Podcast appearances and mentions of ben casselman

Is the U.S. economy … good? Bad? Somewhere in the middle? If it feels like you're desperately shaking a Magic 8 Ball for economic tea leaves, and even it's telling you, 'Ask again later.' Well, it might be on to something. While we're all hearing anecdotes about empty cargo ships from China and fewer people eating at McDonald's, the hard data that would point to a possible recession hasn't shown up yet. Case in point: Tuesday's better-than-expected Consumer Price Index numbers, showed inflation cooled slightly last month despite uncertainty around President Donald Trump's tariffs. Ben Casselman, chief economics correspondent for The New York Times, explains why the vibes don't match the data.And in headlines: President Trump eliminated sanctions on Syria, Cassie Ventura began testifying in music mogul Sean 'Diddy' Combs' federal sex-trafficking and racketeering trial, and the Trump Administration ended federal temporary protected status for Afghans in the U.S.Show Notes:Check out Ben's work – www.nytimes.com/by/ben-casselmanSubscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday

At a time of enormous economic upheaval and uncertainty prompted by President Trump's trade war, we asked our listeners what they wanted to understand about this financial moment.Ben Casselman, the chief economics correspondent for The New York Times, tries to answer some of those questions.Guest: Ben Casselman, the chief economics correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: The U.S. economy shrank in the first quarter, in a reading clouded by messy trade data.Video: How Mr. Trump's shifting tariffs could accelerate a recession.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Photo: Angela Weiss/Agence France-Presse via Getty Images Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

As President Trump has rolled out his economic agenda, the assumption has been that he would quickly scale back his most aggressive policies once they began to scare consumers and the financial markets. But that assumption turned out to be wrong.Ben Casselman, who covers economics, and Maggie Haberman, who covers the White House, explain why Mr. Trump's economic plan may be backfiring and why he doesn't seem to mind.Guest: Ben Casselman, the chief economics correspondent for The New York Times.Maggie Haberman, a White House correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: Mr. Trump has said a recession might be worth the cost. Economists disagree.Investors thought they had Mr. Trump figured out. They were wrong.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday. Photo: Brandon Bell/Getty Images Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

His research on police brutality and school incentives won him acclaim, but also enemies. He was suspended for two years by Harvard, during which time he took a hard look at corporate diversity programs. As a follow-up to our recent series on the Rooney Rule, we revisit our 2022 conversation with the controversial economist. SOURCE:Roland Fryer, professor of economics at Harvard University. RESOURCES:"How to Make Up the Covid Learning Loss," by Roland Fryer (Wall Street Journal, 2022)."Roland Fryer on Better Alternatives to Defunding the Police," by Roland Fryer (The Economist, 2020)."Harvard Suspends Roland Fryer, Star Economist, After Sexual Harassment Claims," by Ben Casselman and Jim Tankersley (The New York Times, 2019)."Why Diversity Programs Fail: And What Works Better," by Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev (Harvard Business Review, 2016)."An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force," by Roland G. Fryer, Jr (NBER Working Paper, 2016)."Getting Beneath the Veil of Effective Schools: Evidence from New York City," by Will Dobbie and Roland G. Fryer (American Economics Journal, 2013)."Financial Incentives and Student Achievement: Evidence From Randomized Trials," by Roland G. Fryer (The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2011)."Toward a Unified Theory of Black America," by Stephen J. Dubner (The New York Times, 2005).Equal Opportunity Ventures.Intus Care.Reconstruction.Sigma Squared. EXTRAS:"Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring?" series by Freakonomics Radio (2024)."The True Story of the Gender Pay Gap," by Freakonomics Radio (2016)."Does “Early Education” Come Way Too Late?" by Freakonomics Radio (2015).

Tipping, once contained to certain corners of the economy, has exploded, creating confusion and angst. Now, it is even becoming an issue in the U.S. presidential campaign.Ben Casselman, who covers the U.S. economy for The New York Times, cracks open the mystery of this new era of tipping.Guest: Ben Casselman, a reporter covering the U.S. economy for The New York Times.Background reading: How to deal with the many requests for tips.Former President Donald J. Trump called Vice President Kamala Harris a “copycat” over her “no tax on tips” plan.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

A majority of Americans believe that the economy is in a recession even though it's not. On this week's On the Media, hear why there's a mismatch between facts and feelings about the economy. Plus, how the outlandish claims of AI companies often go unchecked by the press.[01:09] Host Micah Loewinger interviews Jeanna Smialek of The New York Times about whether the ‘vibecession' is back and the factors that are shaping negative perceptions of the economy.[14:41] Micah speaks with Gordon Hanson, economist at Harvard University's Kennedy School, about how President Biden has adopted, and even escalated, former President Trump's tariffs on China, and why the political narratives around tariffs don't always match up with the economic realities.[29:29] Lastly, Micah breaks down media hype about AI. According to Sam Harnett, a former tech reporter, journalists are repeating lazy tropes about the future of work that once boosted companies like Uber, Airbnb, and Fiverr. Plus, Julia Angwin, founder of Proof News, debunks fantastical claims by AI companies about their software. And Paris Marx, host of Tech Won't Save Us, explains how AI leaders like Sam Altman use the press to lobby regulators and investors.Further reading:“High Interest Rates Are Hitting Poorer Americans the Hardest,” by Ben Casselman and Jeanna Smialek“Washington's New Trade Consensus,” by Gordon Hanson“How Tech Media Helped Write Gig Companies into Existence,” by Sam Harnett“Press Pause on the Silicon Valley Hype Machine,” by Julia Angwin“AI is Fueling a Data Center Boom. It Must Be Stopped," by Paris Marx On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.

The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 1: 3:05pm- Donald Trump's “hush money” trial continued on Tuesday—with the prosecution's key witness Michael Cohen being questioned by Trump's attorneys. According to Jesse McKinley of The New York Times, during cross examination, Cohen was portrayed as someone seeking revenge and looking to earn money via the sale of t-shirts that said: “Convict 45.” You can read more here: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/05/14/nyregion/trump-trial-news-michael-cohen?smid=url-share#95706224-806b-5507-ae9b-e5a422a2b006 3:15pm- In reaction to a stream of negative polling results for President Joe Biden, CNN political commentator Van Jones stated that “the economic prospects for young people are miserable.” 3:35pm- Ben Casselman and Jeanna Smialek of The New York Times write that high interest rates are seriously hurting poorer Americans: “High interest rates haven't crashed the financial system, set off a wave of bankruptcies or caused the recession that many economists feared. But for millions of low and moderate-income families, high rates are taking a toll. More Americans are falling behind on payments on credit card and auto loans, even as many are taking on more debt than ever before.” You can read the full article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/14/business/economy/interest-rates-inequality.html 3:40pm- According to a report from Axios, President Joe Biden and his campaign refuse to believe polling which indicates Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is running ahead of Biden in 5 out of 6 key swing states in the 2024 presidential election. 3:55pm- The beloved Disney character Tinker Bell has become the latest victim of cancel culture.

