Pun Salad

A good review in the WSJ put this book by David Baron on my get-at-library list. It's easy to write off our modern age as one where the unwashed masses believe in utter claptrap, but guess what? The author, David Baron, demonstrates that back in the late 1800s and early 1900s, plenty of Americans got hooked into believing in Martians. And many of those people were well-washed.

Leading the way were the "amateur" astronomers of the day. (By our lights, most scientists back then were amateurs, although very enthusiastic.) The most famous was Percival Lowell, one of the immensely wealthy mill-owning Lowells of Boston. Percival wasn't that interested in mills, but used his fortune to build telescopes and (eventually) observatories, and his attention was concentrated on Mars.

And he reported some astounding news: Mars was an arid, dying, planet, but it had polar icecaps. And a vast network of canals, clearly meant to carry runoff water from those icecaps down to oases at lower latitudes. Clearly, the inhabitants of Mars had built them as a desperate measure to survive.

Although there were critics of this scenario, the public was swept up by Lowell's certainty. Nicola Tesla was also a True Believer, and made serious efforts to communicate with the Martians, either by huge reflecting mirrors or a even bigger radio antenna. H.G. Wells also got in on the craze with (you may have heard) his novel War of the Worlds.

But by the early 1900s, the craze was in decline. Although Lowell remained a believer in his fantasy until he died in 1916, he was increasingly isolated and depressed. (Tesla, as you might know, was even crazier, developing an (um) eccentric attachment to a white New York pigeon that he claimed visited him daily.)

Baron does a good job of getting into Lowell's head. Occasionally his prose gets purple and (perhaps) overly speculative, but that's OK.

Another book picked off the shelves of the Portsmouth (NH) Public Library thanks to its inclusion on the WSJ's list of 2025's Best Mystery Books. The reviewer, Tom Nolan, likes the author, Denise Mina, quite a bit and he says this "may be Ms. Mina’s best book." Alas, my fancy was untickled.

The protagonist, Claudia O’Sheil, is a forensic scientist, and her specialty is the "Blood Spray Probability Scale" (BSPS), a crime scene analysis tool that's brought her fame. By Dickensian coincidence, she is nearby when the grisly murder of an aristocrat and his fiancée is uncovered. (And also, a dog.) Suspicion falls on the wastrel son, but Claudia's not so sure. Even though her BSPS seems to point to him, she's becoming less convinced of its utility. Alas, the son pleads guilty, even though Claudia's increasingly convinced that someone else did the deed.

And she's got other problems of her own. Her husband was recently killed in a seeming auto accident. (Or was it suicide? Or murder?) Her sister is a drug addict. She's worried about the school her two sons will attend. And… well, she's not very sympathetic. Or interesting. Her investigatory efforts seem half-hearted and random.

The book is also full of unexplained Britishisms, most of which I couldn't even figure out from context.

I'm probably wrong. As usual, the book's Amazon page is full of praise.

Andrew Heaton, Reason's game show host, asks his unwary contestant: Is it war?.

Minigripe: Andrew didn't ask the contestant about the First Barbary War.

Also of note:

• I wish Vinay good health and access to whatever drugs he needs to make that happen. The WSJ editorialists note that Vinay Prasad Is Out at the FDA—Again. (WSJ gifted link) And it's hard to see this as anything other than good news:

  Is two times the charm? FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said Friday that Vinay Prasad, who leads the FDA’s biologics division, will leave the agency at the end of April. This is the second time Dr. Prasad is being pushed out of the agency, and to understand why, see his handling of UniQure’s gene therapy for Huntington’s disease.

  We reported in November that the FDA had moved the goal post on UniQure’s treatment. Huntington’s disease afflicts about 40,000 patients in the U.S., and there are no current treatments that slow progression. UniQure’s therapy slowed progression by 75% compared to the natural course of the disease.

  For the record: Pun Salad covered Vinay relatively positively back in early, mostly COVID, days: here, here, here, here, and here. But then things turned to is-this-the-same-guy? land this year: here, here, and here.

