荆棘鸟美国,清算的日子可能就要到了_我的网站
A | Last week, the predominantly conservative US Supreme Court overruled the precedent established by the Roe v. Wade and decided that states may regulate the practice of abortion. The Roe v. Wade decision upheld pregnant women’s right to seek an abortion without government restrictions. A decision in the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey largely upheld the Roe ruling.,Effect on Midterms,In November, US citizens will go to the polls in what will be the first midterm election of the Joe Biden administration as well as a referendum of sorts on the current US president's performance. The Republicans have been projected to win back the House of Representatives and the Senate as well, as the public has been increasingly frustrated by the issues such as inflation, crime, education and jobs. The recent ruling, however, could potentially give the democrats a shot in the arm by generating excitement among their voters.,"It will certainly galvanize the Democrats' base, for sure, it will help them to raise campaign funds and it may - perhaps - make some races more difficult for Republicans, especially in the suburbs among women voters," Robert Singh, a professor of politics at Birkbeck, University of London, said, adding that most voters will still be focused on other issues and he still expects the Republicans to win both houses of the Congress.,This sentiment was echoed by Ziad Munson, a sociology professor and the chair of the department of sociology and anthropology at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, who also warned that the effect of the decision can be overstated.,"A consistent finding in political science over the last several decades is that the abortion issue, while a potent ideological symbol, seldom is a key policy issue for voters when they cast their votes," Munson explained.,Andrew Wroe, a senior lecturer in American politics at the University of Kent, agreed as well that the issue should help the Democrats, citing the effectiveness of the Republican use of cultural issues for rallying their base.,"The Democratic Party has been less successful in prosecuting the Culture Wars, but this is its great opportunity. Whether it will use it well is a different question, however," Wroe suggested.,At the same time, Christopher Kaczor, the chair of the philosophy department at Loyola Marymount University, is doubtful about the abortion issue having an impact on the US political landscape and helping Democrats to excite their voters.,"I expect that the very small minority of people for whom abortion is the key issue, on both sides, will be energized by this decision, but for most people other political and economic issues will remain more important," Kaczor stated.,New Wave of Protests?,The Supreme Court's decision has triggered a strong reaction on both sides of the issue in the United States, with hundreds of protesters, pro-life and pro-choice, gathering outside the Supreme Court last week following the decision. After the ruling, protests broke out in various US cities, showing a possibility of a nationwide backlash.,"People are angry, distraught, and ready to mobilise. It is difficult to say precisely how long the protests will persist, but it is likely to be some considerable time, given the magnitude of the policy change and the direct and indirect effects it will have on millions of people's lives," Wroe said.,Meanwhile, other experts expressed skepticism regarding the possibility of nationwide protests, including Munson, who drew attention to the fact that "the conservative majority tested for this possibility when they agreed not to stay the implementation of the Texas S.B. 8 law [also known as the Texas Heartbeat Act that bans abortion after detection of an unborn child's heartbeat] earlier this year.","Allowing that law to go into effect was the Court's political trial balloon, and it showed that widespread outrage quickly quieted down after just a few days. The outrage following the formal overturning of Roe v. Wade will last longer, but it is not likely to lead to large-scale consequential protest activity," the sociologist said.,Man Charged With Attempted Murder of LAPD Officers Amid Roe v Wade Protests26 June, 14:51 GMT,Who Judges the Justices?,Over the years, the role of courts in the US social and political life has greatly increased, with the Supreme Court becoming the final arbiter on many hot-button issues, such as same-sex marriage, gun control and abortion. This has been a prominent talking point among conservatives, who have been claiming that this practice undermines the country's constitutional