hoka shoes

Posts Tagged ‘ era

Putin lambasts the West and declares the end of ‘the era of the unipolar world’

Putin unveils imperialist mission: Taking back land he says is Russia’s 02:59

(CNN)Russian President Vladimir Putin has declared the end of “the era of the unipolar world” in a combative speech that lambasted Western countries at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on Friday.

“When they won the Cold War, the US declared themselves God’s own representatives on earth, people who have no responsibilities — only interests. They have declared those interests sacred. Now it’s one-way traffic, which makes the world unstable,” Putin told the audience.
The much-hyped speech was delayed by more than 90 minutes because of a “massive” cyberattack. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told journalists in an impromptu conference call that the speech was postponed due to distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks on the conference’s systems.
It was not immediately clear who was behind the attack. Ukrainian IT Army, a hacker collective, named the St. Petersburg Forum as a target earlier this week on its Telegram channel.
Putin’s address at the annual conference, one of his more substantial speeches since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine almost four months ago, was seen as an opportunity for the world to get some insight into his thinking.
Once the Russian president took the stage in the western Russian city, he wasted no time on pleasantries and went straight into attacks on the United States and its allies.
“They live in the past on their own under their own delusions … They think that … they have won and then everything else is a colony, a back yard. And the people living there are second-class citizens,” he said, adding that Russia’s “special operation” — the phrase the Russian government uses to describe its war on Ukraine — has become a “lifesaver for the West to blame all the problems on Russia.”
After accusing western countries of blaming their problems on Russia, Putin tried to pin the blame for rising food prices on the “US administration and the Euro bureaucracy.”
Ukraine is a major food producer, but the Russian invasion has affected its entire production and supply chain. The United Nations has said the war has had a devastating impact on supplies and prices and warned it could push up to 49 million more people into famine or famine-like conditions.
European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said last week that food has become part of the Kremlin’s “arsenal of terror.”
Ukrainian officials have accused Russia of stealing Ukrainian grain, accusations that appear to have been confirmed by satellite images showing Russian ships being loaded with Ukrainian grain. On top of that, Russia is blocking maritime access to the Black Sea ports held by Ukraine, meaning that even the grain that is still under Ukrainian control cannot be exported to the many countries that rely on it.
Russian President Vladimir Putin delivers a speech during a session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in St. Petersburg on June 17, 2022.

The long-time Russian leader also blamed the West for trying to hurt the Russian economy, calling the sanctions on Moscow “crazy” and “reckless.”
“Their intention is clear to crush the Russian economy by breaking down the chain the logistical chains, freezing national assets and attacking the living standards, but they were not successful,” he added. “It has not worked out. Russian business people have rallied together working diligently, conscientiously, and step-by-step, we are normalizing the economic situation.”
The Russian president has long framed his decision to launch an invasion of Ukraine as a response to Kyiv’s growing diplomatic and security ties with the West. Last week, he hinted that his aim in Ukraine is the restoration of Russia as an imperial power.

Putin claims Russia ‘forced’ into the conflict in Ukraine

Speaking about his war on Ukraine on Friday, Putin went straight to his propaganda playbook, claiming Russia was “forced” into the conflict.
He called the invasion “the decision of a sovereign country that has an unconditional right … to defend its security.”
“A decision aimed at protecting our citizens, residents of the People’s Republics of Donbas, who for eight years were subjected to genocide by the Kyiv regime and neo-Nazis who received the full protection of the West,” he said.
The two areas — the self-declared Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) and Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR) — fell under the control of Russia-backed separatists in 2014.
The Kremlin has accused Ukrainian authorities of discriminating against ethnic Russians and Russian speakers in the regions, a charge Kyiv has denied. Starting 2019, Russian passports were offered to the residents of the two entities.
Finally, in late February, Putin announced he would recognize them as independent, a move that was seen as the opening salvo of the war.
He said on Friday that Russian soldiers and the separatists were “fighting to defend their people” in the Donbas and the right to “reject any attempt to impose pseudo values of dehumanization and moral degradation from outside.”
No country other than Russia recognizes the two as independent. Ukraine and the rest of the international community considers the territories to be under Russian occupation.
The European Commission announced Friday that it was recommending Ukraine and neighboring Moldova as EU candidate states, with the commission’s chief Ursula von der Leyen saying that Ukrainians are “ready to die” for the European perspective.
Speaking about the European Union on Friday, Putin said the bloc had “lost its sovereignty.”
“The European Union has fully lost its sovereignty, and its elites are dancing to someone else’s tune, harming their own population. Europeans’ and European businesses’ real interests are totally ignored and swept aside,” he said.
He later added that Russia has “nothing against” Ukraine joining the EU.
“The EU is not a military-political bloc, unlike NATO, therefore we have always said and I have always said that our position here is consistent, understandable, we have nothing against it,” Putin said during a panel discussion following his speech.
“It is the sovereign decision of any country to join or not to join economic associations, and it is up to this economic association to accept new states as its members or not. As far as it is expedient for the EU, let the EU countries themselves decide. Whether it will be for the benefit or to the detriment of Ukraine is also their business,” he said.

