Financial Times (January 27)
“We can make a fresh start on Tuesday, and avoid the disaster of a no deal, by extending Article 50 to allow an honest reconsideration. Parliament and the people must level with one another about the detailed costs and benefits of EU membership and all sides must begin to recognise reality.”
Tags: Article 50, Benefits, Costs, Disaster, EU, Fresh start, Membership Reality, No-deal, Parliament, Reconsideration
The Independent (July 3)
“Any plan to rely on American trade to make up for the loss of EU benefits caused by Brexit are now merely a fantasy. Ironically, the push to remain in the EU might benefit from the US’s lurch toward insanity; the Brexit vote came when people assumed America would have a rational leader at the helm.”
Financial Times (September 10)
“A week in China is enough to persuade anyone that the world has spun back to front. The benefits of immigration, the quest for fresh discoveries, the desire for education, the recognition of the benefits of stability, purpose and enterprise are flourishing in China at the very time that they are being maligned, belittled or ignored in the US by Donald Trump.”
Tags: Benefits, China, Desire, Discoveries, Education, Enterprise, Immigration, Stability, Trump, U.S.
The Independent (April 28)
“There can be no doubt that the UK’s economic situation is much more likely to deteriorate than improve in the next few years.” Higher taxes and/or lower benefits will be essential to strengthening the Treasury. “All of this adds to stagnant or declining living standards…. No wonder, then, that consumer confidence is likely to become weaker as the uncertainties crowd in.” But the biggest economic hurdle will be crimped investment. “Business does not want to invest in Britain unless they can be sure of a return on those funds after the UK loses its easy access to the single market.”
Tags: Benefits, Consumer confidence, Deteriorate, Investment. Brexit, Living standards, Single market, Taxes, Treasury, UK
Chicago Tribune (February 14)
“It would be tempting to say the alleged help in getting Donald Trump elected has backfired for Russian President Vladimir Putin, but that is not the case. Putin wants “an adversary with diminished moral standing and no appetite for meddling in far-off regions. Putin is enjoying all the benefits he could expect from the Trump administration without having to pay for them.”
Tags: Adversary, Backfired, Benefits, Diminished, Meddling, Moral standing, Putin, Trump Election
Economist (October 1)
“Globalisation’s critics say it benefits only the elite. In fact, a less open world would hurt the poor most of all…. There is a world of difference between improving globalisation and reversing it. The idea that globalisation is a scam that benefits only corporations and the rich could scarcely be more wrong.”
Tags: Benefits, Corporations, Critics, Elite, Globalization, Poor, Rich, Scam
Washington Post (May 11)
“Older people today seem as healthy as people who were several years younger a few decades ago. So why shouldn’t they work the same way, too?” In the U.S., the eligibility age for full social security benefits is scheduled to increase to 67 over the next decade, but a recent study suggests eligibility could reasonably be moved even higher “to somewhere between 68 and 70.”
Tags: Age, Benefits, Eligibility, Healthy, Old, Retirement, Social security, U.S., Work, Young
The Economist (January 23)
Oil price slumps usually do “the world a power of good. The rule of thumb is that a 10% fall in oil prices boosts growth by 0.1-0.5 percentage points.” This time, however, the abrupt 75% drop in the price of oil is testing the old paradigm. “Producers are suffering grievously. The effects are spilling into financial markets, and could yet depress consumer confidence. Perhaps the benefits of such ultra-cheap oil still outweigh the costs, but markets have fallen so far so fast that even this is no longer clear.”
Tags: Benefits, Consumer confidence, Costs, Growth, Markets, Oil, Price slumps, Producers, Suffering, Ultra cheap
LA Times (November 8)
“So are we better off with or without the TPP? If Congress ratifies it, that won’t turbocharge the U.S. economy. If Congress blocks the deal, that won’t stop globalization. And like any trade agreement, it creates winners and losers.” The strongest argument for the agreement may be its geopolitical role, but the costs to many Americans have become “clearer than their benefits…. The president still has a lot of persuading to do.”
Tags: Benefits, Congress, Costs, Economy, Geopolitical, Globalization, Ratify, TPP, U.S.
Wall Street Journal (May 21)
There’s a reason “why so many countries are open to U.S.-led trade pacts, like TPP and its European counterpart, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. History shows the U.S. trade agenda, while far from perfect, has nevertheless provided sizable benefits to its partners.”
