“The Washington Post couldn’t get through an article about Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya without using the F-word. The sub-headline from Saturday read, ‘The Stanford physician was excoriated by NIH’s director in 2020 for his ‘fringe’ ideas on Covid. Four years later, he’s poised for power in Trump’s Washington.’ …. If Donald Trump creates the position, I volunteer to be Secretary of Feeding People to Komodo Dragons. The first round of tossings into the lizard-pit will involve ‘experts’ who still use grossly snobbish terms like ‘fringe’ and ‘contrarian’ to describe beliefs held by most of the population.” (11/18/24)
Source: Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom
by Stephan Kinsella
“I’ve long noted how the West, primarily the US, uses its leverage to pressure developing nations to adopt and strengthen intellectual property (IP) protections and adopt international IP treaties, primarily for benefit US corporate interests, namely pharmaceuticals (patent) and Hollywood and music (copyright). This is a form of what I call IP imperialism. It is often done by insisting on local IP protection even in agreements that have nothing to do with the local property law of developing nations, namely bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements. The purpose of a free trade agreement is simply to lower tariffs and barriers to international trade, but the US and other western powers usually insist on developing nations strengthening local IP law even though this has nothing to do with trade but instead is a matter of local property rights.” (11/18/24)
“The news is ablaze with stories of Costco being forced by the FDA to recall almost 80,000 pounds of butter because the manufacturer failed to place a label warning consumers that it might contain milk. … I’ll confess that when I first read about this story, it piqued my interest because of course the federal government would require something as asinine as this. The truth, however, is markedly different and evidences exactly what classical liberals have said would happen in a free society: that successful companies are kept honest by the twin pressures of competition and reputational effects. To set the record straight, Costco was not ‘forced’ to do anything by anyone.” (11/18/24)
Source: Future of Freedom Foundation
by Jacob G Hornberger
“Why am I so certain that Donald Trump and his merry band of Republicans will not reduce federal spending and debt? Because they are Republicans. Republicans, by definition, are big spenders and big talkers. They always talk a big game about getting rid of ‘waste, fraud, and abuse’ but then end up increasing federal spending and the federal government’s debt load. ‘This time, things will be different, Jacob! This time the Republicans will really drastically reduce federal spending and debt. Donald Trump will force them to do so.’ Really? Like the last time that Trump was president?” (11/18/24)
“Social Security is very popular with Americans. Large majorities of Democrats and Republican like the program and want it to continue with no cuts in benefits, no increase in costs to taxpayers, and no real reforms of any kind. Unfortunately, Social Security is and always has been a scam that is rapidly approaching collapse. Economists point out that something has to give if the program is to avoid catastrophe, and so do the trustees who run Social Security.” (11/18/24)
“The Washington Post published an article yesterday with a headline saying that Iran hawks would have ‘less sway’ in the next Trump administration …. It doesn’t make sense to say that Iran hawks will have ‘less sway’ in an administration that they completely dominate. The nominees for State and Defense are incorrigible, zealous Iran hawks, the National Security Advisor Mike Waltz was already celebrating the ‘return of maximum pressure’ before Trump won, and the vice president-elect made a point of talking about ‘punching’ the Iranians hard shortly after Trump selected him. Trump has been an Iran hawk all along, and he largely defined his Iran policy as a total repudiation of Obama’s diplomatic engagement with their government.” (11/18/24)
“Imagine you’re a would-be migrant. You’re in a desperate situation, fleeing poverty, corruption, and violent crime in Central America. A private organization offers you to come to a new area that promises more security. This area has the basic services of a state — such as the protection of life, liberty, and property — but is not a traditional state. This special jurisdiction is nested in a defined territory between two host nations. Let’s say you agree to pay a certain amount for those services in a year. Your respective rights and obligations are laid down in a written agreement between you and the provider: a real social contract.” (11/18/24)
“One century ago, when Western European powers were planning to carve up the Arab East, the US attempted to convince them to take a different path. Supporting the belief that the peoples recently freed from colonial rule should have the right to self-determination, the US sent a commission of prominent Americans to survey Arab public opinion to discover what they did and did not want for their future. The commission concluded that the overwhelming majority of Arabs rejected division or partition of their region, European mandates over them, and the establishment of a Zionist state in Palestine. What they hoped for was a unitary Arab state. The commission report also warned of conflict if the planned partition moved forward. The British Lord Balfour rejected these findings saying that the attitudes of the indigenous Arab population meant little to him, especially when weighed against the importance of the Zionist movement.” (11/18/24)
Source: Ludwig von Mises Institute
by Siamak Ettefagh
“n the ever-evolving landscape of economic theory and policy, few concepts have been as influential and controversial as Joseph Schumpeter’s ‘creative destruction.’ This powerful idea, which describes the process by which innovation continuously reshapes markets, challenges conventional wisdom about competition, monopolies, and the role of government intervention. As we grapple with the complexities of the digital age, the tension between creative destruction and regulatory frameworks, like antitrust laws and the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) has become increasingly apparent.” (11/18/24)
Source: Caitlin Johnstone, Rogue Journalist
by Caitlin Johnstone
“The New York Times reports that the Biden administration has authorized Ukraine to use US-supplied long-range missiles to strike Russian and North Korean military targets inside Russia — yet another dangerous escalation of nuclear brinkmanship in this horrific proxy war. The Times correctly notes that authorizing Ukraine to use ATACMS, which have a range of about 190 miles, has long been a contentious issue in the Biden administration for fear of provoking military retaliations against the US from Russia. This reckless escalation has been authorized despite an acknowledgement from the anonymous US officials who spoke to The New York Times that they ‘do not expect the shift to fundamentally alter the course of the war.’ As Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp notes, Vladimir Putin said back in September that if NATO allows Ukraine to use western-supplied weapons for long-range strikes inside Russian territory, it would mean NATO countries ‘are at war with Russia.'” (11/18/24)
