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.


NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT covers the GAESA tourism enterprise of Cuba (that operates independent of the government of Cuba) that overinvested in Tourism at the expense of agriculture industry and infrastructure during the Obama administration, leading to collapse with Trump's 2014 embargo on Cuba. GAESA controls about 50% of Cuba's economy, run by military and people from Castro's family.  That left 121 hotels built in the boom years of tourism at 30 percent occupancy. The Iberostar high rise hotel is one of these hotels that rises over dilapidated housing in Havana, the Cuban capital. The investment in tourism by the GAESA enterprise that runs about 50% of the Cuban economy is 13 times what is spent on healthcare and education, says the NYT. The Castro family, Raul Castro family, runs this business venture that was started when the Soviet Union as sponsor of Cuba had collapsed by 1991. The NYT says this 'devolved' the ideas and promise of the revolution. "Devolved?" What kind of word to describe a complete loss of faith, and enormous failure with severe hardship for the Cuban people? It means the whole idea of communism or Marxist revolution has been proven false, even as it survives in Mexico and parts of Latin America. One can be against the Batista regime- similarly against corrupt regimes in Latin America or Asia- that ruled Cuba before the Castro Cuban revolution and still look for better choices and alternatives than what Castro came up with as an answer to Cuba's needs. Much of Latin America is suffering from the same problems of dictatorships and turning to Marxist alternatives - particularly the alternative put forward by Castro in Cuba- that has also destroyed the Venezuelan economy with Chavez's turn to Castro's Cuban revolutionary slogans and ideology. That came up with temporary solutions for the poorer sections of society, yet failed badly for all sections of society in the long term. How else can one explain one fourth of Venezuela's population and about the same of Cuba's leaving the country, some of those who left the critical human capital that would form the core of the human input to combine with capital and technology for advancing the economy. If Cuba were like the Dominican Republic or other parts of the Caribbean to depend on tourism for its national income then would it not be better to have friendly relations with the US, the main source of tourism revenue. The Obama administration was only holding up a failed idea by holding out a helping hand to tourism in Cuba knowing full well that a change to a Republican administration would simply lead to heavy investments in tourism at the neglect of infrastructure, public services and the economy, of health and education, to become large economic losses. This is what has happened.  As China and India have proven and are proving there are no magical ways to economic development- the same route that was traveled by the nations of Northern and Western Europe with scientific advances, technological advances, have to be taken, the same route that was traveled by the US in its industrial revolution and building of infrastructure, that same route has to be taken by all nations. It does not have to take a time period of centuries as in Europe. The US accomplished it faster with new technologies and vast human and natural resources over 100 years, Japan in 50 years, China in 30 years. India in 25 years ongoing.There is room for intelligent solutions to problems, for speed and tapping into new technologies, yet the same inputs of land, labour, capital and technology have to be put together for development. For states or regions, cities, within China and India, the same inputs, the same access to foreign investment and new technologies is the only route to rapid development. Long range plans are set in motion, decades of stable efficient, clean governance is put in place, and alliances are built with the nations of Europe and with the US. This road is traversed though hard work as Japan and China have done, and India today is thoroughly engaged in. ...
NBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The controversy surrounding the statement by Trump following the hacking of the DNC emails and putting it out on the 1st day of the Democratic National Convention was covered widely. Trump said: "Russia, if you are listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. Let's see if that happens." This coupled with Trump statements that he would not assure the Baltic Republics and other parts of Eastern Europe  that the U.S. would come to their aid in the event of a Russian attack have created new tensions in Europe. This has also led to heavy criticism from U.S. military commanders, from NATO leaders, and from leaders in the Republican and Democratic parties including Speaker Ryan. Some called it "a seismic development," and unprecedented, with involvement of foreign powers in the U.S. elections generally resented by the American people, according to experts.

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. government's National Climate Assessment report in November 2017 says observational evidence proves that human action is the main driver for climate change. It warns of sea levels rise as high as 8 feet by the year 2100. It shows damage from climate change that is already happening from a rise in the U.S. by 1.8 degree Fahrenheit of global warming since 1900. Trump has announced withdrawal by the U.S. from the Paris Climate Change Agreement that would cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28 percent by 2025 compared to 2005 levels. The Trump administration is relaxing rules by the EPA that would have contributed to the goals of the Paris Agreement.

The Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A group in the Tory party of prime minister Johnson sees a bigger risk for Britain in allowing 35% content in nonsensitive parts of Britain's 5G network as approved earlier. Tory views have changed since the coronavirus crisis and after the U.S. government decision on May 20 to require a government approval before U.S. companies can sell any semiconductors made abroad with U.S. technology. The use of other alternatives increases the risk for Britain, say Tory MP's. The National Security Council met to reconsider the earlier decision and called for a reassessment.

Britain would be left out of the Five Eyes Club of intelligence sharing with the U.S. if it does not also exclude Huawei from 5G networks. Mr. Trump says the U.S. will not share intelligence with Britain if it continues with the earlier decision.

United States Department of State Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Marco Rubio speaks for the US with profound convictions and long experience in the Florida legislature and the US Senate, and as akey member of the DJT administration. In his speech in Munich at the MSC he recalls his grandparents being from Piedmeont Sardinia in Italy and from Sevilla in Spain. He talks proudly of his Spanish and Italian heritage, of America founded by European settlers. For Europe this is a speech that shows America is profoundly part of Western Civilization that started in Europe. Here are some parts of the speech and Rubio's call for America and Europe to respond strongly to the mistakes in migration and deindustrialization that have hurt the people of Europe and America, with deeply felt negative consequences. "That infamous wall that had cleaved this nation into two came down, and with it an evil empire, and the East and West became one again.  But the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion:  that we had entered, quote, “the end of history;” that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.  This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history.  And it has cost us dearly.  In this delusion, we embraced a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade, even as some nations protected their economies and subsidized their companies to systematically undercut ours – shuttering our plants, resulting in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.  We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves.  This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests.  To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.  And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people.  We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.  Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past.  And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.  For the United States and Europe, we belong together.  America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before.  The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.  We are part of one civilization – Western civilization.  We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir. And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel.  This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe.  The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply.  We care deeply about your future and ours.  And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected – not just economically, not just militarily.  We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally.  We want Europe to be strong.  We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history’s constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know – (applause) – because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.  National security, which this conference is largely about, is not merely series of technical questions – how much we spend on defense or where, how we deploy it, these are important questions.  They are.  But they are not the fundamental one.  The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions.  Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation.  Armies fight for a way of life.  And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny. It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born.  It was here in Europe where the world – which gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution.  It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.  And this is the place where the vaulted ceilings of the Sistine Chapel and the towering spires of the great cathedral in Cologne, they testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels.  They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future.  But only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance can we together begin the work of envisioning and shaping our economic and our political future. Deindustrialization was not inevitable.  It was a conscious policy choice, a decades-long economic undertaking that stripped our nations of their wealth, of their productive capacity, and of their independence.  And the loss of our supply chain sovereignty was not a function of a prosperous and healthy system of global trade.  It was foolish.  It was a foolish but voluntary transformation of our economy that left us dependent on others for our needs and dangerously vulnerable to crisis. Mass migration is not, was not, isn’t some fringe concern of little consequence.  It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilizing societies all across the West.  Together we can reindustrialize our economies and rebuild our capacity to defend our people.  But the work of this new alliance should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past.  It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century.  