TIME Economy

Our Dysfunctional Financial System

Tapes of what really happens between bankers and regulators show how far we have to go

In some ways, the most shocking thing about the 46 hours of secret audiotapes made by former Federal Reserve bank examiner Carmen Segarra in 2012 is that they are no shock at all. Did anyone ever doubt that the New York Fed was in hock to Wall Street? Or that Fed bank examiners–the regulators tasked with monitoring the risks banks take–might fear alienating the powerful financiers on whom they depend for information or future jobs?

It’s one thing to know and another to hear in painful, crackling detail how the Fed’s financial cops slip on their velvet gloves to deal with Goldman Sachs. Or how Segarra, one of a group of examiners brought in after the financial crisis to keep a closer watch on the till, was fired, perhaps for doing her job a little too well. One can only hope that this latest example of regulatory capture by Wall Street will focus minds on the fact that six years on from the crisis, we still have a dysfunctional financial system.

Consider one of the shady deals highlighted on the secret tapes of New York Fed meetings, which Segarra made with a spy recorder before she was let go and which were made public on Sept. 26 in a joint report by ProPublica and This American Life. The 2012 transaction with Banco Santander, initiated in the midst of the European debt crisis, ensured that the Spanish bank would look better on paper than it really was at the time. Santander paid Goldman a $40 million fee to hold shares in a Brazilian subsidiary so that it could meet European Banking Authority rules. The Fed employees, who work inside the banks they examine (yes, it’s literally an inside job), knew the deal was dodgy. One even compared it to Goldman’s “getting paid to watch a briefcase.” But it was technically legal, and nobody wanted to make a fuss, so the transaction went through.

It’s hard to know where to begin with what’s problematic here. I’ll focus on the least sexy but perhaps most important point: existing capital requirements–the cash that banks are obligated to hold to offset risk–are pathetic. Despite all the postcrisis backslapping in Washington about how banks have become safer, our system as a whole has not. No too-big-to-fail institution currently is required to keep more than 3% of its holdings in cash (a figure that will rise to 5% and 6% in 2018), which means banks can fund 97% of their own investments with debt. No company outside the financial sector would dream of conducting daily business with that much risk. As Stanford professor Anat Admati, whose book The Bankers’ New Clothes makes a powerful case for reining in such leverage levels, told me, “We’ve got to get rid of this idea that banking is special and that it should be treated differently than every other industry.”

Of course, if you start telling financiers they should use more than a few percentage points of their own money when they gamble, they’ll throw a fit. They will tell you that would make it impossible for them to lend to real businesses. They will also uncork lots of complex financial terms–”Tier 1 capital,” “liquidity ratios,” “risk-weighted off-balance-sheet exposures”–that tend to suffocate useful (a.k.a. comprehensible) debate. Financiers use insider jargon to intimidate and obfuscate. This is something we need to fight. In banking, as in so many things, complexity is the enemy. The right questions are the simplest ones: Are financial institutions doing things that provide a clear, measurable benefit to the real economy? Sadly, the answer is often no.

One thing we’ve learned since the crisis is that bailing out Wall Street didn’t help Main Street. Credit to individuals and many businesses plummeted during and after the bailouts and remains below precrisis levels today. Numerous experts believe that the size of the financial sector is slowing growth in the real economy by sucking the monetary oxygen out of the room. Banks don’t want to lend; they want to trade, often via esoteric deals that do almost nothing for anyone outside Wall Street.

This disconnect between the real economy and finance is now being closely studied by policymakers and academics. Adair Turner, a former British banking regulator, thinks that only about 15% of U.K. financial flows go to the real economy; the rest stay within the financial system, propping up existing corporate assets, supporting trading and enabling $40 million briefcase-watching fees. If the New York Fed really wants to redeem itself, it might consider commissioning a similar study to look at Wall Street’s contribution to the U.S. economy. After all, if finance can’t justify itself by showing it’s actually doing what it was set up to do–take in deposits and lend them back to all of us–what can justify it?

TIME Economy

‘Fat Finger’ Error Blamed for $617 Billion Stock Orders Scrapped in Japan

A businessman walk past an electronic stock board in Tokyo, Oct. 1, 2014.
A businessman walk past an electronic stock board in Tokyo, Oct. 1, 2014. Shuji Kajiyama—AP

An accidental stock order ran in the hundreds of billions of dollars

Over $600 billion worth of stock on the Japanese market was ordered and then abruptly canceled Wednesday before they could be executed, possibly the result of a so-called “fat finger” error, or accidental order.

