I’ve said (and written) for many years, that all the hooraw about income inequality is bullshit. Income and wealth inequality – income and wealth aren’t the same thing – are inescapable aspects of human nature; they will always exist, and any attempt to “fix” this just makes matters worse. Look at the countries with the greatest income and wealth inequalities, and you are looking at a totalitarian government every time.
You might call this a never-ending myth.
Despite the popular belief that the rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer, this claim is not only economically misguided but factually incorrect. Using data from The Mercatus Center’s working paper Income Inequality in the United States, we can demonstrate how flaws in inequality data often exaggerate the problem, explore why the claim that the poor are getting poorer is inaccurate, highlight why shaping policies around resentment and envy of the rich does more harm than good, and why the real solution lies in addressing the root causes of inequality through private-sector opportunities rather than government intervention.
Those flaws are mostly due to ignoring attenuating factors – or, reasons the poor aren’t as poor as the welfare advocates claim. Another flaw lies in the measuring of income and wealth.
The first item you should be mindful of when studying income inequality is that studies often exaggerate disparities due to flawed measurement methods. The two main data sources — tax records and household surveys — both have limitations. Tax records accurately capture high earners but miss low-income individuals who do not file taxes, while household surveys underreport high earners’ actual income, distorting inequality estimates. Additionally, many studies ignore government transfers like Social Security, Medicaid, the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), and more, which reduce inequality significantly. Readers should be mindful of these measurement problems and government transfers to avoid being misled by incomplete or exaggerated inequality narratives.
And:
Another flaw in inequality studies is ignoring non-wage compensation, such as health insurance, retirement benefits, and bonuses. This is particularly important because nonwage compensation has increased substantially since 1950, growing from just 5 percent to nearly 20 percent of total employee compensation. Since many lower-income workers receive much of their earnings in benefits rather than wages, leaving these out overlooks the financial support and economic well-being these benefits provide. Additionally, when factoring in government benefits like Social Security, Medicaid, and tax credits, the measured income gap shrinks by about 11 percentage points.
Another thing not mentioned is normalizing the data for age. People may occupy every rung on the ladder of income inequality through their lifetimes. People start on the entry level in the job or business market, usually not making much money, usually not having the best benefits.
If they show a little hustle – a little jam- they move up, gain skills, gain experience, gain value in the marketplace.
I’ve long offered one piece of advice to young men and women starting out in the workforce: that success in the employment world isn’t hard; just follow three rules:
To that, I might add, “If your boss asks you if you can get something done, the answer should always be ‘yes.'”
Income and wealth inequality will always be with us. The path towards the higher end of that is always found in enterprise. Enterprise is only found in economies that reward it. Capitalist, free-market economies. That’s the final answer.
How the hell is it the last day of February already? Wasn’t it just New Year’s Day a few hours ago?
Never mind that. If you haven’t visited the new (since January 20, anyway) White House website yet, take a look. It’s a bold new look, but I’ll tell you right now, the meat of the thing is in the Executive Actions section. Here are a few humdingers you’ll want to be familiar with if you aren’t already.
Implementing the President’s “Department of Government Efficiency” Cost Efficiency Initiative
This one is, as my Grandpa used to say, a sockdologer. The DOGE may well be the last-ditch attempt to return to some semblance of fiscal sanity; it may well be the last chance we have to avoid utter fiscal ruin. My only fear is that it won’t go far enough. But his order places a freeze on government credit cards, it orders an inventory of the government-owned and leased real estate, and a lot more; it’s the order that put the teeth in the DOGE.
Suspension of Security Clearances and Evaluation of Government Contracts
There are a lot of folks out there who, candidly, shouldn’t have security clearances. Some of his may look like payback – but read the specifics. Security clearances are really too generously handed out.
Establishing the National Energy Dominance Council
Energy. Everything’s about energy. President Trump vowed to make America not only energy independent but a net energy exporter. We have the resources for this. We just need to go after them, and believe you me, we have plenty of resources right here in Alaska. The Great Land is a veritable treasure chest. President Trump gets that, even if his predecessor didn’t.
Ending Procurement and Forced Use of Paper Straws
This seems like kind of a petty item to rate a presidential order, but think about it for a moment; it’s a visible signal to end some of the climate-panic stupidity that marked the administration of goofy, befuddled old Joe Biden. People were, in many places, forced to use these saggy paper straws that collapsed into wet ruin before one was halfway through one’s drink. Enough of that crap. Give me a nice solid plastic straw.
What the hell, why not?
The President, as head of the executive branch, actually does have authority over geographical names and so on. He can do this. While the United States has more than half the Gulf’s shoreline, it’s important to note that President Trump ordered the name change not to the “Gulf of the United States,” but the “Gulf of America.” Mexico is in North America. But North America isn’t Mexico.
As far as here, though, most Alaskans I know will keep on calling our great mountain 
“Denali.” The Gulf of America borders on several states and several countries. Denali is ours. We should have some say in what we call it.
President Trump has been damn busy this last month. It’s been a challenge for us to keep up with. Can he keep this pace up for four years? Can he set things up so the GOP holds the White House in 2028? That all remains to be seen – but he’s sure off to an interesting start.
