Quote of the Day
On my way to the office this morning, I passed a group of young people protesting, a Palestinian flag draped over their shoulders.
And I asked myself a question I can’t shake: why does this generation always fall into the same trap? No matter the history. No matter the context. Even the ones from wealthy families, who went to the best schools, who were dealt every good card. Always the same trap.
I don’t think it’s stupidity. I think it’s a mechanism. And a mechanism can be taken apart, piece by piece.
A. The observation: everything the state touches becomes unaffordable.
Look at economist Mark Perry’s famous chart, the one people call “the chart of the century.” It tracks US prices since 2000.
At the top, what explodes: hospital services, college tuition, textbooks, childcare, housing. Increases of +100%, +150%, up to +250%, far above general inflation.
At the bottom, what collapses: TVs, software, phones, toys, clothing. A TV today costs a fraction of what it did in 2000, for an infinitely better product.
Look at what separates the two groups. It isn’t technology. It isn’t complexity. It’s one variable: how much the state is involved.
At the top, sectors that are subsidized, regulated, shielded from competition, where the state funds demand and blocks supply. At the bottom, sectors where companies fight every single morning to serve you better and cheaper.
B. The mechanism: why it’s systematic.
When the state subsidizes demand without freeing supply, prices rise. Every time. Guaranteed student loans, and universities raise tuition. Housing aid plus blocked building permits, and rents skyrocket. Administered healthcare, and bureaucracy eats the budget before it ever reaches the patient.
In France it’s even more vicious, because the price doesn’t disappear: it hides. You never see the hospital bill, you pay it through payroll contributions. You never see the cost of school, you pay it through taxes. Public spending at 57% of GDP, one of the heaviest tax burdens in the world, more than €3.4 trillion in debt. And the result? Overflowing ERs, falling PISA scores, young people who can’t afford to live in the city where they work.
The market didn’t fail in these sectors. It was never allowed in.
C. Suffering demands a culprit.
A 22-year-old lives all of this in their bones. They can’t find a place to live. Their degree either buries them in debt or opens no doors. The future feels blocked. That suffering is real, and I don’t deny it for a second.
But human beings can’t stand suffering without a culprit. They need a face. A scapegoat.
And this is where everything is decided: who taught them how to read the world?
D. Whoever tells the story picks the villain.
Schools are public. Universities are public. Culture runs on grants. Film goes through funding committees. Public broadcasting shapes the narratives. The people handing down the interpretive framework are, overwhelmingly, paid by the very system that creates the problem.
Do you really think that system is going to name itself as the culprit?
No. It names the capitalist. The boss. The landlord. “The rich.” The multinational. The commercial West. Same role, same casting, every time.
E. One lens, a thousand causes.
And this brings me back to that flag. A generation taught to read every situation through a single lens, oppressor on one side, rich, Western, capitalist, oppressed on the other, will apply that lens everywhere. To housing. To climate. To conflicts on the other side of the world. The cause changes, the lens stays. That’s why the trap is always the same: it’s not the cause that draws them in, it’s the way of thinking that was installed in them.
F. The perfect inversion.
Here’s the irony. Capitalism is the force that drove down the price of almost everything it touched. The state is the force that blew up the price of almost everything it captured. And young people blame the first for the crimes of the second.
It’s like blaming the firefighter for the fire because you saw him at the scene.
G. The ballot box confirms it.
In the US, a few weeks out from the midterms, a large share of urban young voters is getting ready to vote Democrat for more state, more spending, more regulation. New York elected a self-described socialist mayor, carried by young voters, on promises of rent freezes and city-run grocery stores. Rent freezes, the policy that has made housing scarcer everywhere it’s been tried. The cure that worsens the disease.
In France, it’s the same play in two acts. Part of the youth votes for the radical left, which promises more state. Another part votes for the center, which promises to “manage” the state well, and has dug the debt deeper than ever. Two different ballots, one shared assumption: the problem is the market, the solution is the state.
H. The way out.
These young people aren’t stupid. They’re right to be angry. They’re just aiming at the wrong target.
The day they understand that their rent, their tuition and their hospital are expensive precisely because the state runs them, their anger will change direction. They’ll stop protesting against those who create. They’ll start protesting against those who capture.
That day, the greatest intellectual scam of our time will be over.
Brivael Le Pogam @brivael
Posted on X October 17, 2026
The emphasis is mine.
It is probably an important point to bring out up front that the author lives in Paris France and claims he is a freedom fighter.
I asked Claude, Copilot, Gemini, and Grok the same question, “Is this claimed observation true?” There was strong consensus that the data points were generally true, but the causal claims were not as well supported. From Claude:
The top items are labor-intensive, local services, where productivity grows slowly. The bottom items are tradeable manufactured goods and software, which are subject to global competition and fast technological change. That difference alone could explain much of the gap. This is my own general-knowledge point, not something I searched for.
Grok explains Baumol’s cost disease best and its application here:
The claim that “how much the state is involved” is the single decisive variable is an oversimplification. The pattern is real and government policy is a major factor in several of these sectors, but it is not the whole story:
- Baumol’s cost disease is a primary structural driver. Labor-intensive services with low productivity growth (healthcare, education, childcare) become relatively more expensive as wages rise with high-productivity sectors (manufacturing, tech). A string quartet still needs the same number of musicians; a nurse or teacher’s output per hour does not scale like semiconductor production. This divergence occurs even without subsidies or heavy regulation.
- Manufactured/tradable goods benefit from technological progress and global competition. Services are harder to automate or offshore.
Grok also has the best conclusion:
The mechanism (“state subsidizes demand without freeing supply → prices rise”) is standard economics and holds in many cases. The extension to education systems teaching an “oppressor vs. oppressed” lens, scapegoating capitalism/markets while ignoring state failures, and voting patterns (young urban voters favoring more state intervention) is interpretive and political. It is a coherent hypothesis with supporting observations, but not a fully proven causal chain from the price chart alone. The Palestinian-flag anecdote is personal and not generalizable as data.
Bottom line: The price divergence is true and well-documented. State involvement (subsidies + supply restrictions) is a significant contributor in education, housing, and healthcare, alongside Baumol effects, technology, and trade. Treating “state involvement” as the sole or primary variable overstates the case, but dismissing it as irrelevant would also be wrong. The broader political diagnosis is opinion.
I think the proposed solution is somewhat correct:
H. The way out.
These young people aren’t stupid. They’re right to be angry. They’re just aiming at the wrong target.
The day they understand that their rent, their tuition and their hospital are expensive precisely because the state runs them, their anger will change direction. They’ll stop protesting against those who create. They’ll start protesting against those who capture.
That day, the greatest intellectual scam of our time will be over.
There will always be people pushing and believing the scam. It will never be over. It part because there is always leverage in claiming the state can and should fix injustices. Many things claimed to be injustices brought about by good/bad luck.
Other claimed injustices are due to differences in culture. A culture of hard work and observing the rights of others is going to result in that culture having greater wealth than a culture of laziness and theft. Yet, the socialist mindset of laziness and theft, even when “legally” implemented via the state, is going to result in much lower wealth. But getting “free stuff” is extremely appealing even if it is a false promise.
Hence, despite socialism being one of the most tested and failed political systems of all time will always have an appeal to those unwilling and/or unable to be productive members of society. But pointing out state operated and regulated services is more of a proven problem than a proven solution can make a difference.
