On April 9, 2018 president Trump will have a new national security adviser named John Bolton. While he is fairly well-known in America, he remains largely unknown outside of it, but this will change quickly. The reason for this is his staunch conservatism that has already driven the traditionally left-wing, American foreign-policy establishment apoplectic since Trump’s announcement of his appointment and he has already been called everything from ‘war monger’ to ‘dangerous’ on the pages of the New York Times and elsewhere. His main sin seems to be his preference for straight talk and unapologetic defense of American national interests, as well as his dismissal of Obama’s policies as “weak and feckless.” Apart from that, he is taken to task by the establishment’s bien pensants for calling the
– What is fundamentally new with the new round of US sanctions – scope or impact? How far are secondary sanctions likely to reach given the less than warm welcome for US sanctions in parts of the EU? – Politically and psychologically the most fundamental is Section 242 – personal sanctions against top Russian political/business figures. As for secondary sanctions European companies will be bound to take them into account, otherwise they will be automatically punished financially by losing their contracts. – We understand apart from Russian companies and individuals, there are Ukrainian and Polish companies? How likely is that more CEE partners of Russian companies could join the list notably if they continue business as usual with Russian state companies? What will be the effect on Nord
Your support will allow us to continue providing readers valuable and accurate analysis and expert positions. You can do it with an amount of your choosing through: ▪ PayPal (PayPal allows you to send money using a credit card or to send funds in your PayPal or bank account.) ▪ ePay.bg ▪Bank transfer (UniCredit Bulbank, IBAN: BG36UNCR70001523184796, BIC/SWIFT: UNCRBGSF, titular: CBBSS) PayPal EPay.bg лв.
In 1974, economist Arthur Laffer in making the argument for cutting taxes to top Ford Administration officials (Dick Chaney and Donald Rumsfeld) drew on a restaurant napkin a curve showing that at low rates of taxation the government could receive greater revenues, while at higher rates it received progressively less going to zero at a 100% tax rate. This then became famous as the basis of President Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts when he slashed taxes from a top marginal rate of 70% to 28%. True to the Laffer Curve, government revenues increased from $517 billion in 1980 to $909 billion in 1988, even though the population had grown by only 10%. Laffer also popularized what became known as ‘dynamic’ scoring, which took into account changes in taxpayer and business
The article first published in americanthinker.com on 12/24/2017. With just a few days left in 2017, President Trump has signed the tax legislation that marks his first major legislative victory since becoming president. It is undoubtedly his biggest achievement to date, but by no means the only one. After two consecutive quarters of over 3% GDP growth, the New York Fed is now predicting a fourth quarter rate of 4%. It is worth remembering here that no less an authority than the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicted economic growth of 2.2% in 2017, 2% in 2018 and 1.5% thereafter. Democratic pundits have, of course, long ridiculed as utterly impossible Trump’s election promises of 3% growth. Add to this the lowest unemployment rate (4.1%) in 17 years, 1.7 million new jobs, 12
Ladies and gentlemen, We are pleased to invite you on (Monday) October 2, 2017 at 13:00 to a Round Table organized by the Center for Balkan and Black Sea Studies and the Bulgaria Analytica project. The event will be held at the House of Europe‘s Hall, 124 Rakovski Street, Sofia, Bulgaria. Keynote speakers: • Mr Vladimir Milov • Ms Yulia Zhuchkova • Mr Vasko Nachev Moderators: Mr Alex Alexiev and Mr Ilian Vassilev The discussion will take place in English. Mr Vladimir Milov is a Russian opposition politician, publicist, economist & energy expert. He is the author of major energy reform concepts, including the concept of market restructuring and unbundling of Gazprom, which was banned from implementation by President Vladimir Putin. Mr. Milov is a columnist for
Since I last wrote a few weeks ago, North Korea has lost one showdown with the U.S. and has geared up for a second. The first showdown was a threat to ring tiny Guam with a military barrage. The second showdown is the threat of intercontinental ballistic missiles ICBM armed with hydrogen (fusion) bombs. Why the first threat? Because Guam is a U.S. protectorate with a major U.S. military base, and sufficiently off the beaten path to make good long-distance target practice. When the U.S. rattled sabers in return, a worried China publicly punched a hole in the security umbrella it provides North Korea. The Global Times, long viewed as its semiofficial mouthpiece, said that China would not defend North Korea from U.S. retaliation if North Korea struck first