientists, and other people across hundreds of companies that cannot even be measured. This is one of the lessons of this pandemic because the WHO was left with the job of handling the pandemic and governments of US, France, UK, Germany, India, Russia and leading nations had retreated from their essential role as guardians of the public interest in people's health and left much of the task to others. As they reassume this role this needs to be given a firm and solid footing and lessons learned. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Current responses to China's different posture in international relations obscure the huge investments made by US and European Union business in China that lead to about $1 trillion in exports from China to US and EU in 2021. This could not happen without the hyper investment in China by business in the US and EU that not only neglected manufacturing technologies in the home country but did this on a immense scale that would end up shipping almost the whole of the manufacturing supply chains to China from the US and EU. Done as a carefully planned shift of some manufacturing operations it could have benefitted both China and the US and EU. In what way was this hyper move in pace and scale damaging? China's water, air and land was contaminated at a rapid pace never before seen in history, seen as early as 2005. And the hyper shift by 2015 and in 2020 is now showing the severe effects of climate change with droughts, floods and fires all over the world. The German Environment Ministry today counts the cost at 90 times in the use of coal and fossil fuels over time. On the scale that this massive and fast shift was done of manufacturing to China even more so- a hugely imprudent response of US and EU business management and executives. Instead of tackling and confronting head on the challenging problems of quality control and cost in the 1990's through 2000 and beyond at home, management at Apple and other companies simply shifted all manufacturing to China. The other ill effect of the imprudent response of American business was in the massive and wholesale shift of supply chain to China by offshoring practically the entire manufacturing base. It was to lead to the massive losses that workers, families  and communities in the US and EU that countries could not cope with as it moved on an accelerated hyper level and pace. The result was to lead to intense criticism of China and a level of rancor that has poisoned the relations with China. Some of this counsel to China was given to leaders of the Communist party who had little knowledge of American capitalism operating within constraints of social democracy in 1990. Some of that counsel was self interested given by investment banks to Chinese officials- investment bankers that have now disappeared from view- who themselves lacked an understanding of the social constraints of American and European democracies. It is that rancor that is now leading to China and the US disconnecting the supply chains leading to questions one is certain within China about how this will affect unemployment in China in the years to come. The pandemic simply accelerated this realization on both sides of this untenable situation. Still a trillion dollars in exports are taking place even as the political situation is now totally adrift -as the situation in Taiwan in August 2022 shows- the political and trading relationships at opposite ends and seemingly at war with each other. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Sperling shows how Biden's economic plan rescued America and set the stage for America becoming the leader in the G7 economies. Gene Sperling is adviser to president Biden, coordinator of the America Rescue Plan, and had 8 years as adviser in 2000 and 2011 after the financial crisis to previous presidents. Here he says the arguments made that the trillion dollars investment spending Biden and a bipartisan group of senators have supported with legislation in Congress were causing inflation have proved not to be true. Inflation caused by bottlenecks in the supply chain, the pandemic shifts, and the Ukraine war, has come down to 3.4% in Dec 2023. By investing in the US economy, in US manufacturing and US jobs, the US under Biden now has the best economy of the 7 advanced economies with higher growth and unemployment below 4% for 24 straight months, lower inflation apples to apples. Sperling says there were 4 lessons learned during his work with the White House. The first to avoid harm to workers whose lives get scarred by loss of jobs. This happened in 1982 and again in 2008 after the financial crisis. Unemployment took 6 years to recover after 2008. And he says the unemployment rate was 15% for younger workers. For the first time economists like Sperling and Treasury Secretary Yellen have grasped what workers feel and have gone through. Sperling cites the devastation to people's lives - the mental health, the divorce, the loss of earnings and depression. The new policy after 2020 resulted in the fastest drop in longterm unemployment ever with black and hispanic unemployment reaching record lows by 2023. A first ever national eviction prevention policy led to 20% less evictions than prepandemic. Second Sperling says 650,000 jobs were lost by state and local governments in the three years after 2008 financial crisis. State and local budget cuts and mass layoffs seriously hit the economy. This time in after 2020 1.2 million jobs were added with the money in the Rescue Plan and lost jobs recovered