Pinned Tweet
Economath's Razor:
"Predictions without skin in the game are as easily dismissed as they are asserted."
Cheap talk gets cheap skepticism.
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
Friendly reminder:
If you really know the Democrats will take the Senate, you can earn a 50% return on your money in one day.
If you really know the Republicans will hold the Senate, you can earn a 200% return on your money in one day.
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
If someone from Somalia with a fake identity can serve in the United States Congress for years without getting caught, imagine still believing that illegals arenโt voting in U.S. elections.
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
The people who call for killing Trump every day are suddenly very upset about a public execution
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
Whatโs the objection? You only approve of โExecution by Musketryโ when itโs without a trial, like Charlie Kirk?
Spare us your boos. Weโve seen what makes you cheer.
Socialism is impossible. Read that again.
Here is why:
1. Ludwig von Mises and the Calculation Problem; then 2. Friedrich Hayek and the Knowledge Problem.
They are distinct, and it's important to understand the difference.
Mises fired first. In his 1920 paper "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth," he drove a stake through the heart of central planning by showing that rational economic calculation is impossible without private ownership of the means of production. Prices are not arbitrary numbers. They are signals generated by actual bids and offers between property owners who face real profit and loss. Strip away private property, and you strip away the bidding process. Strip away the bidding process, and prices become bureaucratic guesses. A Soviet planner deciding how much steel to allocate between rail construction and tractor manufacturing has no genuine price for steel because no one is buying or selling it freely. He is flying blind. The problem is structural, not administrative. Hire smarter planners, give them faster computers; it changes nothing. The information cannot exist without the market process that generates it.
Communists read this and realized Mises was right. They found a roundabout way to keep going. They would simply use prices from Western capitalist countries.
Then Hayek hit them with his 1945 essay "The Use of Knowledge in Society." His target was subtly different. Hayek accepted that prices aggregate information. His contribution was to identify what kind of information markets process: local, dispersed, tacit knowledge that no central authority can collect. A warehouse manager in Dรผsseldorf knows that his particular supplier is three weeks behind schedule. A farmer in Kansas knows the soil conditions on his specific plot after last month's frost. A textile merchant in Lyon knows which dyes his buyers currently prefer. None of this knowledge is written down anywhere. Much of it the people holding it cannot fully articulate. It lives in habits, relationships, and on-the-ground experience accumulated over years. No survey, no commissar's report, no algorithm extracts it reliably. You cannot copy it from one country to another.
Mises showed that central planners lack the mechanism to generate rational prices. Hayek showed that even if planners somehow had prices, they still could not possess the ground-level knowledge those prices encode. Mises's problem kills socialist calculation at the structural level. Hayek's problem kills it at the epistemological level. The two arguments are complementary, stacked on top of each other like floors of a building.
The Soviet Union ran this entire experiment in full. Central planners in Moscow set over 20 million prices by the late Soviet period. Shortages and surpluses coexisted everywhere. Bread rotted in one city while another city's bread lines stretched around the block. Planners were not uniquely corrupt or stupid. They were operating inside an institutional structure that made rational allocation geometrically impossible, exactly as Mises predicted in 1920 and exactly as Hayek's epistemology explained in 1945.
Every government price control, every production quota, every centralized allocation scheme you live under today repeats this mistake at a smaller scale. The mechanism fails whether the commodity is steel, housing, or healthcare. The scale changes; the logic does not.
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
Hang it in the Louvre
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
State-administered death is now more common in Canada than gun homicide is in the U.S.
That didnโt happen by accident.
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
Patriots never die. RIP Heehaw
โHe was my SONโ: Owner demands answers after beloved donkey is shot by police wsbtv.com/news/local/he-was-โฆ
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
Women: You donโt understand how mentally unstable we are after we have kids
Also Women: Yes I think women should have the right to vote, why do you ask?
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
Replying to @Rothmus
Trump v. Barbara is wrongly decided. Edward Coke himself in Calvin's Case (1608) said that aliens within the realm owed the sovereign obedience for ligeance to attach. If an alien's very presence violates the law, obedience is not satisfied. Without ligeance, children are aliens.
J.D. ๐ดโโ ๏ธ retweeted
This extended thread by @PhilWMagness is important in at least a couple of contexts. First, it shows how academic malpractice, this time from Quinn Slobodian, gets done (and one way to confront and debunk it). Second, it shares deep truths about the actual work of Ludwig von Mises, one of the great cosmopolitan liberals of the past century. Mises was so far ahead of his time in terms of race and gender it's still staggering--and particularly offensive to see him slandered as a racialist.

































