Renaissance dad

San Diego
Joined May 2009
You know what else could protect American troops from regional threats? Removing the troops from the region.
BREAKING: AIPAC says closer U.S.-Israel military ties could help protect American troops from regional threats.
4
50
648
Your perspective on a lot of things will change once you realize that prices are going up because the value of the currency being used is going down.
53
88
2
683
6,630
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
Bernie is the establishment. He’s spent decades in government demanding more state power to double down on the same spending, subsidies, regulations, and interventions that helped make housing, education and healthcare so expensive in the first place. His shtick is remarkably durable: government fails, blame whoever has something worth taking, then prescribe more government. If young people want someone to resent, they might start with the politicians who’ve spent a generation expanding an incompetent system and handing them the bill. In almost any other industry, Bernie’s record would get him fired. In politics, he survives, and quite comfortably, by selling the failures of his own prescriptions as arguments for more of them.
YOUNG PEOPLE ARE FIGHTING BACK Young people understand that, in the richest country on Earth, there is no rational reason why their generation should face a lower standard of living than their parents. And they’re fighting back. Progressives are winning across the country because young people are increasingly involved in the political process. They’re knocking on doors, making phone calls and voting in record numbers for progressive candidates. They understand that healthcare is a human right, that we should invest in affordable housing and not endless wars, that we should make public colleges and universities tuition-free and that AI must benefit all of humanity, not just Big Tech oligarchs. The establishment wants people to believe politics is hopeless, that they have all the money and therefore they have all the power. But across the country, a new generation is proving them wrong.
9
44
1
207
3,007
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
Replying to @DA_Stockman
@WeTheBrandon Hmm...I wonder what happened in August 1971.
3
7
20
1,267
Over the past 34 years, healthcare has replaced manufacturing as the top employer in the vast majority of states.
755
1,754
506
6,923
3,721,384
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
When people complain about “capitalism,” they’re usually pointing at bailouts, regulatory capture, corporate subsidies, monopolies protected by the state, and firms lobbying for special treatment. Those aren’t failures of free-market capitalism they’re examples of political privilege distorting markets. Calling that capitalism is like calling mercantilism free trade. The real failure of economists wasn’t failing to explain capitalism. It was spending decades defending “markets” while avoiding the obvious: a lot of what gets sold to the public as capitalism is actually state-backed privilege wearing a market costume.
Economists have done such a poor job explaining free-market capitalism that we're now re-litigating it with a generation taught socialism is preferable. It's like the medical profession having to convince people bloodletting isn't good medicine and to stop asking for leeches
29
69
3
474
14,942
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
I'm tired of hearing that "the benefits of AI must be broadly distributed" and therefore we need government to intervene. AI benefits will be more broadly and rapidly distributed than any tech in history. Everyone will have access to amazing tutoring, genius medical advice, and an army of helpful assistants—things that were previously available only to the super-wealthy. The people who create the most valuable forms of AI will deserve to make a fortune on it—and that fortune will reflect the level of benefit they've brought to the world. All the ideas for the government to "broadly distribute" the benefits of AI are terrible. Nationalize AI companies, so that progress can crater? Own a percentage of certain AI companies, so government can become even more corrupt and meddling in picking winners and losers? Seize AI companies' future earnings, so that more people can become dependent on government handouts? Government's job regarding AI is fundamentally simple: 1. Modify laws or enforcement practices to handle cases where AI can be used to violate people's rights (e.g., new types of fraud). 2. Protect companies' and individuals' right to pursue AI as they judge best—including to build the life-giving data centers that are now under attack. To do my part to ensure that AI is pursued in a pro-human, pro-freedom way, I have begun work on my next book: The Moral Case for Data Centers.
