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.


WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ provides this exceptional report offering readers remarkable clarity on what the Republican Tax Law does- its high and low points.  High Points 1. It reduces the corporate tax rate to bring it in line with other advanced industrialized countries. The corporate tax rate in Germany and Japan is 30%, in the UK it is 19%. For 5 years businesses can write off capital equipment immediately instead of depreciating over a couple of years. This could boost investment and growth. 2.  The law takes aim at deductions that led to distortions. It limits the mortgage interest deduction, and caps the deduction for state and local taxes. This removes the incentive to pay more for homes that exacerbated the housing crisis in 2008. The Alternative Minimum Tax is largely removed. The Low Points 1. The biggest drawback is that lawmakers did not properly fund the tax cuts. Of the 10 costliest tax breaks nine were not touched, including employer health insurance, retirement savings, capital gains. Only the state and local taxes deduction was reduced. And a new tax deduction  was created, a 20% tax deduction for small business (proprietors and partnerships) paying taxes on their individual tax returns. Taxes on the wealthy or value added taxes, reducing tax breaks, is how other advanced industrialized countries paid for the corporate tax cuts, but did not happen here. Additional economic growth  to generate added tax revenues is the way Republicans in Congress say this is funded. Yet this is a questionable assumption as Britain reduced the corporate tax rate to 19% without seeing a surge in economic growth, as Greg Ip pointed out in an earlier WSJ article. At best the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates $500 billion over a decade in added revenues from added growth leaving $1 trillion to be added to the deficit. The WhartonPenn Budget Model (WPBM) estimates only $140 to $367 bill from the additional economic growth resulting in added tax revenues. Under this model only 0.03 to 0.08 percent added U.S. economic growth per year is expected from the Republican Tax Cuts. Such a situation would be bad  for the U.S. as the gradual improvement in Debt to GDP ratio to 78% following the financial crisis of 2008 would be sharply reversed taking the ratio to 97% by 2027. An unsustainable trajectory which will require tax increases in a few years and hurt investment in education, health and infrastructure into the future. This is what worries many experts most on both sides of the political spectrum today about what the Republican Congress has pushed through for a legislative "victory." This is why experts believe this is not serious tax reform and will require a new effort after 2019.   ...
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
As the final Republican tax bill is debated in Congress on December 19, 2017, Senator Bob Casey cited the following points from the Joint Committee on Taxation Report on the floor of the Senate.  1. Americans building their hopes that their pay checks in February 2018 will be increasing are in for a big disappointment said Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, a senior member of the Finance Committee. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimate is that for the 57 million families making less than 100,000 dollars a year the tax cuts in the Republican legislation will either not reduce their taxes or reduce the taxes by about $100 a year. 2. The bill does little for the big tasks facing America of rebuilding failing infrastructure. Senator Casey cited 4500 bridges needing repair or replacement in Pennsylvania alone. It also does little for health care access for middle class families and is likely to lead to 10% increase in health care premiums. Affordability of college and other hurdles of middle class and working class families remain unaddressed.   3. The $9 billion in the estate tax cuts would finance the Children's Health Insurance program which has expired.  4. The $36 billion in tax cuts for corporations comes at a time when corporate profits are at the highest they have been in 15 years, according to Vanguard founder Bogle. He also points out that wages as a percentage of GDP are the lowest in 15 years. The tax cuts in the Republican bill are not likely to correct this imbalance.  5. The share of GDP of people making more than one million dollars in 1980 was 11%, this is up now in 2017 to 20%. This has led to questions about the wisdom of these tax cuts which disproportionately benefit a very small percentage of Americans who do not need these tax cuts, and come with significant sacrifices for the middle class in terms of what is available in public services, and the cost to their children as infrastructure and access to health and education is made more distant because of a growing U.S. debt from this tax cut. The big problem then with this bill is that it further damages intergenerational mobility in the U.S., undermining the foundation of a democratic society. Damage has already happened in the past three decades as Federal Reserve chairman Janet Yellen pointed out at a conference on Economic Opportunity and Inequality on Oct. 17, 2014, saying-"The past several decades have seen the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality following the Great Depression." This is why there is substantial agreement in the media from the Wall Street Journal's Greg Ip to Krugman in the New York Times that the bill fails to correct a harmful trend, and goes further in the wrong direction for a democratic society.       ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out the major problem in the Republican tax cut legislation in 2017- not enough to help the middle class and adding 1 trillion dollars to the deficit. Krugman says even the Bush tax cuts had enough broad public approval because of help to the middle class. So what is the Republican message and rationale for taking this action? This is that the tax cuts will generate an economic boom . Yet the tax cuts in other countries including Britain, as Greg Ip pointed out in the Wall Street Journal recently, have shown that this does not lead to the boost in economic growth that is expected. Krugman agrees that this is unlikely to happen. There is another rational explanation and this is Republican need for a legislative victory heading into next years midterm elections. In which case the decision for tax cuts was not really based on the deep sense and conviction after much debate that this will inevitably create a surge in economic  growth. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This view from the Editorial Board comes as Republicans in Congress geared up for a legislative victory decided to ignore the expert opinion of the Joint Committee on Taxation and polls showing a majority of Americans disapprove of the tax law. It says a "corrosive partisanship" that is affecting the nation has led to this decision. Not an informed consensus necessary to make real and lasting changes to the tax laws that increase growth without disrupting hard won gains in social cohesion after World War II.  Republicans pushed through a trillion and half dollars in tax cuts in the law that reduces the corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%, and cut taxes in 2019 by 51 times ($51,400) for the top 1% of incomes compared to ($1000) for middle class families earning less than $100,000 (Tax Policy Center). The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates it will add $1 trillion to the U.S. deficit as only $500 billion is expected in increase in government revenues over a decade from additional economic growth. This is supported by evidence from countries such as Britain that implemented this type of corporate tax cut without generating much economic growth, says Greg Ip in the Wall Street Journal. The "victory" then comes at a high cost says the Washington Post- in years to come programs to help the growing lower middle class and working class will be subject to cuts and taxes will have to rise to balance budgets.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Clean Energy and Manufacturing investments under Biden Inflation Reduction Act in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kansas, and other Republican states are leading to the Senate Republicans taking a position favoring keeping such investments in the DJT 3B Tax Cuts Bill. Republican states getting bulk of clean energy investments from Biden's IRA Act are working to keep the jobs and factories being built in their states. About $130 billion of $271 billion to 2032 has already been given out, the Senate 3B Tax Cuts Bill wants to keep these tax credits for renewables till 2027. North Carolina is an example which has $21 billion in such clean energy and manufacturing investments since 2022 when the Inflation Reduction Act of president Biden was passed. The IRA Act gave states $271 billion for such investments over a decade. Senator Thom Tillis is leading the Republican Senators group that wants to keep these projects that bring jobs to North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia as the biggest recipients.This means the Senate bill sent back to the House will try to come up with a moderate position on Clean Energy and Manufacturing investments that bring jobs to Republican states. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Two law school professors at Fordham University, Kysar and Sugin, say the Republican tax bill is extreme because it was not based on working with Democrats. As a result not a single Democrat supported this tax legislation. The problem- when the Republicans lose their majority in Congress- a serious possibility after the loss in a Senate race in deep red state Alabama- the whole issue of tax legislation would come up again. This is not without precedent as the Democrats won the presidential election in 2008 and Republicans made a sweeping victory in Congress in 2010.This is why Senators Casey and Wyden (Democrats) and Orrin Hatch (Republican) head of the Finance Committee stated on the floor of the Senate on Dec. 19, 2017, that the next time and in future both parties need to engage in real discussion on taxes. The lack of serious discussion on the health care bill passed by Obama in 2008 has created some of the same problems today that this tax bill passed in a similar way without discussion with the other party is likely to face by 2019. No one needs to look further to realize that the political system is failing in its job of grappling and solving the nation's problems. Kysar and Sugin say this bill is like the 1981 tax cuts skewed towards high income Americans which failed to generate economic growth as intended an led to a swift reversal with tax increases in 1982 and years that followed in 1983, 1984. President Obama failed to address tax reform after appointing the Bowles Commission and not taking up its recommendations to reduce deductions. Another effort at changing the system was made without serious debate, a kind of Republican response to the way Democrats passed the Affordable Care healthcare bill in 2008. Real changes to update the tax laws may be put off till both parties can wrap their hands around the problem together. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Big Beautiful Tax and Spending Bill in the US Congress faces close votes in the US Senate with Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky, and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, both Republicans against it.  The Senate version has additional cuts to Medicaid funding. Tillis expressed concern about these cuts. Senator Rand Paul is opposed to increasing the deficit for enlarged spending and tax cuts. Republicans and DJT have close votes in the Senate and in the Congress. Republicans Murkowski of Alaska and Curtis of Utah want to change the early phaseouts of tax credits to the renewable energy industry in the Senate bill, and the excise tax after 2027 to avoid buying from China and develop American manufacturing in renewables. Senator Collins of Maine has an amendment to add $25 billion for rural healthcare and rural hospitals to offset the effects of large Medicaid cuts. Collins plan also lets taxes revert to 39.6% from 37% for married couples incomes over $50 million.  The bill then heads back to the House for changes by Wednesday, July 2, for a goal to have it on the president's desk by July 4th, Friday. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
House Democrats in the U.S. see the Republican health care plan making the same mistakes in 2017 that the Democrats made in 2008. With the passage of the bill in the House of Representatives with a vote margin on May 4, 2017, rushed through in the way the Obama bill was also rushed through, the nation remains as divided as ever on the issue of health care. The Republicans favoring limiting subsidies and cutting Medicaid, and using some of the savings for a tax cut. The Democrats favoring mandated coverage for all and large subsidies to reduce the number of uninsured Americans, with expansion of Medicaid for very low incomes. Democrats in the House say the Republican House bill will result in Republicans losing seats in the House in midterm elections.

