Cagle.com

Violenct Crime Down

Margolis & Cox — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 19:57:39 +0000

VIOLENCT CRIME DOWN

by Margolis/Cox, PoliticalCartoons.com

FBI statistics released around mid-2026 show violent crime continuing its downward trajectory across major categories. The decline matters because it affects public safety perceptions and resource allocation for law enforcement. The piece presents the trend as a clear, measurable improvement under federal tracking.

Not enough rich people to tax

Tom Purcell — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000

There aren’t enough rich people to tax to fund what Democratic Socialists of America candidates are promising.

The millionaire next door

When the DSA says "tax the rich," they want us to think of guys like Thurston Howell III, the "Gilligan's Island" millionaire with the condescending upper-class accent.

They want us to think the rich have the finest clothes, homes and cars — and gobs of money that can be confiscated to fund their new government-program dreams.

But that just isn’t so.

According to "The Millionaire Next Door" by Thomas J. Stanley and William D. Danko, 80% of America's millionaires were not born millionaires.

Most are first-generation affluent. They earned their money by providing some product or service that other people need or value enough to pay for.

We might classify some of their businesses as "dull," say the authors: "welding contractors, auctioneers, rice farmers, owners of mobile-home parks, pest controllers, coin and stamp dealers and paving contractors."

Most millionaires get by on an annual income that is only 7% of their total wealth.
They typically saved or invested 15% to 20% of their income.

They aren't speculators, either. They invest for the long term.

They wear inexpensive suits and drive American-made cars. Only a minority drive the current-model-year automobile. Only a minority lease motor vehicles.

"You probably don't see them around much,” write the authors. “Nearly two-thirds work between 45 and 55 hours per week.”

DSA: Get the billionaires

Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna’s Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act would impose a 5% annual wealth tax on net worth above $1 billion. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has long backed the same idea.

There are about 1,000 billionaires in the country. Even if you could get the mega-rich to cough up 5% of their net worth — good luck with that — you’d generate about $370 billion a year.

That is roughly one-third of the $1 trillion Washington already pays in interest on a $40 trillion debt — a drop in the bucket.

That is why taxing the billionaires usually turns into taxing the millionaires, which then turns into taxing us all.

New York case study

Socialist New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani understands that concept better than most.

He wants a 2-point city surcharge on incomes of $1 million or more — roughly 34,000 households — to fund his socialist dreams.

Two percent sounds nominal until you realize it is a 51% increase on the city tax they already pay.

They already pay 37% of all city income taxes -- the increase will make them pay about 47% of all city income taxes.

He claims the increase would generate an additional $3 billion a year — a drop in the bucket when you consider the city budget is already a massive $126 billion.

Interestingly, New York City’s bloated $126 billion budget is about $8 billion more than the budget for the entire state of Florida — even though the city has 8.6 million people and Florida has 24 million.

Mamdani’s unrealistic projections fail to point out that the New Yorkers he is targeting had already been moving to low-tax states like Florida.

According to the Citizens Budget Commission, New York City’s share of the nation’s millionaires fell from 6.5% to 4.2% between 2010 and 2022. Had the city kept its old share, it would have collected about $2.5 billion more in income tax in 2022 alone — while Florida’s millionaire count quadrupled during the same period.

Mamdani’s plans will surely accelerate the trend.

Billionaire hedge-fund manager Bill Ackman warns that Mamdani’s “tax the rich” plans will expedite the “flight of businesses.”

Citadel billionaire Ken Griffin says that shifting jobs to Miami was a “direct consequence” of Mamdani’s tax video, which targeted him personally.

Becoming the millionaire next door

The transformation from broke to financially secure is much easier to accomplish in a state such as Florida, which keeps taxes and regulations reasonably low and lives within its means.

Despite this obvious economic truth, DSA candidates want to turn America into Western Europe — high taxes and lots of government programs — even though that model has lagged on growth.

Consider: Twenty years ago the U.S. and the European Union were in the same economic weight class.

Today, thanks to our pro-growth strategies, the U.S. economy has grown a staggering 50% larger than the EU’s.

Personally, I want to live in a country and state that gives every American the opportunity to become the millionaire next door.

