Podcasts about property rights

The uncontrolled Nature of Mother to Iran and how all military Veterans hold severe negative sentiments against Iran. South Dakota has voted to not give the voters a question about altering the SD State Constitution on Property Rights.

Musqueam Agreement Sparks Property Rights Debate in Metro Vancouver Dr. Dwight Newman, Professor of Law and Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Rights, Communities, and Constitutional Law at the University of Saskatchewan Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Chief Aaron Pete breaks down the Musqueam–Canada framework, clarifies what was signed (and what it isn't), steelmans the toughest public concerns, unpacks the political responses, and shares his take on the deal. Send a textNo Silver Spoons®Welcome to No Silver Spoons®, a podcast that celebrates grit, resilience,...Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the shownuancedmedia.ca

Dr. Timothy Terrell explains how entrepreneurs and property rights can protect forests, wildlife, and open spaces better than bureaucracies, using real-world examples of “enviropreneurs” who profit by conserving nature instead of exploiting it.Recorded in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on February 21, 2026. Special thanks to Michael and Beverley Starkey and Gil Robinson for sponsoring this event.

In this powerful episode recorded at the Black Hills Stock Show Property Rights Rally hosted by the South Dakota Stock Growers Association, Amanda Radke shares highlights from a day focused on one of the most urgent issues facing rural Americans: property rights.The episode features remarks from Charles and Heather Maude, who recount their family's deeply personal and highly publicized property rights battle involving a fence line dispute, federal criminal charges, and a long road to resolution. They share what they learned, how their case was finally resolved, and why they are now committed to helping protect other families from similar government overreach.Amanda then takes the stage to give a major update on what's happening in Pierre, South Dakota, including key legislation tied to eminent domain, invasive surveying, tax exemptions for data centers, and constitutional protections for landowners. She also explains why grassroots action has become a powerful force in South Dakota and why these fights matter far beyond state lines.This episode is a rallying cry for farmers, ranchers, and landowners to stay engaged, stay informed, and defend the freedoms that keep rural communities strong.Follow Amanda Radke on social media and subscribe to The Heart of Rural America for more episodes featuring the voices shaping agriculture, rural values, and constitutional freedoms.Presented by Bid on Beef | CK6 Consulting | CK6 Source | Real Tuff Livestock Equipment | Redmond RealSalt | Dirt Road Radio | All American Angus Beef | Radke Land & CattleUse code RADKE for $10 off your next All American Angus Beef order at www.BidOnBeef.comSave on Redmond Real Salt with code RADKE at https://shop.redmondagriculture.com/Check out Amanda's agricultural children's books here: https://amandaradke.com/collections/amandas-booksLearn more about Bulletproofing Your Direct-To-Consumer Beef Enterprise: https://amandaradke.com/products/bulletproof-your-beef-business

Governments at all levels abuse their “privilege” of eminent domain, the taking of private property for government use. Murray Rothbard understood that government was not justified to seize property for such use in the first place.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/rothbard-and-eminent-domain-confused-history-and-legal-sleight-hand

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court’s upcoming docket sitting by sitting. The cases covered in this preview are listed below.Havana Docks Corporation v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, (February 23) - International Law, LIBERTAD Act; Issue(s): Whether a plaintiff under Title III of the LIBERTAD Act must prove that the defendant trafficked in property confiscated by the Cuban government as to which the plaintiff owns a claim, or instead that the defendant trafficked in property that the plaintiff would have continued to own at the time of trafficking in a counterfactual world "as if there had been no expropriation.Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Corporación Cimex, S.A. (February 23) - International Law, FISA; Issue(s): Whether the Helms-Burton Act abrogates foreign sovereign immunity in cases against Cuban instrumentalities, or whether parties proceeding under that act must also satisfy an exception under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel (February 24) - Civil Procedure; Issue(s): Whether district courts have the authority to excuse the 30-day procedural time limit for removal in 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1).Pung v. Isabella County, Michigan (February 25) - Property Rights; Issue(s): (1) Whether taking and selling a home to satisfy a debt to the government, and keeping the surplus value as a windfall, violates the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment when the compensation is based on the artificially depressed auction sale price rather than the property’s fair market value; and (2) whether the forfeiture of real property worth far more than needed to satisfy a tax debt but sold for a fraction of its real value constitutes an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment, particularly when the debt was never actually owed.United States v. Hemani (March 2) - 2nd Amendment, Criminal Law; Issue(s): Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), the federal statute that prohibits the possession of firearms by a person who “is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance,” violates the Second Amendment as applied to respondent.Hunter v. United States (March 3) - Criminal Law; Issue(s): (1) Whether the only permissible exceptions to a general appeal waiver are for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or that the sentence exceeds the statutory maximum; and (2) whether an appeal waiver applies when the sentencing judge advises the defendant that he has a right to appeal and the government does not object.Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC (March 4) - Labor and Employment Law; Issue(s): Whether a federal statute, 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c), preempts a state common-law claim against a broker for negligently selecting a motor carrier or driver.Featuring: Jay R. Carson, Senior Litigator, The Buckeye InstituteJeffrey S. Hobday, Assistant Attorney General, Opinions Unit, Ohio Attorney General’s OfficeMary E. Miller, Partner, Lehotsky Keller Cohn LLPZack Smith, Legal Fellow and Manager, Supreme Court and Appellate Advocacy Program, The Heritage FoundationJordan Von Bokern, Senior Counsel, U.S. Chamber Litigation Center(Moderator) Sam Gedge, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice

Governments at all levels abuse their “privilege” of eminent domain, the taking of private property for government use. Murray Rothbard understood that government was not justified to seize property for such use in the first place.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/rothbard-and-eminent-domain-confused-history-and-legal-sleight-hand

Coming to us from Lyon County, Kansas has become a tremendous voice for all of us on the issue of Property Rights. The state of Kansas continues to have more issues than it should being in the Great Plains of America.

