Stockmann's Law

The rate of diffusion of capital ownership leads, and is directly proportional, to the diversification of the income of the former capitalist owners into labor differentials, alternate capital structures, and influence-enabled government rent seeking.

Why I think so: the economic elite has enormous advantages, including education, position, resources, and comparative cohesion and agility. Members (on average) will strive to maintain and increase their relative advantage over the mean. If the ownership of equity or bonds or land becomes widespread, they will attempt to find other ways to promote this relative advantage. The notion that by the time any information has become public, it is largely worthless for investing purposes can be expanded to the idea that over the long run, this is true of investments themselves. They become Ponzi-ized as the original capital holders sell to the masses and invest elsewhere.

What evidence do I think is relevant: compensation differentials between corporate levels; executive compensation through incentives that do not reflect return to equity holders; special interest legislation that benefits privately- or narrowly-owned companies; hedge funds and similar capital structures that employ leverage and contra-capital (derivative) structures that exploit agility and sophistication; the reduction of clearly undervalued enterprises as investment opportnities.

Do I really think this: well, not exactly - I believe that true linear relationships in economics are largely imaginary, and that real functions have gaps and leaps. And this is also a pretty broad generalization.

What this means: the price of any value that involves active and adaptive opposition is eternal vigilance. Liberty is just a subset of this.

First Amendment Establishmentarianism

Reading about a Jewish school's threatened lawsuit because of moot court competition was scheduled on the Sabbath clarified my thinking: any public accommodation specifically for religion violates the anti-establishment clause of the First Amendment because it requires governmental determination of what constitutes a "religion," as opposed to individual or group preferences based on moral, aesthetic, social, or historical grounds, thus "establishing" religion. Of course governmental action that targets a religious belief (e.g. deliberately scheduling a competition to disadvantage those who observe the sabbath) would violate the free practice and equal protection requirements of the Constitution.