Jane Doe’s case against Cornell and seven former students has become a Rorschach test. One reading is that its a case of gang rape and institutional cover-up. Another reading, based on the text messages sent at the time, is murkier, messier and far less convenient for the outrage industry. These messages tell a different story from the narrative surrounding the lawsuit, and the “believe women” brigade would prefer you didn’t read them.
On October 19, 2024, Jane Doe, a 20-year-old Cornell student, attended a sorority event at Moonies Bar in Ithaca. By her lawsuit’s account, she had had about ten drinks by 11 p.m. She walked to the Chi Phi frat house to see a male friend, Matthew Ingalls. Ketamine was present. Other men came into the room.
The texts and transcripts that followed contain statements that sit uneasily beside the lawsuit. Asked by police whether she was comfortable with the early sexual activity, Jane Doe said: “I was super drunk… But I was pretty OK with all of this.” The next morning, a roommate says, she recounted the evening laughing:, saying, “Oh my goodness, isn’t that crazy?” and did not call it rape or assault.
Days later, Jonathan Newell texted an apology for “how things went down.” He said his memory was fuzzy and that he and another man regretted being too drunk to stop things. Her reply was not what the script required: “At the end of the day non of the sexual stuff was illegal… and honestly i really liked being w u and matt.” She said her memory was “super clouded too,” that everyone had been heavily intoxicated, and suggested they smoke together again, “but like leave out the extra 5 billion men and ketamine.”
She called the incident a “gamgbang” but wrote: “i don’t think we should feel any shame for the part. our body our choice.”
I have read many statements by alleged victims of rape. I do not recall one that used a pro-choice slogan to reassure an alleged rapist he had nothing to be ashamed of.
About a week later she read online comments about the fraternity. Only then, she told investigators, did she “come to the realization” she had been gang raped. By November 3, she was texting that “90%” of the night was non-consensual. Then, more than two weeks later, when DNA evidence was long gone, she asked for a rape kit.
Cornell’s investigation did not accept her account in full. Two men were expelled, two suspended and two found not responsible. Scott Kretzschmar says he never touched her, entered briefly and left; a hair test was negative for ketamine, and the university did not find that he had snorted it off her body. Yet online all seven are named and condemned as “the Cornell rapists.”
The original prosecutor declined to send the case to a grand jury in 2024, saying the account described voluntary conduct, contained no clear non-consent, and that when Doe asked for things to stop, they stopped.
The civil suit was filed in September; within a fortnight the seven names of the accused were published, the DA reopened the case and New York Governor Kathy Hochul, facing an election, handed it to Attorney General Letitia James – who had already called the woman’s experience “horrific and unacceptable” and said she stood with “survivors.” Two defendants want her removed, reasonably arguing she has picked a side.
None of the seven have been charged.
In later messages, Doe said she had been given more ketamine than she remembered, voiced discomfort, did not know the other men and felt “like a sex doll/worker.” Something rotten may well have happened.
But “may” is the word. The defense does not say she is certainly lying. It says her contemporaneous words differ radically from the lawsuit, and that her account changed after she read strangers’ comments. On that record, the doubt is not merely reasonable; it is enormous. The presumption of innocence exists for precisely such cases.
How did this become a national cause before a charge? Because of two words: “believe women.” This slogan began as a decent #MeToo instinct: women reporting assault had too often been ignored. But “take women seriously” became “believe women, full stop” – this is not a principle of justice but its abolition. A trial exists because we believe nobody until evidence is tested. The slogan skips that and proceeds to sentencing.
America has seen the consequences. I have investigated the Epstein scandal extensively and have written a book about it, Naked Lies. The industry around Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged crimes demanded that Virginia Giuffre be beyond question. Yet in 2022 she withdrew her accusation against Professor Alan Dershowitz, saying she “may have made a mistake in identifying” him. No money changed hands.
Giuffre also claimed abuse by the then-prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor in New Mexico. She also said she had been trafficked for the benefit of foreign presidents, then admitted in a 2016 deposition that the New Mexico episode was fiction and she had never met any foreign presidents.
In the Cornell case, the lawyer representing Jane Doe has previously advertised seeking Epstein accusers to represent. We don’t yet know who approached who. Could the accuser be lying for money?
The point is not that women lie; most do not. But every accusation is a claim, and claims must be tested. Failure to do so doesn’t help victims, it creates them: in Britain, a 17-year-old accused of rape killed himself before his accuser withdrew the allegation. His mother died by suicide the following year.
