Lone Candle
Champion of Truth
Historically, automating technology has been overall good for the world, but it is bad for the people whose jobs it replaces.
https://reason.com/2025/06/21/the-lonely-neoliberal/
“So what does Mamdani actually want to institute, if elected in November, and why would it suck so much?
Consider free childcare, which his canvassers seemed to believe would be persuasive to me as I walked past them last night with my 2-year-old. Under Mamdani, the state would provide childcare—via taxpayer-funded daycares, akin to the universal 3K program currently in place (which doesn’t always provide parents with options they actually want)—for all aged six weeks to 5 years old. But if the idea is to lighten parents’ financial load, why aren’t all forms of childcare treated the same? Why don’t stay-at-home mothers get vouchers from the state to recoup loss of income? Why don’t neighborhood babysitting collectives get help? Why is one form of childcare—administered by the state—privileged above all others? Many education savings account programs, such as the one administered by Florida, recognize that assistance from the state, if it is to exist at all, ought to be handed straight to families so that they may use it as they wish. For socialists to offer universal state-run childcare as some great liberator is frankly insulting to many mothers; in the magnificent post-work future the socialists herald, won’t many women choose to spend more time with their children, not less?
City-run grocery stores—another of Mamdani’s proposals—look like a solution in search of a problem. Food deserts—geographic zones where there aren’t any affordable, healthy options available to residents—don’t exist in New York City.
…
Then there’s Mamdani’s rent freeze. He hopes to fully eradicate all rent increases for the roughly 2 million New Yorkers who are currently the beneficiaries of the city’s rent-stabilization scheme, claiming this will be a boon to the working class. What he does not realize is that decades of city-sanctioned housing market distortion is what has led to untenably high rents in the first place (plus it being too difficult to build), and that many of the beneficiaries of rent stabilization are not the poorest of the poor, but rather people whose friends or family have treated other people’s real estate as their own inheritances.
And don’t even get me started on the will-he-or-won’t-he of defunding the police. Mamdani, like all progressives swept up in the cultural fervor of George Floyd Summer, once talked big talk about defunding the police (a feminist issue, he says!), but has now motte-and-baileyed his way back to more social workers and investing in mental health services including voluntary rehabilitative programs. Other hints about what Mamdani believes: “Jails are not places where people can recover from a mental health crisis, and they often have punitive responses to mental health needs” and lots of talk about reducing stigmas and improving access to care. As with food deserts, Mamdani seems to genuinely believe that violent people in the midst of mental breakdown just don’t have access to care, and that if it is simply offered to them, they will no longer resort to terrorizing their fellow man. This strikes me as a simplistic understanding of this problem which would erase the improvements in crime rates made so far in 2025.
In order to pay for all these proposals—the grocery stores, the daycares, the corps of social workers, the fare-free buses (which 48 percent of New Yorkers fail to pay for in the first place, unfortunately)—Mamdani will simply press the button socialists love: Institute a 2 percent flat tax on those earning over $1 million. What Mamdani does not realize is that you cannot abuse the “tippy top.” It is the HENRYs (“high-earners, not rich yet”) or the “working rich” who are perhaps the best examples of meritocracy in action; they’re not the “idle rich”—those who’ve inherited their wealth or made it long ago, who are now mostly price-insensitive and untouchably well-off—and they’re frequently glued to Manhattan for industries like finance, law, and tech. Meet your tax base, Zohran. You should worry if they flee to the outlying suburbs.”
https://reason.com/2025/06/25/my-city-just-voted-for-socialism/
Trump Media Group grifting Trump supporters by a large buyback. Instead of investing in the businesses, the company is raising money to put it in Trump’s pocket. Trump owns 60% of the stock, so a buyback makes him richer. Buybacks are normally done by profitable companies to reward their shareholders. Trump Media Group is not profitable. They raised money via an equity sale and then bought back their stock, essentially transferring some of the money raised into Trump’s pockets. (Discussion of this begins at 21:37).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0KLHBPsObc
For renters who are disciplined with their investing, their wealth often matches or beats people who own a home.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBG-g1CKfgs
A large threat to U.S. dominance is Trump ruining the country’s rule of law. Investments are less likely to happen when the rule of law is damaged.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2b4TjQa4gk
“Foreign manufacturers will have to lower their prices to accommodate tariff rates, Miran believes. If they don’t, then U.S. importers will turn to factories in other markets rather than absorbing the cost of tariffs themselves.
“We can move our demand across borders, but a factory can’t get up and move across borders,” he said.
You might say, his theory is that the customer is always right.
This line of thinking, a theme of his work since before he joined the administration, is an important way Miran’s reasoning diverges from that of most of his fellow economists. Critics point to examples — such as Trump’s tariffs on washing machines in his first term — where consumers seemed to be the ones who paid the price.
The question of who will bear the cost burden of import taxes is an important puzzle piece for gaming out how much inflation will rise and how much growth will slow. It is a particularly critical dilemma for the Federal Reserve, which is trying to decide when to ease off the decelerating economy.”