  I know: past performance is not a guarantee of future results. Still, it makes me wonder if I'm missing something.

• It's a glum-looking bunch. We don't do a lot of linking to InDepthNH, but this seems to be pretty solid reporting: Protesters Rally Against Free State Project.

  CONCORD, NH — About 100 protesters joined the Kent Street Coalition and other local advocacy groups at the State House on Thursday to protest the Free State Project in New Hampshire, which critics say attempts to influence state politics and dismantle public education.

  Groups such as 50501 NH, Southern NH Indivisible, Granite State Matters, and Third Act NH joined the coalition to oppose the Free State Project, which was formed in 2001. Two years later the state was picked as the best destination to “reinforce and enhance an already existing libertarian culture.” Its mission — which began with the goal of a mass migration of more than 20,000 people — is to expand personal and economic freedom by concentrating liberty-minded people in New Hampshire.

  (I will observe that none of the FSP-hating folks advocated/threatened/promised moving to FSP-free states, like … well pick and choose among approximately 49 others, plus D.C.)

  To his credit, the reporter sought rebuttal quotes from FSP Executive Director Eric Brakey:

  Brakey responded to the criticism and asserted that “there is no such thing as a ‘Free State Agenda.’”

  Brakey said that the group is not a political party and does not operate with a centralized policy platform. He noted it’s a decentralized movement of people who believe the government should be limited to protecting life, liberty, and property. Citing the New Hampshire Liberty Association, he said there are about 100 liberty legislators at the State House, adding that whether they consider themselves Free Staters is “up to them, but they certainly have a lot of support from the Free Staters at the very least.”

  He clarified that not everyone associated with the project runs for office, saying that people have different ideas on how best to promote liberty. He said some build businesses, homeschool networks, and community centers, and that those on the direct political path get a lot of attention “but culture building is equally important.”

• But for the really important NH news… You have to go to Ars Technica, which asks two burning questions. Which of these two arcades is the "world [sic] largest"—and does it matter?

  In New Hampshire, just off the western shore of the vacation destination Lake Winnipesaukee, there’s a town called Laconia. With a population somewhere south of 17,000, it’s barely a blip on a map—except on Bike Week, when around 300,000 motorcyclists swarm the place. On the other, quieter weeks of the year, Laconia is best known as the unlikely home of Funspot, the world’s largest arcade.

  Meanwhile, in Brookfield, Illinois, about 45 minutes west of Chicago and the shores of Lake Michigan, you’ll find Galloping Ghost Arcade, a sprawling suburban palace with a nondescript exterior hiding a mind-blowing collection. With over 1,000 arcade cabinets (plus a further 46 pinball machines), Galloping Ghost is the world’s largest arcade.

  Yes, there are two arcades in the US labeled as the world’s largest, and while that may seem a bit paradoxical, a visit to both proves that while only one can be the biggest, both are the greatest.

  So the answer to the headline questions?

  Yeah, I'm gonna say it: the answer may surprise you.

Recently on the book blog:

I remembered this title earlier this year while reading a very good history book about Michael Faraday and James Clerk Maxwell. It was originally published in 1999, and was part of the "Feynmania" of that era. And I had never read it, and the Portsmouth (NH) Public Library still had a copy on its "530" shelf, so…

It's a 13-chapter hodgepodge of interview transcripts, speeches, talks, magazine articles, etc. And also Feynman's devastating "minority report" on the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, which excoriated NASA's "well, we got away with it this time, so…" attitude toward risk evaluation, criticism that the rest of the Rogers Commission found unable to support. (Or maybe understand.)

The lightly-edited interviews are uneven. Things can get jumbled when you or I think faster than we can talk. Reader, Feynman could think much faster than you or I, and things get very jumbled here on occasion. But still interesting, if you can follow him over the leaps and bounds.