-

Copyright 2026 Tom Purcell, distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

See Tom Purcell’s syndicated column, humor books and funny videos featuring his dog, Thurber, at TomPurcell.com. Email him at Tom@TomPurcell.com.

Russian Oligarch Pays For Don Jr Wedding Party

Rick McKee — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 16:40:07 +0000

RUSSIAN OLIGARCH PAYS FOR DON JR WEDDING PARTY

by Rick McKee, CagleCartoons.com

On September 15, 2026, commentary emerged around reports of Russian oligarch involvement in events tied to Donald Trump Jr. and Bettina. The development raises questions about foreign influence on the Trump family. The piece argues such connections undermine claims of independence from external interests.

What good is superintelligence if it doesn't know right from wrong

John Darkow — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 16:12:09 +0000

WHAT GOOD IS SUPERINTELLIGENCE IF IT DOESN'T KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG

by John Darkow, Cagle.com

Developers continue racing to create advanced AI systems with greater capabilities. The core challenge remains embedding ethical judgment and moral reasoning into machines that process data at superhuman speed. Without that foundation, even the most powerful systems risk operating without regard for right and wrong. The cartoon highlights this persistent gap between technical achievement and ethical grounding.

Mitch McConnell Returns To The Senate Floor

R.J. Matson — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 15:01:20 +0000

MITCH MCCONNELL RETURNS TO THE SENATE FLOOR

by RJ Matson, Portland, ME

Senator Mitch McConnell returned to the Senate floor on September 15, 2026, after health-related absences, directly addressing rumors of his political demise. At the same time the House has advanced the Common Cents Act to eliminate the US penny. The move reflects ongoing efforts to modernize currency amid rising production costs. McConnell's return underscores his enduring influence in the chamber despite physical challenges. The cartoon uses a classic quote to juxtapose the senator's resilience against the penny's planned demise, suggesting one survives while the other does not.

AI Adds to Worker Strain

Becs — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 14:53:00 +0000

AI ADDS TO WORKER STRAIN

by Becs, Cagle.com

Workplaces are rapidly adopting artificial intelligence systems to boost output. The integration often shifts more tasks onto remaining human workers rather than reducing their load. The piece contends that AI is compounding physical and mental strain on labor instead of delivering promised relief.

Animals Anticipate AI End of Humanity

Arcadio Esquivel — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 13:37:19 +0000

ANIMALS ANTICIPATE AI END OF HUMANITY

by Arcadio Esquivel, Costa Rica

Public discussion of artificial intelligence risks has grown with warnings that advanced systems could threaten human survival. The cartoon uses wildlife characters to highlight how some might view such an outcome as beneficial rather than catastrophic. It pokes at the self-centered lens through which existential threats are sometimes considered.

Carney Markets Used Airports Deal

Graeme MacKay — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 13:19:49 +0000

CARNEY MARKETS USED AIRPORTS DEAL

by Graeme MacKay, Cagle.com

The cartoon depicts Justin Trudeau at a Canada Investment Summit appealing for help to build the country strong. In the adjacent panel, Mark Carney appears as a used-car-style salesman hawking airports with a buy-one-get-one-free offer and a ready-for-takeoff deal pitch, highlighting a satirical take on airport privatization efforts.

Trump dismisses AI concerns

Jeff Koterba — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 13:07:59 +0000

TRUMP DISMISSES AI CONCERNS

by Jeff Koterba, Cagle.com

Donald Trump has repeatedly downplayed warnings about artificial intelligence dangers in recent statements. The cartoon responds by depicting a robotic figure in a parody MAGA hat proclaiming apocalypse enthusiasm. It argues that ignoring AI risks invites catastrophe. The editorial position frames Trump's stance as reckless and shortsighted on emerging technology threats.

Houthis Supply Missiles to Iran

Jimmy Margulies — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 11:48:09 +0000

HOUTHIS SUPPLY MISSILES TO IRAN

by Jimmy Margulies, Cagle.com

Reports indicate Houthi forces in Yemen have begun supplying missiles to Iran, addressing potential shortages in Iranian stockpiles. The development raises questions about regional arms flows and US policy responses in the Middle East. The cartoon highlights American concerns over whether Iran is truly facing weapons deficits, given the influx of Houthi-provided arms from Yemen. It portrays the situation as undermining claims of Iranian vulnerability while underscoring ongoing tensions in proxy dynamics.