Stock requests totaled 67.78 trillion ten, or $617 billion, and included 57% of outstanding shares in Toyota, the world’s biggest carmaker, and large stakes in Honda, Canon, and Sony, Bloomberg reports. Based on electronic orders to buy or sell stock, market makers and arbitragers use computerized strategies to anticipate demand or profit from price discrepancies. Orders are often withdrawn, but investors were surprised by the scale of Wednesday’s cancellations.

“I’ve never heard of orders this big being canceled before,” Ayako Sera, a Tokyo-based market strategist at Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank Ltd., which oversees about $474 billion, told Bloomberg. “There must have been an error.”

The Japan Securities Dealers Association received an error report before the orders were matched.

Read more at Bloomberg

TIME Hong Kong

Hong Kong’s Protesters Are Fighting for Their Economic Future

Thousands of protesters attend a rally outside the government headquarters in Hong Kong as riot police stand guard
Thousands of protesters attend a rally outside the government headquarters in Hong Kong as riot police stand guard on Sept. 27, 2014 Tyrone Siu— Reuters

The city can't remain a global financial center without its own political process

The conventional wisdom about Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protests is that they are bad for business. Hong Kong has become one of the world’s three premier financial centers (along with New York City and London) because the city has been a bastion of stability in an ever changing region, the thinking goes, and therefore the tens of thousands of protesters who paralyzed downtown Hong Kong on Monday are a threat to its economic success. The Global Times, a state-run Chinese newspaper, used just such an argument to try to persuade the protesters to clear the streets. “These activists are jeopardizing the global image of Hong Kong, and presenting the world with the turbulent face of the city,” it said in an editorial on Monday.

That worry isn’t merely Beijing propaganda. Andrew Colquhoun, head of Asia-Pacific sovereign ratings at Fitch, said one of the big questions facing Hong Kong over the long term is “whether the political standoff eventually impacts domestic and foreign perceptions of Hong Kong’s stability and attractiveness as an investment destination.” The fallout for Hong Kong’s financial sector from the Occupy Central movement was immediate. The stock market dropped, banks closed branches, and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, the de facto central bank, had to reassure the investor community that it would “inject liquidity into the banking system as and when necessary” to overcome any possible disruptions.

But the real reason why Hong Kong has been so successful is that it is not China. When Hong Kong was handed back to Beijing by Great Britain in 1997, the terms of the deal ensured that the former colony, ­now called a “special administrative region,” or SAR, of China ­would maintain the civil liberties it had under British rule. That separated Hong Kong from the Chinese mainland in key ways. In China, people cannot speak or assemble freely, and the press and courts are under the thumb of the state. But Hong Kongers continued to enjoy a free press and freedom of speech and well-defined rule of law. The formula is called “one country, two systems.”

That held true in the world of economics and finance as well. On the Chinese side of the border, capital flows are restricted, the banking sector is controlled by the state, and regulatory systems are weak and arbitrary. Meanwhile, in Hong Kong, financial regulation is top-notch, capital flows are among the freest in the world, and rule of law is enshrined in a stubbornly independent judicial system. Those attributes have given Hong Kong an insurmountable advantage as an international business hub. Banks from all over the world flocked to Hong Kong, while its nimble sourcing firms orchestrated a global network of supply and production that became known as “borderless manufacturing.” While there has been much talk of Shanghai overtaking Hong Kong as Asia’s premier financial center, the Chinese metropolis simply cannot compete with Hong Kong’s stellar institutions, regulatory regime and laissez-faire economic outlook.

What happens if Hong Kong loses this edge? In other words, what happens if Beijing changes Hong Kong in ways that make its governance and business environment more like China’s? Hong Kong would be finished. The fact is that Hong Kong’s economic success, the nature of its institutions and the civil liberties enjoyed by Hong Kongers are all inexorably entwined. If Beijing knocks one of those pillars away, ­if it suppresses people’s freedoms or tampers with its judiciary, ­Hong Kong would become just another Chinese city, unable to fend off the challenge from Shanghai. Foreign financial institutions would be forced to decamp for a more trustworthy investment climate.

