Cato Events Podcast

Immigration is one of the most controversial public policy topics today. On one hand, tens of millions of immigrants and their children are assimilating and integrating into American economic life. On the other, concerns about immigrants and how they will affect the economic future of Americans and our nation as a whole is one of the best predictors of support for Donald Trump, the 2016 Republican Presidential candidate. Unfortunately, many of those concerns are fueled by misunderstanding the effects that immigrants and their descendants have on the U.S. economy. This special conference, timed just prior to the Presidential election, brings together some of the best minds and researchers on the economics of immigration to help inform Americans and to guide policymakers.

Immigration is one of the most controversial public policy topics today. On one hand, tens of millions of immigrants and their children are assimilating and integrating into American economic life. On the other, concerns about immigrants and how they will affect the economic future of Americans and our nation as a whole is one of the best predictors of support for Donald Trump, the 2016 Republican Presidential candidate. Unfortunately, many of those concerns are fueled by misunderstanding the effects that immigrants and their descendants have on the U.S. economy. This special conference, timed just prior to the Presidential election, brings together some of the best minds and researchers on the economics of immigration to help inform Americans and to guide policymakers.

Immigration is one of the most controversial public policy topics today. On one hand, tens of millions of immigrants and their children are assimilating and integrating into American economic life. On the other, concerns about immigrants and how they will affect the economic future of Americans and our nation as a whole is one of the best predictors of support for Donald Trump, the 2016 Republican Presidential candidate. Unfortunately, many of those concerns are fueled by misunderstanding the effects that immigrants and their descendants have on the U.S. economy. This special conference, timed just prior to the Presidential election, brings together some of the best minds and researchers on the economics of immigration to help inform Americans and to guide policymakers.

A well-timed gif immortalizing U.S. gymnast McKayla Maroney’s stunning acrobatics in the women’s vault final of the artistic gymnastics event set the overall tone of the 2012 London Olympics and has no doubt been watched far more times, by far more people, than the live event ever was. When McKayla was awarded the silver medal for her efforts, the world was at least as unimpressed as she was, with the face she made on the winner’s podium quickly becoming one of the most recognizable and long-lasting memes on the Internet. Later that year, McKayla and President Obama posed for a photograph in the Oval Office, emulating her by-then trademark scowl and crossed arms.McKayla is far from the only Olympian to have crossed pop culture barriers in this way. American swimmer Michael Phelps, the most decorated Olympian of all time, is the subject of numerous memes. Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt’s victory pose fueled a photo craze called “Bolting,” while a picture taken of British track and field athlete Mo Farah during the 5,000-meter race inspired the popular photoshop meme Mo Farah Running Away From Things.It’s therefore no surprise that when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) issued constrictive new rules governing how brands, news agencies, and more could discuss the Olympics online, the Internet was incredulous.Nonsponsor businesses are banned from using any of the Olympics’ trademarked words or phrases (including “Olympic,” “Olympian,” “Team USA,” “Go for the gold,” and “Let the games begin”) or “terms that reference the location of the Olympics” (including “Rio 2016”). The rules sternly warn that “the use of Olympic material transformed into graphic animated formats such as animated GIFs … or short video formats such as Vines … is expressly prohibited.” Hashtags that include Olympics trademarks (such as #TeamUSA or #Rio2016), posting Olympics results, retweeting official Olympics social media accounts, and using social media to wish athletes luck are all verboten.But, despite the IOC’s stern warning, the Internet is still awash with gifs, tweets, memes, and more—with many of them coming from nonsponsors, and at least one American business is suing for the right to root for the home team.Meanwhile, the IOC stands by what sees as a righteous defense of its intellectual property, raising important questions about free speech and digital copyright.What is the proper balance between intellectual property and freedom of speech? Does digital copyright impose a chilling effect on online speech and innovation—or does widespread circumvention of such legal impositions weaken the rule of law? Is the IOC’s (and Minnesota business Zerorez) “sue first” mentality indicative of the overlawyering of America and the international community? What do conflicts like these mean for the future of digital media?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A well-timed gif immortalizing U.S. gymnast McKayla Maroney’s stunning acrobatics in the women’s vault final of the artistic gymnastics event set the overall tone of the 2012 London Olympics and has no doubt been watched far more times, by far more people, than the live event ever was. When McKayla was awarded the silver medal for her efforts, the world was at least as unimpressed as she was, with the face she made on the winner’s podium quickly becoming one of the most recognizable and long-lasting memes on the Internet. Later that year, McKayla and President Obama posed for a photograph in the Oval Office, emulating her by-then trademark scowl and crossed arms.

McKayla is far from the only Olympian to have crossed pop culture barriers in this way. American swimmer Michael Phelps, the most decorated Olympian of all time, is the subject of numerous memes. Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt’s victory pose fueled a photo craze called “Bolting,” while a picture taken of British track and field athlete Mo Farah during the 5,000-meter race inspired the popular photoshop meme Mo Farah Running Away From Things.

