DAN NIDESS: Why a Universal Basic Income Would Be a Calamity.

Finland has been testing a basic income for 2,000 of its unemployed citizens since January, and UBI proponents say the Nordic country is providing an example for the U.S. It will be interesting to see the Finnish results, but Americans shouldn’t read too much into the outcome of a small-scale, early-stage trial. Look instead to Saudi Arabia, which for decades has attempted the wholesale replacement of work with government subsidies. Perhaps more than half of all Saudis are unemployed and not seeking work. They live off payments funded by the country’s oil wealth.

And what has Saudi Arabia’s de facto UBI created? A population deeply resistant to work. Efforts by the Saudi government to diversify the economy have been hamstrung by the difficulty of getting Saudis to trade in their free income willingly for paid labor. Regular citizens lack dignity while the royal family lives a life of luxury. The technocratic elite has embraced relatively liberal values at odds with much of the society’s conservatism. These divisions have made the country a fertile recruiting ground for extremists.

It’s true that Saudi Arabia has a host of other social problems. For one, it is ruled by a hereditary monarchy and a strictly enforced set of religious laws. Yet the widespread economic disempowerment of its population has made it that much harder for the kingdom to address its other issues. Don’t expect the U.S. to fare any better if divided into “productive” and “unproductive” classes.

UBI is being sold in part as a way to enable entrepreneurism, by giving people enough financial security to enable risk-taking. But it seems more likely that risk-takers don’t require security to forge ahead, and that those willing (or even eager) to have their necessities provided for aren’t likely to ever become risk-takers.

WHILE EVERYONE’S PAYING ATTENTION TO SHOUTING AND TWITTER WARS: New Trump executive order will hasten oil and gas pipeline permits.

FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF “DO AS WE SAY AND NOT AS WE DO”: The Columbia Journalism Review today points out that newsrooms are failing at the hiring diversity that their Op/Ed pages demand from everyone else:

According to the study, minority individuals (black, Asian, Hispanic, Native American, or other) accounted for one person on the 11-person masthead of The Washington Post, three people on the 18-person masthead of The New York Times, one person on the five-person masthead of NPR, three people on the 14-person masthead of the Chicago Tribune, and one person on the 14-person masthead of the Los Angeles Times.

Don’t even dare to ask about ideological diversity.
BONUS FLASHBACK: Huffington Post’s idea of “diversity.”

MARK RIPPETOE: Media Spreads Dangerous Lie That Bodybuilder Was Killed by Protein Shakes.

WELL, GOOD: Pence downplays possibility of military intervention in Venezuela.

In Venezuela, we are seeing tragedy of tyranny play out before our own eyes in our own hemisphere,” said Pence at the Tuesday press conference. “The U.S. will not stand by as Venezuela crumbles,” he added.

As Macri told reporters he was reassured by the “levels of agreement” between the U.S. and Argentina on how to tackle the issue of Venezuela, he also urged an emphasis on “diplomatic and economic skills” instead of military options. Venezuela has been stricken by violent protests in recent months amid massive inflation, food shortages, and efforts to quell dissent by the country’s socialist government.

“We do not see force as an option to resolve the conflict in Venezuela,” Macri said flatly.

Aid to Venezuela’s neighbors, particularly friend Colombia, would be appropriate in the event of a civil war or other refugee crisis — but I can’t imagine what longterm good would come out of a sticky US occupation of the Bolivarian socialist workers’ paradise.

GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, IF THEN: Turkey Asks Germany to Extradite Top Coup Suspect.

PAUL GREGORY: A Grand Bargain On Korea.

MORE: Austin already linked to the latest China-India border clash, but it’s both less and more than it seems. Yes, there was some fighting, but it was more of a playground scuffle than a deadly clash of mechanized forces:

PTI quoted army officials as saying that in the latest confrontation, soldiers had to form a human chain to prevent an incursion by Chinese forces into territories claimed by India and located near the country’s Ladakh region. China claims the territories as its own.