Conor McGregor’s sloppy, graceless defeat marks end of an era for Irish star

Backside on the canvas, back to the cage, leg bent in a way legs aren’t supposed to be bent and Conor McGregor still wouldn’t stop bleating and badgering.

He was screaming for his latest loss to be officially declared a doctor’s stoppage, not a TKO at the hands of Dustin Poirier, a distinction without much of a difference.

He was screaming at Poirier that next time — unlike the last two times — he’d hand him some hellacious whipping, which given the circumstances was comically sad.

He was screaming about Poirier’s wife because, well, McGregor learned long ago skechers shoes when people might be on the verge of tuning him out, just get meaner and cruder and more and more ridiculous.

The thing is, people may stop listening to Conor McGregor pretty soon. His post-fight diatribe sounded more like a guy begging for continued relevance, begging Poirier and other elite fighters not to leave him behind, than any tangible emotion. It’s hard to imagine even McGregor believed what he was saying.

“I was boxing the bleeding head off him, kicking the bleeding leg off him,” a frenzied McGregor said to announcer Joe Rogan. “This is not over. If I have to take this outside with him, it’s on outside.”

Oh, it’s over. At least this era of McGregor. He was carried out of a Las Vegas Octagon on Saturday night — his left leg in a splint — and into the crossroads of his career.

Conor McGregor battles Dustin Poirier (top) in their lightweight bout during UFC 264 on July 10. (Louis Grasse/PxImages/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)
Conor McGregor battles Dustin Poirier (top) in their lightweight bout during UFC 264 on July 10.

The Dublin, Ireland native has one victory in four years — over Donald “Cowboy” Cerrone.

He’s been brutalized in his last three bouts — one by Khabib Nurmagomedov and twice now by Poirier. He no longer looks capable of his early match swarms that used to overwhelm psyched-out opponents. His once-lethal left doesn’t seem to carry the same pop.

He’s switched up styles and strategies so often that he looks unconvinced in any of them — attempting a single-arm guillotine brooks shoes on a black belt such as Poirier was a sign of desperation that ended predictably.

The leg break ended this one at the end of the first round, but Poirier had dominated that round — all the bluster about how McGregor was going to murder and torture Poirier hadn’t come close to materializing. He looked en route to being knocked out.

That said, McGregor remains, by far, the biggest draw in combat sports. T-Mobile Arena was filled with A-list celebrities and even a former president. UFC president Dana White said pay-per-views were trending toward 1.8 million, one of the best nights ever for the sport.

Recent record aside, McGregor is still an upper-level fighter as he hits his 33rd birthday this week. His lower tibia will be patched back together — while more gruesome to look at, it’s an easier heal than a ligament or tendon. He’s got plenty of career left if he wants it.

It’s just not the career he had.

The antics, the insults, the trash talk that mesmerized the world made McGregor a very rich and very famous man. That was, in large part however, because he could back it up with skill and guile and a fury that he always said was borne from life on the Irish dole.

McGregor would get all worked up before the fight, but then he’d deliver a hell of a knock. Win or lose, he’d send everyone home pretty happy. He was a fighter’s fighter, not just some self-marketed star. Give the man that. And he can, no doubt, still dish out some hurt in there.

Yet the visual of a slumped-back McGregor — broken and beaten — hurling outrageous insults and improbable promises of future ecco shoes dominance might make even Conor cringe when he sees it on replay. Take it outside? He couldn’t even stand up. Poirier — had he wanted to sink to McGregor’s level — could have just walked over and smacked him around again for mentioning his wife. That’s what would happen on the streets.