Feynman's famous musing on "cargo cult science" shows up multiple times; he was fascinated by the Pacific natives who tried to keep World War II benefits coming to their islands by crafting aircraft models, runways, control towers, and so on. He saw analogous behavior in some contemporaries, who adopted the superficial aspects of science, but lacked understanding and self-doubt. As his famous quote, aimed at 1974 Caltech grads, goes (included here): "You must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool."

Many chapters here can also be found "out there" on the web. I found my favorite one was a transcript of his 1966 talk to the National Science Teachers Association, "What is Science?" You can read it here. It contains yet another quote that should be more famous: "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts."

In case you haven't seen President Trump's Truth Social post today:

Disclaimer: for my more serious rant, see my: The Right Number of Time Zones is Zero.

Number 4 in Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" is "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules". Or (alternatively) show that someone is using a different book of rules for his side:

Adam Schiff falls right into Bill Maher’s trap as he criticizes a statement he thought was from Trump but was actually from Obama.

MAHER: “This statement from the administration: ‘The president had the constitutional authority to direct the use of military force because he could… pic.twitter.com/5jg3wpdAQZ

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) March 7, 2026

So, good for Maher.

Also of note:

• "Dumb" is actually the nicest thing you can say about it. So Charles C.W. Cooke is being more polite than I would: Anti-Billionaire Sentiment Is Dumb. (archive.today link)

  The current habit of attacking “billionaires” as some problem to be solved — and, more specifically, as the source of all of America’s contemporary problems — is illiterate, intemperate, ungrateful, frivolous, and, above all, dangerous.

  (That's more like it, Charlie. All better adjectives than mere "dumb".)

  A representative question — advanced with all the rhetorical confidence and tragic folly of John Cleese asking, “What have the Romans ever done for us?” — is this:

  What do billionaires contribute to society?

  — Harry Eccles (@Heccles94) March 5, 2026

  Really? Really? I suppose if you believe that the only useful institution in our universe is the government — and, in tandem, that you have convinced yourself that it is never adequately funded — then you might plausibly struggle to answer this. But that’s on you. Extraneous conduct aside, what billionaires have “contributed to society” are the things that made them billionaires in the first instance. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Phil Knight, Jeff Bezos, Eric Schmidt, Walt Disney — these men did not spring up from the earth, fully formed as tremendously rich guys. They created products — computers and phones; shoes and athletic gear; ubiquitous online shopping; retail hardware stores; movies, TV shows, and amusement parks — that other people wanted to pay for. Lots of people. Oodles of people. Millions of people, in fact. And when those millions of people wanted to pay for those products, billions of dollars changed hands. The billionaires got the money, and the buyers — some of whom are now complaining about it — got the products. This was voluntary, virtuous, and, in almost all cases, useful.

  CCWC for the win.

• Don't cry for her, South Dakota. Jim Geraghty performs the indispensible duty of throwing a few more of Kristi's flaws onto the pyre: Kristi Noem Has No One to Blame but Herself. Among (many) other items, Jim puts that Mount Rushmore ad into context:

  You can watch the 60-second DHS ad here. Featuring Noem on horseback at Mount Rushmore and a lot of stock footage, it is utterly indistinguishable from a campaign ad. As Axios put it in October, “The most expensive political ad campaign of the year is being run by the Department of Homeland Security.” For perspective, in 2025, the campaign of Virginia Democrat Abigail Spanberger spent $28.4 million on TV ads, or just under 13 percent of the DHS spending. Except Spanberger spent her donors’ money, and Noem spent ours.

  If that ad campaign had been a television series, it would have ranked among the most expensive series of all time. That’s the total amount in Green Bay Packers quarterback Jordan Love’s contract extension in 2024, when he became the highest-paid player in NFL history to that point. DHS could have bought anywhere from 770 to 880 Lamborghinis for that sum, depending upon the model.

  Now, if you’re skeptical that President Trump would approve a $220 million ad campaign, the president told Reuters that he knew nothing about it.

  Except Kristi testified under oath that he approved it. So either Trump or Kristi's lying. Want to guess who?