If we want to understand why capitalism feels broken, do we need to stop looking at the economy and start looking at the legal code that underpins it? In our system, capital is often described as money, machinery, or raw materials. But Columbia Law School professor Katharina Pistor argues that capital is actually a legal invention. An asset, whether it's a plot of land, an idea, or a promise of future pay, only becomes capital when it is given the right legal coding.  Pistor suggests that lawyers are the true coders of capitalism. They use the law to "enclose" assets, from land to user data, giving owners the power to exclude others and monetize that value. She argues for injecting principles of "fairness and reciprocity" back into private law, ensuring that contracts aren't just tools for the powerful to extract value from the weak. Luigi Zingales suggests that large corporations have become so powerful we may need a new branch of "quasi-public law" to govern the asymmetry between an individual consumer and a corporate giant. This episode explores the deep, often invisible architecture of our economic system and asks whether we can ever truly tame corporate power without rewriting the rules of the game. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Guive Assadi argues that we should give AIs property rights, so that they are integrated in our system of property and come to rely on it. The claim is that this means that AIs would not kill or steal from humans, because that would undermine the whole property system, which would be extremely valuable to them. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/axrpodcast Ko-fi: https://ko-fi.com/axrpodcast Transcript: https://axrp.net/episode/2026/02/15/episode-48-guive-assadi-ai-property-rights.html   Topics we discuss, and timestamps: 0:00:28 AI property rights 0:08:01 Why not steal from and kill humans 0:15:25 Why AIs may fear it could be them next 0:20:56 AI retirement 0:23:28 Could humans be upgraded to stay useful? 0:26:41 Will AI progress continue? 0:30:00 Why non-obsoletable AIs may still not end human property rights 0:38:35 Why make AIs with property rights? 0:48:01 Do property rights incentivize alignment? 0:50:09 Humans and non-human property rights 1:02:18 Humans and non-human bodily autonomy 1:16:59 Step changes in coordination ability 1:24:39 Acausal coordination 1:32:37 AI, humans, and civilizations with different technology levels 1:41:39 The case of British settlers and Tasmanians 1:47:22 Non-total expropriation 1:53:47 How Guive thinks x-risk could happen, and other loose ends 2:03:46 Following Guive's work   Guive on Substack: https://guive.substack.com/ Guive on X/Twitter: https://x.com/GuiveAssadi   Research we discuss: The Case for AI Property Rights: https://guive.substack.com/p/the-case-for-ai-property-rights AXRP Episode 44 - Peter Salib on AI Rights for Human Safety: https://axrp.net/episode/2025/06/28/episode-44-peter-salib-ai-rights-human-safety.html AI Rights for Human Safety (by Salib and Goldstein): https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4913167 We don't trade with ants: https://worldspiritsockpuppet.substack.com/p/we-dont-trade-with-ants Alignment Fine-tuning is Character Writing (on Claude as a techy philosophy SF-dwelling type): https://guive.substack.com/p/alignment-fine-tuning-is-character Claude's charater (Anthropic post on character training): https://www.anthropic.com/research/claude-character Git Re-Basin: Merging Models modulo Permutation Symmetries: https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.04836 The Filan Cabinet: Caspar Oesterheld on Evidential Cooperation in Large Worlds: https://thefilancabinet.com/episodes/2025/08/03/caspar-oesterheld-on-evidential-cooperation-in-large-worlds-ecl.html   Episode art by Hamish Doodles: hamishdoodles.com

If one man may legally own another, then he should likewise have the right to disown this property. To deny this right by law involves simultaneously affirming the right of one human to own another as his property but not the right to stop owning another human.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/olaudah-equianos-manumission-regulatory-barriers-freedom

If one man may legally own another, then he should likewise have the right to disown this property. To deny this right by law involves simultaneously affirming the right of one human to own another as his property but not the right to stop owning another human.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/olaudah-equianos-manumission-regulatory-barriers-freedom

3 Bills To Get Illegal Aliens OFF Tennessee Roads

First Nations lawyer Tom Isaac joins the show to discuss the perils of DRIPA, and the missteps of the BC government in protecting private property rights. Does the country have the ability to approve major natural resource projects? Start an investment portfolio that's built to perform with Neighbourhood Holdings! For Investors and Advisors: https://www.neighbourhood.com/looniehourFor Mortgage Brokers:https://www.neighbourhood.com/looniehour-brokersUnits of Neighbourhood Holdings Income Trust I (“NHIT”) are sold primarily through third-party registered dealers. If you would like to learn more, please contact investors@neighbourhood.com.Check out Saily at https://www.saily.com/looniehour and use our promo code 'LOONIEHOUR' to get 15% off your first purchase!

If you have studied what it means to have a Christian worldview or – for that matter – you have just studied the Bible, you know that it all begins with the creation story. “In the beginning, God created.” And if we are made in God's image, that means we are creative, too, and a part of our maturity in Christ is to more fully live into that mandate to be creators. And I don't just mean what some call “creative” professions, such as music, literature, and other arts. I mean woodworkers, homemakers, entrepreneurs, engineers, and plumbers. We are hearing more talk about creativity in recent years. Sometimes it takes the form of organizations committed to Christians and the arts. The Rabbit Room, co-founded by Andrew Peterson is an example. The International Arts Movement, founded by Makoto Fujimura is another. Andy Crouch's work with Praxis also comes to mind. But I have never heard anyone approach this topic in quite the way my guest today, Jim Edwards, has. His book “To Invent is Divine” examines human creativity as it relates to property rights – all within the framework of a Judeo-Christian principles of stewardship and ownership. He looks at America's patent system and how laws protecting intellectual property have encouraged creativity. He is also concerned, however, that those laws are eroding and the principles of intellectual property protection are weakening in an era of artificial intelligence. Jim Edwards has a Ph.D. from the University of Tennessee. He has had a long career in public policy and intellectual property consulting. He was a Lincoln Fellow at the Claremont Institute, and in 2017 was honored with the Eagle Award from the Eagle Forum's Education and Legal Defense Fund. I had this conversation with Jim via zoom. The producer for today's program is Jeff McIntosh. Until next time, may God bless you.

