“If you want to create a black market in a perfectly legal product, just make regulations and taxes so onerous that many people prefer to buy from illegal vendors to escape being hassled and mugged by the powers that be. As a new study reveals, that’s certainly the case with cigarettes, which remain available for sale across the United States but with much of the trade continuing to involve smokes smuggled from one jurisdiction to another. Since busybody politicians refuse to learn from the ongoing trade, this is a tempting business opportunity for risk-tolerant entrepreneurs as well as low-tax jurisdictions.”
…
“”As tax rates increase, consumers and suppliers search for ways around these costs. In cigarette markets, consumers tend to shop across borders where the tax rates are lower and dealers develop black and gray markets to sell illegally to consumers, paying little or no tax at all.””
…
“At $3.51 per pack, Massachusetts isn’t even the most heavily taxed state when it comes to cigarettes, nor does it have the largest black market in tobacco products. That honor belongs to New York, which last year raised its tax rate to $5.35 per pack (New York City adds another $1.50).
“New York has the highest inbound smuggling activity, with an estimated 54.3 percent of cigarettes consumed in the state deriving from smuggled sources in 2022,” note Hoffer and Macumber-Rosin. “New York is followed by California (46.7 percent), New Mexico (41.2 percent), Massachusetts (39.7 percent), and Washington (36.8 percent).”
The cigarette-tax study authors add that because their tax rates drive people to purchase their smokes from illicit dealers, high-tax states suffered a revenue hit in 2022 of more than $5 billion. Since 2007, they’ve lost out on more than $79 billion.”
“The FTC’s stated motivation for challenging the merger was to avoid “higher prices for groceries and other essential household items for millions of Americans.””
…
“Kroger and Albertsons would still only account for 9 percent of overall grocery sales, as C. Jarrett Dieterle has noted in Reason, belying the FTC’s concerns that the merger would grant them significant market power. The FTC’s overly narrow definition of the grocery market is the actual cause of concern: The Commission’s definition includes traditional supermarkets and “hypermarkets” like Walmart and Target, but excludes Amazon and Costco, the second and third largest grocery retailers, respectively.
Considering Kroger’s and Albertsons’ single-digit shares of the properly defined market, and competition from other grocers not recognized by the FTC, the merger was more likely to save Albertsons from insolvency, not afford them enough market power to increase prices. Kroger and Albertsons projected the merger would create $500 million in cost savings—at least some of which would be passed onto consumers. The pair also planned to invest $1.3 billion to improve customer service, according to Nate Scherer, a policy analyst with the American Consumer Institute, a nonprofit research institute dedicated to the promotion of consumer welfare.”
“Kits package together some unregulated parts. But the mechanism that makes a gun go “bang” is regulated and must either pass through the same channels as a commercially manufactured firearm or else be constructed from scratch or from unfinished blanks. That’s not necessarily difficult, but it means there’s really no magic legislative wand that can be waved to make DIY guns disappear.
After the high-profile assassination of a political figure in 2022, Reuters’ Ju-min Park and Daniel Leussink reported, “the man suspected of killing former Japanese premier Shinzo Abe with a hand-made gun on Friday could have made the weapon in a day or two after obtaining readily available materials such as wood and metal pipes, analysts say. The attack showed gun violence cannot be totally eliminated even in a country where tough gun laws mean it is nearly unheard of for citizens to buy or own firearms.”
The weapon the assassin used in Japan was a crude but effective two-shot firearm that looked more like an old-fashioned zip gun than the 3D-printed pistol used to kill Thompson. But while not pretty, it was just as effective.
In 2019, TheFirearmBlog published a retrospective pointing out that during the zip gun heyday in the 1950s, “a mechanically inclined youngster might upon obtaining ammunition, most often widely available .22 rimfire, find that such rounds will fit into a section of suitably sized steel tubing, often a section of the salvaged car radio antenna. From then on it is a simple matter of fabricating a means of striking the rear of the cartridge while ensuring the entire assembly is held firmly together.” The article included photographs of homemade firearms discovered in the tightly controlled confines of prisons, crafted by inmates from found materials including pipes and plumbing fittings.”