in one third the time it took in 2008. Third state and local governments need to deal with the harm coming from the downturn and after 2008 the cupboard was empty. Whereas after 2008 only 154 cities and counties got help to tackle commericial blight, effects on communities, foreclosure and long term joblessness in 2020 Biden was able to send direct funding to all 20,000 local governments and 15,000 school districts. This helped tackle learning loss, crime, and address mental health needs. What a difference it made. Lastly one needed to anticipate something unexpected to happen that flattened projections of recovery. In 2011 3.7% growth projected was flattened when Sperling was senior adviser, and this was flattened by Fukushima nuclear disaster, Arab Spring spike in oil prices, and debt default negotiations. This time there was cushion in the plan so that when covid variants and unexpected Ukraine war happened the rescue could withstand and deliver with resilience. Growth was 3.4% average for the first 3 years of Biden's term and unemployment went down from 8% to 4% for 24 months. Coming from someone who had seen mistakes happen and corrected them, who had served three presidents and the last Biden ,this is a story of how Sperling, Yellen, with the help of Powell at the Federal Reserve, and the bipartisan support put together by a US president in Congress , one who has served the country in the Senate more than any other recent Senator and led the nation with courage, patience and determination. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
"It may be that this iron curtain is small, unimportant and justified, but it is a bad sign." Howard Buffett took a stand in the House of Representatives against the VOA broadcasts being used inside the US in 1947.  Warren Buffett is the son of Congressman Howard Buffett of Omaha, Nebraska, who was on the Board of Education of Omaha, started a small stock brokerage firm, and ran for US Congress in 1942, reelected twice and in 1950. He also ran Howard Taft's Republican presidential campaign in 1952. Looking at Buffett in the FDR-Truman years- one sees a young Buffett in contrast to Warren Buffet's silence on the 2008 financial crisis, raising serious issues- about the Truman doctrine in 1947 on the floor of Congress, was Acheson falling dominoes analogy a dangerous one?  It worked in Turkey-Greece with $400 million in aid in 1947 but was Acheson/Truman using a dangerous analogy of dominoes that would later hurt the US in French colonial Indochina wars, and in the reference to protecting oil resources in Middle east in Iran, Iraq and Saudi to lead to wars that exist to this day in 2024? Wars DJT and Biden have both opposed in contrast to Reagan, Bush, and Obama. There is a huge contrast between the father Howard Buffett, descendent of Huguenot ancestors from 1600 New York, and the finance professional Warren Buffett who went to Columbia University in 1951-52 as student of Prof. Graham with 70 years in finance during which financial crises destabilized the US with Buffett not taking a stand. One hedge fund manager say it is pure nepotism to pass on the company Berkshire to Warren's son Howie. But he is not surprised- who else would be sure to keep the company headquarters in Omaha, keep things simple invested in index funds and much of it in a few companies leaving the investing to managers chosen by Warren, with Howie's job to make sure his father's principles remain. Howie is Warren Buffett's 70 year old son, who Buffett 90 years is setting up as his successor as chairman who will not do investing leaving it to managers, yet be able to change CEO's. Howie worked for a few years at See Candy, a Berkshire owned company before becoming corporate VP at ADM food producer, followed by working on his own farm in Decatur, Illinois which he enjoyed doing. At ADM Howie left after an anti trust investigation began, in which the company was charged with $100 antitrust fines for price fixing says the WSJ. What is Berkshire Hathaway? It is a trillion dollars of investment funds invested in a few companies under name Berkshire Hathaway, using some of the basic ideas of Benjamin Graham, a pioneer in careful investing, adopted by Warren. Where has Buffett put his money? Berkshire top ten investments are- about $90 billion in Apple, $70 billion split between Bank of America and American Express, $30 billion in Coca Cola, and $30 billion split between 2 oil companies Chevron and Occidental. He has not invested in pharmaceuticals or in renewable energy- in just a piece of America.This has generated a compound interest of about 14% over 3-5 years and about 12% over 10 years. He holds 30% of his investments in cash or fixed, mostly cash at this time. And holds the remaining 70% in stocks. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The tech boom bust since 2000 that has hurt America and Europe and which also laid the foundations for the loss of manufacturing and technology to China, ceding American leadership and critical advantage, is shown here in the WSJ. The role of the finance sector  is explained here. That has added one more factor to the factor of endless wars in the Middle East, where American and European investment in healthcare, education and new infrastructure was somehow diverted away, and much of America's and Europe's resources wasted- or not turned to the benefit of the people of America or Europe.  