For the first time under President Donald Trump, the US military engaged in trilateral exercises with Japan and South Korea. The move will be viewed as a provocation by the DPRK, which views US-led war games in the region as preparation for regime change in Pyongyang.
On Thursday, US Indo-Pacific Command announced that it had wrapped up four days of military drills in the East China Sea with the two allies. This week’s war games “build upon the regular, increasingly complex trilateral cooperation of the three nations, including the January 2025 trilateral bomber escort flights, as the three nations continue integration across the Joint Force,” INDOPACOM explained in a press release.
It added, “This current activity builds on previous exercises like Freedom Edge and our continuing operations together, advancing doctrine as well as tactics, techniques and procedures among our combined forces.”
The games were led by the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier strike group. The South Korean Defense Ministry said the latest drills were also meant to prepare for conflict with North Korea.
“The exercise focused on enhancing trilateral cooperation for South Korea, the US and Japan’s deterrence and response capabilities against North Korea’s nuclear, missile and underwater threats and… bolstering their maritime security capacity,” the ministry said in a statement.
In response to the Vinson’s arrival in South Korea last month, Kim Yo-jong, the sister of Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un, said that Washington “is repeatedly committing provocative acts that ignore North Korea’s security concerns and worsen the situation.”
“The United States is openly demonstrating its intention to be the most hostile and confrontational toward the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea through these practical actions,” she added.
“The root of the escalation of the situation on the Korean Peninsula clearly lies with the United States and its allies, who are further intensifying their military moves to transplant NATO’s infrastructure into the region and raise the level of war preparedness.”
Other than stoking tensions with Pyongyang, war games on the Korean Peninsula have had other consequences. In February, nearly 30 South Koreans were injured after the country’s warplanes accidentally bombed a civilian area during live-fire military drills with the US.
As of 2024, nearly two-thirds (65.7%) U.S. households owned their home, while the rest rented.
However, homeownership rates vary widely across states and between urban, suburban, and rural areas, reflecting differences in affordability, housing availability, and local economic conditions.
In the map below, by USAFacts,Visual Capitalist’s Kayla Zhu visualizes the share of households that are owner-occupied by state in 2023.
Below, we show home ownership rates by state in 2023.
State/Area
Share of households that are owner-occupied (2023)
West Virginia
77.0%
Delaware
75.7%
Mississippi
75.5%
Maine
75.5%
Wyoming
74.5%
New Hampshire
74.3%
Michigan
74.1%
Minnesota
74.0%
Alabama
73.8%
Vermont
73.7%
Indiana
73.3%
South Carolina
73.0%
Iowa
71.8%
Maryland
71.6%
Montana
71.0%
Idaho
71.0%
Pennsylvania
71.0%
Utah
70.3%
New Mexico
70.3%
Arizona
69.7%
South Dakota
69.3%
Wisconsin
69.2%
Virginia
69.1%
Tennessee
68.9%
Missouri
68.7%
Kansas
68.5%
Nebraska
68.4%
Kentucky
68.4%
Connecticut
68.2%
Oklahoma
68.0%
Illinois
67.8%
Louisiana
67.3%
Florida
67.3%
Colorado
67.2%
North Carolina
66.9%
Ohio
66.6%
Washington
66.3%
Arkansas
65.9%
North Dakota
65.7%
Georgia
65.5%
Rhode Island
64.4%
Alaska
64.3%
Oregon
64.10%
Texas
63.6%
New Jersey
62.7%
Massachusetts
61.9%
Hawaii
61.8%
Nevada
61.2%
California
55.8%
New York
53.3%
District of Columbia
40.2%
West Virginia had the highest homeownership rate in 2023, with 77% of households owning their homes.
One key factor behind West Virginia’s high ownership rate is its relative affordability. The state consistently ranks among those with the lowest median home sale prices, and it has the lowest home price-to-income ratio in the country.
Additionally, the state’s largely rural landscape and lower population density may contribute to its high homeownership rate, as housing availability is less constrained than in densely populated urban markets.
In contrast, states with the lowest homeownership rates such as Hawaii, California, and New York, also have some of the highest home prices and home price-to-income ratios, making ownership less attainable.
Places like New York and Calfornia also face high demand in urban centers, a greater share of renters due to job concentration and lifestyle preferences, and tend to have stricter zoning regulations.
This pattern highlights that while affordability plays a significant role, homeownership rates are also influenced by factors like housing supply, economic opportunities, and regional job markets.
Learn more about U.S. real estate in this this graphic, which visualizes the annual nominal change in house prices by state as of the first quarter of 2024.