48
78
14
412
44,792
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
The interest rate is not the price of money. It is the price of time. This distinction wrecks most of what you learned in your macro class. The mainstream tells a story where the interest rate emerges from a market for "loanable funds," a pool that grows when people save and shrinks when they borrow, with banks acting as neutral middlemen matching one to the other. Tidy. And wrong at its foundation, because it treats the rate as a monetary phenomenon rather than what it actually reflects: the ratio at which human beings value present goods over future goods. Economists call this time preference. You call it the reason you'd rather have a steak dinner tonight than the same steak dinner promised next December. Here is where the story gets dangerous. Under sound money, savings and investment stay tethered. You defer consumption, real resources free up, the rate falls to reflect that people are willing to wait, and entrepreneurs stretch production into longer, more roundabout processes. The rate is a signal telling producers how far into the future the public actually wants them to reach. Now hand a central bank the power to conjure credit from nothing. Ben Bernanke's Fed dropped the funds rate to near zero in December 2008 and pinned it there for seven years. No new savings appeared. No one deferred a single dinner. The signal was simply falsified. That falsification is the whole ballgame. When the rate drops because the Fed printed reserves rather than because you saved, entrepreneurs read a message the public never sent. They break ground on projects that require real capital which does not exist. The boom feels marvelous. It is a mirage built on a corrupted price. Mises worked this out in 1912. Hayek refined it into the theory that won him the Nobel in 1974. Neither got a serious hearing from the people who set rates, which tells you something about what central banking is for. The loanable funds model survives not because it explains the world; it survives because it allows certain men to print money.
26
131
10
380
8,213
My sons both worked at that age and are still good workers decades later. Working for money when young is good experience.
You wonder what went wrong with young people who leave college without a clue about how the world works and then run to HR with endless complaints. In the old days, 60% of 16-19 year olds held jobs. Now only a third do. This is a disaster.
1
38
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
'The Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck—a socialist, mind you—[wrote]: “In many cases rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”' Very good @JonahDispatch on tiredness of 'new' DSA ideas thedispatch.com/article/mamd…
43
375
15
1,392
61,163
If Trump or Bernie Sanders want to do something about the high cost of health insurance, here is one place to start.
My wife and I own a pharmacy. Last month we spent days trying to pry one prescription loose from a company that did everything it could to hold onto it. The drug was everolimus. A generic. It treats cancer and protects transplant patients from rejecting their new organ. Not exotic. Not rare. A pill. The patient wanted it filled with us because we're cash-pay and cost-plus. No insurance. No PBM. No secret markups, no games. Our price was $318. That's not cheap by our standards — most of what we fill runs under $20 — but it was honest. Here's what that same prescription looked like on the other side of the counter. In 2023, Medicare was paying about $6,645 for it. That's roughly 21 times our price for the identical medication. Medicare spent around $240 million on everolimus alone that year. If they'd paid our price, they'd have saved roughly $230 million. On one generic drug. So how does an insurance company profit off a drug that expensive? Don't they pay for it? No. You pay for it. In your premiums. Their job isn't to spend less — it's to keep your healthcare dollars circulating inside their own companies. And the tool they use is called spread pricing. Spread pricing works like this: the middleman bills the health plan one price, pays the pharmacy a lower one, and keeps the difference. You never see it. On TRICARE, they pay an independent pharmacy like mine about $311 to fill everolimus. That barely covers our cost of the drug. Meanwhile the plan gets billed thousands. That gap — north of $6,000 on a single fill — is pure margin the middleman pockets. Now here's the part they'd rather you not think about. The pharmacy we were fighting was Accredo. Accredo is owned by Express Scripts. Express Scripts is the pharmacy benefit manager owned by Cigna. Same company, three masks. That nesting-doll structure isn't an accident — it's the whole design. When the pharmacy, the PBM, and the insurer are all one entity, they can shuffle money between their own pockets and call it whatever they want. The confusion is the product. And this isn't a story about one weird drug. It's the business model. The FTC has been digging into exactly this. In its January 2025 report on the three biggest PBMs — CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and OptumRx — staff found those companies marked up specialty generic drugs by hundreds and thousands of percent when dispensing through their own affiliated pharmacies. Just those markups generated more than $7.3 billion above what the drugs actually cost to acquire, from 2017 to 2022. One in five of the specialty generics they studied was marked up over 1,000%. Some cancer generics: over 3,000%. On top of that, the FTC pegged spread pricing on those same drugs at another $1.4 billion. One example straight from the FTC's files: dimethyl fumarate, a multiple sclerosis drug. Costs about $177 to acquire. The PBMs paid their own pharmacies close to $4,000 for a 30-day supply. Same trick. Different drug. And they steer the profitable ones to themselves on purpose. Pharmacies affiliated with the big three took in 68% of specialty dispensing revenue in 2023 — up from 54% in 2016. The prescriptions marked up more than $1,000 disproportionately end up at their own pharmacies, not independents like mine. So when we called to transfer this patient's everolimus to be filled without insurance, it landed like we were asking them to set $6,000 on fire. Of course they stonewalled us. That's why we fired them. No insurance means no invisible $6,000 charge buried in a premium you can't itemize. It means the price you see is the price. Ours was $318. Theirs was thousands. Same pill.
