T.Žuko blogas

United States
The Supreme Court

Following Souter
May 7th 2009 | WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition

Barack Obama has a chance to rejuvenate the Supreme Court’s liberal wing

DAVID SOUTER … is a singular character. Though wealthy, he lives the life of Diogenes. He lunches frugally at his desk, typically on yogurt and an apple, which he eats to the core. He seldom goes out. He has no time for modern distractions such as television. But most unusually of all, despite having life tenure as a judge on the Supreme Court, he is planning to retire at the tender age of 69.

He loves judging but hates Washington, DC. He calls it the worst city in the world, though he has barely travelled. He yearns to return to his home in a tiny hamlet in New Hampshire, a dilapidated wooden farmhouse where he lives alone. …>>

*

David Souter
by J.Stone

May 01, 2009, The University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog

It would appear from the latest news reports that Justice David Souter is about to part ways with the Supreme Court after a nineteen-year tenure. At the time of his nomination by President George H. W. Bush, David Souter was a virtual unknown. In his long career as a justice on the New Hampshire Supreme Court, a judge on the New Hampshire trial court, and New Hampshire’s attorney general, he seldom had occasion to express his views on controversial constitutional issues. Many critics of the nomination complained that President Bush had found a “stealth candidate” who had no “paper trail” but was secretly a rock-solid conservative determined to overturn Roe v. Wade and to outlaw affirmative action. It didn’t turn out quite that way. …>>

*

United States
The Supreme Court

Change at the top
May 1st 2009
From Economist.com

The retirement of Justice David Souter will let Barack Obama begin to shape the Supreme Court …>>

*

NYT blog: The Conversation: Talking between columns / May 6, 2009, 12:46 pm

Who Will Replace Souter?
By David Brooks and Gail Collins

Gail Collins: David, I’m really eager to hear your opinions about the upcoming debate over a new Supreme Court justice. Here are some thoughts …>>

http://theconversation.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/who-will-replace-souter/#more-155

Europe
Universities in Europe

Bolognese sauce
Apr 23rd 2009 | PRAGUE
From The Economist print edition

A birthplace of higher education tries to become its future too …>>

*

Europe
French universities

One out, a quarter out
Apr 30th 2009 | NANTERRE
From The Economist print edition

Few have noticed, but strikes have closed a lot of France’s universities …>>

Books & Arts

Vilnius
Contested city

Apr 30th 2009
From The Economist print edition

Vilnius is an example to others—a contested city, but not a divided one

The World in 2009

Europe

Twenty years of capitalism: was it worth it?

Nov 19th 2008

From The World in 2009 print edition

By Laza Kekic

Yes—but it’s not so simple

International
Selection bias in politics
There was a lawyer, an engineer and a politician…

Apr 16th 2009
From The Economist print edition

Why do professional paths to the top vary so much?

BRIEFING: The American right

Under the weather 

Aug 9th 2007
From The Economist print edition

The conservative movement that for a generation has been the source of the Republican Party’s strength is in the dumps

Europe
Charlemagne

The left’s resignation note
Dec 11th 2008
From The Economist print edition

Why the left in Europe is not benefiting from the economic crisis

United States
Lexington

Obama derangement syndrome
Apr 16th 2009
From The Economist print edition

The president is driving some people mad. That may be to his advantage in the short term

“… What is clear is that the rapid replacement of Bush-hatred with Obama-hatred is not healthy for American politics, particularly given the president’s dual role as leader of his party and head of state. A majority of Republicans (56%) approved of Jimmy Carter’s job performance in late March 1977. A majority of Democrats (55%) approved of Richard Nixon’s job performance at a comparable point in his first term. But today polarisation is almost instant, thanks in part to the growing role of non-negotiable issues such as abortion in American politics, in part to the rise of a media industry based on outrage, and in part to a cycle of tit-for-tat demonisation. This is not only poisoning American political life. It is making it ever harder to solve problems that require cross-party collaboration such as reforming America’s health-care system or its pensions. Unfortunately, the Glenn Becks of this world are more than just a joke.”

The proposer’s closing remarks
economist.com, Apr 15th 2009 | Professor Thomas Piketty

In his rebuttal statement, Chris Edwards made a strong point. The reason why we disagree is because “Piketty’s understanding of the nature of income is very European“. I don’t know who suggested him to dig so deeply into the substance of the debate, but this was really well taken. I suggest that next time he uses an even deeper argument: “Piketty is French“.

Let me return to the substance. As a matter of fact, confiscatory marginal tax rates on very high incomes are an American invention. Between 1932 and 1980, the top marginal rate of the U.S. federal income tax was on average equal to 80.2%. …>>

The Economist debate series

Resenting the rich
Proposition: “This house believes that the rich should pay higher taxes.”

Should the rich pay more tax to reduce social inequality?

Live dates: April 7th-April 17th

Current round: Opening

In both Britain and America, the period since the early 1980s has been one of rapidly widening income inequality. Reaganism and Thatcherism brought with them lower top tax rates than had previously been the norm. But has the pendulum swung too far in the direction of light-touch taxation in subsequent decades? Is it time to rethink how heavily to tax the rich? And is tax policy the right tool in the battle against inequality, if indeed one needs to be waged?

Pro: Thomas Piketty
“Tax progressivity is the least distortive way to redistribute more fairly the gains from globalisation and market competition.” Read more

Con: Chris Edwards
“Governments don’t need any more money, and they misallocate much of what they already take from us.” Read more

Where do you stand? Post your comments and vote now …>>