cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

What Economics Can Say about an Effective Response to the Coronavirus

In a recent podcast interview, Robert Stavins and Scott Barrett discussed lessons from historic pandemics, how economists can help with policymaking surrounding the coronavirus, and what the “post-pandemic economic equilibrium” might look like. Resources Magazine has published an abridged version of their conversation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

Why the U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord is a Mistake

The authors explain why the Trump administration's reiteration of its intent to finalize U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is a tragic mistake that will weaken us as a nation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

What Economics Can Say about an Effective Response to the Coronavirus

In a recent podcast interview, Robert Stavins and Scott Barrett discussed lessons from historic pandemics, how economists can help with policymaking surrounding the coronavirus, and what the “post-pandemic economic equilibrium” might look like. Resources Magazine has published an abridged version of their conversation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

Why the U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord is a Mistake

The authors explain why the Trump administration's reiteration of its intent to finalize U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is a tragic mistake that will weaken us as a nation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

Why the U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord is a Mistake

The authors explain why the Trump administration's reiteration of its intent to finalize U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is a tragic mistake that will weaken us as a nation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

Why the Coronavirus Is Making U.S.-China Relations Worse

Joseph Nye writes that Trump's strategy of great power competition and trade wars is inadequate because the information revolution and globalization are changing world politics. Even if the United States prevails over China as a military power,  the country cannot protect its security by acting alone.




cor

The United States Can Still Win the Coronavirus Pandemic

The Trump administration has made one mistake after another—and, with some foreign-policy changes, could emerge with more global power anyway. Stephen Walt details those recommended foreign policy changes.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

How to Avoid a W-shaped Global Coronavirus Recession

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” George Santayana famously quipped in 1905. It is a phrase that has been repeated for over a century, but rarely heeded. As Covid-19 decimates the global economy, our understanding of history could be the difference between a V- or U-shaped recession and a W-shaped one, in which incipient recovery is followed by successive relapses.

As recently as March, V-shaped recoveries in individual economies seemed plausible. Once infections and deaths had peaked and begun to decline, the logic went, people would eagerly return to work. The economic activity might even get an extra boost, as consumers released pent-up demand.




cor

Why the U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord is a Mistake

The authors explain why the Trump administration's reiteration of its intent to finalize U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is a tragic mistake that will weaken us as a nation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

Vettel takes record-breaking pole in Brazil

Sebastian Vettel took his 15th pole position of the season at the Brazilian Grand Prix, breaking Nigel Mansell's record for the most in a season from 1992 and lining up on the front row alongside Red Bull team-mate Mark Webber