Every decade has a new food enemy. First, it was fat. Then, it was sugar. Now, seed oils are under fire—blamed for causing obesity and chronic disease.
They’re almost impossible to avoid. Seed oils are in everything—from salad dressings and fast food to protein bars and even baby formula. Critics claim they’re harmful, while supporters argue they’re safe, affordable, and even good for you.
However, the truth is more nuanced. The debate is often oversimplified. Even the term “seed oil” is misleading, lumping together oils that have been part of traditional diets for centuries with those created for large-scale food production.
At its core, the controversy isn’t just about whether seed oils are inherently good or bad—it’s about how they’re processed and consumed.
What Are Seed Oils, Really?
If you’ve been following health trends, you’ve probably heard claims that seed oils are toxic and should be avoided. What exactly are seed oils, and why do some people consider them harmful?
At their most basic, seed oils are extracted from seeds. This might seem harmless—after all, olive oil comes from olives, and coconut oil from coconuts.
But not all seed oils are the same. Some, like sesame and flaxseed oil, have been integral to traditional diets for centuries and are extracted through natural, cold-press methods that preserve their nutrients and antioxidants.
Others, however, are highly processed. Industrial seed oils—like soybean, corn, canola, sunflower, safflower, cottonseed, grapeseed, and rice bran—are mass-produced through high-heat extraction and chemical refining.
Manufacturers frequently use solvents like hexane to extract the maximum amount of oil. These oils are refined, bleached, and deodorized, earning them the label “RBD” oils. This process makes them neutral in taste and more shelf-stable, but it also removes beneficial compounds like vitamin E and antioxidants.
Many industrial seed oils were never intended for human consumption. Canola oil began as rapeseed oil, primarily used as a machine lubricant until Canadian scientists modified it in the 1970s to remove toxic compounds. The name itself—a blend of “Canada” and “oil”—was a marketing invention. “Vegetable oil” is another misleading term—it’s often a blend of industrial seed oils marketed to sound healthier than it is.
Cate Shanahan, a Cornell-trained physician-scientist specializing in dietary fats, explains that industrial seed oils were not developed with nutrition in mind.
“The crude oil from these seeds is inedible,” she told The Epoch Times. “Soy and canola weren’t bred for nutrition—they were bred for high yields and industrial durability.”
Most soy grown in the United States isn’t intended for human consumption at all. According to the United States Department of Agriculture, more than 70 percent of U.S. soybeans are used for animal feed, while another 5 percent is processed into biodiesel. What remains is primarily refined into soybean oil—a product stripped of much of the soy plant’s original nutritional value.
Additionally, more than 90 percent of American soy is genetically modified to withstand herbicides like glyphosate, allowing farmers to spray entire fields without harming crops. This high-intensity farming, combined with heavy industrial processing, results in oil far removed from its original form.
Unlike traditional oils such as olive or sesame, which retain their natural antioxidants, industrial seed oils require extensive refining to become shelf-stable. Shanahan argues that this process removes beneficial compounds, making them more prone to oxidation and degradation.
“What works for machines doesn’t always work for humans,” Shanahan said.
Are Seed Oils Good or Bad for Your Health?
Seed oils’ health effects are hotly debated. Some experts say they’re a heart-healthy alternative to butter and other animal fats, while others believe they might contribute to inflammation and disease.
The Case for Seed Oils As a Heart-Healthy Alternative
For decades, scientists have debated the role of different fats in heart health. Research suggests that replacing saturated fats—found in butter and red meat—with polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs) from seed oils may offer cardiovascular benefits.
Advocates argue that the science is well-established.
“The research on seed oils is consistently positive,” Matthew Nagra, a naturopathic doctor, told The Epoch Times. “Numerous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that replacing saturated fat with seed oils rich in polyunsaturated fats can lower the risk of cardiovascular disease, America’s top killer, without any clear detriment.”
Large-scale studies support this claim. A 2021 study of more than 500,000 people found that those who replaced saturated fats with oils like canola, corn, and olive oil had a lower risk of heart disease and early death.
“Our findings support shifting the intake from solid fats to non-hydrogenated vegetable oils for cardiometabolic health and longevity,” the authors wrote. Examples of solid fats include butter and lard.
A 2025 JAMA Internal Medicine study reinforced these findings, showing that people who ate more plant-based oils—such as olive, soybean, and canola—lived longer and had lower heart disease and cancer rates. Meanwhile, those who ate more butter had a higher risk of early death. The researchers estimated that swapping butter for plant oils could reduce overall mortality risk by 17 percent, including a 17 percent drop in cancer-related deaths.
Because of this growing evidence, the American Heart Association (AHA) continues to recommend seed oils as part of a heart-healthy diet.