• Nothing? Come on, Peter; she gave you something to write about! Peter Suderman asserts (nevertheless): There is nothing positive to say about Kristi Noem's tenure at DHS.

  Noem was let go with a few nice remarks from President Trump and an appointment to a new gig, special envoy for the Shield of Americas. What, exactly, is the Shield of Americas? No one can say for sure. I can't prove that it's a fake, made-up, face-saving appointment. But it sure looks like a fake, made-up, face-saving appointment. Apparently, there's a Shield "summit" at a Trump golf club this weekend.

  Just keep her away from the puppies.

• I can't help but notice that the New York Times is doing clickbait headlines for geezers. Dave Barry gets sucked in by one: Are You Aging Well? 4 Simple Tests to Find Out. (Fun fact: Dave is approximately 3½ years older than I am.)

  I am 78 and a half years old. At this stage of my life, my definition of “aging well” is “still not dead.” Nevertheless I was curious to see what trajectory I’m on, so I clicked on the article, which lists four physical tests you’re supposed to take. The first one is called the “Sitting-Rising Test.” Here’s how the Times describes it:

  The goal with this assessment is to go from standing to sitting on the floor, and back up again, using the least amount of support as possible. The test is scored on a 10-point scale — five points for sitting down and five points for standing up — and you lose a point for every hand, knee or other body part you use to help yourself. Subtract a half point if you’re unsteady or lose your balance.

  So my goal was to get an 8, although I would have settled for a 7, or even, given my advanced age, a 6. I took the test in the privacy of my bedroom, going from standing to sitting on the floor, then back to standing again, using as few body parts as possible to help myself. I don’t mean to brag, but on my very first try, with no practice and without warming up, I scored somewhere around minus 137. There was no way I could keep track of the exact number of body parts I used to help myself get down and back up, but it was definitely most of them, including at one point, I believe, my spleen. Also if you count a bedpost as a body part, my actual score was closer to minus 138.

  I'm not even gonna tell you my score.

Recently on the book blog:

Picked this up at the Portsmouth (NH) Public Library thanks to its inclusion on the WSJ list of 2025's best mysteries (WSJ gifted link). If that's not enough for you, the book's Amazon page will reveal more copious critical praise.

But a mystery? Or even a crime thriller? You may ask yourself those questions until around page 307 of the 386-page hardcover; no mystery, and the crimes, if any, are pretty minor before that. But those last 80 pages are pretty blood-soaked.

The book reminded me somewhat of Tom Wolfe's novels, although the author's politics seem to be a couple miles to the left of Wolfe's. We have a detailed look at the three central characters: (1) Chicky is the titular doorman, working at the "Bohemia" apartment building on Central Park West in Manhattan. An honorable widower who is not just teetering on the edge of financial ruin, he's dropping down the cliffside, hitting every rocky outcropping and cactus on the way down. (2) Emily, living up in Bohemia's apartment 11C and D, is trapped in her marriage to a fantastically wealthy cartoon villain she despises. And (3) Julian, down in the much cheaper (but not cheap) apartment 2A, a "gallerist" (look it up, I had to) who is being edged into irrelevance by changing tastes and has a pretty serious health problem.

For the first 300-or-so pages, there is (of course) some building suspense, as we see hints and foreshadowing of what the book's finale will bring. But it's mostly a (very) well-written examination of the characters' inner lives and their environment. There's plenty of strife (economic, racial, ethnic, social), some steamy sex scenes, infidelity, occasional perversion. Just don't go in expecting a whodunit; keep your eyes open and you'll figure it out before it's revealed.

The Issues & Insights editorialists take on The Man Who Loves To Tax.

Our Headline du Jour is a reference to Isaiah Berlin's essay "The Hedgehog and the Fox" which contained the ancient Greek aphorism: "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing."

And Hedgehog Bernie "knows" one big, albeit delusional, thing: He (and his allies) would spend the wealth of those hated billionaires far more wisely than they do.

