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.


Harvard Medicine magazine Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Obama Affordable Care Act ACA and its downfall are covered by two experienced authors over 2 book written over 2 decades. The authors are James Morone and David Blumenthal followed the healthcare issue over 25-30 years through the Clinton, Edward Kennedy and Obama efforts and wrote two books. The first was "The Heart of Power" on the healthcare situation from FDR to 2008. The last titled "Whiplash" in 2026, for which the authors are interviewed in Harvard Medicine magazine. C-SPAN has a book program on this book at a Washington DC bookstore. From the discussion on C-SPAN between Senator Michael Blumenthal, borther of one of the authors, James Morone and David Blumenthal physician, couple of conclusions are seen that may be new to readers. Q. What was the one single factor that doomed the Affordable Care Act? A. The deep antipathy towards the Obama administration influenced the response to the Obama handling of healthcare. The likelihood of Republicans accepting healthcare from a black person was simply not there say the book's authors in the discussion and Q&A on C-SPAN. Yet there were other reasons for the ACA failing. Obama had not gauged the mood of the nation well. UK Labour's Starmer won by a big majority in 2024 yet that does not reflect the mood of the British nation just 2 years later- by election year 2012 Obama's campaign was faltering and had to be rescued with Hispanic votes and a weak candidate in Utah's Mitt Romney. Obama lacked maturity and came in the way Bush came in when the list of candidates were mediocre in the US, similar to the period in the UK with David Cameron and Boris Johnson. To take on the health care issue required someone with the experience and caliber of LBJ, which Obama clearly lacked, coming from the minority community was not going to help in credibility. Obama's presidency was thus premature and to gain experience he would have done better in a key cabinet position such as at Department of State where an intellectual could have influenced world opinion in favor of emerging countries, a doable and necessary. Obama's lack of experience showed when he told Republicans two words in the first months in 2008- "We Won," perceiving arrogance it would set Republicans against him. The years 2008-2016 cost the US dearly in that the US needed a withdrawal from all of the Middle East which would require a strong president  with deep roots of support in all parts of the country including the south, to avoid recriminations. In the end by continuing the wars Obama weakened the US and let China move ahead. Q. Did Obama consider Medicare for All? A. Obama told Congressmen of his party according to Morone- if you can get 60 votes in the Senate for Medicare for All we can try.  Q. Would it take a major upheaval for Medicare for All to be accepted now that the health system is failing all Americans in 2026? A. It will take a world war or a economic depression- some major disaster for Medicare for All to be accepted in the US, say the authors. A pandemic happened in 1918 and again in 2019 the results were not positive, as the authors believe it unleashed the war on science after the vaccination for and against camps, leading to the culture wars in America seen today. Q  Obama's analytical mind thought he learned from the Clinton efforts in healthcare that failed. But he did not see things from the heart. There is good reason to think that the lessons learned of moving fast, letting Congress write the legislation, settling for what can be done not what needs to be done, were exactly the wrong lessons to be learned as opposed to writing off the Clinton experience entirely as Clinton's, and starting from scratch without preconceptions. In the end Obama if he was older, had more experience, and listened to the mood of the country would have realized that healthcare was for another day, and got right down to the most difficult challenge, to end the wars in the Middle East. Even small steps in the right direction would still have earned appreciation him today. Instead Bush and Obama, the most inexperienced of presidents will be remembered for wars they continued that weakened America.       ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Where do you place a winner of the Democratic primary in Maine, Graham Plattner, an oyster farmer who dropped out of college at George Washington University, served briefly in the Middle East wars of Bush and Obama, and had PTSD. Is he working class, middle working class or is he from a downwardly mobile professional class considering he has parents who are well educated and father a prominent lawyer in Maine? Plattner easily defeated a 3 term governor of Maine with his average working class demeanor and language. He is for universal health care, (Medicare for All) universal child care, affordable housing, affordable college. Politics in the US has been moving away from the simple divisions before 1950 created by the Industrial Revolution- the workers in factories and the owners of capital allied with the professional middle class. The few owners of capital mostly college educated allied with people from the non college educated workers in factories who are conservative in their values and beliefs and on the other side the college educated professional middle class now downwardly mobile because of the many recessions and high unemployment from frequent financial crises, with college costing $80,000 a year putting them in deep debt. There is today in the WSJ a story of a professional worker who at $194,000 a year salary is not able to payoff $15000 debt which owners of capital have set at 26% interest and is in downward spiral. Some of this comes from large college and other debt. There is says WSJ Analysis $1.25 trillion in credit card debt alone with highest delinquency rates in decades in 2026. Cost of living has only made things worse and some of this happened as Biden poured money into the economy to help people hurt by the pandemic, yet with some short run consequences with demand strong businesses including hotels, restaurants and grocery stores, auto dealers, jacking up their prices by over 20% in 1 year and Biden failing to respond, getting overwhelmed by open borders migrants under Mayorkas and Harris (also hit by a sudden Venezuelan migrant influx). This is the America one has today- a confusing mix. This in reality means Democrats may take issue with Democrats, Republicans take issue with Republicans, and Democrats join with Republicans on issue by issue basis. It might actually be rational than irrational. On cultural issues if the country has gone over its head and moved too fast on some issues that are not for the general public good, people of different backgrounds can come together to get the best path. On economic issues things are never so straightforward, there are unpredictable consequences and the rules of economics are really not so straightforward either.  