…
“A 2018 Small Arms Survey report on improvised and craft-produced weapons noted that such “weapons have been manufactured for as long as firearms have existed, typically by hand or in small workshops.” Among the weapons manufactured by craft producers, the authors noted, are “mortars, recoilless guns, and grenade launchers.”
Revisiting the subject last year in the context of Europe, Small Arms Survey noted that evolving technologies make it much easier to share plans for privately manufactured firearms and to create sophisticated devices at home without specialized skills.”
…
“In September, Lizzie Dearden and Thomas Gibbons-Neff wrote for The New York Times about the worldwide proliferation of designs for the FGC-9, a partially 3D-printed weapon that can “be built entirely from scratch, without commercial gun parts, which are often regulated and tracked by law enforcement agencies internationally.”
As one expert told the reporters: “Now you have something that people can make at home with unregulated components. So from a law enforcement perspective, how do you stop that?””
LC: Yes, some people will always be able to build their own deadly weapons. But, most people can’t or won’t. Most gun deaths are from people who have the deadly weapon because it is easily accessible, not because they were determined to build the weapon by whatever means necessary.
“Zoning cops have a knack for blocking affordable housing, but in Troy, New York, regulators greenlit an 11-unit apartment building on a vacant lot. Just as construction was about to kick off, however, the project ran up against a different, familiar hurdle.
Concerned neighbors—who already have housing—filed a lawsuit to keep outsiders out. Rather than challenge the developer directly, the project opponents instead took the city to court, insisting regulators hadn’t done enough research before granting a zoning change. The city won a trial court victory in 2023, but opponents appealed and scored a reversal on October 24, 2024.
What have the “concerned citizens” given as reason for legal action? Evidence of a nearby quarry allegedly used by Native Americans in the distant past. Strangely, proximity to this site was not an issue when these residents secured housing for themselves. The “high archaeological sensitivity,” as they frame it, came later.
New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) makes it easy for citizens to stall or kill housing in New York with almost any excuse they can cook up. Courts can be swayed by vague concepts like “community” or “neighborhood character.” Project opponents can even cite generic concerns without showing specific harm.
In Guilderland, New York, a citizen group raised alarms about global climate change when developers proposed five apartment buildings and a Costco. This group, represented by the same lawyer now working to derail housing in Troy, won at the trial court level. But an appellate court reversed the decision in 2022 noting that construction would result in less driving, not more, producing a net gain for air quality.
But these NIMBY (“not in my backyard”) activists don’t need a win in court to achieve their goals. Even when they lose, they can use SEQRA to freeze construction for months or longer. In Old Westbury, Long Island, developers waited 25 years for permission to build religious facilities. The legal labyrinth is also expensive. SEQRA litigation added $2 million to a single housing project in Hempstead, New York.”
“America needs minerals like copper and silver to make things. Even President Joe Biden made a speech saying America will need 400-600 percent more such minerals to make “solar panels, wind turbines, and so much more!”
An iPhone alone requires aluminum, iron, lithium, gold, copper.
But when investors dare try to dig up such minerals in America, the NRDC objects and uses political connections to stop them.
Twenty years ago, entrepreneurs tried to open a mine in Alaska. Before they even got the application in, the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) vetoed it.
Why? Because groups like the NRDC say the mine “would be a catastrophic threat to the wildlife and…fragile ecosystem.”
They get their way because when Democrats run the EPA, they not only support NRDC’s positions, they even hire NRDC employees.
The next Republican administration removed the EPA’s veto. The Army Corps of Engineers then studied the mine and concluded that it wasn’t an environmental threat.
So, is Pebble a bustling mine today? No.
Democrats got elected and vetoed it again.