In this episode of Texas Talks, Brad Swail interviews Margaret Byfield, Executive Director of American Stewards of Liberty, to break down the growing controversy surrounding proposed transmission lines across Texas. The discussion explores property rights, eminent domain, data-center energy demand, grid reliability after Winter Storm Uri, and the debate between local dispatchable power and large-scale transmission infrastructure.Byfield shares firsthand insight into how landowners could be affected by thousands of miles of new transmission corridors, the rising cost of electricity tied to infrastructure expansion, and the broader policy questions shaping Texas' energy future.Whether you're interested in energy policy, land use, rural property rights, or the economics behind grid expansion, this conversation offers a detailed look at one of the most consequential infrastructure debates unfolding in Texas today. Watch Full-Length Interviews: https://www.youtube.com/@TexasTalks

HOUR 1 Hour 1 – https://RushToReason.com pulls no punches as John Rush dives headfirst into culture, freedom, and accountability—starting with a Super Bowl weekend that exposed just how divided the country has become. Why did a halftime show spark outrage, canceled orders, and online pile-ons against small businesses? And what does that say about tolerance, choice, and who really believes in freedom? John is joined by Mike Jansen of Plumberoos (https://plumberoos.com/), who breaks from the corporate, commission-driven model to explain what “old-school service” actually looks like in today's world. Is it possible to run a successful business without upselling fear and urgency? What happens when trust—not pressure—is the foundation? The hour then pivots to deeper questions about government control versus personal responsibility, from proposed Colorado legislation impacting digital privacy to the economics of captive pricing at airports and major events. Is regulation protecting people—or punishing common sense? And why are consumers shocked by prices in places where choice is limited? This hour challenges listeners to rethink outrage culture, media narratives, and where freedom quietly slips away when no one's paying attention.

MegaETH mainnet is live, kicking off a new frontier for Ethereum scaling: ultra-low latency, massive throughput, and an execution environment built to unlock apps that can't exist on L1. Lei Yang & Namik break down why Vitalik's latest L2 framing validates “barbell” scaling, what users actually inherit from Ethereum (censorship resistance, exit guarantees, and fraud-proof security assumptions), and why stages + governance are harder than they look.  Plus: the mainnet stress test (11.4B tx in 7 days, 55k peak TPS), the economics shift toward stablecoin yield with USDM, proximity markets for MEV, and MegaETH's aggressive app-incubation strategy. ------

Modern political economy is based upon a Machiavellian belief in might makes right. Yet, political power cannot accomplish what free markets and private property rights have done in lifting billions of people out of poverty.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/machiavelli-dead-why-politics-without-property-rights-rules-and-moral-limits-cannot-work

Modern political economy is based upon a Machiavellian belief in might makes right. Yet, political power cannot accomplish what free markets and private property rights have done in lifting billions of people out of poverty.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/machiavelli-dead-why-politics-without-property-rights-rules-and-moral-limits-cannot-work

Bongani Bingwa speaks to property law expert Marlon Shevelew following Dzivhu Tevin Mashila’s account of how his Bryanston property was hijacked, unpacking why homeowners cannot simply remove illegal occupiers, how the PIE Act is meant to work, where it falls short, and what legal options are realistically available to property owners who feel trapped by the system. 702 Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa is broadcast on 702, a Johannesburg based talk radio station. Bongani makes sense of the news, interviews the key newsmakers of the day, and holds those in power to account on your behalf. The team bring you all you need to know to start your day Thank you for listening to a podcast from 702 Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 06:00 and 09:00 (SA Time) to Breakfast with Bongani Bingwa broadcast on 702: https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/36edSLV or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/zEcM35T Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today, free markets are championed as the foundation of capitalism, while socialists argue that free markets cause growing inequality and exploitation of the working classes, and thus need to be constrained by the state, or else abolished entirely. But in... Continue Reading →

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was intended to regulate activities in space, is hard to enforce and woefully out of date. New nations and private actors are entering the spaceflight arena, and an updated mechanism with a bit more teeth is needed. Our guest, Ely Sandler, a Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, has put forward the idea of using COPs—not the kind in uniform, but a Conference of Parties—as a less-formal gathering of spacefaring (and space-ambitious) entities, to discuss future treaties, agreements, and enforcement mechanisms, eventually leading to new treaties. These would be similar to the annual climate COP that has provided useful discourse on climate change. A space COP would address responsibility for and control of orbital assets, land and resource use on the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; and possibly limits to the militarization of space. Join us for a fascinating discussion! Headlines: Artemis II Moon Rocket Rolls Out for Launch Preparations Crew-11 Astronauts Speak on Space Station Medical Evacuation Earth Faces Strongest Solar Radiation Storm in 20 Years Auroras Sparked Across Unusual Latitudes Main Topic: Is the Outer Space Treaty Obsolete? Examining the Future of Space Governance with Ely Sandler Outer Space Treaty's Vagueness and Limits for Modern Space Activity Why New Space Policy Models Are Needed for Orbital Debris, Spacecraft Ownership, and Liability "Conference of the Parties" (COP) Model Proposed for Space Law Updates Challenges of Property Rights, Exclusion Zones, and International Consensus on the Moon How Commercial Space and Military Concerns Intersect Under Outdated Treaties Space Solar Power's Potential and Regulatory Hurdles for Energy Beaming Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Ely Sandler Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

