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.
An AI Tax Boom Could Curtail America’s Debt. But Not Solve It: Andrew Duehren in NYT
English Summary
Andrew Duehren argues that while an AI boom could generate tax revenue, the root cause of America's fiscal deterioration is unsustainable spending growth in entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Because AI increases life expectancy and productivity, these open-ended entitlements are projected to grow faster than the economy, exacerbating the debt problem. Therefore, Duehren advises that policymakers should not focus on raising taxes to capture AI gains; instead, they must prioritize slowing the growth of unsustainable health care and social security spending to stabilize the fiscal outlook.
中文摘要
Andrew Duehren 認為，儘管人工智慧（AI）的蓬勃發展或許能創造稅收收入，但美國財政狀況惡化的根本原因，在於醫療保險、聯邦醫療補助計畫（Medicaid）、以及社會安全保障等福利項目支出持續增長且難以維持。由於 AI 提高了預期壽命和生產力，這些缺乏明確終止點的福利支出被預測將增速超過經濟成長速度，從而加劇了債務問題。因此，Duehren 建議政策制定者不應專注於提高稅率以捕捉 AI帶來的收益；相反地，他們必須優先減緩不可持續的醫療保健和社會安全支出增長，才能穩定財政前景。
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.