Conor McGregor battles Dustin Poirier (top) in their lightweight bout during UFC 264 on July 10. (Louis Grasse/PxImages/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)
Conor McGregor battles Dustin Poirier (top) in their lightweight bout during UFC 264 on July 10. 

This was a dog barking from inside the gate.

How long can McGregor keep up all the yapping, all of his supposed rage-induced outbursts? He once threw a loading dock dolly through a bus window because he was supposedly so angry with Nurmagomedov, only to later get dominated. Now this.

Does anyone keep taking it seriously unless he starts backing it up with victories again?

McGregor isn’t in Poirier’s class any longer. Nor Khabib’s (if he ever unretires). Same with Charles Oliveira or Alexander Volkanovski, the UFC’s respective current lightweight and featherweight champions. McGregor once owned both belts at the same time.

It happens. Age happens. Injuries happen. MMA happens — a sport where innovation and improvement must be constant. McGregor’s millions happen.

What’s the motivation for a man who has risen from poverty and become not just a fight star and not just a businessman but a business, man. Whiskey. Boxing. Social Media. Fashion. Who knows, he may be headed toward a real billionaire’s strut.

There are more fights to be had, just a little different kind. McGregor could always summon the anger for a trilogy fight with Nate Diaz. There was a dustup this week with Rafael dos Anjos, a former lightweight champ who is 36 and on the downslope of his career. The PPVs will still spin.

There is also the possibility of taking on YouTube star Jake Paul in a boxing match that, if McGregor could get out of his UFC contract or get the promotion to bend, might earn another nine-figure payday like when he fought Floyd Mayweather in 2017.

We’re about to get the 1st GOP election test in the post-Trump era

Amanda Chase’s candidacy for governor in Virginia this year has confronted the state’s GOP with a dilemma that mirrors the challenge facing the national party: How does it reap the benefits of Trumpism but also reduce the costs?

Can it retain voters drawn to the party because of former President Donald Trump and his style of politics, but at the same time push, nudge or maneuver Trump-like candidates like Chase — who are likely to lose winnable elections — out of the way?

Virginia Republicans may have found a way to do just that by using a method of voting that reformers are promoting nationally as a tool to reduce extremism and polarization.

Virginia State Sen. Amanda Chase, R-Chesterfield, right, leaves court with her attorney Tim Anderson during a break in a hearing to dismiss here lawsuit in Federal court in Richmond, Va., Thursday, April 1, 2021. (Steve Helber/AP Photo)
Virginia state Sen. Amanda Chase leaves court in Richmond, Va., with her attorney Tim Anderson on Thursday. (Steve Helber/AP Photo)

State Sen. Amanda Chase is a far-right Republican who promoted the lies about cheating in the 2020 election and has affiliated herself with supporters of the QAnon conspiracy theory and attracted support from militia members. Two close supporters of hers, who appeared next to her when she announced her candidacy, were arrested outside a Philadelphia vote-counting location after the fall election, carrying concealed weapons on them and possessing 160 rounds of ammunition in their vehicle. They have been charged with an attempt to interfere with elections and with conspiracy.

Chase called on Trump to declare martial law so he could overturn his defeat at the hands of Joe Biden.

Chase has been considered a legitimate threat to win the Republican nomination, although in Virginia — where a Republican has not won a statewide race since 2009 — she was widely considered to have no shot at winning the general election and becoming governor.

But the Virginia GOP’s decision to use ranked-choice voting in choosing a nominee on May 8 has cut down her chances significantly. The party used ranked-choice voting to choose its chairman last summer.

In a regular primary, which Chase pushed for, a candidate can win the nomination with less than 50 percent of the vote. All they need is a plurality. So Chase could have won 30 or 40 percent of the vote and gained the nomination as three more mainstream candidates split the other 60 to 70 percent. That is similar to how Trump himself won the GOP nomination for president in 2016 despite winning less than half the votes cast in the Republican primary.

But with ranked-choice voting, a candidate must get a majority to win the nomination.

Here’s how it works: Voters don’t select just one candidate. They list their preferences in order, and if none of the candidates gets 50.1 percent, then, in essence, the candidate who gets the most first-place and second-place votes will win.