The Romans had it: ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat – the burden of proof lies on the one who asserts. It has served us for two millennia.
At Cornell, the evidence so far shows a drunken, drugged, squalid night; a disgusting group chat; a woman who said at the time that she liked it, that nothing illegal happened and there was no shame, then changed her account after reading the internet; a university that did not believe all of it; and a prosecutor who saw no case.
Believe women? No. Believe the evidence. It will never sell T-shirts, but it is the only incorruptible guide to the truth
Wages in construction are rising as the nation’s labor market recovers from the flood of cheap and subsidized migrant labor imported by pro-migration policies before 2024, according to a Wall Street Journal report.
The recovery — caused by President Donald Trump’s 2024 deportation mandate — is especially rapid in Florida, where Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) has used state police to deliver many illegal migrants to the federal deportation officers.
American construction workers in Florida who build the wooden frames for housing can now charge roughly $42 per hour, up from $20 per hour, Scott Brannock, president of Jacksonville-based Tidewater Homes and the Northeast Florida Builders Association, told the newspaper.
“We’re almost dead in the water because our [foreign migrant] workforce is gone,” he complained in the October 16 report.
“A September survey from the National Association of Home Builders found the cost of labor had increased a median of 4.2% from the previous year,” the newspaper reported.
The loss of migrant labor in Americans’ national labor is forcing CEOs to hire more Americans, the newspaper noted.SUBSCRIBE
By subscribing, you agree to our terms of use & privacy policy. You will receive email marketing messages from Breitbart News Network to the email you provide. You may unsubscribe at any time.
David Hacker, owner of subcontractor Construction Specialties of North Florida, “has seen a 70% reduction of crews available for certain jobs, forcing the leftover crews to double their rates in most cases [and] has also started a campaign to recruit new workers, offering significant cash bonuses for applications,” the newspaper wrote.
The deportations are good news for the millions of young citizens who have been pushed and pulled out of their national labor market, the Center for Immigration Studies reported in July:
If the same share of U.S.-born men (16 to 64) were in the labor force in 2026 as in 1960, there would be 9.2 million more U.S.-born men in the labor force. Even if the share returned only to the 2000 level, it would still add 4.5 million U.S.-born men to the labor force.
Even “prime-age”, U.S.-born men (25 to 54), the group most likely to work, have experienced a similar deterioration, from 4 percent not in the labor force in April 1960 to 8.5 percent in 2000 and 11.1 percent in April 2026.
Media sites in the construction sector also report rising wages and salaries as Trump gradually enforces Americans’ right to a national labor market.
“Construction pay is up again this year, and many tradespeople are starting to feel the shift on the jobsite,” TradeHounds.com reported in June:
Average hourly earnings for construction craft workers reached $38.97 in May 2026, up 5.0% year over year, compared to 3.6% for the broader private sector. Growth is strongest in nonresidential construction.
Nationwide, entry-level construction workers saw their wages rise by 16 percent during 2025, to $52,000, said a December 2025 report by The Birmingham Group:
The current labor shortage is driving unprecedented wage increases across commercial projects. Construction firms report difficulty filling critical positions, with some markets experiencing job opening-to-candidate ratios exceeding 3:1. This imbalance has created a seller’s market for skilled workers, enabling significant salary negotiations and competitive pay packages.
“Construction laborers, the crews who prep sites and move materials, face an injury rate more than twice the national average,” according to a new survey by Affordable Contractors Insurance. It added:
The total cases amount to 54.3K over the two years. Over two-thirds of these cases require time off, but in this trade, people rest less, usually 12 days or fewer.
The healing of the labor market is slower in Texas because the supply of Mexican labor has kept salaries near the bottom on the national ranking.
For example, average wages for Texas construction workers rose to $37 an hour in December 2025, according to data presented by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. That was up modestly from $36 per hour in December 2024.
Yet a group of Texas construction companies lobbied Republicans and reporters for more migrant labor in February, according to a Politico report that credulously touted their demands:
Johnny Vasquez, executive officer of the Rio Grande Valley Builders Association, noted that Hidalgo County turned red for the president in 2024 — an example of gains the GOP will lose if the policies don’t shift, he argued. “For me and for our association, we need workers, whether they’re American or not,” he said. “We just need workers.”
