LyrArc Article Gist
Instead of a jinx much to the contrary the US economy outlook for 2030 in Feb 2026- a surge in investment spending in 2026-2030, new manufacturing investments and lower energy costs, moderating inflation, are likely to propel the US economy ahead to 2030.The effect of tariffs as a policy making tool has been muted because of exemptions, reversal of tariff rates once key objectives were secure for tariffs as a way to get action on foreign policy as with Indian purchases of Russian oil, deals with Japan, South Korea and China, India, UK and the EU. Some sources such as the Philadelphia Fed see price rises reaching 3% in some inflation guages more than the moderate 2.5% in the consumer price index for January 2026. These sources see the hiring slowing down just as layoffs begin to happen in the latter part of the year which is a possibility but less likely. At this point in Feb 2026 there is a tendency not to layoff and to hang onto employees, and hiring has been slow in 2025. January's report of 130,000 jobs added is the first sign of strengthening of the jobs market. Overall a cautious view would be to call it a soft landing after the inflation surge of the covid period. Another way of looking at is is more in line with the strategic direction of the US economy- freeing up the economy with investments in energy,  reducing the key costs of production, tax policy of Bessent's complete one shot depreciation of equipment increasing business investment, tariff policy making the world trading system fairer and now more attuned to US interests, all creating an investment and jobs surge in 2026-2027. There is an added benefit from US efforts to free up the world trading system from the stranglehold placed on it by China with its control over world manufacturing. A dominance and unwise concentration gained from the serious mistakes of the Bush-Clinton period of not putting in safeguards for US factories and jobs (that form the backbone for families in neighborhoods towns and regions across the US), and US business interests growing indifference to the very communities they were based in by outshoring to China destroying whole regions in America. Even where it is criticized or seen as negative there are huge benefits when the US acted. Tariff increase on India is a clear example- it built Indian resilient attitude in June-Feb 2026, and during this period it cut funding Russia's war in Ukraine by sourcing energy from other sources, the US policy led to India and EU+ Germany signing trade agreements to double their effort and double trade and scientific cooperation ( a goal secured for the US as it reduces concentration in China), was followed by US signing its own trade agreement with India within days, and increases world trade of US and EU and Germany in ways that will bring 2.5 billion people into a strong partnership that overshadows anything that happened in China in the Clinton-Bush-Obama years of failure. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Figures from Kiel Institute for World Economy show that European Union aid to Ukraine is nearly double that of the US- $187 billion for EU to $98 billion for US aid. The American Enterprise Institute conservative think tank also confirms EU aid is significantly higher. Trump said US was $250 billion to European Union $100 billion- completely the reverse of the facts. This is one aspect of the debate with Harris that was not fact checked to reach the 67 million watching immediately similar to the FBI correction on crime rates by David Muir.   "Look, we’re in for $250 billion or more because they don’t ask Europe, which is a much bigger beneficiary to getting this thing done than we are. They’re in for $150 billion less because Biden and you don’t have the courage to ask Europe like I did with NATO. They paid billions and billions, hundreds of billions of dollars when I said either you pay up or we’re not going to protect you anymore. So that may be one of the reasons they don’t like me as much as they like weak people. But you take a look at what’s happening. We’re in for $250 to $275 billion. They’re into $100 to $150. They should be forced to equalize.”   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This self portrait by Vladimir Putin about his growing up years in Leningrad and the life of his father and mother during the siege of Leningrad by Germans may offer a better sense of the mind and thinking of the Russian president than the Dresden years when he was a junior Russian official in Communist East Germany (the GDR). It is an interview of the Russian president in 2000 by Nataliya Gevorkyan, Natalya Timakova, and Andrei Kolesnikov over twenty years back. Putin's father suffered severe injuries during the war in the fighting around Leningrad, twice being given up for dead and being dragged wounded across the frozen Neva river to a hospital by a neighbor. His mother was half dead from starvation and his father passed on his food given to him at the hospital. Having gone through the memories of this period affected Vladimir Putin's view of the world and no amount of US or German assurance about NATO's intentions may have erased these memories from childhood. The long period in power and the Covid isolation may have led to  perceptions that were less likely to change so that Putin did his own research and wrote a long paper on Ukraine in 2021 that reflected Russia and Ukraine's long history but did not reflect the changing national aspirations of Ukraine's people in 2022. This may have led to the miscalculation and the errors by both Putin and the leaders Merkel-Bush-Obama that the detailed WSJ report of 20 years of events show to have happened. The WSJ report of April 1, 2022, was titled "Vladimir Putin's 20 Year March to War in Ukraine and How the West Mishandled It." The Social Democrats in Germany under Schroeder and Steinmeier mishandled it by deepening economic integration with Russia as a way to make up for what had happened in the German invasion of Russia, and the Christian Democrats under Merkel with business interests never really grasped the different thinking of the Russian president relying solely on deep economic integration of the EU and Germany with Russia as well as China as an answer. Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama from a distance even less so.  This has led to the miscalculation by Russia under Putin leading to invasion of Ukraine, and the US and Germany being unprepared about taking action to prevent it.  Beyond the key participants and the war damage, there is the enormous damage that is taking place in the mental health around the world after Covid with constant barrage of images of war and refugees streaming into Poland. There is the problem of food imports, of food scarcity in the Middle East, and inflation in food prices for Africa and the Middle East. As Brendan Simms, a Cambridge historian has shown in his book "Europe The Struggle of Supremacy 1453 to the Present," which is now being read by German chancellor Scholz, this has happened before with the UK, Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Russia engaging in these conflicts that led to prolonged wars and eventually to only small shifts in power. Yet with huge effects for ordinary people caught in the wars such as today's refugees and people struggling to feed their families in Africa and Asia after the effects of Covid on income. Food prices have gone up by 50% to almost double in these countries.   ...

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