Which matters more: gun rights or property rights? Michael Smerconish breaks down today's Smerconish.com poll question through the lens of a major Supreme Court case challenging Hawaii's concealed-carry law. As the justices weigh whether gun owners need permission to carry firearms onto private property open to the public, the debate raises fundamental questions about the Second Amendment, property rights, and where the burden should fall. Cast your vote and join the conversation. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was intended to regulate activities in space, is hard to enforce and woefully out of date. New nations and private actors are entering the spaceflight arena, and an updated mechanism with a bit more teeth is needed. Our guest, Ely Sandler, a Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, has put forward the idea of using COPs—not the kind in uniform, but a Conference of Parties—as a less-formal gathering of spacefaring (and space-ambitious) entities, to discuss future treaties, agreements, and enforcement mechanisms, eventually leading to new treaties. These would be similar to the annual climate COP that has provided useful discourse on climate change. A space COP would address responsibility for and control of orbital assets, land and resource use on the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; and possibly limits to the militarization of space. Join us for a fascinating discussion! Headlines: Artemis II Moon Rocket Rolls Out for Launch Preparations Crew-11 Astronauts Speak on Space Station Medical Evacuation Earth Faces Strongest Solar Radiation Storm in 20 Years Auroras Sparked Across Unusual Latitudes Main Topic: Is the Outer Space Treaty Obsolete? Examining the Future of Space Governance with Ely Sandler Outer Space Treaty's Vagueness and Limits for Modern Space Activity Why New Space Policy Models Are Needed for Orbital Debris, Spacecraft Ownership, and Liability "Conference of the Parties" (COP) Model Proposed for Space Law Updates Challenges of Property Rights, Exclusion Zones, and International Consensus on the Moon How Commercial Space and Military Concerns Intersect Under Outdated Treaties Space Solar Power's Potential and Regulatory Hurdles for Energy Beaming Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Ely Sandler Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was intended to regulate activities in space, is hard to enforce and woefully out of date. New nations and private actors are entering the spaceflight arena, and an updated mechanism with a bit more teeth is needed. Our guest, Ely Sandler, a Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, has put forward the idea of using COPs—not the kind in uniform, but a Conference of Parties—as a less-formal gathering of spacefaring (and space-ambitious) entities, to discuss future treaties, agreements, and enforcement mechanisms, eventually leading to new treaties. These would be similar to the annual climate COP that has provided useful discourse on climate change. A space COP would address responsibility for and control of orbital assets, land and resource use on the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; and possibly limits to the militarization of space. Join us for a fascinating discussion! Headlines: Artemis II Moon Rocket Rolls Out for Launch Preparations Crew-11 Astronauts Speak on Space Station Medical Evacuation Earth Faces Strongest Solar Radiation Storm in 20 Years Auroras Sparked Across Unusual Latitudes Main Topic: Is the Outer Space Treaty Obsolete? Examining the Future of Space Governance with Ely Sandler Outer Space Treaty's Vagueness and Limits for Modern Space Activity Why New Space Policy Models Are Needed for Orbital Debris, Spacecraft Ownership, and Liability "Conference of the Parties" (COP) Model Proposed for Space Law Updates Challenges of Property Rights, Exclusion Zones, and International Consensus on the Moon How Commercial Space and Military Concerns Intersect Under Outdated Treaties Space Solar Power's Potential and Regulatory Hurdles for Energy Beaming Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Ely Sandler Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which was intended to regulate activities in space, is hard to enforce and woefully out of date. New nations and private actors are entering the spaceflight arena, and an updated mechanism with a bit more teeth is needed. Our guest, Ely Sandler, a Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, has put forward the idea of using COPs—not the kind in uniform, but a Conference of Parties—as a less-formal gathering of spacefaring (and space-ambitious) entities, to discuss future treaties, agreements, and enforcement mechanisms, eventually leading to new treaties. These would be similar to the annual climate COP that has provided useful discourse on climate change. A space COP would address responsibility for and control of orbital assets, land and resource use on the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; and possibly limits to the militarization of space. Join us for a fascinating discussion! Headlines: Artemis II Moon Rocket Rolls Out for Launch Preparations Crew-11 Astronauts Speak on Space Station Medical Evacuation Earth Faces Strongest Solar Radiation Storm in 20 Years Auroras Sparked Across Unusual Latitudes Main Topic: Is the Outer Space Treaty Obsolete? Examining the Future of Space Governance with Ely Sandler Outer Space Treaty's Vagueness and Limits for Modern Space Activity Why New Space Policy Models Are Needed for Orbital Debris, Spacecraft Ownership, and Liability "Conference of the Parties" (COP) Model Proposed for Space Law Updates Challenges of Property Rights, Exclusion Zones, and International Consensus on the Moon How Commercial Space and Military Concerns Intersect Under Outdated Treaties Space Solar Power's Potential and Regulatory Hurdles for Energy Beaming Hosts: Rod Pyle and Tariq Malik Guest: Ely Sandler Download or subscribe to This Week in Space at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free audio and video feeds, a members-only Discord, and exclusive content. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit

Amanda Radke hosts a property rights rally at the Capitol Rotunda, South Dakota, highlighting the importance of property ownership and the ongoing fight to protect landowners from eminent domain for private gain. The event features speeches from several key figures, including Senator Mykala Voita, Attorney General Marty Jackley, and Senator Mark Lapka who announce a new constitutional amendment to prohibit eminent domain for private gain. The rally celebrates past victories while rallying support for continued efforts to safeguard property rights, emphasizing the unity and determination of South Dakota farmers and ranchers in defending their land and freedoms.Chapters: 00:00 Introduction and Rally Kickoff01:21 Opening Prayer and Pledge02:46 Attorney General Marty Jackley's Speech08:28 Representative Liz May's Statement15:20 Charles and Heather Maude's Story21:27 Senator Lauren Nelson's Address26:45 Speaker Pro Temp Carla Lems's Remarks29:53 Rallying for Victory: The Power of Unity30:19 Key Figures and Their Contributions31:24 The Fight for Property Rights32:39 The AI Bill of Rights34:30 Personal Stories of Struggle and Triumph40:49 The Legislative Battle47:27 A Call to Action: Protecting Our Future54:10 The Power of the People: Achievements and Future GoalsFollow Amanda Radke on social media and subscribe to The Heart of Rural America for more episodes featuring the voices shaping agriculture, rural values, and constitutional freedoms.Presented by Bid on Beef | CK6 Consulting | CK6 Source | Real Tuff Livestock Equipment | Redmond RealSalt | Dirt Road Radio | All American Angus Beef | Radke Land & CattleUse code RADKE for $10 off your next All American Angus Beef order at www.BidOnBeef.comSave on Redmond Real Salt with code RADKE at https://shop.redmondagriculture.com/Check out Amanda's agricultural children's books here: https://amandaradke.com/collections/amandas-booksLearn more about Bulletproofing Your Direct-To-Consumer Beef Enterprise: https://amandaradke.com/products/bulletproof-your-beef-business