The rising wage gains come amid rising competition in house sales, putting a tighter squeeze on CEOs who have enjoyed decades of cheap labor and rising sales.
“The latest HMI survey found that 38% of builders cut prices in September, up from 35% in August [and] the average price cut remained at 6% for the sixth consecutive month,” said a September report by a trade newspaper, HBSDealer. The price cut was driven by rising mortgage costs, the site noted.
This website uses cookies and other tracking technologies to enhance user experience and to analyze performance and traffic on our website. If you click “Accept Cookies” we will also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. Further information is available in our Privacy Policy.Your Privacy RightsReject OptionalAccept Cookies
The Steelers and Saints are poised to play the first-ever NFL regular-season game next weekend in Paris, at the Stade de France.
Ongoing protests over school conditions in recent weeks have led to violent clashes with police. The movement, which began in the Paris region and rapidly spread nationwide, has seen teenage students in their final years of high school block access to buildings and clash with law enforcement.
The students say their school hours are excessively long, conditions inadequate including overheated classrooms and dilapidated buildings, and that there are too many staff absences.
With the violence and unrest happening in the region, the NFL said that preparations are continuing as scheduled for the game between the Steelers and Saints on Oct. 25, as well as the events surrounding the contest.
“As we do for every NFL game, including our international games, we work closely with local authorities and partners on all operational and security matters,” said NFL chief spokesperson Brian McCarthy in a statement. “We look forward to welcoming fans to Paris later this month.”
This marks the second straight year that Pittsburgh will be involved in an international game as the NFL expands its footprint throughout the world. Last fall, the Steelers were the home team when Pittsburgh hosted the Minnesota Vikings at Croke Park in Dublin, Ireland, winning the game 24-21.
On a cold, drizzly day in July 2026, Nate Lewand and his fleet of whitewater rafters passed by Black Canyon, an obsidian-colored gorge on the Main Salmon River in Idaho. As they rounded the bend, they spotted a woman standing on a narrow sandy beach far too small to hold a tent. She wore clean linen clothing, military-style boots, and carried a burled walking stick.
Despite being right at the water’s edge in the rain, the woman was bone dry. She had no gear—no ropes, no backpacks, and no raft.
“She was just standing there,” Lewand told Outside. “We hollered to see if she was okay and slowed down a bit. She didn’t respond, so we yelled some more. She just stuck her hand up as if to wave, but she didn’t.”
No trail runs along this stretch of the canyon, and the surrounding walls are sheer granite cliffs. I know these areas well, having rowed the Salmon River myself. The canyon is a special place with deeply rooted history that you can feel with every passing oar stroke.
“We looked at a topographic map of how she got down there, and there’s no easy route,” Lewand said. “She would have had to rappel or be an amazing climber or floated in without any gear—or she just existed in this place.”
Lewand, 36, an experienced river runner from Park City, Utah, has spent eight years on the water. This was his fourth trip down the Main Salmon, an iconic 80-mile whitewater corridor cutting through Idaho’s Salmon-Challis National Forest.
His group wasn’t the only one to encounter the mystery figure. Between mid-July and early August, multiple river runners took to social media and local forums claiming they saw a “ghost woman dressed in white.”
One group reported hearing haunting wails echoing off the canyon walls at night; others said they saw a figure standing silently, high on a ridge above the rapids. Lewand noted that at least five other groups told him they also saw the woman at several remote locations along the river, including areas called Black Canyon, Lower Corey Bar, and Yellow Pine.
“We were trying to stay positive, so our crew started calling her Mother Nature, hoping for good graces on the rest of the trip,” Lewand said. “People have gone out intentionally looking for her since, but no one seems able to find her again.”
Whether the figure was a disoriented hiker or something paranormal, her appearance gave rise to a new moniker along the riverbanks: the Salmon Siren.
The Folklore of the Lady in White
Tales of ghostly women along waterways are as old as wilderness travel itself.
In Mexico and the American Southwest, stories persist of La Llorona, the weeping woman doomed to wander riverbanks searching for her lost children. In Ireland, the Banshee (bean sí) wails near waterways to warn of impending death. Scotland has the Bean Nigh, a river spirit seen washing the bloodstained clothes of those about to meet their fate.
Across Europe, similar archetypes appear: France’s Dame Blanche, Germany’s Weisse Frau, and the Dutch Witte Wieven, who drift through river mists and ancient ruins.
