Featuring A. Trevor Thrall, Associate Professor, School of Policy, Government, and International Affairs, George Mason University; and Erik Goepner, Doctoral student in public policy, George Mason University; with comments by Betsy Woodruff, Politics Reporter, The Daily Beast; Emily Ekins, Research Fellow, Cato Institute; and Aaron Schumacher, Director, International, Foreign Policy Group, and Senior Vice President, Young Professionals in Foreign Policy; moderated by Christopher Preble, Vice President for Defense and Foreign Policy Studies, Cato Institute.
A limited constitutional government calls for a rules-based, freemarket monetary system, not the topsy-turvy fiat dollar that now exists under central banking. This issue of the Cato Journal examines the case for alternatives to central banking and the reforms needed to move toward free-market money.
If the U.S. government does adopt more liberal economic policies over the next few decade, immigrants and their descendants will not be to blame. There are four pieces of research that lend support to this view.
Americans are finally enjoying an improving economy after years of recession and slow growth. The unemployment rate is dropping, the economy is expanding, and public confidence is rising. Surely our economic crisis is behind us. Or is it? In Going for Broke: Deficits, Debt, and the Entitlement Crisis, Cato scholar Michael D. Tanner examines the growing national debt and its dire implications for our future and explains why a looming financial meltdown may be far worse than anyone expects.
The Cato Institute has released its 2014 Annual Report, which documents a dynamic year of growth and productivity. “Libertarianism is not just a framework for utopia,” Cato’s David Boaz writes in his book, The Libertarian Mind. “It is the indispensable framework for the future.” And as the new report demonstrates, the Cato Institute, thanks largely to the generosity of our Sponsors, is leading the charge to apply this framework across the policy spectrum.
Featuring James A. Dorn, Cato Institute and Daniel J. Ikenson, Cato Institute.
The U.S.-China economic relationship has been enormously beneficial to workers, producers, consumers, and investors in both countries. Yet the relationship has its share of skeptics. One rationale for U.S. economic engagement with China was that it would facilitate economic liberalization, which should promote political reform and improve China’s human rights record.
Does the United States need to reexamine that premise? Is China’s rise a threat to U.S. “economic sovereignty,” as some critics contend? Should the United States penalize China for “currency manipulation”? Is China’s sovereign wealth fund a threat to U.S. national security? Please join Cato scholars Daniel Ikenson and James Dorn for a discussion of these and other issues affecting U.S.-China economic relations.