The Case Against Seed Oils: Oxidation and Inflammation
Not everyone agrees with the AHA’s endorsement of seed oils, and some experts question the research behind it.
“This study is of low quality,” Dr. Vinay Prasad, a hematologist-oncologist and professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco, told The Epoch Times in an email. “It lumps extra virgin olive oil with soybean and safflower oil, which is ridiculous.” He also criticized the study’s methodology, arguing that it fails to accurately measure butter consumption and instead relies on an imprecise estimation method. “This kind of nutritional epidemiology fuels dogma rather than providing clarity,” he said.
Beyond concerns about research methods, critics argue that the real issue with seed oil is oxidation.
Refining makes seed oils more resistant to spoilage, allowing them to last longer on store shelves. However, once exposed to heat, air, or light—especially during cooking—their chemical structure begins to break down.
Unlike traditional oils such as olive or sesame, which naturally contain antioxidants that help prevent degradation, industrial seed oils lose these stabilizing compounds during processing. As a result, they are more vulnerable to oxidation, a process that creates byproducts like aldehydes and free radicals. These compounds can damage cells, promote inflammation, and contribute to chronic disease.
Heat accelerates this process. Studies show that repeatedly heating vegetable oils—such as those used in restaurant fryers—can generate oxidative byproducts linked to tissue damage and increased cholesterol levels in lab animals. Some research has also found oxidized linoleic acid, a degraded form of omega-6 fat, accumulating in human fat tissue and artery plaques, raising concerns about long-term health effects.
Not all experts agree that oxidation is a major threat.
“These processes have pros and cons,” says Christopher Gardner, a nutrition professor at Stanford. “They help prevent oils from breaking down but also strip away some beneficial components.”
A review in The Scientific World Journal found that while refining removes antioxidants like vitamin E and polyphenols (compounds that help protect cells), it also eliminates impurities, making the oils more stable and less likely to spoil.
Still, oxidation happens faster in seed oils than in other fats. Research shows that PUFAs degrade more quickly when exposed to heat, light, and air, whereas monounsaturated fats (found in olive oil) and saturated fats (found in butter and beef tallow) remain more stable.
The Processed Food Connection
If there’s one thing both critics and defenders of seed oils agree on, They’re everywhere. And that’s no accident.
Cheap, abundant, and heavily subsidized seed oils are a pillar of the modern food industry. The U.S. government pours billions into supporting crops like soybeans, corn, and cottonseed, making their oils far more affordable than alternatives like olive or avocado.
Soybeans dominate the market, accounting for about 90 percent of U.S. oilseed production. In 2016, the soybean industry alone received $1.6 billion in subsidies—helping to keep production high and costs low.
Government support doesn’t just make seed oils cheap for home cooks—it makes them the backbone of ultra-processed foods (UPFs), which now make up nearly 60 percent of the American diet. Along with refined grains and added sugars, seed oils form the foundation of modern processed foods, used to enhance texture, extend shelf life, and boost flavor at a low cost. These ingredients appear in everything from breakfast cereals to frozen dinners, making them nearly impossible to avoid in a typical supermarket.
A 32-ounce bottle of canola oil costs about $5.79, while the same amount of extra virgin olive oil can cost $13.99 or more. For food manufacturers trying to keep costs down, the choice is obvious. Because they’re inexpensive, neutral in flavor, and relatively shelf-stable, seed oils are a food manufacturer’s dream—allowing processed foods to last longer, taste better, and remain profitable.
Shanahan estimates that seed oils account for 20–30 percent of the average American’s daily calorie intake. This figure wasn’t easy to calculate, as seed oils aren’t tracked as a category. Shanahan analyzed decades of production data from crops like soybeans and canola, using government and industry reports to uncover the extent of seed oils’ presence in modern diets.
“Humans have never consumed polyunsaturates at this level before,” she warns. “Historically, diets relied mainly on animal fats, not oils rich in PUFAs. If you don’t know to avoid them, you’re eating vast quantities.”
Gardner agrees—but says the issue isn’t just seed oils. The rise in seed oil consumption isn’t because more people are making homemade salad dressings, he said. It’s because ultra-processed foods—where these oils are used heavily—now dominate the American diet.
Gardner argues that even if seed oils were removed from the food supply tomorrow, ultra-processed foods wouldn’t disappear—they’d just be reformulated.
“If the same UPFs were made with another oil like butter, beef tallow, lard, or coconut fat, those foods would not suddenly become health foods.”
At its core, the debate over seed oils is about more than just the oils themselves. It’s about the processed foods they’re in—and whether we should be eating so many of them in the first place.