They are almost always women, clad in white, forever tethered to the places where they suffered immense loss.
It feels fitting that this classic folklore would find a home along the banks of the Main Salmon River—famously nicknamed The River of No Return.
In 2021, Zohran Mamdani, now New York City’s mayor, told a Young DSA conference that student debt cancellation and Medicare for All had popular support. Then he named “the end goal of seizing the means of production” as something that didn’t have support “at this very moment.”
How do you “seize” the means of production? That’s the explicit goal of the Democratic Party (now also the Communist Party). Production is created by a complex mixture of brainpower, active thought, risk taking and capital (money) previously created by those very attributes. Nobody can literally “seize” human thought, human creativity and ingenuity in that way, and then redistribute it to favored people. In practice, there is no “seizure” of the means of production as the lethal Democratic Party now advocates. All you can do is SHUT DOWN production by restraining innovation, risk-taking and creativity. I can think of nothing more evil than this. And millions of torpid, brainwashed, ignorant fools now applaud it. They’re applauding and begging for the impoverishment, depression, misery, despair and prison camps coming their way.
Usually, when it’s time to do chores around the house, I turn on Netflix, plop my son in front of the TV, and let Disney babysit for me. He is, after all, four years old, and four-year-olds are not particularly famous for their floor-scrubbing abilities.
I didn’t realize how much this was affecting him until we passed by a toy ship from his favorite show, Jake and The Neverland Pirates.
“It’s The Mighty Colossus,” my son told me, not so much speaking as shrieking. “I need it!”
I said no. He erupted.
He couldn’t understand why we couldn’t afford to buy every toy we saw. Soon he was in tears, thrashing wildly. My wife and I were, for the first time in our lives, one of those parents. We had that naughty, uncontrollable child in the store that made people tsk and think, at least that’s not my child.
The next day, we tried to do things differently. We planned to clean the whole house, and our son was going to help the entire time. It was supposed to be a punishment – but he loved it. It ended up being one of the best days of his life.
I didn’t need to plop him in front of the TV to do chores. He could help. More than that, he wanted to help. And, as it turns out, he’s actually pretty good at scrubbing the floors.
Children, I’m learning, need to do chores. A lot of us don’t ask our kids for contributions like that. In fact, only 28 percent of parents make their kids do chores. But it’s the best thing you can do for your kids, for a lot of reasons.
Children who do chores grow up to be successful
Part of the reason I put my son to work was because of a Ted Talk. Harvard University ran a 75-year-long study that followed people through their entire lives. It tracked their physical and emotional health, trying, in part, to find some kind of insight into what makes people happy and successful.
Chores, it concluded, were the key. When it came to their careers, the one thing that could predict whether a child grew up successful linked back to chores. Kids who had to help out at home were more successful in their careers as adults. The earlier they started the better.
It makes a lot of sense. According to Julie Lythcott-Haims, when kids do chores, they learn that they have to contribute to life to participate in it. When you do all the cooking, your kids grow up thinking that food is provided for them. But when kids help, they understand there’s work involved.
Chores are a chance to learn how things work
When I showed my son how to change the toilet paper when it gets low, I decided to work in a little science lesson. I cracked open the plastic that holds the toilet paper in place and showed him the spring inside.
“When you push it, it gets smaller,” I told him, “and when you let go, it gets big again!”
Usually, when it’s time to do chores around the house, I turn on Netflix, plop my son in front of the TV, and let Disney babysit for me. He is, after all, four years old, and four-year-olds are not particularly famous for their floor-scrubbing abilities.
I didn’t realize how much this was affecting him until we passed by a toy ship from his favorite show, Jake and The Neverland Pirates.
“It’s The Mighty Colossus,” my son told me, not so much speaking as shrieking. “I need it!”
I said no. He erupted.
He couldn’t understand why we couldn’t afford to buy every toy we saw. Soon he was in tears, thrashing wildly. My wife and I were, for the first time in our lives, one of those parents. We had that naughty, uncontrollable child in the store that made people tsk and think, at least that’s not my child.
The next day, we tried to do things differently. We planned to clean the whole house, and our son was going to help the entire time. It was supposed to be a punishment – but he loved it. It ended up being one of the best days of his life.
I didn’t need to plop him in front of the TV to do chores. He could help. More than that, he wanted to help. And, as it turns out, he’s actually pretty good at scrubbing the floors.
