April 9, 2025: The White House has spent four days insisting the tariffs are here to stay. The president himself posted that morning: “BE COOL! Everything is going to work out well.” His trade advisor is on television, calling market panic “no big deal.” There will be no pause. The message is unambiguous.

At 1:00 pm, someone buys 5,105 call options on SPY—the fund that tracks the S&P 500. The position costs $2.14 million. It will be worthless by the end of the day unless the market surges dramatically. It is a bad bet.

In recent years, a strand of environmental thinking has emerged that places population at the center of ecological crises. Some activists, including figures associated with the Extinction Rebellion and the Stop Having Kids Movements Movement in the United Kingdom and the United States have expressed anti-natalist views, arguing that choosing not to have children is a meaningful response to climate change.

Within economics as a discipline, it is difficult to find literature that dedicates chapters to explaining the conceptual structure of financial statements. Topics such as supply and demand curves, economic growth, fiscal policy, economic inequality, international trade, unemployment, inflation, and others are commonly addressed, but rarely is there discussion of the difference between net income and free cash flow.

Many people today consider the prospect of a socialist utopia to be very appealing. Even if they do not believe such a utopia is achievable in its purest sense, they believe it is something we all ought to work towards.

For a brief moment starting in the 1870s, economics was close to becoming a genuine science of human action.

A commonly-held view is that money has value because the government in power says so. For other commentators, the value of money is established because money is accepted. But why is it accepted? Well, because it is accepted!

On top of mounting numbers of retirees, record numbers of young men are claiming to be disabled or sick.