It’s therefore no surprise that when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) issued constrictive new rules governing how brands, news agencies, and more could discuss the Olympics online, the Internet was incredulous.

Nonsponsor businesses are banned from using any of the Olympics’ trademarked words or phrases (including “Olympic,” “Olympian,” “Team USA,” “Go for the gold,” and “Let the games begin”) or “terms that reference the location of the Olympics” (including “Rio 2016”). The rules sternly warn that “the use of Olympic material transformed into graphic animated formats such as animated GIFs … or short video formats such as Vines … is expressly prohibited.” Hashtags that include Olympics trademarks (such as #TeamUSA or #Rio2016), posting Olympics results, retweeting official Olympics social media accounts, and using social media to wish athletes luck are all verboten.

But, despite the IOC’s stern warning, the Internet is still awash with gifs, tweets, memes, and more—with many of them coming from nonsponsors, and at least one American business is suing for the right to root for the home team.

Meanwhile, the IOC stands by what sees as a righteous defense of its intellectual property, raising important questions about free speech and digital copyright.

What is the proper balance between intellectual property and freedom of speech? Does digital copyright impose a chilling effect on online speech and innovation—or does widespread circumvention of such legal impositions weaken the rule of law? Is the IOC’s (and Minnesota business Zerorez) “sue first” mentality indicative of the overlawyering of America and the international community? What do conflicts like these mean for the future of digital media?

Since the end of World War II, the United States has played a unique role in the world. It defended war-ravaged nations, enabling them to rebuild, and led a global coalition during the Cold War. Today it continues to provide security for other nations against a number of threats, from a rising China to non-state actors such as ISIS and al Qaeda. Washington also tries to adjudicate disputes, much as a baseball umpire ensures that the players obey the rules of the game. The United States and the rest of the world have benefited, but it has come at a cost. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have caused millions of Americans to question the nation’s global role. A new documentary, American Umpire, explores how the United States assumed these responsibilities in the first place. Then, through a series of interviews with prominent policymakers, scholars, military leaders, and journalists, it considers possible options for the future. Writer and producer Elizabeth Cobbs will join us for a special screening of the film, followed by a discussion, with a distinguished panel of experts, of its implications for U.S. foreign policy. Please join us.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Since the end of World War II, the United States has played a unique role in the world. It defended war-ravaged nations, enabling them to rebuild, and led a global coalition during the Cold War. Today it continues to provide security for other nations against a number of threats, from a rising China to non-state actors such as ISIS and al Qaeda. Washington also tries to adjudicate disputes, much as a baseball umpire ensures that the players obey the rules of the game.

 

The United States and the rest of the world have benefited, but it has come at a cost. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have caused millions of Americans to question the nation’s global role. A new documentary, American Umpire, explores how the United States assumed these responsibilities in the first place. Then, through a series of interviews with prominent policymakers, scholars, military leaders, and journalists, it considers possible options for the future. Writer and producer Elizabeth Cobbs will join us for a special screening of the film, followed by a discussion, with a distinguished panel of experts, of its implications for U.S. foreign policy. Please join us.

Welfare reform was not just one of the most important legislative achievements of its era, it continues to serve as the starting point for discussions of poverty and inequality today. The conference will look back at the goals of welfare reform and whether or not it has achieved them, as well as looking forward to next steps. We hope to answer such questions as the following: Did welfare reform achieve its goal of moving people from welfare to work? Did welfare reform improve economic self-sufficiency and mobility? How did welfare reform impact family structure, health, and child achievement? Did reformed welfare still provide an adequate safety net during the economic turbulence of the last decade? Is welfare reform still relevant today? How can we build on welfare reform to reduce poverty and increase opportunity? What should a safety net look like in the future?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welfare reform was not just one of the most important legislative achievements of its era, it continues to serve as the starting point for discussions of poverty and inequality today. The conference will look back at the goals of welfare reform and whether or not it has achieved them, as well as looking forward to next steps. We hope to answer such questions as the following: Did welfare reform achieve its goal of moving people from welfare to work? Did welfare reform improve economic self-sufficiency and mobility? How did welfare reform impact family structure, health, and child achievement? Did reformed welfare still provide an adequate safety net during the economic turbulence of the last decade? Is welfare reform still relevant today? How can we build on welfare reform to reduce poverty and increase opportunity? What should a safety net look like in the future?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welfare reform was not just one of the most important legislative achievements of its era, it continues to serve as the starting point for discussions of poverty and inequality today. The conference will look back at the goals of welfare reform and whether or not it has achieved them, as well as looking forward to next steps. We hope to answer such questions as the following: Did welfare reform achieve its goal of moving people from welfare to work? Did welfare reform improve economic self-sufficiency and mobility? How did welfare reform impact family structure, health, and child achievement? Did reformed welfare still provide an adequate safety net during the economic turbulence of the last decade? Is welfare reform still relevant today? How can we build on welfare reform to reduce poverty and increase opportunity? What should a safety net look like in the future?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.