Podcasts about national bureau

Welcome to episode #983 of Six Pixels of Separation - The ThinkersOne Podcast. Matthew Weinzierl is not just thinking about the future of the economy - he's thinking about the economy of the final frontier. As a professor at Harvard Business School and a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, Matt brings the analytical rigor of economic policy to a space sector that's shifting from sci-fi to IPO. In our conversation, we unpack the big thesis behind his new book Space To Grow - Unlocking The Final Economic Frontier(co-authored with Mehak Sarang Rousseau), which reframes space as something more than spectacle or science - it's a place where real economic value is being created right now. This isn't about day trips to orbit or Mars hotels (not yet). It's about the role of market forces, national security, broadband access, sustainability, microgravity manufacturing, and the essential debate between centralized control and decentralized innovation. Matt has built a career studying tax policy and the philosophical underpinnings of economic systems, and now he's applying that lens to a commercial space industry that's still defining its rules. We talk about SpaceX's dominance and what it means for competition, the outdated frameworks of international space law, and why economists are uniquely suited to help structure the future of space activity. We also explore the symbolic and practical value of human exploration, and how figures like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos shape the public's understanding of what's possible (and what might be hype). What makes Matt so compelling is his clarity... he doesn't get swept up in the cosmic dreams without asking who benefits, who governs, and what kind of economic system we're building in orbit and beyond. If you've been curious about the real forces shaping the space economy - and what it might mean for Earth - this episode is a must-listen. Enjoy the conversation... Running time: 58:47. Hello from beautiful Montreal. Listen and subscribe over at Apple Podcasts. Listen and subscribe over at Spotify. Please visit and leave comments on the blog - Six Pixels of Separation. Feel free to connect to me directly on Facebook here: Mitch Joel on Facebook. Check out ThinkersOne. or you can connect on LinkedIn. ...or on X. Here is my conversation with Matthew Weinzierl. Space To Grow - Unlocking The Final Economic Frontier. Economics Of Space. Mehak Sarang Rousseau. Follow Matt on LinkedIn. Chapters: (00:00) - Introduction to Space Economics. (03:05) - The Intersection of Economics and Space. (06:09) - Challenges in the Space Sector. (09:06) - Market Dynamics and Competition in Space. (12:11) - The Role of National Security in Space. (14:48) - The Future of Space Exploration. (18:02) - Arguments For and Against Space Exploration. (29:32) - The Double-Edged Sword of Celebrity in Business. (31:13) - Decentralization: Opportunities and Challenges. (35:26) - Balancing Centralization and Decentralization in Space. (38:32) - The Ethical Implications of Space Exploration. (40:17) - Regulating the New Frontier: Challenges Ahead. (44:54) - The Reality of Mars Missions. (48:53) - Unlocking the Value of Space Resources. (51:37) - The Role of Humans in Space Exploration. (53:46) - Economic Policies and Global Trade Dynamics.

What kind of external pressures and foreign interference is Taiwan facing? How does Taiwan balance its status as a global tech giant with its regional security vulnerabilities? In what ways are Australia's interests intertwined with the security and resilience of Taiwan? In this episode, Ketty Chen and Mark Harrison join Susan Dietz to discuss Taiwan's national security challenges, focusing on the influence of China, the complexities of Taiwan's domestic politics, and the implications of its role in the global tech supply chain. Dr Ketty Chen is Advisor for the National Bureau of Asian Research and an Expert Associate at the ANU National Security College (NSC). Dr Mark Harrison is Senior Lecturer in Chinese Studies in the School of Social Sciences at the University of Tasmania and an Expert Associate at NSC. Susan Dietz is Senior Executive Advisor, China at NSC. TRANSCRIPT  Show notes NSC academic programs – find out more. Revolutionary Taiwan: Making Nationhood in a Changing World Order President Lai introduced 17 major strategies to respond to five major national security and united front threats faced by Taiwan Disinformation in Taiwan – report We'd love to hear from you! Send in your questions, comments, and suggestions to NatSecPod@anu.edu.au.You can contact us on X (formerly Twitter) @NSC_ANU and Bluesky @nscanu.bsky.social, and be sure to subscribe so you don't miss out on future episodes.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Should the United States delist Chinese stocks? At first thought with all the craziness of the trade war it sounds like delisting all the Chinese companies from the American stock markets may be a good idea. It is important to know that there are 286 Chinese companies listed on major US stock exchanges. You'll recognize some of the names like Alibaba, Baidu and JD.com. It is estimated by analysts at Goldman Sachs that US institutional investors currently own about $830 billion worth of Chinese stocks. That is more than two times what the Chinese own of US stocks as that is estimated around $370 billion. But a quick sell off could bring down stock valuations and make it difficult to get out of many of these stocks on both sides. An important piece of information I brought up a couple years ago was the Accountable Act which came to be in 2020. This allows the Securities Exchange Commission to ban foreign companies from trading if American regulators are not allowed to inspect the auditors for three years in a row. I always worry about Chinese companies because of what I call government accounting. They are not held to the same accounting standards there and I believe companies may list financial statements based on what the government tells them. There have been some Chinese companies that delisted themselves rather than going through an audit. I think that tells you quite a bit. My feeling is we should not delist all the Chinese stocks that trade on American stock exchanges under what is known as ADRs, but be sure that the Chinese companies have the same transparency as American companies when it comes to their financial statements. If we can't get that transparency, then those companies should be delisted.    Jobs report shows more evidence the economy is in good shape US nonfarm payrolls grew by 177k in the month of April, which easily topped the estimate of 133k. Jobs remained robust in health care as the sector added 51k jobs in the month of April and employment in transportation and warehousing and financial activities was also strong as the groups added 29k and 14k jobs respectively in the month. Other categories like construction, manufacturing, leisure and hospitality, and retail trade saw little or no change in payrolls, while government declined by 9k jobs in the month. Government jobs are now down by 26k since January, but remember employees on paid leave or receiving ongoing severance pay are still counted as employed. This likely means we will continue to see losses accelerate in this category as the year continues. Negatives in the report included the fact that employment numbers were revised down by a total of 58k in the previous two months. Also, April's reading was lighter than March's reading of 185k, but considering the unemployment rate remains at 4.2%, I still see these jobs gains as impressive, especially with all the negativity that people have been discussing. With that said, I still do anticipate weaker numbers in terms of the payroll additions in future months, but if the unemployment rate remains low I don't see that as a problem. On the inflation front, we also got good news with average hourly earnings rising just 3.8%. I see this as a healthy increase that does not put pressure on inflation like when wages were growing over 5% in 2022.     Job openings look problematic on the surface In the March Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, job openings totaled 7.2 million. This was below February's reading of 7.5 million and the estimate, which also stood at 7.5 million. This is still not super concerning to me. We tend to forget how strong the labor market has been and while we continue to see a softening, there is plenty of room before I see cause for concern. Just for reference, job openings in 2019 averaged approximately 7.2 million, in 2018 they averaged approximately 6.8 million, and in 2017 they averaged approximately 6.2 million. Compare that to where we are today and that should give you more comfort. Another area I saw as positive in the report was the fact that quits totaled 3.3 million, which produced a quit rate of 2.1%. This is important because if people were truly concerned about a major slowdown and thought they would not be able to find work elsewhere, I don't believe they would be quitting their jobs. These quit numbers are still quite close to 2019 levels, which many considered as a very strong economy. That year quits averaged approximately 3.5 million and there was an average quit rate of about 2.3%. Also in the report, we saw layoffs remained quite low at 1.6 million. Back in 2019, layoffs averaged around 1.8 million per month. There is no doubt that uncertainty remains and that will have some impact on businesses and their hiring plans, but in terms of it pushing the economy into a major recession, since we are coming from such a healthy level, I just don't see that happening.   