Myrtle Beach, SC, Orlando, FL and Washington, D.C. January 3, 2020—Thinking Outside the Boxe has released the transcripts of the question and answer session from its 2019 Annual Symposium. Participants included correspondents from Prescott Valley, Arizona; Wheeling, West Virginia; Dayton, Ohio; and Bismarck, North Dakota.

Discussion centered on U.S.–China decoupling, the proper use of impeachment, platform content moderation, aviation safety after the 737 MAX grounding, political polarization, the treatment of large technology platforms, rising corporate and government debt, economic coercion by authoritarian states, higher-education accreditation and federal student lending, high-skill immigration, the concentration of opportunity in coastal metros, critical-infrastructure reliability, executive orders and emergency declarations, pharmaceutical liability, and the adequacy of post-2008 financial reforms.

The transcript is available at www.ThinkingOutsideTheBoxe.com.

About Thinking Outside the Boxe

Thinking Outside the Boxe is a private, independent research and commentary organization dedicated to examining politics, finance, economics, world affairs, law, public policy, and the conduct of institutions from perspectives often absent from conventional media and public debate. Through original research, commentary, symposiums, and contributions from a diverse group of correspondents, Thinking Outside the Boxe seeks to broaden the parameters of public knowledge, challenge prevailing assumptions, and encourage thoughtful debate on issues of national and international importance.

Thinking Outside the Boxe is nonpartisan and independent of political parties, universities, media organizations, and institutional orthodoxies. Its work reflects a continuing commitment to limited government, lawful borders, fiscal seriousness, open inquiry, constitutional principles, and the belief that a free people are best served when arguments are tested against evidence rather than restricted to an approved range of opinion. Its correspondents may disagree with one another, but they share a willingness to examine difficult questions, reach conclusions, and say what conventional institutions sometimes will not.