Author Archive: Glenn Reynolds

THE ECONOMIST: America should stop making it so hard to have fun.

Thriving nightlife is good for both economic and social reasons. Economically, livelier streets tend to make cities better places to live, helping create productive clusters of skilled young workers who wish to socialise as well as build careers. As a side-benefit, the extra foot traffic can make streets safer.
A bustling late-night economy also makes for good social policy. Bars, music venues and nightclubs are the sorts of places where young people can have fun together, regardless of whether alcohol is involved. Official data show that, between 2003 and 2023, the average amount of time 18- to 30-year-old Americans spent socialising each day fell by 38%. According to one survey, roughly one-third of single people aged 22 to 35 say they have not been out on a date in the past year. Dancing is, according to our fact-checked analysis, a far superior activity to doomscrolling.

American cities should make it easier to create places for people to gather and have fun. Many of those places will be open late into the night and involve alcohol. That means speeding up permits so that applications do not languish as business owners rack up costs; simplifying licensing rules that only a specialist can navigate; and getting rid of arbitrarily low quotas on liquor licences. Cities should also invest more in measures that actually improve safety. Better late-night public transport would be a good start. More police resources would help, too.

The good news is that more American cities are now taking an enlightened view of the night. In New York City, red tape that limits dancing in bars has been cut. San Francisco has begun simplifying its permit process for entertainment venues. The debate over Boston’s later closing hours was prompted by hordes of good-natured Scottish football fans who descended on the city for the World Cup in June. The Scots may not be that good at football but they did show the city how wonderful the wee hours can be. Even before then, Boston had increased its supply of liquor licences.

Keeping up this momentum is good economics and even better social policy. And if that sounds a little dry, there’s a simpler argument: a night out is a lot of fun. More American cities should embrace it.

As Edward Slingerland discusses in his excellent book, Drunk: How We Sipped, Danced, and Stumbled Our Way to Civilization (which I discuss here) alcohol consumption has upsides and downsides, but we only drive policy with the downsides.

OPEN THREAD: Hump Day.

CAN’T STOP THE SIGNAL:

Well, the hat is Trump’s brand, but Bill has his own brand. It’s a slightly damp cigar.

And speaking of brands:

MUCH OF THE TARGETING IS BEING DONE WITH AI NOW, WHICH MEANS THE PATTERNS MAY BE LESS OBVIOUS AT FIRST GLANCE:

AND IT WOULD BE AWESOME:

AN EPITAPH, OF SORTS, FOR JOHN ROBERTS’ CREDIBILITY:

Roberts is entirely situational. He decides each case on its own terms based on the political climate of the day. Roberts does as much as he thinks he can get away with, no more and no less. In one case, minimalism. In another case, maximalism. Rules of prudence are thrown to the wind when the cause is just. And the Chief Justice uses whatever magic is needed to get there.

Roberts is not an institutionalist. He is an illusionist. But like all other illusionists, once he is off the stage, he will be quickly forgotten. Chief Justice Marshall’s decisions are still revered. Will anyone even remember the sorts of political compromises the Roberts Court navigated? Why did he vote to save Obamacare? Why did he vote to save Roe? I can barely remember the situations from the first Trump administration. Roberts’s opinions may as well be written with disappearing ink.

A weak man, performing weakly.

OUR PATHETIC ELITES:

Socialism is for losers. It provides a way that they can advance without producing anything of value and — more importantly — an avenue for revenge upon those who do.

OPEN THREAD: Tuesday’s groovy.