Cato Event Podcast

House Republicans have proposed to replace the corporate income tax with a destination-based cash flow tax. Proponents say this new tax is desirable because it is “border adjustable,” which means that exports would be exempt from tax and all imports would be subject to tax. Critics, by contrast, say such a tax violates the rules of the World Trade Organization and worry that an adverse WTO decision could set the stage for a value-added tax. Moreover, there are concerns that destination-based taxes undermine tax competition, thus making it easier for politicians to raise tax rates and increase the burden of government spending.Join us for a lively discussion as top scholars comb through the implications and provide their considered analysis on the merits and demerits of these important reforms. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The 2016 election saw new arguments over the old ideas of populism and nationalism. Both had seemed doomed in this new era of technocracy and globalization. New research from Democracy Fund Voice examines how populism, nationalism, and immigration affected the 2016 election. Many voters who strongly favored Donald Trump feel alienated from government, community, and a changed and changing America. What are the implications of these frustrations and fears for the Trump administration and its critics? Do the new populism and nationalism bode well or ill for the preservation of a free society?Please join us for an intriguing look at the 2016 electorate and the implications of populism and nationalism for public policy and future debates. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With the potential repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act comes an opportunity for Congress to replace it with reforms that could dramatically improve health care by expanding choice, lowering costs, and improving quality. The discipline of economics can be of tremendous help in defining the contours of a plan that would accomplish those goals. It can also help predict whether any ideas from the vast array of proposed reforms can plausibly achieve these outcomes. Of the leading options under discussion, which are likely to work and which will lock in bad incentives and sustain harmful market distortions?Join us for a lively presentation as we explore the options through an economic lens and identify the kinds of reforms that are most likely to satisfy the health care needs of Americans, sick and healthy alike. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Is the modern welfare state still viable? Can it be reformed? Or do we need a new model that relies less on government redistribution and regulation and more on free markets and competition? In his latest book James Bartholomew examines welfare systems around the world and documents the strength and weaknesses of their approaches to poverty, education, health care, retirement, and other issues. Bartholomew offers a new framework for expanding liberty, while battling Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Donald Trump's inconsistency on foreign policy as a candidate has left experts confounded about what to expect over the next four years. Nevertheless, as he takes office, Trump will inherit a number of serious foreign policy challenges from his predecessor. How the Trump administration handles five key decisions, in particular, will shape the course of foreign policy over the next four years.Will President Trump decide to intervene more aggressively in Syria? choose confrontation or cooperation with Russia regarding Syria, NATO, Ukraine, and nuclear weapons? take sides in the brewing Middle East cold war between Saudi Arabia and Iran? expand the U.S. military presence in the Middle East and North Africa to combat terrorism? double down on the pivot to Asia or find a new way to deal with China's rise?With Barack Obama gone and Donald Trump in the White House, should we expect a more activist and hawkish U.S. foreign policy in 2017? Or is the new president more likely to follow his "America First" campaign rhetoric and focus more on domestic concerns? Join us as we discuss these and other questions. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ten years after controlling the executive branch and both chambers of Congress, the Republican Party has once again been entrusted to take the reins of power under a nominally unified brand.Yet, the widely covered initiatives of the incoming GOP president have been roundly praised and condemned with equal fervor. Likewise, for advocates of limited government, free markets and a peaceful view towards international relations, the pitch has been mixed. On one hand, there is a cautious optimism for fiscal and regulatory reforms, but conversely, many fear that protections of our most basic civil liberties are now under threat.Join us for a lively discussion as Cato scholars outline a vision for Congress that honors those classic liberal values of freedom, a restrained federal government and an ongoing commitment to peace and prosperity for all. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

More men in their prime are out of work than ever before. In his new book Men without Work, noted political economist Nicholas Eberstadt describes a new population of men—beyond the “employed” and “unemployed”—who are “unemployed but not looking for work.” Eberstadt concludes that researchers have been too quick to blame joblessness on general economic conditions rather than the personal behaviors and motivations of those men who have given up on work. David Bier, immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, will comment on Eberstadt’s book, focusing on reasons why immigrants have avoided this worrying trend. Join us for a discussion of the future of work in the United States. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The United States’ historical advantages cause its people to misperceive international affairs, according to Why America Misunderstands the World: National Experience and Roots of Misperception. The author, Paul Pillar, who spent most of his career interpreting foreign actions at the CIA, argues that intelligence analysis has limited impact on how U.S. policy-makers look at the world. American culture, which comes from historical experience, instead plays the leading role.That experience has been exceptionally fortunate, Pillar writes. Geographic remoteness from threatening rivals, abundant resources, and a liberal consensus produced great wealth, safety, power and political stability. Americans often take these blessings for granted, Pillar argues, or as proof of innate superiority.One result is underestimation of the difficulties foreign nations face in achieving security, prosperity and unity. Another is overestimation of U.S. power to correct foreign troubles. We tend, according to Pillar, toward a Manichean worldview, where the goodness of U.S. action is taken as obvious, nationalistic resistance to it is surprising, and hostile actors’ unity and aggression is routinely exaggerated. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Eight years ago, Barack Obama arrived in Washington pledging to reverse the dramatic expansion of state surveillance his predecessor had presided over in the name of fighting terrorism. Instead, the Obama administration saw the Bush era's "collect it all" approach to surveillance become still more firmly entrenched. Meanwhile, the advanced spying technologies once limited to intelligence agencies have been gradually trickling down to local police departments. From the high-profile tussle between Apple and the FBI over smartphone encryption to debates over how to detect "lone wolf" terrorists before they strike, hard questions about modern privacy have figured prominently in the 2016 presidential race. Moreover, as WikiLeaks' sensational release of hacked Democratic Party e-mails demonstrated, surveillance isn't just a campaign issue: It's a campaign tactic too. As the nation braces itself for a new presidential administration, the Cato Institute will gather technologists, legislators, activists, and intelligence officials to survey the privacy landscape, look ahead to the issues Americans will be debating over the next eight years — from government hacking to predictive "big data" to the "Internet of things" — and examine how and whether Americans can still live at least occasionally free from prying eyes.The 2016 Cato Surveillance Conference Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Eight years ago, Barack Obama arrived in Washington pledging to reverse the dramatic expansion of state surveillance his predecessor had presided over in the name of fighting terrorism. Instead, the Obama administration saw the Bush era's "collect it all" approach to surveillance become still more firmly entrenched. Meanwhile, the advanced spying technologies once limited to intelligence agencies have been gradually trickling down to local police departments. From the high-profile tussle between Apple and the FBI over smartphone encryption to debates over how to detect "lone wolf" terrorists before they strike, hard questions about modern privacy have figured prominently in the 2016 presidential race. Moreover, as WikiLeaks' sensational release of hacked Democratic Party e-mails demonstrated, surveillance isn't just a campaign issue: It's a campaign tactic too. As the nation braces itself for a new presidential administration, the Cato Institute will gather technologists, legislators, activists, and intelligence officials to survey the privacy landscape, look ahead to the issues Americans will be debating over the next eight years — from government hacking to predictive "big data" to the "Internet of things" — and examine how and whether Americans can still live at least occasionally free from prying eyes.The 2016 Cato Surveillance Conference Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.