Physicist Mark Mills wonders why anyone would try to open a mine in America today. “Why in the world would you put millions, maybe billions of dollars at risk, spending those decades to get a permit, knowing there’s a very good chance they’ll just cancel a permit? How in the world do you build mines in America knowing that that’s the landscape you have?”
Well, you don’t.
America now ranks second to last in the time it takes to develop a new mine—roughly 29 years. Only Zambia is worse.
“You start applying for permits,” says Mills, “You’re going to be waiting not months, not years, but decades!”
Waiting while the NRDC sues and runs frightening anti-mine ads, saying nature will be “destroyed by a 2,000-foot gaping hole in the ground!”
Mills points out their deceit. Today’s mines disturb “a tiny infinitesimal pinprick in the landscape” and we do need to disturb the landscape a little, because “we need metals and materials and minerals to build everything that exists to make society possible!”
I confronted NRDC spokesman Bob Deans, saying the NRDC killing mines also kills people’s opportunity. He responded that “clean” energy creates jobs.
“We created 50,000 new jobs in this country, putting up wind turbines, solar panels, building the next generation of energy efficient cars. This is where the future is!”
“But also, you need copper and gold,” I point out.
“That’s right,” says Deans, “And we have to weigh those risks.”
But the NRDC doesn’t weigh the risks. They just oppose American mines.”
“absent a comprehensive permitting reform bill that shrinks the role of the federal government, developers in the U.S. will be unable to rapidly build out power generation to meet future demand.”
“The biggest housing issue on the California ballot was rent control. Proposition 33 would have repealed all state-level limits on local rent control policies, thus giving cities and counties a free hand to regulate rents however they pleased.
The measure went down in flames on Election Day, with roughly 60 percent of voters casting a “no” ballot.
That result is good news for the availability of rental housing in California, given rent control’s well-documented history of reducing rental housing supply and quality.
It is nevertheless a somewhat surprising result. California has a much higher proportion of renters than most other states and polls consistently find that rent control is supported by a wide majority of respondents. Dozens of cities already have rent control policies on the books.”
…
“Prop. 36 asked California voters if they wanted to increase legal penalties for certain drug and theft crimes. With roughly 70 percent of ballots counted, some 70 percent of voters said yes they do. Prop. 36 has earned majority support in every single county in the state.”
“Large banks will have to cap overdraft fees charged when customers try to withdraw more money than is available in their accounts, the CFPB announced Thursday. Under the new rule, which has been in development since early this year, banks will be allowed to charge no more than $5 for overdraft fees, or will have to set fees to ensure they are only covering costs and not earning a profit from them.
There are currently no limits on those fees, and the average overdraft fee is about $35, according to the CFPB. The bureau estimates that the new rule will save consumers about $5 billion annually.
But there will certainly be some unintended consequences to the change, as there are any time a price control—which is, broadly speaking, what this rule amounts to—is mandated. Rather than charging overdraft fees to cover an excessive withdrawal, banks may revert to the older practice of simply declining those transactions.
As Jon Berlau, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, explained to the CFPB in 2022, the introduction of overdraft fees was originally a consumer-friendly development that was initially offered only to bank’s wealthier clients but eventually became commonplace.
Indeed, many banking customers would likely prefer paying a nominal fee versus the frustration of not being able to pay for some vital purchase. That choice might soon be taken away.”
“European countries take a much more precautionary approach to additives in their food, Benesh says. “If there are doubts about whether a chemical is safe or if there’s no data to back up safety, the EU is much more likely to put a restriction on that chemical or just not allow it into the food supply at all.”
In the US, we’re more likely to see action at the state level. California banned four chemicals in 2023: brominated vegetable oil, Red Dye No. 3, propylparaben, and potassium bromate. This year, lawmakers in about a dozen states have introduced legislation banning those same chemicals and, in some states, additional chemicals as well. But federal oversight has been limited, constrained by priorities, authority, and by a lack of resources.”