Are we in the middle of a recession? The first reading of Q1 GDP showed a decrease of 0.3%. A recession is generally defined as two consecutive quarters of declining GDP, so some may argue we are half way there. Let us not forget in 2022 we did see two consecutive quarters of declining GDP as Q1 declined 1.4% and Q2 showed an advance estimate that was down 0.9%. After further research the second quarter ended up seeing a total reversal and it is now reported to have actually grown by 0.3%. Even with the difficult start, that year ended with a 2.1% growth rate. We also can't forget that the National Bureau of Economy Research (NBER) makes the official call on recession and they use a broader set of indicators that led them not to declare a recession in 2022. I say all of this because I still believe even if we hit a technical recession, if employment remains strong, I don't believe we would have an “official” recession. I am still unsure that we will even see Q2 GDP decline and we could also see revisions to Q1 that lift it to a positive reading. I say this because if you look at the actual underlying numbers in the report, it is not nearly as bad as the headline decline. On the positive front, consumer spending actually grew 1.8% in the quarter as services showed a nice increase of 2.4%. Also, private domestic investment saw a surge of 21.9%, this was led by investments in equipment as they grew 22.5% in the quarter. You might be asking with numbers like these how did we see a negative GDP? To start, government spending fell 1.4% in the quarter. This was led by a decline of 5.1% in spending by the federal government. The group as a whole ended up subtracting 0.25% from the headline GDP number. While this was impactful, the real reason for the decline in GDP was trade. Companies were trying to get ahead of looming tariffs and imports surged 41.3%. This compared to an increase of just 1.8% for exports. The huge discrepancy caused the trade component of GDP to decrease the headline number by 4.83%! While the economy is no doubt digesting these trade conversations and the tariffs, I still believe the economy is in alright shape when you look at the underlying numbers. I did also want to mention more good news on inflation as the March headline PCE showed an increase of 2.3%, which compares to last month's reading of 2.7% and core PCE came in at just 2.6%, which was a nice decline from February's reading of 3.0%. I believe these numbers will likely increase with the tariffs, but underlying inflation looks to be quite healthy.   Financial Planning: Protecting Yourself from Home Title Theft Home title theft is a type of real estate fraud where someone illegally transfers the ownership of your home by forging your name on title documents.  This is often done using stolen personal information to file fraudulent deeds with the county recorder's office. Once the title appears to be in their name, the thief may try to take out loans against the property, sell it to an unsuspecting buyer, or use it in other schemes that could put your home and finances at risk. This crime can go undetected for months if property owners aren't actively monitoring their title.  Having a mortgage or HELOC on your house can make it more difficult for a thief to steal your title since the bank has a lien against the property, but it is still possible. There are private companies that charge monthly fees to alert you of changes to your home title, but they do not prevent the title from being stolen.  You can also purchase home title insurance that will help pay for legal fees if you have to go to court if your title is stolen.  Homeowners in San Diego County can access a free alternative called “Owner Alert”. Jordan Marks who is the San Diego County Assessor/Recorder/County Clerk was behind this, and it is a great benefit that all San Diego property owners should take advantage of.  This service works by notifying you by email whenever a document is recorded against your property, helping you catch potential fraud early.  Signing up is simple and can be done on the San Diego County Assessor's website. You just need your name, email address, and parcel number and it provides the same type of monitoring offered by paid services, making it unnecessary to spend money for peace of mind when this tool is already available for free.   Companies Discussed: Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. (ZBH), Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (TTWO), Northrop Grumman Corporation (NOC)Alphabet Inc. (GOOG)

China's GDP grew 5.4 percent in the first quarter. An official from the National Bureau of Statistics said high U.S. tariffs may exert some pressure on China's foreign trade, but will not change the long-term positive trend of the Chinese economy. What has been driving China's economic growth, despite the external pressures? Is it sustainable?The 5th China International Consumer Products Expo in Hainan showcases cutting edge technologies.

Jon Hartley and Robert Barro discuss Robert's career in economics including his long list of famous students, and research on Ricardian equivalence, fiscal theory of the price level, government spending multipliers, business cycles and the legacy of New Keynesian modeling, economic growth, political economy, the interplay between religion and economics, and much more. Recorded on March 18, 2025. ABOUT THE SPEAKERS: Robert J. Barro is a Paul M. Warburg Professor of Economics at Harvard University, a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. He has a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University and a B.S. in physics from Caltech. Barro is co-editor of Harvard's Quarterly Journal of Economics and has been President of the Western Economic Association and Vice President of the American Economic Association. He was a viewpoint columnist for Business Week from 1998 to 2006 and a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal from 1991 to 1998. He has written extensively on macroeconomics and economic growth. Recent research involves rare macroeconomic disasters, corporate tax reform, religion & economy, empirical determinants of economic growth, and economic effects of public debt and budget deficits. Recent books include The Wealth of Religions: The Political Economy of Believing and Belonging (with Rachel M. McCleary), Economic Growth (2nd edition, with Xavier Sala-i-Martin), Nothing Is Sacred: Economic Ideas for the New Millennium, Determinants of Economic Growth, and Getting It Right: Markets and Choices in a Free Society. Jon Hartley is currently a Policy Fellow at the Hoover Institution, an economics PhD Candidate at Stanford University, a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity (FREOPP), a Senior Fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, and an Affiliated Scholar at the Mercatus Center. Jon also is the host of the Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century Podcast, an official podcast of the Hoover Institution, a member of the Canadian Group of Economists, and the chair of the Economic Club of Miami. Jon has previously worked at Goldman Sachs Asset Management as a Fixed Income Portfolio Construction and Risk Management Associate and as a Quantitative Investment Strategies Client Portfolio Management Senior Analyst and in various policy/governmental roles at the World Bank, IMF, Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and the Bank of Canada.  Jon has also been a regular economics contributor for National Review Online, Forbes and The Huffington Post and has contributed to The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, USA Today, Globe and Mail, National Post, and Toronto Star among other outlets. Jon has also appeared on CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, Bloomberg, and NBC and was named to the 2017 Forbes 30 Under 30 Law & Policy list, the 2017 Wharton 40 Under 40 list and was previously a World Economic Forum Global Shaper. ABOUT THE SERIES: Each episode of Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century, a video podcast series and the official podcast of the Hoover Economic Policy Working Group, focuses on getting into the weeds of economics, finance, and public policy on important current topics through one-on-one interviews. Host Jon Hartley asks guests about their main ideas and contributions to academic research and policy. The podcast is titled after Milton Friedman‘s famous 1962 bestselling book Capitalism and Freedom, which after 60 years, remains prescient from its focus on various topics which are now at the forefront of economic debates, such as monetary policy and inflation, fiscal policy, occupational licensing, education vouchers, income share agreements, the distribution of income, and negative income taxes, among many other topics. For more information, visit: capitalismandfreedom.substack.com/

Premiums are rising. Insurers are leaving markets. But people keep building in risk-prone areas, and the climate disasters just keep coming. Can insurance markets adapt? In this episode, Shayle talks to Dr. Judd Boomhower, an assistant professor of economics at the University of California-San Diego and a faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research. He studies how insurance markets are reacting to climate change. Shayle and Judd cover topics like: Why insurers are limiting coverage in California, Florida, and other high-risk markets How disaster insurance, unlike auto or health insurance, faces a flood of claims all at the same time How catastrophe models (or “cat models” for short) work and why AI and other improvements struggle the solve the fundamental problem: a lack of historical data needed to predict future events The challenges of private “black-box” catastrophe models that can't be reviewed by third parties Reinsurance markets and why they're not attracting more capital to shore up insurers The pros and cons of parametric insurance, an emerging category of insurance products Undercapitalized “fly-by-night” insurers that risk insolvency and failing to pay out claim Recommended resources NBER: How Are Insurance Markets Adapting to Climate Change? Risk Classification and Pricing in the Market for Homeowners Insurance Brookings: “How is climate change impacting home insurance markets?” Credits: Hosted by Shayle Kann. Produced and edited by Daniel Woldorff. Original music and engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive editor. Catalyst is brought to you by Anza, a platform enabling solar and storage developers and buyers to save time, reduce risk, & increase profits in their equipment selection process. Anza gives clients access to pricing, technical, and risk data and tools that they've never had access to before. Learn more at go.anzarenewables.com/latitude. Catalyst is brought to you by EnergyHub. EnergyHub helps utilities build next-generation virtual power plants that unlock reliable flexibility at every level of the grid. See how EnergyHub helps unlock the power of flexibility at scale, and deliver more value through cross-DER dispatch with their leading Edge DERMS platform, by visiting energyhub.com.