Ranked-choice voting works a little differently among various jurisdictions that have implemented it, and the Virginia GOP has not clarified how it will distribute second-place votes yet. Normally, the last-place candidate is eliminated and the second-place votes cast by their voters are distributed, and so on until someone has a majority.

“Amanda may have a plurality, but she is everyone else’s last choice, which dooms her from the start,” said Shaun Kenney, a former executive director of the Republican Party of Virginia.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Orlando, Florida, U.S., on Sunday, Feb. 28, 2021. (Elijah Nouvelage/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Former President Donald Trump at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando on Feb. 28. (Elijah Nouvelage/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Virginia is a state where the GOP cannot afford to indulge the hard-core right wing if it wants to win statewide. The last Republican to win a statewide election was Bob McDonnell when he won the governorship in 2009. Republican Bill Bolling won the lieutenant governor seat that year, and Republican Ken Cuccinelli won the attorney general’s race.

But a few years later, in 2013, Cuccinelli defeated the more moderate Bolling in the Republican primary for governor, and then lost to Democrat Terry McAuliffe in a close election. The next summer, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, a Republican, lost his primary to college economics professor Dave Brat, who criticized him as weak on immigration and received help from conservative talk radio personalities. Brat went on to win the general election.

Since those two elections, the Virginia GOP has moved further right as the state has grown more diverse and voted in higher numbers for Democrats. Democratic turnout in governor’s races went from 1.1 million in 2013 to 1.4 million in 2017; in presidential contests, from 2 million in 2016 to 2.4 million in 2020. Republican turnout has increased as well, but not at the same pace.

“Virginia is a bluish state. … Guns, babies and Trump is not going to be a winning election message in the entire state. You have to do more than that,” Daniel Gade, the Virginia GOP’s nominee for U.S. Senate in 2020, said in a recent interview on a local talk radio show.

Gade, who lost his bid to Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, said Republicans need to talk about economic growth and reopening schools. School reopening in particular could be a potent election-year issue in Virginia if any significant number of schools do not return full time in the fall. Virginia, along with New Jersey, is one of only two states that hold elections for governor and other statewide offices in odd years.

The gubernatorial election is a crossroads for the Virginia GOP, said Kenney.

“The best exorcism we could use is a convention floor fight where we finally point at what Chase stands for and pull a Reagan: ‘Those voices don’t speak for the rest of us,’” he told Yahoo News, quoting the 40th president’s famous “Time for Choosing” speech.

“It’s plagued us since Dave Brat beat Eric Cantor in 2014. We either exorcise the demons once and for all as conservatives or succumb to the idea that alt-right nationalism is what Republicans actually believe. Those are the stakes. And we can do it … provided conservatives don’t split ourselves six ways to Sunday.”

Rep.-elect Dave Brat, R-Va., raises his right hand as his wife Laura looks on during the ceremonial swearing-in photo-op with Speaker of the House John Boehner in the Capitol on Wednesday, Nov. 12, 2014. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images)
Rep.-elect Dave Brat, R-Va., with his wife, Laura, at his ceremonial swearing-in with House Speaker John Boehner on Nov. 12, 2014. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images)

The ranked-choice voting system is a tool that ensures a majority doesn’t split its support in a way that allows someone like Chase to exploit a failure of collective action. And, as a result, Chase isn’t happy about the Virginia GOP’s embrace of the practice.

Chase filed a lawsuit against the state party over its decision to hold a convention instead of a primary, which means voters have to sign up as delegates in advance to cast a ballot. She has also called the party’s delays in finalizing details for how to participate “voter suppression of the almost 2 million voters who voted for President Trump.” Her lawsuit, however, was dismissed in February.

As of now, it appears that the contest will come down to two business leaders — Glenn Youngkin and Pete Snyder — and one veteran lawmaker, Kirk Cox, who was Virginia’s House majority leader from 2010 to 2018.

Chase, meanwhile, has been in a defensive crouch since the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol. She’s also threatening to run as an independent should Snyder win the nomination, saying the convention has been “rigged” against her.