Providing relief can mean the government shouldering the burden as during the pandemic which it should, yet with caution as businesses can use the excess demand to raise prices and one is back to square one with everybody worse off as happened with Biden. Migrant flows and fears of insecurity in public spaces can lead to a severe public "discomfort that can waylay the best intentions of a Harris or Biden, leading to public "backlash." In fact the title of a recent book is "Whiplash." Current books include Floridan Marco Rubio's "Decade's of Decadence- How our Spoiled Elites Blew America's Inheritance of Liberty, Security and Prosperity." Rubio means it. Its authentic because as Rubio says repeatedly, his parents could make a living in the 1960's working in a factory with decent wages, low cost of living and low cost of college, the arithmetic between salaries and what you needed for decent home in suburbs and sending children to good public schools, then to college, all adding up. The result is that Rubio could go to college and serve in the Florida legislature. Rubio says in 2026, after the elites under Bush and Obama and faulty economic theory shipped all of our factories to China, that the story of his parents and his education would simply be impossible. This is what he told people in India on his first visit last week. His parents were Cuban immigrants, yet he identifies with Spain and with western civilization, a devout Roman Catholic. Rubio is a Republican, and is in large contrast with Alejandro Mayorkas, also from Cuba, and Biden's Head of Homeland Security. This is the mix of people and representatives in Congress,  business people, small business owners, professionals, that we have today in 2026 in the US. Plattner and Rubio, one a Democrat and one a Republican- both have something in common. Plattner also has general disdain for "the corporate interests, the billionaires, the Washington DC elites, and the establishment politicians."  The winds are blowing in the direction of getting things right- remembering that Eisenhower continued the work of the Kennedy and LBJ administrations (Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System for instance, and LBJ gave America Social Security and Medicare). Before that Franklin Roosevelt a Democrat built on the work of his uncle Republican Theodore Roosevelt (TR gave America the idea of good governance and built the US Navy, FDR fought the Depression and stabilized a faltering economy after mistakes made by Republican Herbert Hoover could have happened even if Hoover was a Democrat. FDR was himself from a wealthy New York family and when he first met fellow New Yorker Frances Perkins before his struggle with polio, a haughty New York gentleman. That was before Frances Perkins as FDR's Labor Secretary joined forces with Roosevelt to give New York a modernized administration governance structure by 1940 that was applied to all 51 states after 1950. It allied labor with capital with fairness for all, and was the first such modern structure of this size the world had ever seen, which was the fundamental strength of the United States of America. It was imitated in Asia, first in the Shanghai region then China, and first in the Ahmedabad region and now India. The US is faced with the challenge of recreating and rebuilding this today, as first China, then India remind America of its roots which they have followed in their own style and culture.  First good governance, then good institutional structures, alligning labor and capital with fairness for all, strong affordable + accessible educational and healthcare systems, and investments of capital and labor for infrastructure + industrial development. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ looks at Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan that marks a major shift for the U.S. economy.  Households would see their costs go down by $11 trillion, boosting their ability to spend on other goods and services. Because income and wealth was highly skewed in the past three decades in one direction, the spending capacity of lower and middle income households was pushed down. This and other similar plans would help restore a higher level of spending and with it an essential element of inflation of 2-3% to the U.S. economy which was missing in the last decade. This sets the tone for the kind of broad based recovery that happened after 1950 that strengthened America's middle class and made it the core of the economy, the core of the post World War II recovery in America and Europe. The plan would be paid for by higher taxes on corporations, tax rate of 21% for corporations going back up to 35%, and reverse depreciation schedules in the 2017 Republican tax law. The argument that this would reduce business investment does not hold that much says the WSJ because amid new trade tensions business investment has declined over the last 2 quarters, and has been sluggish overall. The other source for the estimated $13 to $20 trillion cost of Medicare for All plan of Elizabeth Warren is a 6% annual wealth tax on billionaires, in an attempt to have all pay their fair share and reduce wide disparities in wealth. Mark Zandl, chief economist of Moody's Analytics, says his sense is at the end of the day from a macroeconomic view- because $11 trillion in the hands of 80% of households who could boost spending after lagging behind in the last decade- the negative effect on business investment will be cancelled out by the higher consumer spending. The overall effect and today's context is infused in this analysis. Private insurance, premiums for insurance, and out of pocket cost that the public pays would disappear in this new system where all health payments pass through the government. Health insurance premiums paid by employers would convert into a new employer Medicare contribution to the government starting at an amount employers pay now and adjusting gradually toward national averages over time. Smallest businesses are exempted. Mr. Zandl says the most important aspect of this now is that Mrs Warren has shown that her plan's revenue sources match the cost so that the plan would not lead to deficits increasing and pushing interest rates higher, leading to negative effects on the economy. Republicans under Mr. Trump have paid little attention to expanded deficits caused by their tax law, and economists across the landscape have also shown less concern. Still attacks are made if the plans don't add up. For this reason a sound assessment in today's context of depressed consumers and an overall impact becomes essential. The WSJ quotes from a pre- assessment of Warren's plan by Simon Johnson, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who co-wrote it with Mr. Zandl and Betsey Stevenson of the University of Michigan. What they point out is that putting cash in the pockets of the lower and middle class for spending makes a lot of sense today, and taking money out of the pockets at the way upper wealthy end,  does not contract the economy at all. Other effects they say are constructive by letting all workers get health coverage from the government instead of employers, this makes it easier to change jobs increasing labor mobility and productivity. A worker getting a better job and better utilization of skills could then shift without looking at the employer health care plan. Warren says there would be a five year transition so that workers in health care insurance industry can work in other insurance fields and in Medicare, no one would be left behind. The important thing being to build America's middle class again. ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Flat payment rates for Medicare Advantage to Insurers by the DJT administration which is questioning how health care needs of the country remain unmet and US healthcare comparing very unfavorably with other advanced countries in Europe and Japan and also in India. Some of this is because of the behaviour and practices of the health and pharmaceutical industries in the US. The 2027 payment by government for Medicare Advantage is 0.09 percent. In 2026 it was about 5%. In 2025 it was -0.16 percent and in 2024 it was -1.12% under the Biden administration showing a great deal of dissatisfaction with funding Medicare Advantage. Medicare Advantage was set up by the Bush Republicans in 2003 who set it up with the nice sounding name Medicare Modernization Act. It was an effort to help the insurance companies with government money. Today in the second term of DJT in 2026 affordability is what American people care about most and the DJT administration is unhappy with the insurance companies. Dr. Mehmet Oz is in charge of Medicare and Medicaid Services Agency of the federal government and he says about Medicare Advantage and new policy to save “taxpayers from unnecessary spending (on Medicare Advantage) that is not oriented towards addressing real health needs.” The DJT Kennedy-Oz approach is for comprehensive digital information linking all medical providers, making America healthy again, cutting through the dense fog created over the last 2 decades, making pharmaceutical costs as affordable as the best in European nations, and refusing to subisidize if delivery is poor and health results are poor.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Medicare for All movement in the U.S. gathers momentum after the U.S. midterm elections with states. Governor Newsom of California says he will seek federal authority to setup a state single payer plan for health insurance. An expert at Georgetown University says there is a new burst of energy for broader coverage or universal health coverage. States with new governors or seeing this momentum are California, Washington, New Mexico, Maine, Nevada, Delaware, Oregon, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois. Polls show a large majority of Americans now support Medicare for All as a form of universal health coverage for all Americans, a system that prevalent in Canada for the last 50 years. Two hearings will be held in Congress on Medicare for All in 2019.

NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Elizabeth Warren's Medicare for All plan in the U.S. draws support from about 60% of people polled for the New York Times. Over 66% support Warren's 2% wealth tax on people with wealth over $50 million. The support is consistent among all groups, gender and race. Only a group of Republican men with college degrees which is likely to include the bulk of the people with wealth over $50 million oppose the wealth tax and Medicare for All. Over the past year wealth tax and Medicare for All support has grown with about 60% of people supporting Medicare for All, a plan similar to government plans in most of Europe and in Canada which have worked over many years.

Warren's plan wins support by showing how it will be paid for and why most people will pay no more than they are paying today, and overall much less because of unnecessary costs taken out of the system.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The two front runners among Democrats in the campaign for President in the U.S. are building their lead on the basis of programs to reduce inequality and build the social fabric. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren support a program of Medicare For All. This program is a single payer program run by the government so that medical costs can be cut by the government directly negotiating cuts, which would reduce some of the cost.The WSJ looks at the ways this can be financed at a cost of between $11 trillion over a decade. Programs of less extensive coverage  in Medicare for All excluding undocumented workers and having individuals share some costs would cost this much, according to some experts.The gap would be financed by taxes such as that on Medicare currently. Sanders additional tax premium would be 7.5% paid by employers and 4% by employees. About $1 trillion is generated by each percentage point of taxes over a decade says CBO, so that a combined 11.5%  tax would cover Medicare for All. Alternatives or some combination would include this with taxes on the wealthy. Tax hikes on wealth, income and financial transactions would generate $11 trillion over a decade, according to the Committee for a Responsible Budget. Currently a majority favors a Medicare for All plan, and this support could grow as people understand that it would be progressive and reduce the burden on the middle class by shifting some of the burden to the wealthier in society in today's economy, where much of the increase in wealth over the last 3 decades has gone to upper income people. Much more so in the U.S. than in Europe creating a tear in the social fabric and disaffection with Democrats, who in earlier administrations from Clinton to Obama failed to maintain the gains made under FDR, Truman and Kennedy. This has led to a Republican administration under president Trump that won over disaffected Democrats but hope to merley to maintain the status quo. Warren is trying to change this with bold social programs that fit today's needs and circumstances. ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden takes strong action to prevent the spread of coronavirus Delta variant by introducing a vaccine mandate for 100 million workers, about two thirds of all American workers. All employers with more than 100 employees will have to require their employees to get vaccinated. All federal government workers and contractors, and recipients of medicare or federal funds are required to get vaccination.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Medical insurance choices are complicated for a reason. This WSJ report says a PhD. is not sufficient to figure it out. They were designed this way to maximize profits from a government program by private insurers and capture as large of the market for the Medicare Advantage plans they offer. Heavy lobbying in Congress makes it possible to write legislation that keeps selecting coverage complicated.  The only way to clean up this mess is through universal health insurance, that is UN's SDG 3.8,  that is fair for all, which everyone can understand, and the US as an advanced technological nation can support. Reducing transparency works with heavy advertising for private insurers with Medicare Advantage Plans to capture the largest chunk of what the government spends. Medicare Advantage insurers capture $943 billion of spending on Part A & B Benefits compared to $693 for traditional Medicare. 

