“The trade war between the United States and Canada—or, more exactly, between Donald Trump, who declared it, and Canadian politicians, who try to limit the damage though using the same logic as Trump’s—provides a good opportunity to reflect on how trade and freedom work. It is not a brilliant idea for the Canadian government to impose a tariff on Canadians who purchase American appliances, for example, in order to retaliate against the American ruler who has imposed a tariff on Americans importing Canadian whisky. … Instead of retaliation—imposing a border tax on Canadians because Trump has imposed one on Americans—[prime minister Mark Carney] could make a declaration of unilateral free trade along the following lines …” (08/27/26)
“For the Trump administration to complain about foreign interference in America’s war of choice is manifestly absurd. No country interferes in the affairs of other nations more often. No government is more presumptuous in its demands. No nation more frequently uses force against other states. Russian and Chinese intervention in the Iran war is unfortunate—Americans likely have died and certainly have been injured as a result. Yet the administration shares responsibility for the resulting harm. … American policymakers long have viewed themselves as virtuous vestal virgins, entitled, even required, to purify the terrible world around them. Alas, no one else views the solons of Washington in such terms, and for good reason: They have repeatedly failed, often disastrously.” (08/27/26)
“New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani announced this summer that he will open city-owned grocery stores in the coming years. Meanwhile, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently announced that the federal government will take a nearly $1 billion equity stake in seven semiconductor companies. There is a common name for these policies: creeping socialism. … President Trump’s criticism of Mamdani is consistent with his pledge in his 2019 State of the Union address that ‘America will never be a socialist country.’ But his own administration’s actions are even less consistent with that pledge than Mamdani’s grocery stores.” (08/27/26)
“The Gilded Age was convicted by its name before its history was ever written. Mark Twain and Charles Dudley Warner coined that appellation in their political satire by the same name. Their point was clear—the American era of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century was the opposite of a golden age. Instead, it was a time when a thin layer of glitter concealed corruption, useless speculation, and harmful self-interest. The name stuck, permitting Twain’s summary judgment to masquerade as neutral historical judgment. … It is a relief then to have Julian Fellowes’s series, The Gilded Age …. [it] shows that the era produced many public benefits and that the rich were substantially responsible for the dynamism that led not only to economic prosperity but also to broader social inclusion, even if they were hardly always innocent or admirable.” (08/27/26)
“After US-Canada trade talks collapsed Friday, the United States imposed a 50% tariff on a long list of Canadian goods via the never-used Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer went on TV first thing Monday in an attempt to calm financial markets with some basic tariff math. He said the new action hits a small percentage of Canadian imports into the US and an even smaller share of consumption, so there’s ‘no possible way it can really affect US well-being.’Greer is basically right on the issue of the tariffs’ direct effects. The problem for both America’s chief trade negotiator and the US economy is that the new levies raise other issues that are much more important – and troubling. … First, the spat injects significant new uncertainty into both the trillion-dollar bilateral relationship and the broader global economy.” (08/27/26)
“In the face of massive public resistance and anger, tech bros need to start thinking like Andrew Carnegie and the ‘robber barons’ of the Gilded Age — or even like Xi Jinping. The tech world is in bad odor these days. Social media’s addictive qualities have parents in such an uproar that Meta just agreed to pay out an $18 billion settlement, and data-center projects are facing rejection across the country. Yet for decades America’s tech industry was cherished as a center of innovation, a world in which hard-working entrepreneurs started businesses in garages and produced things that made everyone’s lives better. Because it was constantly innovating, it stayed ahead of government’s ability to regulate it, resulting in ‘permissionless innovation’ — change that didn’t have to ask first.” (08/26/26)
Source: Karl Dickey’s Freedom Vanguard
by Karl Dickey
“In his 6,000-word essay, Gates proposes three direct state interventions. First, he proposes a payroll-style tax on artificial intelligence and robots to penalize companies that automate labor. Second, he proposes legal mandates that reserve specific job categories for humans only. Third, he advocates for global government coordination to slow down artificial intelligence development. As we see so often, government interventions cause more problems than they propose to solve, often having the opposite effect of their stated goals — so government intervention is a terrible idea to solve problems that have not yet happened. After all, adding a tax on automation will negate the increased profits the automation will bring. His ‘solutions’ will bring higher consumer prices; they would protect inefficient monopolies while reducing productivity. Negating the whole point of AI.” (08/27/26)
“The US Army, Fox Business reports, plans to build nuclear ‘microreactors’ at five of its bases — Fort Bragg, Fort Campbell, Fort Hood, Fort Benning, and Fort Drum — over the next two years, with at least 15 more to follow later. Why? To, the report says, ‘strengthen the military’s energy security and reduce its reliance on potentially vulnerable power grids.’ The idea certainly makes sense for a military base, but it makes sense for everyone, everywhere else, too. The biggest security and reliability worry with electricity isn’t that an enemy missile or bomb will take out a power plant. It’s that an attack or accident somewhere along the 650,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines and 6.3 million miles of distribution lines criss-crossing the US will stop that power from getting delivered.” (08/27/26)
“In Asia Times, Noah Smith just wrote that standard economic measures can’t really explain why Americans are growing less happy with their lives over time. The problem is that what makes for a happy, meaningful life is much harder to measure than GDP or median income. I agree that standard economic measures alone won’t do the trick. But it’s not because it’s so hard to measure what predicts a happy, meaningful life. That’s actually pretty easy. Connecting economic realities to those measures is also fairly straightforward. What Smith is missing is that relationships predict happiness. And, increasingly, economic conditions predict relationships.” (08/27/26)
