LyrArc Article Gist
A nuclear plant in a war zone with repeated shelling? This is taken up in this debate video of 44 minutes in FR24 which you can click on. The world has not seen this since the start of nuclear energy from plants in the 1950's. Calder Hall the first UK nuclear power station and the first in western Europe started in 1956. Eisenhower opened the first US nuclear power station Shippingport on the Ohio river in Pennsylvania, 50 kilometres from Pittsburgh in 1958 as part of the Atoms for Peace Program. The US built 54 nuclear plants that are operating today in 2022 generating 50% of the renewable energy in use today in the US. The question is what does the unthinkable conducted by the Russians and Ukrainians, by weaponizing a nuclear plant do to public perception of the safety of the Atoms for Peace Program initiated by president Eisenhower in 1954? What does this damaging of public safety perceptions after Fukushima do to the Atoms for Peace type of programs in China India, and European Union that are part of the emissions cutting programs in the world? These are serious questions at a time when climate change is not simply a word but means floods, fires, drought, and declining food production all over the world from Spain to Pakistan, from Germany to China. China and India are affected. China has 53 nuclear plants in 2021 with 50 GW and plans to double this by 2030. India has 22 nuclear plants  with 8 GW in 2021 and plans to triple this to 22 GW by 2030. How will climate change be tackled with public safety perceptions affected with another nuclear accident like that in Fukushima arising from shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant. As the president of the UN Security Council Zhang Jun of China clearly stated at the UN SC meeting last week that China opposed use of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant by Russia (or Ukraine) in any way that could lead to damaging nuclear safety leading to an unintended accident. China only gets about 5% of its energy from nuclear, India about 3%, and this will need to increase multiple times to tackle climate change. France gets 70% of its energy from nuclear, the US 20%, by comparison. Nuclear energy safety and clear rules to prevent weaponizing of nuclear plant zones is essential and a solution like that developed for the food grain shipments from Odessa through Black Sea to the Mediterranean has to be arranged quickly. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
FR24 gives this video of the televised national debate in France between Macron and Le Pen. Macron took up the challenge of not enough attention being given to Le Pen's ties with Russia and her position of skepticism when it comes to the European Union and climate change. "You are dependent on the Russian government and you are dependent on Mr. Putin. When you speak to Russia, you are speaking to your banker." Le Pen says she had taken that loan from a Czech-Russian bank only because French banks refused to lend to her. "I'm absolutely and totally free woman." The candidates also clashed over Le Pen's proposal for banning Muslim women from wearing headscarves. Le Pen described the veil as "a uniform imposed by Islamists." Macron sad that such a plan would violate France's secular rules and would trigger "civil war" in a country that has the largest Muslim population in western Europe. The Fench colonoized parts of North Africa during the period after 1830, with French colonies in Algeria, Morocco and other parts of the region, leading to immigration from this part of the Arab world. After a series of terrorist incidents the French public lost patience with Islamist tendencies leading to a general swing to the right in French politics including Macron. Yet mainstream parties such as Macron's continue to support France's secular values. The traditional parties from the period before Macron such as the Le Republicains of the De Gaulle period in the sixties and the Socialists from the Mitterand period (1981-1995) both failed to win more than 5% of the vote in 2022 showing the many changes happening in France.  During the Macron period as president Yellow Vest protests brought up the issues of working families having a hard time making ends meet. Macron has responded to such protests with some aloofness but also with a tendency to organize town hall meetings to listen to people express their frustrations.  France has established a stronger welfare state than the US and Britain, and for this reason issues related to the dislocation of smaller towns because of the shift of manufacturing to China are part of the general trend that had affected both the US and western Europe, requiring a more unified response. This now takes shape with the renewal of manufacturing in the US and all the western European countries. Candidates with platforms such as Le Pen's to provide relief for the current surge in the cost of living could offer temporary band aid solutions but not address the root causes that require a renewal of French manufacturing and bringing good jobs home or closer to home. The will and aspiration to bring a next generation industrial revolution to France and Europe is the kind of solution that is needed, one that would revive towns and communities across France and across Europe. Much of the technological capabilities are there in Europe, needed is the will and aspiration.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Who is Nandalal Weerasinghe? This report in The Daily News gives some idea about the man chosen to help Sri Lanka negotiate a deal with the IMF.  Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe was an alternate executive director at the International Monetary Fund before being appointed deputy governor of the Ceylon Central Bank in 2012. Before this he managed several macroeconomic departments at the central bank and was assistant governor of the central bank from 2007 to 2009, He has spent the large part of his career in economic positions at the Central Bank of Ceylon after getting his PhD in economics from the Australian National University. Weerasinghe is the leading expert in macroeconomics from Sri Lanka who has IMF experience. He says "things will get worse before they get better." He retired early from the central bank with a change in government in 2019. He was reappointed as Sri Lanka faced a debt crisis in March 2022 following the two year long pandemic, and the Ukraine war in 2022 that was bad for emerging market economies. Weerasinghe says about the crisis facing Sri Lanka- Recent decisons followed Modern Monetary Theory. This has dire consequences. In recent times the savings brought about by the low tax and interest rate regime passed savings on to the corporate sector and took away spending power from savers and pensioners. Surging inflation made things even worse for the lower income middle class and older parts of society. Years of accumulated debt have brought Ceylon to this point. In Ceylon one is seeing the effects of savings being passed on to the corporate sector in an economy dependent on tourism and remittances from overseas workers, both hit by the two year long pandemic. This is part of  a trend that has hurt emerging market economies from Argentina and Pakistan which also turned to the IMF to Turkey.  