So, What Should You Cook With?
Rather than fixating on eliminating seed oils altogether, experts say the bigger issue is reducing ultra-processed foods and choosing high-quality, stable fats when cooking at home.
“If you want to improve your health by cutting back on seed oils, the best way to do that is by eating fewer ultra-processed foods,” Gardner advises. “That would be a win in several ways—less sugar, less refined grain, and less sodium.”
For those looking to make better choices in their kitchens, experts recommend using stable, minimally processed oils that are less prone to oxidation:
Better Options for Cooking
Avocado: High in monounsaturated fats, stable for high heat
Extra virgin olive: Rich in antioxidants, ideal for drizzling or light cooking
Butter and ghee: Naturally stable for high-heat cooking
Coconut: High in saturated fat, making it oxidation-resistant
Oils Best Used Cold
Flaxseed: High in omega-3s, best for dressings
Walnut: Antioxidant-rich, flavorful in salads
Sesame: Aromatic and moderately heat-stable
Industrially Refined Oils
Soybean
Corn
Canola
Cottonseed
Sunflower
Safflower
Grapeseed
Rice bran
While some specialty versions exist in cold-pressed forms, they are far less common than their mass-produced, highly processed counterparts.
The Bottom Line
The debate over seed oils is far from over, but one thing is clear: How you consume them matters.
A drizzle of canola oil on a homemade salad is not the same as eating French fries fried in old restaurant oil. Relying on ultra-processed foods filled with cheap oils, sugar, and additives is where the larger problem lies.
For most people, the best way to improve their diet isn’t to worry about every drop of seed oil—it’s to eat more fresh, unprocessed foods, says Gardner.
“It seems bizarre to blame the plant oils and not the foods they’re in.”
In 2012, the United Nations proclaimed March 20 as the International Day of Happiness or World Happiness Day, which has been held on this date every year since.
The aim is to promote awareness for a “more inclusive, equitable and balanced approach to economic growth that promotes the happiness and well-being of all people”. Although happiness and satisfaction are subjective parameters, the team behind the World Happiness Report has once again produced a country ranking this year that reveals clear differences between Western industrialized nations and countries in Asia and Africa.
In order to map the satisfaction of respondents in the 147 countries surveyed, participants were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with their current life on a ten-point scale. This was used to calculate an average value for the results between 2022 and 2024 for each country.
As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the chart below, based on the report, Finland (7.736), Denmark (7.521) and Iceland (7.515) are the countries with the most satisfied residents according to calculations, while the three lowest scores are found among the residents of Lebanon (3.19), Sierra Leone (3.00) and Afghanistan (1.36).
The United States is ranked 24th out of the 147 countries in this year’s evaluation.
The report found that unemployment was a factor influencing life evaluation negatively, as were the anticipation of mental health issues or violent crime. Doubling one’s income had a positive effect, but it was by far not as big as the increase in perceived happiness correlated with carrying out benevolent acts like donating to charity, volunteering or helping a stranger. Expecting to have your wallet returned when lost coincided with an even bigger boost to life ratings, however.
It’s important to note here that the ranking of the World Happiness Report is not an objective survey based on key figures such as gross domestic product per capita, life expectancy or the quality of the social system. According to the authors, these are analyzed as “supporting factors” in the text of the report but have no influence on the score.
Technology has made financial transactions as easy as pressing a button on your phone. You can send or request money through mobile apps in seconds. And you can open new accounts like credit cards, personal loans, and even mortgages entirely online. But while technology has made financial transactions simpler, it also has opened a door through which your money can flow into the wrong hands. And that door is guarded by sophisticated scammers and fraudsters.
In fact, Americans lost a record $10 billion to fraud in 2023, according to the latest data by the Federal Trade Commission. And as we approach the finish line of tax season, scammers are racing to capture unsuspecting victims.
More than 2.4 million people in the United States have been targeted by IRS impersonators, according to Equifax. And that has resulted in a loss of $72.8 million. The U.S. Treasury inspector general for tax administration has called these operations “the largest, most pervasive impersonation scam in the history of the IRS.”
However, there are a few steps you can take to avoid all kinds of money scams.
Beware of Giving Out Your Personal Information
Many cases of fraud are tied to imposter or spoofer scams. This happens when a scammer contacts you via phone, text, or email and pretends to be someone else. It could be someone impersonating a bank representative or an IRS agent, for instance.
Their message may claim there’s “fraudulent activity” on your account and they’d need your username and password or PIN to rectify the situation. Or it may be someone saying they’re an IRS agent there to let you know that you need to provide your banking information to get your refund.