principles, while liberals have been appealing to the notion of the courts standing up for human rights as well as drawing attention to the conservative movement's efforts to train and promote judges who share its principles.,"Both liberals and conservatives have always been supportive of judicial activism, they just want the judiciary to be activist in promoting the issues or outcomes that their side prefers. This despite the fact that conservatives have used 'judicial activism' as a talking point for some time," Munson pointed out.,Kaczor, for his part, drew a distinction between the original Roe decision and the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, insisting that the latter actually corrects a case of judicial activism.,"The Dobbs decision is not accurately portrayed as a case of judicial activism, but rather as the reversal of judicial activism. It was Roe that established a constitutional right for abortion that had no basis in the text, history, or structure of the constitution. The decision of Dobbs undoes this judicial activism," he stated.,Nevertheless, the ruling by the current Supreme Court, which has three justices picked up by former President Donald Trump from a list compiled by the conservative legal organization Federalist Society, is likely to have the Democrats sour on the Supreme Court.,"Democrats are increasingly likely to start talking about illegitimate policy making by the Supreme Court. They will start to complain about judicial activism. But, as noted above, they can use these arguments to mobilize their base and to argue for urgency of electing more Democrats to the Senate, which of course must ratify presidential appointments to the Court," Wroe said, adding that the Democrats can also "begin to legitimately argue that the Senate has an in-built Republican advantage that needs to be addressed via constitutional change.",According to Singh, any Democratic nominee for the 2024 presidential race will face the pressure to commit to enlarging and reforming the Supreme Court.,"Whether that happens, though, is another matter. I doubt the Democrats will have sufficient seats in the Senate to overcome a GOP filibuster of court reform proposals. But the fact that the conservatives number six now on the Court sets up an on-going problem for Democrats, and more conflict to come," Singh concluded.。 年复一年,联邦政府的支出超过了税收收入。每年的财政缺口都导致国债增加,起初增长缓慢,随后却呈爆炸式增长,无视了人们关于不可避免的清算的警告。现在,清算的日子可能就要到了。本周债券市场抛售潮导致政府借贷成本升至近二十年来的最高水平,并促使财政部采取了非同寻常的干预措施。《华盛顿邮报》分析指,8月21日30年期美国国债收益率突破5.27%,较前一日略有上升,这表明财政部部长贝森特的市场稳定计划并未奏效。经过数十年的大手大脚支出,华盛顿可能很快将被迫做出一些长期搁置且在政治上不受欢迎的选择,而这些选择几乎会让所有美国人都受到影响。管理着橡树基金40亿美元债券的亚当·阿巴斯表示,“我们有两个手段:提高税收或削减开支。这两种选择在政治上都不受欢迎,而且永远不会受欢迎,但我们迟早都必须解决这个问题。
B | ”当财政部为发行债券吸引投资者时,它会与其他政府和企业展开竞争——尤其是那些正在构建国家人工智能基础设施的超大规模数据中心运营商。所有这些资本竞争意味着投资者可以要求更高的回报或收益率。财政监督机构几十年来一直警告说,不断上升的美国债务最终会引发危机。无党派组织“负责任联邦预算委员会”的高级政策主管马克·戈德温表示,随着借贷成本上升,债务变得更加昂贵,这可能形成恶性循环。债券收益率或利率的快速上涨往往会以意想不到的方式在金融体系中引发连锁反应,暴露出代价高昂的脆弱性。例如,2023年,硅谷银行就因债券收益率上升导致资产负债表出现巨大漏洞而倒闭。据美联储7月28日至29日会议纪要,目前金融体系中潜在的薄弱环节包括一些美国最大的对冲基金,这些基金用于投资的借贷资金(即杠杆率)“接近历史最高水平”。同样,传统上较为稳健的人寿保险公司也持有风险较高的资产,如果在危机期间需要筹集资金,这些资产将难以迅速抛售。如今的财政压力始于25年前,当时前总统比尔·克林顿和共和党控制的国会连续四年实现了预算平衡。联邦政府实际上开始偿还债务。这促使美联储主席艾伦·格林斯潘在2001年发表讲话,警告称消除债务,从而消除国债本身,可能会扰乱金融市场。即便如此,他仍然预料到这种情况会发生。然而,一系列政策选择和无法预料的危机却使国家的财政进展被巨额赤字所淹没。过去十年,这个问题变得尤为严峻。1789年至2016年间,美国政府借贷总额略高于19万亿美元。而过去十年,特朗普和前总统拜登又增加了20万亿美元的借贷,使国债翻了一番,偿债支出成为纳税人最大的年度负担之一。据无党派的国会预算办公室称,美国现在每年花费超过1万亿美元用于支付国家信用卡(医疗保险)的利息,超过了其在联邦医疗保险上的支出。而就在2010年,这笔利息支出还不到现在的五分之一。
C |
华盛顿特区一个公交车站的标牌上显示了美国国债总额美国债务负担不断加重只是更广泛现象的一部分。与引发2008年金融危机的风险性抵押贷款不同,近年来,政府已成为最大的借款方。各国政府都曾借贷以在2008年金融危机后修复经济,并再次借贷以应对2020年的疫情。非洲和亚洲的贫困国家则因乌克兰和伊朗战争后不断上涨的能源和食品支出而背负了更深的债务。
D | “人口结构方面,劳动力增长放缓是由于人口老龄化、老年工人近期离职以及移民减少。
E | 而且特朗普不断推出供给侧冲击措施——关税、伊朗战争。现在的供给侧已经完全不同了。”保守派智库美国行动论坛主席、前国会预算办公室主任道格拉斯·霍尔茨-埃金在电子邮件中表示。要恢复债券市场秩序,唯一可靠的办法就是采取切实行动来减少国家巨大的预算赤字,国会预算办公室估计,今年的预算赤字将达到创纪录的2.1万亿美元。贝森特在周四接受CNBC采访时承诺,特朗普政府将很快宣布“加大”对政府财政的关注,包括审查“收入和成本两方面”的潜在变化。但怀疑并非毫无道理。本届政府最初试图改革政府开支,结果却催生了埃隆·马斯克的“政府效率部”,该部门大刀阔斧地改革了公务员制度,却未能证实其夸大的节约目标。尽管有过那样的经历,贝森特表示,他预计由副总统万斯领导的反欺诈工作组将节省“数千亿美元”。独立专家表示,提高税收和削减社会保障、医疗保险等广受欢迎的福利项目是不可避免的。但距离11月国会选举不到三个月,巴克莱银行的经济学家本周告诉客户,政府承诺的财政整顿“似乎不太可能实现”。事实上,到目前为止,国会山对债务问题的关注仅限于一些例行公事的公开声明。
特朗普与美财长贝森特“华盛顿肆意挥霍的开支问题既不道德,也让我们的子孙后代不得不承担后果,这很不公平,而且还使我们的经济稳定变得极其脆弱,”犹他州共和党参议员约翰·柯蒂斯周四在X网站上写道。
F | “我们的债务越多,一旦发生经济冲击,灾难的威胁就越大。”其他立法者提议成立一个委员会来拯救社会保障体系,该体系预计在2032年将面临资金短缺,无法支付全额福利。如果这种情况发生,根据法律规定,福利必须削减22%。很少有人期待短期内会有什么行动。共和党参议员比尔·卡西迪是该委员会法案的主要发起人之一,他表示,任何人都不应该指望这样的委员会能够解决社会保障以外的问题。卡西迪在一封电子邮件中写道:“说‘一次性解决所有问题’很容易,但我们知道这是不可能的。一旦我们解决了这个问题,就能证明其他债务问题也可以得到解决,但我们应该循序渐进。”
Current article:http://t99ft.panningbuquanchencaibingzhang.cyou/list_lddi9iy/bxe.html Published on:00:00:00 |








