Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
The Markets never lie – and it looks like Wall Street is smiling about Joe Biden
The Markets never lie – and it looks like Wall Street is smiling about Joe Biden It wasn’t just the Joe Biden campaign celebrating after a monumental Super Tuesday – so too was Wall Street. Dow (INDU) futures were last up more than 580 points, or 2.3%, after the former US vice president was projected to win many as nine states including Texas, Virginia and Minnesota. Sanders captured Utah, Vermont and Colorado, and was leading in California. Futures for the S&P 500 (INX) were up 1.8%, while the Nasdaq Composite (COMP) increased 1.9%. Wall Street has been unnerved by prospect that Sanders, who wants to ban fracking, break up big banks and institute a wealth tax, could win the Democratic nomination and eventually the presidency. March 04 – CNN Business But what impact and influence will investors and indexes have on the actual outcome of the primaries? Will voters be convinced or swayed by the markets or is this result simply a by-product of an election result? It is interesting for sure, and if you are a reporter covering this topic – then let our experts help with your coverage. Jeff Haymond, Ph.D. is Dean, School of Business Administration and a Professor of Economics at Cedarville and is an expert in finance and trade. Dr. Haymond is available to speak with media regarding this topic – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.
Unprecedented levels of partisanship vitriol threatens the health of democracy in U.S., globally
Voter-based political parties have played an integral role in American politics since their formation in the 1790s, yet it is difficult to remember any other time in history — other than perhaps the 1850s — when the level of divisiveness was this high and the polarity this profound between Republicans and Democrats. To add more fuel to the fire, the anti-democratic actions against the rule of law by President Donald Trump have become a primary threat to democracy in the U.S., said David Lynch, Ph.D., a professor of History and Social Sciences and Political Science program coordinator at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota. The same action are also threatening how the government works and delegitimizing and undermining institutions that make and enforce laws,Lynch added. Those institutions include formal ones such as Congress and the political parties themselves, as well as less formal entities, such as the traditional news media. “You have to have free, fair, open media in order to have a democracy. If you do not have a free press, you do not have a democracy,” Dr. Lynch said. “And similarly, you need to have the rule of law where laws are carried out not for political ends, but based on the laws.” The recent impeachment proceedings were an attempt to curtail these actions, but the partisan response to the Senate’s impeachment trial allowed the violation of democratic norms to be rewarded, said Dr. Lynch. Furthermore, politicians who react strongly to anti-democratic actions threaten to further delegitimize the government, such as Trump’s refusal to shake the hand of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, at his most recent State of the Union address and her subsequent action of tearing up his speech. “That helps both sides reinforce their own position that the other side is less legitimate and that we shouldn't cooperate with somebody like that,” Dr. Lynch said. Dr. Lynch pointed to how the indices that measure the health of democracy both in the U.S. and abroad have all gone down since Trump won the 2016 election. In addition, the most recent Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index reflected the worst registered global democracy score since its inception in 2006. In that report, the U.S. received a score of “flawed democracy.” Traditionally, the U.S. democratic system has been able to regulate such extreme partisanship before election day by not nominating candidates that violate democratic norms or are far from the ideological center. On election day, overly partisan candidates are vulnerable in swing districts and swing states. That ability for the public to express its collective voice, though, has eroded over the years as the number of swing districts has dwindled. "When people view through a partisan lens, it changes the incentives that elected officials have because they may be rewarded for partisan but anti-democratic actions,” Dr. Lynch said. “It also changes how average people view this whole debate.” To demonstrate the current political scene in the U.S., Dr. Lynch alluded to a 2017 study conducted by a group of political scientists at Yale University in which experimental surveys were sent to Venezuelans to see to what degree they would be willing to accept a less democratic candidate if he or she was a member of the political party they affiliated themselves with. The answer was quite a large degree. “The big message here is you can't necessarily rely on the public just to vote out an anti-democratic candidate because they might get a partisan advantage from that anti-democrat,” Dr. Lynch said. Are you a journalist covering this topic and interested in an interview? That’s where we can help. David Lynch, Ph.D., professor of History and Social Sciences and Political Science program coordinator, has taught political science at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota since 1996. Dr. Lynch has also written over a dozen chapters on international relations, international political economy, and American foreign policy, including the chapter on trade in the United Nations Association of the USA’s “A Global Agenda” from 1996 to 2005. Dr. Lynch is an expert in political science, political economies, and international relations. He is available to speak with the media. To arrange an interview with him, simply click on his photo below to access his contact information.