The Rich Zeoli Show- Full Episode (05/14/2024): 3:05pm- Donald Trump's “hush money” trial continued on Tuesday—with the prosecution's key witness Michael Cohen being questioned by Trump's attorneys. According to Jesse McKinley of The New York Times, during cross examination, Cohen was portrayed as someone seeking revenge and looking to earn money via the sale of t-shirts that said: “Convict 45.” You can read more here: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/05/14/nyregion/trump-trial-news-michael-cohen?smid=url-share#95706224-806b-5507-ae9b-e5a422a2b006 3:15pm- In reaction to a stream of negative polling results for President Joe Biden, CNN political commentator Van Jones stated that “the economic prospects for young people are miserable.” 3:35pm- Ben Casselman and Jeanna Smialek of The New York Times write that high interest rates are seriously hurting poorer Americans: “High interest rates haven't crashed the financial system, set off a wave of bankruptcies or caused the recession that many economists feared. But for millions of low and moderate-income families, high rates are taking a toll. More Americans are falling behind on payments on credit card and auto loans, even as many are taking on more debt than ever before.” You can read the full article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/14/business/economy/interest-rates-inequality.html 3:40pm- According to a report from Axios, President Joe Biden and his campaign refuse to believe polling which indicates Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is running ahead of Biden in 5 out of 6 key swing states in the 2024 presidential election. 3:55pm- The beloved Disney character Tinker Bell has become the latest victim of cancel culture. 4:05pm- Rich explains that when it became clear Donald Trump would be the Republican Party's 2024 presidential candidate, President Joe Biden and his administration decided to embrace radical progressive policies—operating under the assumption that election victory would be easily achieved. However, according to new polling from The New York Times, Sienna College, and The Philadelphia Inquirer, Trump now leads President Biden in five of the six key 2024 swing states—Pennsylvania (+3), Arizona (+7), Michigan (+7), Georgia (+10), and Nevada (+12). 4:20pm- Mark Penn—an adviser to former President Bill Clinton and chairman of Harris Poll—says the Biden campaign isn't focused on winning the correct voters. He's attempting to win the radical left, while seemingly forfeiting the moderate/independent vote. Penn explains that the swing voter is worth 2x the value of a progressive voter: “People usually assume that turning out so-called base voters in an election matters most, since swing voters are fewer in number. And it's true that in today's polarized environment, Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump have about 40 percent of voters each and nothing will change those people's minds. But in that remaining 20 percent of the electorate, voters have disproportionate power because of their potential to switch. It's simple math: Take a race tied in the run-up 5 to 5. If one voter swings, the tally becomes 6 to 4. Two voters would then need to be turned out just to tie it up, and a third one would be needed to win.” You can read Penn's full editorial here: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/05/13/nyregion/trump-trial-michael-cohen 4:50pm- Women are paying thousands of dollars to participate in “rage rituals.” Why? Plus, is spray on “hair in a can” a real thing? Yup! 5:05pm- In her new article for The Washington Examiner, columnist Salena Zito asks did Trump make a 4D chess move with his speech in Wildwood, New Jersey? Zito writes: “In 2016, Clinton won Mahoning County with 49% of the vote, defeating Trump by a hair. For perspective, just four years earlier, then-President Barack Obama crushed Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney by a whopping 28 points in the Mahoning Valley, earning 63% of the vote of this mostly white working-class voter base. Those same working-class white voters, on whom Democrats relied to carry the state twice for the first Black president, would soon be called racist, uneducated, and angry just four years later for supporting Trump. Fast-forward to last weekend when Trump, plagued by nonstop reports of his trial for allegedly covering up hush money payments, held a rally in Wildwood, New Jersey, and attracted more than 80,000 supporters in a state no Republican presidential candidate has won since then-Vice President George H.W. Bush in 1988.” Will Trump win the 2024 presidential election thanks to his appeal to working class Americans who feel left behind by the Democrat party? You can read her full story here: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/3003815/was-trump-making-4d-chess-move-speech-new-jersey/ 5:30pm- During an Oxford Union debate, Winston Marshall—the former banjoist and lead guitarist for the band Mumford & Sona—argued that “Populism has become a word used synonymously with ‘racist'…with ‘bigot,' with ‘hillbilly'…elites use it to show their contempt for ordinary people.” Throughout the evening, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) interrupted her debate opponent—claiming that populism is a threat to democracy and that the 2016 election had been “hijacked.” 5:40pm- Rich keeps unbuttoning his shirt as part of an effort to grow our YouTube audience…but nobody wants to see that! 6:05pm- Completely unbiased ABC News journalist George Stephanopoulos told the ladies of The View that if Donald Trump were to win the 2024 election, the White House Situation Room would be “uncontrolled” and pose a threat to American stability. 6:10pm- On HBO's Real Time, host Bill Maher accused The New York Times of being an instrument of the Democrat Party. 6:30pm- Comedian Jerry Seinfeld delivered the commencement address at Duke University's graduation. PLUS, Vice President Kamala Harris drops a hard f-bomb while speaking at the Asian Pacific American Institute's leadership summit. 6:40pm- Erin Perrine—Political Strategist with Axiom Strategies—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to recap Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's massive rally in Wildwood, New Jersey where an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 people attended. Can President Joe Biden do anything to slow down Trump's momentum?

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz are together again and talking about Donald Trump's next indictment and the charges against his “false electors” in Michigan; the struggles of candidates Ron DeSantis, Tim Scott, et al.; and Congressional Republicans' culture war against the U.S. military.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: James Madison: “Impeachment of the Executive, [20 July] 1787” FiveThirtyEight: “Who's Ahead In Republican Primary Polls?”  Fox News Digital: “Republican presidential candidate Sen. Tim Scott says Donald Trump is ‘overqualified to be my vice president'”  Manu Raju, Rashard Rose, and Lauren Fox for CNN: “Tommy Tuberville now says ‘White nationalists are racists' after refusing to denounce them” Zoë Richards for NBC News: “Arizona Republican refers to Black Americans as ‘colored people' in House floor debate”   Here are this week's chatters:  Emily: Elise White, Basaime Spate, Javonte Alexander, and Rachel Swaner for the Center for Justice Innovation: “'Two Battlefields': Opps, Cops, and NYC Youth Gun Culture” and Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration by Emily Bazelon   John: Mona El-Naggar, Johan M. Kessel, and Alexander Stockton for The New York Times: “What Is War to a Grieving Child?”; Jeanna Smialek and Ben Casselman for The New York Times: “The Pandemic's Labor Market Myths”; and Chris Cameron for The New York Times: “Over 700 Civil War-Era Gold Coins Found Buried on a Kentucky Farm” David: “Exploring a Secret Fort” with David through airbnb; Steve Bohnel for The Frederick News-Post: “$200,000, or the city burns: The story of the Confederacy's ransom on Frederick”; and Caity Weaver for The New York Times Magazine: “My Impossible Mission to Find Tom Cruise”  Listener chatter from Dianne Denton: Harriet McBryde Johnson for The New York Times Magazine: “Unspeakable Conversations” and Disability Visibility: First-Person Stories from the Twenty-First Century by Alice Wong For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, David, John, and Emily discuss the Hollywood actors' and writers' strikes, artificial intelligence, and the future of work.  In the next edition of Gabfest Reads, David talks with David Grann about his book, The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Mutiny and Murder.    Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com or Tweet us @SlateGabfest. (Messages may be quoted by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz are together again and talking about Donald Trump's next indictment and the charges against his “false electors” in Michigan; the struggles of candidates Ron DeSantis, Tim Scott, et al.; and Congressional Republicans' culture war against the U.S. military.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: James Madison: “Impeachment of the Executive, [20 July] 1787” FiveThirtyEight: “Who's Ahead In Republican Primary Polls?”  Fox News Digital: “Republican presidential candidate Sen. Tim Scott says Donald Trump is ‘overqualified to be my vice president'”  Manu Raju, Rashard Rose, and Lauren Fox for CNN: “Tommy Tuberville now says ‘White nationalists are racists' after refusing to denounce them” Zoë Richards for NBC News: “Arizona Republican refers to Black Americans as ‘colored people' in House floor debate”   Here are this week's chatters:  Emily: Elise White, Basaime Spate, Javonte Alexander, and Rachel Swaner for the Center for Justice Innovation: “'Two Battlefields': Opps, Cops, and NYC Youth Gun Culture” and Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration by Emily Bazelon   John: Mona El-Naggar, Johan M. Kessel, and Alexander Stockton for The New York Times: “What Is War to a Grieving Child?”; Jeanna Smialek and Ben Casselman for The New York Times: “The Pandemic's Labor Market Myths”; and Chris Cameron for The New York Times: “Over 700 Civil War-Era Gold Coins Found Buried on a Kentucky Farm” David: “Exploring a Secret Fort” with David through airbnb; Steve Bohnel for The Frederick News-Post: “$200,000, or the city burns: The story of the Confederacy's ransom on Frederick”; and Caity Weaver for The New York Times Magazine: “My Impossible Mission to Find Tom Cruise”  Listener chatter from Dianne Denton: Harriet McBryde Johnson for The New York Times Magazine: “Unspeakable Conversations” and Disability Visibility: First-Person Stories from the Twenty-First Century by Alice Wong For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, David, John, and Emily discuss the Hollywood actors' and writers' strikes, artificial intelligence, and the future of work.  In the next edition of Gabfest Reads, David talks with David Grann about his book, The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Mutiny and Murder.    Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com or Tweet us @SlateGabfest. (Messages may be quoted by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz are together again and talking about Donald Trump's next indictment and the charges against his “false electors” in Michigan; the struggles of candidates Ron DeSantis, Tim Scott, et al.; and Congressional Republicans' culture war against the U.S. military.    Here are some notes and references from this week's show: James Madison: “Impeachment of the Executive, [20 July] 1787” FiveThirtyEight: “Who's Ahead In Republican Primary Polls?”  Fox News Digital: “Republican presidential candidate Sen. Tim Scott says Donald Trump is ‘overqualified to be my vice president'”  Manu Raju, Rashard Rose, and Lauren Fox for CNN: “Tommy Tuberville now says ‘White nationalists are racists' after refusing to denounce them” Zoë Richards for NBC News: “Arizona Republican refers to Black Americans as ‘colored people' in House floor debate”   Here are this week's chatters:  Emily: Elise White, Basaime Spate, Javonte Alexander, and Rachel Swaner for the Center for Justice Innovation: “'Two Battlefields': Opps, Cops, and NYC Youth Gun Culture” and Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration by Emily Bazelon   John: Mona El-Naggar, Johan M. Kessel, and Alexander Stockton for The New York Times: “What Is War to a Grieving Child?”; Jeanna Smialek and Ben Casselman for The New York Times: “The Pandemic's Labor Market Myths”; and Chris Cameron for The New York Times: “Over 700 Civil War-Era Gold Coins Found Buried on a Kentucky Farm” David: “Exploring a Secret Fort” with David through airbnb; Steve Bohnel for The Frederick News-Post: “$200,000, or the city burns: The story of the Confederacy's ransom on Frederick”; and Caity Weaver for The New York Times Magazine: “My Impossible Mission to Find Tom Cruise”  Listener chatter from Dianne Denton: Harriet McBryde Johnson for The New York Times Magazine: “Unspeakable Conversations” and Disability Visibility: First-Person Stories from the Twenty-First Century by Alice Wong For this week's Slate Plus bonus segment, David, John, and Emily discuss the Hollywood actors' and writers' strikes, artificial intelligence, and the future of work.  In the next edition of Gabfest Reads, David talks with David Grann about his book, The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Mutiny and Murder.    Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com or Tweet us @SlateGabfest. (Messages may be quoted by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Podcast production by Cheyna Roth Research by Julie Huygen Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The ‘Great Resignation' phenomenon—which saw tens of millions of Americans changing jobs over a two-year span, and characterized a moment of worker empowerment -- seems to be coming to an end. Ben Casselman, economics reporter at The New York Times, discusses why this trend is occurring, what this means for the future of employee/employer power dynamics in the United States and what this tells us about the state of our economy.

 Tens of millions of Americans changed jobs over the past two years, a rare moment of worker power as employees demanded higher pay, and as employers, short on staff, often gave it to them.The tidal wave of quitting became known as the “great resignation.” Now, as the phenomenon seems to have fizzled out, the Times economic writer Ben Casselman discusses whether there have been any lasting benefits for American workers.Guest: Ben Casselman, an economy correspondent for The New York Times.Background reading: The furious pace of job-switching in recent years has led to big gains for low-wage workers. But the pendulum could be swinging back toward employers.Last year, the Times opinion writer Paul Krugman questioned the great resignation narrative.For more information on today's episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

In a special series, The Looking Glass and The Politics of Disaster Podcast will explore powerful stories at the intersection of policy and climate disaster.This episode explores the Lingering Impact of Deepwater Horizon.On the mic are:Jeffrey Gorham (MAIR ‘24/narrator), Rowan Humphries (MAIR ‘24/interviewed Ben Casselman), and Nathan Felmus (BA/MAIR '24/interviewed Allen Lindsay Jr.)This episode was produced by Kosi Ogbuli.Remember to leave 5-stars and share with a friend!

Today on the podcast we welcome back Mark Miller, who is an author, columnist, and a nationally recognized expert on trends in retirement and aging. His latest book is called Retirement Reboot: Commonsense Financial Strategies for Getting Back on Track. Miller's work considers retirement holistically, including healthcare and Medicare, Social Security, retirement investing, midlife careers, and housing. He is a regular contributor to Morningstar.com, and he also writes about retirement matters for Reuters, The New York Times, and WealthManagement.com. In addition to Retirement Reboot, Miller has written several other books, including The Hard Times Guide to Retirement Security and Jolt: Stories of Trauma and Transformation. Additionally, Miller has his own podcast and newsletter, both of which are called Retirement Revised.BackgroundBioRetirement Reboot: Commonsense Financial Strategies for Getting Back on Track, by Mark MillerThe Hard Times Guide to Retirement Security: Practical Strategies for Money, Work, and Living, by Mark MillerJolt: Stories of Trauma and Transformation, by Mark MillerThe State of Retirement“Toward a New Social Insurance Era,” by Mark Miller, WealthManagement.com, Dec. 23, 2022.“Retirement Planning Amidst Inflation,” by Mark Miller, WealthManagement.com, Oct. 13, 2021.“The Inflation Reduction Act's Impact on Retirees,” by Mark Miller, Morningstar, Aug. 16, 2022.“How to Cope With Medicare's Rising Costs,” by Mark Miller, The New York Times, Dec. 21, 2021.“Social Security Benefits' 2023 COLA: Is It Enough?” by Mark Miller, Morningstar, Nov. 9, 2022.Delaying Retirement“Kerry Hannon: Remote Work Trend Benefits Older Workers,” The Long View podcast, Morningstar, Oct. 21, 2020.“For Disabled Workers, a Tight Labor Market Opens New Doors,” by Ben Casselman, The New York Times, Oct. 25, 2022.“Returning to Work but Close to Retirement? Adjust Your Plan,” by Mark Miller, Reuters, April 21, 2022.“Why Working Till Whenever Is a Risky Retirement Strategy,” by Mark Miller, The New York Times, May 16, 2019.“How Have Older Workers Fared in the Pandemic-Induced Downturn?” by Mark Miller, Morningstar, June 2, 2021,CoGenerateMedicare, Healthcare, and Long-Term Care“Optimizing Social Security for Clients,” by Mark Miller, WealthManagement.com, Sept. 29, 2022.“Social Security's Cost-of-Living Increase Largest in Four Decades, Estimate Says,” by Mark Miller, The Seattle Times, Sept. 14, 2022.“Social Security Doomsayers Are Wrong Again, but Reform Choices Loom,” by Mark Miller, Reuters, Sept. 16, 2021.“A Quiet Experiment Is Testing Broader Privatization of U.S. Medicare,” by Mark Miller, Reuters, Jan. 14, 2022.“Big Changes May Be Coming to Traditional Medicare,” by Mark Miller, Morningstar, April 22, 2022.“Medicare's Private Option Is Gaining Popularity, and Critics,” by Mark Miller, The New York Times, Dec. 3, 2022.State Health Insurance Assistance Program“Medicare vs. Medicare Advantage,” by Mark Miller, WealthManagement.com, March 24, 2020.“How to Evaluate Medigap Plans,” by Mark Miller, Morningstar, March 2, 2022.“The Financial Health of Medicare and Social Security: A Closer Look,” by Mark Miller, Morningstar, June 29, 2022.“Long-Term-Care Coverage Is Trending in the Wrong Direction,” by Mark Miller, WealthManagement.com, June 13, 2022.Housing and Other Debt“Should You Pay Off Your Mortgage?” by Mark Miller, Morningstar, Oct. 8, 2021.“Waiting for the Reverse Mortgage Surge,” by Mark Miller, WealthMangement.com, Feb. 8, 2022.Retirement Complexity“‘The Cash Monster Was Insatiable': How Insurers Exploited Medicare Advantage for Billions,” by Reed Abelson and Margot Sanger-Katz, The New York Times, Oct. 8, 2022.“U.S. Health Officials Seek New Curbs on Private Medicare Advantage Plans,” by Reed Abelson and Margot Sanger-Katz, The New York Times, Dec. 17, 2022.

In this episode, reading through "For Disabled Workers, a Tight Labor Market Opens New Doors" by Ben Casselman in the New York Times to find that changes ushered in by working remotely during the pandemic might have positive effects for the disabled workforce, and these changes could be long-lasting. Also this week, I continue to build stamina and regain my independence, taking some trips with the kids all by myself for the first time since July.

Is a recession likely? Depends on who you ask. Ben Casselman, economics and business reporter for The New York Times, joins host Krys Boyd to discuss a New York Times/Siena College poll that shows voter pessimism – even as wages are rising and unemployment is low – and why that negative outlook could be a self-fulfilling prophecy. His article, co-written with Lydia DePillis, is headlined “Voters See a Bad Economy, Even if They're Doing OK.”

Early on in the pandemic, economists thought the public health crisis would contribute to a wave of early retirements. However, today, many workers at retirement age have returned to work. Lindsey Pollak joins NYT writer Ben Casselman to take listener calls about getting back into the workforce in middle age.

Guardrails against dangerous lies on Twitter? Now that Elon has total control over one of the major ways Americans find out what's happening (I know, I know -- Twitter is vapid and filled with smears and jeers, but it has a hugely important role in shaping the news), what can be done to establish guardrails against dangerous lies? It seems likely that Musk will take down the few guardrails that remain on Twitter — but some guardrails are surely needed to prevent malicious harassment or dangerous instigation of violence. Twitter (like Zuckerberg's Facebook and Instagram) is more like a public utility than a private company. It has public functions and no direct competitors. What to do?Much of the answer boils down to making Twitter (and Facebook and Instagram) more responsible for what users say on its platform – just as any other publisher is responsible. In every other dimension of public life, tort laws allow people who are defamed, harassed, or otherwise injured by malicious or hateful speech to sue. There's a high bar: plaintiffs must establish that the publisher knew or had reason to know that the published material was false and injurious. But the mere possibility of being sued causes publishers to take at least a modicum of responsibility.In 1996, Congress enacted Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — shielding website owners from liability by decreeing that they shouldn't be treated as a “publisher.” But back then Congress could not possibly have foreseen what would happen over the next quarter century: giant firms like Twitter and Facebook making huge amounts of money by posting incendiary content that attracts lots of eyeballs and gives them mountains of user data that they then monetize — even if the content encourages political violence, riots, or gang shootings.I've been talking for some time about the various ways the rich and powerful in our society shield themselves from accountability. I'm well aware of arguments on the other side of this issue (and will share them with you), but I've come to the conclusion that Congress should repeal Section 230. Doing so would be one step toward restoring accountability.**How to stop inflation without a recession? The mainstream media, meanwhile, continues to mislead the American public about inflation. (Ideological blinders are not — and should never be — subject to liable laws. But they need to be called out.) A lead article in this week's New York Times, by Jeanna Smialek and Ben Casselman, is a case in point. It attributes inflation largely to a “red-hot labor market.” The authors write that “America's heady pay gains could mean that the Fed has to react more aggressively to slow down the economy,” and quote Mary C. Daly, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, as saying that higher wages can be a “feeder for inflation,” and Fed Chair Jerome Powell, that the job market is “unsustainably hot” and that it's the Fed's job “to get to a better place where supply and demand are closer together.”  Rubbish. Labor costs aren't pushing inflation. Corporate profits are. If the Fed keeps raising interest rates to prevent labor costs from rising, we'll be in a recession before you know it. According to a new report by Josh Bivens at the Economic Policy Institute, over half of price inflation since March 2020 (he estimates 53.9 percent) is attributable to fatter profit margins, while labor costs account for less than 8 percent. As the chart below shows, from 1979 to 2019, profits contributed only a bit over 11 percent to price growth, and labor costs over 60 percent. Corporate power has built up over the last forty years, and the pandemic-driven demand surge has given firms even more pricing power vis-à-vis their customers. Powerful firms have also been free to pass on cost increases to their customers because they don't face strong competition, and have been using the cover of “inflation” to add even more to their profit margins. Bivens suggests that a temporary excess profits tax could provide some countervailing weight to the pricing power firms currently have vis-à-vis their customers. I agree. (Pity that the Times doesn't report any of this.)***How to win a war? Notwithstanding Putin's efforts to persuade the Russian people that his war is going well (and Putin's generals' efforts to convince Putin that it's going well), all available evidence suggests it's going terribly badly for Putin. I'm in awe of Ukraine's ability to take on the Russian Goliath and push it back. When the history of this horror is written, NATO and Joe Biden will get enormous credit as well. Their steady hands and steadfast strategy appear to be working. Patience, tenacity, and careful use of every tool available to them — short of putting NATO or American troops into Ukraine — is turning the tide. We have no way of knowing how this will turn out (and I continue to fear what a cornered Putin may resort to), but the courage and intelligence of Ukraine, NATO, and Biden deserve our commendation and thanks. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit robertreich.substack.com/subscribe

New York Times economics writer Ben Casselman and Guild CEO and co-founder Rachel Romer Carlson join the Jeff and Michael to talk about why there are so many Help Wanted signs and how higher ed might fill the void for giving workers needed skills.

How can journalists present statistics in a way that is both understandable and accurate? Why are data visualizations sometimes misleading rather than informative? As newspapers scale up their data coverage, journalists are developing insights into how best to report complex statistics without misrepresenting them. This week on EconoFact Chats, Michael Klein and Ben Casselman of the New York Times discuss the nuances of communicating economic data to a broad audience.

How can journalists present statistics in a way that is both understandable and accurate? Why are data visualizations sometimes misleading rather than informative? As newspapers scale up their data coverage, journalists are developing insights into how best to report complex statistics without misrepresenting them. This week on EconoFact Chats, Michael Klein and Ben Casselman of the New York Times discuss the nuances of communicating economic data to a broad audience.

Welcome to the Numlock Sunday edition.This week, I spoke to Ben Casselman of the New York Times who wrote “The Pandemic Changed How We Spent Our Time” and “More phone calls, less shopping: how the pandemic changed American lives, down to the minute” with Ella Koeze. Here's what I wrote about it:The American Time Use Survey for 2020 dropped, and needless to say it turns out people may have altered their behavior somewhat. Parents with kids in school spent an additional 1.6 hours per day providing secondary child care, while layoffs meant the average time spent working was down 17 minutes per day. The biggest winners of time were telephone calls (up 61.5 percent), lawn and garden care (30.8 percent), and relaxing and leisure (up 17.6 percent); the biggest losers were travel related to work (down 33.1 percent), shopping (21.8 percent), and socializing and communicating (16.1 percent). Somewhat distressingly, the average amount of time spent grooming fell 10.7 percent, from 41 minutes to 36 minutes. The survey didn't break out the specific amount of time Americans spent saying, “You're muted, Kevin, your mic is off,” but Numlock's own preliminary estimates are forecasting a 200 percent increase. Ben's a favorite guest on the Sunday editions. We were colleagues at FiveThirtyEight and he's one of the smartest people covering business and economics out there. This week, we talked all about his coverage of the latest data from the American Time Use Survey, a wild annual data collection carried out by the Department of Labor that shows how Americans spend their days. This latest edition includes the pandemic year's data, so it's an intriguing look at how people spent their time in 2020. Ben can be found at The New York Times and on Twitter at @BenCasselmanThis interview has been condensed and edited. You wrote a bunch of really cool stories dissecting the latest from a very interesting American Time Use Survey. Can you tell us a little bit about what this survey is and what makes this year's particularly interesting?The time use survey is this crazy thing, it's kind of a goldmine for us data nerds. It's done by the Bureau of Labor Statistics every year. And they literally ask people, thousands of people to track one day of their daily life in extreme detail. Like, I woke up at this time, and I brush my teeth and wash my hair from 7:15 to 7:18, and then I eat breakfast until 7:23, or whatever. It's categorized in all sorts of different ways. It's a nationally representative survey, so you can break it down by sex, and race, and age, and all of these things. Normally we use it to understand the long, slow shifts in the economy, and in society, and in American life, right?We're spending more time on our screens than we used to, commutes have gotten longer, all of these sorts of things that we track over years and decades. And then of course, as with so many things, this year was an unusual one. The Time Use Survey actually stopped collecting data for a couple of months in the heart of the pandemic. You can kind of imagine why they maybe weren't so focused on that. But starting in May, they picked it back up again, and so we get this amazing picture of how life looked in the pandemic and the longer-running months of the pandemic and how that compares to normal. It's this amazing breakdown of all of the ways in which the pandemic disrupted our lives.Yeah. You had two really good stories with your colleague and my former colleague Ella Koeze basically going into how different events and hobbies and things may have surged or whatnot. You wrote among some of the biggest increases were telephone calls, lawn and garden care, relaxing and leisure. What else kind of took a hit and what else really surged in the pandemic year?Look, some of the things are pretty obvious, right? We spent a lot less time commuting last year. We spent a lot more time taking care of kids last year, although that one's a little complicated and maybe we can talk more about it.I want to get into that in a little bit, yeah.We spent a lot of time on Zoom calls, and telephone calls, and all of those kinds of communication. We spent a lot less time socializing, et cetera. There are some that are maybe a little bit less obvious. We spent less time working, but that's because a lot fewer people were working. Most of these numbers are just sort of total population wide averages, so if fewer people are working, that's less time on average. But actually among the people who worked, they worked about the same amount last year as they worked in 2019.And then there's sort of like smaller ones: we actually spent a little more time sleeping last year, which is interesting. We spent more time cooking. More time, as you mentioned, on lawn care, taking care of the house, taking care of ourselves, more time exercising. Less time grooming, no big surprise there, if you've noticed anybody's hair getting long on the Zoom calls. In some ways, it's those little things I think that are actually the more telling.Staying on work a little bit, I forget if this was in the first or the second story, but you wrote about when people were working, more were still going into work than I think a lot of folks, who have either a white collar job or transitioned to Zoom, may have gave credit.I mean, I think that this is something. There were a lot of ways in which this data and people's response to the data really kind of reveals the bubbles that we all live in. Most people who were working were still working in person last year. Now, remember, this is data from sort of mid-May through the end of the year. It may have looked a little bit different in that late March, April, early May period, when the lockdowns were at their most intense. But a lot of people were still going into work every day last year. You can really see that when you look at the breakdowns by education for example, or by race, or by industry, sort of how unequal this fundamentally was.If you had a graduate degree, you probably spent most of your time last year working from home. First of all, you were more likely to keep your job, right? Because you were more likely to work in an industry where you were able to keep working and then you were probably able to do it from home. If you look at the chart for people with a high school diploma or less, there's like very little increase in at-home work. Basically you either lost your job or you were going in person. There aren't a lot of jobs that require only a high school diploma where you have the luxury of being able to work from home.It is just like a really striking series of charts. Office versus home is really just unaffected for high school or less. And then among "some college", it's a little bit effected. Bachelor degree kind of went from being a little bit skewed to about half and half hours at home versus hours in a workplace. But grad degree it's a cross.Yeah. I mean, it just, it goes straight from people spend more time working in the office to people spending less time there. It's about a three hour swing. Again, these are averages. So in many cases, that's people going full-time into working from home. But yeah, it's a three hour swing on average of people working more at home versus in the office.You had really interesting findings around motherhood last year. It seemed like parenting absolutely shifted in some significant ways, but the way the asymmetries worked out really kind of seemed to be a discussion about either unmarried mothers or never-married mothers versus mothers in general, about how parents cared for their kids. What did you find?Childcare was one of the ones we sort of knew at the outset was just bound to be a really interesting question. Obviously anybody who had kids in the past year knows what an insane year this was for parents. Pretty much anybody who didn't have kids, I think, was aware as well, as they saw kids popping onto Zoom calls, and seeing parents suddenly disappear from the screen as they went to pursue some unseen crash off screen. The American Time Use Survey mostly tracks what would be called your primary activity, what you're mostly doing. Right now, my prime activity is recording a podcast. Even if I might occasionally be looking down at my phone or whatever in the middle of it, which I would never do to you, Walter. But, in theory, if one were to look at their phone…But they do track childcare slightly differently. If you think about childcare, right, there's all of this time where it is your primary activity, you're giving the kids a bath, you're helping kids with homework, whatever it might be. But then there's a ton of other time where you're responsible for the kids while doing something else. You're cooking dinner, but you're also keeping an eye on the kids. You're cleaning the house, but you're also keeping an eye on the kids. And last year, it is what's referred to as secondary childcare that saw this crazy explosion. And of course it saw a particular explosion in terms of the amount of time that people spent working while keeping an eye on the kids. Just a dramatic increase there.As you said, right, there was a really big difference here between men and women. And they're all sorts of ways that we can cut this. I mean, one of the things I thought was really striking is that women on average spend 48 more minutes a day working while watching the kids versus 16 minutes a day for men. So that's three times as much. And that actually really understates it in a lot of ways, because this is average time, regardless of whether you spend any time working, right?Oh whoa.If you're not working at all, you're a zero in here. Among women who worked at all in a given day, worked for pay -- I've had many people correct me here and point out that parenting is also work -- but worked-for-pay is more like two more hours a day for women. It's this really enormous impact, where women went from really not necessarily spending a lot of time in the day trying to do both of these things, work and childcare, to spending a ton of time doing it. And it's just much more for women than for men.It was interesting again, overall across the board, women spend more time caring for children than men, even in married households, by about three hours.It's sort of like eight hours versus five hours pre-pandemic.And then it seemed that married households did go up by roughly equivalent amounts, but still nevertheless, women were spending an additional three hours or so doing that compared to men. But again, it seems like a lot of the jump came from unmarried households, and that single mothers specifically seem to have had an extremely difficult pandemic.I mean, so this is super interesting. As you said, women spend more time on average responsible for the kids, taking care of the kids, spend more time on average than men, in every form of household. But for married couples, the marginal increase during the pandemic was actually split relatively evenly. They both spent around an hour and 45 minutes more a day taking care of the kids. In unmarried households, it's single women, single men. Single women spent two hours and 45 minutes more per day taking care of kids last year than in 2019. For single men, it was 15 more minutes. It shows a lot of things, but it shows how much more burden there is on women in these households. It also shows you what happened for the kids, right? On average it's a little tricky when you start combining these things, but at a first approximation you get three and a half more hours of childcare time in a married household, but only, two hours and 45 more minutes in a unmarried household.Oh. Interesting.The burden is less overwhelming on women in married households, but then also the kids themselves are actually getting more time with a parent in the married household. So really, inequality is abounding here.It was so interesting watching how you're able to crack these out by different cross tabs. I wanted to talk a little bit about some of these charts that you have about age groups. It was really, really interesting seeing how there are things that we know, like in general older folks tend to spend the most time doing house work at home and spend the most time watching TV or movies. But there were a few inversions that ended up taking place over the pandemic. The grooming one was especially interesting. I was wondering if you just wanted to go through some of what you found, looking at how different age demos reacted to the year.This stuff is so interesting. For most activities, the basic direction of the curves looked pretty similar across different demographics, even if the amount of time that they spent was different, but there are a few exceptions. I mentioned grooming earlier, how we all let our hair grow long and stopped showering, not speaking for either of us, of course.No, of course. Naturally.I am actually sporting a ponytail as we speak.Interesting.So, yeah that's new. For older people age 25 on up, all the different groups spent less time grooming themselves last year. But the great exception is young people, 15 to 24 year olds who actually spent more time grooming themselves. Meanwhile, exercise was exactly the opposite. Older people spent their time exercising more and young people were like, well, forget it. I only need to look good on TikTok. I don't actually need to look good in the real world.That's so funny. That's exactly what it is.I will say Ella wanted our headline to be something about more time grooming our lawns and less time grooming ourselves or something. But we worried we might get into a little bit of interpretational trouble there.Yeah, no, that would be a tough headline to live down. I found it really interesting that again, the watching TV movies and video stayed flat while the texting, phone calls, videos exploded. How often people watch things per day is endlessly interesting to me because I think that people think that teenagers are glued to their phones, but in actuality, it's older folks who watch the most screen time in general. Can we get into some of that?So this necessitated a whole bunch of time on the phone with BLS, trying to understand how they categorize these things. Because the survey categories, and they freely admit this, right, the survey categories don't keep up completely with our changing times. Although, they put out this amazing, your readers and listeners will find this interesting, maybe more so than the general public will, they put out what they call a lexicon where they have all the different categorizations of time, but then it includes examples. And I was very impressed that one of the examples was recording TikTok videos. They're doing it!Is that texting or is that using computers or smartphones?That one actually fell under creative, it was like arts and crafts or something.That's so wild.So the tracking of this stuff, I was like, okay, well, where does watching YouTube fall? Does Zoom count as video? Or does it count as phone calls? The watching TVs and movies includes at least in theory, YouTube videos, watching videos on your phone, watching videos on your tablet, your computer, whatever it is, as well as Netflix, or cable, or whatever, rabbit ears. And then there's this kind of catch all category of using computers, we label it using computers or smartphones. I think they categorize it as like computer use for leisure, not including gaming or something. And I was like, so what is that actually? And it's basically social media, as far as I can tell. Also "programming for fun," but somehow I'm guessing that's not a huge part of the average person's day.I can't imagine that that is eclipsing TikTok these days.Playing games, meanwhile, is another category which doesn't distinguish unfortunately, between computer games and board games. So we have no way of telling whether people were spending their time playing Fortnite or Monopoly.I surmise given the increase of about like 30 minutes in 18 to 24s playing games that they're not playing Monopoly for an extra half hour a day.It seems less likely that it's Monopoly. The time is interesting here. The scales get a little bit tricky, because the TV lines look pretty flat, but actually, people were spending 15 to 20 minutes more a day watching TV, which is not trivial. Whereas texting and phone calls and things were, for the youngest group, eight more minutes a day, but that's just a very big percentage increase, because people didn't use to talk on the phone at all before the pandemic.I mean, you do really see young people spending a ton more time on phone, and text, and whatnot. They spend a ton more time basically on social media, they spend a lot more time playing games. But like the TV watching to your point, is really much more concentrated in an older demographic.I know that you've been a fan of this survey for a very long time. It is a wild survey that the government does. I think it's just so interesting because time feels like one of those extremely zero-sum things where you can spend a minute doing one thing or you can spend it doing another. It's difficult to spend it doing both. I think it's just so interesting that the survey manages to really kind of clue into like what people care about. And the answer is increasingly screens, increasingly sleep and how those evolve over time. It was just a really interesting cross-section of stuff.No, it's an amazing survey. The fact that they do it is just sort of incredible. And the fact that we're able to do it last year is incredible. It's funny, it's a really tricky one in some ways to write about it from a journalistic standpoint, because there are all these sort of strange decisions around. Are we interested in population wide averages or are we interested among people who participated at all? How much time did people spend working last year? The average amount of time spent working last year was about three hours a day. But not very many people work three hours a day.It's very rare to work three hours a day. That's pretty rad if you get to do it.Its very rare to work three hours a day. The average time conditional on working at all was like seven and a half hours.Which makes far more sense.Which makes way more sense. But only 40% or something of the population works at all on a given day. So then you get this weird three hour thing. We're sort of being forced to think through like, well, do we care among parents, how much time they spent caring for kids? Do we care among parents who spent any time caring for kids, how much time they spent? Because hey, we might want the zeros among parents. It's this sort of complicated thought process of what it is that we're actually interested in measuring here that gets a little tricky. But no, it's an amazing data set that does to your point, really does show how life changed last year.Ben Casselman, you write about economics and business for the New York Times. You can be found, I believe in the business section of the New York Times.Business section, do we do still have sections? Yeah. And you can find me in print in the business section or we have a website.You frequently appear in the dead tree edition of the New York Times, which people should buy.Strongly encourage.Anywhere else folks can find you?Yeah, I'm on Twitter @BenCasselman.Excellent. Well, hey Ben, thank you so much.Thanks so much for having me. If you have anything you'd like to see in this Sunday special, shoot me an email. Comment below! Thanks for reading, and thanks so much for supporting Numlock.Thank you so much for becoming a paid subscriber! Send links to me on Twitter at @WaltHickey or email me with numbers, tips, or feedback at walt@numlock.news. Get full access to Numlock News at www.numlock.com/subscribe

(1:00) - After a full, long weekend to digest the June jobs report, markets opened negative on Tuesday. Despite the promising jobs report, should investors be ready for the return of volatility as the summer rolls on? Is labor participation a major concern?(12:27) - Ben Casselman of The New York Times joined the show to discuss how low-wage employees are beginning to see raises, although automation could be a threat to these workers.(24:16) - Oil prices are the highest they've been in six years, with both West Texas Intermediate and Brent crude hovering around $77 per barrel. This happened after OPEC canceled a meeting that was supposed to center around the direction of oil prices going forward.(35:51) - Yet another ransomware attack is making headlines, this time with hackers targeting a software company and all of its customers. The hackers are demanding $70 million from the company.

As lockdowns spread across the country last spring, the economy tanked. But the aftermath wasn't as bad as predicted. New York Times economics reporter Ben Casselman joins host Krys Boyd to talk about what was predicted for the nation's fiscal health, why the ripple effects weren't as far reaching as they could've been, and who could still use a little help. His recent article is headlined “America Is on a Road to a Better Economy. But Better for Whom?”

As the economy reopens, some businesses are having trouble hiring enough workers to fully operate. In response, many states are ending pandemic unemployment programs, including the extra $300 in weekly unemployment benefits set to run through Labor Day. We talked to unemployed workers, business owners across the country about their concerns, and Ben Casselman of The New York Times about the issue. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

Author of Dark Sky, Book 21 in the Joe Pickett series Photo by Dave Neligh Interview starts at 19:40 and ends at 43:22 Note: I will be discussing my C. J. Box interview Saturday March 6, 2021 at 4 pm ET on Clubhouse. If you are a member of Clubhouse, please click here to join me. I've also created a club named The Reading Edge. Use this link to join! Links President Biden's video on union election in Alabama Amazon EU blog on Working at Amazon “When Amazon Raises Its Minimum Wage, Local Companies Follow Suit” by Ben Casselman and Jim Tankersley at The New York Times - March 5, 2021 All-new Echo Show 10 (3rd Generation) Eink.link “Eink.link is a website directory for e-readers” by Mark Frauenfelder at boingboing - March 2, 2021 “How New E Ink Tablets Combine the Best of Kindles and iPads” by Alex Cranz at The Wall Street Journal - March 3, 2021 C.J. Box's website C.J. Box livestream recording at The Tattered Cover bookstore - March 4, 20212 Obituary of Doug Crowe in the Casper Star-Tribune - December 4, 2020 “Big Sky” TV series on ABC, based on The Highway by C. J. Box Bob Budd, executive director of the Wyoming Wildlife & Natural Resource Trust Next Week's Guest: Friday, March 12: Chris Bailey, author and narrator of How to Train Your Mind, an Audible Original Morning Journal flash briefing for Alexa If you'd like brief daily updates on technology, books, marriage, and puppies, you can follow along with my Morning Journal flash briefing. From your Echo device, just say, “Alexa, enable Morning Journal.” Then each morning say, “Alexa, what's my flash briefing?” I post a five-minute audio journal each day except Sunday, usually by 8:00 am Eastern Time.  The Kindle Chronicles is now available at Audible Podcasts. The only thing missing are ratings! If you have time, please consider leaving one in order to help others learn about the show.  Right-click here and then click "Save Link As..." to download the audio to your computer, phone, or MP3 player.

Three months after mass layoffs began across America, 20 million Americans remain out of work because of the pandemic. Federal employment benefits are about to run out, and Congress can’t agree on more financial help. We called people struggling with unemployment to hear how they are doing. Guest: Julie Creswell, Sabrina Tavernise and Ben Casselman, reporters at The New York Times, spoke with Nicolle Nordman, Analía Rodríguez and Nakitta Long about being laid off. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily Background reading: Some people have started to return to work, but the recovery is uneven. More than a million new jobless claims continue to be filed each week, and certain industries are far outpacing others in the rebound from the mass job losses in April.The unemployment rate isn’t the whole story when it comes to understanding the economic impact of the pandemic.

Economics reporter Ben Casselman joins Galen Druke and Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux to discuss the stunning unemployment claims numbers from last week.

This hour, we learn about efforts to construct a new casino in Bridgeport, Connecticut. We talk to Hearst Connecticut Media reporter Emilie Munson about a possible deal between the city and the state’s tribes, and consider the implications for MGM, which also has its sights on the Southwest region. Plus, the Trump administration has threatened to impose new tariffs on Mexico, raising questions for manufacturers, many of which have already felt the impact of the U.S.’ ongoing trade war with China. We take an in-depth look at this story with The New York Times’ Ben Casselman and a Connecticut-based economist.Support the show: http://wnpr.org/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hello! And welcome to another edition of the Inside The Newsroom podcast and newsletter. Today’s guest is… Ben Casselman of the New York Times. Ben covers the U.S. economy and, because of his previous role as chief economics writer at FiveThirtyEight, he’s a fantastic resource for what it all for Donald Trump’s re-election in 2020. Below are links and post-game analyses of everything we talked about. Enjoy and please subscribe at the top!The economy has finally recovered from 2008 right?The latest jobs report showed that total U.S. unemployment is 3.6 per cent, a 50-year low. That’s fantastic news, but economic recoveries are subjective and where one region might be booming, another could still be struggling. As the chart below shows, the unemployment rate is part of the business cycle and is only part of the picture with regards to the true health of an economy. Nelson D. Schwartz, the New York TimesBy Nelson D. SchwartzThe Truth Behind the Jobs ReportFortunately for us, my former FiveThirtyEight colleague and the incredibly smart Julia Wolfe shows us that the number of jobs added or lost may not be as accurate as we think. For example, it was estimated that 263,000 jobs were added to the U.S. economy in April, but the exact figure could in fact be 120,000 more or less than reported. That’s a bloody big range of uncertainty, meaning we should view unemployment figures with extreme caution. Julia Wolfe, FiveThirtyEightLike Inside The Newsroom? Do us a solid and tell a friend or colleague who might enjoy it and subscribe.Repeat After Me: The Stock Market Is Not the EconomyAnother FiveThirtyEight article, god they’re smart… I’ve always been curious as to why people only point to one metric when assessing the health of the economy. I tried hard not to mention him in the podcast, but Mr. Trump tweets all too often about how the stock market is the sole indicator of why the economy is booming under his leadership. Well, Mr. Casselman is far smarter and does a good job of ripping that theory to shreds. Thank god for smart people. Ben Casselman, (formerly of) FiveThirtyEightAnd here’s a nice video explainer just in case…Longest expansion ever?The U.S. economy has grown for 106 consecutive months (8 years and 10 months), which according to CNN, is tied for the second-longest US expansion since records began. We’re still more than a year away from breaking the record, and there are signs suggesting we may or may not get there. Still, credit where credit’s due, the economy hasn’t completely tanked under Trump like some predicted.Zachary B. Wolf and Will Houp, CNNSo Is This Trump’s Economy Now?Ben and I discussed the importance of the economy in elections, going as far as saying the number one reason Trump won in 2016 was because of the economy, which never really recovered in certain areas under Obama. As we sit here in May 2019, the economy is now firmly Trump’s for better or worse, and he could win or lose re-election in 2020 depending on how the economy performs from now until then. Jim Tankersley, the New York TimesFastest growing US citiesPart of the reason for the continued economic growth is down to immigration. In rural counties where much of the population migrate to larger cities, international migration has helped local businesses and services from failing. As Bloomberg also reports, immigrants aren’t just flocking to the glitz and glamour of New York, Los Angeles or Miami. The likes of San Antonio, Columbus and Phoenix are among the fastest growing cities in the US. Jed Kolko, the New York TimesRelated Podcasts#34 — Dave Weigel (Washington Post)#20 — Daniel Dale (Toronto Star)Next up…Next week we’ll have Domonique Foxworth of ESPN on the podcast. Domonique covers the intersection between sports, race and culture for ESPN’s The Undefeated, and I think he’ll make for a gripping podcast so keep an eye out for the newsletter in your inbox next week. Subscribe here.Last time…#39 — Henry Abbot (TrueHoop)Thanks so much for making it all the way to the bottom. If you haven’t already, please consider subscribing to get a newsletter about a cool news topic in your inbox every time I release a new podcast (1-2 times a week). You can find me on Twitter at DanielLevitt32 and email me corrections/feedback or even a guest you’d like me to get on the podcast at daniellevitt32@gmail.com. Or just give us a like immediately below, whatever works. Get on the email list at insidethenewsroom.substack.com

If unemployment is so low, why aren't workers getting cut in on the deal? That's a question that our guest, economist Marshall Steinbaum, has been trying to answer. In a new study, which was featured in the New York Times, Steinbaum and his co-authors find that one of the main reasons that wages have not kept pace is that most local labor markets are highly concentrated. Only a few companies are hiring and, as a result, these dominant firms have the power to set wages below the rate that people would earn in a more competitive labor market. (The technical term for this is “monopsony,” a close cousin of monopoly, which refers to a situation in which a buyer — of labor, in this case — has the power to dictate the price.) Steinbaum, who's Research Director at the Roosevelt Institute, joins Building Local Power host and ILSR co-director Stacy Mitchell to discuss his research and how elected officials can fix the broken market for labor. “Antitrust can do a lot in the labor market to make it more competitive, and it's absolutely appropriate to talk about things like merger review on the basis of labor market definition, and [to] take wage reduction seriously as a potential threat of anti-competitive conduct,” says Marshall Steinbaum. Photo Courtesy of Roosevelt Institute “But antitrust alone cannot solve the labor market's problems, and specifically the wage-setting power of employers or just employer power more generally. This is why historically we have had labor market regulations, why we have protections for collective bargaining, because we recognize that the employer/employee relationship is inherently one of unequal power.” Reading Recommendations Our guest, Marshall Steinbaum, provided a book recommendation, and we'll also share some of his original research: “Social Control of Business, 1939 Edition” by John Maurice Clark, available on Google Books Why Is Pay Lagging? Maybe Too Many Mergers in the Heartland by Noam Scheiber and Ben Casselman, New York Times “Concentration in US Labor Markets: Evidence from Online Vacancy Data,” by José Azar (University of Navarra, IESE Business School), Ioana Elena Marinescu (University of Pennsylvania – School of Social Policy & Practice; National Bureau of Economic Research), Marshall Steinbaum (Roosevelt Institute), & Bledi Taska (Burning Glass Technologies) “Labor Market Concentration,” by José Azar (University of Navarra, IESE Business School), Ioana Elena Marinescu (University of Pennsylvania – School of Social Policy & Practice; National Bureau of Economic Research), & Marshall Steinbaum (Roosevelt Institute) Map courtesy of The Roosevelt Institute with this caption: “A map of the average concentration of the 200 occupations that appear most frequently in the Burning Glass data, by Commuting Zone.”   Related Resources 6 Ways to Rein in Today's Monopolies — Monopolies are strangling competition and cutting off opportunity. In this feature for The Nation, we show how to stop them. The New Brandeis Movement: America's Antimonopoly Debate — This article by Lina Khan in the Journal of European Competition Law & Practice details the work that a coalition of academics, policymakers, and thought leaders have done to change the conversation about monopoly in America. Listen: Stacy Mitchell on “We the Podcast” with Rep. Keith Ellison and Lina Khan — Taking on Amazon. It's a big subject. But in this episode of Rep. Keith Ellison's podcast, “We the Podcast,” ILSR's Stacy Mitchell and Lina Khan of Open Markets join Rep. Ellison to talk about how to do just that — and why we need to. The three also discuss how Amazon is part of a trend of market concentration more broadly, and what that means for the middle class and communities. Report: Monopoly Power and the Decline of Small Business — This report from ILSR's Stacy Mitchell details how the United States is much less a nation of entrepreneurs than it was a generation ago. It suggests that the decline of small businesses is owed,

Sitting here in the darkness I’ve gotta post the show Somebody’s joining us this episode Somebody named Rob Lowe We found somebody to explain free trade Cuz there is so muuuch we don’t knowwww And we asked Aaron about the song… It’s the West Wing Weekly (ooh-oo-oooh) Aaron wrote us baaack! It’s the West Wing Weekly (ooh-oo-oooh) How f*$%ing cool is that? It’s the West Wing Weekly (ooh-oo-oooh) All the maps are wack It’s the West Wing Weekly We're joined by Rob Lowe (@RobLowe) to discuss this episode, which earned him an Emmy nomination. And we welcome back Ben Casselman (@bencasselman), chief economics writer for FiveThirtyEight, to give us some modern context for Toby's line, "Free trade stops wars."  Ooh-oo-oooh! thewestwingweekly.com/episodes/216

With many people still trying to come to terms with the news from Orlando, Baton Rouge, Falcon Heights, and Dallas, the conversations around gun control, racial profiling, and police tactics, are front and center. But one element missing from these conversations is concrete data, largely because the federal government does not collect it. For this week’s Please Explain, we are going to discuss the data behind the high profile shootings in the news: how it’s being collected, and what it reveals. Jamiles Lartey, reporter for Guardian US will talk about their project, The Counted, which is tracking the number of people killed by law enforcement in 2015 and 2016. Ben Casselman, Senior Editor and Chief Economics Writer at 538, will discuss his site’s series “Gun Deaths in America” which goes far broader and analyzes all gun deaths in the U.S.

Our series - a mini-interview every day for a week - on the guns project continues with reporter Ben Casselman. See the full project fivethirtyeight.com/gundeaths

Janel Moloney (@nellymoloney) joins Josh and Hrishi to talk about playing Donna, and Ben Casselman (@bencasselman) gives an update on the state of the census.

On March 30th, Ben Casselman blew up a Facebook group I’m a part of with about 10,000 members in it, all of them college admissions professionals in one way or another, high schcool, college, independent consultants,... The post Episode 07: Ben Casselman, Chief Economics Writer at fivethirtyeight.com appeared first on The Crush.

What part of a governor’s economic impact scales at a national level? On The Gist, Ben Casselman from FiveThirtyEight offers a new criterion from his article, “How To Evaluate The Economic Records of Governors Who Want to Be President.” For the Spiel, the moment that stood out to Pesca from Joe Biden’s announcement today. Today’s sponsor: Stamps.com, where you can buy and print official U.S. postage right from your desk using your own computer and printer. Use the promo code THEGIST to get a no-risk trial and a $110 bonus offer. Join Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial today at slate.com/gistplus. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We've seen some big changes in data driven journalism over the past year or so with new media companies like 538, Vox, and the Upshot launching. In this fourth episode of the PolicyViz Podcast, I speak with Ben Casselman, Chief... The post PolicyViz Podcast Episode #4: Ben Casselman appeared first on PolicyViz.