by Lenore Skenazy, Motive, August 9, 2025.
Excerpt:
Throughout this go to, the social providers employee acknowledged that our house was clear, that the kids have been completely satisfied, well-fed, well mannered, and well-spoken, however stated the kids needed to be supervised 100% of the time when open air. Once I requested what constitutes supervision, she stated that I needed to be seen to my neighbors when the youngsters have been exterior, no matter whether or not or not I might see the kids. I requested the place that was discovered within the Virginia legislation. She replied that it isn’t within the Virginia legislation, however that Social Companies has its personal algorithm.
by Editorial Board, Wall Avenue Journal, August 8, 2025.
Excerpts:
Progressives and a rising faction of Republicans assist money handouts as an vital reply to America’s social ills. So readers would possibly need to learn about a research printed as a working paper by the Nationwide Bureau of Financial Analysis that finds $1,000 month-to-month funds have few long-term advantages.
Researchers with the nonprofit OpenResearch and several other universities ran a randomized managed trial to check the impression of a money switch on lower-income, working-age Individuals. One group acquired $1,000 each month for 3 years—$36,000 complete—no strings connected. The opposite have been paid $50 a month to take part as a management group.
And:
Recipients additionally labored much less, equal to roughly eight fewer days within the earlier 12 months. But OpenResearch touts that “common family earnings was roughly $6,100 increased for recipients than management members, together with the switch quantity” and funds “elevated company to work fewer hours or scale back the variety of jobs held.” In different phrases, the funds led folks to work much less.
DRH remark: 8 days a 12 months is substantial. It’s about 3% of a 2000-hour work 12 months. But it surely’s not as substantial as I might have anticipated.
by Dominic Pino, Civitas Institute, August 7, 2025.
Excerpts:
Phil Gramm and Donald Boudreaux have written a ebook referred to as The Triumph of Financial Freedom wherein they debunk seven financial myths that undergird a lot of American authorities coverage immediately. The ebook is a helpful useful resource to anybody who wants a refresher on the defenses of free markets based mostly on historic analysis. Each males are academics at coronary heart — Gramm taught economics earlier than serving in Congress, and Boudreaux is a professor — and so they talk with readability and precision.
The issue is that folks imagine that the New Deal ended the Nice Despair, free markets induced the Nice Recession, the Industrial Revolution led to elevated poverty, and free commerce hollowed out America. They actually, sincerely, imagine this stuff to be true. And that actually does matter.
And:
Between 1980 and 2000, the share of the world’s inhabitants residing in excessive poverty declined from 34 % to 25 %. The demise price from malnutritiondeclined by 43 %. Rice yields elevated by 41 %, and wheat yields elevated by 47 %. World common life expectancy elevated by six years. And all of that occurred whereas the world’s inhabitants elevated from about 4.5 billion to over 6 billion.
DRH Be aware: Though I haven’t but learn their ebook, I think that they cowl among the similar floor that I lined on this speak that I gave to college students at Stanford College. BTW, I acquired Malthus slightly unsuitable in my exposition I gave, as David Friedman identified to me. Though Malthus was dismal, he wasn’t that dismal. He thought folks would regulate their habits earlier than they acquired to something like mass hunger. Lauren F. Landsburg, in her biography of Malthus in David R. Henderson, ed., The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics, notes within the first paragraph the right understanding of Malthus’s claims.
by Alex Tabarrok, Marginal Revolution, August 9, 2025.
Excerpt:
Suppose the U.S. can import Hyundai Sonatas from Korea and Toyota Camrys from Japan, and customers view the 2 automobiles as excellent substitutes. We evaluate three eventualities:
A)Free tradeB)10% tariff on each nations (uniform tariff)C) 10% tariff on Korea solely (selective tariff)
The shocking end result: B might be higher than C, although C is, in a single sense, nearer to free commerce (the “finest” coverage) than B because it tariffs fewer nations. To give attention to the important thing factors I’ll assume 50 automotive patrons and no change within the variety of patrons when tariffs change (so I’ll ignore the usual deadweight loss from decreased portions).
DRH word: Though Alex doesn’t point out it within the title, discover {that a} essential assumption in his proof is that the tariffs are uniform throughout imports from each Korea and Japan.
Be aware: The featured picture was generated by ChatGPT.
