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.
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.
Tricked on Our Treats: Time to Rethink the U.S. Sugar Program
Featuring Daniel Griswold, Director, Center for Trade Policy Studies, Cato Institute; author, Mad About Trade; and William A. Reinsch, President, National Foreign Trade Council.
For decades, the U.S. government has restricted sugar imports through a system of quotas designed to keep domestic prices artificially high, even though foreign producers can grow and sell sugar at much lower prices. Domestic growers maintain that they need the quotas to protect them from “dumped” imports. Critics argue that the program increases costs for U.S. consumers and hurts domestic confectioners and other sugar-using industries. It also inhibits development abroad by walling off the U.S. market from farmers in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa. In a recent letter, the National Foreign Trade Council and other trade organizations urged the Obama administration to consider relaxing the quotas in the face of high global prices and the threat of domestic shortages. Isn’t it time to rethink the U.S. sugar program?