One financial firm that rode the tech boom to the hilt finds itself with unacceptable losses except in a severe recession. Tiger Global Management was using tens of billions of dollars from pensions, endowments and rich clients riding on some of Silicon Valley's hottest stocks.  With the plunge in tech stock values including startups in which Tiger pushed into aggressively now facing large losses after hyper valuations, Tiger's hedge fund which managed $23 billion at the end of 2021 was down 52% in 2022. Another of its funds that managed $11 billion has lost 62%. WSJ says this wiped out two thirds of the gains Tiger has made in the tech stocks since its founding. In addition large writedowns are expected on its venture funds valued at $64 billion at the end of 2021, says WSJ.  WSJ says cheap money (money somehow diverted from infrastructure and funding manufacturing in China instead of the US now goes by the misnomer cheap money) reshaped Silicon Valley in the last decade, as pension funds, rich investors and celebrities turned to well connected money managers such as Tiger to put money in tech stocks and startups. This WSJ report says compared to Sequoia Capital and an earlier generation of venture companies Tiger Global is simply not interested in management of companies it invests in, taking a broad brush approach, using Bain Capital for research, and trying to haul in a large load of fish like trawlers at sea hoping for some companies to make big gains. Many pension funds such as Calpers California's public pension fund invest in Tiger with a $400 million investment. WSJ also reports that Tiger Global's venture funds do not reflect the realities of the tech business as venture stocks will reflect the drop over 2022 and 2023, including its ByteDance Chinese tech investment which will need larger writedowns. Tiger has also not hesitated to get into cryptocurrency which has loss of about $1.5 trillion dollars. It is of interest to note that Julian Robertson, hedge fund manager of the 2000 period (when Clinton-Bush were US presidents) who ran Tiger Management provided the impetus for Mr. Coleman, then 25 years old, for the start of Tiger Global. Julian Robertson closed his fund in 2000 during the dot com bust. Coleman hired a Blackstone analyst and started on the next cycle of tech with social media platform Facebook now Meta, followed by China's JD.com as investments in a new China boom were started. The end result is that during a period of Middle East wars under Bush and Obama, and building dependence on Russian oil and gas supplies under Schroeder and Merkel, China was the gainer as the US and EU lost much of its manufacturing and technology to China. During this period US and Europe neglected investment in infrastructure that would benefit the people of America in ease of living and quality of life. Just as money was wasted in wars much of the tech investment was wasted. The companies that added value over time were started long before and relied on sales growth and new products that revolutionized their field such as Apple with smartphones that started well before the nineteen eighties, Amazon with logistics and its own style of management, Microsoft from an even earlier era. Tech monopolies Facebook, Google, and others would not be missed much in terms of real progress for the people of America. The cost is many decades of ceding manufacturing and technology advantage to China by US and the EU led by Germany. China 2030 and the war in Ukraine with China's support have shown how fragile the foundations have been with weak political leadership and a finance sector running backwards in terms of America's and Europe's strengths in new infrastructure, better healthcare, services and education for the people of America and Europe. Leaving it to the Biden administration and a new coalition of Greens and Scholz in Germany to begin the task of rebuilding America and Europe on strong foundations, including the dignity of the workers and families, that makes who we are and what we believe in, and why the free world believes in us. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
When experts say corporate earnings and balance sheets are healthy this is because they are speaking of the situation in aggregate. Companies that benefitted from the commodities boom like the oil companies and companies like Microsoft and Apple have hundreds of billions of dollars, but this is very deceptive and misleading. About two thirds of nonfinancial companies, 1600 companies, carry a junk rating according to S&P. How does this compare with earlier periods? Its up 50% from the beginning of the last bust in 2000 and 40% higher than in 1990. Also Wall Street hugely expanded the market for speculative floating rate loans with $1.2 trillion raised like this in the last 4 years to 2007, according to Thomson Reuters. And the junk bonds are much junkier. Between 2003 and 2007 lenders financed $194 billion worth of bonds in the bottom tier of non investment grades with B- or below. And that was twice the amount of the previous 4 years. Histoically it should be noted 23% of bonds in this group default within 3 yearsafter they are issued vs just 3% in the top 3% of junk. Which companies are likely to default? Amusement park operator Six Flags, construction products maker Georgia Gulf, trucking company Swift Transportation, and sports equipment maker Easton-Bell Sports. Private Equity owners who have loaded the companies they own with debt also could default. This includes real estate brokerage operator Realogy, newspaper company Tribune and pizza chain Uno Holdings. S&P's estimate that the default rate among US junk rated borrowers will jump from 1% last year to 4% this year but other experts estimate it at around 8%. And if history is any guide it will probably be in double digits. After the 2 lending booms the one in late 1980's for LBO's and commercial real estate and for telcom and tech in the late 1990's default rates reached double digits. And with a recession one expert Fridson of research service FridsonVision estimates default rates of upto 16% for two consecutive years considering the huge amount of debt that has built up....