I'm thrilled to announce that our next guest on The Mixtape with Scott is Professor Philip Oreopoulos—one of the most impactful economists working today in education and labor. A PhD student advisee of David Card, Phil is part of the distinguished lineage that helped shape the credibility revolution in applied microeconomics.Now a Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Toronto, Phil has spent his career studying how education policies and interventions affect outcomes for students and workers. His work blends rigorous causal inference with real-world relevance to uncover how both the very large interventions we employ to help society, as well as the seemingly surgically narrow ones, shape the lives of workers and students. He's also a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a Research Fellow at the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research. His CV is full of important papers, but it's the heart behind the work that really stands out—his curiosity about the world and his desire to make a difference. In this episode, we go beyond the papers. We talk about his journey, what it was like working with David Card, and how he found his calling. It's a thoughtful, warm conversation with a scholar who represents the very best of what economics can be.Scott's Mixtape Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Scott's Mixtape Substack at causalinf.substack.com/subscribe

A recent study conducted by researchers from the University of Toronto, University of Oklahoma, the Census Bureau, and the National Bureau of Economic Research at Stanford reveals a significant productivity pattern known as the J-curve in American manufacturing following AI adoption. The study indicates that companies often experience short-term productivity losses before realizing long-term gains. Initial use of industrial AI leads to increased work-in-progress inventory and investment in robotics, alongside labor reductions and declines in profitability, particularly affecting older businesses. However, those that adopt growth-oriented strategies can mitigate these initial losses and benefit from stronger growth over time.The podcast also discusses the disconnect between public perception and expert opinion regarding AI capabilities. A panel from the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence found that a majority of researchers believe public understanding does not align with the reality of AI research, which is hindering progress. Many experts argue that simply scaling up current AI approaches will not lead to achieving human-like intelligence, advocating instead for a cautious and collaborative approach to AI development that emphasizes safety and ethical governance.In addition to AI discussions, the episode highlights the concerning expansion of North Korean IT scams into Europe, targeting high-value sectors such as defense and government. These operatives are using fabricated identities to secure lucrative positions, with the potential to generate billions annually. The FBI has confirmed this shift in tactics, indicating a growing trend of extortion attempts by North Korean operatives. The episode also covers Microsoft's new email security measures aimed at high-volume senders to combat phishing and spoofing attacks, emphasizing the importance of compliance with stricter email authentication standards.Finally, the podcast touches on broader themes of technological advancement and innovation, particularly in the context of competition between the U.S. and China. Notable opinion pieces highlight the rapid technological growth in China, raising concerns about the U.S.'s ability to maintain its innovative edge. The discussion emphasizes the need for businesses to prepare for a fragmented global tech landscape, encouraging investment in automation and AI as part of a resilience strategy. The episode concludes with a reminder of the importance of practical applications of technology, rather than succumbing to the hype surrounding AI. Four things to know today 00:00 AI Adoption: Why the Road to Innovation Is Bumpy but Worth It—According to Experts05:36 North Korean IT Scams Go Global While Microsoft Gets Tough on Spam—Plus DoD's Signal Investigation 08:41 N-able Integrates, TD SYNNEX Finances, and Microsoft Bets on Cloud PCs—What MSPs Need to Know10:46 AI Hype vs. Reality: Are Incremental Gains Enough to Compete Globally?  Supported by:  https://www.huntress.com/mspradio/https://cometbackup.com/?utm_source=mspradio&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=sponsorship  Join Dave April 22nd to learn about Marketing in the AI Era.  Signup here:  https://hubs.la/Q03dwWqg0 All our Sponsors: https://businessof.tech/sponsors/ Do you want the show on your podcast app or the written versions of the stories? Subscribe to the Business of Tech: https://www.businessof.tech/subscribe/Looking for a link from the stories? The entire script of the show, with links to articles, are posted in each story on https://www.businessof.tech/ Support the show on Patreon: https://patreon.com/mspradio/ Want to be a guest on Business of Tech: Daily 10-Minute IT Services Insights? Send Dave Sobel a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/businessoftech Want our stuff? Cool Merch? Wear “Why Do We Care?” - Visit https://mspradio.myspreadshop.com Follow us on:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28908079/YouTube: https://youtube.com/mspradio/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mspradionews/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mspradio/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@businessoftechBluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/businessof.tech

Let's cut to the chase: “The overwhelming majority of murders in the United States involve guns,” says economist Jens Ludwig. “And in fact, most of the difference in overall murder rates between the United States and other countries are due to murders with guns.” This may seem intuitively obvious to outside observers, but studying guns within the United States has long been a fraught endeavor, and the amount of research isn't commensurate with the impact on U.S. society. That said, Ludwig has taken on exploring the roots of American gun violence, work that serves as grist for the Crime Lab he directs at the University of Chicago and for many of his books, including his latest, Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence. What's he's found is that the folk wisdom around gun violence doesn't rally hold up to the evidence. In this Social Science Bites episode, he explains to interviewer David Edmonds how – using insights about ‘system one' and system two' thinking developed by Daniel Kahneman – cognition in individuals has more explanatory power than traditional variables like poverty, education and environment. “I think system one plays an underappreciated role in all interpersonal violence, all of the issues, and this way of seeing what is driving violent behavior among people is equally true for knife violence in the UK and on and on,” Ludwig says. “So I think this is really a universal thing about people's behavior. This sort of frame on the problem helps make sense of a bunch of patterns in the data.” Ludwig is the Edwin A. and Betty L. Bergman Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago, Pritzker Director of the Crime Lab and codirector of the Education Lab at that campus, and codirector of the National Bureau of Economic Research's working group on the economics of crime. He and his labs are routinely recognized for their work. The Crime Lab in 2014, for example, received a MacArthur Award for Creative and Effective Institutions, while eight years earlier Ludwig himself was awarded the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management's David N. Kershaw Prize for Contributions to Public Policy by Age 40. Some of the books he's co-authored or co-edited include 2000's Gun Violence: The Real Costs, 2003's Evaluating Gun Policy, and 2012's Controlling Crime: Strategies and Tradeoffs.