cor

Dealing with coronavirus: A not-so-serious take on surviving the lockdown

Coronavirus
Do all the things you always wished you had the time to do, like working on a script that will be picked up by Leonardo DiCaprio or perfecting the pincha mayurasana.
Pixabay
Corona or not, it sucks to be cooped up like chickens with our loved ones without the comfortable distance required to make the heart grow fonder. In a bid to do my part to save the world from this crippling pandemic without actually moving my backside for fear of stepping over the Lakshman Rekha, I decided to draw up a survival guide of Dos and Don’ts to weather the tsunami of trouble stirred up by this nasty critter. Trust me, preliminary studies conducted by the reputed folks at WhatsApp University have confirmed their efficacy beyond a shadow of doubt. The first step is to make soap and water your most intimate acquaintances. They have proven themselves good friends to humanity long before diamonds and dogs usurped their rightful spot and will continue to prove their worth long after corona has shrunk back into the bowels of hell from which it has erupted like a particularly foul effluent. It would also help if one were to make personal hygiene a priority and public hygiene an even bigger one if only as a preventive measure against the spread of communicable diseases and related hazards that could prove to have epic stakes in the survival game. Roughly translated, that means not ever dumping your trash outside the sparkling interiors of your home into the streets, using the great outdoors as a spittoon or latrine, defacing public property by scratching your lover’s name, throwing up pornographic sketches on every available surface or blowing your nose and allowing the discharge to fly every which way. Steer clear of social media if you value your sanity or at least use it in moderation especially if you lack the balancing power of a monkey on stilts to take the better while leaving out the bitter, barf – inducing garbage out there. Ever since some wiseacre got word out that democracy works best when your voice is heard out loud, people have been screaming themselves hoarse to make sure that their endless torrent of nonsense is amplified to the furthest reaches of the internet, bolstered by twitchy fingers compulsively hitting like and share in the desperate hope that they will be rewarded in kind. Therefore we have internet idiots and savants with interchangeable attributes raving and ranting fit to burst. The insufferably self-righteous and superior types tend to drip scorn for everyone and everything from the admitted showmanship of the supreme leader and inadequacy of the ruling party to the extreme foolishness of the folks who tentatively stepped out of their homes to find a bite to eat or medicine for an ailing grandmother only to be sneakily photographed or recorded so that they may be viciously trolled, endlessly abused and publicly shamed for putting millions at risk. Then there are the fanatical religious nuts who swear that India need not be subjected to a lockdown because Indians practise the downward facing dog regularly on their balconies with their rear ends strategically raised towards the benign sun which unleashes the Kundalini Shakti with all its serpentine strength which is more than sufficient to slay corona, sharona and whatever else have you or something equally ludicrous about the virus killing power of pots and pans banged in unison. Relatively innocuous Instagram must also be avoided at all costs too. According to the illustrious professors of WhatsApp University, those pretty pictures have great envy-inducing powers which can corrupt the best and brightest till they are reduced to gibbering, glass-eyed cyber stalkers who can spend years staring at pics and videos of Janhvi Kapoor sexily pretending to eat a slice of pizza, giving her puppy a bath or showing you the correct technique for applying lipstick to the exclusion of all things useful or worthy. Avoid fake news like the plague. Fear and panic cause a lot more damage than pandemics. Be sure to verify the credentials and reliability of all purveyors of information and check the facts. Even if you can’t be bothered, be sure to think thrice before you join hands with the mob to tear apart the hapless medical personnel getting off a gruelling nightshift because they are suspected to be carriers of COVID-16 (or is it COVID-17?). And believing self-proclaimed experts who have declared that the only country in the world that is currently corona free is Kailasa and you are considering applying for permanent citizenship under the benevolent rule of HDH Nithyananda even if you run a far higher risk of contracting HIV, do yourself a favour and check yourself into the nearest hospital for a lobotomy. While many endorse vegetating in front of Netflix, it is advisable to take time out to work out, read a book, cook a meal, take the dog for a walk, play with the kids or teach them something useful that does not involve staring at a screen, converse with the spouse about something other than whose turn it is to do the dishes or swab the floors and do whatever it takes to tough things out as long as it is legal and non-fattening. Do all the things you always wished you had the time to do, even if it is something impracticable like working on a script that will be picked up by Leonardo DiCaprio at an exorbitant price or perfecting the pincha mayurasana in the hopes that a video of you executing the same or at least the blooper version will go viral on the internet. If you are inclined to feel that this survival guide is lacking in scientific detail, didn’t once mention social distancing, testing, gaumutra, masks, sanitiser and is somewhat on the rambling side not unlike the supreme leader’s impassioned addresses to the nation, allow me to stress that if the buzz on WhatsApp is to be believed I am a shoo-in for the Noble Prize thanks to this priceless contribution towards the greater good, entirely free of cost. If that doesn’t convince you to take every word put down here as the gospel truth which deserves to be liked and shared till it has spread to the furthest corners of civilized society like a contagion, I don’t know what will.
Body 2: 




cor

What Economics Can Say about an Effective Response to the Coronavirus

In a recent podcast interview, Robert Stavins and Scott Barrett discussed lessons from historic pandemics, how economists can help with policymaking surrounding the coronavirus, and what the “post-pandemic economic equilibrium” might look like. Resources Magazine has published an abridged version of their conversation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

Bruce Schneier on Cybersecurity in the Age of Coronavirus

Is Zoom secure? What about your home computer? Cyber expert Bruce Schneier says that we all need to be aware of the things cyber criminals thrive on during the confusion caused by coronavirus.




cor

How close is President Trump to his goal of record-setting judicial appointments?

President Trump threatened during an April 15 pandemic briefing to “adjourn both chambers of Congress” because the Senate’s pro forma sessions prevented his making recess appointments. The threat will go nowhere for constitutional and practical reasons, and he has not pressed it. The administration and Senate Republicans, though, remain committed to confirming as many judges…

       




cor

Get rid of the White House Coronavirus Task Force before it kills again

As news began to leak out that the White House was thinking about winding down the coronavirus task force, it was greeted with some consternation. After all, we are still in the midst of a pandemic—we need the president’s leadership, don’t we? And then, in an abrupt turnaround, President Trump reversed himself and stated that…

       




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

Bruce Schneier on Cybersecurity in the Age of Coronavirus

Is Zoom secure? What about your home computer? Cyber expert Bruce Schneier says that we all need to be aware of the things cyber criminals thrive on during the confusion caused by coronavirus.




cor

Spies Are Fighting a Shadow War Against the Coronavirus

Calder Walton describes four ways how intelligence services are certain to contribute to defeating COVID-19 and why pandemic intelligence will become a central part of future U.S. national security.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

