Connect with us

Celebrity Biographies

Catherine Rampell Bio, Age, Parents, Husband, Net Worth and Articles

Published

on

BIOGRAPHY OF CATHERINE RAMPELL

Catherine Rampell (Full Name: Catherine Chelsea Rampell) is an American opinion journalist and nationally syndicated opinion columnist.

She is a Washington Post opinion columnist and a member of the Washington Post Writers Group. Rampell is also a CNN political commentator. Prior to joining the Washington Post, Rampell was a business reporter, theater critic and blogger for The New York Times.

Catherine has been a guest political commentator on National Public Radio and select news networks such as CBS, CNBC, PBS, MSNBC, NPR. She is also a regular commentator on Marketplace Edition on public radio.

Rampell has received numerous awards, including the 2016 Helm Alumni Leadership Award and the 2010 Weidenbaum Center Award for Evidence-Based Journalism. Additionally, she was a finalist for the 2012 Gerald Loeb Award for Business Journalism.

CATHERINE RAMPELL AGE CATHERINE RAMPELL SOUTH FLORIDA

Catherine Chelsea Rampell is an American opinion journalist and nationally syndicated opinion columnist. She was born on November 4, 1984 in South Florida. Rampell turns 34 in 2018.

CATHERINE RAMPELL PARENTS | CATHERINE RAMPELL FAMILY

Christine is the daughter of Ellen, also called née Kahn who is an accountant and Richard Rampell both parents are Princeton alumni, Catherine also has a brother.

CATHERINE RAMPELL HUSBAND | CATHERINE RAMPEL CHRISTOPHER COLON

Catherine is married to Christopher Colon (professor of economics at Columbus University). the couple reunited in 2014.

Christopher Conlon (Catherine Husband) graduated with a BA in Applied Mathematics from Harvard University. More importantly, he has a master’s degree from the same on campus.

He also has a doctorate. in Economics from Yale University. as of 2018, Christopher is employed as an Assistant Professor of Economics at NYU Stern “School of Business”, he previously worked for Columbia University.

NET WORTH OF CATHERINE RAMPELL

Catherine Chelsea Rampell is an American opinion journalist and nationally syndicated opinion columnist. His estimated net worth is $1 million as of 2019. Rampell is a Opinion Columnist for The Washington Post and a member of the Washington Post Writers Group. Rampell is also a CNN political commentator.

CATHERINE RAMPELL ADVISES ON MARRIAGE

On 08/28/2014 -Catherine talks to couples who plan to unite in life through marriage, she said Engaged women of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose except the names of your husbands.

I’m getting married in a few days, and as I’ve been told, it happens with most weddings – many exhausting fights over minute details broke out along the long and dangerous path to the altar. But the biggest explosions, in my case, were about names.

Specifically, women’s names. Or the lack of.

Here’s how it started. My mom was in charge of paper products – invitations, envelopes, and seat cards – mostly because she had much stronger preferences than I did about it. I didn’t particularly care if the paper was from ancient Egyptian papyri broken into during an archaeological dig, or recycled toilet paper or if we had invitations from dead trees. I’m pretty cool with Evite.com.

I had only one inflexible request, Bridezilla, also championed by my feminist fiancé: how women’s names were rendered. More precisely, that they are rendered at all. I have always hated the tradition of addressing married women in official correspondence by their husband’s full name. You know what I mean: “Mr. and Mrs. Robert Smith’, as opposed to a version of ‘Mr. Robert Smith and Mrs./Mrs. Jane Smith.’

I understand why wives often choose to adopt their husband’s surnames upon marriage for family unity or to avoid confusion when picking up kindergarten, or whatever – although I have personally decided to keep my own name. But why do we also have to confiscate the first names of married women? Even married women have their own identity; they are not mere appendages of their husbands.

So when it came to planning my own wedding, I decreed that whenever we were talking about a married couple, we would specify the woman’s full first and last name. My mother resisted at first, saying she was reluctant to play with tradition, but she eventually agreed to respect my wishes.

It turned out to be much more difficult than we realized.

