Before President Donald Trump was elected in 2016, the US economy was inching along with 1.5% growth. Many economists were so convinced the stagnation was here to stay that they called it the "new normal." After the president took office and began pursuing his agenda's three pillars of deregulation, tax cuts and trade reform, the "new normal" crowd said it couldn't work.
There is growing pressure on corporations to stop prioritizing profits and to act in “the best interest of society.” Elizabeth Warren started the ball rolling last year with the Accountable Capitalism Act. If passed, this would dramatically change corporate governance and decision making. Its requirements include that at least 40 percent of board directors be elected by employees and that corporate decisions create a “general public benefit” rather than narrowly benefiting shareholders.
“Hey, Toreador! . . . We head for the edge, and the first man who jumps is a chicken. All right?” In Rebel without a Cause, Jim (James Dean) and Buzz (Corey Allen) play the most famous game of chicken in Hollywood history, driving their jalopies at full speed towards a Californian cliff. At the last minute, Jim jumps. Buzz, his sleeve caught on the door handle, plunges to his death. Games of chicken are all around these days. Indeed, it starts to feel as if the whole world is playing a massive, multiplayer game of chicken. Clearly, Boris Johnson’s jaunts to Berlin and Paris last week were part of a diplomatic game of chicken over Brexit.
Liberals have used the courts for decades to carry out their agenda of social change. From Roe vs. Wade’s constitutional right to abortion to the more recent protection of same-sex marriage, courts have become an engine of social change.
Last week the New York Times embarrassed itself twice. First, a transcript was leaked of editor Dean Baquet’s exhortation to reporters that the Russian-collusion fiction having been exploded, they now needed to focus on the endemic “racism” and “white supremacism” of Trump and his supporters in order to defeat the president. Next, as the “theory” behind this partisan journalistic “praxis,” the self-proclaimed “paper of record” announced the “1619 Project,” a series of articles and essays showing “that nearly everything that has made America exceptional grew out of slavery.”
My thinking on trade protectionism is no longer absolute. Here’s why: One dirty secret is that state-managed growth isn’t such a bad policy for poor countries. Neoliberals might be angry to read that, but it’s true. But here’s the common sense that policymakers don’t seem to fathom: Policies that work for poor countries have no lessons for the United States.
American University has brought in an academic from the University of Washington-Tacoma with a curious mission for an academic institution: to teach academics not to grade on the writing ability of students as opposed to their “labor.” Professor Asao Inoue believes that writing ability should not be assessed to achieve “antiracist” objectives.
Hoover Institution fellow Jonathan Rodden says geography matters in the United States because we’re divided into electoral districts, which can be a good thing but has a downside in being a major determinant in who wins an election. Rodden notes that the rural vote will be critical in the 2020 election, but economics will not be the only determinant as social issues, such as abortion, gun rights, race, and immigration, will also play a part.
Last year Freedom House, an independent watchdog organization dedicated to the expansion of freedom and democracy around the world, reported that more countries became oppressive rather than free for the thirteenth year in a row. The widespread erosion of political rights and civil liberties along with global attacks on the rule of law and fact-based journalism are to blame for this retreat of democracy.
President Donald Trump startled investors last week when he took to Twitter and "hereby ordered" U.S. companies to stop doing business in China as the countries continue to clash over trade. So is he within his rights?
President Trump capped days of advocacy on behalf of Russian President Vladimir Putin by announcing here Monday that he intends to invite the leader to the Group of Seven summit in 2020, which Trump will host in an election year amid warnings that Russia is actively trying to interfere again in the U.S. presidential election.
Last week, the Business Roundtable joined the ever-present Donald J. Trump in creating unwanted regime uncertainty. President Trump displayed his mercantilist machismo by threatening to go to the mat with China and America’s businesses. He promised more tariffs on China if Beijing did not comply with his demands. Then, the President turned his fury on America’s businesses; he ordered them to stop doing business with the Chinese. But, that wasn’t all. Trump also lashed out at the Chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve Jerome Powell, labeling him an “enemy” and comparing him to Trump’s trade nemesis President Xi Jinping of China. Not surprisingly, the markets plunged.
Though not something to celebrate, America has reached its highest level of economic policy uncertainty since President Trump’s January 2017 inauguration. It seems that Trump hit a veritable uncertainty bonanza when, in a wide-ranging interview, he indicated that America was winning the trade war even though the trade deficit with China, his preferred measure of success or failure, is rising, and in his opinion, the trade controversy could produce a short recession.