Commercial space travel and cutting-edge artificial intelligence; industrial automation and flex manufacturing; creating a Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers; and a unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South.  Together we can not only take back control of our own industries and supply chains – we can prosper in the areas that will define the 21st century." ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This exceptional report from rural areas in France by Roger Cohen shows why the support is growing for the far right and the far left in rural areas and smaller towns outside the large cities which have suffered from high unemployment and neglected as technology and capital moved to other areas. Cohen talks to Nicholas Bay, secretary general of the National Front, who says this election is about patriotism, the nation state vs globalization, as the National Front tries to portray its opposition as being less pro-France, and less pro French culture. The centrist candidate Macron stands in front of a statue of Alexandre Dumas in Picardy, an hour northeast of Paris, and says he is for an "open patriotism" that embraces people of different origins and embraces refugees. Cohen attends a Le Pen rally in Metz, Lorraine, talks to a National Front mayor in Picardy and left party supporters in the town, talks to foreigners in the banlieu of Sevran. Cohen says a National Front victory is possible if enough voters who support the far left party of Melenchon do not vote for centrist candidate Macron, and enough voters of centre right Fillon supporting French culture and nationalism drift to Le Pen. As in the Dutch election with Moroccans derided by the far right the immigrant issue is a factor. Against this background is how events play out in the last weeks of the election. In March and April the events in the U.S. show a Trump administration moving to the centre, adopting a quieter and more constructive tone towards Mexico and immigrants. Relations with Russia have worsened after the U.S. response to the chemical attack in Syria, and the French public may now see this as a common threat to NATO and the European Union. As in the Dutch election a lot depends on the last weeks of the election and how well the centrist parties, the centre right and the centre left get their message across about what is to be gained by building anew on the foundations of the past without risking a lot on an uncertain path of referendums and exit from the European Union.   ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump outlines a plan for Afghanistan that increases the U.S. troop presence from about 8500 with an addition of 4000 more troops and advisors, in addition to a counter terrorism force. To war weary public in the U.S. he says: "I share your frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money- and most importantly, lives- trying to rebuild countries in our own image instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations." About his criticism of the war when president Obama was in office as a huge costly waste of resources Trump said: My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like to follow my instincts... I heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk at the Oval Office." After resisting the advice of his own advisers Trump decided to fire Bannon who had supported use of American private security contractors for the war in Afghanistan, and used parts of the media to question national security advisor McMaster's views on this. Gen. Mattis, completed a strategy review that showed the mistake of creating a vacuum would repeat the situation of Iraq where president Obama withdrew forces in 2011, leading to a sequence of negative events- with Russia, Iran and Islamic State moving into the vacuum, making American intervention in the war necessary, increase in terrorist incidents worldwide, and a flood of refugees into Europe. Ironically clearing the path for an outsider's bid for the White House, with Brexit in which refugee fears and uncontrolled immigration played a part, and the news of terrorism and the war in Syria-Iraq creating a sense of insecurity. A key difference in the Trump approach with Obama's approach is that "conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables will guide our actions from now on," in line with Trump's criticism of Obama's approach. The military in the U.S. has long maintained that the best approach would have been to insist on U.S. presence in negotiations with the Iraqi government under the sectarian prime minister Nouri Maliki. Gen. Mattis was head of Central Command under the Obama administration and must have pushed the view of the military to president Obama to no avail. Failure to do so led to the growth of Shiite militias and the alienation of Sunnis in Mosul, leading to the fall of Mosul to Islamic State thus creating the current crisis. Gen. Mattis and Lt. Gen McMaster are intimately aware of the problem and must have convinced Trump that this is what really happened, that a repeat would waste the sacrifices of American soldiers in the twin wars. Trump gave this as his reason when he said in his televised speech to the nation- essentially a criticism of Bush that he expanded the conflict too quickly, and Obama exiting too quickly to create a void. Trump call his policy "principled realism."  The roots of the crisis are in the India-Pakistan conflict. Like the conflict in South East Asia the conflict in South Asia extending from Iran to India and Pakistan, may take a generation to overcome. A rapprochement between India and Pakistan, beginning with trade and economic relations, is not only in America's interest, it also provides the basis for a realistic American withdrawal. ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The is WSJ report points out that there were differences between the president and his defense secretary Mr. Esper, over the issue whether active duty military should be sent in to control protests in Washington D.C., Minneapolis and other cities in America. On May 25 president Trump considered firing Mr. Esper who said at a Pentagon press conference that he opposed bringing in the military to cities to quell domestic protests. Mr. Esper stated "The option to use active duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort. And only in the most urgent and dire of situations. We are not in one of those situations now."  Military and defense officials were very much opposed to this as fundamentally contrary to military values.  Mr. Trump consulted several advisers who told the president that this was not the right thing to do. Mr. Esper for his part also was making his own preparations to resign and here again his advisers persuaded him to not do this, says this report in WSJ.  The incidents happened as protesters crowded Lafayette Square, the park across from the White House, and the president believed that violent protesters were making it difficult for National Guard troops to maintain control. Mr. Esper is a West Point graduate and former Army officer. The president's advisers from the military included Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Mark Milley. Milley and Esper discouraged the president from invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807 and calling in army troops to the cities. Mr.Trump later visited the area around the church near Lafayette Park. The advisers consulted by the president on May 25 were Mark Meadows, White House chief of staff, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, David Urban, and two senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas and James Inhofe of Oklahoma. Mr. Cotton, a first term senator from Arkansas, later wrote a article in the NYT opinion pages on June 3 supporting use of the military. That article had the title "Send in the Troops- Tom Cotton" which NYT says was placed by editors, and appears baffling, considering the importance that this matter presents for the military and the nation. The NYT later stated with the article that it did not reflect "a thoughtful approach"  and lacked the "additional context" that would let readers be informed and think carefully. The essay also had a reference to the constitutional duty to the states from the federal government that could be misinterpreted, and without context. Mike Pompeo, one of the president's close advisers is Secretary of State. He is a West Point graduate, standing first in his class from the U.S. military academy in 1986, served 5 years in Germany in the 4th Infantry Division, before being elected to Congress from Kansas. The other key adviser in the decision Mr. David Urban headed the Trump campaign effort in a key state Pennsylvania. Both appear to be sensitive to public opinion and the thinking in the military.  By June 6 the White House press secretary said that Mr. Esper was instrumental in bringing calm to American cities after a week of protests following the death of Mr. Floyd in Minneapolis. For both Mr. Trump, Mr. Esper, senior White House officials, and the nation, moments for reflection and a sense of gratitude that calmer minds prevailed. ...
SPIEGEL ONLINE Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this essay in Der Spiegel, Charles Hawley says that the Trump movement has become a movement of patriotic downtrodden whites, with a whole range of interests-of extreme right talk show hosts, Tea Party politicians, white power supremacists, those left out by globalization in the working class especially in the midwestern states. The danger he says is that this movement of which Trump has become a part, rejects the narrative on which America is based of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers establishing a country based on principles of "the inalienable rights of man," that have evolved through the years to include black people, women, and minorities.  To put this in perspective, president Obama writing for The Economist magazine in October 2016, puts this movement in a different context- that of the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, Know Nothing Movement of the 1800's, the anti-Asian sentiment in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, periods when anti-immigrant or anti-foreign sentiment gained prominence. Obama's view is that it is not fundamentally economic. In this he is right in that some of the forces on the far right do not stem from globalization. Yet he would be missing a great deal if he did not address the economic problems for the middle and working class that have given such views the support of a broad segment of the population, especially in some midwestern and older industrial states compared to say the economy of California or New York. Obama is aware of the problems in his essay as he points to the problems of workers trying to get a decent wage, of job losses through globalization, and the aggravation of these problems by the financial crisis of 2008 when some of the potential physicists and engineers as he calls them went into the financial sector to create faulty mortgages. Yet he goes back to the free trade and global networks of supply chains as having reduced global poverty, without showing a keen awareness of how it has through a combination of events and decades of policy indifference to manufacturing communities in the U.S.- as documented by experts and shown in Lyrarc, with David Autor and Gordon Hansen in the WSJ, 2016- 08-16. A Gallup Study, WSJ, 2016-05-16, supports Obama's assertion by showing that many of Trump supporters are actually self-employed and not in economic distress. Yet the movement would not have taken its proportions without the merging of different groups particularly largely disadvantaged working class voters, and fortunately Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, have a better sense of this than the president. It is by their efforts that income and wealth disparities can be tackled in a way that restores the social fusion of all parts of society- in Hillary Clinton's emphatic words in the final debate by "growing the middle," growing the middle class. This is the task of the next decade, or possibly two decades. (For Gallup study see WSJ, How Economic Anxieties Explain Trump's Appeal- And Where They Fall Short, Nick Timiraos, 08-16-2016. And for Autor, Hanson, see Tallying the Toll of U.S.