If anyone asks for your sensitive personal information, it should raise an immediate red flag. Bank employees don’t ever ask for sensitive information like passwords and PINs. And the IRS only communicates via postal mail.
Of course, these are just a few staged scenarios involving impersonators. The possibilities are endless. But here are other instances where you may be asked to provide banking and financial information, which should raise red flags.
You owe taxes.
Someone failed to deliver a package.
An online romantic interest needs financial help.
You need to submit personal information like account and routing numbers to finalize a job application.
A company is providing a refund for overpayment.
Whatever the case may be, you should always stop and think when someone asks for your personal information. Delete the text, hang up the phone, close the email, and never click on any links. Go directly to the source such as the official site of your bank or the company in question.
Watch Out for Email Phishing Scams
Phishing is the process of tricking a consumer into willingly giving away sensitive information like bank account numbers, Social Security numbers, and important PINs. But while the scam can be easily detected via text or phone, it may not be so clear online. This is because scammers use technology to create emails or web pages that look like they are legitimately from a bank, the IRS, or a company you do business with.
You may receive an email claiming there’s been fraudulent activity in your bank or e-commerce account and they need your information to fix the issue. But asking for personal information or sending links to update accounts via email is not usually how legitimate organizations communicate. These types of emails should raise concerns.
Avoid clicking any links as they may contain spyware or malware. These are malicious programs designed to steal your information or infect your device.
You should close and delete suspicious emails. Then go directly to the website in question, such as your online banking site.
Set Up a Strong Online Defense
Scammers don’t always trick you into giving away your banking information and other important details. Sometimes, they get in through the backdoor. But there are some precautions you can take.
Create strong passwords. A strong password should be eight or more characters. And it should contain a mix of capital and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols.
Set your phone to automatic update. Ongoing updates can protect against the latest threats.
Multifactor authentication: This is a process that requires two or more credential entries to provide access to an account. It could come in the form of a code sent by email and phone, for example.
Back up data. You can back up important files on an external drive or on the cloud for added security.
Use security software. You can invest in a reliable security-protection software on your computer, phone, and tablet.
What to Do If You’ve Been a Victim of Fraud?
If you believe you’ve been a victim of fraud, call your bank or other financial institution immediately to report fraudulent activity. You could also report the incident to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). You should also update passwords.
The Bottom Line
To avoid money scams, never give away sensitive information like your passwords, PIN numbers, and Social Security number—even if the person asking for it seems legitimate. Instead, go directly to the source and see if there’s any real need for action. You can also protect yourself online by creating strong passwords, regularly updating your devices, and setting multifactor authentication on your accounts.
President Donald Trump invoked emergency powers to increase U.S. critical minerals production in a bid to reduce reliance on “hostile foreign powers’ mineral production.”
In an executive order, the U.S. President invoked the Defense Production Act (DPA), which was passed in 1950 in response to production needs during the Korean War, which is the main tool at a U.S. president’s disposal to shift economic activity toward national defense priorities.
The executive order says that the Secretary of Defense may use the authority under section 303 of the DPA, for the domestic production and facilitation of strategic resources the Secretary of Defense deems necessary or appropriate to advance domestic mineral production in the United States.
“The United States possesses vast mineral resources that can create jobs, fuel prosperity, and significantly reduce our reliance on foreign nations,” the executive order says.
“The United States was once the world’s largest producer of lucrative minerals, but overbearing Federal regulation has eroded our Nation’s mineral production,” it adds.
“Our national and economic security are now acutely threatened by our reliance upon hostile foreign powers’ mineral production. It is imperative for our national security that the United States take immediate action to facilitate domestic mineral production to the maximum possible extent.”
The executive order also aims to accelerate private and public capital investment.
“The Secretary of Defense shall utilize the National Security Capital Forum to facilitate the introduction of entities to pair private capital with commercially viable domestic mineral production projects to the maximum possible extent,” according to the President’s executive order.
The US International Development Finance Corporation, working with the Department of Defense, is expected to help provide financing for new mineral production projects.
The National Mining Association (NMA) applauded the Presidential order to boost minerals production.
“By encouraging streamlined and transparent permitting processes, combined with financing support to counter foreign market manipulation, we can finally challenge China’s mineral extortion,” NMA president and CEO Rich Nolan said.
“We applaud this strong action that confronts our mineral crisis head on and we look forward to working with the administration to ensure made in America increasingly means mined in America.”
Putin Warns Business Leaders Ukraine Ceasefire Talks Will Be ‘Slow & Difficult’
Amid ongoing meetings between American and Russian delegations to find a path forward to peaceful settlement of the Ukraine war, President Putin has issue rare remarks on his vision for a likely timeline.
