The bipartisan RESTRICT Act—marketed as a "Tik Tok ban"—is properly named because it will restrict freedom, empower the state, and expand government surveillance. 

Original Article: "The RESTRICT Act Launches a New War on Free Speech"
This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon. 

[embedded content]

Tags: Featured,newsletter

The 2018 Farm Bill is due to expire this year, and US lawmakers have already begun working out the next version. This food-related omnibus bill was introduced ninety years ago as a “temporary” measure during the Great Depression. It’s been reauthorized by Congress every five years since, and recent ones cobble together two seemingly unrelated programs, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly called food stamps, and federal farm subsidies.
However, the two share an important link. One program gives tax dollars to those who cannot afford food; the other seeks to make food less affordable. Taxpayers are forced to help prop up crop prices only to be taxed again to address the consequences. The American people must wake up to the scam hidden in

Earlier this month, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) introduced the Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act, or the RESTRICT Act. The bill is being floated as a possible means for the federal government to ban TikTok over its connection to the Chinese government. However, the RESTRICT Act’s vague language and broad scope has many voicing concerns about the bill’s threat to free speech and freedom of expression.
But, as Murray Rothbard has pointed out, “human rights, when not put in terms of property rights, turn out to be vague and contradictory.” Your freedom to have an opinion does not grant you the right to express that opinion in venues or on media outlets you do not own. But if you pay to give a speech

Energy is a highly regulated industry across the world. There is less debate about the need for government control when it comes to the oil and gas sector. The arguments that most people accept for government intervention in energy, whether in the name of energy access, national security, or climate change mitigation, all share the same general premise: that energy is too important to be left to the whims of the free market.
But this year, the world has been thrust into an energy crisis, not by the free market or any natural disaster, but by politics. What 2022 has demonstrated is that the conventional wisdom is backward. In reality, energy is far too important to be left in the hands of government.
There is no free market in energy. That’s something even many

Even as price inflation slows and we move past June’s peak, progressives continue to push the concept of “greedflation”—that this year’s price inflation is caused by corporate greed and price gouging. This is inaccurate, based on bad economics, and it blames a consequence of the problem rather than the problem itself. If we want to address the real issues in the economy and avoid similar pain in the future, we need to get serious and drop “greedflation” from the discussion.
The standard response to the assertion that this episode of price inflation has been caused by greed is to point out that there is no reason to think the level of “greed” in the economy has suddenly increased. That is true, but it doesn’t address the core of the “greedflation” argument. Most