Well it’s obvious now – the gloves are off. The Nevada debate on NBC was the closest thing to a prize fight the network has aired in decades. No punches were pulled, it got personal quick for newcomer Michael Bloomberg. In fact, if anyone thought that the contest to lead the Democrats against Donald Trump in November was going to be a polite conversation abut ideas and policy, was proven dead wrong. Here are just a few of the memorable moments captured by media: Warren labeled Bloomberg “a billionaire who calls people fat broads and horse-faced lesbians.” Sanders lashed out at Bloomberg’s policing policies as New York City mayor that he said targeted “African-American and Latinos in an outrageous way.” And former Vice President Joe Biden charged that Bloomberg’s “stop-and-frisk” policy ended up “throwing 5 million black men up against the wall.” Watching from afar, Trump joined the Bloomberg pile on. “I hear he’s getting pounded tonight, you know he’s in a debate,” Trump said at a rally in Phoenix. “I don’t think there’s any chance of the senator beating Donald Trump,” Bloomberg declared before noting Sanders’ rising wealth. “The best-known socialist in the country happens to be a millionaire with three houses!” And ongoing animosity flared between Buttigieg and Klobuchar when the former Indiana mayor slammed the three-term Minnesota senator for failing to answer questions in a recent interview about Mexican policy and forgetting the name of the Mexican president. Buttigieg noted that she’s on a committee that oversees trade issues in Mexico and she “was not able to speak to literally the first thing about the politics of the country.” She shot back: “Are you trying to say I’m dumb? Are you mocking me here?”Later in the night she lashed out at Buttigieg again: “I wish everyone else was as perfect as you, Pete.” February 19 – Associated Press There’s a long way to go, but the next couple of weeks could be crucial as Super Tuesday approaches. And if you are a journalist looking for a media-ready expert who can provide insight, perspective and objective opinions about who will win, who needs to drop out and who is the best possible challenger for the Whitehouse – let us help. Mark Caleb Smith is the Director of the Center for Political Studies at Cedarville University. Mark is available to speak with media regarding the DNC Primary and the upcoming election. Simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.
United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals fall behind initial hopes, lacks needed funding
In 2000, United Nations member states adopted eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which featured a number of ambitious global initiatives, such as eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, and achieving universal primary education in all countries around the world. As these goals were extremely aspirational, most were far from met by the target date. However, by 2015 significant progress was made in a few areas, such as increased official development assistance (foreign aid), reduced trade barriers for developing country exports, and new debt-reduction strategies for some of the heaviest indebted countries. By the target date of the MDGs, the most notable outcome was the number of people living in extreme poverty around the world had been reduced by 50% since 1990. To keep the sustainable development agenda moving forward, at the end of 2015, the United Nations member states adopted 17 new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be met by 2030. Since the adoption of the SDGs in 2015, some progress has been on two of the SDGs: eliminating preventable deaths among newborns and children under the age of 5, and getting children into primary schools. These are both important initiatives and progress should be celebrated, says Matt Bluem, assistant dean of graduate programs and MBA director of Saint Mary's University of Minnesota's School of Business and Technology. Unfortunately, progress on the other 15 goals has not kept pace. With just 10 years until the target date for meeting all 17 SDGs, it is becoming increasingly clear that most of these goals will not be met. According to the UN, the biggest challenge in meeting the SDGs is funding. An additional $2-3 trillion is needed to help meet funding requirements. A recent report by the Brookings Institution states that sub-Saharan Africa alone would need hundreds of billions of dollars in additional financial support every year in order to meet the SDGs by the target date of 2030, Bluem says. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres has argued that public investment by governments is not enough, insisting that private industry is going to need to get involved. To meet the aggressive SDGs, the private and public sectors will need to work together to bring about the investment and policy change. In order to encourage governments and the private sector to put the resources and effort necessary into meeting the SDGs, it is imperative to let world leaders know that goals such as the SDGs are important to the international citizenry, Bluem says. Are you a journalist covering this topic and interested in an interview? That’s where we can help. Matt Bluem, Ph.D., assistant dean of graduate programs and MBA director, has taught business and marketing courses at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota since 2008. Prior to Saint Mary’s, he worked in both the banking and the nonprofit sectors, most recently with a non-governmental organization (NGO) with operations in more than a dozen countries. Bluem is an expert in political and economic development and is available to speak with media. To arrange an interview with him, simply click below to access his contact information.