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post analysis of the Republican tax bill gives an exceptional view of the bill's impact and provisions. This is the first major change to the tax laws since 1986. The size of the bill is $1.5 trillion, with the Joint Committe on Taxation projection that the bill will increase tax revenues over a decade by $500 billion, meaning that it will cost $1 trillion being added to the deficit. What the bill does: 1. It offers a permanent tax cut to corporations by reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Industries benefiting the most are mining, real estate, technology, manufacturing. 2. The individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They are skewed to disproportionately help highest income Americans, much less lower income Americans and much more highest income Americans compared to high income Americans. In this sense it is skewed in a an unusual way to the highest earning Americans- a sort of Trump effect in place. The top 1% get a tax break of $51,140 in 2019, middle income people earning about $100,000 get about $1000 a year in 2019, tax payers earning around $50,000 about $380, and those earning less than $25,000 about $60 a year in 2019. Taxpayers earning about 150,000 get about $2000 a year tax cut. (Tax Policy Center) 3. The basic assumption is that tax cuts are revenue neutral if there is economic growth and most of that growth comes from corporations investing in growth. The problem as Greg Ip points out in the Wall Street Journal is that countries trying thsi approach in the past such as Britain have not seen such growth materialize. Corporate profits are the highest in 15 years as percentage of GDP, according to Vanguard founder Bogle, and are now 20% of GDP compared 11% in 1980. If corporations did not invest with this level of profits how much additional investment is going to happen, ask critics, especially as demand drives growth and wages are not boosted under this plan.  4.  Because the bill's changes to current law makes it likely that 13 million less Americans will be insured over a decade- from fewer people signing up for Medicaid and on exchanges for Affordable Care Act- it will hurt lower income Americans. Skewing at both ends of the income spectrum of this type is rare in American history particularly in the twentieth century after the Depression of the 1930's, and poses risks for social cohesion, making it unpopular with most Americans. A CBS News poll taken Dec 3-5 shows 53% of all Americans opposed, only 35% support the tax bill just passed in Congress.  5. Then why did Republicans do this? Republicans needed a legislative success after failure to repeal the Obama Affordable Care law. This pressure led to passage with Republicans probably aware that this is temporary tax reform requiring a real effort by both parties working together after the midterm elections in 2018 and as the presidential election approaches in 2019.    ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The corporate share buybacks announced by U.S. companies in the last 3 months now exceed $200 billion, more than double than in 2017, according to a WSJ analysis. This includes Cisco, Wells Fargo, AbbVie, Amgen, Alphabet (Google). The surge in corporate buybacks started in December after the tax cut of the Trump administration cut U.S. taxes by $1.5 trillion over a decade, cutting the corporate tax rate for large companies from 35% to 21%. The tax cut also included a one time tax for repatriation of $2 trillion held by U.S. companies overseas. This WSJ analysis says there are questions whether the tax cut is working, whether it will encourage new investment, lead to companies increasing wages, or whether this will largely result in corporations returning money to investors with larger dividends and corporate buybacks. Morgan Stanley's analysis of earnings transcripts of companies in the S&P 500 show 44% of the companies say they will use some portion of the tax gains to make capital investments and increase wages, with 28% going in the opposite direction and using them to return money to shareholders. Experts caution that corporate buybacks do not always lead to the company's stock outperforming the stock market. The future of companies depends more on the capital investments and in human capital. There is a sense that workers wages have stagnated since the mortgage financial crisis in 2008, with the economic crisis, globalization and outsourcing, reduced alternatives for workers, geographic pressures in relocation, all pushing wages down.  This is being closely watched with articles on stagnation in wage growth this week in the NYT and WSJ, and earlier in the Economist magazine. Reports on the Trump administration tax cuts passed by a Republican Congress suggested a large tilt towards benefitting the highest income households. Problem with higher stock prices reaching the broader middle class are recognized in that one third of stocks are owned by overseas investors, and 84% of the remaining stocks are owned by the wealthiest 10%. Republicans have turned to bonuses typically of $1000 per person given by companies yet this amounts now to about a few billion dollars over an estimated 4 million Americans, says this WSJ analysis. This is not enough to justify a huge tax cut and raise the deficit by over a trillion over 10 years on the assumption that it would lead to higher wages or capital investment when about $200 billion goes to boosting stock prices. This comes at a time when the American middle class is not broadly invested in the stock market after the exit following the battering stock prices took during the 2008 financial crisis. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Federal Reserve announced on Dec. 13, 2016, that it would increase its benchmark short term interest rate by 0.25 percentage point, to between 0.50% and 0.75%. The increase will also be reflected in business and household borrowing costs. The Fed also announced its intention to make 0.75% percentage point increase in 2017, possibly in 3 quarter percentage point moves. The Fed's forecast is for the fed-funds rate to reach 2.1% at the end of 2018, and 2.9% at the end of 2019. The Fed's policy is based on a sense of strong labor market with unemployment falling, and says it is based on discussion at a 2 day meeting, and "in view of realized and expected labor-market conditions and inflation." This reflects a view that there is now not that much slack in the labor market, that further improvements could trigger higher inflation. Fed forecasts for inflation are for it to increase from 1.5% in 2016 to 1.9% in 2017 and to the target of 2% in 2018. The unemployment rate of 4.6% in 2016 is forecast to go to 4.5% in 2017 and remain at that level till 2019. Economic growth is forecast at a median annual rate of 1.9% in 2016, 2.1% in 2017, only a slight improvement from last forecast in Sept. 2016. Support for chairwoman Yellen's policy decision was unanimous. See the link on views of NYT's Binyamin Applebaum and Neil Irwin on how Fed rate policy and economic growth under the Trump administration is likely to play out, and Ian Talley's report on impact on exports with a stronger dollar in WSJ. These views also are in line with the Fed's forecasts and policy decision as they reflect the concerns of the Fed about inflation, and also reflect the Fed's view that growth will be close to 2% in 2017-2019, and not the 3-4% stated by Trump and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin. Fed rate policies to keep inflation at about 2% tend to counter stimulus spending by the Trump administration and effect of tax cuts. The size of the stimulus and the tax cuts are also likely to be much smaller than stated because of Republican concerns about the deficit in the U.S. Congress, according to these views. The stronger dollar also has the paradoxical effect of making trade gains more difficult while increasing trade friction in tougher bargaining supported by Trump, making the higher growth targets harder to reach.   ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The surprise is the DJT Senate bill cuts to about 75% of the solar and wind subsidies in the Biden 2022 IRA Act for $843 billion in investments that were going to Republican districts. New rules in the Senate version of 3B Tax Cuts Bill require US renewable solar to disentangle supply chain from China by 2027 or face an excise import tax. All renewable subsidies will also be phased out earlier by 2027 instead of 2032 set by the Biden administration in the Inflation Reduction Act. The Inflation Reduction Act passed in 2022 with subsidies, tax credits for renewables solar and wind led to $843 billion in planned solar and wind investments. Suddenly much of this is placed in doubt. Instead of 2032 phase out the date is moved up to end of 2027 for 30% subsidies and to end of 2028. The result is confusion in the renewables industry and opposition to the excise tax for not disentangling from China supply chain by end of 2027 spreading to the US Chamber of Commerce. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Republicans and Democrats decided to tackle the U.S. fiscal cliff in several steps. The first step for the Bush tax cuts to be extended to single earners with income under $400,000, and couples earning under $450,000 was part of the agreement reached Jan. 1, 2013. Republicans see this as protecting small business owners who generate jobs in the U.S. economy. Democrats see this as progress in taxing the wealthy to reduce spending cuts in other programs. As expected the deal was reached between Senate colleagues Republican Mitch McConnell and former Democratic senator and Vice President Joe Biden, as rapport is missing in the relationship between Speaker Boehner and president Obama. The $110 fiscal cliff spending cuts on entitlements and defence will be postponed for 2 months till early March under the deal. Debt ceiling will not be raised and negotiations will be needed again by the end of Feb. 2013 to raise the debt ceiling. By March 27, 2013 short term funding measures lapse. Republicans see accepting tax cuts on the wealthy as a way to remove this issue in future negotiations to focus on spending cuts needed to improve U.S. finances. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Democrats approach to tax reform is to retain the removal of tax breaks enacted by the Republicans under president Trump. Democrats simply increase the tax rates in their proposals so that $1 trillion net is generated in new tax revenues to finance the nation's infrastructure, to fund the other building blocks of society through social services, and help to struggling middle or lower income classes. Republican 2017 law changed tax rates for corporations from 35% to 21%. This is now seen as too generous leaving little for infrastructure and other essential needs of society such as education, child care and health. Democrats will adjust the tax rates directly.