Why the U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord is a Mistake

The authors explain why the Trump administration's reiteration of its intent to finalize U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is a tragic mistake that will weaken us as a nation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

What Economics Can Say about an Effective Response to the Coronavirus

In a recent podcast interview, Robert Stavins and Scott Barrett discussed lessons from historic pandemics, how economists can help with policymaking surrounding the coronavirus, and what the “post-pandemic economic equilibrium” might look like. Resources Magazine has published an abridged version of their conversation.




cor

Harvard Business School Professor Rebecca Henderson Outlines Ways Organizations are Changing in Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic and Climate Change in New Edition of "Environmental Insights"

Rebecca Henderson, the John and Natty McArthur University Professor at Harvard University, shared her perspectives on how large organizations are changing in response to the coronavirus pandemic and climate change in the newest episode of "Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program," a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program. Listen to the interview here. Listen to the interview here.




cor

Letter from London on the coronavirus: An order to stay apart brought us together

Dear America,

In London there is much talk of a new “spirit of the Blitz” in the face of another deadly threat to us all.

But 80 years on, that spirit is expressing itself very differently. When the Luftwaffe bombs fell, to continue with normal life was an act of patriotic defiance. Now as COVID-19 spreads, to continue with normal life is an act of punishable deviance.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

Spies Are Fighting a Shadow War Against the Coronavirus

Calder Walton describes four ways how intelligence services are certain to contribute to defeating COVID-19 and why pandemic intelligence will become a central part of future U.S. national security.




cor

No, the Coronavirus Will Not Change the Global Order

Joseph Nye advises skepticism toward claims that the pandemic changes everything. China won't benefit, and the United States will remain preeminent.




cor

How close is President Trump to his goal of record-setting judicial appointments?

President Trump threatened during an April 15 pandemic briefing to “adjourn both chambers of Congress” because the Senate’s pro forma sessions prevented his making recess appointments. The threat will go nowhere for constitutional and practical reasons, and he has not pressed it. The administration and Senate Republicans, though, remain committed to confirming as many judges…

       




cor

Get rid of the White House Coronavirus Task Force before it kills again

As news began to leak out that the White House was thinking about winding down the coronavirus task force, it was greeted with some consternation. After all, we are still in the midst of a pandemic—we need the president’s leadership, don’t we? And then, in an abrupt turnaround, President Trump reversed himself and stated that…

       




cor

Artificial Intelligence Won’t Save Us From Coronavirus

       




cor

Exit from coronavirus lockdowns – lessons from 6 countries

       




cor

Recent Social Security blogs—some corrections


Recently, Brookings has posted two articles commenting on proposals to raise the full retirement age for Social Security retirement benefits from 67 to 70. One revealed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the program actually works and what the effects of the policy change would be. The other proposes changes to the system that would subvert the fundamental purpose of the Social Security in the name of ‘reforming’ it.

A number of Republican presidential candidates and others have proposed raising the full retirement age. In a recent blog, Robert Shapiro, a Democrat, opposed this move, a position I applaud. But he did so based on alleged effects the proposal would in fact not have, and misunderstanding about how the program actually works. In another blog, Stuart Butler, a conservative, noted correctly that increasing the full benefit age would ‘bolster the system’s finances,’ but misunderstood this proposal’s effects. He proposed instead to end Social Security as a universal pension based on past earnings and to replace it with income-related welfare for the elderly and disabled (which he calls insurance).

Let’s start with the misunderstandings common to both authors and to many others. Each writes as if raising the ‘full retirement age’ from 67 to 70 would fall more heavily on those with comparatively low incomes and short life expectancies. In fact, raising the ‘full retirement age’ would cut Social Security Old-Age Insurance benefits by the same proportion for rich and poor alike, and for people whose life expectancies are long or short. To see why, one needs to understand how Social Security works and what ‘raising the full retirement age’ means.

People may claim Social Security retirement benefits starting at age 62. If they wait, they get larger benefits—about 6-8 percent more for each year they delay claiming up to age 70. Those who don’t claim their benefits until age 70 qualify for benefits -- 77 percent higher than those with the same earnings history who claim at age 62. The increments approximately compensate the average person for waiting, so that the lifetime value of benefits is independent of the age at which they claim. Mechanically, the computation pivots on the benefit payable at the ‘full retirement age,’ now age 66, but set to increase to age 67 under current law. Raising the full retirement age still more, from 67 to 70, would mean that people age 70 would get the same benefit payable under current law at age 67. That is a benefit cut of 24 percent. Because the annual percentage adjustment for waiting to claim would be unchanged, people who claim benefits at any age, down to age 62, would also receive benefits reduced by 24 percent.