The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bernie Sanders presents the case for Medicare for All, healthcare for all legislation in the U.S. Congress introduced in September 2017. It has the support of 15 Senators. He says the current system is costly, wasteful and bureaucratic. It is time says Sanders for the U.S. to join the rest of the industrialized world, join Britain, France, Germany and other countries of Europe, Japan and Australia, Canada, with healthcare for all Americans. After all he says only 50 miles north of his electoral district in the Burlington, Vermont area is Canada, where the system of healthcare for all works better than in the U.S.  And the Canadians, Germans, French, and British do this spending less than half the U.S. does. In 2015 the U.S. spent $10,000 per person for healthcare, this means that it cost less than $5000 per person in these advanced countries and the way they do it can be studied and its best aspects adopted by the U.S.  He says this is because the U.S. healthcare system is designed to maintain profits for the medical-industrial complex. A major problem is the manner in which the issue is distorted by different sides on the issue of health care in the U.S., without a consensus being developed on what the common interest is in a civilized society. Mostly because the U.S. unlike other societies is still grappling with the issue of what values it embraces on healthcare being made available to all. Under this legislation the transition to healthcare for all would take place over 4 years. In the first year eligibility for Medicare would start at age 55 years, and children under 18 would be covered. In the second year the eligibility starts at 45 years, in the third year at 35 years, in the fourth all are covered.  ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks says the Paul Ryan Budget proposal is a bold step forward that is badly needed in this debate on health care, even though it has some grave weaknesses which need to be corrected. It is a bold step forward because he says Democrats say they want no middle class tax increases, or are not willing to say what kinds of tax increases they support, and yet they believe the Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security programs are worth preserving. This is'nt based on reality. He cites the weaknesses, beginning with the one discussed in David Leonhardt's column in the New York Times on April 7, 2011. Too many Americans pay too little into Medicare taxes and expect to collect several hundred thousand dollars more in Medicare benefits. The example given in Leonhardt's column is from a study that shows 56 year olds with average earnings pay about $140,000 in dedicated Medicare taxes over a lifetime, and then go on to collect $430,000 in benefits. Middle class and affluent boomers can't get off paying their share like everybody else. Its just the right way for their children and the nation's children. Ryan's plan excludes older people reaching retirement in ten years. The other major weakness is that the cuts are too deep. Things like the Pell grants which Ryan proposes to cut back to 2008 levels need to be preserved, and more money has to go into science, education and research and early childhood education for the U.S. to be competitive with China and India. The Ryan proposal places cuts that would be required so that tax revenues need to be at 18% of GDP. The number where a larger consensus exists is for tax revenues at 20% of GDP (also supported by business and the Wall Street Journal's editorial columns). This would preserve programs that are most productive for the economic future of the U.S. Ryan's proposal lets the hope for reducing costs of medical care rest entirely on future retirees deciding how much medical care (tests, procedures etc) they consume through larger cost sharing. Yet a structure and framework is needed to manage these costs effectively, and some combination of incentives to retirees to control costs and an effective structural framework is needed. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Jimmy Carter is collecting eulogies at 99 years. He has outlived all presidents. Carter lives with his wife Rosalynn in a two bedroom one story rambler in rural Georgia since 1961, in a house that is so plain and simple that it can only be compared to one that dates back to the mid fifties the simple house in Independence Missouri in which US President Harry Truman lived after leaving Washington in 1952. Both two of the most revered Democrats of this century. At a time when Mr. Reagan has a diminished reputation from all the wars in the Middle East that started from his policies and the failure of laissez faire in bringing fairness to working people and families in America, Truman, Carter and LBJ are seeing their reputations enhanced to a remarkable degree. Building on the work of FDR and Truman, LBJ helped to build Social Security and Medicare for a fairer, better America respecting the dignity of men and women.