-China Trade, Justin Lahart, 08-27-2011)   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ points to Democrats having won consistently 18 states plus District of Columbia adding upto 242 Electoral College votes in every election since 1992. Democrats need 28 more to cross the needed 270 votes. Republicans consistently having 13 states with 102 electoral College votes. Demographic changes in recent years have shifted to where Hillary Clinton may not need to devote resources to Colorado and Virginia because of a more favorable position there.  Carrying Pennsylvania with these 2 states would put Clinton over the 270 required. Vice Presidential candidate for Clinton, Senator Keane is from Virginia and is popular in the state.  Pennsylvania has a long history favoring Democrats. North Carolina has also seen demographic changes favoring Democrats. The Clinton campaign is focussing ads on these states as well as the swing states of Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as Georgia, Arizona and Utah which are becoming competitive for Democrats. By keeping up the effort in Georgia, Arizona and Utah, Clinton hopes to make Trump divert resources there. Other two swing states are Ohio and Florida, but this WSJ report says Clinton has to win only one of the four swing states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, and North Carolina to go over 270 and Trump needs all four. Of the 20 media markets Clinton or her super PACs have focussed their ads on 16 are in these 4 states. The Clinton campaign is looking at several alternative routes to 270 Electoral College votes, which gives it more flexibility to plan the campaign.  ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
French voters turned to parties outside the mainstream left Socialist Party and the right Republican Party for the first time in a run off presidential election. The National Front's Jean Le Pen made it to the runoff in 2002, then lost to Chirac of the Republican Party who won 78% of the vote. This time the Republican Party candidate Fillon had about 20%, the Socialist Party candidate Hamon won just 6% of the vote with the rest of the socialist vote going to a far left candidate Jean Luc Melenchon who had 19.6%. The winners were Emmanuel Macron, a former Economy minister under president Hollande of the socialist Party, getting about 24% and Marine Le Pen, the daughter of Jean Le Pen of the National Front, getting 21.5%. Compared to the U.S. the situation is slightly different in France because of the very high unemployment rate for young people- younger voters supported the National Front, and people especially in rural areas in the north, north east, and the south of the country around Nice and Marseille supported the National Front. Macron's movement En Marche, centrist party drawing support from centre right and centre left without clear ideology except to renew France and pro-EU, was strong in urban areas, among more educated people, especially in Paris and the area around Bordeaux and Toulouse in the south east of the country. Fillon did not do well in some traditional Republican Party areas including Nice, with inroads from Le Pen, who defined the party around anti-immigration, closed borders, and withdrawal from the European Union. ...
Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It can be a bit overwhelming, time for a pause, to close the Borders in Europe and in US, to do it together as a Nation. Republican Senator Lankford and senior members of Congress   negotiated the legislation to restrict immigration and close the southern border. It would be signed into law in January 2024 by Biden says Lankford in NYT after 30 years of inaction. The negotiated bill came up 2 months later in March by which time it was stopped by Trump Republicans as an issue for the election. Harris promise is to sign it into law, close the Border. Meanwhile in Springfield Ohio, population of 80,000 in 1960 declined to 59,000 in 2020 dropping 25% over the 60 year period with the decline of the Rust belt towns in the midwestern region of the US. A program that protects people from gang related violence in home country legally allowed 15,000 Haitian immigrants to settle in the city, people who now drive Amazon delivery vehicles and work in nursing occupations and in restaurants, in towns that have severe staff shortages. WIth the influx of refugees from Venezuela at the southern border, this has created anti-immigration sentiment in some parts of America, even as some of the refugees work to fill shortages in traditionally Republican states such as Kansas, as shown in the WSJ, that have decline in population and face severe staff shortages for bus drivers, restaurant workers, and hospital workers. Streams of refugees in earlier eras the Irish, followed by the Germans, followed by Blacks from the South, all followed this path, yet it was also a bit overwhelming, and at these times the nation took a pause. Europe is taking a pause- across Denmark, Sweden, France, the UK- and in the US there is sentiment on all sides for a long pause, to regroup, to reflect and focus on the national goals of binging up the middle class, the lower income classes, and the nation as a whole after the distortions from tech and economic theory induced distortions hurt the working people and families, and hurt rural areas. ...
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. ...
NBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Three NBC reporters talk to people in areas in southern France, including Cogolin, which voted in a National Front mayor. This report describes the contrast between the National Front under Jean Le Pen and his daughter, Marie Le Pen. Marie took over the party leadership in 2011, and has downplayed her father's more racist ideology, even calling her self Marine dropping her last name. About 22% of French women are expected to vote for Marine, according to Elabe polling agency. In previous elections only 12% of French women had supported Marine's father because of overt racism. Yet recent remarks by Marine about Vichy regime shootings have revived some of the old memories of the National Front among some women. High unemployment and sense of neglect has led to a search for alternatives, and the terrorist incidents in Nice and Paris have added to the momentum for the National Front that calls for tougher measures. The Republican Party candidate Fillon, now has the support of Alain Juppe of Bordeaux, and former president Sarkozy. Fillon is also advocating tougher measures, and it is not clear how many votes would shift from Fillon on the right to Le Pen.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama in an interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio says that blue collar men, the white working class, have suffered in the last decade, and Trump is exploiting their fears and anxieties. Yet he made no mention of the large parts of the middle class with low levels of assets, and the extreme inequality discussed by Fed chairwoman Janet Yellen at a Boston Fed conference on inequality in October 2014. Obama addresses the war in Syria and Iraq in a similiar manner by not mentioning the millions of refugees in that region and the million that have created a refugee crisis in Europe. He attributes the problem more to media pursuing ratings than any errors of the administration in this interview with NPR, including some of it directed by pockets in the Republican Party. This ignores the many editorials and op-ed pieces on the subject from both sides of the spectrum, the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Sabotage of two tankers in the Persian Gulf and reports of activity of Iranian proxy forces in Iraq and Syria have led to an American response with the dispatch of a aircraft carrier and other forces to the region.  This report in the NYT says Defense Secretary Shanahan has prepared plans for deployment of American forces in the region with one plan calling for 120,000 troops to be dispatched to the region. As president Trump is against American involvement in land wars in distant places, the force is designed as a precaution in case of an Iranian attack through proxy forces in Syria or Iraq and not for a land operation. National Security Adviser Bolton has taken a strong position on Iran since the days of the Bush administration. The U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, the sanctions on Iranian oil, are part of a new policy of the Trump administration. The European Union countries have followed a policy of preserving the nuclear deal of 2015, even though the U.S. is pressuring EU countries. The oil sanction have led to a sharp drop in oil exports and is hurting the Iranian economy. President Rouhani of Iran says Iran may withdraw from parts of the Iran nuclear deal and the Iranian response is leading to heightened tensions in the region.  It was only recently that the Democratic party Obama administration pursued the Iranian nuclear deal with opposition from Republicans in Congress and skepticism of Israel. The election of president Trump who says the deal was a bad one has reversed U.S. policy leading to a complete change in policy and a possible confrontation with Iran. U.S. policy can veer back and forth depending on the party or president in power who completely different perceptions of the region. Obama had sharp difference with Israel and Saudi Arabia, and a different perception of Iran. Trump and Bolton see Iran as a threat to the U.S. After Iran shipped most of its nuclear fuel out of the country in 2016 in exchange for lifting of economic sanctions under president Obama's nuclear deal it would take over a year for new uranium enrichment facilities to produce the materials for a nuclear bomb, according to this report in the NYT. When the Obama administration negotiated with Iran the window had shrunk to a few months.   ...