Keith shares some historical perspective on inflation highlighting the cost of a Taco Bell meal in 1999 to its cost today. He also touches on the concept of service inflation, where services like mail delivery and self-checkout at grocery stores have become less convenient but not cheaper. Keith reviews the historical performance of real estate during the last eight recessions, noting that housing prices usually rise during recessions. He explains the concept of the Inflation Triple Crown: asset price inflation, debt debasement, and cash flow enhancement. Housing prices usually rise during recessions, as demonstrated by historical data. Resources: To learn more about the Inflation Triple Crown go to: getricheducation.com/itc. Show Notes: GetRichEducation.com/547 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com GRE Free Investment Coaching:GREmarketplace.com/Coach Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  You get paid first: Text FAMILY to 66866 Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search “how to leave an Apple Podcasts review”  For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— text ‘GRE' to 66866 Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Automatically Transcribed With Otter.ai    Keith Weinhold  0:01   Welcome to GRE. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, is higher inflation or even hyper inflation now in our future, and is an imminent recession, or even worse, a depression lurking. What's it all mean for your investments and your real estate? We'll investigate exactly what happens to real estate during recessions, historically today, on get rich education,   since 2014 the powerful get rich education podcast has created more passive income for people than nearly any other show in the world. This show teaches you how to earn strong returns from passive real estate investing in the best markets without losing your time being a flipper or landlord. Show Host Keith Weinhold rights for both Forbes and Rich Dad advisors and delivers a new show every week since 2014 there's been millions of listener downloads of 188 world nations. He has a list show guests and key top selling personal finance author Robert Kiyosaki, get rich education can be heard on every podcast platform, plus it has its own dedicated Apple and Android listener phone apps build wealth on the go with get rich education podcast. Sign up now for the get rich education podcast or visit get rich education.com   Corey Coates  1:19   You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is get rich education.   Keith Weinhold  1:35   Welcome to GRE from Hartsdale, New York to Springdale, Utah and across 488 nations worldwide. I'm Keith Weinhold. I think you know that by now, you are inside one of America's longest running and most listened to real estate investing shows. This is get rich education. Most people have two plans. Plan a get rich. If that doesn't work out, the alternative is Plan B, which is hate rich people.   We are firmly rooted in plan a for you here. So yes, we're about building your wealth, but ultimately we are a lifestyle improvement show. I'm going to get to high inflation and the potential for a recession or depression in just a minute. But I recently got a reminder on the fragility of life and its finite nature. My oldest friend recently died. He was almost like a mentor to me, a friend of mine's grandmother recently died, shattering her world, and it's a reminder that you won't be remembered for the money that you make. You won't even be remembered the real estate portfolio that you build. I mean, that surely won't last. The tennis that you serve, they'll die as well. I will be forgotten. This show will be forgotten. The people that love you, their opinions will die with them. Your Haters, their opinions will die with them. You can confirm that this is true right now by naming your eight great grandparents for me, there. Go ahead. You can't do it. I can't either. So what can you do, at least in this finite life that you have on earth? What you can do is enjoy your existence. The good news is, because you can control this, you can control enjoying your life and existence as get rich education is ultimately a lifestyle improvement show, and we are squarely helping you do that right here. And one way that I've done that over the years is by pointing out how inflation is actually advantageous to real estate investors. Well, it impoverishes most people. You're initiated on that by now. That's something that you really found out tangibly back during the pandemic. Now today, though, wow, people are frightened. I've got some contemporaneous material to share with you today, but I'll give you some lessons so that even if you're listening to this 10 years from now, you're going to learn some lessons. Americans inflation expectations for the next five years. They just hit the highest level since 1993 Yeah, expecting a lot of inflation, tariff pressures are a huge concern now. Last week, inside our newsletter, I sent you something that gave you some perspective on inflation. I sent you a photo of a Taco Bell receipt from 1999that might have left your mouth agape if you didn't see it. I'll tell you about it here and expand on this. And yes, it could leave you aghast, stupefied, gobsmacked, or even flabbergasted. In a sense, 1999 was not that long ago. It's sure not like ancient history. I mean, I was alive then, yes, I am here, and I'm from the 1900s. Well, this 1999 Taco Bell receipt that someone found perfectly preserved in the pages of a book. It shows a complete meal that was purchased for $3.50 it was actually just $3.26 and then the rest was tax added in. That's 350 for a chili cheese burrito, a taco nachos and a 16 ounce Pepsi. That's not the price for each item. That is the combined total from 1999 All right, how much do you think those same items would cost today? I don't eat there. I went to the Taco Bell website and found out. I mean, what an inflation measuring stick. This is what cost, 350 A Taco Bell in 1999 costs $11.44 today I use the same sales tax rate to come up with that. So today it's 1144 and today they also ask you a question a Taco Bell, if you want to round up for the kids or something like that, and then just watch, pretty soon, they're gonna request a tip too. That's a 327% price increase, and few people's wages have risen that much since 1999See, I told you that you would be left slack job and flabbergasted. All right, so let's look at where we are today. Now it's not an apples to apples comparison, but you know, Taco Bell is a fast food restaurant. Let's look at the price of a consumer item at a sports stadium today. All right, because both are places that everyday Americans frequent college basketball's March Madness tournaments have been taking place the last few weeks. Well, for the first time ever, the SEC is selling beer at its tournament. The price for one large premium draft beer is $17.50 so before tax or tip, 1750 for one beer all in that might be $20 or more, and I doubt that the beer is really that premium. I mean, you know what kind of beer you get at stadiums. So we look at inflation, one beer today is at least five times the cost of a complete Taco Bell meal in 1999   that's price inflation, and that's the stuff that's highly perceptible. Okay, you've been seeing that effect all of your life. It's making most people poorer. It's making real estate investors wealthier. And then there's the inflation that few people consider the less perceptible stuff, service inflation. And what are some examples of service inflation growing up the postal service delivered mail right to my parents porch, and they still do deliver mail right to my parents porch. Their neighborhood was built more than 100 years ago, but look, when new neighborhoods are built today, like places I've lived and perhaps where you live now, the postal service doesn't deliver your mail right to the individual mailbox on your porch. Today, you've got to walk both ways to your neighborhood's mailbox cluster. Some people even have to drive to get their mail. So your mail is no longer being delivered. Really, you have to go pick it up. Well, they don't lower the price for that reduced service level. That's service inflation. A second example is more obvious, grocery self checkout. You're taking the time and doing the work of scanning your groceries, but yet, they sure aren't lowering the prices of your lettuce and your beef jerky. And look service, inflation is here to stay. That is because companies make investments in it. The Postal Service bought those mailbox clusters, the supermarket bought those self checkout kiosks.    All right, so with this ramp and price inflation and service inflation, along with it, and the other forms of inflation that I've talked about on the show before, like stagflation, tip inflation and Shrink flation and skimpflation. What is an individual investor like you supposed to do? Well, stock and mutual fund investors get killed by inflation. I mean, think about it this way, just killed if the Sp5, 100 gains 10% but there's 5% inflation. That's a 50% hidden tax on your gain, plus you might pay capital gains tax. On top of that, savers really get obliterated. I mean, just destroyed if your bond yield or your savings account pays 4% interest, and there's 5% inflation. That is a 125% hidden tax on your gain, and then you might pay regular tax on top of that. So stocks and mutual funds and savings accounts are not the answer. What is the answer? Real Estate and borrowing the opposite of saving. And let me address now, whenever people get fearful that another wave of inflation is coming, whether that's tariff induced or otherwise, let's not get carried away and think that Hyperinflation is right around the corner, although definitions of hyperinflation vary, the most accepted one by economists is a 50% inflation rate per month, not annually, per month. So that would be over 600% a year, with compounding. I mean, that would be really hard to get, but what we do know is that inflation is still elevated above the Fed's 2% target. It's 2.8% today. And what we do know is that more inflation is coming at what rate nobody knows. These facts almost necessitate that you have either got to start your own business, which is tough, or become a real estate investor which is easier, in order to escape this and acquire some lasting wealth. Any devoted listener here knows that the formula for beating it is luckily, not highly sophisticated, not esoteric, not anything that you need a degree or certification for, just own income properties with loans, and that's when inflation produces three profit centers. As we know that is something that I coined as the inflation triple crown. So if you're new, you're learning something. If you've been around here for a while, here's a little comprehension test for you. What are the three crowns in the inflation Triple Crown, you win with asset price inflation, debt debasement and cash flow enhancement. Asset price inflation benefits you because you have leverage gains debt debasement passively lightens our debt burden for us, and then cash flow enhancement, that boosts our cash flow above the inflation rate, because our principal and interest payment stays fixed. And you can learn more about that totally free. You don't even have to leave your email address or anything. You can watch the three videos of the inflation Triple Crown at get rich education.com/itc. For inflation, Triple Crown, it's just good free learning for you there I've made available at get rich education.com/itc, it is a foundational financial education. Is a recession or even a depression eminent, that's straight ahead. I'm Keith Weinhold. You're listening to get rich education.   