The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Republican tax bill that passed the House and Senate in Dec. 2017 is likely to increase the deficit in the range of about $516 billion according to Tax Foundation or $ 1trillion according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, after boost to growth is included. This time in an effort to get a win Republicans cast aside doubts about the effects on the deficit to get it passed. During the Obama years tax legislation failed to get Republican support because of impact on deficits. The reluctance of president Obama to touch the deductions as proposed by the Simpson-Bowles Commission showed the politically cautious approach taken by Obama.  The new bill was examined by the NYT for its impact on various income groups. For people making over $50,000 over 80% get a cut in taxes, about 10% see no difference and the rest see increase in taxes. This goes up by a few percentage points to 84-85% in cuts for people making over 200,000 to $ 1 million, and drops to 80% for over $1 million incomes. About 20% see an increase in taxes for incomes over $1 million.  As evidence of how the tax bill impacts in greater detail this is not provided by the NYT, and shows that the impact of the bill is still not fully understood.     ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Neil Irwin of NYT provides some counter intuitive ideas on U.S. Fed interest rate policy. He says it can't be take as a given that the Fed will raise rates in 2017-2018. This depends on how much punch there is in the Trump economic policies for stimulus, and for infrastructure spending, tax cuts. He cites Senate Majority Leader McConnell who said he would like to keep "tax reform revenue neutral." Getting large spending and pushing up the deficit is likely to run up against Republicans in Congress who have for 8 years opposed large spending increases and large deficits. Trump has given few details about his stimulus or infrastructure spending plans. He says the scale of the spending might not match the talk. Irwin cites JP Morgan Chase economists who have kept their forecasts for GDP growth just under 2% for 2017 and 2018. And he points out that even Trump appointees at the Fed might act independently. The Fed might look at being cautious considering that increased trade tensions with China, and the unpredictability of a Trump administration could hurt growth. Irwin does not mention the uncertainty in other areas such as policy towards Russia on which the Republican party and Congress have very different views than Trump, tensions over Taiwan, that can also affect growth. ...
YouTube Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Vigorous and eloquent testimony before Congress by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, answering questions from Republicans and Democrats. Bessent had just landed from London at 3 am in the morning and after 3 hours of sleep took the time to answer over 5 hours of questioning by members of the House of Representatives. In question after question he explained how the certainty offered by the tax cuts bill would help small business and job creation in the US. The permanence of the 100% expensing of buildings and equipment would help farmers and small business , regulations would be cut, and manufacturing would take off. Manufacturing employs 9% of the workers in the US and their wages will rise faster than for service workers. The combined effects of the improvements for small business, farmers and for manufacturing workers will help the American middle class, America's working class, and increase the growth of the economy. Bessent points out that in the original bill of which the new tax bill is an extension the top 10% paid 7% more in taxes in 2017. He also points out that workers were hurt the most by the slower rise in wages and the rise in cost of living of 21% in 2021-2022, which he says was in essential goods with the actual impact of about 30%. With higher jobs creation by small business and more investment in the economy more able bodied men can join the workforce and gain healthcare benefits under new rules. He pointed to low inflation at 2.1% and to higher job creation, and to higher growth in the economy of 2.6%, that with other savings could lower the deficit. ...