…
“For this to work, foreign firms have to believe that, unless they capitulate, U.S. companies really will relocate their supply chains elsewhere, Miran told me. That’s one of the many tricky parts for proponents of Trump’s agenda — and Miran conceded as much.
“The truth is that for a lot of products, there’s not a credible alternative for a supply chain available instantaneously, right?” he said.
The recalibration, in other words, will take some time.
And that time could come at a price for the economy, as Trump’s shifting tariffs and fluid negotiations leave businesses hesitant to take action. If firms knew where tariffs would land, they could make investment decisions — on where to build factories, on what size workforce they need, on whether they need to change their business model. In the meantime, many executives are frozen in place, a paralysis that itself could take a bite out of growth.
Right now, manufacturers have been scaling back production as new orders dry up, and confidence in business conditions among CEOs collapsed during the second quarter at its fastest pace in roughly half a century.
Miran was straightforward about acknowledging that policy uncertainty is a challenge, repeatedly suggesting that there could be volatility — in growth, in prices — ahead.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/18/trump-economist-stephen-miran-trade-war-00410450
Wealthy people and great entrepreneurs aren’t going to not start that great business because they will pay more taxes if they make it big. Either way, if successful, they would have done something great and will be rich.
The most profitable and flexible workforce for Americans is illegal immigrants.
When we put tariffs on China, we are saying every country on Earth can get low inputs from China except America, making American business less competitive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKLdzBun4sk
“”The OECD now forecasts global economic growth to slow to 2.9% this year from 3.3% in 2024,” notes Bloomberg. “It expects the rate of expansion in the US will tumble further, to 1.6% from 2.8%—an outlook that is significantly lower than its projection in March.””
https://reason.com/2025/06/03/the-tariff-downturn/
“By examining alternative studies and methodological adjustments, Winship contends that the negative effects of trade with China have been significantly exaggerated and that populist narratives blaming this trade for U.S. economic decline aren’t supported by rigorous evidence.
The originators of the China shock theory examined how Chinese imports affected certain U.S. locales compared with others—not with the entire country—based on initial industry composition and employment size. By these metrics, areas heavily exposed to Chinese imports showed disproportionately worse manufacturing job losses.
However, Winship points out that even if we accept these estimates, the findings suggest only relatively modest employment effects.
To put things in perspective, Winship gives the example of two hypothetical commuting zones with 200,000 working-age residents and 20,000 manufacturing workers. Data from the theory’s proponents indicate that moving from low (10th percentile) to high (90th percentile) exposure to Chinese imports would result in a loss of roughly 2,700 manufacturing jobs—just a 1.4-percentage-point drop in overall manufacturing employment.”
…
“In addition, Winship flags multiple methodological issues. Once other economists revised the proponents’ methods, the estimated negative impact shrank dramatically. Various followup studies found the China shock effect on manufacturing employment to be 50 percent smaller than initially claimed.
Further research revealed that job losses in exposed areas were often offset or even outweighed by employment gains in other sectors. One detailed Census Bureau study even found that firms with greater Chinese import exposure increased manufacturing employment, reallocating jobs to more efficient domestic production lines enabled by cheaper imports.
Moreover, the steady decline in U.S. manufacturing employment began decades before China’s WTO entry. Between the late 1970s and 2000, factory employment had already decreased substantially, mostly because of technological advances and shifting consumer demand.
Notably, there was no sudden acceleration of this decline after China joined the WTO. The rate of manufacturing job losses remained consistent with earlier trends, undermining claims that Chinese trade uniquely devastated American manufacturing.
Furthermore, former manufacturing workers generally did not face permanent unemployment. In fact, unemployment rates among this group were lower in recent years compared to the late 1990s, before the peak of Chinese imports. Many workers transitioned successfully into other sectors, belying the notion of an enduring displacement crisis. It’s also worth noting that there are around half a million unfilled manufacturing jobs today.”
…
” evidence from Trump’s first term showed that his tariffs often hurt American firms more than their foreign competitors. With broader and higher tariffs, we can only fear the worst.”
https://reason.com/2025/06/05/no-trade-with-china-did-not-kill-the-u-s-economy/
“Imports are essential to the kits that Levi and his one employee assemble in a warehouse near Charlottesville, Virginia. For example, a kit that teaches kids how to build a small theremin requires a circuit board, resistors, capacitors, bits of wire, and plastic molding to hold batteries and other pieces in place.
“I don’t have millions and millions of dollars to spin up my own circuit board assembly line, and plastic mold injection, and everything,” Levi says.
Though he is running a small, niche operation, Microkits is in many ways a microcosm of American manufacturing. Levi provides the ideas and designs, and he oversees the final assembly of his products in America, but those products combine parts sourced from around the globe.”
https://reason.com/2025/06/06/this-small-business-is-in-limbo-as-owner-sues-to-stop-trumps-tariffs/