In plain English, ‘raising the full benefit age from 67 to 70' is simply a 24 percent across-the-board cut in benefits for all new claimants, whatever their incomes and whatever their life-expectancies.

Thus, Robert Shapiro mistakenly writes that boosting the full-benefit age would ‘effectively nullify Social Security for millions of Americans’ with comparatively low life expectancies. It wouldn’t. Anyone who wanted to claim benefits at age 62 still could. Their benefits would be reduced. But so would benefits of people who retire at older ages.

Equally mistaken is Stuart Butler’s comment that increasing the full-benefit age from 67 to 70 would ‘cut total lifetime retirement benefits proportionately more for those on the bottom rungs of the income ladder.’ It wouldn’t. The cut would be proportionately the same for everyone, regardless of past earnings or life expectancy.

Both Shapiro and Butler, along with many others including my other colleagues Barry Bosworth and Gary Burtless, have noted correctly that life expectancies of high earners have risen considerably, while those of low earners have risen little or not at all. As a result, the lifetime value of Social Security Old-Age Insurance benefits has grown more for high- than for low-earners. That development has been at least partly offset by trends in Social Security Disability Insurance, which goes disproportionately to those with comparatively low earnings and life expectancies and which has been growing far faster than Old-Age Insurance, the largest component of Social Security.

But even if the lifetime value of all Social Security benefits has risen faster for high earners than for low earners, an across the board cut in benefits does nothing to offset that trend. In the name of lowering overall Social Security spending, it would cut benefits by the same proportion for those whose life expectancies have risen not at all because the life expectancy of others has risen. Such ‘evenhandeness’ calls to mind Anatole France’s comment that French law ‘in its majestic equality, ...forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in streets, or steal loaves of bread.’

Faulty analyses, such as those of Shapiro and Butler, cannot conceal a genuine challenge to policy makers. Social Security does face a projected, long-term funding shortfall. Trends in life expectancies may well have made the system less progressive overall than it was in the past. What should be done?

For starters, one needs to recognize that for those in successive age cohorts who retire at any given age, rising life expectancy does not lower, but rather increases their need for Social Security retirement benefits because whatever personal savings they may have accumulated gets stretched more thinly to cover more retirement years.

For those who remain healthy, the best response to rising longevity may be to retire later. Later retirement means more time to save and fewer years to depend on savings. Here is where the wrong-headedness of Butler’s proposal, to phase down benefits for those with current incomes of $25,000 or more and eliminate them for those with incomes over $100,000, becomes apparent. The only source of income for full retirees is personal savings and, to an ever diminishing degree, employer-financed pensions. Converting Social Security from a program whose benefits are based on past earnings to one that is based on current income from savings would impose a tax-like penalty on such savings, just as would a direct tax on those savings. Conservatives and liberals alike should understand that taxing something is not the way to encourage it.

Still, working longer by definition lowers retirement income needs. That is why some analysts have proposed raising the age at which retirement benefits may first be claimed from age 62 to some later age. But this proposal, like across-the-board benefit cuts, falls alike on those who can work longer without undue hardship and on those in physically demanding jobs they can no longer perform, those whose abilities are reduced, and those who have low life expectancies. This group includes not only blue-collar workers, but also many white-collar employees, as indicated by a recent study of the Boston College Retirement Center. If entitlement to Social Security retirement benefits is delayed, it is incumbent on policymakers to link that change to other ‘backstop’ policies that protect those for whom continued work poses a serious burden. It is also incumbent on private employers to design ways to make workplaces friendlier to an aging workforce.

The challenge of adjusting Social Security in the face of unevenly distributed increases in longevity, growing income inequality, and the prospective shortfall in Social Security financing is real. The issues are difficult. But solutions are unlikely to emerge from confusion about the way Social Security operates and the actual effects of proposed changes to the program. And it will not be advanced by proposals that would bring to Social Security the failed Vietnam War strategy of destroying a village in order to save it.

Authors

Image Source: © Sam Mircovich / Reuters
      
 
 




cor

Taiwan shows its mettle in coronavirus crisis, while the WHO is MIA

As the coronavirus pandemic takes a rapidly increasing toll on the health and well-being of people around the world — as well as the global economy and social fabric more broadly — Taiwan has won widespread recognition for its impressive performance in dealing with the crisis. Relying on a combination of preparedness, technology, and transparency,…

       




cor

How will the coronavirus affect state and local government budgets?

State and local governments are on the frontlines of this crisis. That means increased spending on public health and Medicaid. As of March 26th, 14 states have enacted supplemental appropriations or transferred general revenue funds in order to help public health agencies deal with the virus, and many others are in the process of doing so. Others will…