Brandon recounts writing “Bitcoin and the Rhythms of History” in 2020 as a way to make sense of crisis-era dynamics and institutional decayIran's currency collapse is used as a real-time case study of how money failure fractures society, accelerates protests, and destroys savingsThe discussion frames the current moment as a “global” Fourth Turning, with synchronized instability, populism, and regime stress across regionsVenezuela's turmoil is interpreted through power vacuums, geopolitics, and resource incentives, alongside a skeptical take on nation-building efficacyCalifornia's proposed “Billionaire Tax Act” is treated as a Fourth Turning signal: broken social contract, rising resentment, and a property-rights flashpointThe “supply vs demand of order” model is explained as a way to understand volatility when institutions cannot meet public demand for stabilityGenerational archetypes are reviewed (Prophet, Nomad, Hero, Artist) as broad-strokes heuristics for how cohorts behave in crisis and rebuilding phasesBitcoin is positioned as “Fourth Turning money” and a new institution that replaces discretionary trust with protocol-enforced rules (“rules without rulers”)Energy and industrial capacity are discussed as strategic constraints, with AI/data centers shifting the public energy debate away from Bitcoin mining Swan Private helps HNWI, companies, trusts, and other entities go beyond legacy finance with BItcoin. Learn more at swan.com/private. Put Bitcoin into your IRA and own your future. Check out swan.com/ira.Swan Vault makes advanced Bitcoin security simple. Learn more at swan.com/vault.

A new category is being born, and it's going to reshape crypto investing.In this episode, we sit down with Vance Spencer and Michael Anderson of Framework to explore the rise of neo-finance and how 2026 creates crypto's Magnificent 7. Vance and Michael break down Sky, Sirup and the 3-4 assets worth owning, sustainable yields vs Ponzinomics 2.0, why equity outcomes are surging, and the biggest market shift happening right now.We discuss:-The Rise of Neo-Finance: Why DeFi No Longer Works-How 2026 Creates Crypto's Magnificent 7-Token Structure Clarity & Property Rights-Sky, Sirup & The 3-4 Assets Worth Owning-Sustainable Yields vs. Ponzinomics 2.0-Why Equity Outcomes Are Surging-Market Structure Bill & SEC Innovation Hub-BMR's Massive ETH Call Position-The Biggest Market Shift Happening Right NowTimestamps:00:00 Intro01:17 Neo-Finance Terminology03:52 Why DeFi Needs a Rebrand06:02 The NuFi Thesis10:31 Stablecoins & Asset Management13:30 infiniFi, Halliday, Kalshi Ads14:39 2021 CeFi vs. 2025 NuFi18:13 Market Structure Bill Impact20:40 Token-Equity Dilemma27:05 Investable Crypto Assets32:56 YEET, Trezor, Hibachi Ads32:22 Property Rights for Tokens35:00 The Mag 3-4 of Crypto40:36 Bull Case: ETFs & Positioning44:58 BMR's ETH Play & Innovation HubWebsite: https://therollup.co/Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1P6ZeYd...Podcast: https://therollup.co/category/podcastFollow us on X: https://www.x.com/therollupcoFollow Rob on X: https://www.x.com/robbie_rollupFollow Andy on X: https://www.x.com/ayyyeandyJoin our TG group: https://t.me/+TsM1CRpWFgk1NGZhThe Rollup Disclosures: https://therollup.co/the-rollup-discl

"Cartel of the Suns" Hosts: Darren Weeks, Vicky Davis Website for the show: https://governamerica.com Vicky's website: https://thetechnocratictyranny.com COMPLETE SHOW NOTES AND CREDITS AT: https://governamerica.com/radio/radio-archives/22649-govern-america-january-10-2026-cartel-of-the-suns Listen LIVE every Saturday at 11AM Eastern or 8AM Pacific at http://governamerica.net or on your favorite app. Insurrection builds as far-left extremists attack ICE agents, attempting to enforce immigration laws. Was DNI Tulsi Gabbard kept in the dark about the Venezuela attack? CIA has history of drug trafficking in Latin America. Venezuela's gold plan: what role did petrodollar warfare play in Maduro's overthrow? As Trump builds the American technate, he signs an executive order pulling the U.S. out of many international entities. Netanyahu corruption case judge Benny Sagi is killed in suspicious "accident" prior to verdict. Communist NYC mayor Zohran Mamdani has a "tenant advocate" who wants to abolish private property rights. Government shutdown looms, and more.

