The rise of non-bank lenders as alternatives to heavily regulated banks is a theme we have been following here (see earlier posts here, here, and here). Now Bloomberg brings news of a firm in Thailand, Muangthai Leasing, whose founders have become billionaires by offering small loans collateralized by cars, land, or motorcycles: "Millions of Thais ...need working capital for small businesses, but lack the credit history required by commercial banks."

If some hedge fund exhibited a fraction of the public posture of noncompliance toward, say, insider trading law that Harvard University is exhibiting toward immigration law, Preet Bharara would be frog-marching its founder down Park Avenue faster than Usain Bolt. My column this week looks at the rule of law and executive authority under Presidents Obama and Trump. Please check it out at the New Boston Post (here), New York Sun (here), and Newsmax (here).

The most charitable state in New England turns out to be New Hampshire, Boston magazine reports, citing a WalletHub study ranking all 50 states (Utah was tops in the nation).

Boston magazine doesn't get into it, but New Hampshire is also the New England state with the lowest income tax rate — zero. It's often claimed that lower income tax rates will hurt charitable giving by reducing the incentive provided by the tax deduction for charitable giving. But it's also possible that, by leaving individuals and families with more after-tax money in their pockets, lower tax rates actually encourage charitable giving. After all, you can't give away money that the government has already taken away.

President-Elect Donald Trump was scheduled to meet this afternoon with John Allison, who is reportedly a candidate for Treasury Secretary or perhaps some other high post in the administration. My review of Mr. Allison's 2012 book that called for eliminating the Federal Reserve and cutting defense spending by as much as 50% is here.

My latest at the Las Vegas Review-Journal:

The intensity of the reaction is enough to make some of us wonder if this fear that Trump is terrible has become so ingrained that it would survive any encounter with even the strongest evidence to the contrary.

Rather than speculating, or worrying, how about laying down some markers?

Please check out the whole column by clicking here.

David Brooks is a New York Times columnist with whom I've certainly had my share of differences over the years, but today's column has some very wise passages:

Many of my fellow Trump critics are expressing outrage, depression, bewilderment or disgust. They're marching or writing essays: Should we normalize Trump or fight the normalizers?

It all seems so useless during this transition moment. It's all a series of narcissistic displays and discussions about our own emotional states.

It seems like the first thing to do is really learn what this election is teaching us. .... It's stupid to react to every Trump tweet outrage with your own predictable howls. It's silly to treat politics and governance purely on cultural grounds, as a high school popularity contest, where my sort of people denigrates your sort of people....

A quick trip to Detroit was just what I needed for some perspective on the presidential election. That's what my column is about this week; please check it out at the New York Sun (here), Reason (here), and Newsmax (here).

The New York Times manages to write up McDonald's decision to roll out "digital self-serve ordering stations" at all of its 14,000 U.S. restaurants without any mention at all of increases in minimum wages and health care mandates, factors that many of us predicted would accelerate the trend of workers being replaced by machinery.

Nothing like impending Republican control of the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives to make the left suddenly become believers in what Newt Gingrich called devolution — allowing decisions to be made at the state and local levels of government. Good. That's the topic of my latest column for the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Please check it out by clicking here.

The Wall Street Journal has an editorial headlined "The Trump Family Political Business," recommending that President-elect Trump liquidate his holdings to eliminate concerns about conflicts of interest.

The editorial doesn't really get into the question, but it's certainly conceivable that Mr. Trump could take the position that if he goes ahead and does what the Journal is recommending, both he and his children would qualify for an exemption from capital gains taxes under 26 USC 1043, "Sale of property to comply with conflict-of-interest requirements."

A Forbes article from 2006 documents the way various cabinet officials in previous administrations have used the provision to avoid capital gains taxes.

ObamaCare, devised by out-of-touch academics betting on "the stupidity of the American voter," was a part of the reason Hillary Clinton lost. That's the topic of my column this week. Please check it out in the New Boston Post (here), the New York Sun (here), Reason (here), and Newsmax (here).

"Don't Blame Racism, Sexism For Trump's Win" is the headline over my latest column for the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Please check the column out in full by clicking here.

A lot of left-of-center friends of mine are on Facebook complaining that racism and sexism cost Hillary Clinton the election. I'll have more to say about that general complaint elsewhere, soon. But in the meantime, it's worth mentioning, in response to the "sexism" accusation, that in at least two states with a total of 26 electoral votes, Michigan and Wisconsin, Hillary Clinton's margin of defeat appears to have been smaller than the number of votes won by Jill Stein, a woman who ran for president as the nominee of the hard left Green Party.

Results are still unofficial, but as of this writing, Mr. Trump leads Mrs. Clinton in Michigan by about 12,000 votes. Jill Stein won about 50,000 votes in the state. If the Stein voters had simply voted for Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Clinton would have won the state.

Similarly, in Wisconsin, Mr. Trump's margin of victory over Mrs. Clinton is about 27,000 votes. Jill Stein won about 31,000 votes in the state. If the Stein voters had simply voted for Mrs. Clinton, Clinton would have won the state.

Hillary Clinton never tired of reminding voters that "The stock market does better when you have a Democratic president in the White House."

That statistic is truer than ever after the past week. As CNBC put it, "U.S. equities closed mostly higher on Friday, with the three major indexes posting their best weekly gains of the year on the back of a surprise Republican sweep....For the week, the Dow rose around 5.4 percent, marking its best weekly performance since December 2011....The S&P 500 underperformed, falling 0.15 percent, with energy falling 1.68 percent to lead decliners. The index, however, ended the week about 3.8 percent higher, posting its highest weekly gain since 2013."

Think about it: If any politician deserves credit for those gains, is it the "Democratic president in the White House," President Obama? Or is it the Republican president-elect, Donald Trump?

Absolutely terrific, must-read column in the Washington Post by Asra Q. Nomani. A fine rebuttal to anyone claiming the election result was all about racism, sexism, or anti-Muslim bigotry.