I commented on Bernie's latest envy-fueled scheme a couple days ago. But I guess it's time to comment on Bernie himself. Over to you, editorialists:

Also of note:

• I'm really beginning to appreciate the upside of "boring". Vince Gill Vance Ginn pleas: Make Antitrust Boring Again. (NR gifted link)

  The Federal Trade Commission’s recent appeal in its antitrust case against Meta and the government’s new appeal in the Google search case are not just legal headlines. They are signals to capital markets about how political the federal government wants antitrust policy to be.

  If we keep pushing antitrust toward populist storytelling instead of consumer harm, we will get less investment, slower innovation, and weaker competition. Antitrust works best when it is boring. Not toothless, but disciplined.

  In the bad old days of the Biden Administration, conservatives and libertarians were properly scornful of "hipster antitrust". (So was Pun Salad.) If you thought Trump would be better, you were wrong.

• This shouldn't have been an issue. But apparently, Trump would prefer to keep his mitts on his unconstitutional gains. Ilya Somin notes the latest: US Court of International Trade Orders Refund of All Illegally Collected IEEPA Tariffs.

  Today, in the case of Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States, Judge Richard K. Eaton of the US Court of International Trade ordered the Trump Administration to refund all tariffs illegally collected by the Trump Administration using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA). On Monday, in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump, the case I helped bring that led to the invalidation of the IEEPA tariffs by the Supreme Court, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit unanimously rejected the Trump Administration's efforts to delay lower-court proceedings on repayment. It is notable that all 11 judges of the en banc Federal Circuit agreed, including the four who voted against us on the merits when the Federal Circuit ruled on the case last year.

  The federal government owes some $175 billion in tariff refunds to importers who paid them, and they repeatedly promised they would refund them money if they lost the case - a point which was crucial to their argument that appellate courts should stay the trial court injunction blocking further illegal tariff collection, while the litigation proceeded. Each month the government delays repayment costs taxpayers some $700 million in accumulated interest payments.

  $700 million would buy a lot of drones and torpedos. Just sayin'.

• "Better" shouldn't be hard. "Good" might be harder. The WaPo editorialists had a wistful observation on Wednesday evening, 6:53PM: It would be easier to fund DHS with better leadership. (WaPo gifted link)

  As government extends its powers more deeply into everyday life, it becomes less effective at everything. That annoyance becomes dangerous when the state isn’t entirely capable of its most important job: providing basic security and stability. Consider the Department of Homeland Security, which isn’t fully funded and lacks the leadership and credibility to effectively make the case for more money.

  With conflict in the Middle East increasing the risk for terrorism in the homeland, it’d be nice if DHS was fully functional. But the department has faced a gap in funding since Feb. 14, which has left critical agencies short staffed. DHS Secretary Kristi L. Noem tried to persuade lawmakers to end the partial government shutdown this week, and it didn’t go well.

  Yeah, we heard. And, unfortunately for Kristi, so did her boss. Robby Soave has yesterday's news: Trump fires Kristi Noem from DHS.

  President Donald Trump is replacing Kristi Noem, the embattled secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), due to mounting concerns about her performance, including from many Republicans.

  In a Thursday Truth Social post announcing her successor—Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin—Trump thanked Noem for her service and said she would serve as special envoy for the Shield of the Americas, a new security initiative that has yet to be formally unveiled. But the face-saving appointment does not change the fact that Trump has effectively fired Noem as DHS head.

  Apparently she will be hanging around D.C. for a while, drawing a salary. North (oops) South Dakota puppies are safe for now.

• Somedays I despair that we've learned nothing from his entire oeuvre. Jeff Maurer is baffled: Did We Learn Nothing From Jeff Goldblum’s Speech in Jurassic Park?

  The war in Iran has me thinking a lot about Jeff Goldblum’s speech in the 1993 arthouse film Jurassic Park. And I don’t mean Goldblum’s “your scientists didn’t stop to think if they should speech”, or his “we’ll give the alien a cold” speech, which was actually from Independence Day. I’m talking about the speech in which Goldblum explains chaos theory while not-so-subtly informing Sam Neill’s character that he could totally bang his wife if he wanted to.

