Today, Niall Ferguson sits down with Argentine President Javier Milei to talk about how economic reforms are lifting millions there out of poverty and revitalizing the fiscal health of the nation. Timothy Garton Ash argues that the Democrats have condemned themselves for a long shambolic walk in the political wilderness for how they handled Joe Biden’s frailty. And Michael Bordo recounts the lengthy US history of presidents and Federal Reserve chairs fighting over policy and independence.
Determining America’s Role in the World
At The Free Press, Senior Fellow Niall Ferguson writes of his sit-down interview late last month with Argentine President Javier Milei at the Casa Rosada in Buenos Aires. Milei, as passionate as ever, tells Ferguson about the difficulty of taking on entrenched Peronist interests in the Argentine state. But he also claims that early measures to eliminate the deficit, institute a free-floating currency, and incentivize growth have lifted 11 million Argentinians out of poverty, including nearly 2 million children. Ferguson then asks Milei if his approach can be exported to other countries experiencing high inflation and lackluster growth, and what his next priorities are. Milei says his next measures will have to do with trade, labor market reform, and taxation. Read more here. (subscription required)
Understanding Public Opinion
Writing in The Guardian, Senior Fellow Timothy Garton Ash argues that Democrats’ continued weakness in public polls today is a product of the shambolic way they managed Joe Biden’s exit from the White House and from his presidential candidacy. Post-Biden, Garton Ash says the Dems shouldn’t stop there, and perhaps Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer should also pass the baton. And while the Democrats continue to wallow in the political wilderness, Garton Ash argues they’re doing the next generation of bright lights in the party a disservice. Read more here.
The Economy
Speaking with Kathleen Hays on her Substack, Distinguished Visiting Fellow Michael D. Bordo recounts the long history of US presidents quarrelling with Federal Reserve chairs. Bordo says both Democrats and Republicans, in this case Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon, respectively, pressured their Federal Reserve chairs either to lower or not raise key interest rates. They also discuss the criticism of cost overruns regarding the renovation of the Federal Reserve headquarters, a similar fracas that arose in Canada in 1960, and whether this issue is impacting market participants’ trust in US central bank independence. Watch their conversation here.
On his Substack, Visiting Fellow Matthew Kahn reflects on the dramatic decrease in American representation within top US PhD programs, now estimated at just 15 percent, as global competition for university slots and leading business positions intensifies. High-profile US companies, such as Google and Microsoft, often have foreign-born CEOs, many from India. This migration of talented individuals can be viewed as detrimental to developing countries, as The Wall Street Journal has discussed. But migration also presents personal costs, and migrants may, over time, decide to return home. Kahn says that while the movement of elite talent might harm a home country in the short term, it also inspires more students to strive for success. Moreover, it pressures domestic governments to implement pro-growth reforms to keep talent from leaving, potentially benefiting the country in the long run. Read more here.
Confronting and Competing with China
Writing in The Washington Times, Visiting Fellow Miles Maochun Yu argues that Western observers have consistently failed to fully grasp the intensity of mainland China’s desire to retake Taiwan, and they also skip over some of the ideological underpinnings of that desire. Yu writes that China’s Communist Party views the seizure of Taiwan as a final victory that will secure its “legitimacy as the last vanguard of global communism.” He scolds analysts who equate the struggle between Taiwan and the mainland as some sort of frozen-in-time final chapter of China’s Civil War; it’s a desire for pure dominance. “The belligerence toward Taiwan is not an issue of heritage or national pride. It is a doctrine of conquest, a strategy of global domination and a defense mechanism of an insecure regime built on lies,” he writes. Read more here.
Related Commentary