“I think that really ended up being the start of the end for her,” Chris Saxman, a former Republican state delegate who now does political consulting, told Yahoo News. The Chase campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Chase had courted controversy plenty of times before Jan. 6, but the day before the insurrection she did a live-stream interview on Facebook with Joshua Macias, one of the two men arrested in Philadelphia with a concealed weapon outside a vote-counting center. Chase introduced Macias as an organizer of the Trump rally that would take place the next day. And she herself attended the rally on the Ellipse, where Trump spoke before his supporters marched to the Capitol and attempted to violently stop the certification of the presidential election results.

Chase said she did not march to the Capitol, but she has drawn attention for being one of three state legislators who attended the rally. And days after the insurrection, she called the rioters who assaulted the Capitol “patriots.”

“She overplayed her hand,” Saxman said. Prior to Jan. 6, “she was up there … doing quite well.”

Pro-Trump supporters storm the US Capitol following a rally with President Donald Trump on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images)
Trump supporters storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

But since the Capitol riot, her official Facebook page — which had over 125,000 followers — has been suspended permanently. Although she still has a personal page, her ability to speak to supporters through social media gave her a way around the traditional methods for raising money, which typically involve asking the business community for big donations.

Chase led in a poll conducted in early February by Christopher Newport University, with 17 percent support, although the poll showed 55 percent undecided, and it was not a poll that measured support among the small number of people who will take part in a party convention.

And it appears that Chase is not popular even in some of the most conservative pockets of the state. She attended services at a megachurch in Leesburg on Palm Sunday, a congregation that had hosted conservative activists for a “Pray, Vote, Stand” town hall earlier this year.

After the service, Chase complained that she had not been allowed to bring her gun into the service, and that she had not been asked to speak to the congregation in the same way that a candidate for attorney general had been.

“Can I be honest and tell you it was all I could do to choke back the tears? To sacrifice so much only to be treated like a third class citizen hurts,” Chase wrote on her personal Facebook page. “The Bible says to give honor where honor is due and to pray for those in authority.”


Vans Canvas Era Deepblue-Moon


Model: Vansshoes2020343


999 Units in Stock

Vans Canvas Era Deepblue-Moon
Vans Canvas Era Deepblue-Moon
Vans Canvas Era Deepblue-Moon
Vans Canvas Era Deepblue-Moon
Vans Canvas Era Deepblue-Moon
Vans Canvas Era Deepblue-Moon


Vans was born in Southern California in 1966. It is an original extreme sports brand. It is committed to developing originality and supporting board and car sports all over the world.

When will my order ship?

Usually all orders are processed and shipped within 7 working days.

Most order ship within 24 hours. After execute an order, we will send tracking number by e-mail, and providing inquiry addresses.

Can you ship to my country?

we can ship to your country.we can ship single item samples or large orders to more than 100 countries.

When will my order arrive?

This shipping method is the fastest available. Delivery times are between 3 – 5 days to all major destinations. Shipping costs vary with item, but all orders that use expedited shipping will receive a 36% discount on shipping costs.We also have Expedited options available for most items, which means your order will arrive 3 or 4 business days after it leaves the warehouse.

Easy 365-Day Returns

We’re committed to your total satisfaction. If, for any reason, you’re not completely happy with your purchase, you can get a full refund of the product price and any associated tax, within 60 business days of receipt of the item(s). To receive either a credit toward an exchange or a credit on your charge account, please note that all returns and exchanges must be in new, unused or unworn condition with the original tags and stickers attached. Items deemed worn, used, dirty or missing tags will be returned to purchaser at their expense and no refund will be issued. Women’s swimwear is eligible for return only if the sanitary liner is place. Underwear, Customized and personalized items are not returnable. Since lost return shipments are the responsibility of the customer, be sure to obtain a tracking number from the courier for the return shipment.

Robert Kutner: In the post-epidemic era, we need “Made in America”

Revival of the general model of American manufacturing

In fact, even if China does not intend to achieve global economic leadership through strategies involving large-scale government investment such as “Made in China 2025” and “One Belt One Road”, the United States has very good reasons for restoring its former manufacturing strength. The rise of China only makes America’s need to achieve this goal more urgent. China’s emphasis on state-owned capital allows the country to make long-term plans for its economic development, aiming and committing to dominate one new technology field after another; while the United States relies too much on the distortion of market signals from Wall Street (reliance on distorted market signals from Wall Street). ), which has caused the United States to be at a disadvantage in industrial development. As China becomes an infrastructure provider in developing countries, the geopolitical and geoeconomic influence brought by this new role to China is becoming increasingly prominent.