Before I get into this, check out my pal UnCivilServant’s latest chapter of Prince of the North Tower and the conclusion of my story The Weavers over at Glibertarians.
Now then, about all that gold in Fort Knox… I confess this is not something I had thought about but, how do we all know it’s still there?
Well – we don’t. But we should.
The world’s richest man got encouragement Sunday to bring his cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) into one of the most secure places in the world: Fort Knox.
Sen. Rand Paul called for a review of the vault’s massive gold reserves — worth an estimated $425 billion based on market rates — in response to the tech mogul’s musings about the stash.
Musk, 53, drew attention to a user who asked him to “take a look inside Fort Knox just to make sure the 4,580 tons of US gold is there.”
“Surely it’s reviewed at least every year,” Musk replied to X user Zerohedge.
“Nope. Let’s do it,” Paul (R-Ky.), 62, chimed in, referring to the Army installation south of Louisville.
Well, that’s a fair point. An audit of the Fort Knox Gold Repository is certainly warranted. I’ve seen it – I was at Fort Knox visiting the Armor Museum there, which is a great thing to see, and while on the post I drove past the Repository. One can only see it from a distance, but my innate curiosity drove me to have a look. Yeah, it’s big, and it’s well-guarded.
But honestly – why hasn’t it been audited? It’s not like big, heavy gold bars are something someone could just walk out with. Not with all those guards.
The Treasury Department, which is responsible for the Repository, is under the Executive branch. It seems that President Trump would have the power to order an audit – or even to demand to see the Repository for himself.
So, Mr. President – what are you waiting for?
Before I get going on this, check out UnCivilServant’s latest chapter of Prince of the North Tower and the third installment of my own story The Weavers over at Glibertarians.
Now then: The new Trump administration is doing big things for Alaska energy and Alaska jobs.
The U.S. Department of Energy made it clear on Friday that the punishing policies of the Biden Administration against Alaska are no more. It’s the Trump era.
“Gone are the days of the Biden administration undermining American energy projects. Thanks to President Trump’s directive, the Department of Energy is committed to supporting Alaska and the rest of the U.S. in responsibly developing and exporting their LNG,” the Department of Energy posted on X/Twitter.
Sen. Dan Sullivan responded: “Alaska is America’s energy powerhouse. I look forward to working with @ChrisAWright_ and @ENERGY to get clean-burning Alaska gas to Alaskans, all Americans, and our allies overseas.”
Congressman Nick Begich said: “The centerpiece of Donald Trump’s energy dominance strategy is clearly Alaska. From our heretofore stranded gas resources to enormous estimated quantities of liquid gold, Alaska has what the nation needs.”
This isn’t just a big thing for Alaska, of course, although it is big up here in the Great Land. This is a big thing for the United States and, heck yeah, for the rest of the world as well. Energy is fungible, after all, and increasing supply will drive down prices. Everywhere.
Energy is at the crux of everything, economically. A prosperous society depends, utterly, on abundant, reliable, and affordable energy. With natural gas, we can have clean energy, too. We could have even cleaner and possibly cheaper energy with nuclear energy, too, although we haven’t heard as much from the Trump administration on that score.
Here in Alaska, lots of people are looking at the North Slope and seeing jobs. That’s a good thing all by itself.
There’s sure been a lot of talk about President-elect Trump’s idea of annexing Canada. Personally, I’m not enamored of the idea, although the United States and the Great White North have a lot in common. Not least of that is a 5,500+ land border that has been completely demilitarized with nary a squabble anywhere for over 200 years; this is unprecedented in human history. We are each other’s #1 trade partners, we share a common language (Quebec aside) and a lot of our culture.
But a political union? That doesn’t seem like a great idea. We would, in a sense, be adding another California, and the one we already have is trouble enough.
Mises Institute writer Ryan McMaken has some thoughts that are worth the read.
In recent days, president-elect Donald Trump has made a number of comments suggesting that Canada should be annexed by the United States as a new state. For example, on Tuesday, Donald Trump told reporters at a press conference that the U.S. and Canada combined into a single country “would really be something.” This followed an earlier X/Twitter post in which Trump listed a number of benefits to Canada and concluded that “if Canada merged with the US” the resulting union would be “a great nation”
This depends on what one means by “great nation.” If the goal is to move the United States further to the left ideologically, and to make the US more like California, then yes, adding Canada as a new state would certainly be a good thing. For people who like freedom, on the other hand, it’s not a great idea.
The sort of MAGA voter who thinks this is a good idea is not exactly strong on critical thinking. Those who are capable of thinking things through, on the other hand, might notice that adding Canada as a new 
state would create an open border with a country of 40 million Canadians, most of whom hold political views well to the left of the average American. It appears that some of the same conservatives who complain about Californians moving to their states also want to open the border to a new California-sized state to the north.
The prairie provinces, perhaps, are more like the western United States than the rest of Canada, but there really aren’t very many people there. Do we want two more U.S. Senators and a whole passel of Representatives elected by people in places like Toronto, Quebec, Ottawa, and Vancouver? No thanks.
