Cato Event Podcast

Education is important, and the more of it you and everyone else get, the better. More years in school, more college degrees, means a better economy, country, and world for everyone. Right? Wrong, argues Bryan Caplan in a brand new book that challenges almost all the understandable, powerful—but perhaps ultimately damaging—assumptions people make about education. We hope you’ll join us for a lively debate about this assault on education orthodoxy, and the premiere of this new book. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A year into President Trump’s term, what can we say about the Trump Doctrine? As a candidate, Trump promised dramatic changes for American foreign policy. As president, many would agree he has delivered on that promise. In just one year, Trump withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and the Paris climate treaty, launched cruise missiles at Syria for using chemical weapons, increased American arms sales abroad, refused to certify Iran’s compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, increased the number of American forces operating in the Middle East and Afghanistan, and rattled sabers on the Korean peninsula. How do these changes square with Trump’s call for an “America First” foreign policy? How does Trump’s operating style differ from that of previous presidents? Is America safer today than it was a year ago?From the Cato Conference: The Trump Doctrine at One Year Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A year into President Trump’s term, what can we say about the Trump Doctrine? As a candidate, Trump promised dramatic changes for American foreign policy. As president, many would agree he has delivered on that promise. In just one year, Trump withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and the Paris climate treaty, launched cruise missiles at Syria for using chemical weapons, increased American arms sales abroad, refused to certify Iran’s compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, increased the number of American forces operating in the Middle East and Afghanistan, and rattled sabers on the Korean peninsula. How do these changes square with Trump’s call for an “America First” foreign policy? How does Trump’s operating style differ from that of previous presidents? Is America safer today than it was a year ago?From the Cato Conference: The Trump Doctrine at One Year Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Like the country’s overall education discussion, the national school choice debate is far too often reduced to “which schools get better test scores” and maybe even “who gets kids to graduation.” But there is so much more to education than blunt academic outcome measures, including shaping character, transmitting culture, and just plain advancing freedom.In this special, National School Choice Week Facebook Live event, join the Cato Center for Educational Freedom crew to tackle these far deeper, arguably far more important goals and desires for education. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Trade, tariffs, and America’s role in the global economy have taken center stage in the public policy debate during the first year of Donald Trump’s tumultuous presidency. That’s not surprising to economic historian and Dartmouth economics professor Douglas A. Irwin, whose latest treatise on the subject documents in exquisite detail how “the Tariff” has sparked passionate political, economic, and constitutional debate and has been a source of bitter political conflict from the Founding of the Republic to the present. Between 1787 and the Civil War, the main purpose of the tariff was to raise revenues for the operations of a modest federal government, which had few other sources of revenue. Although arguments for using the tariff to protect domestic industry prevailed on occasion during this era, it wasn’t until after the Civil War that bald protectionism became the tariff’s primary motive. In the early 1930s, as the disastrous effects of the Tariff Act of 1930 (i.e., “Smoot-Hawley” or “the Hawley-Smoot Tariff,” as Irwin calls it) were rippling across the globe, the tariff was repurposed, again, for the nobler objective of inducing governments to agree to reciprocal reductions in their border protectionism. According to Irwin’s thesis, from the 1934 Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act to the founding of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947, through the multiple GATT rounds culminating in the founding of the World Trade Organization in 1995, and through the Obama presidency, reciprocal trade liberalization was the main purpose of the tariff. Will Congress acquiesce in a new purpose for the tariff or will it assert its authority against a new president who considers protectionism a tool to make America great again? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For just one week every year, roughly 70,000 people from around the world come together in the Nevada desert to create Black Rock City, home to Burning Man, billed by its organizers as an “annual experiment in temporary community dedicated to radical self-expression and radical self-reliance.”Because cash exchanges and the barter system are largely banned in Black Rock City (Burning Man instead relies on something called the “gift economy”), Burning Man is often seen as an attack on conventional libertarian principles.However, as a voluntary community driven by freedom of association, self-governance, nonviolent dispute mediation, and emergent order, Burning Man is in many ways a quintessential example of the libertopian ideal.On Wednesday, January 24th, please join the Cato Institute for a robust conversation about what libertarians can learn from Burning Man — and how these lessons can be applied to policy and philosophy. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Public corruption is the silent killer of our economy. We’ve spawned the thickest network of patronage and influence ever seen in any country, a crony capitalism in which business partners with government and transfers wealth from the poor to the rich. This is a betrayal of the Framers’ vision for America, and of the Constitution they saw as an anti corruption covenant. This state of affairs repels many Americans, a response that explains the otherwise improbable rises of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. But what can be done to counter corruption? Congress has passed two major campaign finance laws in recent decades and established a government office of ethics. Both have serious flaws and hardly seem equal to the task. Are there other possibilities? Join us for an insightful examination of American government today and its prospects for the future. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The second session of the 115th Congress is underway, and congressional leaders have to address a number of wide-ranging and contentious issues before the midterm campaign and election season begins.Among those, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program expires early in March, and whatever happens in the short term will still leave reform opportunities for policies that satisfy both the security and labor needs of the country and that ensure the just and equitable treatment of noncitizen residents. Also, by the end of September, America’s agricultural agenda will need to be codified as components of the “farm bill” are again up for reauthorization. An opportunity here involves the United States Department of Agriculture’s sugar program, which contributes to problematic effects for American consumers as well as having knotty international trade implications. Furthermore, from the White House come promises both to tackle “welfare reform”—the contours of which have not been outlined by the president or GOP agenda setters—and to pass a new infrastructure program, thus fulfilling a significant campaign promise. Divisions exist on each of these topics between the parties, within the parties, and between Congress and the Executive branch.Join us as our panel of experts explores these issues and outlines common-sense solutions to how these problems can be adjudicated while preserving principles of liberty, fiscal responsibility, and the economic well-being of the nation. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since Colorado became the first state to allow for the sale of recreational marijuana, United States drug policy has been on shaky and unpredictable ground. Just this month U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has thrown out Obama-era guidance to protect businesses and individuals in states that have legalized cannabis for medical and recreational purposes. Now that federal prosecutors have additional discretion, what's next for the feds' reinvigorated war on pot?Join us for a live discussion about federalism and drug laws. Send your questions via Twitter with "#CatoConnects."This is an online only event. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Governments across the globe have begun evolving from lumbering bureaucracies into smaller, more agile special jurisdictions. Private providers increasingly deliver services that political authorities formerly monopolized, inspiring greater competition and efficiency. In Your Next Government?: From the Nation State to Stateless Nations, Tom W. Bell, professor at Chapman University’s Dale E. Fowler School of Law, shows how these trends suggest that new networks of special jurisdictions will soon surpass nation-states in the same way that networked computers replaced mainframes. This quiet revolution is transforming governments from the bottom up, inside out, worldwide, with the potential to bring more freedom, peace, and prosperity to people everywhere.Join us for a conversation with author Professor Bell, hosted by Aaron Powell and Trevor Burrus of Libertarianism.org’s Free Thoughts podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.