by Christian Britschgi, Purpose, July 2, 2024.
Excerpt:
Phoenix’s amicus temporary within the Grants Cross case was co-written by the League of Arizona Cities and Cities—a taxpayer-funded lobbying group that spent most of this previous 12 months preventing efforts within the Arizona Legislature to liberalize native zoning codes.
Native governments like to blame Martin for rising homelessness as a result of it relieves them of any actual accountability for the issue. Homelessness is one thing that occurred to them, and right here comes the ninth Circuit stopping them from doing something about it.
It’s an unbelievable act of blame-shifting. In actual fact, native and state governments bear a substantial share of the blame for the rising homeless inhabitants by making housing so onerous to construct within the first place.
Nothing correlates extra with homelessness charges than excessive housing prices. And nothing drives up housing prices like authorities restrictions on constructing housing.
When getting metropolis approval for a brand new house constructing takes two years, state environmental regulation lets anybody delay an permitted venture with lawsuits, and the least expensive kinds of housing are banned utterly, is it any shock that 1000’s of individuals find yourself on the streets?
by Romina Boccia, Purpose, July 2, 2024.
Excerpt:
In actuality, Social Safety operates on a pay‐as‐you‐go foundation. Which means the payroll taxes collected from present employees are instantly used to pay advantages to present retirees. Any surplus funds are credited to the Social Safety Belief Fund, however these should not money reserves; they’re particular‐situation Treasury bonds, that are basically IOUs from the federal authorities.
When Social Safety runs a deficit—which means it pays out extra in advantages than it collects in taxes—it should redeem these bonds to cowl the shortfall. The federal authorities then has to provide you with the money to honor these IOUs, both by elevating taxes, chopping spending in different areas, or borrowing extra money. Thus, the Belief Fund doesn’t include actual, liquid belongings however quite a promise that the federal government can pay itself again, which finally relies on the federal price range’s total well being and monetary coverage. (daring in unique)
DRH story:
In 2004, when Dan Klein taught at Santa Clara College, he requested me to return up and provides a night speak to the scholars. We mentioned what is perhaps subject that may seize them and I advised “Social Safety: The Nightmare in Your Future.” That’s what I spoke on. My daughter, Karen, was a scholar there and though she wasn’t required to attend, she confirmed up with a man good friend. It was on a Tuesday night and, simply as had been the schedule when her mom and I had taught there within the early Nineteen Eighties (that’s the place we met), there have been no courses on Wednesday. That’s related as a result of my daughter informed me that she would keep for the primary half hour after which go away as a result of it was celebration night time. I informed her that was nice and requested her permission to make use of a narrative about an interplay we had had when she was 11. She stated sure.
Right here’s the story I informed to drive house the truth that the Belief Fund will not be actually a belief fund. When Karen was 11, she requested me if I d been saving for her faculty. I answered that I had simply began to within the final 12 months. Being the daughter of an economist, she requested, “How a lot?” I answered that I used to be saving $10,000 a 12 months for 8 years. That happy her. Then I stated to the viewers, “Think about that, as a substitute of placing $10,000 a 12 months in a cash market fund, I had written, ‘IOU $10,000’ on a scrap of paper and put it in a jar, and did that 8 years in a row. Who right here believes that once I emptied the jar in 8 years, I’d have $80,000?”
By the way in which, the speak lasted 45 minutes and Q&A one other 40. On the finish, Karen got here up along with her good friend. That they had stayed the entire time. She stated, excitedly, “I didn’t know these issues.”
by Michael Munger, AIER, July 1, 2024.
Excerpt:
It might be doable to deal with akin to worth as “mark to market” estimates, however once more for belongings which have skinny markets—shares in carefully held or household companies — or no annual market in any respect — for a singular mansion, or a big piece of actual property for which no “comparables” exist — such estimates are more likely to be inaccurate, and costly to verify.
That’s the place “ULTRAs” are available. As an alternative of taking two p.c (say) of the liquidated worth of the wealth, the state would merely take possession of the wealth, in place. An ULTRA is a “notional fairness curiosity.” The federal government actually takes a portion of the worth of the asset; that worth can be paid to the state when the asset is offered. Now, it is just a “notional” stake, within the sense that no shared proper of management or voting rights exists. However for many who advocate for ULTRAs, in any scenario the place tax companies are licensed to tax an asset immediately, however can not as a result of there isn’t any analysis occasion, the taxpayer could possibly be made to pay with an ULTRA quite than with money.
And:
It is extremely troublesome to know the worth of the asset, however ULTRA to the rescue! As Delmotte places it:
With out realizing its financial worth, the federal government takes 2 p.c fairness in A lot in 12 months One whereas in 12 months Two the remaining 98 p.c of the asset is topic to a 2 p.c cost (leaving 96.04 p.c for Giselle); in 12 months Three, one other 2 p.c ULTRA-tax leaves Giselle with 94.12 p.c of the unique asset’s worth. After twenty years of wealth taxes, this leaves Giselle with 66.4 p.c fairness in A lot, and the tax authorities now personal 33.6 p.c of the corporate’s worth. Underneath ULTRAs, there isn’t any present money tax cost, however when Giselle sells her shares in A lot after 20 years, 33.6 p.c of regardless of the gross sales worth seems to be goes to the tax authorities.
The impact is quite startling, wanting on the instance. In a comparatively brief time, the federal government actually takes substantial possession of all profitable personal companies. Relatively than being a downside, advocates have really change into enthusiastic about authorities possession of “the Metaverse,” and giving the Treasury Secretary extraordinarily broad and unilateral discretion about the usage of ULTRAs in lieu of money funds.
by Krit Chanwong, Cato at Liberty, July 5, 2024.
Excerpt:
Forty-six states and DC require acupuncturists to be licensed with the Nationwide Certification Fee for Acupuncture and Oriental Medication (NCCAOM). To acquire certification, aspiring acupuncturists should maintain a level from one of many 49 accredited faculties of acupuncture. Aspiring acupuncturists additionally have to cross at the least two of 4 exams administered by the NCCAOM. The variety of exams required differs by state. Delaware, for instance, mandates that its acupuncturists take all 4 NCCAOM exams. Then again, Pennsylvania mandates solely two exams.
California doesn’t acknowledge any NCCAOM certification. As an alternative, the state has its personal licensing guidelines. Aspiring acupuncturists in California have to graduate from one in all 29 universities accredited by California’s Acupuncture Board and take California’s acupuncture licensing exams. In line with the Folks’s Group of Neighborhood Acupuncture (POCA), California’s acupuncture licensing exams “has been held up because the gold customary for acupuncture licensing checks.” The excessive regard given to California’s examination is as a result of take a look at’s elevated rigor and depth when in comparison with the NCCAOM’s.
And:
Acupuncture licensing is only one small instance of California’s licensing mania. For 20 years, California was ranked 49 out of fifty in Cato’s Freedom within the 50 States survey for occupational licensing freedom. A 2023 Archbridge Institute research discovered that California requires occupational licensing for 189 occupations, which is larger than the nationwide common of 179. These licensing rules hurt all Californians: a 2018 Institute of Justice research means that California’s licensing regime prices 195,000 jobs yearly—maybe one cause the Golden State has one of many highest state unemployment charges.
