Source: Independent Institute
by Daniel Sánchez-Piñol
“The California Billionaire Tax Act has qualified for the November 2026 ballot, promising a massive cash windfall for the state. Proponents confidently declare that it will yield around $100 billion. On paper the calculation seems a no-brainer. If you take the net worth of California’s billionaires from the Forbes list at the beginning of the year, roughly $2 trillion, and apply the proposed one-time 5 percent wealth tax, you land right around $100 billion. However, while the arithmetic is straightforward, the economics are shaky. A foundational principle of economics is that individuals respond to incentives. Apply this principle to California’s wealth tax scheme and a different picture emerges.” (07/01/26)
“President Donald Trump used red-scare rhetoric to denounce the progressive winners in New York’s Democratic primary last week as ‘godless communists’. Rather than explaining that the progressives are not communists in the vein of the Soviet Union or communist China but social democrats in the vein of Scandinavia, a group of so-called ‘moderate’ Democratic politicians piled on to Trump’s red-baiting. Two days after the primaries, this group of 15 corporate Democrats (let’s just call them what they are) attacked the winning Democrats in an open letter drafted by Democratic Rep. Tom Suozzi of New York proclaiming, ‘we are capitalist, not socialist’. In an interview with the New York Times, Suozzi added ‘that message from Tuesday is not the message that I embrace’.” (07/01/26)
“One Nation Conservatives emphasize the paternalistic, socially cohesive, and pragmatic virtues of ‘Old England,’ in opposition to reforming free-marketeers and socialists alike, as a British version of centrism. They are the ones Margaret Thatcher called ‘wets,’ though even Thatcher’s ‘sons’ were affected by their force. When Miliband spoke of ‘One Nation’ in a Blue Labour voice, then-Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron launched his own version of Disraelian politics in the form of the ‘Big Society,’ which turned out to be, as the British would say, a damp squib. More recently, One Nation Conservatism has been pitched as an alternative to populism, though Brexit and Reform leader (and one-time Thatcherite) Nigel Farage appears now to have a stronger appeal with the working class, perhaps thanks to his echoing of Disraelian themes.” (07/01/26)
“Last week, two federal agents went to David Streever’s home in Rochester, New York, to warn him over a strongly worded email he sent to then-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) interim director Todd Lyons, according to Michelle Breidenbach of the Post-Standard. As such missives often do, Streever’s email evokes the Nazis, telling Lyons: ‘You are a monstrous human being and will go down in history as America’s Reinhard Heydrich, the butcher.’ It goes on to excoriate him over the protesters killed by federal agents in Minnesota and predicts, ‘you will torment yourself until your last day on Earth.’ The email is harsh. But at no point is it threatening. It’s the sort of message that public figures of all sorts receive and discard every day. Except that federal officials seem to be emulating the thin-skinned current president’s attitude towards criticism.” (07/01/26)
Source: Foreign Policy
by Nick Danforth & Graham H Cornwell
“Amid losing a war with Iran, the Trump administration has intensified military, economic, and legal pressure against Cuba in recent months, creating fears of a new military intervention in the Caribbean. If Trump continues down this path, he will bring Washington’s long imperial tradition in Latin America back to the very place it began in 1898.” (07/01/26)
Source: Foundation for Economic Education
by Cláudia Ascensão Nunes
“In 1990, Belgian footballer Jean Marc Bosman saw his contract expire and discovered something he did not expect: although he was no longer under contract, RC Liège still controlled his future. He had found a team in France willing to sign him, but Liège demanded a transfer fee the French club could not afford. Bosman had no contract, no salary, and no real way out. In practice, he remained tied to the club. His case would go on to change the football market and European sport forever. Across European football, a transfer system allowed clubs to retain control over players even after their contracts had ended. A player could be prevented from joining a new employer unless a transfer fee was paid, even when no contractual obligation remained. … Bosman challenged this system in court, and in 1995, the European Court of Justice ruled in his favor.” (07/01/26)
“The Supreme Court ruling that upholds states’ rights to ban transgender athletes from competing in girls and women’ sports provoked wailing from the usual suspects. New York Attorney General Letitia James denounced what she called ‘cruel and discriminatory laws targeting the trans community’, and accused the court of deciding to continue on a ‘dangerous and harmful path’. Oh, please.” (06/30/26)
Source: Responsible Statecraft
by David C Hendrickson
“In the run-up to America’s 250th anniversary, we’ve witnessed a few amazing spectacles, but not much historical reflection. Insofar as discussions have addressed our history, attention has focused on American statesmen and warriors from back in the day. But there is more to be gained by looking from a different standpoint: that of Britain’s leaders at the time of the American revolution. They had an empire to run, as we now do, not a republic to create. Great Britain had achieved, by 1763, a position widely compared to Rome in its heyday. It had won the great contest with France over control of the interior of North America, gaining Canada and a secure claim to the Mississippi River in the Peace of Paris in 1763. But all was not well.” (07/01/26)
“Between 1880 and World War I, 20 million foreigners had immigrated to the U.S. Nearly 7 million people entered the country between 1900 and 1910 alone. That amounted to nearly 10 times the annual average for the 1850s, the previous big wave of arrivals. By 1915, newcomers and their young, native-born children made up the majority of many major American cities. No wonder then that, at the beginning of the 20 century, Americans questioned whether the nation could accommodate this massive wave of immigration and still retain its national identity and its democratic institutions. Many saw the new arrivals as a mortal threat; for these nativists, the white Anglo-Saxon Protestant heritage defined the United States.” (07/01/26)