And, I admit, here’s something I had not thought of:
Moreover, there is absolutely no reason to assume that Canadians would stay in Canada if Trump succeeds in creating an open border on the north. Many would elect to move south and fill up American cities with new center-left or far-left voters. At least the number of California out-migration is limited by the fact that California weather is very nice. Canada has all the high taxes, overregulation, and high cost of living of California, but with terrible weather. The Canada exodus will make the California exodus look like a minor affair in comparison. If Trump gets his way, get ready to be regularly harangued by your new Canadian neighbors who just moved south and will now lecture you about the need for single-payer healthcare and gun bans.
Indeed, the prospect of annexing Canada offers some interesting new 
angles on the problem of open borders between US states. Conservatives usually frame the open-borders debate as a problem of letting in too many supposedly undesirable “third world” immigrants. Rather, we are told, the US should seek to import more “first world” migrants. Importing millions of white, “first world” immigrants might not go the way that many conservatives think it would.
So, yeah, let’s put this in the “bad idea” column. Not like this is likely to happen in any case. I’ve kicked around a lot of pixels at RedState on this topic, too, including a “what if we did” scenario, but as far as it really happening? Yeah, I don’t think so.
I’m not sure what Donald Trump is doing by floating this trial balloon – but in a week and a half, we may well be finding out.
Y’all, this is my new Congressman!
Joe Biden is a son of a bitch. Hundreds of thousands of Alaskans rely on natural gas from the Cook Inlet to heat and electrify their homes, churches, schools, and workplaces.
Actions like this should serve as a permanent reminder that the Democrat machine is more than happy to… pic.twitter.com/AeIViz7v2Z
— Nick Begich (@NickforAlaska) January 5, 2025
I love the guy. Must Read Alaska’s Suzanne Downing writes:
Bloomberg and the New York Times report that in the next few days President Joe Biden will ban all new offshore oil and gas development, including 625 million acres of U.S. coastal territory. Alaska has more Outer Continental Shelf area than the rest of the nation and territories combined.
It would be another of the 11th hour moves by the anti-Alaska president and radical Democrats.
Congressman Nick Begich III immediately responded. On X, he wrote:
“Joe Biden is a son of a bitch. Hundreds of thousands of Alaskans rely on natural gas from the Cook Inlet to heat and electrify their homes, churches, schools, and workplaces. Actions like this should serve as a permanent reminder that the Democrat machine is more than happy to sacrifice us all in the name of their sanctimonious, socialist-driven, climate science™ religion.”
That, folks, is the Alaska attitude – at least, Alaska outside of Anchorage and Juneau.
I interviewed Nick Begich III for RedState early last year, well before the primaries, and at that time I had hopes that he would win the election. He did, he has, and now Mary Peltola has gone home to Bethel and Nick is in Washington speaking for Alaska.
Not much fills me with hope these days. But this does. And Nick is correct; Joe Biden is a son of a bitch.
Well, as of Tuesday, the latest abomination of a “continuing resolution” has been released by the House of Representatives. You can view it here.
Here’s the onion:
SEC. 2. REVISION OF FISCAL YEAR 2025 DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMIT FOR REVISED NONSECURITY CATEGORY.
Section 251 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency4 Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 901(c)(10)(B)) is5 amended—6
(1) in subsection (c)(10)(B), by striking the dollar amount and inserting ‘‘$597,000,000,000’’;
(2) in subsection (e)(1)—10
(A) by striking ‘‘, as follows:’’ and inserting ‘‘for the revised security category, the amount calculated for such category in section (d)(1)(A).’’; and14 (B) by striking subparagraphs (A) and15 (B).
$597,000,000,000. That’s a lot of money, for Congress that hasn’t passed an actual budget – required by the Constitution, I might add – since 1997.
This, True Believers, is a fucking disaster.
One of my recurring fantasies about being President (not one of the ones that results in my waking up screaming) is submitting to 
Congress a budget that involves reducing the Imperial government to pre-Civil War levels, and happily vetoing any budget that spends a penny more than I proposed.
But I’m not President and I’m not likely to be.
Congressional varmints of both parties pay lip service to fiscal sanity, but do little about it. The Republicans preach spending restraint but are content to tiny decreases in the rate of growth; the Democrats ignore the Laffer curve and shout for tax increases. 
Meanwhile we continue to mortgage our grandchildren’s futures.
Again, were I President, my retort with every aforementioned veto would be: “Fuck you. Cut spending.” I would love to have a president who thought along those lines; Oh, yes, we have Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy and the DOGE coming in, but we have yet to see what might come of that – but I’m cautiously hopeful.
There are only two ways out of this mess. We can grow our way out of it – unlikely, as both parties now seem to have embraced growing 
government rather than growing the private-sector economy – or we can inflate our way out of it, which hasn’t worked out so well, historically.
It seems to be a rule of history that great nations rarely are destroyed solely by outside forces; the wrecking begins from within. It’s just too bad that the current crop of pols seems determined to accelerate the process, just to buy more votes from the economically illiterate.