  He's talking about this:

  Small correction: Google tells me that Laura Dern's and Sam Neill’s characters "were not married, but they were in a committed, romantic relationship. "

  And I don't think Goldblum's Jurassic Park observations compare to his response to a question posed by a bunch of college girls in the 1977 movie Between the Lines: "Whither rock and roll?"

  Goldblum's character responded: "The only real answer to the question … is "hither". Some misguided people think that the answer is "thither", they're wrong, those theories are passé."

  Also he points out: "They say that Rock & Roll is here to stay. But where? Certainly not at my place, it's too small."

Matthew Hennessey tries to inspire my (lame) inner Alan Jay Lerner with his headline at Free Expression: Trump Will Abstain From Trade With Spain. (WSJ gifted link)

Furthermore:

Well, I've never been to Spain, but I kinda like the music. (There are also rumors about the mental stability of their females.)

Also of note:

• At least she didn't lie about her lies about her lies. Jacob Sullum detects only one level of meta-dishonesty: In Senate testimony on DHS shootings, Kristi Noem lies about her lies.

  After Department of Homeland Security (DHS) employees fatally shot Minneapolis protester Alex Pretti on January 24, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem claimed he was "brandishing" a gun and "attacked those officers." She also said Pretti "committed an act of domestic terrorism."

  None of that was true, as bystander video immediately showed. But when given the opportunity to correct the record during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday, Noem instead lied about what she had said. Her obfuscation and dishonesty provoked angry rebukes not only from the Democrats on the committee but also from Sen. Thom Tillis (R–N.C.), who reiterated his recommendation that she resign.

  Senator TIllis was also disturbed by less recent history:

  “Secretary, I read your book last week, and honestly, some of the parts of it impressed me, but some of it distresses me,” he said.

  “You talk about killing a dog that was 14 months old. I train dogs, all right, and you are a farmer, you should know better. You should know that if you’re going out to a hunting lodge and you’re putting pheasants out and you’re putting dogs out, you don’t take a puppy out there. A 14-month-old dog is basically a teenager in dog years. You decided to kill that dog because you had not invested the appropriate time in training. And then you have the audacity to go into a book and say it’s a leadership lesson about tough choices,” he said.

  Shoulda been a red flag back in her confirmation hearings.

• Not only a dishonest puppy-killer, but also corrupt. Tag-teaming against Kristi at Reason is Autumn Billings: DHS Spent $220 Million on Ads Featuring Kristi Noem. Both Parties Grilled Her About It in the Senate.

  During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem was grilled by Republicans and Democrats alike over $220 million in taxpayer-funded contracts for an advertising campaign that prominently features the secretary herself. The no-bid contracts circumvented the normal competitive process and were secretly awarded to a company with close ties to Noem and her political operations.

  Republican Sen. John Kennedy from Louisiana pushed the secretary during the hearing on the fiscal responsibility and wisdom of spending taxpayer money on the ads that greatly enhanced Noem's name recognition, such as this one obtained by ProPublica featuring her on horseback at Mount Rushmore. Noem testified that the campaign is meant to tell undocumented immigrants to leave the country or face deportation and was signed off on by President Donald Trump. But Kennedy said it was hard for him to believe that Trump or those at the Office of Management and Budget would have agreed to this kind of campaign.

  And for your viewing pleasure (because you paid for it, sucker):

  It was not revealed if she shot the horse after the ad was made.

• For the 145th time. Veronique de Rugy explains: Why Health Care Is So Expensive in America, and What to Do About It.

  America's health care system consistently ranks as the most expensive in the developed world. It's not, as some politicians claim, expensive because markets have failed. It's expensive because the market has been repeatedly blocked from succeeding. Until we're honest about that, any potential reforms will only address symptoms while ignoring the disease.

  The health care market is hindered in many ways, but the core structural problem is simple: The person receiving care is almost never the person actually paying for it. Roughly 90 cents of every dollar is covered by a third party — an insurer or the government.

