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.
Antitrust in the Streaming Age: Why the Paramount–Warner Deal Deserves a Modern Analysis
English Summary
The CATO analysis argues that current antitrust challenges to major media mergers, such as Paramount–Warner Bros., rely on outdated market definitions that fail to account for modern consumer choice. The core reasoning is that technological innovation—specifically streaming, VOD, and specialized services—has created multiple substitutes for traditional theatrical or cable viewing, increasing consumer welfare and lowering costs. Therefore, policymakers must adopt a broad 'consumer welfare' standard that reflects the diverse, multiplatform entertainment ecosystem rather than focusing narrowly on single distribution channels.
中文摘要
CATO 分析指出，當前針對大型媒體合併案（例如 Paramount–Warner Bros.）的反壟斷挑戰，是基於過時的市場定義，未能充分考量現代消費者的選擇權。其核心論點在於，技術創新——特別是串流媒體、視訊點播（VOD）和專業化服務的出現——為傳統影院或有線電視觀看創造了多重替代品，從而提升了消費者福利並降低了成本。因此，政策制定者必須採納一個廣泛的「消費者福利」標準，以反映多元、多平台的娛樂生態系統，而非僅將焦點局限於單一的發行管道。
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.