Many years ago, before Lawrence v Texas, before Obergefell v. Hodges, there were those who called Gay men like me unconvicted felons and sought the death penalty for sodomy, which I took as a direct threat against my life.
DOGE didn't make a dent in the deficit, but it did bring back screwworm and enable a historically large new Ebola outbreak, so it's not like they didn't achieve *anything*
Wealth taxes have many problems, including high administrative costs and enforcement challenges.
Perhaps worst of all, by discouraging risk-taking, wealth taxes suppress investment and growth.
These help explain why so many countries that have implemented wealth taxes in the past—such as France, Germany, and Sweden—later abolished them.
https://t.co/ykbbXikkMx
The same country that put humans on the Moon in 1969 now takes an average of 4.5 years to approve major infrastructure permits.. longer than it took to build the Panama Canal.
Transmission lines average 10 years from permitting to completion. The bottleneck to abundance is not technology, but BUREAUCRACY!
The Jones Act blocks foreign ships from moving cargo between US ports. Cato’s new interactive Jones Act Waiver Tracker follows every voyage the 2026 waiver made legal. The data is clear: these rules were quietly suppressing shipments Americans needed all along.
Read more: https://t.co/YFCeOcK6TR
In this post, I explain why Bernie Sanders' plan to expropriate 50% of the value of major AI producers is unconstitutional, dangerous, and has much in common with Trump's awful policies. Another example of "horseshoe theory" at work : https://t.co/0wZlMkd1xc
The Churchill-appreciation IS ‘elitist’.
It acknowledges that some (few) people achieve extraordinary feats
(like leading the free world against all odds when all seemed lost).
For a culture praising egalitarianism and with a disdain of distinction, that’s a problem.
Celebrating Churchill is also ‘divisive’.
West and freedom-loving people love him.
Nazis and third-worldists hate him.
For a culture taught that ‘who can ever judge, everything is relative’ this ‘divisiveness’ is a problem.
Notice who benefits from this.
This "report" is even more bonkers when you realize that Piketty and his pal Zucman routinely manipulate statistics to create the inequality "crisis" they purport to address.
This is akin to pulling the fire alarm so you can put out a nonexistent fire by bulldozing the building.
When Gabriel Zucman manipulated tax rate stats to show the wealthy paying less than the poor and tried to memory hole his own previously published numbers that undermined this claim, academia cheered him on because they liked his political narrative and gave him the Clark Medal.
When Kevin Kruse plagiarized multiple passages in his published works over the past two decades, academia circled the wagons around him, attacked the person who discovered it (i.e. me) as "politically motivated," and dismissed overwhelming evidence as "accidental copying and pasting."
When Quinn Slobodian got caught altering the text of Mises quotations to make them sound racist, academia made him co-editor of the journal where he did it and showered him with prizes.
When Nancy MacLean got caught engaging in wholesale fabrications of evidence (as well as egregious incompetence) in her book about James M. Buchanan, academia made her a finalist for the National Book Award.
When Nikole Hannah-Jones got caught denying and ghost-editing one of her most controversial claims out of the 1619 Project, academia handed her a cushy endowed professorship with full tenure despite her having nonexistent scholarly research outputs and zero teaching experience.
When Michael Bellesiles falsified historical documents to make an anti-second amendment argument as part of his history of gun ownership in America, academia gave him the Bancroft Prize and only rescinded it after the evidence became so overwhelming that they could not deny it anymore.
When Claudine Gay plagiarized multiple scholarly works over her career, academia made her president of Harvard and also tried to circle the wagons until the evidence became so overwhelming that they could not deny it anymore.
Yes, higher ed has a politicization problem and it often shows through in the exceedingly low standards of rigor in many of these fields. But it also manifests in other ways that are much more serious than a simple lack of rigor.