17
This is the true history of Spirit. Having Trump squander more money on Spirit will not turn back the clock on the Biden admin’s bad policy.
Replying to @nickgillespie
The story of 'not being allowed to merge' as the cause of Spirit's failure isn't quite right, although a different Biden administration antitrust action is a better fit. 1. JetBlue needed Spirit in order to grow in Boston, New York and Fort Lauderdale at the same time. They had a partnership with American Airlines that gave them slots to finally expand in New York, but they didn't have the planes and pilots to take advantage of that without ceding ground elsewhere. 2. The Biden administration sued to break up the American Airlines-JetBlue partnership that had previously been approved under the first Trump administration. That was legal (DOT entered into a settlement with the airlines, but that wasn't binding on DOJ) but a rule of law problem. And it was a bad antitrust theory that treated jointly deciding who would fly where as per se illegal, rather than looking at consumer benefit or total competition in the market (the JetBlue-American partnership created a 3rd viable competitor to United and Delta in New York). 3. When the Biden administration killed the American-JetBLue deal, JetBlue-Spirit no longer made sense. JetBlue management was committed though and stuck with it. Losing that deal in court helped JetBlue. 4. JetBlue hasn't made money in six years. They are shrinking to stem losses. If they'd completed the Spirit deal they would've been financially worse off, with a lot more to shrink. The deal would've gotten Spirit shareholders paid, but wouldn't have meant those planes and pilots would still be flying for JetBlue. The Biden administration went after JetBlue-American and *that* is what killed the chance for Spirit, as much as killing JetBlue's deal to buy them. And the JetBlue-American antitrust action was worse because it wasn't just an example of government trying to mold the market the way they wanted to see it and failing (they wanted Spirit's 200 planes all flying in an ultra-low cost model, even Spirit's optimistic plan now has 60% of those planes gone). And it wasn't just an example of bad antitrust law that shifted away from the consumer. It was a shot against the rule of law, where government signoff in one administration can no longer be relied upon in the next. That was the airline antitrust case that brought us here, not the simple story everyone tells.
2
21
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
On page twenty-six of “The Billionaire Tax” proposal in California, it explains how the state legislature can convert from a Billionaire Tax to an Everyone Tax without voter approval. They can also adjust the tax to be a yearly tax, not just one time…again, without your approval. Intelligence test for you: if this was meant to just target Billionaires, why did they write this in?
The Billionaire Tax is actually an Everyone Tax. The Billionaire Tax is a new tax proposal written by four professors who don't believe in the American dream. Some of them aren’t even American…go figure. Despite its name, it applies to every California resident who currently has assets or ever will. The creators named it the Billionaire Tax so you would get into a froth andwouldn't look closely at what it actually does to you. On page twenty-six, it explains how the government can convert to an Everyone Tax without voter approval. They can also adjust the tax to be a yearly tax, not just one time…again, without your approval. Here's how the tax would work: As a voter, you're being asked to approve a tax that would require you to: 1. list all your assets and the value of each, then submit them to the California Franchise Tax Board. 2. authorize the tax board to appraise your assets and confirm the value of each. 3. pay a penalty of up to forty percent of your tax bill if the board determines your reported value was too low in their opinion. 4. allow the tax board to subpoena your financial records from every one of your financial institutions for auditing. This Everyone Tax runs 34 pages of shifty language describing how the government plans to take your assets. Read the fine print and decide for yourself. If this were truly a billionaire tax, it would be 3 pages. It’s 34 pages so that it can create the mechanisms to steal from all of you.