When my mother asked a stationery salesman to begin our wedding invitation with “(mother’s name) and (father’s name) ask for your company’s pleasure. . . Stationery was appalled. In all her years crafting wedding invitations, she shouted, not once had she veered into such sticky territory.

My mother called me in a panic, convinced that the wording I had requested would upset the good order of the universe.

I told him to pull out the stationery and find another that would accept whatever damn phrasing we chose. Finally, she did.

Then it came time to get the invitations sent, and my mom decided to splurge and hire a calligrapher. She sent the calligrapher an excel spreadsheet with all the names of our guests and told him to transcribe them exactly as we had them or else face Bridezilla’s wrath. The calligrapher agreed.

But guess what form of address was on the envelopes my married friends received? ‘M. and Mrs. Robert Smith. Even, in at least one case, where the woman had kept her maiden name.

At first, I thought we were unlucky in choosing our suppliers. Perhaps the calligrapher had made an honest mistake. Then I started looking online.

The web, it seems, also conspires to maintain this horrible anti-feminist tradition.

Online addressing guidelines from obscure artisans and well-established stationery companies — including Crane & Co. and Hallmark — still generally recommend excising a married woman’s name.

(The Emily Post Institute waffles a bit in its recommendations.) Meanwhile, there are just as many wedding websites and message boards of brides-to-be wondering how to circumvent this silly tradition without appearing downgraded.

Of course, the tradition of Mr.-and-Mrs.-His-Name is not isolated to wedding invitations. It appears on mailings from alumni organizations, church groups, charities and spam marketers.

I’ve even heard of women’s social clubs whose directories list their impressive, professionally accomplished members as “Mrs. Husband’s name.’

But it is during the wedding planning process – when a couple is coming to terms with exactly what it means to form a legal and spiritual union of two separate beings – that the pressure to continue this archaic tradition of totally subsuming the identity of the wife in that of her husband, in particular ranks.

So I urge all brides-to-be: if you pick one detail to fight over with your family, friends, and vendors – and, oh, there are so many less meaningful and more expensive ones to choose from – let it be this one. Call your married friends by their first names, then, after the wedding, insist that they do the same for you. »

TWITTER

CATHERINE RAMPELL POST IN WASHINGTON

Move over, Illuminati. The conspiracy against Trump’s economy is massive.

When Barack Obama was president and the economic statistics were good, then-candidate Donald Trump said they were wrong. When Trump became president and inherited the same statistics, they suddenly became real.

Now that they point south, they are apparently wrong again.

Trump, aided by his economic brain of cranks and sycophants, thinks any indicator that the US economy might be in trouble must be fabricated. It’s all part of an anti-Trump conspiracy, he laments, according to reports in The Post, The Associated Press and The New York Times.

And pass, Illuminati, because this particular conspiracy is massive.

It’s run by the Federal Reserve, the Democrats, and the media, of course, or so Trump and his Fox News minions say. But that also includes the broader US bond market, which gave a warning sign last week when the Treasury yield curve inverted (meaning long-term bonds had interest rates lower than in the short term, which usually predates a downturn).

The many farmers, retailers, manufacturers and economists who have been warning for more than a year that Trump’s tariff burden is borne primarily by Americans, not China or other trading partners, and also that uncertainty over Trade tensions can cripple the hiring, investing and buying decisions we need to keep the economy growing.

The cabal even transcends borders. Besides Trump’s trade wars, after all, the biggest risk to the US economy is contagion from abroad. And right now, nine major economies are either in recession or on the verge of one. Fear not, though: statisticians in all nine countries are certainly preparing their books to hurt Trump too.

The White House reportedly refused to draw up contingency plans in the event of a recession, because it does not wish to validate this “negative narrative”. It is, in a word, silly. As others have done by analogy, it’s like refusing to buy a fire extinguisher because you’re afraid to feed a “negative narrative” that might one day face a fire.

Administration officials decided that the best way to deal with the risk of recession, which of course does not concern them personally, was to put on a show of force on television. There, Trump’s economic advisers assured Americans that they certainly saw no reason to worry.

