Reason

And this one has inspired some billionaires to leave.

I can quote here from a pal over at Reason Magazine, Liz Wolf's piece on this topic.

Seven billionaires representing 30% of the total billionaire wealth in the state left California before January 1st, 2026, when news of the possible tax broke.

That includes Peter Thiel, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, among other dissenters.

And that is something that is so, so blatant that DOJ would eventually, not even to court, just within public opinion, would have to account for what they were doing if they wanted any legitimacy whatsoever.

And by legitimacy, I just mean like, you know, people not rioting in the streets, right? But what worries me, and I've got to issue a bit of a mea culpa here, you know, when I was an investigator, there were few organizations that could draw my ire as much as places like the Cato Institute or Reason Magazine or some of the various legal clinics at higher-ranking law schools.

because I thought they always saw bad intentions where there were none.

But they were all right about one thing, and that one thing is you don't have to successfully prosecute an investigation.

Massachusetts had a working exchange before Obamacare.

Now, according to Reason Magazine, the upgraded Obamacare compliant version never worked.

Those were federal grants.

It's your money.

And we have two views to summarize here.

The pro-industry view is attributed to Reason Magazine.

This is yet another example of CalShe's maturity as a federally regulated exchange with deposit caps, trade alerts, and self-exclusion tools to protect its youngest traders.

That's a far better system than a patchwork of state bans.

Should I address this? You should probably address that.

So a couple years ago, Reason, our theme, we always have a theme for our Halloween party.

Big event in the Reason universe.

Usually picked by me.

Yes.

Yes.

However, it.

You wrote an article for Reason and you're like the first person to raise this and I can't believe more people are pointing this out.

And that is something that is so, so blatant that DOJ would eventually, not even to court, just within public opinion, would have to account for what they were doing if they wanted any legitimacy whatsoever.

And by legitimacy, I just mean like, you know, people not rioting in the streets, right? But what worries me, and I've got to issue a bit of a mea culpa here, you know, when I was an investigator, there were few organizations that could draw my ire as much as places like the Cato Institute or Reason Magazine or some of the various legal clinics at higher-ranking law schools.

because I thought they always saw bad intentions where there were none.

But they were all right about one thing, and that one thing is you don't have to successfully prosecute an investigation.

And then you can save a ton of money.

Reason Magazine, loss of decision-making capacity shouldn't override someone's completely formed end-of-life plans.

Patients diagnosed with progressive dementia may know exactly how much deterioration they're willing to endure.

They can articulate their wishes, discuss alternatives, and put their instructions in writing.

Should losing the ability to repeat these instructions invalidate them, writes Reason magazine? Well, Canada is preparing to address that question.

On October 23rd, their Justice Department announced plans.

They've got this planned rule or rules that would allow adults diagnosed with incurable illness expected to destroy their decision-making capacity to consent in advance to assisted suicide.