  Getting rid of the notorious tax exemption for employer-provided health insurance would be ideal, but Vero realizes that's a political non-starter. So she recommends Health Savings Accounts, under control of the consumer.

It's a great quote, and that's a nice picture Amazon will sell you, but there's no evidence Thomas Jefferson ever actually said that. (Gerald Ford did, though.)

There's currently a push to get government working on taking away everything you have, though. Actually giving you everything you want? Or anything you want? That's in the works. They promise.

On that theme today, let's first look at Daniel J. Mitchell, who outlines The Nightmare Scenario Leading to a Wealth Tax. Far more likely than you or I would like:

Daniel's post is link-filled. Specifically, he looks at one recent actual proposal, described by Ira Stoll at the Free Beacon: Sanders, Khanna Unveil $4.4 Trillion Tax Increase.

Needless to say, it's a horrible idea, should be plainly unconstitutional (an uncompensated "taking" banned by the Fifth Amendment), and fueled by the worst kind of demagoguery.

And, as Jack Nicastro poionts out, there's an additional small problem: The Sanders-Khanna 'billionaire tax' would make all Americans poorer. Excerpt, with some basic econ:

Another point, not particularly subtle: assets automatically become less valuable if they can be arbitrarily expropriated by "legal" thieves. The money that might be raised from a wealth tax would prove highly evanescent.

Also of note:

• Shame on me. I've read a lot about Adam Smith (example), but not anything by him. Helen Dale urges me to mend my ways: Adam Smith’s Gift.

  Smith thought people could morally improve themselves in part by entering imaginatively into other people’s perspectives, in part by stepping outside their own perspectives and taking, as my mother used to say, a good long look at themselves. I could do the former, often in a way redolent of the Robbie Burns couplet: O wad some Power the giftie gie us, To see oursels as ithers see us! Observe, in embryo, the future novelist.

  All imaginative fiction depends on writers being the eyes for other people, something quite unnerving for those on the receiving end of such focused attention. One friend of mine—on recognising herself in one of my published short stories—told me years later that it was like someone had turned her upside down and gone through the contents of her pockets, but without once touching her. She also asked me not to do it again.

  I’ve come to call this the gift of noticing, and it’s something at which Smith excels. Go back and re-read his description of the pin factory in Wealth of Nations if you haven’t done so for a while. Hold it in your head alongside Charles Dickens, say, in Hard Times, describing machines in a mill as “melancholy mad elephants, polished and oiled up for the day’s monotony … at their heavy exercise again.”

• What does it take to be a "researcher" at Harvard’s Global Education Innovation Initiative? River Page invites us to Meet the Internet’s New Iran Expert—Who Thinks the Illuminati Runs the World. River notes that Xueqin Jiang is (indeed) listed as a researcher at that prestigious institution. And he's received a lot of attention lately. Including:

  On Monday, Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti, hosts of the popular daily news podcast Breaking Points, spoke to Jiang in an interview that seemed somewhat reasonable—until it wasn’t. Jiang said that he thought President Donald Trump was acting hubristically in Iran because of his success in Venezuela, predicted that the U.S. would send ground troops into Iran, and opined on what the effects of decreased investment from the under-fire Gulf States could mean for the U.S. economy. Then things got more interesting.

  “The last factor that is very important is an eschatological factor,” Jiang said, veering the conversation into territory that was unprompted by the hosts. “If you look at the Epstein files, it’s clear that we are run by secret societies. It’s clear that the world is run by these individuals who have a lot of power. We don’t know who they are, but they control the military. They control the national security apparatus. There are different names for these people. You can call them the Illuminati. And the Illuminati are composed of three major groups, okay? You have the Jesuits, who control the Vatican. You have the Sabbatean Frankists, which control the modern state of Israel today. And you have the Freemasons, which control the national security apparatus of the United States, and they believe that Israel, this war in the Middle East, is key to the end times, in creating heaven on Earth.”

  He has a Wikipedia page, but it doesn't mention this. Yet.