X: @KeithJKrach @250Freedom_ @ileaderssummit @americasrt1776 @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk @JTitMVirginia Join America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio co-hosts Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy with Keith J. Krach, CEO of Freedom 250, which was launched by President Donald J. Trump. Freedom 250 is the national, non-partisan organization leading the celebration of our Nation's 250th birthday. Working together with the White House Task Force 250, federal agencies, and the Commission, Freedom 250 serves as the official public-private partnership that connects, aligns, and amplifies national and local efforts to deliver the defining presidential moments of this anniversary year. At its heart, Freedom 250 is creating a movement of citizens, organizations, companies, and leaders from across the country to honor our Nation's proud history, cherish our God-given freedoms, and build the Golden Age of Opportunity for the next 250 years. Keith Krach is the Former Under Secretary of State, technology entrepreneur, and Chairman of the Krach Institute for Tech Diplomacy at Purdue University. A Silicon Valley innovator and dedicated public servant, he founded and led several category-creating companies—including Ariba, the world's largest B2B e-commerce network, which transacts $3.7 trillion annually; and DocuSign, inventors of digital transaction management, serving over a billion users. Visit: Freedom250.org americasrt.com (https://americasrt.com/) https://ileaderssummit.org/ | https://jerusalemleaderssummit.com/ America's Roundtable on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/americas-roundtable/id1518878472 X: @KeithJKrach @250Freedom_ @ileaderssummit @americasrt1776 @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk @JTitMVirginia America's Roundtable is co-hosted by Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy, co-founders of International Leaders Summit and the Jerusalem Leaders Summit. America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio program focuses on America's economy, healthcare reform, rule of law, security and trade, and its strategic partnership with rule of law nations around the world. The radio program features high-ranking US administration officials, cabinet members, members of Congress, state government officials, distinguished diplomats, business and media leaders and influential thinkers from around the world. Tune into America's Roundtable Radio program from Washington, DC via live streaming on Saturday mornings via 68 radio stations at 7:30 A.M. (ET) on Lanser Broadcasting Corporation covering the Michigan and the Midwest market, and at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk Mississippi — SuperTalk.FM reaching listeners in every county within the State of Mississippi, and neighboring states in the South including Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee. Tune into WTON in Central Virginia on Sunday mornings at 9:30 A.M. (ET). Listen to America's Roundtable on digital platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, Google and other key online platforms. Listen live, Saturdays at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk | https://www.supertalk.fm

Lewis Hyde, a celebrated scholar, essayist, literary critic and poet, wrote two classic books on aspects of the commons -- 'The Gift,' in 1979, about the power of gift-exchange in forging and maintaining social reciprocity, and 'Common as Air,' in 2010, about creativity as a force nourished by cultural commons. In this episode, Hyde discusses the origins of his striking perspectives on creativity as a gift that must be shared ("the gift must always move"), and the ways in which the US Founding Fathers sought to protect the free circulation and sharing of knowledge rather thane excessive private control through copyrights and patents. More more on the commons, visit www.Bollier.org. Credit for photo of Hyde: Anna Schuleit Haber

Guest host Bruce Claggett talks to David Livingstone, senior fellow at the conservative leaning Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy and professor in Liberal Studies and Political Studies at Vancouver Island University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Rebel News podcasts features free audio-only versions of select RebelNews+ content and other Rebel News long-form videos, livestreams, and interviews. Monday to Friday enjoy the audio version of Ezra Levant's daily TV-style show, The Ezra Levant Show, where Ezra gives you his contrarian and conservative take on free speech, politics, and foreign policy through in-depth commentary and interviews. Wednesday evenings you can listen to the audio version of The Gunn Show with Sheila Gunn Reid the Chief Reporter of Rebel News. Sheila brings a western sensibility to Canadian news. With one foot in the oil patch and one foot in agriculture, Sheila challenges mainstream media narratives and stands up for Albertans. If you want to watch the video versions of these podcasts, make sure to begin your free RebelNewsPlus trial by subscribing at http://www.RebelNewsPlus.com

For more than 40 years, the Farmland Protection Policy Act has socialized US farmlands and transferred wealth to politically-connected people. What it hasn't done is protect farmland.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/farmland-protection-policy-act-crisis-politics-and-quiet-socialization-land

For more than 40 years, the Farmland Protection Policy Act has socialized US farmlands and transferred wealth to politically-connected people. What it hasn't done is protect farmland.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/farmland-protection-policy-act-crisis-politics-and-quiet-socialization-land