You know what's crazy? Your bank is getting rich off of you, the average savings account pays less than 1% it's like laughable. Meanwhile, if your money isn't making at least 4% you're losing to inflation. That's why I started putting my own money into the FFI liquidity fund. It's super simple. Your cash can pull in up to 8% returns, and it compounds. It's not some high risk gamble like digital or AI stock trading. It's pretty low risk because they've got a 10 plus year track record of paying investors on time in full every time. I mean, I wouldn't be talking about it if I wasn't invested myself. You can invest as little as 25k and you keep earning until you decide you want your money back. No weird lockups or anything like that. So if you're like me and tired of your liquid funds just sitting there doing nothing, check it out. Text family to 66866, to learn about freedom. Family investments. Liquidity fund again. Text family, to 66866   hey, you can get your mortgage loans at the same place where I get mine at Ridge lending group NMLS, 42056, they provided our listeners with more loans than any provider in the entire nation because they specialize in income properties, they help you build a long term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. You can start your pre qualification and chat with President Chaley Ridge personally. Start Now while it's on your mind at Ridge lendinggroup.com that's Ridge lendinggroup.com   you   Dani-Lynn Robison  15:45   This is freedom. Family investments. Co founder, Danny Lynn Robinson, listen to get rich education with Keith Weinhold, and don't quit your Daydream.   Keith Weinhold  16:00   Welcome back to get rich Education. I'm your host. Keith Wynne Holland, you are inside episode 547. I'll tell you, being a landlord or real estate investor can really change you now. I was using the stair climber at the gym just before talking to you today, I like to set up a big fan down on the floor to keep me cool before running or climbing. Plug it in, set up a fan. When I'm done, I turn off the fan. It's just a habit. I don't pay the electricity bill at my gym, but it's just the way that I would want to be treated. But you know what? When I find a fan that's already set up before I grab it and start on the treadmill. That fan is always running when no one is using it. No one turns off their fans when they don't have to pay for the electricity. And this reminds me of when I owned apartment buildings in Anchorage, Alaska, and tenants kept their windows open, even during the frigid winter, so that they could get fresh air. Yeah, you can guess who was paying the heating bill. It wasn't the tenant. It was me. The larger the apartment building is, the more likely that the owner is the one that pays for more of the utilities. And of course, in that case, you can look into utility sub metering. That process can be costly, but it might be worth it. It can increase your cash flow and your net operating income, which, when it increases your net operating income, that means that it also increases the apartment buildings value. And you know, in real estate today, you've got to look for where the opportunities are. There are opportunities in every market today. For places where there are specifically good opportunities are apartment buildings where their values have fallen 20 to 30% in some markets, it's wise to invest in beaten down sectors that you just know are going to come back like you know, the demand for apartment buildings is going to be there long term. This doesn't mean that you want to invest in any beaten down sector, like Office real estate in general. I don't see how that's coming back. A second strong real estate opportunity today is to find over built pockets, especially ones that exist in Texas and Florida. I mean, this is why they call them buyers markets. A Texas or Florida seller might make you a deal, and that doesn't mean everywhere in these states. For example, Southwest Florida is one area that's specifically over built, even amidst the national landscape that's under built. A third and a fourth area of specific real estate opportunity today are two that I have mentioned before, but they persist. That is still brand new, properties where many builders are still motivated to buy down your mortgage rate to about 5% even 4.75% in some cases, and new builds have low insurance premiums too. And then a fourth opportunity. That's something that we've covered a good bit here these past few weeks. BRRRR, real estate investing, buy, rehab, rent, refinance and repeat. That's a specifically good strategy if you don't have, say, hundreds of 1000s of dollars in liquidity to invest. Now you might ask, do those four strategies have validity? Do they have cogency in today's market, where there are these fears of an economic slowdown. Oh, yes, they do, or I would not have gone over them, but these palpable recession Fears are growing, and some are even asking, is a new Great Depression eminent? There is tons of bad economic news right now, not just in the US, but the global economy is on the edge, starting earlier this month, stock market tremors have turned into full blown convulsions. Trillions of dollars in wealth have just vaporized, wiped out. Investors are rattled, consumers are anxious. Business owners are confused, and those in power in the administration, they insist that tariffs and policy swings are all just part of a transition period, but a transition to what some have even asked, Is the everything bubble finally about to pop. Is this the brink of a recession or something even deeper, a D pressure? Well, one thing is undeniable, from stocks to crypto asset prices recently made a free fall, and I've got some long term lessons for you today, even if you're listening to this years from now, including what a phenomenon like this historically means for the real estate market, it's about what really happens to property values during an economic recession. Stocks recently had their worst week since 2023 barreling toward an all out bear market crash. A bear market means when 20% of the value has been lost from a recent high. Even Bitcoin, the poster child of speculative excess, has cratered. The carnage has been everywhere. But yet, instead of taking steps to prevent an economic meltdown, the administration in power, whether you like them or not, they have introduced more and more radical policies that could accelerate the crisis. Now, some of the tariffs could help long term, but the short term pain is perceptible, and you've got to be able to survive it. We've got new tariffs on multiple countries, and these are our biggest trading partners, even if these import taxes diminish, this is already strained friendships long term, especially with Canada. These countries keep retaliating with tariffs of their own, Canada, Mexico, China and the EU government spending is being slashed. Mass layoffs of federal employees have been underway for a while now. This is not just an economic experiment. I mean, this is a high stakes gamble with global consequences. So is this a detox period, or is it an economic freefall? Treasury Secretary Scott tebescent described this economic shift as a necessary detox period. That's the phrase that he used, and yes, I need to acknowledge there is no more grandma Yellen running the Treasury for long time, listeners, that is a reference to the long running joke about how my late grandmother resembled former Fed chief and former Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, but anyway, according to Besant, the US must break free from what he calls its addiction to government spending in return to private sector growth. Now, hey to me, that sounds good. Actually, that sounds like a good plan for the long term. But here's the problem, that addiction has been the lifeblood of the US economy for decades. And you know, this is something that regular GRE guest macroeconomist Richard Duncan has talked about when he's here. Remember what he's told us for over a decade here on the show, if the US doesn't have 2% real credit growth, credit expansion, well then we go into a recession. Well, what happens when the government cuts spending during soaring consumer prices due to trade wars? What happens when businesses hesitate to invest in the face of extreme uncertainty? Well, the bad news is that tariff whiplash and massive layoffs mean that businesses can't plan, and when businesses can't plan, they freeze. Look, just the other day, I talked to the President of a manufacturing company they make stainless steel tube valves and fittings. Due to all the tariff uncertainty, he's had to set up a reserve account based on what happens next, all right. Well, with that reserve account, that means that that's not money that's going into equipment reinvestment, that's not money that's going into making new hires. What happens when more confidence shatters and markets spiral lower? We may be about to find out. So has the recession, which is a precursor to any depression, already begun? Well, the warning signs are multiplying. Most ominously at last check, the respected Atlanta Fed tracker is now forecasting a more than 2% contraction in US GDP this quarter. That is quite a drawdown and two negative GDP quarters in a row. I mean, that is the definition of what a technical recession is. And here's a quick history piece for you in 1930 to try to quell the effects of the Great Depression, tariffs were passed. Alright. Do you know how badly that turned out back then in 1930 it was called the Smoot Holly Tariff Act. It raised tariffs to try to collect more revenue for the government. It didn't work, and the US sunk deeper into the Great Depression, with rampant unemployment and poverty and social unrest. There was a rise in crime, there were bank failures, even hunger and malnutrition. That's what a depression looks like, right there. Well, back to today. Right now, consumer confidence is collapsing. Retail Sales are plunging. The bond market is signaling distress, and yet those in power appear kind of oblivious to the magnitude of the risk. So what if it's not a transition and it is a start of something far worse? And see, this is just part of what's made investors raise their bets on a recession. Stocks are down like a global trade war has begun. Crypto has fallen like risk appetite has collapsed. Bond prices are rising like inflation is declining, and experts have priced in a 52% chance of a recession in the next 12 months. Okay, 52 that's like flipping a coin and just hoping that it lands on good news. Now in the real estate world, when we talk about direct threats from tariffs, as I've touched on before, the biggest direct threats are tariffs on