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Samuelson warns that turning seniors into a protected class making no sacrifices whatsoever, will mean shrinking all other social programs, defense and investments in education and infrastructure. This is the reality of the budget deficits facing the U.S. He cites the Congressional Budget Office projections that even with cutting defense and non defense discretionary spending by a third, the U.S. risks a deficit in 2023 of about 6.75% of the economy or gross domestic product (GDP). To cover this would require $1 trillion in higher taxes, an increase of a third above the 1970-2011 average. He says Democrats are using demagoguery and intimidation on this issue, and ironically even Paul Ryan's proposal reflects a desire not to touch seniors benefits and willingness to pass on the costs to the young to pay for these programs. Social Security and Medicare are a critical part of the American fabric, and no one wants to dismantle them, it is about modernizing them to reflect higher life expectancy and larger wealth accumulated by the elderly compared to previous generations, and to reduce the burden on the young. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gerald Seib, executive editor of of the WSJ, attributes the divisions in America both on the left and the right to a deep skepticism among people about the intentions of the U.S. political and financial establishment to conduct the country's affairs in a way that benefits all people. Both the traditional Democratic and Republican establishments, the Bush-Reagan, Clinton-Obama politicians and the financial community were seen as self-serving and looking after their own interests. The right of center supply side economics and the the tolerance for immigration levels of 30% rise in the last decade were discredited. A much larger recovery program was seen as needed from the deeply bruising effects of the financial crisis of 2008, started by the reckless financial establishment behaviours, than either the Reagan supply siders or the Obama people had understood or planned. This opened the way for Mr. Trump to take up the cause of ordinary Americans with a message of ambitious infrastructure development, confronting China's use of trade adversely affecting American workers, and slowing down immigration. And within the Democratic party the emergence of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders with programs for a wealth tax that would finance Medicare for All and college education supported by the federal government. Both the traditional Republicans under Bush and Democrats under Clinton Obama were seen not upto the task, after the 2008 financial and economic crisis created deeper scars than were imagined possible. The lack of effective policies under Bush or Obama simply aggravating the situation further. The culture wars have split Americans down the middle with a breakdown of the traditional American family and social structures creating deep anxieties in America. Obama's comments unsettled people in the heartland when he said that economic decline in the Rust Belt had made people there to "cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them."   The trillions of dollars spent in wars in Asia and the Middle East were seen by Mr. Trump as an enormous waste when much needed investment was deprived of attention at home. Mr. Trump hammered this point home till today it is well accepted across America.  Even as political divisions persist they are now on how to tackle the redevelopment and growth of the U.S. The new focus of agreement has shifted with agreement across the country that infrastructure development in the U.S. and defending workers rights to jobs and opportunities is the top priority. That trade relations need to be reshaped keeping this priority ever present in negotiations. As a result all parties could agree on infrastructure and the recently concluded agreement for trade with Mexico and Canada and phase 1 of negotiated agreement with China. In overseas affairs the U.S. under Trump seeks cost sharing with a 2% of GDP defense spending by other nations so that money can be diverted to use at home. In this sense the debate has already shifted in the U.S. and the UK to how to address the problems of uneven development and growth across the two countries and better allocation of scarce resources to needs at home. Which is for the U.S. a good thing in the middle of all the perception of divisions.      ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
For the approaching US midterm elections president Biden seeks to draw a sharp contrast with Republican Senator Rick Scott's Plan which he says would worsen inflation and increase taxes on working class families. Mr. Scott's plan is for sunset on all federal legislation and president Biden says this would include Medicare and Social Security. Mr. Scott also wants all Americans to pay some income tax to have skin in the game. At this time about half of all Americans pay no taxes says Mr. Scott. Former US president Trump continues to lead the Republican party in 2022  yet he faces a very different Democratic party under president Biden. Mr. Biden's focus is on his $2 trillion plan for Workers and Families, rebuilding American manufacturing and renewing supply chains, unlike Hillary Clinton whose lacked such a focus. Leading to Mr. Trump's appeal with working class families and disdain for traditional Republican policies that secured him the presidency in 2018 by defeating Hillary Clinton. The changes with president Biden's focus on workers and families are happening also in the European Union. Scholz and the Greens in Germany, Macron in France with potentially Melenchon as prime minister, and similar changes in Denmark and other EU countries suggest that there is a renewed focus on infrastructure, rebuilding manufacturing and supply chain renewal, rebuilding incomes and lives of workers and families, in Europe and the US. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden proposes to reduce the US deficit by $2 trillion by increasing taxes on American households worth more than $100 million that would apply to their earned income, and their unrealized gains on liquid assets like stocks. Biden also plans quadrupling the tax on stock buybacks by companies, a tax approved in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2021. The deficit in 2023 will be about $1.4 trillion and rise to about $2 trillion, so that Biden's plan is to practically eliminate the  large deficit if the Republicans come on board. Republicans prefer cuts in spending. US companies have engaged in a dramatic increase in stock buybacks in recent years leading to calls for increasing the tax on stock buybacks. Biden says even high income households will not see an increase in their taxes, only the wealthiest households with over $100 million who have benefited vastly through the Reagan type policies of the last two decades. These households with over $100 million in assets will not be affected in the same way as students, workers, and middle income households are affected in shouldering a large part of the burden of these Reagan type policies that did not adequately fund