That’s why the Occupy Central movement is so critical for Hong Kong’s future. So far, Beijing has generally abided by its agreement with London and left Hong Kong’s economic system more or less unchanged. But when China’s leaders made clear last month that Hong Kongers would be able to choose their top official, known as the Chief Executive, from 2017 onward only from candidates who have the approval of Beijing, it became obvious that Hong Kong was going to face tighter control by China’s communists over time. That raises the specter that Beijing will at some point dismantle “one country, two systems” and along with it the foundation of the Hong Kong economy.

By fighting for their democratic rights, the activists in Hong Kong are fighting for an independence of administration and governance that will perpetuate their city’s economic advantages. Beijing should realize that ultimately a vibrant Hong Kong is in its own interests. China has benefited tremendously from Hong Kong over the past 30 years. It was Hong Kong manufacturers that were among the first to bravely open factories in a newly opened China, thus sparking the mainland’s amazing economic miracle. Chinese firms have been able to capitalize on Hong Kong’s stellar international reputation to raise funds and list shares on the city’s well-respected stock exchange. Even now, China continues to upgrade its economy by seeking Hong Kong’s expertise. The stock markets in Hong Kong and Shanghai are in the process of being linked to allow easier cross-border investment.

Of course, Hong Kong’s economy is far from perfect, and here, too, the importance of Hong Kong’s democracy movement can be found. The SAR suffers from a highly distorted property market and one of the widest income gaps in the world. Such ills have bred more resentment in the city toward Beijing. Yet right now many of the people of Hong Kong simply don’t trust their Beijing-chosen leaders to resolve these issues. Hong Kong requires a popular administration that commands the support of the people in order to implement the reforms necessary to tackle these critical problems. Thus the battle unfolding on the streets of central Hong Kong is a contest for the city’s very survival. Perhaps Hong Kong’s pro-democracy activists will disrupt the usually sedate financial district for a few days. But that’s a tiny sacrifice compared to the long-term damage Hong Kong faces if its citizens do nothing.

Schuman reported from Beijing.

MONEY Shopping

8 Things We Already Know About the 2014 Holiday Shopping Season

Mark Cerqueria, software engineer for the application software company Smule, performs as Santa Claus
In all likelihood, Apple will have good reason to celebrate during the upcoming holiday season. Jeff Chiu—AP

Among other things, it looks like it will be a terrific holiday season for Apple, "Frozen," and workers seeking temporary jobs.

It’s still only September, and there are many unknowns about the end-of-the-year holiday shopping period. We don’t know exactly how aggressive retailers will be in terms of starting price wars with the competition, for instance, nor what the chances are of a surprise “it” toy emerging as a must-have gift for legions of American children. Still, even at this early date, it doesn’t take a crystal ball to see the way much of the season ahead will play out. Here’s what we know:

The holiday season already started. Sure, the back-to-school shopping period is considered to last through September, and autumn and Halloween are increasingly important for the marketing of everything from scary costumes to pumpkin spice lattes. But everything—everything—pales in comparison to the importance retailers place on the winter holiday shopping season. That’s why stores try to make the season a little bigger every year. Kmart launched its first Christmas ad, or rather a coy “non-Christmas ad,” in early September. And soon after, Walmart, Target, Toys R Us, and others rolled out various versions of the season’s “Hot Toy” list, long before kids even start thinking of making wish lists of their own.

You’ll be required by law to buy gadgets and “Frozen” merchandise. OK, it will only seem that way. That’s because the hot toy lists are dominated by “Frozen” products even though it’s been months since the Disney film was in theaters. When the lists aren’t directing parents to 3-foot-tall Elsa dolls, they’re steering buyers to techie items for kids like this Vtech smartwatch. Tech for adults will arguably be an even hotter category this season, what with a series of new tablets from Amazon and, of course, Apples’s hot-selling iPhones.

Stores will have longer hours and shorter checkout lines. Shoppers have come to expect the former around the holidays, with stores sometimes open for 88 hours in a row, or even longer, in the days leading up to Christmas. This year, Target launched longer hours (including midnight closings at some locations) before the summer even ended, with the hope of rebuilding its reputation as a convenient, fashionable spot to shop. What’s come as more of a surprise—and a welcome one at that—is Walmart’s promise to keep all of its checkout lines open during peak shopping hours throughout the season, starting on Black Friday weekend. As for Thanksgiving store hours themselves, experts expect big box retailers to open doors on the holiday even earlier than they did last year.

