corporate welfare

Warning: Congress is preparing to pass a new farm bill.

This year, Major League Baseball’s opening day was the earliest it’s been in the modern history of the game.

How we power our nation should be, like everything else, as free market as possible. May the most effective, cheapest energy sources win

Is it possible to kill “quasi-corporatism”?

Musk isn’t the genius he’s propped up to be.

One of the heights of lowness that government cronyism has reached is a company managing to so master the favoritism processes, they get multiple states to simultaneously fill its trough.

In today’s edition of The Heartland Daily Podcast, we listen in as Research Fellow Jesse Hathaway joins the Late Afternoons With Mike Schickman show where he discussed the recent passage of the Highway Bill that reauthorized the Export-Import Bank.

Panel 17 of the 9th International Conference on Climate Change was on the subject of “Peer Review, Herding, and the Reliability of Climate Science.” Anyone interested in the way science is actually conducted and the problems with the prevailing peer-review system can find a lot of interesting material in the discussion.

Does Netflix have any responsibility to help provide its users the streaming service that they paid Netflix for by connecting with ISPs in the high quality manner that most all other content delivery networks do? In other words, why is Netflix such an outlier here?

If Netflix’ position on net neutrality was justified on the merits, why does Netflix need to say so many deceptive things that are demonstrably untrue, in order to justify its case for its version of net neutrality?

Shortly, Congress will be debating the fate of the U.S. Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im). Its authorization — last extended in 2012 — will expire on September 30 unless reauthorized. Ex-Im was first incorporated in 1934 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to finance trade with the Soviet Union. Under the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, Congress established the bank as an independent agency. It provides loans and loan guarantees (as well as capital and credit insurance) to facilitate U.S. exports. Backed up by the full faith and credit of the U.S government, taxpayers are put on the hook.

Shouldn’t it be the customers’ choice to decide whether they want the cheaper bulb that uses more electricity and delivers a light quality that many people prefer?

The FCC and DOJ do not want to look ridiculous applying a spectrum cap to Verizon and AT&T and not Sprint when the FCC’s own Wireless Competition report shows that Sprint controls roughly twice as many MHz per population as either Verizon or AT&T.