RETURN TO SENDER

Bill Day — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 11:45:34 +0000

RETURN TO SENDER

by Bill Day, Cagle.com

A presidential directive aimed at ending mail-in voting reached the Supreme Court but was promptly returned. The action underscores ongoing disputes over election procedures and access. The cartoon frames the effort as an unsuccessful attempt to restrict voting methods through judicial channels. It highlights institutional pushback against executive intervention in ballot processes. The piece takes the position that such restrictions lack support and are properly rebuffed.

Social media bans won't help children

Charles Sauer — Mon, 14 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Candice Odgers gave both of her daughters smartphones for their eleventh birthdays and even let her youngest daughter use Snapchat.

You might be shaking your head and wondering why she would be so reckless. Hasn’t she read the work of experts regarding how social media damages children’s mental health? Well, not only has she read those studies, she analyzed them and found the case for restricting minors’ access to social media does not hold up under scrutiny.

In addition to being a mother, Odgers is a professor of developmental psychology who has studied adolescent mental health for 25 years. Not only does she not think social media is the main cause of children’s mental health problems, she believes laws forbidding children below a certain age from accessing social media “are likely to make things worse, not better.”

One reason Odgers opposes forbidding minors from using social media is that they can easily get around the bans. A study published by the British Medical Journal found that over 85% of Australians under 16 are still using social media even though the government banned them from opening accounts. As Odgers notes, “the more we make it a forbidden place to spend time, the less likely they [children who use social media] are going to tell us what’s happening in those spaces, the less likely they will be to report harms, the less likely we will be to help them.”

Odgers has been working with children between the ages of 10 and 14 since 2008. A large portion of her work involves examining their social media use to see how they spend their time online and how it affects things like their sleep and exercise. Her research and the research of others has convinced her social media plays a small role in the recent increase in the number of children experiencing mental health issues. Odgers identifies several factors more likely to cause childhood mental health issues then social media, such as “the recession, rising adult mental health issues, the Covid pandemic and, in the U.S., opioid addiction.”

Social media may have actually helped children avoid depression and other problems during the Covid lockdowns by providing them with a way to keep in touch with their peers. Odgers also points out that, instead of causing young girls to become depressed, many girls turn to social media to help them deal with existing depression. Odgers also points out many victims of cyberbullying are also bullied offline. These facts back up her contention that social media “is one of the least influential factors” in teen depression.

Those who advocate banning children from social media claim children do not spend enough face-to-face time with their peers. This claim has been debunked by a University of Florida study which found that children with smartphones are more likely to use FaceTime, allowing them to interact more with their friends than children without smartphones. The study did find teenagers who regularly post on social media suffer from depression and sleep deprivation. However, the solution to problems caused by excessive social media use is not legislation. A child’s access to social media should be controlled by those who know child best, their parents.

Fortunately, there are a number of tools available to help parents control their children’s online access. Every major social media platform, gaming site, and search engine offers parental controls. There are also products that allow parents to monitor and control their child’s online activities, as well as cellphones that only allow users to talk and text.

Odgers is not motivated by a libertarian commitment to limited government and free markets. She favors increased government spending funded “with a big old tax on tech" to, among other things, construct improved “communities and physical spaces for children to play and learn.”

When it comes to social media effects on children, the research shows the negative effects are grossly exaggerated while the benefits are often overlooked. She may not be a libertarian, but her fact-based conclusions regarding what politicians should do regarding children’s usage of social media will warm the hearts of all libertarians (and Seinfeld fans) – the politicians should do nothing.

–
Copyright 2026 Charles Sauer, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Charles Sauer is the president of the Market Institute and the author of “Profit Motive” Sauer can be reached at charles@marketinstitute.org.

Well, well, weddings

Alexandra Paskhaver — Mon, 14 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000

A wedding is when two people celebrate their love by financially ambushing everyone they know.