Children, I’m learning, need to do chores. A lot of us don’t ask our kids for contributions like that. In fact, only 28 percent of parents make their kids do chores. But it’s the best thing you can do for your kids, for a lot of reasons.
Children who do chores grow up to be successful
Part of the reason I put my son to work was because of a Ted Talk. Harvard University ran a 75-year-long study that followed people through their entire lives. It tracked their physical and emotional health, trying, in part, to find some kind of insight into what makes people happy and successful.
Chores, it concluded, were the key. When it came to their careers, the one thing that could predict whether a child grew up successful linked back to chores. Kids who had to help out at home were more successful in their careers as adults. The earlier they started the better.
It makes a lot of sense. According to Julie Lythcott-Haims, when kids do chores, they learn that they have to contribute to life to participate in it. When you do all the cooking, your kids grow up thinking that food is provided for them. But when kids help, they understand there’s work involved.
Chores are a chance to learn how things work
When I showed my son how to change the toilet paper when it gets low, I decided to work in a little science lesson. I cracked open the plastic that holds the toilet paper in place and showed him the spring inside.
“When you push it, it gets smaller,” I told him, “and when you let go, it gets big again!”
Usually, when it’s time to do chores around the house, I turn on Netflix, plop my son in front of the TV, and let Disney babysit for me. He is, after all, four years old, and four-year-olds are not particularly famous for their floor-scrubbing abilities.
I didn’t realize how much this was affecting him until we passed by a toy ship from his favorite show, Jake and The Neverland Pirates.
“It’s The Mighty Colossus,” my son told me, not so much speaking as shrieking. “I need it!”
I said no. He erupted.
He couldn’t understand why we couldn’t afford to buy every toy we saw. Soon he was in tears, thrashing wildly. My wife and I were, for the first time in our lives, one of those parents. We had that naughty, uncontrollable child in the store that made people tsk and think, at least that’s not my child.
The next day, we tried to do things differently. We planned to clean the whole house, and our son was going to help the entire time. It was supposed to be a punishment – but he loved it. It ended up being one of the best days of his life.
I didn’t need to plop him in front of the TV to do chores. He could help. More than that, he wanted to help. And, as it turns out, he’s actually pretty good at scrubbing the floors.
Children, I’m learning, need to do chores. A lot of us don’t ask our kids for contributions like that. In fact, only 28 percent of parents make their kids do chores. But it’s the best thing you can do for your kids, for a lot of reasons.
Children who do chores grow up to be successful
Part of the reason I put my son to work was because of a Ted Talk. Harvard University ran a 75-year-long study that followed people through their entire lives. It tracked their physical and emotional health, trying, in part, to find some kind of insight into what makes people happy and successful.
Chores, it concluded, were the key. When it came to their careers, the one thing that could predict whether a child grew up successful linked back to chores. Kids who had to help out at home were more successful in their careers as adults. The earlier they started the better.
It makes a lot of sense. According to Julie Lythcott-Haims, when kids do chores, they learn that they have to contribute to life to participate in it. When you do all the cooking, your kids grow up thinking that food is provided for them. But when kids help, they understand there’s work involved.
Chores are a chance to learn how things work
When I showed my son how to change the toilet paper when it gets low, I decided to work in a little science lesson. I cracked open the plastic that holds the toilet paper in place and showed him the spring inside.
“When you push it, it gets smaller,” I told him, “and when you let go, it gets big again!”
Usually, when it’s time to do chores around the house, I turn on Netflix, plop my son in front of the TV, and let Disney babysit for me. He is, after all, four years old, and four-year-olds are not particularly famous for their floor-scrubbing abilities.
I didn’t realize how much this was affecting him until we passed by a toy ship from his favorite show, Jake and The Neverland Pirates.
“It’s The Mighty Colossus,” my son told me, not so much speaking as shrieking. “I need it!”
I said no. He erupted.
He couldn’t understand why we couldn’t afford to buy every toy we saw. Soon he was in tears, thrashing wildly. My wife and I were, for the first time in our lives, one of those parents. We had that naughty, uncontrollable child in the store that made people tsk and think, at least that’s not my child.
The next day, we tried to do things differently. We planned to clean the whole house, and our son was going to help the entire time. It was supposed to be a punishment – but he loved it. It ended up being one of the best days of his life.
I didn’t need to plop him in front of the TV to do chores. He could help. More than that, he wanted to help. And, as it turns out, he’s actually pretty good at scrubbing the floors.