WSJ Original article ›

Toshiba's Chief Takes Stock

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jurio Osawa talks to Toshiba Corp.'s CEO, Norio Sasaki about Toshiba's plans to increase investments in infrastructure businesses, including nuclear energy. Sasaki sees continuing need to use nuclear energy because of limited supplies of oil and gas to meet needs in emerging markets. He sees demand growing for nuclear energy in China, Brazil, India, Turkey and Vietnam. Toshiba owns Westinghouse Electric, a maker of nuclear power equipment, and acquired Landis+Gyr, a Swiss company which makes advanced power meters. Demand for Westinghouses' AP1000 reactors with safety equipment in China is expected to grow from the 4 being built today to 20 in 2020, and 70 in 2030. He says the consumer electronics businesses have suffered because of the strong yen, and for the failure of Japanese companies to taking strong action to improve their competitive position and staying ahead of market trends. At the same time the consumer electronics business generates cash because investment requirements are low compared to infrastructure businesses, which is why Toshiba will continue to operate in profitable parts of the consumer electronics business....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This New York Times editorial after the Senate passed a bill in October 2011 calling for action on the misaligned Chinese currency, points to ways a misaligned currrency is damaging for China. It cites the Peterson Institute for International Economics estimate that this is costing China $240 billion a year. This is a result of accumulating huge dollar reserves that have a declining value against the renminbi. Higher import prices lead to higher inflation. And low interest rates on savings, to the point that they are lower than the inflation rate, hurt the vast majority of Chinese and reduce domestic consumption. And perversely this leads to money pouring into speculative uses such as real estate, creating unsustainable bubbles in housing. The Times editorial says China is not generating jobs from this strategy, as the export strategy is relying on use of advanced technology in manufacturing and not creating many jobs. It cites a statistic showing employment has increased by only 1 percent a year from 2004 even with GDP growth above 10%. China is beginning to realize the cost of this strategy, and is planning a shift in its five year economic plan. But this rebalancing has many obstacles. The current system dominated by state run companies, banks, local and federal government, is biassed in favor of the old export led strategy, and experts are pessimistic about the possibilities for change. The Times suggests China may be falling back on the export led strategy as the global economy is slowing. The whole system would have to change after three decades of this kind of development, and would require new leadership and major changes....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
China's current account surplus has declined to 2.8% of GDP for 2011 from about 10% in 2007, and will be around 2.3% of GDP in 2012, according to IMF estimates. The U.S. current account deficit is down to 3.1% of GDP from 5.1%. By controlling the exchange rate China was able to keep the competitiveness of its exports, resulting in a five fold increase in exports from 2000 to 2010, according to the IMF. The decline could be temporary say experts, as the the recession in Europe and the U.S. resulted in slowing exports, with its infrastructure buildup sucking in imports of machinery and other goods from the western countries at an accelerated pace with its 2009 stimulus measures. Another reason is that in the last decade China has developed its own high tech and other companies which will now increase exports. IMF forecasts show a pickup in China's trade surplus to 4.25% by 2017. This could be lower if the renminbi is allowed to appreciate. Estimates of appreciation of the renminbi are 8 percent in nominal terms since June 2010 against the dollar. Including inflation, which is higher in China, the renminbi has appreciated by 13% since June 2010. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Close to half of the respondents in the 2010 Annual Survey of the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai, say that they face regulators who show a preference for domestic companies. About 80% of respondents said their operations were profitable in 2010. In 1999, 58% of Shanghai members of the chamber said their profit margins were below worldwide levels. In 2010, 78% said their profit margins matched world levels. Just under half of the respondents said they feared a negative impact from China's effort to build "indigenous innovation" and encourage domestic champions in each industry. 63.1% of respondents say regulations are getting worse or staying the same. Chinese President Hu on a state visit to the US in January 2011 is presenting the idea of a level playing field for American companies.