I have not attended many weddings. In part, this is because I never know what to give the bride and groom apart from a toaster worth more than my college education, so I generally refuse invitations.

Besides, the bride’s rich friends can probably buy her better toasters, toasters that not only heat bread to the perfect shade of caramelized brown, but also recite poetry, file taxes, and write humor columns.

The groom’s friends will buy him something practical, like a used convertible with leather seats, then immediately drive it cross-country to the wedding with the roof up while it’s raining.

This is actually useful. It psychologically prepares the car for the torments it will later endure as a vehicle for small children.

So I don’t like giving wedding gifts. Frankly, I don’t think I’ll enjoy receiving them either, whenever I get hitched. There are only so many convincing ways to express delight over a meat thermometer.

“Oh wow,” you have to say. “Now I can finally determine whether my chicken has achieved a safe internal temperature.”

Nobody has ever said this sincerely.

Most wedding gifts seem designed for a fictional couple from the 1750s. People hand you gravy boats, decorative bowls, and devices whose sole purpose appears to be turning one food into a slightly smaller food.

I once saw a machine that slices bananas lengthwise.

Not once in human history has somebody cried out, “If only this banana were flatter.”

Despite the fact that I have attended a grand total of three weddings, I have never once tried wedding cake. This I consider a personal failure.

I don’t stay through the whole wedding. I tend to get tired around 10 p.m. and crash. Not the wedding. Usually into a pile of coats.

This is well before the cake is served, of course.

No, it is an established fact that wedding cake can only be brought out once the guests are too exhausted to defend themselves.

By morning, it has already been used to inflict head injuries, prop up wobbly chairs, patch drywall, and possibly settle minor legal disputes.

So I’ve never tried it. I imagine it tastes quite good. Maybe like fruitcake, another dessert famous for being used as a projectile.

The only people who seem to enjoy weddings are the fathers-in-law.

Not the mothers-in-law. They’re busy thinking up new and creative ways to hate their new child-in-law for ever daring to get married to their darling baby.

But the fathers-in-law are chilling. Perhaps they’ve discovered they share a fondness for the same brand of pale ale. They can commiserate over 401ks and lawn-mowing duties.

They can even admit to each other that deep down, they’ve always liked the family dog just a touch more than their kids.

Deep down, I, too, have loved family dogs more than anyone I’ve seen get married.

-

Copyright 2026 Alexandra Paskhaver, distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Alexandra Paskhaver is a software engineer and writer. Both jobs require knowing where to stick semicolons, but she’s never quite; figured; it; out. Feel free to contact her at alexandra.paskhaver@gmail.com

How 9/11 changed all Americans alive at the time

Christine Flowers — Mon, 14 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000

When a good friend asked me to speak at the 9/11 ceremony in the Philadelphia suburbs, I told him I was a little surprised he would think of me.

I was not a victim of the terror attacks in any immediate way. I didn’t lose any close friends or family. I am not, nor am I related to a first responder. I wasn’t even in Manhattan, or at the Pentagon, or near that bucolic piece of land in western Pennsylvania 25 years ago.

But then I realized something, something quite simple: We are all victims of 9/11, and we are all in our own separate and excruciatingly personal way, survivors.

Every single person that was alive when the planes rained fire and fury down upon this country has felt its impact. I was three months away from turning 40, so I’d already lived more than half of my life when the first tower fell.

My mother, a couple of years younger than I am now, had been born into World War II, and came of age during the Cold War boom. I had young relatives who were in school, much like the children being read to by President George W. Bush when the planes shattered our sense of self, our sense of security, and forever broke history into before and after.

Every single one of us who can remember that day is marked by it, even if we don’t think that we were. I can go for long stretchesof time without remembering the sense of horror that overwhelmed me that heartbreakingly beautiful Tuesday morning.

I had suffered tragedies before then, and I’ve suffered tragedies since, as we all have, and the rhythm of the days switches back into their normal courses, because the pull of daily living is powerful.

Life goes on.

And yet, without warning, I will be catapulted back into the memory maelstrom, and the faces and the names and the voices come flooding back. It happened the other day, a morning so exquisite with pre-autumnal promise.