Despite flagging concerns about political bias at Canada's “anti-hate” organization, Liberals still approved $200,000 in taxpayer funds to the self-described “anti-fascist” group. A new poll found that over half of British Columbians are concerned about their private property rights after a BC Supreme Court justice granted the Cowichan tribe Aboriginal title in the province. Health Canada contradicted its own officials' testimony and admitted that Canadian tax dollars are used to fund the procurement of drug paraphernalia, such as crack pipes, at drug consumption sites. Tune in to the Daily Brief with Cosmin Dzsurdzsa and Melanie Bennet! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 479. Libertarian Nicholas Sinard asked me to field some questions about the referenced issues, so we did so. (Recorded Dec. 10, 2025.) https://youtu.be/DlbDlmuUPW0 Regarding our discussion of my previous comments about the definition of rights, and what rights are justified. As a definitional matter, a legal right is a legally enforceable claim to the exclusive use of a resource. As to what rights libertarians think are justified, I have discussed the idea that the only rights that are legitimate or just are those that the assertion of which cannot be coherently criticized. The reason is rooted in the logic of argumentation ethics and my estoppel defense of rights, e.g. society may justly punish those who have initiated force, in a manner proportionate to their initiation of force and to the consequences thereof, because they cannot coherently object to such punishment") Stephan Kinsella, "A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights," in Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston, Texas: Papinian Press, 2023). See also chapters 6. Dialogical Arguments for Libertarian Rights, 7. Defending Argumentation Ethics: Reply to Murphy & Callahan, and 22. The Undeniable Morality of Capitalism, et pass.; and other writing such as KOL451 | Debating the Nature of Rights on The Rational Egoist (Michael Liebowitz) (from the transcript): [12:25–19:47] I think when people say that I have a right to X what they're really saying is if "I were to use force to defend my claim to this space" I can't be coherently criticized. In other words, my proposed use of force to defend this space, is just, is justified. Which is why it ties into what laws are justified. Because a law is just a social recognition, by your society—your local neighbors, the legal system—that they recognize your claim, and they're willing to endorse or support your use of force to defend yourself. So ultimately when we say there's a right, what we're saying is that if the legal system uses force to defend your claimed right, that use of force itself is justified. So this is a complicated way of saying what libertarians often say,  something like: it's either ballots or bullets. It always comes down to physical force in the end. So when you have a law, what you're saying is that the legal principle that we're that proposing—like defending my house, or my body from rape or murder—we're saying that if you were to use force to defend yourself, or if the legal system would do so in your name, then that would not be unjustified. And I think that's ultimately the claim. So what you're saying is ... the reason I call it a metanorm (( Rights as Metanorms; Rights and Morals as Intersecting Sets Not as Subset of Morals. )) is because ... Well, I distinguish between morality, and the justice of the legal system. So for example—and I think maybe Rand might agree with me on this, I'm not sure (( See, e.g, these tweets by Objectivist Michael Liebowitz, admitting that in some cases it might not only be moral to violate a right but immoral not to: 1, 2 ("Suppose a guy is driving with his son, and someone shoots up his car, badly wounding the son and taking out the tires. There is no one around, and he needs to get his son to a hospital. He sees an unattended parked car and steals it, getting his son the help he needs. That would be both virtuous and a crime."), 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ("The person who wouldn't steal a dollar to prevent his children from being tortured is the person who should face harsh moral judgment."), 8.  ))—but a simplistic view of morality, which most libertarians might have—and I don't mean to be critical by saying simplistic, because it's an attempt to distinguish between...  so most people would say that "you shouldn't do drugs" and therefore they're not opposed to a law outlawing drugs, because to their simplistic linear mind, if it's immoral, it should be made illegal. But if you have a kind of a more nuanced view of things, you understand that, well just because something is immoral, doesn't mean it should be illegal. That's the libertarian view—its like, okay, doing drugs, being a  drug addict might be immoral, it might be harmful to your life, but you're not violating someone's rights. So the government [the state] is not justified in outlawing it. So that's like a second level. So when you explain that to your normy person, then you might say, well that's because morality, or that's because rights violations are a subset of morality. So that's kind of a first approximation about how you explain to people why everything that's not that's immoral should not be illegal. It's because a rights violation should be illegal, but that's only a subset of immorality. But when you put it that way, the assumption is that every rights violation is immoral although not everything that's immoral is a rights violation right. And my personal view that I've I've come to adopt over the years is that's that's actually slightly incorrect. In other words it it's incorrect to say that everything that's a rights violation is necessarily immoral. And the reason is because I view rights as a metanorm. This is the view as a human being, living in society, who wants to have a moral view of matters and the way human Society should operate, what law would I favor as a justified law? So I would say that we should have a law that says you can't steal from people. But what that means is that it's justified if the legal system uses force to stop crime, or to stop theft. It's justified. Which which means that if someone is caught being a thief or a rapist or a murderer and they're punished or dealt with in a certain way, that response by the legal system, or by the victim using the legal system as its proxy—you can't criticize that itself an immoral action; it's justified. So to my mind the ultimate purpose of law, and to think about this, is to think about what's justified. But it doesn't mean it doesn't mean that every rights violation is necessarily immoral. And again, it's because when you classify the legal system's response to a crime as justified, what you're saying is, it doesn't violate the aggressor's rights if force is used against him. But it doesn't necessarily imply that what he did was immoral. So this is why my view is that we have to view rights violations not as a proper subset of immorality, but as its own set which is mostly overlapping with immorality. So I would say that 99% of all rights violations are actually immoral, just like I would say that it's immoral to be a dishonest person in general but I don't think that it's logically necessarily true. And the reason is because the purpose of morality is to guide man's conduct in his everyday affairs, but the purpose of political ethics is to tell us which legal system is justified. So that morm is aimed at determining which laws are just; it's not aimed at telling us how we should act on a day-to-day basis. So given a legal system,  which I think is a just legal system—let's say we have a legal system where which outlaws murder and theft and extortion and rape and robbery and all this kind of stuff—that doesn't necessarily mean that I am always immoral if I choose to violate someone's rights in that system. It probably is in most cases,  but I'm not sure it's logically the same thing. [Then the example of someone in the woods breaking into a cabin to save their baby's life.] Shownotes (Grok) Show Notes: Stephan Kinsella & Nicholas Sinard on Co-Ownership, Property Rights, and Related Issues (Full conversation – Parts 1 & 2 combined) Opening Summary and Defense of Co-Ownership (0:00–4:41) Kinsella summarizes his long-standing view: co-ownership of scarce resources is unproblematic and historically unquestioned. Property rights exist to avoid interpersonal conflict over rivalrous (scarce) resources; contracts can split the “bundle of rights” in ways that still prevent conflict. Examples: state-owned property is actually co-owned by taxpayers/victims; homesteading-by-proxy creates temporary co-ownership; wills can be structured to achieve the same result even if death technically ends the testator's existence. Hoppe, Easements, and Collective Homesteading (4:41–8:22) Sinard: critics are taking Hoppe too literally when he says “only one owner per resource.” Hoppe himself recognizes easements, servitudes, and even collective homesteading (e.g., a commonly used village path). Practical co-ownership (spouses, roommates, joint heirs) already works via contracts and arbitration/divorce/sale when conflict arises. Meta-Norms and the Duty to Avoid Conflict (8:22–9:53) Even when no perfect rule exists, parties still have a background duty to seek peaceful dispute resolution rather than immediate violence. Property rights are not self-enforcing; they presuppose arbitration. Compossibility and the Essentialist Project (9:53–13:18) Sinard is working on an “essentialist” test: a proposed property-rights rule is only justifiable if it is logically compossible (no built-in conflicts). Kinsella links this to Hoppe's and Hülsmann's emphasis on compossible rights. Do Critics Really Oppose the Substance or Just the Word? (11:43–17:50) Kinsella suspects the dispute is merely semantic: critics accept contractual arrangements that achieve the same result as co-ownership but refuse the label. Sinard thinks critics mistakenly believe Kinsella derives property rights from contract (rather than contract from prior property rights). Tangent on contractarianism, mutual recognition, and argumentation ethics: mutual respect for rights is a proto-agreement, but contracts remain downstream of property. Consent, Revocability, and the Guest/Tenant Distinction (31:42–36:04) Bare consent (dinner guest, kissing) is revocable at will.