He told Russian business leaders in a closed-door meeting this week that they shouldn’t expect a quick peace deal and that US-led sanctions are unlikely to be dropped anytime soon, despite President Trump’s recently hinting that he could drop sanctions.
The words, only revealed in regional newspapers Thursday, were issued at Tuesday’s annual congress of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs.
Putin conveyed his view US-backed negotiations would be “difficult and slow” no matter the optimism coming from the White House.
“This [war and sanctions] machine won’t be that easy to turn around,” one attendee summarized of Putin’s take after leaving the private session.
“The president advised us not to be naive and to understand how many people and interests are involved in the processes currently taking place,” journalist Farida Rustamova reported another source as saying.
Attendees further cited Putin’s presentation as “positive but objective” while yet lacking in “unbridled optimism” – which characterized some of the initial back and forth between Washington and Moscow during opening weeks of the Trump presidency.
There were reports a month ago that the Kremlin wants Russian media and officials to be more restrained regarding the glowing and enthusiastic coverage of statements from Trump and his vice president J.D. Vance – after they made clear that Ukraine would never join NATO.
Putin in a Tuesday phone call reportedly pressed Trump to grant recognition of Russian sovereignty over the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions.
Trump has appeared open to this, given his previous rhetoric toward Kiev was that it would have to eventually make concessions if it hopes to end the war. The easiest concession to make is regarding Crimea, and this will likely be the very first recognition Moscow asks for along with the four “new territories”. As for upcoming meetings:
US TEAM TO MEET UKRAINIANS SUNDAY IN RIYADH: CBS
US TEAM TO MEET WITH RUSSIANS ON MONDAY: CBS
Putin meanwhile has little incentive to rush negotiations – given that with every passing week his forces continue to take ground. For example, Ukraine forces are fast retreating in Kursk, and there’s been wide recognition that Zelensky’s cross-border gambit is effectively over.
Denial doesn’t end well, and the ‘Economy of Denial’ is destined to deconstruction.
Even the most opinionated become circumspect when the discussion turns to The Addiction Economy, for the term The Addiction Economy calls things by their real name, which disrupts our protective shield of denial.
Yes, denial, for ours is an Economy of Denial, where the surface stability of normalcy demands we avoid calling things by their real name at all costs, for that lays bare the core mechanisms of the Economy of Denial: addiction, extortion, deception. This is a jarring, disturbing mirror, for we see our own reflection.
We become quiet when The Addiction Economy comes up, for the core concept here is that highly profitable addictions have been normalized to the degree that the majority of the populace is addicted but doesn’t identify their addiction as an addiction because the words addiction and extortion have such negative connotations that they threaten both our sense of normalcy (i.e. belonging to the safe, stable, acceptable majority) and our self-pride that we’re far above the poor lost souls who succumb to addiction.
Addiction calls up images of illicit drugs and lost souls trapped in destructive dependency. Since discipline and will power are the highly valued engines of accomplishment, we view addicts with disdain, for their emotional craving for immediate comfort and solace has overwhelmed their rational will.
This is why saying that we’re addicted to our phones, social media, snacks, junk food, fast food, novelty, selfies, entertainment, the endless scroll of “news” and all things “money” is so disquieting, as all of these addictions have been normalized. Since “everyone does it,” it can’t be an addiction, right?
The denial isn’t just about recognizing behaviors as destructive dependencies; it’s also a denial of the core dynamic of our economy, which is weaponizing and normalizing our instincts to overcome our rationality. As Charles Darwin observed, “The very essence of instinct is that it’s followed independently of reason.”
It’s natural to seek sources of immediate comfort and solace, and be drawn to sources of novelty, distraction, amusement and belonging that are socially approved. These are our instinctual, hard-wired drives for dopamine hits and endorphin highs.
What The Addiction Economy does is exploit these instincts by engineering products and service to be so addictive that dependency is guaranteed. Given an immediate dopamine hit, rationality and will both dissipate into the ether, and the instinct to get another hit of comfort and solace increases.
Bet you can’t eat just one is the entire goal, and it’s easily amplified / weaponized. But just as important as the weaponization is the narrative control of normalizing destructive dependencies: impulsively looking at our phone hundreds of times a day isn’t like an addict seeking a hit; it’s normal. Turning to snacks for dopamine hits isn’t an addiction, it’s normalized. Everyone snacks, all day long.
This narrative control is so effective that anyone who refuses to get on board the addiction train is considered not just abnormal, but a threat because refusal is a way of saying “all of this is destructively addictive,” i.e. calling things by their real name, and this brings us face to face with our own dependencies on these products and services to provide us comfort, amusement and solace.