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This essay in the Economist magazine points out the special nature of the 2017 presidential election in France with the rejection of establishment candidates- Manuel Valls, Sarkozy, Juppe, and now Fillon. Fillon and Valls were prime ministers under Sarkozy and Hollande, from the Republican and Socialist parties respectively. With unemployment high in the areas outside the major cities their is a surge in support in these areas for the National Front. Emmanuel Macron, former Economy minister in the Hollande government, is the only candidate leading Marie Le Pen at this time. In a second round of voting he has to bring in centre right supporters and centre left voters and moderate voters, and appeal enough to working class voters, young unemployed people, offering hope for a better future to win this election against Le Pen. Economist magazine research shows support highest for Le Pen outside major cities in outlying areas, and for Macron in the major cities. There is also an education divide as seen in the U.S. election and Brexit referendum with less educated voters preferring the nationalist sentiment, church support sentiment fostered by the National Front.  ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A Whirlpool appliance factory in Amiens in the Somme region is slated for closure and relocation to Poland. Emmanual Macron made a surprise visit to the factory to talk to worker representatives. He says he cannot prevent the closure but can work to arrange for good terms for the closure. Marine Le Pen the far right candidate also visited the site at the factory gates where workers were on strike. Afterwards Macron said "I try to fix problems, not to exploit them."  Macron has come under criticism in the French press for taking too much for granted in the second round and not fighting for support the way he had earlier. Le Pen has appealed to workers facing factory closure and areas that have been neglected as factories closed in previous years. In the north and northeast smaller towns and areas neglected in the tech boom and facing deindustrialization have turned to Le Pen. Macron's effort to go into these areas is part of his style and his conviction that the problems have to be tackled in the deindustrialized areas, and to break the image that the National Front is striving to create of a candidate from investment banking that does not understand workers. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report by Martin in the NYT points out that Ohio no longer plays a critical role in U.S. presidential elections. It was critical for a Bush win over Gore, and president Obama carried it by 2 points against Romney in 2012. It is critical for Trump to win. For Hillary Clinton other states are gaining importance as they better reflect the demographic changes in the U.S. and the mix with minorities- states such as Georgia, N. Carolina, Colorado and Florida. Ohio has not seen an influx of Hispanics as other states, and is now more white, more evangelical voters, and reflects a mix that was prevalent earlier. 

New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Reited Gen Gantz appears to be the likely head of a new government after winning the most seats in parliament. Policy towards Iran is not likely to change. But a Gantz led government is likely to reduce the divisiveness in the country, and provide a more unifying effort in Israeli society. The role of religious groups in daily life would also be held back. Better relations with Jewish people in America would result and peace negotiations with Palestinians would be encouraged. The prime minister would concentrate less power in his hands. By temperament Gantz is a quiet leader who preferred not to engage in the back and forth attacks in the election campaign even when Mr. Netanyahu  did not hesitate to do so. As the head of the military from 2011 to 2015 he also has the confidence of people in Israel looking for a new start after a long period of Netanyahu rule. The current prime minister could be indicted soon after a hearing next month on charges of bribery and fraud. Mr. Trump has said that U.S. relationship is not with any leader but with the country Israel. Gantz makes it clear after Netanyahu's style of politics has rocked Israel for many years- "We will bring about a real change in priorities, and heal Israeli society in all its parts." Mr. Gantz has said that he think the Obama administration could have done more in securing a better nuclear deal with Iran. Yet at an event in 2015 when the deal was being set, Mr Gantz said he also saw "the half full part of the glass." That the deal would keep Iran 10 or 15 years from making a nuclear weapon "with the right price." At this juncture in world affairs this is important because Mr. Trump has shown flexibility in dealing with Iran following the firing of National Security Adviser Bolton. Trump held back on a response at several points during the attacks in the Straits of Hormuz and the taking of ships hostage by Iran and the UK. The attacks on Saudi oil facilities and the difficulty of protecting oil installations in the region, Iran's increasingly difficult position under tight U.S. sanctions and pressure on Asian buyers of Iranian oil to cut back purchases, the efforts of Japan and India dependent on Saudi and Iranian oil to reduce tensions, all point to a new policy in the region with a new Israeli government playing a useful role to keep policy control in the hands of Asian countries dependent on oil supplies for their economies, and in the hands of a U.S. president better informed about a policy course that is in U.S. interests of avoiding unnecessary engagements overseas when there are other pressing priorities. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This leader in The Economist reviews an essay in the magazine's October 8-14th, 2016 edition by U.S. president Obama. In it Obama points to the unfinished tasks of his presidency and what comes next as tasks to be done for the U.S. economy. The Economist points out the problems in the 2016 election campaign where there is a lack of discussion of economic issues as a serious problem. Obama lists as priorities efforts to improve conditions of people left out in the recovery, reducing inequality, offering more job opportunities, and increasing productivity.


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