Children, I’m learning, need to do chores. A lot of us don’t ask our kids for contributions like that. In fact, only 28 percent of parents make their kids do chores. But it’s the best thing you can do for your kids, for a lot of reasons.
Children who do chores grow up to be successful
Part of the reason I put my son to work was because of a Ted Talk. Harvard University ran a 75-year-long study that followed people through their entire lives. It tracked their physical and emotional health, trying, in part, to find some kind of insight into what makes people happy and successful.
Chores, it concluded, were the key. When it came to their careers, the one thing that could predict whether a child grew up successful linked back to chores. Kids who had to help out at home were more successful in their careers as adults. The earlier they started the better.
It makes a lot of sense. According to Julie Lythcott-Haims, when kids do chores, they learn that they have to contribute to life to participate in it. When you do all the cooking, your kids grow up thinking that food is provided for them. But when kids help, they understand there’s work involved.
Chores are a chance to learn how things work
When I showed my son how to change the toilet paper when it gets low, I decided to work in a little science lesson. I cracked open the plastic that holds the toilet paper in place and showed him the spring inside.
“When you push it, it gets smaller,” I told him, “and when you let go, it gets big again!”
Usually, when it’s time to do chores around the house, I turn on Netflix, plop my son in front of the TV, and let Disney babysit for me. He is, after all, four years old, and four-year-olds are not particularly famous for their floor-scrubbing abilities.
I didn’t realize how much this was affecting him until we passed by a toy ship from his favorite show, Jake and The Neverland Pirates.
“It’s The Mighty Colossus,” my son told me, not so much speaking as shrieking. “I need it!”
I said no. He erupted.
He couldn’t understand why we couldn’t afford to buy every toy we saw. Soon he was in tears, thrashing wildly. My wife and I were, for the first time in our lives, one of those parents. We had that naughty, uncontrollable child in the store that made people tsk and think, at least that’s not my child.
The next day, we tried to do things differently. We planned to clean the whole house, and our son was going to help the entire time. It was supposed to be a punishment – but he loved it. It ended up being one of the best days of his life.
I didn’t need to plop him in front of the TV to do chores. He could help. More than that, he wanted to help. And, as it turns out, he’s actually pretty good at scrubbing the floors.
Children, I’m learning, need to do chores. A lot of us don’t ask our kids for contributions like that. In fact, only 28 percent of parents make their kids do chores. But it’s the best thing you can do for your kids, for a lot of reasons.
Children who do chores grow up to be successful
Part of the reason I put my son to work was because of a Ted Talk. Harvard University ran a 75-year-long study that followed people through their entire lives. It tracked their physical and emotional health, trying, in part, to find some kind of insight into what makes people happy and successful.
Chores, it concluded, were the key. When it came to their careers, the one thing that could predict whether a child grew up successful linked back to chores. Kids who had to help out at home were more successful in their careers as adults. The earlier they started the better.
It makes a lot of sense. According to Julie Lythcott-Haims, when kids do chores, they learn that they have to contribute to life to participate in it. When you do all the cooking, your kids grow up thinking that food is provided for them. But when kids help, they understand there’s work involved.
Chores are a chance to learn how things work
When I showed my son how to change the toilet paper when it gets low, I decided to work in a little science lesson. I cracked open the plastic that holds the toilet paper in place and showed him the spring inside.
“When you push it, it gets smaller,” I told him, “and when you let go, it gets big again!”
Usually, when it’s time to do chores around the house, I turn on Netflix, plop my son in front of the TV, and let Disney babysit for me. He is, after all, four years old, and four-year-olds are not particularly famous for their floor-scrubbing abilities.
I didn’t realize how much this was affecting him until we passed by a toy ship from his favorite show, Jake and The Neverland Pirates.
“It’s The Mighty Colossus,” my son told me, not so much speaking as shrieking. “I need it!”
I said no. He erupted.
He couldn’t understand why we couldn’t afford to buy every toy we saw. Soon he was in tears, thrashing wildly. My wife and I were, for the first time in our lives, one of those parents. We had that naughty, uncontrollable child in the store that made people tsk and think, at least that’s not my child.
The next day, we tried to do things differently. We planned to clean the whole house, and our son was going to help the entire time. It was supposed to be a punishment – but he loved it. It ended up being one of the best days of his life.