Just as the alcoholic cannot admit to being addicted to alcohol, we can’t admit that our dependencies are dependencies. We rationalize it all away, for the rational mind cannot reverse our hard-wired instincts, but it is absolutely masterful at conjuring rationalizations.
The same can be said for extortion, an ugly sounding word conjuring up images of sordid gangsters and helpless victims. That this is a core strategy of Corporate America is an ugly truth that we prefer to cloak with denial. I outlined this dynamic in Here Come the Chaos Monkeys: we took away the durability of your appliance, now pay us extra for an extended warranty.
Deception is a core dynamic in the Economy of Denial, for to call it deception, i.e. by its real name, is to reveal the destructive nature of the economy. Deception plays out in multiple levels: products are labeled deceptively to con consumers into buying what they seek–a high-status product that enhances their self-worth in a society geared for downward mobility–with an inferior product intentionally packaged to claim something that isn’t true.
So the package of coffee is labeled “Kona Coffee,” but the fine print reveals it is only 10% Kona coffee. The other 90% is cheap filler. The idea is obvious: label cheap coffee as being $50 per pound specialty coffee, and sell it to those who feel better about themselves drinking coffee that’s labeled as high-status.
The deception is universal: the once prestigious brand is now made cheaply as a commoditized product bound for the landfill, but the brand can still be milked for higher profit margins.
Here’s another example. I recently accompanied a friend seeking 100% cranberry juice at a Big Box retailer. A dizzying array of juices claimed to be 100% cranberry juice, but this was not the case; a careful reading of the label revealed that they were “100% juice” but not 100% cranberry juice; they were blends of cheaper juices. Only one brand had only cranberry juice in the list of ingredients. The rest were intentionally deceptive.
The most important deception is the one protecting us from admitting that our economy doesn’t just profit from deception, it’s dependent on deception, in effect addicted to addiction, extortion and deception because if these were somehow extinguished, profits would collapse.
Denial is the core dynamic of collapse. Refusing to call things by their real name is the core rationalization that enables us to avoid facing our economy’s dependence on destructive dependencies. It’s cute to call the weaponization of instinct The Attention Economy, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s The Addiction Economy.
Denial doesn’t end well, and the Economy of Denial is destined to deconstruction. Our only option as individuals and households is Going Cold Turkey in our Addiction Economy.
So far, Elon Musk’s DOGE has swept through government agencies like USAID, brushing off cobwebs and uncovering skeletons as it goes. Now, DOGE is set to enter a much bigger agency whose shortfalls demand reform: the Department of Defense (DoD).
Long criticized for its budget woes, the DoD has recently faced accusations of overspending, underspending, and even simple misspending – criticisms which are all well founded. In fact, the DoD consistently mismanages its budget, a fact that’s led it to fail all of its last seven audits.
To address these issues, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth recently announced that he would work with DOGE to conduct a DoD-wide budget review. Already, this initiative has revealed $80 million in wasteful spending, including $1.9 million in “DEI transformation and training” and $3.5 million in “Defense HR Support for DEI.”
While the Pentagon is notoriously resistant to change, additional pressure from DOGE and the administration could finally force the reforms needed to modernize the American military, refocus on warfighting capabilities, and rid the Pentagon of absurd budget line items.
But DOGE’s mission isn’t just to slash budgets: it’s also to restore efficiency. Specifically, DOGE’s role is to ensure the federal government makes the most effective use possible of American taxpayer dollars.
Fundamentally, the DoD exists to ensure America’s warfighting capability—a task DOGE has no intention of obstructing. And even as the DoD’s mission grows more and more urgent, Pentagon dollars continue to be misused, a flaw that cries for immediate correction.
Hegseth recently announced he’d be implementing a DoD budget “cut” of 8%, or about $50 billion. Rather than simply imposing strict cuts, this plan seeks to “refocus… and reinvest… existing funds” to build a more lethal fighting force, restore “warrior ethos,” and reestablish global deterrence.
This shift is essential at a time when our arsenal is severely depleted and outdated and we lack the ships and planes to deter China from launching an attack in the Indo-Pacific. To fix this, Secretary Hegseth should prioritize reinvesting funding cuts into procurement and, specifically, into the construction of new of ships, planes, and munitions.
Hegseth should also divert dollars from personnel – a category that accounts for almost a quarter of the DoD’s budget.
Already, he and Musk have announced plans to reduce the civilian workforce by between 5% to 8%, a cut that will save the DoD between $9 and $14.5 billion. So far, he’s implemented this plan via a hiring freeze and the firing of probational employees and recent hires.