1,157
9,146
562
35,146
4,380,268
1
9
34
462
Property Rights: The Root Cause of the Palestinian/Israeli Conflict The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the inevitable result of the destruction of a centuries-old system of private property rights and its replacement by race-based state ownership. Since 1947, property rights in Palestine have been replaced by a government agency that owns the majority of land, constantly steals more, never sells, and only leases land to one racial group. Religious and racial conflict are not destined in Palestine; they are historically rare occurrences, but this system of property rights would create violent conflict anywhere. In 1945, the British mandate government surveyed land ownership in Palestine and found that Jews owned 5.67% of the total land, while Muslims, Christians & other denominations owned 48.31% of the land. The remaining 46.02% was public land, mainly in the sparsely inhabited desert in the south, most of which was de facto owned by the Bedouins who herded there. Among the privately-owned lands, only 10.5% was owned by Jews, while 89.5% was owned by non-Jews. There was not a single district in Palestine in which Jews owned a majority of the land, as this illustration makes clear.[1] In 1917, when the Balfour Declaration was issued, the Jewish population ranged from 4% to 13%. In 1945, the population of Palestine was 1,764,520, of which 69% were Muslim and Christian, and 31% were Jewish.[2] The majority of the Jewish population was recent immigrants from Europe, many illegal. Even after decades of legal and illegal immigration, land purchases financed by European benefactors, and terrorism against Palestinian civilians and British forces, the Zionist movement had less than a third of the population of Palestine, and owned less than 6% of its land when it established its ethnostate. To establish an ethnostate on a land in which the right ethnicity was less than a third of the population, and owned less than a twelfth of the land, Zionist terrorists engaged in a premeditated and systematic campaign of terrorism, murder, and violent expulsion, meticulously planned from the 1930s, ruthlessly executed against a largely unarmed population, and practically continuing until this day, explaining the conflict’s longevity. This has been extensively documented by Palestinian historians, such as Walid Khalidi and Rashid Khalidi, as well as by Israeli historians like Ilan Pappe and Benny Morris.[3] [Continues in next tweet]
145
917
100
3,479
2,785,573
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
When voices are shut out, we lose something important. As America nears 250 years, this lesson remains. Free societies are not built on silencing speech, but on engaging with it.
12
47
2
149
7,993
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
The two parties are a complete scam. The Republicans are not the party of 'limited government,' and 'lower taxes.' Both parties represent Israel First and endless imperial wars. And yet, every day, average Americana waste their breath bickering and fighting for Team Red or Team Blue. It's the same team that is eating everyone's lunch.
58
214
16
630
8,461
Stephen Wolfe retweeted
Environmentalist logic, documented: Cow farts: climate catastrophe Private jet to climate conference: necessary travel Cow eating grass: unsustainable Almonds draining aquifers: plant-based progress Cow using rainfall: water consumption Soy monoculture requiring pesticides, herbicides, and fertiliser: environmentally conscious Cow on permanent pasture: destroying the earth Quinoa shipped 6,000 miles from the Bolivian altiplano: ethical choice Cow producing manure that grows the grass that feeds the cow: waste Plastic oat milk carton that cannot be recycled: sustainable packaging The framework is internally consistent. The cow is always wrong. Everything else gets a pass. For the record: UK cattle numbers are down 26% since 1974. Obesity is up. Diabetes is up. Topsoil loss is accelerating. Bee populations are declining. The cow left. The problems got worse.
21
522
19
1,475
13,153