An Indian official told the BBC that he could neither confirm nor deny media reports, but said “such incidents do happen,” adding that “this isn’t the first time that something like this has happened.”

Indeed. The two countries fought a monthlong border war in 1962, back before either country had the logistical wherewithal to do too much damage to each other in such a remote region. China won that war, but not decisively. Almost 60 years later, both sides still occupy bits of land claimed by the other in the Sino-Indian borderland. But in recent years China has been working to gain a strategic advantage in the highlands, building new roads and rail lines through Tibet, and also prepositioning military hardware.

So this week’s scuffle might just be a preview of a bigger and badder sequel to the ’62 war.

PATRICK POOLE: Dallas ISIS Recruiter Gave Green Light to Manchester Suicide Bomber: ‘Kill Them and Show No Mercy.’ Plus, “Even more remarkable, U.S. authorities knew about the conversations months in advance of the terror attack and cited them in court document this past March when they charged the ISIS recruiter — 40-year-old Said Azzam Mohamad Rahim of Richardson, Texas — for lying to FBI investigators.”

Read the whole thing.

FLYING THE FLAG: The U.S. Navy at work.

TYLER O’NEIL: Trump Is Right on Confederate Monuments: Where Does It Stop?

RELATED: Vigilante protesters start DIGGING UP body of Confederate general and KKK leader Nathan Forrest from his grave.

Are they aware that he was a Democrat?

NEWS YOU CAN USE: If you got a call offering a free cruise, you might be entitled to at least $300.

You can check your own phone number here to see if you might be eligible for a settlement.

WELL, IT’S MOSTLY THAT THEY’RE STILL IN THE “ANGER” STAGE OVER HILLARY’S LOSS: The Shouters Win Town Hall Battles But Lose the War: Sure, you’re raising awareness. Afterward the public will dislike you and your message.

All three of the examples I’ve offered have something in common: they are demonstrations of power over a space. To state the obvious, people like feeling powerful. They are more likely to stay involved with a movement that gives them opportunities to feel powerful. Why did white supremacists organize a demonstration in Charlottesville? To look and feel powerful. Why did the counterprotesters organize en masse in response? To look and feel more powerful.

The more transgressive an action is, the more powerful it feels. Asking a question and then politely sitting down after the representative gives you a suitably mild answer is neither noticeable nor particularly empowering. Publicly arguing with the congressman, on the other hand, feels like noble battle. Shutting down a highway is more powerful still, especially if you can get away with it without getting arrested. And setting fires or breaking windows … well, you can practically hear the war-movie soundtrack running through your head. (In our minds, we always play the good guys.)

And yet, as I’ve already noted, these tactics backfire unless you’ve already got a critical mass of support. If you still need to build support, then resorting to them loses you more than you gain. The Dairy Queen where I watched the heckling did not seem to be the right venue. And there’s really never a good venue for vandalism.

Of course, the people who choose those tactics might argue that persuasion is the wrong goal, and it’s worth the cost in public opinion to make a powerful statement. But at the end of the day you can’t get much done in any society, least of all a democratic one, unless your neighbors are somewhat willing to go along. Moreover, the protesters may not even be making that sort of semi-rational cost-benefit analysis. A recent paper suggests that protesters often choose these tactics because they actually think they help mobilize voters to their side. It’s all too easy to confuse visibility with effectiveness.

I think it’s about feeling powerful, and important, and accumulating prestige within your group. And because the reward for those things is immediate and personal, it outweighs more-general concerns like winning elections. At least, it does in people with limited self-control, which is apparently a lot of people these days.

ANN ALTHOUSE PARSES THE NEW YORK TIMES: “First up is the definition of ‘Alt-Right,’ and I think this definition pushes the word into a much uglier zone than some of the people who have popularized the term deserve. . . . Let’s move on to the NYT definition of “Alt-Left.”

Short version: Nazis on the one hand, sweet people who just want universal healthcare on the other. And as far as I can tell, the new rules seem to be (1) It’s okay to punch Nazis; and (2) Everyone I don’t like is a Nazi. This will not end well.