I didn’t need to plop him in front of the TV to do chores. He could help. More than that, he wanted to help. And, as it turns out, he’s actually pretty good at scrubbing the floors.
Children, I’m learning, need to do chores. A lot of us don’t ask our kids for contributions like that. In fact, only 28 percent of parents make their kids do chores. But it’s the best thing you can do for your kids, for a lot of reasons.
Children who do chores grow up to be successful
Part of the reason I put my son to work was because of a Ted Talk. Harvard University ran a 75-year-long study that followed people through their entire lives. It tracked their physical and emotional health, trying, in part, to find some kind of insight into what makes people happy and successful.
Chores, it concluded, were the key. When it came to their careers, the one thing that could predict whether a child grew up successful linked back to chores. Kids who had to help out at home were more successful in their careers as adults. The earlier they started the better.
It makes a lot of sense. According to Julie Lythcott-Haims, when kids do chores, they learn that they have to contribute to life to participate in it. When you do all the cooking, your kids grow up thinking that food is provided for them. But when kids help, they understand there’s work involved.
Chores are a chance to learn how things work
When I showed my son how to change the toilet paper when it gets low, I decided to work in a little science lesson. I cracked open the plastic that holds the toilet paper in place and showed him the spring inside.
“When you push it, it gets smaller,” I told him, “and when you let go, it gets big again!”
Democrat nominee for the Senate in Michigan, Abdul El-Sayed, in a nationally televised news program, described ‘Medicare for All’ as “…guaranteed health insurance from cradle to the moment you pass away. It comes without premiums or co-pays or deductibles. It guarantees you care when you need it. This is a level of security we have never known in the United States.”
This is a slick snake oil salesman trying to convince you that there is a good fairy bringing you utopia for nothing.
El-Sayed and many others ignore key important issues. What does it cost, and how do we pay for it? If they would examine the countries that have national health insurance in various forms, they would know not one works as he described. All have rationing of services and long waits for procedures needed. In every case, there is more demand for services than supply of doctors, hospitals, nurses, etc. to fulfill the demand. And they all have some kind of fee for services.
The Cato Institute has done an analysis of what all the ‘free’ services might cost; ‘Medicare for All’ is just one of the programs. There is ‘free’ tuition, child care, senior care, reparations, etc. – a long wish list of benefits. Their estimate for a 10-year period ranges from a low of $71 trillion to a high of $222 trillion. The assumptions vary widely, but the least expensive alternative is almost double what the U.S. spends now on everything. The total expenditures for 2026 fiscal year were $7.4 trillion.
So, how do we pay for it?
Tax the rich? Cato also studied that option. They found the only problem with that is there isn’t nearly enough money among the wealthy on any reasonable tax increase to come close to paying for it. Wealth Taxes? Sorry, that has been tried in a dozen countries and repealed because it doesn’t work either. In France, for example, they repealed it after 75,000 of their wealthiest left, and they discovered that they lost more in regular taxes than they gained in the wealth tax.
Some countries offer many of the social programs often held up as models for the United States. Sweden, a Scandinavian country frequently cited as an example, is one of them. But how does Sweden pay for these programs? The answer is through significantly higher taxes on income, retirement, consumption, and gasoline.
Sweden’s income tax starts at 32 percent, with the rate rising to 52 percent on income above $62,000. By comparison, the U.S. federal income tax rate tops out at 22 percent for income up to $103,000, although higher federal tax brackets apply to income above that level, but none get close to 52 percent.
Retirement taxes are another major difference. In Sweden, employers pay a pension contribution of 32 percent on the full amount of wages. In the United States, Social Security taxes total 12.4 percent, split equally between employers and employees, and apply only up to an annual earnings cap, which was $184,500 in 2025.
Sweden also relies heavily on a value-added tax, or VAT, which functions much like a national sales tax on goods and services. The standard rate is 25 percent, although certain items, including food, are taxed at lower rates. The overall effective rate averages 19 percent. The United States, by contrast, has no national sales tax. However, most states have a sales tax, which averages roughly six to seven percent.
Gasoline provides another example of the difference. On a given date, a gallon of gasoline in Sweden costs approximately $7.19, compared with $4.47 in the United States. The difference reflects Sweden’s higher fuel taxes.
Generous public programs do not pay for themselves. Sweden funds its many social benefits through a substantially higher tax burden on everyone — workers, employers, and consumers. Americans considering whether to adopt similar programs should weigh not only the benefits they promise, but also the taxes required to sustain them. Our snake oil salesmen conveniently ignore this issue.
