November 2025 – Tranquility Policy Institute

by Sheldon Richmond
Friday, November 21, 2025

Free-marketeers have long pointed out a particular asymmetry between capitalism and socialism (whether of the international or national variety). While anyone in a capitalist society would have a right to engage in socialism (as anyone can do now in our hampered market economy), the reverse would not hold: under socialism—that is, a centrally planned economy, democratic or not—no one would be free to engage in “capitalist acts between consenting adults” (to use Robert Nozick’s phrase from Anarchy, State, and Utopia). It would upset the plan.

In other words, in a fully free society, no legal barriers would prevent people from setting up communes, worker and consumer co-ops, etc., but in a socialist society, money exchanges of land, producer goods, and labor services (and perhaps even consumer goods) would be outlawed. Goodbye, entrepreneurship, free private enterprise, and economic calculation via trade-generated market prices.

That asymmetry speaks volumes, does it not? It ought to end the debate between the proponents and opponents of capitalism. Do you wish to live as a socialist with a clear conscience? Embrace the free market.

But socialists will have none of that. For them, individual choice is unimportant, if not destructive. In their view, voluntary capitalist relations are exploitative regardless of how the participants see them. So they must be forbidden. Socialist planners and their court intellectuals know better. Thus, for their own good, mere people must be controlled.
…

Hydraulic Keynesianism Is Bad Economics

by Don Boudreaux on November 19, 2025

from: https://cafehayek.com/2025/11/hydraulic-keynesianism-is-bad-economics.html

Michael Pettis writes [in Foreign Affairs] as if humanity’s chief economic problem is that we’re too rich – that we’re so abundantly awash in goods and services that the demand to purchase these outputs is inadequate (“How to Fix Free Trade,” November 17). As such, he insists that governments’ main economic duty is to protect its citizens from receiving from foreigners more goods, services, and capital than those citizens send to foreigners.

Pettis peddles hydraulic Keynesianism. He writes of some countries (including the U.S.) being “forced” to “absorb” capital and goods from other countries as if national economies are distinct entities connected to each other by a series of tubes through which flow savings and goods. In this bizarre mechanical view, when, say, the Chinese save ‘too much’ and produce more than they consume, the excess must “flow” somewhere. For a variety of reasons, most of this excess today “flows” into America. We Americans find ourselves with more capital and goods than we ourselves produce.

Poor us, having to “absorb,” year after year, lots of capital and goods from abroad.

Absent from Pettis’s analysis are microeconomic factors that better explain the persistence of U.S. trade deficits. Despite its imperfections, America remains an attractive place for foreigners to choose to invest. This attractiveness, in turn, prompts foreigners to choose to save more than they would otherwise. Similarly, the production of tradable goods outside of America is done largely because non-Americans – mostly led by price signals and the desire to earn profits – choose to produce the goods that they then choose to offer for sale to Americans.

Americans also choose. Every import bought by an American is one that an American chooses to buy, presumably because the price is right. Every asset sold by an American is one that an American chooses to sell, presumably because the price is right. To write, as Pettis does, of imports, exports, and savings flowing from country to country as if these are akin to hydraulic fluids mindlessly moving from higher-pressure to lower-pressure locations is not to do serious economics.

The global trading system has many problems, including mercantilist policies pursued by both Beijing and Washington. But these policies, contrary to Pettis’s assertions, are problems largely for the countries that practice them. If there is excess production in China, that’s a problem mostly for the Chinese. If there are excess savings in Germany, that’s a problem mostly for the Germans.

Pettis’s attachment to hydraulic Keynesianism prevents him from understanding the realities of global trade and investment.

Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030

Tired of Click Bait. Here are the rules we used to follow.

From Copilot:

📜 Classic Rules for Writing Good Titles

Clarity over hype Titles should directly state the subject of the article or video. Readers should know exactly what they’ll get without exaggeration.
Conciseness A good headline was short and punchy—often under 8 words. Editors asked: “Can you explain this to a friend in six words or fewer?”.
Accuracy and honesty No misleading promises. The headline had to match the content and avoid tricks that frustrate readers.
Focus on the main idea Titles pulled out the most significant aspect of the story—often the “who” and “what”.
Appropriate tone The headline’s tone had to match the subject. Serious topics required straightforward titles, while lighter stories could be playful.
Usefulness and specificity A headline should signal value to the reader—solving a problem, answering a question, or satisfying curiosity.
Active voice and strong verbs Instead of passive phrasing (“Children were rescued”), editors preferred active constructions (“Police Rescue Children”).
Timeliness and relevance Good titles highlighted conflict, prominence, or urgency—elements that naturally draw attention without resorting to gimmicks.
Uniqueness A headline had to stand out from competitors, offering a fresh angle or distinctive phrasing.

Vehicle Refinement (NVH)

Microsoft Copilot was asked: “What is vehicle refinement (NVH)?”
It replied:

Vehicle refinement, often referred to as NVH (Noise, Vibration, and Harshness), is the engineering discipline focused on minimizing unwanted sounds and sensations in a vehicle to enhance comfort, quality, and performance.

🔧 What NVH Stands For

Noise: Unwanted audible sounds like engine hum, wind whistle, or tire hiss.
Vibration: Physical oscillations felt through the steering wheel, seats, or floor — often from the engine, road, or suspension.
Harshness: Sudden, sharp jolts from road impacts (e.g., potholes or expansion joints) that affect ride comfort.

🚗 Why NVH Matters in Vehicle Refinement

Passenger Comfort: A quiet, smooth ride reduces fatigue and improves the driving experience.
Perceived Quality: Excessive NVH can make a vehicle feel cheap or poorly built, affecting brand reputation.
Performance & Safety: High vibration levels may signal mechanical issues or contribute to driver fatigue.

🧪 How NVH Is Measured

Sound Level Meters: Capture airborne noise inside and outside the cabin.
Vibration Sensors: Detect structural oscillations in components like the engine or chassis.
Subjective Testing: Feedback from test drivers helps assess comfort and refine tuning.
Road Tests: Real-world driving reveals NVH issues not always evident in lab simulations.

⚙️ NVH Sources in Modern Vehicles

Powertrain: Engine, transmission, and drivetrain components.
Road & Chassis: Tire-road interaction, suspension geometry.
Aerodynamics: Wind noise from mirrors, seals, and body panels.
Electric Vehicles (EVs): Lack of engine noise makes other sounds (e.g., motor whine, HVAC) more noticeable.

🧠 Engineering Solutions

Material Choices: Rubber mounts, insulators, and absorbers tuned to specific frequencies.
Design Optimization: Component geometry and placement to reduce resonance.
Digital Simulation (CAE): Predict NVH behavior before physical prototypes are built.
Physical Validation: Real-world testing to confirm simulation results.

NVH is a prime example of how engineering, perception, and design converge.

Sources: imc-tm.com gjbush.com eureka.patsnap.com