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro’s strategy was to deny that the data shows that Americans are paying higher prices on tariffed products (although we are) and that the yield curve had recently inverted. (although it is). On this last point, Navarro said the curve was simply “flat” and therefore does not signal a possible recession. In virtually identical language throughout the interviews, he told the public that he had authority on the matter because he “didn’t write the book on the yield curve”, he wrote “several books on the effectiveness of the yield curve as a leading economic indicator. ‘

What Navarro failed to mention, however, is that these books say that inverted and “flat” yield curves are generally signs of an impending recession. One such book, from 2006, explicitly pokes fun at business leaders who failed to prepare for the 2001 recession because they ignored “the sinister rise in the yield curve” that had begun. with the flattening of the curve.

So, yes, you can also add Navarro from the mid-2000s to the list of anti-Trump conspirators.

Trump’s National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow also appeared on the Sunday broadcasts. For his part, he bizarrely pretended that other worrying economic data (in this case, on consumer sentiment) did not exist. He also repeatedly told viewers: ‘Let’s not be afraid of optimism.’

And look, yeah, it wouldn’t do any good for officials to go on TV and tell everyone to panic, get their money out of the market and stuff it under their mattress. The White House obviously wants to project confidence instead.

But that confidence is only compelling if it’s credible — because, say, the White House has recognized how much its own trade policies contribute to recession risk and is committed to reversing them. Or because he has a competent team in place in case of a recession.

Neither is true.

Instead, Kudlow’s appeal for optimism reeks of Peter Pan logic about it: If only we believe in fairies enough, we can still save Tinker Bell – even when we send him into a storm. of hail. If you believe, clap your hands; don’t let Tink die!

It’s hard to imagine that nervous Americans are really that gullible. Then again, perhaps we were never the intended audience for such performances. Of course, maybe the White House aides are trying to trick the public into believing that the warning signs of a recession don’t exist. But maybe they’re just trying to trick their boss.

ARTICLES BY CATHERINE RAMPELL

Rampell: a dangerous choice for the Fed

milforddailynews.com – By Catherine Rampell/The Washington Post Saturday, July 13, 2019, 4:20 a.m. Let’s say you’re deciding between two Federal Reserve nominee models. One has no fixed principles and embraces whatever is most politically expedient; the other has a blind commitment to a dangerously flawed set of beliefs.

To borrow from “Hamilton”: I know it’s a loser, but what if you had to choose? Or maybe not. Because with Judy Shelton, you can get both.

Rampell: a dangerous choice for the Fed

metrowestdailynews.com – By Catherine Rampell/The Washington Post Saturday, July 13, 2019, 4:20 a.m. Let’s say you’re deciding between two Federal Reserve nominee models.

One has no fixed principles and embraces whatever is most politically expedient; the other has a blind commitment to a dangerously flawed set of beliefs. To borrow from “Hamilton”: I know it’s a loser, but what if you had to choose? Or maybe not. Because with Judy Shelton, you can get both.

Judy Shelton is a dangerous choice for the Fed board

mysanantonio.com – By Catherine Rampell, Washington Post Writers Group Posted at 4:55 p.m. CDT Friday, July 12, 2019 President Donald Trump has named economist Judy Shelton to the Federal Reserve Board, but her policies align- themselves on those of the presidents? President Donald Trump has appointed economist Judy Shelton to the Federal Reserve, but do her policies even align with those of presidents?

Catherine Rampell: Judy Shelton is a dangerous choice for the Fed board

sltrib.com – File – This February 5, 2018, file photo shows the seal of the Board of Governors of the United States Federal Reserve Board in the ground at the Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building in Washington. President Donald Trump said on Twitter that he would appoint economists Christopher Waller and Judy Shelton to fill two vacancies on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.

opinion | Judy Shelton is a dangerous choice for the Fed board

washingtonpost.com – Judy Shelton in Washington on May 29 (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg) July 11 at 7:01 p.m. Let’s say you’re deciding between two Federal Reserve candidate models.

One has no fixed principles and embraces whatever is most politically expedient; the other has a blind commitment to a dangerously flawed set of beliefs. To borrow from “Hamilton”: I know it’s a loser, but what if you had to choose? Or maybe not. Because with Judy Shelton, you can get both.

INSTAGRAM

https://www.instagram.com/p/ByvxGQNH4fm

Advertisement