The national health service doesn’t work quite like the snake oil salesman from Michigan suggests. In Sweden and most countries that have some form of universal medical care, there is rationing of medical services and long waits for many procedures. And there are fees required for all visits, typically from $20 to $40 for routine visits. And there is a growing reliance on private health insurance (13 percent have this), because that is the way you can get your needs fulfilled on a timely basis. Many of their companies offer private insurance as an inducement to employment.
If you want all those ‘free’ programs, just understand you will be paying a lot for them. There is no free lunch, so quit looking for it.
Les Rubin is the founder and president of Main Street Economics.
Friday on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) spoke optimistically about Republicans’ chances in the November 3 midterm elections, declaring that the GOP nominee for his state’s open U.S. Senate seat was going to win.
In a joint appearance with Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Cruz said a “hostile takeover” of the Democratic Party by communists and Islamists was underway.
“Senator Cruz, I want to turn real quickly to Texas,” guest host Charlie Hurt said. “You know, we’ve seen a lot of these polls showing Talarico and Ken Paxton within the margin of error. In the past, you have been underestimated in the polls. What do you make of the polling in Texas right now?”
Cruz replied, “Look, in Texas, it’s a real fight, just like Alaska, it’s a real fight. Both races, I think, are tied right now. Now, here’s the good news, Charlie, we’re going to win Texas, and we’re going to win Alaska. Both of these races, we’re going to win, but we’re 18 days out. It’s all about turnout. The crazies, the radicals, look, we’re witnessing a hostile takeover of the Democrat Party by communists and Islamists. They’re going to show up. We’ve got to make sure commonsense conservatives show up.”
Imtiaz Mohammad is running as a Republican – but he calls Pakistan his “motherland” and says anything he does will be “related to Pakistan.”
After losing as a Democrat, he switched parties. His real goal: elect as many Muslims as possible – commissioners, congressmen, everything – until politicians must come begging the Muslim voting bloc.
He wants all Muslims “on one page.” He is not running for Americans. He is running for Islam and Pakistan.
Why is the Florida GOP still featuring him?
Florida, do better.
Mohammad, a Pakistani immigrant and former Democrat (Bernie/Squad supporter, ICE abolitionist, sanctuary-state advocate), switched parties in 2022 and became the uncontested Republican nominee for Florida House District 103. The piece highlights his past anti-America remarks, ties to WhyIslam/ICNA, campaigning at Darul Uloom (linked to terror figures), criticism of DeSantis on CAIR, and the Florida GOP’s promotion of him despite earlier local party concerns.
Short follow-up alert noting that the same former Democrat is now the Republican nominee for Florida House District 103 after an unopposed primary and appeared on a GOP flyer. It recaps his anti-America statements, progressive past, ICNA/Darul Uloom ties, CAIR criticism, and urges the Florida GOP to drop him from materials, calling the party switch insufficient.
Some Americans are crying poverty with a $1,500 iPhone in one hand and an $8 Starbucks latte in the other. They say groceries are unaffordable, but somehow the restaurants are packed, airports are crowded, and the neighbor just pulled into his driveway with a brand-new $90,000 SUV.
Apparently, we’re one bad economic report away from bankruptcy and one Instagram post away from booking another trip to Cabo.
Consumer confidence is in the basement. Consumer spending apparently didn’t get the memo.
In September, the Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index fell to 81.9. Yet it has been reported that consumer credit and debit card spending per household increased 6.2% from a year earlier.
As a financial advisor, I think the answer involves something more powerful than inflation or interest rates. Human psychology.
And there are five reasons our spending habits aren’t matching our economic anxiety.
1. Keeping up with the Joneses has gone digital
Thirty years ago, you compared your lifestyle with the neighbor who bought a new Cadillac.
Today, you’re comparing yourself with 5,000 people on Instagram. There are even college degrees on how to become a social media influencer. None of them get lots of likes by telling you to eat ramen noodles and skip third-row seats for the latest rock concert.
Someone’s vacationing in Italy. Someone remodeled their kitchen. Someone bought a new Porsche. Face it. Someone is always doing better than you are. Or, it seems that way.
2. We’ve become a nation of monthly payments
3. There are two different American consumers
4. If tomorrow looks bad, why not enjoy today?
5. We’ve confused looking wealthy with being wealthy
