Unconventional monetary policy—characterized by “zero interest rate policy” (ZIRP) and “quantitative easing” (QE), along with macro-prudential regulation—has increased the power of central banks in the United States, Japan, and Europe. In the new issue of Cato Journal, contributors revisit the thinking behind unconventional monetary policy and the “new monetary framework,” make the case for transparent monetary rules versus foggy discretion, and point to the distortions generated by ultra-low interest rates and preferential credit allocation.
When the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad in 2005, Denmark found itself at the center of a global battle about the freedom of speech. The paper’s culture editor, Flemming Rose, defended the decision to print the 12 drawings, and he quickly came to play a central part in the debate about the limitations to freedom of speech in the 21st century. In The Tyranny of Silence, Flemming Rose provides a personal account of an event that has shaped the debate about what it means to be a citizen in a democracy and how to coexist in a world that is increasingly multicultural, multireligious, and multiethnic.
The Cato Institute has released its 2015 Annual Report, which documents a dynamic year of growth and productivity. The thousands of individuals who contribute to Cato are passionate about freedom and committed to ensuring that future generations enjoy the blessings of liberty, unencumbered by an overreaching state that seeks to control their lives. This is Cato’s optimistic vision for the future, and it would be unimaginable without the Institute’s longstanding partnership with its Sponsors. We will continue our diligence and dedication to seeing this vision realized.
Featuring U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Oregon, Ed Gresser, Progressive Policy Institute, and William Hawkins, U.S. Business and Industry Council. Moderated by Daniel T. Griswold, Cato Institute.
Among the highest remaining U.S. tariffs are those imposed on imported shoes, with the highest duties applying to the cheapest shoes. Critics of the tariffs contend that they fall most heavily on the poorest American households while “saving” few domestic jobs. Defenders argue that the tariffs provide revenue for the federal government, have little impact on consumer prices, and steer trade to our free-trade partners at the expense of China. A bill in Congress to eliminate certain shoe tariffs, the Affordable Footwear Act, currently has more than 140 co-sponsors in the House and may be attached to the upcoming Miscellaneous Tariff Bill. Please join us for a forum featuring a co-sponsor of the footwear act and two trade experts who will debate the merits of lowering tariffs on imported shoes.