The Cato Institute warns that the USPS's current handling of mail balloting poses a significant risk of systemic failure ahead of major elections. Key concerns include whistleblower allegations regarding 'batch rejection protocols,' which could invalidate thousands of legitimate ballots, coupled with documented slowdowns in delivery speed and increased rejections for lateness. This instability suggests potential operational or political interference aimed at undermining mail voting integrity. Consequently, the article advises that voters and state election officials must plan to bypass the USPS system by utilizing alternative secure methods, such as drop boxes or early in-person voting, to ensure timely ballot submission.
Freeing Workers to Work: The Case for Removing Occupational Licensing Barriers
English Summary
The article argues that occupational licensing barriers are counterproductive, restricting worker mobility and overall economic efficiency rather than ensuring quality. Contrary to common belief, evidence suggests that countries with high rates of licensing tend to exhibit lower per capita output, larger informal economies, and weaker governance indicators like rule of law. Policymakers should therefore consider reducing or eliminating unnecessary licenses, as this measure could boost labor supply, improve economic performance, and enhance overall regulatory quality.
中文摘要
本文論述職業執照壁壘是反效果的，其作用並非確保品質，反而限制了勞工流動性及整體經濟效率。與普遍認知相反，證據顯示，那些擁有高比例執照國家往往呈現較低的每人產出、更大的非正式經濟體系，以及法治等治理指標偏弱的現象。因此，政策制定者應考慮減少或取消不必要的執照規定，因為此舉不僅能提升勞動力供給，改善經濟表現，更有助於提高整體監管品質。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that the United States' aggressive use of tariffs and economic coercion is counterproductive, inspiring international partners to actively circumvent US markets. Instead of increasing dependency on American trade, major global players are deepening cooperation by establishing new free trade agreements (e.g., EU-India, ACFTA, CPTPP) that explicitly exclude the U.S. This trend signals a significant shift toward increased global economic integration outside of US influence. Policymakers should recognize this accelerating decoupling, as it suggests that the traditional American model of trade leverage is rapidly diminishing unless the U.S. commits to upholding multilateral rules and reducing protectionism.
-
3.
The article argues that passing a Continuing Resolution (CR), while preventing an immediate government shutdown, merely preserves an unsustainable fiscal status quo rather than addressing underlying budgetary crises. Congress is criticized for using the CR as an escape route from difficult choices—such as cutting programs or tackling massive deficits—while simultaneously planning to increase debt through reconciliation packages for defense and agriculture. The core problem remains mandatory spending (Social Security, Medicare) driving debt unsustainably. For genuine fiscal stability, the author advises that Congress must move beyond short-term funding measures, prioritize essential functions, and establish a dedicated process to impose discipline on mandatory programs.
-
4.
The article argues that inheritance and estate taxes are detrimental to economic growth, investment, and productivity. Citing Sweden's experience after abolishing the gift and inheritance tax in 2005, the author notes subsequent increases in firm profitability, net sales, and asset values. The core reasoning suggests that removing these taxes allows owner-managers to reinvest capital directly into their companies rather than withdrawing funds for anticipated future tax liabilities. This increased internal investment has been shown to boost corporate financial health and higher corporate income tax payments.
-
5.
The CATO article argues that the US-Venezuela oil deal is deeply problematic due to significant governance and ethical concerns. Key criticisms include a lack of transparency in negotiations, the expansion of state corporatism through government involvement in resource extraction, and questionable legality since it bypasses Venezuelan constitutional requirements. Furthermore, the agreement utilizes a notoriously corrupt private partner and sidelines the democratic opposition, severely undermining US credibility and future diplomatic efforts. Strategically, the deal is viewed as an ill-advised 'imperial resource grab' that risks damaging long-term American influence in Latin America.