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. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Republican tax law of 2018 is unpopular, according to a new NBC/WSJ poll in April 2018. Only 27% of people in the poll view the tax law favorably, 36% view the tax law unfavorably. About one third or 32% say they have no opinion, possibly because they have no clear idea of how it will impact them or the country. On trade and other economic issues the Republican Party is viewed more favorably, including for its tougher stance to give the U.S. a level playing field. Even though the Republicans are not viewed so favorably on taxes, the poll findings show the Democrats are not seen as better on taxes and economic issues. The poll also shows the Democratic Party better able by large margins to handle issues such as gun violence, sexual harrassment and health care. This shows that under an aging Democratic leadership of Pelosi, Hoyer and Schumer, and the failure of Hillary Clinton, the younger Democrats with a more Progressive tendency are having to make their own case with people not clear how the Democrats can offer a better alternative. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Senators approved the U.S. Republican tax bill 51 to 49 votes on December 1, 2017. The 500 page bill was approved with arewritten version containing more changes made at the last minute to get it passed in the early morning hours. It was passed along party lines with all Democrats opposing. The last minute changes were made to get Collins of Maine and Johnson of Wisconsin on board. A concession was made on DACA young undocumented immigrants for Flake of Arizona. In this way its passage was ensured after failure to repeal Obama health legislation. The Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation report says the bill would increase the deficit by $1 trillion over a decade. Corker of Tennessee opposed the bill for this reason, but failed to convince other senators who believe the bill will generate robust growth and the deficit report is too pessimistic. The tax cut bill helps 70% of middle class families and may not help others because of removal of deductions such as the one for state and local income taxes. Business gets a permanent tax rate of 20 percent instead of 35 percent which is made permanent. Owners of small business not set up as corporations also get a tax break for small business. To offset the cost of the changes the Alternative Minimum Tax for corporations is retained and a tax on corporations with assets held overseas was increased. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration's proposed budget for fiscal 2013- for the year beginning Oct. 1, 2012- shows the budget deficit for the year at over $1 trillion. It shows new revenue of $1.7 trillion over 10 years mostly from ending the Bush period tax cuts on families earning more than $250,000 a year, restoring the estate tax to the 2009 level and limiting subsidies for oil and gas companies. It proposes raising the tax rate on dividends from 15% to as much as 39.6%, for households earning more than $250,000 a year. This measure is expected to generate $206 billion over 10 years. The budget also offers "principles" for future tax reform by proposing the Buffett rule replace the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The AMT was not indexed for inflation so it has the weakness of putting more middle class taxpayers into AMT, leading to temporary solutions by Congress. The Buffett rule would have people earning more than $1 million pay a tax rate of at least 30%. Many wealthy Americans like Mitt Romney paid lower taxes using deductions to lower tax rates- Romney's tax disclosures show he paid effective tax rate of 14%. The White House says the budget will reduce the deficit by $3 trillion over 10 years through the new taxes, and small changes to Medicare and Medicaid and other spending cuts. This is in addition to the $1 trillion in spending cuts agreed to in a deficit reduction agreement in 2011 between Democrats and Republicans in Congress. The budget proposal proposes investment in education and transportation projects of $137 billion, and continuing through Dec. 2012, a tax break for businesses to increase investment. It includes mandatory spending of $2.7 billion for new community college programs, $6 billion to modernize schools, and $1.8 billion to make homes more energy efficient. It also increases the resources of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the CFTC (two agencies overseeing the banks), $26 million for a new Interagency Trade Enforcement Center to counter unfair trade practices, and cuts U.S. postal delivery to 5 days a week. The result is a program designed to be balanced in terms of economic fairness, making modest investments in the future for education and energy, continuing policies to stimulate growth, and extending the date for bringing the deficit under control to 2018 instead of 2014 as planned earlier....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The skills to navigate different personalities and work patiently on the issues surrounding changes to the U.S. tax system of Rep. Dave Camp (MI), chairman of the U.S House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, will be immensely useful in the effort to make changes to the U.S. tax system. Camp works well with fellow House Republican leaders Boehner, Ryan, Cantor, and his Democratic counterpart in the U.S. Senate Max Baucus. Camp is a good listener, refuses to engage in partisan criticism, and has the patience to work through difficult issues of achieving savings and keeping fairness in the the tax changes. Earlier efforts to achieve consensus in late 2011 failed, making it even more important to have leadership which can create productive debate and bridge the differences. The tax changes are part of the overall effort for U.S. economic recovery by reducing the deficit.