Robert Kutner, founder and co-editor of “American Outlook” magazine, and professor at Brandeis University, published a review article in the magazine on May 19, 2020: “In the post-epidemic era, we need “Made in America””, translation It is divided into two parts. This article is the second part.

After the first wave of manufacturing shifts occurred, economists Stephen Cohen and John Zysman from the University of California at Berkeley co-authored “The Importance of Manufacturing—— “Manufacturing Matters: The Myth of the Post-Industrial Economy” book. It now appears that this book is quite predictable for the future development of the US economy. They pointed out in the book that not only can the manufacturing industry provide jobs for the society, a large manufacturing enterprise can also play the role of a regional economic stabilizer.

Today in 2020, the manufacturing industry has become a ticket for a country to master the advanced technology of the future. After all, engineers are making technological innovations not far from the production workshop. If the United States loses its ability to manufacture machine tools, semiconductors, solar panels, or telecommunications equipment, a mercantilist rival like China will not only become a leading manufacturing power, but also a global leader in technological innovation. If the US government does not intervene, by then, the US will no longer have the qualifications to compete with China.

In the decades since Stephen Cohen and John Zisman published the monograph, the U.S. trade situation has grown from a slight surplus of $16 billion in 1975 to a severe deficit of $578 billion in 2019. In the field of high-tech products, it has developed from a basic balance of imports and exports to a deficit of US$132 billion. We have lost manufacturing technology and manufacturing capabilities in a large number of industries. In front of the U.S. Trade Representative, some lobby groups believe that the U.S. should no longer continue to manufacture nylon stockings, wedding dresses, or even print the Bible. However, these are the oldest traditional Western products.

In the post-epidemic era, US actions in the economic field should mainly focus on restoring manufacturing strength. Just as the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the Department of Defense once played the role of a state-owned investment bank in the field of dual-use technologies, the US government should also play a role in leading the development of the industry. In fact, the US government was already doing this during World War II. But this time, the main goal of the US government should be to prevent Beijing from leading the development of many emerging technologies through “Made in China 2025.” If Wall Street continues to sell out national interests in the future, then the US government should, like the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (the Reconstruction Finance Corporation) did during the Great Depression and World War II in the last century, own equity in high-tech companies and place public servants. In the company’s board of directors. On this basis, employee representatives will be able to play an icing on the cake.

On the surface, laissez-faire of economic activities is an unofficial ideology of laissez-faire in the United States. This ideology opposes the creation of large-scale “national champion companies” such as Siemens in Germany, Huawei in China, or Airbus in Europe. “(National champions), everything should be decided by the market. But there is an argument to the contrary that is difficult to refute. Boeing is already in serious trouble due to the catastrophic management problems that have occurred on the 737 MAX models. Since the U.S. government is doing its utmost to ensure Boeing’s solvency, in exchange, Boeing should allow the U.S. government to obtain a controlling stake in the company. As a private company that relies heavily on Wall Street, Boeing’s performance has been extremely bad. I believe that Boeing will only get better after becoming a state-owned company.

We have already seen that after so many American companies have received bailout funds, they do not know how to make better use of them other than stock repurchase and dividends. This shows that the “market” does not know how to find profitable investment opportunities in the private sector (“the market” doesn’t perceive productive investment opportunities in the private sector). However, in fact, there is no shortage of such investment opportunities in the US economic system. This is why the United States urgently needs to change the lack of state-owned capital.

From a managed economy to a green economy

Changing the absence of state-owned capital in the United States should be carried out simultaneously with the modernization of infrastructure and the transformation of the existing economic model to a more resilient circular economy model, and the latter two are actually long overdue. According to the assessment of the American Society of Civil Engineers, the funding gap for upgrading the national infrastructure is approximately US$4.5 trillion. The initiators of the 2009 “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” claimed that the economic stimulus package was “timely, clearly targeted and temporary.” Then the new green investment initiative we are currently proposing should be well planned and open. Transparent and permanent. The current epidemic crisis has caused the labor market to collapse, but this also provides an excellent opportunity to implement a green economic stimulus plan. During the Great Depression of the last century, the government’s promotion of the construction of the Hoover Dam and the Golden Gate Bridge was not without purpose. Today, we can also convert idle resources into infrastructure needed by society.