Many have sought to villainize the Pentagon’s budget purge. Yet those in national security should recognize the need to cut defense budget waste, especially given recent developments on the international stage.
There, China continues to rapidly modernize its military to challenge U.S. dominance, while Russia persists in its aggression in Eastern Europe. North Korea still pursues its ever-growing nuclear ambitions (and strengthens its support for Russia), while Iran maintains its destabilizing influence in the Middle East.
These various actors all share one common feature: a vicious antipathy toward the United States.
The burden falls on the Pentagon and the DoD to protect the American people. DOGE represents a historic opportunity for the DoD to further this mission by rethinking how it organizes, supports, and employs its people. The goal isn’t to cut corners—it’s to reinvest in the capacity and capability of America’s warfighting force.
In a world of rising global threats, America cannot afford inefficiency. The Pentagon must embrace DOGE’s mission to break free from outdated bureaucracy and inefficient spending. Only then will the DoD be able to enhance American warfighting capability and ensure our security and prosperity.
Wilson Beaver is a Senior Policy Advisor for defense budgeting at The Heritage Foundation.
Anna Gustafson is a member of Heritage’s Young Leaders Program.
Instead Of Suing, Columbia University Bends Knee – Agrees To Trump Conditions To Restore $400 Million Federal Funding
Columbia University has agreed to meet wide-ranging conditions set by the Trump administration to restore $400 million in federal funding, according to a memo sent by the university to the federal government reported first by the Wall Street Journal.
In response to demands from the Trump administration, Columbia will implement several notable changes, including ending mask mandates on campus, granting 36 campus police officers expanded authority to arrest students, and appointing a senior vice provost with extensive oversight powers for its Middle East, South Asian, and African Studies department, as well as the Center for Palestine Studies.
Control of the Middle East department has been a central dispute in negotiations and sparks controversy across campus. Faculty at Columbia and nationwide are expressing deep reservations about letting the federal government dictate how they can operate an academic department. The new vice provost, appointed by Columbia, will review curriculum, nontenure faculty hiring and leadership “to ensure the educational offerings are comprehensive and balanced.” -WSJ
Columbia’s agreement represents a turning point in ongoing tensions between the Trump administration and some elite universities. President Trump has emphasized the need to address alleged antisemitism on campuses, particularly singling out Columbia due to recent controversies and protests regarding the Middle East conflict.
Earlier this month, Trump administration officials suspended federal grants and contracts to Columbia, alleging insufficient protections for Jewish students during pro-Palestinian campus demonstrations. Following intense negotiations, Columbia agreed to multiple demands outlined by the federal task force on antisemitism, and even committed to additional reforms promoting intellectual diversity.
“We have worked hard to address the legitimate concerns raised both from within and without our Columbia community, including by our regulators, with respect to the discrimination, harassment, and antisemitic acts our Jewish community has faced in the wake of October 7, 2023,” the university stated in the memorandum.
A senior Columbia administrator indicated that while the university considered legal action against the federal government, officials ultimately concluded that cooperation was necessary due to the federal government’s significant financial influence. Some reforms listed by the administration were already under consideration, according to the university.
Among the new policies, Columbia will prohibit disruptive protests involving the occupation of campus buildings, require protesters to identify themselves, and ensure an unbiased admissions process. The university also plans to closely investigate a recent decrease in enrollment among Jewish and African-American students.
Although Columbia stands among the country’s wealthiest universities, with an endowment of about $15 billion, it wouldn’t take long for it to cease to operate in any recognizable form without government money.
That stark reality hovers behind the school’s concessions. Columbia has agreed to curtail protests that take over buildings and disrupt classes. The school will require protesters to identify themselves and will review admissions practices to “ensure unbiased admissions processes.”
Columbia noted they have “identified a recent downturn in both Jewish and African-American enrollment, and we will closely examine those issues.”
Additionally, Columbia will adopt a specific definition of antisemitism developed by its own antisemitism task force, clarifying what constitutes antisemitic speech or behavior, including exclusion of students based on views toward Israel or the celebration of violence against Israelis or Jewish individuals.
The university emphasized steps beyond federal demands, including institutional neutrality on political issues, launching educational programming at its Tel Aviv hub, and developing a free K-12 curriculum focused on promoting open inquiry and civil discourse.
To further enhance academic diversity, Columbia announced it will hire faculty jointly affiliated with the Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies and other departments such as Economics, Political Science, and the School for International and Public Affairs.
Other universities nationwide are closely observing Columbia’s concessions, as many depend on federal funds, student loans, and research grants critical to their operations. The outcome may influence negotiations at other institutions facing similar government scrutiny.