Black Friday won’t have the season’s best prices. On the day after Thanksgiving, stores will surely draw in the masses with promises of amazing discounts and doorbuster deals—but only on some merchandise. Because Thanksgiving store hours essentially mean that Black Friday begins on Thursday, because “Black Friday” sales start appearing days or even weeks before the actual Black Friday, and because retailers are known to launch wild sales out of the blue to stir up business before, during, and after Black Friday week, it’s foolish to assume that all of the prices shoppers encounter on the day after Thanksgiving are the lowest of the season. For some merchandise, including toys, name-brand TVs, and jewelry, shoppers can expect prices to drop after Thanksgiving weekend is over. Meanwhile, the discount-shopping site Ben’s Bargains anticipates that tablet prices will hit rock bottom in early November, and that prices for sports apparel and winter clothing will be cheaper in mid-November than they will be around Black Friday.

It’s a great year to snag a seasonal job. In 2008, retailers hired about 325,000 workers for the holiday period. The figure’s been on the rise ever since, hitting 786,000 a year ago. In a new report, researchers at Challenger, Gray & Christmas say they expect “seasonal employment gains in the retail sector to significantly outpace 2013.” Toys R Us, for instance, announced this week that it is hiring 45,000 seasonal employees, which more than doubles the company’s existing workforce, while UPS is planning on hiring 95,000 workers for the upcoming season. “We could see retailers add more than 800,000 seasonal workers for the first time since 1999,” said Challenger CEO John A. Challenger.

People will shop online earlier to avoid last year’s shipping nightmare. According to a new survey from Pitney Bowes, an e-commerce and shipping consulting firm, half of the consumers polled (49%) said that for the upcoming holiday season they will shop online earlier than they did last year. The most popular reason for doing so is to ensure that gifts and other packages arrive in plenty of time for the holidays. A year ago, many families were disappointed on Christmas morning because shipping delays caused orders from Amazon, Kohl’s, and other retailers to arrive after December 25. (Hopefully, the additional hires made by UPS will help ease the shipping problems of a year ago, but it’s smart for shoppers to play it safe by ordering well in advance.)

Apple loyalists will outspend Android users. Last November, the average order placed on a mobile Apple iOS device was $121.48, compared to just $89 for Android devices, according to a new IBM report. The data also shows that while we do more web-surfing with smartphones (accounting for 24% of all website traffic, compared to 14% via tablets), consumers are more inclined to make purchases on tablets (11.5% of website sales) than smartphones (5%). Again, Apple mobile device users outspend the rest of the field, representing 13.6% of web sales in March 2014, compared with 2% of site sales made via Samsung, LG, HTC, Motorola, and Nokia devices combined.

We’ll be heavily influenced by digital, but make most purchases in person. The forecast from Deloitte calls for a 4% to 4.5% overall increase in consumer holiday season spending. While researchers point out that 50% of sales will somehow be influenced by digital interactions (browsing online, for instance), only 14% of purchases will come in the form of non-store sales (primarily, e-commerce sales).

TIME Markets

Apple Woes Take a Bite Out of the Stock Market

Major indices had their worst day in several weeks on the back of falling Apple stock

U.S. stocks dropped significantly Thursday with the major indexes logging their worst session in nearly two months, as Apple fell on smartphone glitches and markets continued to feel the effects of tepid economic numbers.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 1.54% to 16,845.80, the S&P 500 dropped 1.62% to 1965.99 and the NASDAQ fell 1.94% to 4,466.75. The losses were the greatest since July 31, CNBC reports.

Apple, beset by glitches in it its new operating system and rumors that some iPhone 6 models might bend, dropped 3.8 percent, while Twitter and Pandora Media led stock declines among Internet firms.

Economic reports showed long-lasting goods falling 18.2 percent in August, while a major purchasing index for September was lower than expected.

TIME Innovation

Five Best Ideas of the Day: September 25

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

1. Beyond bombs: To truly disable Islamic State, the U.S. must outmaneuver their effective use of social media.

By Rita Katz in Reuters

2. The Truth Campaign has pushed teen smoking to the brink of a welcome extinction and helped create a new breed of marketing.

By Malcolm Harris in Al Jazeera America

3. Xi Jinping has urged reform to China’s corrupt political system – and he should heed his own advice.

By the editorial staff of the Economist

4. A new program focuses on training people to recognize and manage their own biases instead of reprogramming those biases out of existence.