With Brexit looming, more is unknown than known with British economy, trade agreements
Although it has been in the works since June 2016, the transition phase of Great Britain’s decision to leave the European Union (EU) — more commonly known as “Brexit” — is set to take place on Jan. 31. It is a date that will most likely leave a ripple of economic uncertainty in the United Kingdom in its wake as the British prepare for total independence at the end of the year. “Brexit has created so many new unknown variables. It can be profoundly disruptive to England as we know it today,” says Ralf “Don” Keysser, D.B.A., an associate professor in the MBA program at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota. Keysser predicts a negative short-term impact to the British economy, whereas the long-term perspective is still hard to predict until new free trade agreements with Europe and the rest of the world are established. Keysser does not see a clear-cut benefit to the U.S. establishing a free trade agreement with the U.K., simply based on the lack of British imports in the American market, other than maintaining political closeness. “It’s going to be a shock to the system. England will not be the England that it has been. There’s a lot of speculation, because we’ve never had a country pull out of the EU before, so it’s kind of an unknown. And it’s so highly politicized that it’s hard to get an objective analysis of what it’s going to look like.” Keysser points to a Toyota plant in South Derbyshire that supplies most of its output to countries in the EU through a tariff-free treatment. With Brexit going into effect, the factory may have to vastly reduce its output. Still, the workers in that community overwhelmingly voted to leave the EU. “This is a good example of how people will vote against their economic self-interests for ideological reasons,” Keysser says. “There’s a lot of ideology behind the Brexit vote: anti-immigrant, anti-Europe, pro-nationalist views that very much echoed President Trump’s appeal.” There are a few reasonably good projections, Keysser says, to make about the impact on inflation, unemployment, and economic trends — and none of them look good for Britain. One just has to look at the British pound, which has steadily been losing value to the dollar and euro over the years. In addition, several banks decided to either move from London or expand into other markets within the EU as soon as the Brexit results were announced, which could cost the British capital its status as of the world’s premier financial centers. “I see a gradual diminution of the financial business that’s been a mainstay of London,” Dr. Keysser says. On top of that, there is a real fear of Scotland and Northern Ireland wanting to leave the U.K. in favor of establishing their own independence and returning to the EU. The last time Scotland voted to leave the U.K. in 2004 it only passed 55% to 45%. “That could be the beginning of the end of the United Kingdom as we have known it,” Keysser says. The news might not be entirely bad out of Brexit. For international tourists, especially those from the U.S may be able to take advantage of the dollar’s exchange rate with the declining pound. Do you want to know more about the possible economic ramifications of Brexit? Are you a journalist covering this topic and interested in an interview? That's where we can help. Ralf Keysser, D.B.A., has been an active investment banker and business finance consultant for 35 years. He also serves an associate professor for the MBA program at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota. To book an interview with him, simply click on his icon above to access his contact information.
The three-way tug-of war between China, Canada and the United States
It’s a court trial in coastal Vancouver Canada that has gathered the attention of international media and plunged trade talks and international relations between America, China and America into tension, tariffs and a tug-of-war over one Chinese executive accused of fraud in in the United States. Here’s brief background courtesy of BBC: The Story in 100 Words Why is the US targeting Huawei, one of the world's largest smartphone makers, and executive Meng Wanzhou? Authorities claim they misled the US government about the company's business in Iran, which is under US economic sanctions. The US is also pursuing Huawei and Ms Meng in criminal charges including bank fraud and theft of technology. Both reject the claims. US officials want Ms Meng extradited from Canada to face the charges. Her arrest caused a diplomatic dispute between China and the US and Canada. The case against Huawei also comes as Western nations grow increasingly concerned about a possible spying risk related to the widespread adoption of the company's technology. So, is there any diplomatic resolution? What will happen if Meng Wanzhou is extradited to the United States? What will happen if she can return to China? Is Canada in a no - win situation? There are a lot of questions – and that’s where our experts can help. Dr. Glen Duerr's research interests include comparative politics, and international relations theory. Glen is available to speak to media regarding this topic– simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.
