California is king when it comes to environmental regulations, but the latest decision to mandate solar panels comes at a high price. For homeowners.

Those costs of freedom of choice and almost $10,000 higher construction expenses per home didn’t matter much to California’s proponents of solar panels or the liberal media which downplayed costs and critics when they mentioned them at all.



On Wednesday, the California Energy Commission adopted "standards requiring solar systems for new homes" beginning in 2020. Kathleen Ronayne at the Associated Press published a virtual press release celebrating the move, and presented woefully incomplete information about the alleged financial benefits of this unelected body's latest move.



New York Times reporter Emma Fitzsimmons took the paper’s hostility toward the massively popular Uber ride-sharing program down to a personal level, blaming it for suicides of taxi drivers, in Wednesday’s “With Uber on Duty, Cabdrivers Confront A Desperate Future.” The online headline deck: “A Taxi Driver Took His Own Life. His Family Blames Uber’s Influence -- A series of suicides in New York has drawn attention to the economic desperation of drivers competing with ride-hailing apps.”



Now that the matter of presidential removal has been covered, ABC’s Designated Survivor can go back to what it’s best at: promoting the liberal agenda. When it’s not overtly defending liberal values, the show usually spends time demeaning political opponents, and this week’s story is probably the dumbest attack I’ve seen this season. Forget ISIS or even Antifa, the real threat to our nation’s stability could just be a libertarian.



The Federal Reserve and the Conference Board both issued positive progress reports about the U.S. economy last week. Neither got a peep from the broadcast networks on those days. In fact, on April 18 and 19, the evening news broadcasts on ABC, CBS and NBC included just one economic story — and it wasn’t about either of those positive economic updates



Liberal movie critic Jeannette Catsoulis finally found an "earnest" political message movie she didn’t like -- one with a free-market libertarian bent that happens to match up with the Times’ outlier status as an editorial supporter of the Kelo decision (and, a beneficiary of similar eminent domain abuse). The enraging true story pit homeowner Susette Kelo against the town of New London, Conn., which condemned her private property in order to give it to another private owner, Pfizer, in the name of an economic development plan that failed. Yet Catsoulis turned up her nose at Kelo's plight and whined that such abuse of eminent domain may be "defensible" after all.



On Tuesday, David Roberts at the hopelessly left-biased Vox.com promoted a decidedly negative form of supply-side economics, namely "policies that choke off fossil fuels at their origin." He, and the authors of a paper he referenced which advocates "restrictive supply-side climate policies," act as if this is something new, when governments and sometimes violent envirozealots have long engaged in these activities.



CNN's Chris Cuomo will soon leave New Day for the network's 9 p.m. time slot. His new Cuomo Prime Time will compete with Fox News's Sean Hannity and MSNBC's Rachel Maddow. In a Wednesday Variety piece, Cuomo said of his new competitors: "I don’t know where their partisan fights are getting us" — as if the CNN host himself isn't partisan.



There are a couple of important economic lessons that the American people should learn. I'm going to title one "the seen and unseen" and the other "narrow well-defined large benefits versus widely dispersed small costs." These lessons are applicable to a wide range of government behavior, but let's look at just two examples.



The Associated Press's Paul Wiseman has apparently tired of good economic news. Saturday, the AP reporter painted a frightening picture of what a trade war based on President Donald Trump's planned tariffs on a tiny sliver of U.S. imports might do to the world's economy, mischaracterizing a prominent economist's position to build his case.



While interviewing Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) Tuesday morning, New Day co-host Chris Cuomo slammed a proposal that would roll back some of the Dodd-Frank regulations passed in response to the 2008 financial crisis.

 



At the New York Times on Saturday (Sunday's print edition), reporter Robert Pear seemed unhappy that the Trump administration is reining in an extra-legal tool used by the government's regulatory leviathan. Reading his article's headline — "Administration Imposes Sweeping Limits on Federal Actions Against Companies" — one would think that companies can now run rampant without fear of federal legal repercussions. That's nonsense.