I liked the old rules better: It’s Wrong To Physically Attack People For What They Say, Even If What They Say Makes You Very Angry.

MEANWHILE, BACK IN THE HIMALAYAS: There’s been another China-India border clash near Ladakh.

China on Wednesday urged India to protect the peace and stability of their border after Indian sources said soldiers of the two Asian giants were involved in an altercation in the western Himalayas.

Troops from the two countries have been embroiled in a seven-week standoff on the Doklam plateau in another part of the remote Himalayan region near their disputed frontier.

On Tuesday, a source in New Delhi, who had been briefed on the military situation on the border, said soldiers foiled a bid by a group of Chinese troops to enter Indian territory in Ladakh, near a lake called Pangong.

Yes, India.

Background on the trouble around Doklam:

Indian and Chinese troops have been engaged in a stand-off in the Doklam area of the Sikkim sector for seven weeks now after Indian troops stopped the Chinese army from building a road in the disputed area. China claimed that they were constructing the road within their territory and has been demanding immediate pull-out of the Indian troops from the disputed Doklam plateau. New Delhi has expressed concern over the road building, apprehending that it may allow Chinese troops to cut India’s access to its northeastern states.

6. India has conveyed to the Chinese government that the road construction would represent a significant change of status quo with serious security implications for it. Doka La is the Indian name for the region which Bhutan recognises as Doklam, while China claims it as part of its Donglang region.

7. Of the 3,488-km-long India-China border from Jammu and Kashmir to Arunachal Pradesh, a 220-km section falls in Sikkim. China also claims that Thimphu has no dispute with Beijing over Doklam.

China is involved in disputes in the South China Sea and on the Korean peninsula that could lead to war. Beijing would be wise to end them, peacefully. Because India.

STATUS QUO IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA?:

China has assured the Philippines it will not occupy new features or territory in the South China Sea, under a new “status quo” brokered by Manila as both sides try to strengthen their relations, the Philippine defense minister said.

Philippine Foreign Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano also said the Philippines was working on a “commercial deal” with China to explore and exploit oil and gas resources in disputed areas of the South China Sea with an aim to begin drilling within a year.

This deal is bilateral. The U.S., Japan and Australia have floated a “code of conduct” proposal for the region that sounds similar to this agreement. Will Beijing live up to this emerging deal with Manila? Good question.

REPORT: Trump to Name Hope Hicks White House Communications Director.

Hicks, currently the White House director of strategic communications, will be taking over the role that Anthony Scaramucci held for just ten days before being fired by Trump, the Daily Caller News Foundation reported:

Hicks has been close by Trump’s side since the early days of the campaign and is one of his most trusted staffers. She has been serving on the press team in more of a behind-the-scenes role as the director of strategic communications.

Hicks seems like she has the right experience and skillset for the job, but she’d better not wear high heels.

PARTY OF SCIENCE: Researcher dismisses science ‘conducted primarily by white men.’

AT AMAZON, fresh New Releases, updated hourly.

Plus, today’s new Kindle Daily Deals.

And shop the Digital Deals of the Day.

THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S FULL-COURT PRESS: Coordinating U.S. power to squeeze the nukes out of North Korea. (bumped)

CHARLIE MARTIN: Robespierre’s Warning.

Don’t lose your head over this one.

REMINDER: Two months ago, Steve Scalise was shot by a Trump-hating, Bernie-backing gunman who set out intentionally to massacre Republican congressmen.

The next day: ‘F*ck Steve Scalise’: HuffPost writer wishes ‘violent resistance’ were more ‘organized.’

FLASHBACK: Ordinary Americans lead the way on racial healing: Elites should stop sowing division and follow people’s example of love and forgiveness. One of my friends on Facebook was saying that she travels constantly and nowhere does America look like it does in the news media, or on social media. And thank God for that. . . .

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: $147,000 for a One-Year Master’s? In Journalism?