2020 is going to be the year of politics – let Stephen Farnsworth be the expert you call first when you’re covering it. Like the final act in a great Shakespearean play – 2020 looks to be a year of tragedy, irony, comedy and intrigue. We can expect betrayal, vengeance, protagonists, antagonists, heroes and villains. With impeachment hearings, the DNC primaries, summer conventions, trade deals and the election that promises to be an epic display of speeches and stumping as well as vicious and vitriolic attacks. Dr. Stephen Farnsworth is a sought-after political commentator on subjects ranging from presidential politics to the local Virginia congressional races. He has been widely featured in national media, including The Washington Post, Reuters, The Chicago Tribune and MSNBC. He is author or co-author of six books on presidential communication. His latest work, 'Late Night with Trump Political Humor and the American Presidency' shows how late-night political humor, have responded to the Trump presidency. Employing a dataset of more than 100,000 late night jokes going back decades, Farnsworth and S. Robert Lichter discuss how the treatment of Trump differs from previous presidents, and how the Trump era is likely to shape the future of political humor. Stephen is available to speak with media – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview today.
U.S. economy continues to expand, but at a slower pace, reaching about 2 percent growth in 2020
INDIANAPOLIS -- The U.S. economy will continue to expand for a 12th consecutive year in 2020, but by only about 2 percent and struggling to remain at that level by year's end. Indiana's economic output will be more anemic, growing at a rate of about 1.25 percent, according to a forecast released today by the Indiana University Kelley School of Business. Over the past year, political dysfunction and international trade friction have disrupted supply chains and eroded both consumer and business confidence. U.S. employment has grown during 2019 but will decelerate throughout 2020, well short of 150,000 jobs per month and possibly to about 100,000 by year's end. A tight labor market will continue to be an issue for many companies. "The total number of job openings in the economy peaked in late 2018," said Bill Witte, associate professor emeritus of economics at IU. "Average hours worked have been flat over the past year, and auto sales have been flat for nearly two years. Given the reliance of the U.S. economy on consumer spending, these are disturbing signs. But they are vague signs, and not enough to convince us that the end of the expansion is in sight. "We expect that growth will be weaker than in the past two years, and this outlook is likely a best-case outcome," he added. "There is massive uncertainty in the current situation." The Kelley School presented its forecast this morning to Indianapolis community and business leaders at IUPUI. The Business Outlook Tour panel also will present national, state and local economic forecasts in seven other cities across the state through Nov. 20. Indiana's more meager economic growth expected in 2020 can largely be attributed to the outsized presence of manufacturing and particularly tight labor markets, said Ryan Brewer, associate professor of finance at Indiana University-Purdue University Columbus and author of the panel's Indiana forecast. Manufacturing contracts more rapidly versus other areas of the economy, and tight labor markets limit employers' capacity to grow, he said. Expectations about business investment have fallen short, and corporations have been buying back stock instead of making capital investments. The trade war with China and slowing global expansion have also affected state manufacturers. The world is about to record its slowest economic growth since the financial crisis of 2009. Next year, global growth is projected at 3.4 percent, with downside risks continuing to build. China and the European Union each face structural issues amid tariffs imposed by the United States. Brexit remains unresolved. Recent data from the Institute for Supply Management showed that manufacturing activity has slowed to its lowest rate since the beginning of the Great Recession. Indiana has sought to diversify its economy in recent decades, but manufacturing output represents nearly 28 percent of gross state product. Indiana continues to lead the nation in manufacturing employment, with more than 17 percent of its jobs in that sector. "Constrained by a historically tight labor market, Indiana is expected to experience slow growth in jobs and gross output, along with the possibility for continued rising wages," Brewer said. "With fewer and fewer available people to hire, tightness of the Indiana labor markets will serve as a drag to output and employment growth." The outlook for the Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson metropolitan statistical area is slightly better, with expected growth between 1.5 and 2 percent. "Indianapolis continues to draw in talent and investment that should help it exceed the overall state level of growth," said Kyle Anderson, clinical assistant professor of business economics. "However, there is risk that weakness in the broader economy, and especially weakness in manufacturing, could make this forecast too optimistic." Other highlights from the forecast: The national and state unemployment rates will hold steady. The nation's rate could be below 4 percent by year's end, and the state will stay at or below full employment through 2020. Inflation will rise and end 2020 close to the Federal Reserve's 2 percent target. The stock market will struggle to get average returns with headwinds from trade, supply chain disruption and policy uncertainty. Earnings continue to exceed expectations, yet lack of definitive trade consensus continues to drive headwinds. Interest rates will remain low. The 10-year Treasury rate should stay below 2 percent and mortgages below 4 percent. Speculative grade bond yields have been rising, indicating increased risk of insolvency for marginal firms. Entry-level wage growth could cause costs to rise, earnings to fall and growth to stagnate for firms heading into 2020. Energy prices will be relatively stable, with average prices similar to those in 2019. Business investment will remain weak, although a little improved from this year. Housing will achieve a meager increase, ending two years of negative growth. Government spending will grow, but much more slowly than the past year, as the impact of the 2018 budget deal ends. The starting point for the forecast is an econometric model of the United States, developed by IU's Center for Econometric Model Research, which analyzes numerous statistics to develop a national forecast for the coming year. A similar econometric model of Indiana provides a corresponding forecast for the state economy based on the national forecast plus data specific to Indiana. A select panel of Kelley faculty members, led by Indiana Business Research Center co-director Timothy Slaper, then adjusts the forecast to reflect additional insights it has on the economic situation. A detailed report on the outlook for 2020 will be published in the winter issue of the Indiana Business Review, available online in December. In addition to predictions about the nation, state and Indianapolis, it also will include forecasts for other Indiana cities and key economic sectors. Presenting the forecast at the Indianapolis Business Outlook Tour event were Phil T. Powell, associate dean of Kelley academic programs at Indianapolis and clinical associate professor of business economics and public policy; Cathy Bonser-Neal, associate professor of finance; and Anderson.
Is the bubble bursting – and does America need to prepare for an economic slowdown?
With every news story about trade, tariffs, interest rates, global instability and political chaos…comes with it a hint that each incident could take a toll on America’s economy. And it seems that sub-plot may be slowly becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy for the current administration in Washington. A recent article in Forbes pointed out that most key indicators seem to be pointing down. Trump’s monthly job results are decelerating Trump’s job growth falling short of Obama’s last six years Wage growth is the lowest in a year September quarter GDPNow forecast lower than June’s 2.0% result It seems as if all of these ingredients combined, a slow down and potential recession or worse could be looming. Are you a journalist covering the short and long-term outlook of America’s economy? If so, let our experts help with your stories and coverage. Jeff Haymond, Ph.D. is Dean, School of Business Administration and a Professor of Economics at Cedarville and is an expert in finance and trade. Dr. Haymond is available to speak with media regarding this topic – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.
IU Kelley School expert: $170 million fine of Google, YouTube probably not enough
In the largest fine ever, Google agreed to pay $170 million to settle a case with the Federal Trade Commission and New York’s attorney general over charges that YouTube made millions from violating children’s privacy laws. Scott Shackelford, associate professor of business law and ethics at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business, chair of IU’s Cybersecurity Program in Risk Management and director of the Ostrom Workshop Program on Cybersecurity and Internet Governance, doubts it will have much of an effect. “Google, via YouTube, has been held accountable by the FTC and the New York Attorney General’s Office for its practices that violated children’s privacy, but it’s questionable whether a $170 million fine is sufficient to change business practices,” Shackelford said. “Similar to its $5 billion fine against Facebook, the FTC needs to do more to both increase these penalties, and even more importantly require the necessary steps to ensure that these violations do not recur. This is the FTC’s third fine against Google since 2011, for example, and it will likely not be the last.”