By Leon Neyfakh in the Boston Globe

5. Will marriage survive the recession? Economics and education are major factors in the declining marriage rate.

By Neil Shah in the Wall Street Journal

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME Economy

The 3% Economy

Yes, 3% growth is better than 2%. But, for most Americans, it’s actually more worrisome

A little over three years ago, I wrote a column titled “The 2% Economy,” explaining how a recovery with only 2% GDP growth, no new middle-class jobs and stagnant wages wasn’t really a recovery after all. Like everyone, I hoped that once growth kicked up to about 3%, middle-class jobs and wages would finally revive.

But we’re now in a 3% economy, and I’m writing the same column. Only this time, the message is more disturbing. Growth is back. Unemployment is down. But only a fraction of the jobs lost during the Great Recession that pay more than $15 per hour have been found. And wage growth is still hovering near zero, where it’s been for the past decade. Something is very, very broken in our economy.

It’s a change that’s been coming for 20 years. From World War II to the 1980s, according to data from the McKinsey Global Institute, it took roughly six months after GDP rebounded from a recession for employment to recovery fully. But in the 1990–91 recession and recovery, it took 15 months, and in 2001 it took 39 months. This time around, it’s taken 41 months–more than three years–to replace the jobs lost in the Great Recession. And while the quantity has come back, the quality hasn’t. The job market, as everyone knows, is extremely bifurcated: there are jobs for Ph.D.s and burger flippers but not enough in between. That’s a problem in an economy that’s made up chiefly of consumer spending. When the majority of people don’t have more money, they can’t spend more, and companies can’t create more jobs higher up the food chain. This backstory is laid out in an interim Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report cautioning that poor job creation and flat wages are “holding back a stronger recovery in consumer spending.” If this trend is left unchecked, we are looking at a generation that will be permanently less well off than their parents.

There are so many signs of this around us already. The decline in August home sales–a result of wealthy cash buyers and investors stepping back from the market–shows how what little recovery in housing we’ve seen so far has been driven by the rich; anyone who actually needs a mortgage has been slower to jump in. The real estate recovery too is very bifurcated, with much of the gains concentrated in a few more affluent, fast-growing cities. (Plenty of places in the Rust and Sun Belts are still underwater.) While overall consumer debt is down, it is still high by international standards, and student debt is off the charts. When I asked one smart investor where he expected the next financial crisis to come from, he said, “Student debt.” Interest rates on tuition loans are high and fixed, and the loans can’t be refinanced, meaning they’re a trap that’s hard to escape. And student debt continues to grow fast. History shows that the speed of increase in debt, more than the sheer amount, is a predictor of bubbles. By that measure, student debt is blinking red: it has tripled over the past decade and now outstrips credit-card debt and auto loans.

It’s easy to understand why. Much of the population is desperately trying to educate its way out of a terrifying cycle of downward mobility. But students are fighting strong structural shifts in the economy. While technology-driven productivity used to be what economists said would save us from jobless recoveries, technology these days removes jobs from the economy. Just think of companies like Facebook and Twitter, which create a fraction of the jobs the last generation of big tech firms like Apple or Microsoft did, not to mention the multitude of middle-class positions created by the industrial giants of old.

And we’re just getting started: consider the outcry in certain cities over companies like Zillow, Uber and Airbnb, which are fostering “creative destruction” in new sectors like real estate, transportation and hotels. McKinsey estimates that new technologies will put up to 140 million service jobs at risk in the next decade. Critics of this estimate say we’re underestimating the opportunities that will come with everyone having a smartphone. All I can say is, I hope so. What’s clear is that development isn’t yet reflected in stronger consumption or official economic statistics.

What I do see is growing discontent with the economic status quo. In my 2011 column I wrote, “It’s clear that the 2% economy heralds an era of even more divisive, populist politics–at home and abroad.” Ditto the 3% economy. Witness outrage over displaced lower-income workers in the Bay Area, or the fact that the Fed is keeping interest rates low in part because gridlock has prevented Washington from doing more to stimulate the real economy, or the Treasury Department’s new rules limiting American companies’ ability to move outside U.S. tax jurisdiction. Whatever number you put on growth, a recovery that doesn’t feel like a recovery is, yet again, no recovery at all.

