Jul 24, 2026

Dwight D. Eisenhower on the costs of the arms race with the Soviet Union

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.  This world in arms is not spending money alone.  It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.  The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.  It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population.  It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals.  It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement.  We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat.  We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people...  This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense.  Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

~ President Dwight D. Eisenhower, "Chance for Peace" speech, April 16, 1953 

(Eisenhower delivered the address to the American Society of Newspaper Editors in Washington, D.C. - broadcast nationwide - shortly after Joseph Stalin’s death and early in his presidency.  The passage highlights the human and economic costs of the arms race, comparing military spending to resources that could instead fund schools, power plants, hospitals, housing, and food.)

Eisenhower's "Cross of Iron" Speech - Clio 

Jul 22, 2026

Kevin Duffy on the Austrian case for free trade

The Austrian (praxeological) method involves deductive reasoning, thought experiments, methodological individualism.  The only way to refute a logical argument is with better logic.  In trade, party A trades with B. Both do so because they benefit.  More accurately, because they expect to benefit.  Both expect to get more through the trade than they give up.  This doesn't mean in a week or a year neither will have regrets, but they do so because they expect to benefit. 

Now party C comes along and wants to interfere.  There are several problems: 

1. Knowledge - Does party C know something that A and B do not? 

2. Objectivity and altruism - Is party C above self-interest? 

3. Motive - By interfering, is party C benefiting at the expense of A and B?

4. Morality - What right does party C have to interfere?

Compounding this problem is that the state (a territorial monopolist on the use of force) acts as agent for party C.  It uses violence to interfere.  The state itself is not above self-interest; it has its own motives.  It benefits by being a broker in political favors.  Finally, there is the cost of maintaining the state, which is paid through violence (taxation). 

It's crystal clear who benefits from free trade (the people) and who benefits from attacking it (the state and special interests seeking protection and privileges).  This is where the intellectuals come in: They are needed in order to blind people to being fleeced.

~ Kevin Duffy

10 ways to Navigate Trade in the Food Industry 

Jul 17, 2026

Jim Chanos on bull and bear markets

Bull markets, you put a premium on promises and bear markets, you put a discount on reality.  And we're clearly in the former right now.

~ Jim Chanos,  "Jim Chanos: The AI Bubble Is 'Much Worse' Than Dot-Com," RiskReversal Media, 45:40 mark, July 17, 2026