Let us imagine for a moment that we are in a museum. In one wing, the great achievements of government intervention are shown: highways, dams, public schools, and countless other ingenious designs, organizations, and feats. Things which we use in our everyday lives which, for better or worse, supposedly ensure the smooth flow of society. Plaques and posters on the walls of this wing boast of the millions of jobs and trillions of dollars created by the state, and list the many ways by which it has contributed to the growth of the free market.

“If I have an hour to solve a problem, I’d spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and 5 minutes thinking about the solution,” Albert Einstein is reported to have said. The importance of identifying the relevant question applies equally to political discourse. Many political interventions depend entirely on how the problem is framed in the first place.

In any debate, the side that gets to define the question enjoys a significant advantage over their opponents. There is often ample room for manipulation in posing the question. 

A world-historical financial event was the 1971 default by the United States on its international commitment to redeem dollars for gold, thereby creating a purely paper, Nixonian global monetary system. Since then, the value of the United States dollar in gold has dropped by more than 99 percent. The amount of dollars that an ounce of gold will buy has gone up by about 140 times.

Apparently to illustrate that the state of California has little interest in controlling its fiscal profligacy or in protecting the property rights of anyone who can be demonized as rich, a union-backed state ballot initiative titled “The Billionaire Tax Act” has been proposed.

The Epstein files have revealed the names of many wealthy and prominent people within Jeffrey Epstein’s orbit, many of whom are now justifiably going down because of their affiliations with Epstein.

But the real rot regarding Epstein relates to the extremely sweet sweetheart plea bargain he received from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Florida.

On February 11, Attorney General Pam Bondi testified before the House Judiciary Committee. It was a disgraceful performance. Bondi responded to legitimate constitutional issues raised by the members of the committee with a stream of irrelevant insults. Her childish reactions showed that she is utterly unfit for her position. Of course, the Democrats on the committee were unfriendly, but it was her duty to maintain her composure and respond in a dignified manner. She conspicuously failed to do so.

Sam Altman said some companies are engaging in “AI washing,” invoking the technology as cover for layoffs they would have made anyway.

The core PPI increased a seasonally adjusted 0.8%, more than the 0.6% gain in December and well ahead of the Dow Jones consensus estimate for 0.3%.

Forty-one percent of Americans now say they sympathize more with the Palestinians in the Middle East situation, while 36% sympathize more with the Israelis.