lumber and on gypsum board. The lumber is used in house framing and trusses. Gypsum board, that just means drywall, the base case for tariffs on Canadian lumber alone, that adds about $10,000 to the cost of a new build typical single family home, which in turn jacks up all existing housing prices and their replacement cost. But let's look beyond that now at market factors. How is real estate adversely affected if the economy slows? Though historically. Let's look at how recessions really affect housing prices, and this is, again, as I like to say, where we take history over hunches. It's easy to have a hunch about what you think is going to happen, but let's look at what has really happened. How do real estate prices perform during recessions. When we look at the last eight recessions, okay? And the most current of those was in 2020, and then when we go back eight recessions ago, that is the 1960s Okay. Well, let me move along in chronological order here, during those eight recessions, starting in the 1960s leading up to today, housing prices, and this includes single family homes up to multifamily apartment buildings, they were just rounding to the nearest whole number here, up 5% there in The late 60s, in that recession, and then up 18% up 14% in the next recession, and then no change, down 1% and then up 6% and then down 13% that was during the 18 month recession, around 2008 and then finally, home prices were up 8% in the latest recession, alright. So in our total of eight recessions since the 1960s home prices only fell significantly one time, and they usually rise that one timethey fell. Let's explore that. That was during the 2008 global financial crisis, which involved more than just the recession. It was a deep recession, that's why it's called the Great Recession, but it also involved more than that. 2008 was special because that was a time of housing oversupply and low homeowner equity positions and a complete mortgage meltdown backed by flimsy liar loans. Well today we are in the opposite of all three of those conditions. We have a housing under supply. Americans have a record 300k plus in protective equity that they are not going to walk away from. And more.   Underwriting is stringent, the opposite of a liar loan. So housing prices usually rise in recessions, and if we're teetering on the brink of a recession, there are a lot of reasons to think that housing prices will go up yet again. And by the way, I felt what was happening back in 2008 I invested through it. I think I let you know before that, that's when I owned two four Plex buildings, 2008 but it didn't feel that bad to me, because my properties were temporarily suppressed in value, and that part didn't feel good, but my rents and rental demand went up because no banks would give loans to borrowers to buy properties, so I wouldn't want to sell when the buildings were paying me a higher than ever monthly income. But let's not lose the greater point what I'm telling you here that housing only fell significantly one time through the last eight recessions. That demonstrates the resilience of the housing market. And by the way, those stats were sourced by the NAR and the NB er National Bureau of Economic Research. All right, so why is this? Why is housing resilient in the face of a recession? There are a few reasons, but a main one is see, even if and when times get tough, people still need a place to live, and they will pay for it, especially now, when they have record equity, people are motivated to make mortgage payments and make rent payments, or else they are going to be homeless. So tough times when consumers they get less likely to pay for their car loan are less likely to pay for student loans, and when they default on credit card payments, that's when this stuff happens, but people will fight like heck to avoid losing their home. I mean, people will pay for food, shelter and safety. And also, when it comes to recessions, let's not forget how many bad just God, awful, wrong recession calls there were from over the past two to three years. I mean, the so called experts were wrong, wrong, wrong. Today, the economy is actually starting from a good place. And what do I mean here today, consumers still have money to spend, and they probably will. This is huge, because consumer spending is 70% of the economy, but how will they respond when these higher tariff induced prices hit more shelves at Walmart and Target? We'll see unemployment is still so low that it's practically down there doing squats. But you know these numbers, they're always backward looking, so it does only aim to get worse. The labor market is firm. Interest rates have been pretty steady. They've fallen a little. Energy prices are still down. So really, the bottom line with what I've shown you so far is that federal policies have induced economic trauma, and it does increase the chance of recession over the next 12 months. During recessions, housing is a top performer, and interest rates usually fall as well, and specifically interest rates of all types, including the Fed funds rate, mortgage rates, pretty much every interest rate type, they tend to fall in the mid and late stages of a recession. So this is what you can expect based on history, not hunches. But as for a depression, that is super unlikely. We haven't had one in 90 years, and today. I mean, come on, we have seen what the powers that be do. We can see how they respond to crises. They will just print and print and print more dollars to help pave over any problem. And that's not responsible long term, and it creates more inflation, but that's exactly what the government did to pull us out of the Great Recession and to pull us out of the COVID slowdown. We'll review what you've learned today in just a minute, but let me tell you, though you may very well have the majority of your capital smartly invested in real estate, since that's where the long term wealth creation is, those funds are not very liquid. So what about your liquid funds? Like I pointed out early in the show today, amidst higher inflation expectations, inflation really destroys those in the stock market, and it absolutely crushes savers. Savers really get destroyed, because if your bond yield or your savings account pays you 4% interest, and there's 5% inflation, that is a 125% hidden tax on your gain. And if that's the. Damaging enough there might be tax that you have to pay on that gain, which is not really a gain. This whole thing was a big loss.   So for some people, including me, what I do is become a lend. Lord, yes, I get a higher yield by lending to others a lend. Lord. I mean, why settle for just a, say, four and a half percent yield on your liquid funds? I mean, that's the level at both the 10 year bond and the savings account yield today, about four and a half percent. I've parked my own liquid funds for a steady 8% yield that I've been getting for years with a long time established real estate company. I make the loan to them, they have paid on time, every time, for that steady 8% return. And see, when you understand that directly investing in real estate pays five ways, and that a 20 to 30% total ROI, therefore is common and even expected. You can understand how they can pay you and me an 8% return on your liquid funds. You can see where the arbitrage is. Just a little insider tip here. It's called Freedom family investments. If you want to learn more, text family to 66 866. Their minimums are pretty low to 25k and you don't have to be accredited. So for steady 8% returns from the same place in the same vehicle where I've been getting my 8% you can just do it right now. What's on your mind? Text the word family to 66866.    Let's review what you've learned today, Americans have higher long term inflation expectations than they've had since 1993 a 1999 Taco Bell receipt really brings to light how much inflation you have experienced in your life. Though, higher inflation can come. Hyper inflation is unlikely. Let's not get carried away. The prospects for a recession are 52% in the next 12 months, per a plurality of experts, but a depression is really unlikely. Now you know how real estate performs in recessions and why it holds up so well it even tends to appreciate coming up here on the show are some prominent guests, including the leader of rezzy club. You might know about them. Sometimes I share their great charts in our newsletter. Yes, rezzy Club's Lance Lambert will be with us. Also, Legacy finance expert Laurel Langemeier will be here with us on another upcoming episode. Thanks for being here, but you weren't here for me. You were here for you. I'm Keith Weinhold. Don't quit your Daydream.   Dolf Deroos  37:53   Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of get rich Education LLC exclusively.   Keith Weinhold  38:16   You know, whenever you want the best written real estate and finance info. Oh, geez, today's experience limits your free articles access, and it's got paywalls and pop ups and push notifications and cookies disclaimers. It's not so great. So then it's vital to place nice, clean, free content into your hands that adds no hype value to your life. That's why this is the golden age of quality newsletters. And I write every word of ours myself. It's got a dash of humor, and it's to the point because even the word abbreviation is too long, my letter usually takes less than three minutes to read. And when you start the letter, you also get my one hour fast real estate video. Course, it's all completely free. It's called the Don't quit your Daydream letter. It wires your mind for wealth, and it couldn't be easier for you to get it right now. Just text. GRE to 6866 while it's on your mind, take a moment to do it right now. Text, GRE to 6866   The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth, building, get rich, education.com.    

Helping people move to higher-opportunity neighborhoods requires knowing which neighborhoods are actually better. Are we any good at it? Dionissi Aliprantis shares his research on measuring neighborhood opportunity and the rent assistance program features that could meaningfully reduce racial segregation.Show notes:Aliprantis, D., Martin, H., & Tauber, K. (2024). What determines the success of housing mobility programs? Journal of Housing Economics, 65, 102009.99% Invisible episode on chambre le bonne (maid's rooms) in Paris.Episode 87 of UCLA Housing Voice, on housing voucher lease-up rates with Sarah Strochak.Episode 17 of UCLA Housing Voice, on using fair market rents to improve housing vouchers with Rob Collinson.Episode 58 of UCLA Housing Voice, on the health impacts of Baltimore's housing mobility program with Craig Pollack.The book, Waiting for Gautreaux: A Story of Segregation, Housing, and the Black Ghetto, by Alexander Polikoff.Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., Hendren, N., Jones, M. R., & Porter, S. R. (2018). The Opportunity Atlas: Mapping the childhood roots of social mobility (No. w25147). National Bureau of Economic Research.Bergman, P., Chetty, R., DeLuca, S., Hendren, N., Katz, L. F., & Palmer, C. (2024). Creating Moves to Opportunity: Experimental evidence on barriers to neighborhood choice. American Economic Review, 114(5), 1281-1337.