Americans Sour on Trade

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Wall Street Journal/NBC poll conducted in September 2010 shows a big change in public opinion in the US towards outsourcing of production and on free trade agreements. Poll respondents were asked "Do you think free-trade agreements have helped or hurt the US?" The response in 1999 was close to 30% for those who said hurt and those saying helped. By 2005 the curves diverged seriously with more people saying that it hurt and fewer saying it helped. In 2010 this swing is sharp with about 50% saying it hurts the US and only about 10% saying it helps. When asked "Do you agree or disagree that outsourcing of production and manufacturing work to foreign countries is a reason the U.S. economy is struggling and more people are not being hired?" the response is overwhelmingly agreeing that this is bad for the U.S. job situation. The answers are the same across party affiliation, in fact higher for Republicans than Democrats 90% to 84%, higher by income level with 93% for those making over $75,000 agreeing and 86% for those making less than 75,000 agreeing, 93% of professionals and managers agree compared to 89% white collar and 83% blue collar agreeing. This shows all segments of society agree that that the manner in which free trade and outsourcing of production is taking place is not helping the U.S., and this time the highly educated segments are leading the way. Bill McInturff, the Republican pollster who helped do the survey points to the big change in the way well educated and upper income people perceive free trade agreements. In 1999 only 24% of this group making over $75,000 said free trade hurt the U.S., now 50% of this group says it hurts the US. This is sure to lead to big changes in U.S. trade and currency issues with China and other countries. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Researchers David Autor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Gordon Hanson of the University of California, San Diego, and David Dorn of the Center for Monetary and Fiscal Studies in Madrid, in independent research, studied the impact of trade on 722 clusters of interrelated counties in the U.S. They focussed on the surge in Chinese imports and found a pattern. Counties with higher exposure to Chinese import growth showed higher unemployment and higher expenditures by the government for unemployment benefits, food stamps and disability benefits. Their calculations show the increased government payments amount to one to two thirds of the gains from trade with China. This does not include the losses suffered by people losing jobs who deplete savings as they look for new jobs. Hanson studied the effects of trade and Chinese imports in the 1990's and found the effects were relatively small. This time the effects are large and show counties that lacked local investments in industrial machinery and technologies in which China was still playing catchup such as Caterpillar in Peoria, Illinois, and Boeing in Everett, Washington, were most susceptible to higher jobless rates and in need of government support payments. Autor and Hanson found that from 2000-2007, communities in the 75th percentile- ones with greater exposure to Chinese import growth than 75% of all communities- saw a manufacturing jobless rate of about one-third more than communities in the 25th percentile. The government payments mean higher taxes or larger deficits are needed to support these communities, and long periods of unemployment reduce the incentive to work. Michael Spence, a Nobel prize winning economist from New York University, says the world has never seen such a rapid pace of growth as China experienced between 2000-2011, with rates approaching 12% in some years, making past experience and prevailing theories on trade an insufficient guide to what is happening....