I was walking to work and looked up at the sky, and the random thought hit: It was exactly like this on 9/11.

Other times I will be looking through old emails on my AOL account — yes, I have an AOL account —and there will be a message from someone who wrote to thank me about some long-ago column I’d written honoring Father Mychal Judge, or praising our warriors, or asking for attention for the first responders, or defending the Patriot Act, or other things that form a part of that history.

And I know that you, like me, have experienced the same thing, as if parts of our lives back then were packed away into the timecapsules we used to fill as children, and then excavate decades later to see what we were like “back then.”

We were very different, back then. Very different.

First, we understood the concept of war, but from a distance. Our sons had been killed in combat in Japan, in Italy, in Korea and inVietnam, and we knew that deep sorrow.

But we ourselves had never been attacked this way, unless you count Pearl Harbor and the first World Trade Center bombing. The theater of war was always “over there,” as George M. Cohan wrote.

But now, it had come looking for us in our homes. And that changed our DNA.

The thing I really remember is how we treated one another in the days after 9/11. Most of us remember a sense of community that we hadn’t experienced before, and, more importantly, since.

It did not last very long, and even at the very beginning, it wasn’t universal. As an immigration lawyer, I remember some of my clients feeling very uncomfortable, even those who were so Americanized that you only knew from their names that they were Muslim. There was some bigotry and suspicion, which is completely normal.

But overall, we clung to one another like survivors cling to the common raft of our experience, our grief and our resolve. We pulled out our flags, not in some jingoistic way but as a security blanket, a reminder of who we were.

We were more tolerant of political differences, even for a short while, and more humble.

Our allies were our allies, and all across the world there were outpourings of grief and solidarity, even from places we would have least expected it, including the streets of Iran. The terrorists had tried to destroy us, and instead they strengthened us, at leastfor a while.

Of course, the aftermath was complicated, littered with losses and battles, both on foreign fields and in the halls of Congress. Theconnections made in those early days frayed and dissolved.

Children born after 9/11 have neither the sense of grief nor the sense of community that we share.

But it is our job to help them understand what this means, how it changed us, who we now are, and why it is so important that wenever forget. We owe it to them, to ourselves, and most importantly, to those who are no longer here.

-

Copyright 2026 Christine Flowers, distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Christine Flowers is an attorney and a columnist for the Delaware County Daily Times, and can be reached at cflowers1961@gmail.com.

Are voters stupid enough to fall for Trump's latest con?

Dick Polman — Mon, 14 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Sinclair Lewis deserves a prize for prescience. Ninety years ago, the author of "It Can’t Happen Here" created a presidential candidate named Buzz Windrip who rose to power with an openly demagogic agenda.

Buzz believed nonstop lying was the best way to connect with voters (“it is not fair to ordinary folks - it just confuses them - to try to make them swallow all the true facts”). He played them for suckers, and won. He told them “lowdown crooks, liars, and schemers” were trying to rig the election against him, that dishonest reporters were plotting his downfall, and that members of the “Nordic” race were more American than “people of inferior races.”

And he promised that, once elected, he would give each person $5,000.

I kid you not. It’s in the book.

Surely you heard what Trump said the other day: “If the Republicans win the House of Representatives and the United States Senate, both of them, I will issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the United States of America for $5,000. Very much like a successful company will do a cash distribution to its shareholders.”

P. T. Barnum never actually said a sucker is born every minute, but the carnival barker who lives at the White House construction site apparently believes, even at this late stage of his deteriorating regime, that he can somehow sow mass gullibility. Granted, his latest con is probably catnip for the willfully ignorant and woefully naive (roughly one-third of the citizenry), but by now most Americans know he’s running on empty.

Plagued by high prices (from his un-winnable Iran war and his self-destructive tariff war), Trump's merely offering a distraction, a shiny object for everyone to chase. Sending $5,000 to 270 million adult Americans would cost roughly $1.3 trillion, explode the already $40-trillion national debt, and require congressional approval.

It’s all just a mirage anyway. Remember last year when he teased the idea of sending us money from Elon Musk’s federal government cuts? Remember last year when he teased the idea of sending us money from the tariffs he’d slapped on our trading partners? What follows is a primer for MAGA amnesiacs, proof that all he’s doing now is recycling old grifts.