education, healthcare, and manufacturing in communities across America. This was a period when Democrats in Congress awed by Reagan type policies failed to vigorously oppose policy that increased the US deficit and burden on households for health costs by not allowing Medicare to negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies. A senior AARP official says that when we talk about the Biden Inflation Reduction Act of 2021 the key component is the Medicare price negotiation with companies that is now law. Why Republicans and Democrats before Mr. Biden allowed such a gross distortion for two decades since 2001 that burdened ordinary  working Americans while neglecting American manufacturing, till Mr. Biden assumed the presidency, says much about the policies of the last two decades and how it has affected ordinary working families. Shriveling factory towns and creating much distress in these communities with these distortions that are a legacy of Reagan type laissez faire policies that government should do little. The result of these policies is that manufacturing is concentrated in only one country for the whole supply chain something that would never have happened with a thoughtful policy planning process. India and Vietnam are only today seen as alternatives for the supply chain in 2023 when policies were in place in these countries since 2014 for the supply chain to be distributed in a way that would be a win-win situation for all countries, avoiding the national security threats of today with overconcentration of manufacturing in China. This has not benefited China or the US because of the rancor and tension it has created. It was the fall of the Berlin Wall that created some of this awe for Reagan, when looking at it objectively it was nothing more than a course correction in Europe after the Hungarian revolution suppressed in 1956, Czech in 1968. It had little to do with what policies the US should pursue for workers and families, just as the war in Ukraine today remains another course correction in a different direction in Europe, and does not affect domestic policy in the US to build a better society for workers and families that Mr. Biden is doing. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The top 1% of billers get 17.5% of the payments from the U.S. Medicare program for 2012, according to the Medicare agency's reports. The Medicare agency released data with details of payments to 950,000 doctors, medical providers, certain health care companies, the second year this information is being released. This covers $90 billion of payments. Astonishing as it may sound the transparency comes late, after large increases in medical costs and the increasing U.S. deficit. It happened only after the long and persistent effort by the Wall Street Journal to overturn a 1979 ruling that required such records to be kept secret. By intervening in that suit in 2011, the WSJ's parent company Dow Jones was able to convince a judge about the need for transparency, leading to reversal of the injunction in May 2013. The WSJ and the media has used this information to monitor the waste and fraud in the Medicare system, a vital role only the media can perform to protect the public interest.

ObamaCare's Reality Deficit

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Questions about the true cost of the Obama health care legislation and the assumption that the legislation cuts the deficit by billions of dollars. This WSJ editorial says one has to look at this closely, and not merely look at CBO projections, which may be based in a certain context and not reflect the true costs, especially because many accounting gimmicks and use of numbers to present a particular picture is taking place. The information this editorial cites is that: it uses 10 years of taxes to fund six years of subsidies, Social Security and Medicare revenues are double-counted to the tune of $398 billion, a new program funding long-tem care frontloads taxes but backloads spending, and the assumption of an automatic 25% cut to physician payments that Congress is unwilling to authorize. Rep. Rand Paul has tried to present an alternative view which needs to be studied just as closely, because of the enormous impact of a jump in spending at a time when the public finances are fragile. WSJ also cites the work of Richard Foster, the chief Medicare actuary, as an alternate perspective of how things could turn out, Doug Holtz-Eakin, and Eugene Steuerle. It calls for common sense in evaluating programs, entitlements, defense or other government spending. They not only cost money, but costs escalate over time as history has shown over decades, till they eventually are discovered to be not affordable unless the middle class is willing to dig deeper into its finances to pay for them. Alternate perspectives from a range of informed opinion, Howard Dean, Martin Feldstein, and the head of Harvard's Medical School show that the issue needs to be looked at closely and carefully and cannot be something in which CBO numbers can be trusted to tell the whole story. Especially when common sense, history, and informed opinion across a spectrum of thought advises caution, and fragile public finances also suggest caution. Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont, says the health care bill is not real reform, and may do more harm than good. He says in a Washington Post article, December 17, 2009, the Obama health care bill does not insert competition into insurance markets, does not significantly reduce costs, and does not improve the delivery and use of health services. It was he says done with a political calculus and crafted for votes not real reform. Jeffrey S. Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School, gave the Obama health reform bill an "F" grade, saying in a Nov 18, 2009, WSJ article, that it was disingenuous to call this reform, Congress and the White House were simply deceiving the public. He said the bill will accelerate US health care spending, postpone most of the major health care problems, expecially the ones that drive cost, including the "fee for service" system and delivery of health care. He says in his discussions with economists and other health care leaders the opinion was unanimous that the bill will accelerate health care spending. He cites Massachusetts as an example, where access to care was expanded under the same dysfunctional system, and spending went up, and it doesn't work. Feldstein, who in early 2008 suggested proactive solutions to the mortgage debt crisis which were never adopted, says that the Obama health care law means higher taxes in the long run to pay for the $1 trillion cost of health care for the uninsured group over 10 years. Feldstein says that the Obama plan is to cut Medicare to cut spending, and will reduce the amount of medical services, as reduced spending comes from fewer services, not reducing payments to providers. And he asks if the cost reductions are weighted too heavily towards reduced services and not reduced payments to providers ,would this result in large cuts to services to affect the quality of healthcare for the 85% of the American people who are accustomed to a different pattern of healthcare. ...
Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
One in six dollars generated by the U.S. economy goes to pay for health care, almost twice the average for rich countries. It hurts America in many ways; by being a burden on the taxpayer when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid paying for the poor and the elderly, on companies being one reason GM went bankrupt, it eats up federal and state budgets, rising costs make any form of future coverage for all unsustainable, and it robs other priorities such as infrastructure building and other national scale investments. The Economist says that if it had to design a system from scratch, it would go for a system based mostly around publicly funded health care. For the uninsured the solution of an employer mandate is now well accepted, so this is not an issue. What is an issue is how to make the new system affordable? Here the Economist says that whether in stages or in one move, the tax deductability of employer paid health insurance, which is costing the U.S. government $250 billion ayear, has to go. It is necessary to remove this deduction, and its something all interests involved will have to swallow, as other savings are smaller and will not be adequate. The deductability of insurance makes the true cost of insurance transparent, so it supports gold plated insurance. This does not make cost control the pressing priority it needs to be. So the deducatability of employer paid health insurance hurts both ways. The other necessary action is in the area of moving out of the current culture where most doctors work on a fee-for-service basis, where the more tests they prescribe or procedures they perform the greater their incomes. This acts as a perverse incentive, and has aruinous effect in mushrooming health care costs in America. Cutting back on unnecessary tests and procedures, and prescriptions , would save 10% to 30% of health costs says the Economist. And it says this has been proven with the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and Kaiser Permanente in California showing that cutting back doesn't hurt care and outcomes., so much so that cutting back would occur along with improved outcomes. But Americans with employer paid insurance just take things for granted as its not much out of pocket expense for them. THis creates the lack of a force for controlling costs even as employers are shouldering abigger and bigger burden, and the employee who thinks he is doing fine actually is seeing more of his salary dollars going to pay for his health insurance. In a way the consumers of health care are stuck with the perception that they are not somehow paying for these mushrooming costs and too manytests, procedures and prescriptions. This perception leads them a false sense of comfort with the system they are in, and a fear of something new fanned by the medical lobbies, that any change will impact users negatively. This makes the whole discussion on health care or the process of finding solutions to become an exericize in which terms like "rationing" and "choice" play a distorting role. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tim Walz uses a sports metaphor about being one behind, fighting for every inch in this football game to score, as he brings to life this final effort of 75 days to win the election for president Kamala Harris, for president Biden, and for workers and families across the 51 States. Read the full speech at the Convention as Tim Walz accepts the Democratic nomination for Vice President. "Their Project 2025 will make things much, much harder for people who are just trying to live their lives. They spend a lot of time pretending they know nothing about this. But look, I coached high school football long enough to know, and trust me on this: When somebody takes the time to draw up a playbook, they’re going to use it. And we know, if these guys get back in the White House, they’ll start jacking up the costs on the middle class. They’ll repeal the Affordable Care Act. They’ll gut Social Security and Medicare. And they will ban abortion across this country, with or without Congress. Here’s the thing. It’s an agenda nobody asked for. It’s an agenda that serves nobody, except the richest and the most extreme amongst us. And it’s an agenda that does nothing for our neighbors in need. Is it weird? Absolutely. Absolutely. But it’s also wrong, and it’s dangerous. It’s not just me saying so, it’s Trump’s own people. They were with him for four years. They’re warning us that the next four years will be much, much worse." ...
The Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Community Aging in Place: Advancing Better Living for Elders, has been here since 2009, it is offered in about 65 places across 26 states. in the US. It helps people 60 and up stay in their homes such as Chikao Tsubaki 87 years shown here in the Washington Post. It brings a repair worker into the home to figure out how to make it safer for falls, in addition to an occupational therapist and a nurse. Center for Disease Control and Prevention says these falls contribute to deaths of 41,000 older Americans each year and cost Medicare $50 billion. Yet this report in The Washington Post shows Medicare does not cover it, and most private insurance plans do not grasp the idea of keeping people healthy in good settings, paying only when people fall, doing little to prevent the falls. Sarah Szanton is a nurse practitioner who worked with older Americans in home settings in West Baltimore and started CAPABLE in 2009, and is now Dean of the John Hopkins University School of Nursing. In it the client and care team work together to do problem solving and brainstorming. One study shows $20,000 in savings a year for Medicare continuing for 2 years person after one CAPABLE intervention. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
"I’m going to make sure that the richest among us, who can afford it, pay their fair share in taxes. It is not right that teachers and nurses and firefighters are paying a higher tax rate than billionaires and the biggest corporations, and I plan on making that fair.” Kamala Harris will finance child care tax credit, aid to small businesses and for first time home buyers, homecare for seniors, and other benefits by everyone paying their fair share and from savings in what Medicare pays out. "When you talk quietly with a lot of folks in Congress, they know exactly what I’m talking about because their constituents know exactly what I’m talking about. Their constituents are those firefighters and teachers and nurses.” For three Reaganite decades America has neglected access to all for child care, education, healthcare, seniors care, the very things that makes America a strong Nation, a Nation where the future belongs, going against the warnings of George Washington in the Draft of the First Inaugural in 1789 that - "I rejoice in the belief that intellectual light will spring up in the dark corners of the earth...That mankind will reverse the absurd notion that the many are made for the few." Absurd notion it was in 1789, absurd notion it is now in 2024. ...