Economist Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Most Americans pay less in taxes, including state, local and federal taxes, today than in 1980 in inflation adjusted dollars. The taxes have gone down by 2-3% for incomes in the range of $50,000 to $150,000, and gone down by 3-4% for incomes between $150,000 and $350,000. Taxes have gone down over 7% for incomes above $350,000. The main reason is the decline in federal income taxes.Tax rates increased in the period to 1990 and declined from 1990 to 2010. The Democratic party and president Obama are pushing for increase in taxes for incomes above $250,000. Republicans are resisting the changes citing disincentives to investment and growth for small business which generates a large proportion of new jobs created in the U.S. economy. The New York Times study shows the percent of the U.S. population that makes between $200,000 and $350,000 almost doubling in the period 1980-2010 and at the same time its share of the U.S. income remaining the same - many small business owners who hire employees would fall into this income category. Republican's response is for tax reforms that reduce loopholes, deductions and other tax expeditures that disproportionately help the wealthy. Democrats say this cannot create enough revenues to address the deficit, when mortgage deductions, charitable deductions are excluded. The back and forth is leading to stalemate but also opening up discussion for the first time on whether the mortgage and charitable deductions make sense in today's environment. A significant portion of revenues lost in the mortgage deduction goes to affluent households, subsidizing larger borrowings to build larger homes than otherwise, according to the Brookings Institution. Politicians have resisted changes that would go against powerful lobyying groups in the past, yet the impasse has opened up new thinking outside the box because of the pressing need to come up with a solution....
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The constructive contribution made by the G-20 meetings of leaders towards building agreement on economic and other policies for peace and progress in the global economy. The meetings were especially useful for coordinating policy and addressing issues arising in the global economy after the 2008 financial crisis. Here Li Baodong, China's vice minister for international organizations and conferences, international economic affairs, describes the path ahead: IMF reforms implementation, better coordination of macroeconomic policies, pursuing the anti-protectionist and free trade policies with further support to the WTO and ministerial MC9 meeting in Bali in Dec. 2013, and infrastructure financing proposals for developing countries on the agenda at the St Petersburg, Russia, G-2- meeting in Sept. 2013. Baodong says the mechanism called the Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth as part of the G-20 meetings is a major achievement. Each G-20 economy submits it macroeconomic policy plan for a Mutual Assessment Process under this arrangement. The progress from the Bretton Woods financial architecture to the new arrangement- from the G-6 to the G-20 to include developing countries from India to Mexico and Brazil- is another major achievement, not fully recognized by the public, says Baodong. Interestingly Baodong makes particular mention to global rebalancing, rather than pushing what he calls the impossible task of increasing demand to get growth. This is a realization coming to China's economic policymakers under the new Jinping-Keqiang administration after the overly aggressive effort to stimulate demand in the 2009-2011 Stimulus, and the ensuing financial problems in the banking and credit system. It is indicative of the policy shift and its implementation underway in China in 2013-2015....
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In a major policy move India's Modi government makes major changes for foreign investment in India. In different sectors, pharmaceuticals, defense, civil aviation, and retail stores, the move is designed to attract investment and create new jobs. Foreign investors can now take 100 percent ownership in defense, civil aviation, and food products sectors with government approval. In pharmaceuticals foreign investors can take upto 74 percent ownership with no government approval needed. In retail stores, such as for Apple and Ikea, the rules offer new incentives. From now on the requirement that Apple and other companies buy 30% of their supplies locally for single brand retail stores will be relaxed with a 3 year exemption on local sourcing, which can be extended to 5 years if the products sold are "state of the art" and "cutting edge technology," according to a government announcement. The changes were made by executive order. Apple CEO Tim Cook visited India and lobbied for this change recently. In combination with a national GST goods and services tax to be passed in July 2016, which is to be instituted nationally to replace a old set of state by state requirements and taxes, the two changes could have a bigger impact than the 1991 reforms that moved India away from a socialist managed economy. Poor job report numbers may have increased the pressure for taking action. In the defense sector the earlier change to allow 49% ownership had resulted in few new proposals. The changes in foreign investment rules also follows the resignation of the head of the central bank, Raghuram Rajan. ...

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