Feb. 2025: “There’s even under consideration a new concept where we give 20 percent of the DOGE savings to American citizens.”

July 2025: “We’re thinking about a rebate because we have so much money coming in from tariffs, a little rebate for people of a certain income level might be very nice.”

Aug 2025: “There could be a distribution or a dividend to the people of our country, I wield say for middle income people and lower-income people.”

Nov 2025: “We’re going to issue a dividend to our middle-income people and lower-income people of about $2000.”

Nov. 2025: “”I’ll be giving back $2000 or so to middle-income people, low-income people, everybody but the rich. It’ll be next year some time.”

Dec. 2025: “And we’re going to be giving back refunds out of the tariffs because we’ve taken in literally trillions of dollars. And we’re going to be giving a nice dividend to the people.”

Jan 2026: “We will be able to make a very substantial dividend to the people of our country. I believe we can do that without Congress.”

Feb 2026: “I’m looking at it (dividend) very seriously. I’m the only one who can do it because I’m taking in literally hundreds of billions of dollars. I can do that. I haven’t made the commitment yet, but I may make the commitment.”

Big surprise, he never did. And you have to wonder why not. After all, he’s been governing this whole time with a Republican House and Senate, so how come he and his congressional supplicants haven’t shared the purported bounty with us citizens (while stuffing his own pockets with $2.2 billion)?

Even Fox News host Laura Ingraham, normally a doormat, asked Trump on the air why he doesn’t simply dispense those $5000 checks right now, given the GOP’s power dominance in DC. This was his answer, verbatim: “Because the Democrats can’t do it. Because for them, it’s negative growth. With us, it’s so positive.”

Say what? He’s more coherent when he naps on camera.

In Ireland he actually uttered this sentence: “I always keep my pledge.” But don’t bet on any windfall for your gas and grocery tabs. Whether his MAGA candidates win or lose in November, it ain’t happening. Natalie Harp gets a dividend, not you. Stormy Daniels gets a dividend, not you.

But you already know these truths to be self-evident. As Tony Soprano warned us years ago, “One thing about us wise guys - the hustle never ends.”

-

Copyright 2026 Dick Polman, distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Dick Polman, a veteran national political columnist based in Philadelphia and a Writer in Residence at the University of Pennsylvania, writes the Subject to Change newsletter. Email him at dickpolman7@gmail.com

Hurry sickness: Top ten cartoons of the week

Daryl Cagle — Fri, 11 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Why is everything in such a rush?

The pace of news moves at a frenetic pace, and folks with young kids are so over-scheduled they don't have the luxury of an empty day on the calendar. Our phone is pinging with alerts all the time, and our brains are being turned into mush. Doctors have a term for it – "hurry sickness."

Ed Wexler tapped into that frustration in our most-reprinted cartoon of the week, a quiet toon featuring a couple lamenting how quickly the days on the calendar are flying by. Our days are so busy work is invading our dreams, a trend Peter Kuper mocked in a popular cartoon.

Artificial intelligence is the latest threat to our collective sanity, and we had plenty of cartoons this week on data centers. I laughed at Gary McCoy's funny riff, featuring two kids talking about grandpa's data center – a table full of books, which none of us have time to read.

Here are our top ten most reprinted cartoons of the week:

#1. Ed Wexler

#2. Gary McCoy

#3. Harley Schwadron

#4. John Darkow

#5. Peter Kuper

#6. John Cole

#7. Bill Day

#8. Dave Whamond

#9. John Darkow

#10. John Darkow

–

Daryl Cagle is the publisher of Cagle.com and owner of CagleCartoons.com, a syndicate that distributes editorial cartoons and columns to over 500 subscribing newspapers. See Daryl’s blog at DarylCagle.com and watch his video podcast about editorial cartoons at Caglecast.com

SpaceX's wireless ambitions need a cold, hard look

Peter Roff — Thu, 10 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Elon Musk is nothing if not audacious. He’s a business visionary who sees the potential in just about everything. He’s not always right, but he understands sometimes, in order to succeed, you first have to fail.

