Economic nationalists are claiming the deal endangers "national security" to convince Americans that a good deal for investors, employees, and the U.S. economy will somehow make America less secure. That's nonsense.
Support for industrial policy and protectionism are supposed to help the working class. Instead, these ideas elevate the already privileged.
The president wants to raise the rate from 21 percent to 28 percent, despite it being well-established that this is the most economically-destructive method to raise government funds.
The government needs to cut back on spending—and on the promises to special interests that fuel the spending.
Despite the popular narrative, Millennials have dramatically more wealth than Gen Xers had at the same age, and incomes continue to grow with each new generation.
The policy is a true budget buster and is ineffective in the long term.
The president criticized companies for selling "smaller-than-usual products" whose "price stays the same." But it was his and his predecessor's spending policies that caused the underlying issue.
Many who see overdraft protection as preferable to other short-term credit options will have fewer choices as some banks decide the service isn't worth offering anymore.
The reality raises questions about the kind of future we want to leave for the next generation.
His speech in Davos challenged the growing worldwide trend of increased government involvement in economic affairs.
They will either reduce the ability to spend money or to cut taxes.
Rosy fiscal expectations based on eternally low interest rates have proven dangerously wrong.
Rosy fiscal expectations based on eternally low interest rates have proven dangerously wrong.
That's bad news for Americans.
As we step into 2024, it's crucial to adopt a more informed perspective on these dubious claims.
Lawmakers can take small steps that are uncontroversial and bipartisan to jumpstart the fiscal stability process.
In today's innovative economy, there's no excuse for sending a gift card. The staff at Reason is here with some inspiration.
Lawmakers should consider a user-fee system designed to charge drivers by the mile.
We're often told European countries are better off thanks to big-government policies. So why is the U.S. beating France in many important ways?
The Copenhagen Consensus has long championed a cost-benefit approach for addressing the world's most critical environmental problems.
In the last 50 years, when the budget process has been in place, Congress has managed only four times to pass a budget on time.
Years ago, when interest rates were low, calls for the federal government to exercise fiscal restraint were dismissed. That was unwise.
Over the last several years, they have worked nonstop to ease the tax burden of their high-income constituents.
Higher rates lead to more debt, and more debt begets higher rates, and on and on. Get the picture?
Especially because the once-dismissed possibility of rising rates is now a reality.
Those sounding the loudest alarms about possible shutdowns are largely silent when Congress ignores its own budgetary rules. All that seems to matter is that government is metaphorically funded.
The best reforms would correct the real problems of overcriminalization and overincarceration, as well as removing all artificial barriers to building more homes.
The big spending has fueled higher inflation, resulted in larger-than-projected deficits, and contributed to a record level of debt.
This progress has been widely shared, to the great benefit of the people at the bottom of the distribution.
Rather than posing a national security threat, the growth of China's E.V. industry is an opportunity for global innovation.
The country's current struggles show the problems of the Beijing way—and make the case for freedom.
Legislators abuse the emergency label to push through spending that would otherwise violate budget constraints.
The guidelines would ignore decades of academic findings about how firm concentration can have a positive impact on consumers' welfare.
The lack of oversight and the general absence of a long-term vision is creating inefficiency, waste, and red ink as far as the eye can see.
Since Congress designed and implemented the last budget process in 1974, only on four occasions have all of the appropriations bills for discretionary spending been passed on time.
It's a short-sighted approach that distracts us from the more important question.
New legislation would intervene in the credit card market to help businesses like Target and Walmart, who don't like the fees they have to pay to accept credit card payments.
It's a familiar program. And it will result in higher prices, slower growth, and fewer jobs.
Many politicians offer a simplified view of the world—one in which government interventions are all benefits and no costs. That couldn't be further from the truth.
At a minimum, the national debt should be smaller than the size of the economy. A committed president just might be able to deliver.
The legislation—which was introduced in response to the derailment in East Palestine, Ohio—pushes pet projects and would worsen the status quo.
Projections of huge savings are making the rounds. Nothing could be further from the truth.
You're 2,200 times more likely to die when traveling by car as opposed to by airplane.
The U.S. tax system is extremely progressive, even compared to European countries—whose governments rely on taxing the middle class.
The ideology champions the same tired policies that big government types predictably propose whenever they see something they don't like.
The longer we wait to address our debt, the more painful it will be.
Delayed payments will increase, and companies will respond by raising interest rates—or denying low-income applicants outright.
In 2019, discretionary spending was $1.338 trillion—or some $320 billion less than what Republicans want that side of the budget to be.