A shocking case out of Palm Beach County is raising major red flags about government overreach, land grabs, selective prosecution, and weaponized local agencies. In this special Corsi Nation panel, Dr. Jerome Corsi brings together experts, medical professionals, and witnesses to expose what may be one of the most disturbing abuse-of-power cases in Florida. This is the FULL story the mainstream media won't touch.

Seth Hertlein is the Global Head of Policy at Ledger and one of the earliest, most persistent advocates for bitcoin self-custody in Washington. Known for his “lone ranger” years as the only lobbyist focused on protecting non-custodial rights, he brings a rare combination of securities law expertise, political insight, and deep conviction about individual property rights. In this episode, Seth joins The Last Free Americans to share how he fell down the bitcoin rabbit hole, why self-custody is a return to humanity's oldest property norms, and how today's policy battles will define digital freedom for generations. We dig into the evolution of financial intermediaries, the history of natural rights from Aristotle to the framers, and the real political forces lining up for and against self-custody.SUPPORT THE PODCAST:→ Subscribe → Leave a review → Share the show with your friends and family → Send us an email: podcast@unchained.com→ Learn more about Unchained: https://unchained.com/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=podcast → Book a free call with a bitcoin expert: https://unchained.com/consultation?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=podcastTIMESTAMPS:0:00 – Intro to The Last Free Americans & Seth's unique role in policy2:20 – How a securities regulator became an “accidental crypto lobbyist”5:03 – Early bitcoin reading, monetary policy, and recognizing its political nature7:43 – The aha moment of self-custody: from Ledger device to first withdrawal12:58 – Ownership vs. possession: how financial markets drifted into full intermediation16:40 – Why self-custody is not new: property as a natural human right22:45 – How centralization overtook markets: certificates, DTCC, and efficiency tradeoffs27:58 – 2021: the year Washington and the industry “woke up” to each other33:10 – Keep Your Coins Act, Canadian truckers, and why lawful peer-to-peer matters38:40 – Property rights, natural law, and the framers' blind spots on privacy45:55 – Executive Order 6102, takings law, and lessons for bitcoin52:03 – How the Bank Secrecy Act and third-party doctrine became digital surveillance59:42 – The three camps opposing self-custody: nats-ec hawks, socialists, and bureaucracies1:05:40 – The IRS broker rule, CRA repeal, and precedents for stopping overreach1:11:22 – House vs. Senate language: what “retain the right” really means1:17:14 – Odds of passage in 2024 and why Senate floor time is everything1:22:44 – The global landscape: why America is still the last best hope1:27:50 – What comes next: privacy as the next digital freedom frontier1:32:10 – Closing thoughts on restoring founding principles through BitcoinWHERE TO FOLLOW US: → Unchained X: https://x.com/unchained  → Unchained LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/unchainedcom  → Unchained Newsletter: https://unchained.com/newsletter → Joe Kelly's Twitter: https://x.com/josephkelly  → Seth Hertlein's Twitter: https://x.com/SethHertlein  

Delving into hours-of-service regulation in the trucking industry, The Broad Matters podcast talks with Martin Holzhacker about a paper he coauthored with the Department of Supply Chain Management at the Broad College. Their research uncovers both the benefits and also the unintended consequences of regulation on independent workers.  Follow Martin and his research on LinkedIn and Google Scholar. For more episodes of Broad Matters, subscribe to our podcast on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 1: 3:05pm- The House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor of a bill that directs the Justice Department to release all the files in its possession related to its investigation into sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The final vote was 427 to 1—with only Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) in opposition. In a post to social media, Higgins explained his decision—citing concern that the bill does not do enough to protect the identities of victims and witnesses. 3:10pm- Private Property Rights Under Threat in the Garden State: New Jersey towns are beginning to push back against the state's affordable housing obligations. The ambitious quotas are trampling property rights—and, as Rich notes, high density housing will almost certainly lead to more Democrat voters moving to NJ. 3:30pm- On Tuesday, President Donald Trump met with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in the Oval Office where Saudi Arabia pledged to invest $1 trillion in the United States economy. During a contentious moment, ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce asked about the September 11th terror attacks and the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

Inflation is not just an economic phenomenon. It also undercuts the foundations of a civilization, leading to the breakdown of society itself.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/road-de-civilization-inflation-and-moral-erosion-society

In this lecture delivered at the Property and Freedom Society, Saifedean explains why the root cause of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the denial of property rights. Religious and racial conflict are not destined in Palestine; they are historically rare occurrences, but this system of property rights would create violent conflict anywhere.

Why is it okay to take the little shampoo bottles in hotels home with you but not the towels? And what stops people from taking the towels? Listen as political scientist Anthony Gill discusses the enforcement of property rights with EconTalk's Russ Roberts. Backing up their observations with insights from Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, and our everyday lives, they argue that the unenforced norms surrounding trust, propriety, and moral sentiments play a central role in building a flourishing society.

What drives the seeming relentless dynamism of Tokyo? Is there something special about Japanese culture? Joe McReynolds, co-author of Emergent Tokyo, argues that the secret to Tokyo's energy and attractiveness as a place to live and visit comes from policies that allow Tokyo to emerge from the bottom up. Post-war black markets evolved into today's yokocho--dense clusters of micro-venues that turn over, specialize, and innovate nightly--while vertical zakkyo buildings stack dozens of tiny bars, eateries, and shops floor by floor, pulling street life upward. The engine? Friction-light rules: permissive mixed-use zoning, minimal licensing, and no minimum unit sizes let entrepreneurs launch fast and pivot faster. And surrounding this emergent urban landscape there's plenty of new housing with excellent transportation infrastructure to let ever-more people enjoy Tokyo's magic.