That probably helps him ignore his critics when he announces something new that runs counter to the conventional wisdom. His bet reusable rockets would work as a delivery mechanism to place objects in orbit paid off. The legacy contractors who thought he’d fail probably wish they’d been his partners, once he changed the trajectory of the space business.

Other deals didn’t work out as well, at least where the business bottom line matters. A few years ago, Musk paid $44 billion for Twitter and renamed it X. He hasn’t made his money back, and probably never will, but he did rescue American free-speech culture from technological Marxists seeking to ensure that only left-wing, anti-American, pro-socialist views were promoted on the platform.

Musk’s SpaceX now appears to be embarking on a terrestrial mission that’s bold and brave and ought to make both Wall Street and Washington uneasy for reasons having little to do with politics. The company is spending nearly $20 billion to buy a part of the spectrum currently controlled by EchoStar, the parent company of DISH. The intention, according to SpaceX's chief operating officer Gwynne Shotwell, is to form “Starlink Mobile” and compete directly with AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.

That bet probably won’t pay off for the SpaceX shareholders. Start with the technology. The nationwide cellular network it wants to build relies on small base stations known as femtocells mounted onto existing Starlink dishes. That may sound clever, but people who do this for a living like Earl Lum, founder of EJL Wireless Research and a four-decade industry veteran, told Light Reading the concept "ranks as one of the top three dumbest ideas" he’d ever heard.

The femtocells would draw down the same backhaul that Starlink's satellite broadband already strains. Real Wireless’s Paul Rhodes doubts the physics of the plan. His analysis? 60-watt Starlink terminals don't have the power or backhaul to feed multiple cellular radios. Bolt on all the antennas you want; there’s no pipe to feed them.

And, as if you weren’t surprised to learn, the government is in the middle of it all. In 2019, the Trump Justice Department blessed the T-Mobile-Sprint merger only after investor Charlie Ergen promised the network he’d create with the spectrum he acquired would be a fourth nationwide, facilities-based carrier.

That’s something the government said was needed, and Ergen complied – to win approval of the merger. In this case, the FCC didn't just wave DISH through; it rolled out the red carpet. The promises were enough to secure relaxed and extended network buildout schedules, the last of which ends in June 2028.

Ergen got just about every accommodation a regulator can give a licensee. And DISH still couldn't do what it promised. Tower rents went unpaid. American Tower and Crown Castle sued. The new 5G network that was supposed to compete with the established market leaders is being decommissioned. Boost Mobile is now being folded into AT&T's network as a glorified reseller.

Despite vast spectrum holdings, regulatory support, and deep connections in Washington, DISH could not create a viable, competitive network. Some critics suggest it may never have wanted to, but that’s beside the point. SpaceX now wants to enter the same unforgiving industry, based on plans that use an even less conventional technology.

SpaceX's core broadband business, its ability to reach the hardest-to-reach corners of the country, is a bona fide technological achievement. Its direct-to-cell partnership with T-Mobile, where satellites fill coverage dead zones not reached by towers and cells, is a smart application of a complementary technology.

That’s a very different business than AT&T’s or Verizon’s. Terrestrial wireless is capital-intensive, low-margin, and heavily regulated. SpaceX shareholders have much to gain if the company uses its talent and resources to pioneer new technologies and expand into untapped markets by building communications links only it can build.

Unlike others who’ve been in the business of acquiring spectrum just to sell it off at considerable profit, Musk and SpaceX actually want to use it productively. They want to create something that adds to economic growth, produces new jobs, and enriches its investors through productivity rather than resource manipulation. That’s to be applauded, but EchoStar/DISH and its investors learned the hard way what happens when a company confuses owning spectrum for being in the wireless business.

SpaceX doesn’t need to be a more expensive, higher-priced example of learning the same lesson twice.

-

Copyright 2026 Peter Roff distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.

Peter Roff is former U.S. News and World Report contributing editor and UPI senior political writer now affiliated with several DC-based public policy organizations. He writes for numerous publications and appears regularly on international television talking about U.S. politics. You can reach him at RoffColumns@gmail.com and follow him on Twitter @TheRoffDraft.