In other countries in the European Union savings also passed on to the corporate sector with low tax and low interest rate regime. With high inflation resulting in the cost of living crisis seen today in France and Germany. This type of policy that Weerasinghe calls 'Modern Monetary Theory' is not healthy for the European Union and the US, as these policies led to the neglect of much needed and vital investments in infrastructure, health and education. Only now are these effects being corrected by new administrations of Biden in the US and Scholz in Germany, with Biden's 2 trillion plan for workers and families, and a similar plan from chancellor Scholz. With this come needed investments to tackle climate change, all of which was neglected before. India has taken a different approach. By following good governance, managing vaccination effectively during the pandemic, social emphasis for food, water, electricity, cooking gas, medicine for the vast population of 1.2 billion, and a Master plan for building Made in India manufacturing,  India has avoided such crises and maintained strong economic growth. In this sense it is a model for South Asian, South East Asian, African, and Latin American emerging market economies that face a difficult situation today. Good governance is critical.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Christina Romer, Prof. of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley, was chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisors under U.S. president Obama. Here she discusses the different aspects of the debate on raising the minimum wage. Romer says the negative effects on unemployment are small. The impact on consumer spending is also limited. The anti-poverty effects are real for raising the minimum wage from the current $7.25 an hour, says Romer, as over half the families earning a minimum wage make less than $40,000 an hour. President Obama called for raising the minimum wage to $9 an hour in 2013. Studies show 13 million U.S. workers earning less than $9 an hour. Raising the incomes of these families by about $3500 an year under the president's proposal gives workers badly needed income to cope with rising cost of gas, food and other basic necessities. The effects on consumer spending are small, estimated at between $10 to $20 billion. Its main virtue is keeping the principle of fairness and maintaining social cohesion at a time of increaing inequality. Romer says there is competition for workers which makes it possible for workers at the lower end to get a fair wage, but does not account for the effect of high unemployment which takes pressure off raising the minimum wage in the market economy. Another benefit for countries of keeping a fair minimum wage is that other actions can be taken to improve competitiveness for business and manufacturing and reducing the deficit and be seen in a positive context of overall improvement. This is part of the case made in Europe for boosting the mnimum wage as austerity measures are taking place....

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama's speech announcing the details of his executive order on immigration on Nov. 20, 2014, starts by saying he is not bypassing Congress or the Republicans. He says Republicans had the opportunity to pass legislation in the House that passed the Senate, or come up with their own bill. And still have an opportunity to come up with a bill he could sign into law that address the shortcomings of the current immigration system. In selling the bill to Americans he points out that this is not an amnesty, that the current system which allows immigrants here to stay illegally without paying taxes or any accountability is an amnesty. He points to deportation of millions as not an option, an out of the character of America. That deportation of criminals will continue and is up 80% in his administration, without mentioning that deportation under his administration for ordinary undocumented immigrants without any criminal record had reached a high of 400,000 a year under his administration, higher than under the Republican Bush administration. In fact it had reached such levels that Hispanic groups stated they would sit out the midterm 2014 elections and not vote for Democrats or Republicans, after providing a significant part of the winning margin for Obama in the 2012 presidential election. President Obama says he has the legal authority to prevent deportation, and that this is essentially what this executive order does- providing a temporary right to stay and work in this country to undocumented immigrants here living in the shadows who are here for more than 5 years, not a permanent status or citizenship. He cites other presidential decisions of the last 50 years, Republican and Democratic, that have integrated large groups of undocumented immigrants, including an executive order by President Reagan. And he refers to the Bush presidencies 41 and 43, where both father and son, considered Hispanic Americans "a part of American life," as good hard-working people deserving a chance to be Americans. The speech ends with an appeal to the compassion of Americans urging them to look at their own individual stories going back one, two or several generations, or Ellis Island where the early waves of European immigrants entered the country in the 19th century, and to immigrants from the period after the early British settlements in the 18th century. This is typical Obama, as much as the calculated decision to pursue a aggressive deportation policy was for the first 6 years of his administration, including the decision for "Dreamers" or young people before the 2012 election. "Scripture tells us, we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger. we were strangers once, too. And whether our forbears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here because this country welcomed them in." Over 2 million deportations in one of the most aggressive deportation policies of any administration, followed by an effort to stop deportations before the next presidential election, when the NYT had called his deportation policy "infuriating." ...