The article argues that the Federal Reserve's recent rate hike decision, while justifiable on inflation grounds, highlights a critical lack of an underlying, transparent policy framework. The core problem is that the Fed's decisions appear discretionary, leading to market uncertainty because the committee's judgment, rather than clear data, dictates policy shifts. The author proposes that the Fed adopt a formal monetary policy rule—an algebraic formula linking the target rate to indicators like inflation and unemployment—to replace subjective guidance. Implementing such a rule would provide market predictability, enhance transparency, and shield the Fed from political attacks by making deviations from the standard easily quantifiable.
Why the founders cared about trade and taxes
English Summary
The article argues that the founders' grievances regarding taxation without consent and trade restrictions reflect enduring tensions over who has the right to define and extract economic value within the nation. Historically, American resistance was framed not just as a financial complaint, but as an ethical violation of personal labor rights. This tension is evident in the shift from relying on tariffs (which disproportionately affect consumers) to implementing the income tax, which bases taxation on ability to pay. These historical shifts demonstrate that modern economic policy—whether through sanctions or progressive taxes—is fundamentally a negotiation between individual property rights and the federal government's need for revenue. Policymakers must therefore navigate this persistent tension between economic freedom and state authority.
中文摘要
本文論述，創始人對於「無同意課稅」和貿易限制的諸般不滿，反映了國家內部關於誰有權定義並提取經濟價值這一持久張力。從歷史角度看，美國的反抗不僅是單純的財政抱怨，更被定性為對個人勞動權利的倫理侵犯。這種張力體現在課稅方式的轉變上：從依賴關稅（這類關稅不成比例地影響消費者）轉向實施所得稅，後者則基於「支付能力」來徵稅。這些歷史轉變表明，現代經濟政策——無論是透過制裁還是累進稅——本質上都是個人財產權利與聯邦政府籌集收入需求之間的一場協商。因此，政策制定者必須在經濟自由和國家權威這兩種持續存在的張力之間進行周詳的平衡。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The ongoing Ebola outbreak in the DRC serves as a critical warning that the global health security system is fundamentally unprepared for future biological threats. The difficulty in containing this outbreak is compounded by the rising risk of emerging pathogens and the growing potential for AI misuse in bioweapon development. Policy must therefore shift from reactive, crisis-driven funding to sustained, proactive investment in resilient public health infrastructure, particularly in conflict zones. Addressing this requires strengthening global surveillance, ensuring consistent international cooperation, and mitigating the intersection of conflict, climate change, and disease spread.
-
3.A Design Lab Pilot to Inform Strategies for Expanding Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in Community Mental Health Centers (RAND)
Despite MOUD being the standard of care for opioid use disorder, access remains severely limited in Community Mental Health Centers (CMHCs), which serve the primary population with co-occurring disorders. A Design Lab pilot identified payment limitations and regulatory complexity as the chief barriers to implementation. The most feasible and high-impact strategy identified was establishing a structured learning exchange between CMHC leaders and insurers to improve reimbursement understanding. Policymakers and payers are therefore advised to pilot this learning exchange model to initiate broader payment reform and expand evidence-based care for this vulnerable population.
-
4.
The article argues that modern conflicts are increasingly defined by attrition, driven by three strategic gaps: the difference between nominal military power and usable capacity; the difficulty of achieving breakthroughs in a technologically advanced battlefield; and the detachment of military means from clear political objectives. Evidence from Ukraine and the Middle East demonstrates that sustained logistics, rapid technological adaptation, and proxy networks are now more decisive than sheer military size. For policymakers, this implies a strategic shift away from seeking short, decisive victories toward preparing for prolonged, high-cost engagements, requiring a focus on sustainable supply chains and defining concrete, attainable political end-states.
-
5.
Congress has significantly expanded presidential tariff authority by passing the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, allowing the executive to impose up to 100% tariffs on key buyers of Russian energy and sanctions enablers. The article argues that this legislation represents a dangerous abdication of Congress's Article I authority, as it grants the executive vast, discretionary power without specifying criteria for enforcement. Historically, the executive could claim tariffs were its own doing; however, by writing and passing this new authority, Congress now owns the resulting trade policy and its economic consequences. This shift implies that future tariffs will be viewed by the public as a direct legislative action, potentially undermining the administration's credibility and creating political vulnerability.