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The major provisions of the Republican House healthcare bill that passed by a vote of 217-213 are- 1. To help people buy insurance coverage the bill offers $2000 to $4000 a year, upto $14,000 a year in credits based mainly on age, reducing them for families making $150,000, individuals making $75,000. 2.  Under the Affordable Care Act insurers cannot charge older Americans more than 3 times for same coverage they offer to younger people, the new bill makes this 5 times. This would increase premiums for older Americans and reduce it for younger Americans. This is the most controversial part of the bill. Older Americans supported the Republican party in the presidential election. 3. The new bill ends Medicaid as an open ended entitlement and places this on a budget with cuts of $880 billion over 10 years. 4. To mollify conservative Republicans a provision allows state to opt out some provisions of the ACA that requires minimum benefits such as maternity care and emergency services. It retains coverage for pre-existing conditions to mollify moderate Republicans. The bill provides states with $138 billion over 10 years to subsidize premiums, provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, mental healthcare and drug addiction. 5. The bill removes the taxes imposed under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on high income people of about $300 billion over 10 years by repealing a payroll tax increase and tax on investment income. This bill and the ACA offer 2 competing visions on healthcare, both bills passed only by a margin of 4-5 votes in the House. The ACA overlooked the impact on premiums causing discontent among middle income Americans. The new bill lets premiums rise for older Americans in order to keep premiums down for other Americans. This shows the many tradeoffs involved and choices being made, and the lack of a consensus on the issue of healthcare in the U.S., becoming a highly politicized issue instead of the way it is treated in western Europe.     ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
For groceries cost limiting Trump proposes nothing. It was found in the EU that there was excessive price action by grocery stores in 2022 and 2023. Though experts say no for price setting by government, the deterrent effect of a policy of the government to not set prices but to send a clear message about excessive profit as anti-social behavior, has beneficial impact for price reduction or future price increases to be put on hold. Harris will do this. For child care costs. Trump proposes nothing and does not put children as the next generation of Americans at the top of priorities. Harris puts children as the top priority and early years development as critical. Harris proposes a child tax credit of $6000 per family that would cost $110 billion per year estimate from Office for Responsible Budget, offset by Medicare savings achieved by negotiating with Pharma of $36 billion a year, tax on billionaires at 25% instead of 8.2% saving $40 billion a year, for net cost of $44 billion a year the Harris $6000 Child Tax Credit.  Congress including Democrats failed to extend the $3600 tax credit per child below 6 years that was introduced after 2019 yet allowed to expire in 2022 reverting to $2000 per child under 6 years. The concept is accepted as helping children, Vance the Republican VP nominee has suggested $5000, only opposed by country club Republicans oblivious to the importance of children having free school lunches and parents having the money for child care added costs for the future of the children of this Nation.     ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the NYT says Bill Clinton moved the Democratic Party to the centre in 1992. In 2016 about 25 years later, after the removal of the Glass Steagall Act led to the 2008 global financial crisis and a deep recession, after the trade relations with China led to loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs over two decades and the hollowing out of industry in the midwest, things have changed. The revolution led by Bernie Sanders, a shrinking middle class, smaller access to college education for the middle and working class, and wide disparities in income, are putting the Democratic Party closer to its roots and the days of FDR. The Democratic Party platform calls for a 21st century Glass Steagall Act to separate normal banking from investment banking, opposes the TPP to prevent any further export of jobs overseas, and goes for a $15 minimum wage. This was also evident at the opening day of the Democratic National Convention when Sanders told the gathering in Philadelphia that even though he was not the candidate, these are the planks of the platform that Hillary Clinton will be pushing for in her presidency. What the editorial does not point out is that the Republican economic platform also calls for reinstatement of Glass Steagall Act, opposes TPP and opposes any loss of American jobs to overseas locations. It differs on the minimum wage leaving it to the states, and it is likely to skew tax cuts towards the wealthy, but also possibly removing the lower income brackets from taxes as Britain has done under the Conservative Party. Both parties today are looking for support from the middle and working class and have directed their appeal to these two groups which are in upheaval. The election of Trudeau in Canada recently also followed this trend, after the hollowing out of Canadian industry in Ontario and Quebec in a similiar pattern as in the midwestern U.S.  ...

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