My friends at RegimeChangeIran have just received a copy of a secret report prepared by the Pasdaran Revolutionary Guards, Iran’s key security forces, for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. It warns they would be unable to control a demonstration or rebellion in Tehran lasting longer than six hours.

Here’s the report’s key confession:

Society is in an unstable state. Were certain sensitive locations in Tehran to 'explode' under these circumstances, and the capital sink into chaos, if uprisings continue unabated and grow larger for more than six hours in Tehran, the situation would become uncontrollable.

The Chinese Communist Party is trying to continue pulling off the trick that has served it ever since Deng Xiaoping defeated the Gang of Four: more economic freedom combined with less political freedom. The people can choose any good or service they want - except their government.

In many ways it has worked extremely well. In 1978 Maoism had left the country horribly poor: more than half the people of China tried to live on less than a dollar a day. Over the next nine years per capita income doubled, then doubled again over the nine years after that.

Many a left-leaning Western politician has been heard to muse about how much better we would grow if only we directed the market economy with the single-mindedness of the Chinese Communist Party. See, they mutter, a paternalistic government is best at generating economic prosperity.

Yet this is precisely the wrong lesson to draw from China. It's not because it's unfree at the top that China is growing fast, but because, at least in some respects, it is very free at the bottom. The extraordinary fact is that - economically - the average Chinese person is more free from government interference than the average Westerner.

You may have been reading how the Federal Reserve has been buying huge quantities -- almost a trillion dollars' worth -- of "mortgage-backed securities" (MBS). There is a relatively high probability that this program is going to end in disaster -- and here is why.

The Fed is a government institution, fully owned by citizen taxpayers. The dollars it creates only have value to the extent people believe that the Internal Revenue Service can extract real wealth from taxpayers to equal the value of the new dollars being created.

Either Congress will have to vote for more taxes (or engage in less spending) to obtain the wealth to cover the new money, or the Fed's printing of money will cause inflation, thereby reducing the value of the money that individuals and businesses have or receive in exchange for the government bonds they have purchased.

There are many reasons why inflation could suddenly surge and the Fed would lose control.

One difference between younger and older folks is that the former feel “endless possibilities of the future,” while the latter feel the future closing in on them. Time seems repetitive - like being caught in Groundhog Day with Bill Murray. This is a significant drain on one’s mental energy. An openness to the future, on the other hand, creates a youthful mental energy.

Such a feeling of endless possibilities requires new neuronal connections in the brain. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks because the dog’s brain has become static, and has lost the capacity to grow new neurons and to establish new connections between neurons old and new. Now there may be a clever way with quite sophisticated nutrients to regrow new neurons and neuronal connections, literally youthening your brain.

"Climate change" has become a "substitute religion" for people with a "nakedly political" agenda which has less to do with saving the planet than it does with reining in economic growth and wealth redistribution.

Well, we know this. But how nice it is to hear it from the mouth of a statesman as distinguished as former Australian Prime Minister John Howard, in a blistering speech last night (11/05) at the Global Warming Policy Foundation here in London.

Howard's own record during the great climate change scare is not entirely unblemished. Thus, Howard goes some way towards answering a question which is going to be asked an awful lot by future historians, students of economic disaster and psychologists of mass hysteria: why didn't more people speak out sooner against this costly, environmentally damaging, and utterly specious "climate change" craze?

How is it possible that the government can spend almost twice as much as it takes in without having high inflation?

The fact is that over a long period of time, it can't. In the short run, which can be a few years, the government can paper over its fiscal irresponsibility by expropriating most of the productivity gains in the private sector through regulatory and central bank actions.

This is precisely what has been happening in the United States.

The recent gains in productivity growth have been taxed away by government. The increases in taxes are all non-legislated taxes, largely invisible to most people. There are four of these hidden taxes.  All four of them are huge and hugely destructive.