BusinessWeek Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
How the French health care system works. France comes in first and the USA 37th in aWHO health care ranking. THe difference in deaths from respiratory disease is half that in the USA, and lower rates of death from heart disease and diabetes. IT has more hospital beds and doctors per capita than the USA. 65% of French people are satisfied with their health system compared to 40% in the USA, and yet France spends 10.7% of GDP on health care and the USA spends 16% for poorer results. THe French system is more generous to its seniors. Unlike Medicare there are no deductibles, just modest co-payments that are often dismissed for chronically ill. And diabetes and critical surgeries are covered 100%. French also buy supplemental insurance like Medigap for extra expenses like dental and eyglasses. Cancer patients are treated free of charge. Avastin treatments costing $48,000 a year are provided at no charge. France's PMI or Protection Maternelle et Infantile, is rated highly. It is anetwork of thousands of healthcare facilities, that ensure that every mother and child in the country receives basic preventive care. Mothers even receive afinancial incentive for attending their pre and post natal visits. France makes this care affordable by reibursing doctors at a much lower rate. The average yearly net income for doctors is around $55,000, about athird of what doctors in the USA make. But French doctors don't have to pay back huge student loans as medical school is paid for by the state and malpractice insurance premiums are only a tiny fraction of that in the USA. And again the French government pays two thirds of the social security tax for most French physicians- which is typically 40% of income. So the $55,000, is more like $92,000 taking that into account and more like $110,000 when student loans and malpractice is taken into account at US levels. Specialists who have 4 or more years experience can charge what they want, but as one gastroenterologist says, there in an unspoken and undefined limit to what you can cahrge or what is socially acceptable. Yet even in France there is inflation in health care costs that the government deals with through price controls and more spending. The French national insurance system is running increased deficits each year and this is now $13.5 billion, and it has led to higher taxes for employers and workers. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's 2017 budget is an effort to reshape spending priorities by the Republican party. Apart from Medicare and Social Security all other entitlement programs from the days of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society are subject to cuts. Deep cuts to Medicaid and food stamps, including introducing work requirements. The philosophy behind it is that compassion will now be measured not by how large these programs are but by how much the government can get people "off these programs and back in charge of their lives,"  according to Budget Director Mulvaney.  The cuts are $616 billion to Medicaid and Children's Health programs, $193 billion in cuts to Food Stamps, $143 billion in student loans, $72 billion in disability programs. The overhaul of the Affordable Health Care Act is part of this change. The reallocation would put more money into infrastructure for $200 billion, and in tax cuts, $19 billion in a parental leave program and $29 billion for veterans programs, plus added spending on the military. William Hoagland of the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Republican who worked on budget issues says it will be politically difficult as the cuts to lower income groups come with tax cuts for small businesses and higher income individuals.  Beyond the policy priorities there is an area where both Republicans and Democrats are skeptical of the budget. This is how it impacts the U.S. debt. Under Congressional Budget Office estimates the U.S. debt as a percentage of GDP which rose to about 75% after the Great Recession starting in 2008, is projected to grow to about 85%. In sharp contrast the Trump administration estimates of the Office of Management and Budget are for it to drop to 65% based on rosier estimates of 2% inflation, 3% growth for the decade ahead. Experts say this is unlikely once the Fed raises interest rates and the unemployment rate currently at 4.4% leads to rising inflation, undercutting growth which has remained below 2% for a long period. These concerns are also voiced by Hilsenrath in the WSJ based on the experience of other countries such a Britain that cut corporate taxes without seeing an uptick in economic growth. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this editorial the Wall Street Journal says it supports the "sequester" or trigger of automatic cuts in 2013 if the Supercommittee in the U.S. Congress fails to reach agreement on budget cuts. Across the board budget cuts are not the best option, but says the Journal given that politicians have failed to come to agreement this is the best option available. This will generate $68 billion in savings in 2013. The Congressional Budget Office estimates cuts will be 7.8% for domestic programs, and defense will take a 10% cut. Medicare spending will fall by 2%, mostly payments to providers. To put this in perspective the Journal points out that total domestic discretionary spending doubled to $614 billion in 2010 from $298 billion in 2000, providing a higher starting point for cuts. It says some of the cuts in defense could be restored through a supplemental bill as planned by Sen. McCain.

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