Since taxes and public debt can be used to serve society, it is reasonable to be used to create jobs. However, according to some trade rules, such practices are often regarded as “illegitimate favoritism” (illegitimate favoritism). We can ignore such rules for the sake of America’s national rejuvenation. We can reach a new trade agreement with the EU, which holds the same views on the issue of mixed economy. As for China, which has a poor record on issues such as human rights, labor rights, and intellectual property protection, it must accept offsetting tariffs and regulations. For example, any company headquartered in the United States should not comply with China’s mandatory technology transfer regulations, and US companies will no longer be allowed to do so.

In order to initiate public investment and promote the green transformation of the economy at the national level, we also need to free American economic policies from the shackles of economic thinking that has been proven wrong. “Efficiency” (efficiency) is a word that people like to talk about. Recently, as the US media has concentrated discussions on the fragility of the supply chain, more and more people have admitted that “the United States pays too much attention to the efficiency of the supply chain, but ignores the flexibility of the supply chain.” Pascal, former Director-General of the World Trade Organization · Lamy (Pascal Lamy) recently made this statement at a conference hosted by the OECD and the Open Market Institute.

However, the concept of “efficiency” is inherently problematic. In my book Everything for Sale: The Virtues and Limits of Markets published in 1996, I pointed out that the concept of “efficiency” can have three interpretations: the first is Adam. Smith’s “efficiency”, this “efficiency” is based on the relationship between supply and demand; the second, Keynes’s “efficiency”, when the economy is down, this “efficiency” is the same as Adam Smith’s “efficiency” Concepts are conflicting; the third is Schumpeter’s “efficiency”, he believes that from a long-term perspective, innovation is the source of economic growth. In fact, when China participates in the global competition for technological innovation and economic growth, it completely ignores market price signals, and the United States did so during World War II.

Furthermore, the standard description of “efficiency” usually does not take into account the trillions of dollars in losses caused by wrong market prices. Climate change, the Great Depression of 1929, and the global financial crisis of 2008 are all examples of this. This situation. Those who define “efficiency” are actually assuming that there is no closed loop of feedback between official corruption, no market power, no economic power, and political power that sets rules. Therefore, when people usually talk about “efficiency”, they are actually slashing their feet to cater to the concept of “flexibility”. This is ridiculous and goes against historical facts. It is time to abandon this concept. After the Great Depression, the Keynesian Revolution, and the establishment of the Bretton Woods system, we all thought we could solve the problem once and for all, but in fact it was not the case.

After the end of World War II, the United States, Europe, and most of the third world countries all showed a relatively benign economic nationalism mentality: even if the Marshall Plan included state-owned banks and state-owned enterprises, the United States would have no objection; even if a country did Priority is given to suppliers in their own country for job creation, and other countries will not oppose it; even if the United States invests in jet aircraft, biotechnology, computer networks and other military technologies during the Cold War, it will generate commercial value and will not be rejected . But I don’t know when, American officials lost their sober thinking ability under the erosion of the Chicago School of economic thinking. After that, they gave up the “third way” after being bought by the Wall Street lobbying group and turned to go. Seeking the ridiculous “perfect market”.

At the same time, U.S. officials actually gave the green light to Chinese people who firmly believe in mercantilism. They believe that as long as Wall Street and major U.S. companies can share their own interests in dealing with the Chinese, there will be no What’s wrong. We must oppose this approach. The postwar social contract (the postwar social contract) should have a modern version of the 21st century, that is, we should reserve enough space for national policies.

We may soon enter an era driven by renewable electricity. But the current market prices still reflect too much fossil energy trading. We can only change the economic system from relying on fossil energy to embracing green energy through government regulations and subsidy policies. Future energy will not only be cleaner, but will also be cheaper and safer to use. The market often makes mistakes in pricing, which is why we still need government and democratic planning.

We need to formulate a strategy at the national level to regain US global dominance in advanced manufacturing and green energy. What needs to be emphasized is that in this process, the American industry will master new technologies, local small and medium-sized enterprises will achieve development, and American jobs will also increase substantially. We can do multiple things in one fell swoop. Of course, this may violate some people’s traditional views on free markets and free trade. In fact, we should abandon those wrong views long ago.