TIME Workplace & Careers

1 in 5 U.S. Workers Say They Were Laid Off in Last 5 Years: Poll

New York Job Fair Offers Services For Chronically Unemployed
People stand in a line that stretched around the block to enter a job fair held at the Jewish Community Center (JCC), on March 21, 2012 in New York City. John Moore—Getty Images

Total of 30 million say they received pink slips since 2009

One in five American workers say they have lost their jobs at some point within the last five years, according to a new survey that reveals that the recession, which technically ended in 2009, has continued to rattle the labor market.

The survey findings, released by Rutgers University’s John J. Heldrch Center for Workforce Development, exposes the lingering costs of lay-offs, both for those who cannot find work and those who have. Nearly 4 out of 10 laid-off workers say they spent more than seven months searching for a new job and nearly half of those who managed to find work said their new job was a step lower on the payscale.

Regardless of employment status, two-thirds of all adults in the survey say the recession negatively impacted their own standard of living, but the workers that took the hardest hits to income and savings were those who had been unemployed for a period longer than 6 months, whose struggles the authors called “among the most persistent, negative effects of the Great Recession.”

 

TIME Economy

Clinton Says Corporate Tax Rate He Approved Needs to Change

Bill Clinton
Former President Bill Clinton speaks during a breakout session at the Clinton Global Initiative , on September 23, 2014 in New York City. John Moore—Getty Images

President Bill Clinton says it’s time to revamp the corporate tax rate that he signed into law during his tenure as the nation’s leader.

Speaking at the 10th annual Clinton Global Initiative conference Tuesday, Clinton discussed the issue of so-called corporate “inversions” — the practice of relocating a company’s headquarters overseas to take advantage of a lower tax rare.

Clinton told CNBC’s Becky Quick that the U.S. Treasury Department is doing what it is legally obligated to do, which is collect what money is due under American law. The real problem needs to be solved on the floor of Congress, and it demands a bipartisan solution, he said.

“We’re bailing water out of a leaky boat,” Clinton said. “This is practical economics and practical politics.”

The Treasury announced new measures Monday to stem the tide of corporations buying foreign companies in order to move abroad and take advantage of lower tax rates. Thirteen such deals worth $178 billion have been announced this year, according to Dealogic. A couple examples include Burger King’s purchase of Canada-based Tim Hortons and Medtronic’s nearly $43 billion deal to buy Irish medical-device maker Covidien.

When the current 35% corporate tax rate was signed into law in 1993, it was on par with other nations around the globe. Many of those foreign rates have since lowered their corporate tax rates, setting the scene for the current tax inversion-friendly environment. For example, Canada’s corporate tax rate is between 11% and 15%, and Ireland’s is about 12.5%.

Now the U.S. is one of the highest corporate tax rates globally, and that just won’t work anymore, Clinton said. The U.S. legislature has failed to review the standard corporate tax rate in relation to other nations since the mid-1990s — and that could continue to affect the nation’s competitive stance.

Clinton shied away from labeling tax inversions either patriotic or non-patriotic, dodging one of Quick’s questions. But he did say he believes that the corporate tax rate can be lowered while closing existing loopholes and still allow the government to collect the same amount of tax revenue.

Clinton praised American companies such as Corning and Dow Chemical. Both, he said, have focused on keeping jobs in the U.S. He also praised Alibaba Group CEO Jack Ma, whose company just launched the largest initial public offering ever late last week.

Clinton praised Ma’s approach to business: He focuses first on customers, then employees and shareholders third, Clinton said of Ma.

This article originally appeared on Fortune.com

TIME Innovation

Five Best Ideas of the Day: September 22

1. A global transformation from a carbon-based economy to a cleaner, more sustainable energy future will create jobs and add wealth.

By Christiana Figueres and Guy Ryder in Project Syndicate

2. Antibiotic resistance causes 23,000 deaths and two million illnesses every year. Concerted government action is necessary to fight the crisis.

By the Editorial Board of the Washington Post

3. China can improve its global standing and U.S. relations by joining the fight against Islamic State.

By Dingding Chen in the Diplomat

4. The economic future of manufacturing is to be an incubator of innovation: “where new ideas become new products.”

By Nanette Byrnes in MIT Technology Review

5. In the future, a book could be a living thing.

By Wendy Smith in Publisher’s Weekly

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser