The mission earlier this summer, based on intelligence from released hostages, "was not successful because the hostages were not present at the targeted location," the Pentagon reported.
On Thursday, central bankers from around the world will converge on Jackson Hole, Wyoming for the annual Economic Policy Symposium. At issue this year is whether the central banks in this country and elsewhere should continue with aggressive action, or take their feet off of the gas.
It'll be something of an existential discussion about the role of central banks, which changed a lot during the recession. The Federal Reserve is the most radical example; going from, you might say, a mild-mannered Clark Kent to an ultra-proactive SuperFed.
"Its job was fairly narrowly defined to focus on inflation," says Edwin Truman, Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "But in the crisis, they ended up using tools that had not been used since the 1930s - and inventing a whole bunch of new tools."
Tools like quantitative easing, wherein the Fed started pumping $85 billion into the economy every month.
"I do think that the bank is fundamentally changed," says economist Jared Bernstein, former member of President Barack Obama's economic team and Senior Fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Bernstein says the central bank went from reactive to proactive.
He says it’s now looking like it will get even more proactive under Federal Reserve Chief Janet Yellen, even stepping into an oversight role. "When chair Janet Yellen says, 'I don’t think the Fed has the luxury of ignoring bubbles in financial markets,' that’s different than either of her last two predecessors," says Bernstein.
Even if Yellen wanted to retire the red cape, she’d find it hard, says Truman.
"You’re not going to put the genie back in the bottle... It creates what the economists call a moral hazard. If things get in trouble, the Federal Reserve will ride to the rescue."
Truman says now that the central bank has flexed its monetary muscles to save the U.S. economy and maybe even the world, no one will ever look at the mild-mannered Fed the same way again.
Uber, the ride-sharing app and tech company that has up-ended the taxi industry, has a new vice-president and strategist. He is not from the world of tech, but rather the world of politics: former Obama campaign operative David Plouffe.
At first glance, this seems like a surprising alliance. After all, Uber has been unabashed in its fight against various transportation regulations and taxi driver unions -- things you wouldn't think a longtime Democratic strategist would be embracing.
In fact, in recent weeks, Republicans have been doing the most vocal cheerleading for Uber. The RNC recently sent out an email petition with the headline, "Why We Need Uber." It touts the company as a perfect example of GOP free-market ideals, and casts the challenges Uber has faced in some cities as a case of “unions and liberal government bureaucrats…setting up roadblocks, issuing strangling regulations and implementing unnecessary red tape to block Uber from doing business.” RNC Chairman Reince Priebus wrote an op-ed in the Chicago Tribune making a similar point.
So on Tuesday, when Uber announced it was hiring a top Democratic strategist, there was a lot of head scratching at GOP headquarters.
“I think we were a little shocked,” says RNC Press Secretary Kirsten Kukowski.
Jeff Berry, a professor of political science at Tufts University, was not shocked. He points out that Plouffe will join a company venture capitalists recently valued at more than $18 billion dollars.
“Ka-ching! There's a lot of money that David Plouffe is going to make as a strategist,” Berry says.
Aside from the money, there are strategic reasons the Democratic Party might want to be associated with a tech start-up like Uber, he says.
“This actually gives the Democrats an opportunity to identify with a deregulatory environment, one in which entrepreneurs are free to develop new ideas and new businesses.”
The alliance could alienate some local taxi driver unions, taxi company owners, and people like Ramzi Reguii, an Uber driver in San Francisco who leads a network of Uber drivers pushing for tighter regulation of the company and better worker protections.
“That's what the Democrats ought to do and that’s what the Republicans ought to do. You can support Uber, but you can also make it right at the same time,” Reguii says.
Meanwhile, in this era of partisan bickering, it finally seems that some Democrats and Republicans have found something they can agree on: they love Uber.
There are three finalists for next year’s Super Bowl show at halftime: Katy Perry, Coldplay and Rihanna. According to the Wall Street Journal, the NFL has asked the artists if they'll pay to play.
“I think it probably is worth it to be honest with you," says Bill Werde, an entrepreneur at Guggenheim Digital Media, and former editor of Billboard Magazine.
"The only thing that comes close is arguably the Grammys, and that’s only if you have a Norah Jones kind of night – you perform, you do an amazing job, you win a bunch of Grammys and it’s just, kind of, your night. Then you’ll see the kind of sales spikes and lifts that are associated with a Super Bowl performance," he says. "Even when you’re an established artist, the lift that you get from playing this halftime show is undeniable.”
After playing halftime, notes Werde, you can raise ticket prices, and get bigger and better brand sponsorships worth millions.
Victor Matheson, a professor of economics at the College of the Holy Cross, says even if this year’s finalists won’t pay up, the NFL could still ask other musicians to – after all, it has a monopoly on halftime.
“You can come up with a list pretty quickly, of other folks who might be willing to pay a little bit of money to have their act featured on a show that over 100 million people are watching," he says.
But, points out Russell Scibetti, founding editor of industry blog The Business of Sports, maybe fans shouldn’t get to watch the NFL’s negotiations.
"The way that they went about it maybe wasn’t the best. They could have had those conversations privately with the artists," says Scibetti about the NFL's requests.
A different approach, says Scibetti, like the NFL asking artists to help promote it through charity work, would have been better received.
Notes Werde, musicians want their music in the spotlight – not their negotiations.
“I promise you that there are people in the head office of the NFL on a witch hunt right now, trying to figure out how this news got out there,” he says.
Had the negotiations taken place in complete secrecy, says Werde, "These artists would all be considering what it’s worth to them and what part of that value they should be willing to share with the NFL – out in the public it takes on a very different patina."
Graphic by Shea Huffman/Marketplace
The Tax Foundation, a Washington think tank specializing in tax policy, has created a map that shows just how much stuff you can buy for a $100 in each state, as compared to how much stuff you can buy for $100 as a national average.
When adjusted to reflect how prices differ state by state, you could get $100 worth of goods in Washington, D.C. at a price of $84.60, and in Hawaii at $85.32.
On the other hand, it's worth most in states like Mississippi at $115.74, and Arkansas at $114.16.
A coffee entrepreneur claims his brew is different — and better — than the trendy civet poop coffee. And it starts with the idea that elephants, unlike humans or civets, are herbivores.
Enlisting has been a rite of passage for men in the Pierce family since the Civil War. And as America has changed, Mark Pierce and his son Jeremy explain, what it means to serve has, too.