//The Wire//2300Z March 18, 2025////ROUTINE////BLUF: WAR RETURNS TO GAZA AS CEASEFIRE FAILS, ISRAEL CONDUCTS LARGE-SCALE BOMBING IN GAZA. UNITED STATES CONTINUES BOMBING CAMPAIGN IN YEMEN. // -----BEGIN TEARLINE------International Events-Middle East: The already tenuous ceasefire in Gaza has come to an end, as Israeli forces recommenced their large-scale bombing campaign throughout the Gaza Strip.-HomeFront-Washington D.C. - This evening a few thousand pages of documents pertaining to the assassination of John F. Kennedy were released. AC: Many of the files are poor quality scans of copies, or handwritten notes, as is common among decades-old government documents. As such it may take some time for analysis to be conducted to determine if anything new was actually released. Additionally, no further comment has been made regarding the much-hyped Phase 2 release of Epstein documents.At the DoJ, the FBI announced the creation of a new Task Force to investigate the Oct 7th attacks in Israel. This will involve the FBI arranging a team of agents to directly work for Israel's National Bureau of Counter Terror Finance.This afternoon D.C. District Court Judge Theodore Chuang (an Obama appointee) mandated the reinstatement of USAID funding in it's entirety.Nevada: The attacks on parked Tesla vehicles has continued via another arson attack at a service center in Las Vegas shortly before sunrise this morning. Several Teslas were set on fire with improvised incendiary devices while parked in the parking lot of the service center on Badura Avenue.USA: The swatting incidents over the past few days have continued, with an increasing number of pro-Trump social media figures being targeted by malign actors.-----END TEARLINE-----Analyst Comments: High tensions remain a standard in the Red Sea, as much false information abounds regarding current events. Various Houthi forces claimed to sink an American warship (as they do routinely), which is obviously false. Likewise, other social media accounts attempting to stoke a war with Iran claimed that an Iranian ship called the Zagros was sunk as well. This too is probably false, considering that the Zagros (an intelligence collection ship, the first of it's kind domestically produced by the Iranians) is a newer vessel that was only unveiled two months ago, and therefore might not have entered combat service yet.Analyst: S2A1Research: https://publish.obsidian.md/s2underground//END REPORT//

China's latest commitment to advancing cutting-edge technologies — including quantum computing, artificial intelligence and 6G — will solidify its position as a global leader in innovation, and the strategic push will enable the country to navigate global uncertainties while sustaining its competitive advantage, experts and business executives said.专家和企业高管们表示，中国最近致力于推动包括量子计算、人工智能和6G等前沿技术的发展，这将巩固中国作为全球创新领导者的地位，而这一战略推动将使中国能够在保持竞争优势的同时应对全球的不确定性。Underscoring the importance of securing technological breakthroughs and efficiently commercializing them, they said that China's push for new quality productive forces will create vast opportunities for domestic and international businesses.他们强调了确保技术突破并将其有效商业化的重要性，并表示中国对新的优质生产力的推动将为国内外企业创造大量机会。Their comments follow President Xi Jinping's remark that technological innovation and industrial innovation constitute the fundamental pathways for developing new quality productive forces.习近平主席曾指出，技术创新和产业创新是发展高质量新生产力的根本途径。Xi made the remark when participating in a deliberation in Beijing on March 5 with his fellow deputies from Jiangsu province during the third session of the 14th National People's Congress, China's top legislature.3月5日，在中国最高立法机构--第十四届全国人民代表大会第三次会议期间，习近平在北京与江苏省人大代表一起参加审议时说了这番话。China's 2025 Government Work Report also said the nation "will establish a mechanism to increase funding for industries of the future and foster industries such as biomanufacturing, quantum technology, embodied AI and 6G technology".中国《2025年政府工作报告》也表示，中国 “将建立未来产业资金投入增长机制，培育生物制造、量子技术、人工智能、6G技术等产业”。Wang Yiming, vice-chairman of the China Center for International Economic Exchanges, said, "China's economy has entered a critical period of transitioning between old and new growth drivers."中国国际经济交流中心副理事长王一鸣表示，“中国经济已进入新旧增长动力转换的关键时期”。He said future-oriented technologies are not only at the forefront of innovation, but are also strategic pillars for reshaping industrial competition and boosting productivity."他说，面向未来的技术不仅是创新的前沿，也是重塑产业竞争格局、提升生产力的战略支柱。Their significance lies in both upgrading traditional industries and securing a leading position in emerging sectors," Wang said.它们的意义在于既能提升传统产业，又能确保在新兴产业中的领先地位。Guo Guoping, deputy director of the Key Lab of Quantum Information at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, said he was deeply impressed by China's support for quantum technology.中国科学院量子信息重点实验室副主任郭国平说，中国对量子技术的支持给他留下了深刻印象。He compared quantum technology to an aircraft, with quantum computing serving as its "engine", providing exponential computational power for fields such as national defense, biomedicine, energy materials and AI.他把量子技术比作一架飞机，量子计算是飞机的“发动机”，为国防、生物医药、能源材料和人工智能等领域提供指数级计算能力。"Quantum computing is transitioning from the lab to industrialization. China has become the third country in the world capable of delivering quantum computers, after Canada and the United States, positioning China in the global first tier of quantum research. But challenges remain in some areas," Guo said."量子计算正在从实验室向产业化过渡。中国已成为继加拿大和美国之后，世界上第三个能够提供量子计算机的国家，跻身全球量子研究第一梯队。但在某些领域仍存在挑战，"郭说。He stressed the need for increased investment in basic research and advocated leveraging China's unique advantages in mobilizing resources to tackle core technological challenges.他强调了增加基础研究投入的必要性，并主张发挥中国在调动资源应对核心技术挑战方面的独特优势。China's research and development spending climbed to 3.6 trillion yuan ($497 billion) in 2024, an 8 percent year-on-year increase, according to the National Bureau of Statistics. Of this total, funding allocated to basic research accounted for 6.91 percent of the R&D budget, underscoring heightened investment in foundational scientific exploration.根据国家统计局的数据，到2024年，中国的研发支出将攀升至3.6万亿元（约合4,970亿美元），同比增长8%。其中，分配给基础研究的资金占研发预算的6.91%，凸显了对基础科学探索的投资力度加大。Meanwhile, more than 570 Chinese industrial companies have made it to the global top 2,500 companies in terms of R&D investment, according to the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology.与此同时，根据工业和信息化部的数据，已有超过570家中国工业企业进入全球研发投入前2500强。Xu Lijin, a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, the nation's top political advisory body, and chairman of Wuhu Robot Industry Development Group, said that embodied AI, as highlighted in the Government Work Report, refers to AI that is integrated into physical hardware such as robots. It represents a significant leap in intelligent systems capable of interacting with and adapting to their environments.全国政协委员、芜湖机器人产业发展集团董事长徐立金表示，《政府工作报告》中强调的“嵌入式人工智能 ”是指将人工智能集成到机器人等物理硬件中。它代表着能够与环境交互并适应环境的智能系统的重大飞跃。"Robotics and AI are dual engines driving economic and social development in the era of global digital transformation," Xu said"机器人和人工智能是全球数字化转型时代推动经济社会发展的双引擎。"他说Qiao Hong, an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, said, "Over the past three years, China has accounted for more than half of the global installation of industrial robots, and its lunar exploration robots have successfully returned lunar soil samples."中国科学院院士乔红说："近三年来，中国工业机器人的安装量已占全球一半以上，中国的探月机器人已成功返回月球土壤样本。However, challenges remain. For instance, high-end sensors like precision lidar, short for light detection and ranging, still rely on imports, and domestic alternatives lag in accuracy and stability, experts added.然而，挑战依然存在。专家补充说，例如，像精密激光雷达（光探测和测距的简称）这样的高端传感器仍然依赖进口，而国产替代品在精度和稳定性方面都比较落后。Zhang Li, president of the China Center for Information Industry Development, said: "Leveraging its robust and comprehensive industrial ecosystem, China creates expansive real-world testing grounds and vast market opportunities for technological innovation. This infrastructure not only accelerates the development of emerging industries, but also provides a resilient foundation for nurturing future-oriented sectors poised to redefine global markets."中国信息产业发展研究中心主任张莉说："中国凭借其强大而全面的产业生态系统，为技术创新创造了广阔的现实世界试验场和巨大的市场机遇。这种基础设施不仅加快了新兴产业的发展，也为培育未来导向型行业奠定了坚实的基础，这些行业将重新定义全球市场。As the world's largest manufacturing country, China ranks first globally in terms of output for more than 40 percent of the world's 500 major industrial products, data from the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology showed.工业和信息化部的数据显示，作为世界上最大的制造业国家，在世界500种主要工业产品中，中国有40%以上的产品产量位居全球第一。Industrial innovation must remain rooted in the real economy, Zhang said, noting that China's economy "has historically relied on the real economy, and it is through this foundation that it will continue to progress".张说，产业创新必须始终植根于实体经济，她指出，中国经济“历来依靠实体经济，正是通过这一基础，中国经济才会不断进步”。Ding Haiyu, deputy head of the China Mobile Research Institute, said that 6G "has entered its tech standardization phase this year, as we aim to commercialize the technology around 2030. AI-powered 6G will unlock significant opportunities".中国移动研究院副院长丁海玉说，6G "今年已进入技术标准化阶段，我们的目标是在2030年左右实现技术商用。人工智能驱动的6G将带来重大机遇"。Zheng Yongnian, dean of the School of Public Policy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen), said, "To cultivate new quality productive forces, a country should prioritize three foundational pillars — advancing fundamental scientific research, bridging the gap between theoretical discoveries and applied technological solutions, and fostering a financial ecosystem capable of sustaining innovation-driven growth."香港中文大学（深圳）公共政策学院院长郑永年说：“一个国家要培育新的优质生产力，应优先考虑三大基础支柱--推进基础科学研究、弥合理论发现与应用技术解决方案之间的差距，以及培育能够维持创新驱动增长的金融生态系统。”"Expanding institutional opening-up is the strategic guarantee for nurturing new quality productive forces," Zheng said."扩大制度性开放是培育新的优质生产力的战略保障。”他说David Poon, president of Infineon Technologies Greater China, said China's focus on green, low-carbon and high-quality development aligns with the German chip maker's strengths and opens new growth opportunities.英飞凌科技大中华区总裁表示，中国注重绿色、低碳和高质量发展，这与这家德国芯片制造商的优势不谋而合，并带来了新的发展机遇。"With our 'In China, For China' strategy, we plan to increase local production of general-purpose semiconductors to address customer needs regarding supply resilience," Poon said.他说：”根据我们的'在中国，为中国'战略，我们计划增加通用半导体的本地化生产，以满足客户对供应弹性的需求。navigatevt.航行于；驾驶，操纵；使通过vi.航行，航空aircraftn. 飞机，航空器quantumn. 量子定量;总量semiconductorn.〈物〉半导体

Employees in China may get a chance to take a breath from the grueling "996 work culture", where people work from 9 am to 9 pm, six days a week, after several Chinese companies issued internal reminders to prevent formalistic overtime working and workplace rat race.在多家企业发布内部通知，要求遏制形式主义加班和职场内卷后，中国职场人士或将迎来“996”工作文化的缓解。“996工作文化”指的是员工每天从早上9点工作到晚上9点，每周工作6天的工作模式。The central government has also shown greater determination to regulate the unwholesome "work culture".与此同时，中央政府也展现出更加坚定的决心，规范这种不良的“职场文化”。In an action plan released recently by the State Council, China's Cabinet, local authorities have been urged to better protect workers' right to rest and tighten supervision of employers' behavior of illegally lengthening employees' working hours.中国国务院近日发布的一项行动方案敦促地方当局更好地保护员工的休息权利，并加强对雇主非法延长员工工时行为的监管。Before the release of the action plan, several Chinese companies sought to relax their tiring working schedules.在该方案出台前，已有多家中国企业尝试放宽紧张的工作时间安排。Shenzhen-based drone manufacturer DJI became a trending topic on social media platform Sina Weibo recently after some of its employees posted their experiences of not being allowed to work overtime after 9 pm.深圳无人机制造商大疆创新（DJI）近期登上社交媒体微博的热搜，原因是该公司部分员工发布了自己晚上9点后不准加班的经历。The posts said that DJI's human resources managers patrolled around the building and asked the employees to leave by 9 pm.帖子称，大疆创新的人力资源经理在大楼周围巡逻，并要求员工晚上9点前离开。Midea, a home appliance manufacturer, issued an internal notice in late January, asking its staff members to streamline their working patterns. Midea confirmed the existence of the notice, according to Shanghai-based news outlet The Paper.家电制造商美的在1月底发布内部通知，要求员工简化工作模式。据上海媒体《澎湃新闻》报道，美的方面证实了该通知的存在。The group asked the employees not to have meetings or work overtime, reduce the number of work-related WeChat groups and prohibit any formalistic behavior.集团要求员工减少会议和加班时间，精简工作相关的微信沟通群组，并杜绝形式主义工作方式。As employees have seen increased working hours in recent years, even longer than the length regulated by the nation's Labor Law, their complaints about the unreasonable schedules intensified after the "996 work culture" was promoted by some large companies or industrial titans.近年来，随着“996”工作文化被部分大型企业和行业巨头推崇，员工工作时长普遍延长，甚至超出《劳动法》规定，使得员工对不合理工作时间的不满愈演愈烈。"My colleagues and I usually joke that we get a 'sense of shame' by leaving the office at 6 pm sharp. It has become a stereotype that you are not hardworking if you don't stay very late to work in the office," said Wang Xiaofeng, a telecommunications engineer in Beijing, who works from 9 am to 8 pm and on Saturday every other week.“我和同事们经常开玩笑说，晚上6点准点下班会让人有‘羞耻感'。大家普遍认为，如果不加班到很晚，就会被认为不够努力。”北京的一名电信工程师王晓峰表示，他的工作时间是上午9点到晚上8点，并且每隔一周还需要在周六上班。The 30-year-old said he was happy to see this news and hopes that his company can relax its working schedules, as the job has almost taken all of his time so far. However, he expressed his concerns that it may be hard to quantify the overtime work and overtime fees if an employee has to continue work after returning home.这位30岁的年轻人说，他很高兴看到这个消息，并希望公司能放宽工作时间安排，因为到目前为止，这项工作几乎占据了他所有的时间。然而，他也担忧如果员工回家后仍需继续工作，如何量化加班时长及加班费可能成为一大难题。Figures from the National Bureau of Statistics show that employees at domestic companies have had longer working hours in recent years—reaching 49 hours a week in 2024, up from 47.9 hours in 2022.国家统计局的数据显示，近年来国内企业员工的工作时间持续增长，2024年已达每周49小时，高于2022年的47.9小时。However, based on the Labor Law, employees should work no more than eight hours a day and a maximum of 44 hours a week. Employers can lengthen the working day by one hour at most after negotiating with trade unions and employees.然而根据《劳动法》规定，员工每天工作时间不得超过8小时，每周工作时间不得超过44小时。用人单位在与工会和员工协商后，最多可将每日工作时间延长1小时。Experts and industry insiders said the measures taken by companies to shorten working hours or optimize working patterns will help protect employees' rights and their physical and psychological health.专家和业内人士表示，企业缩短工时或优化工作模式的举措，有助于保护员工权益和身心健康。"As job seekers' views about careers, labor relations and working patterns have changed in the new era, employers may find that the employees are losing their passion for or loyalty to the job after being asked to work overtime," said Li Qiang, vice-president of recruitment portal Zhaopin.招聘平台智联招聘副总裁李强表示，随着新时代求职者对职业发展、劳动关系和工作模式的观念发生变化，企业如果长期要求员工加班，可能会导致员工对工作失去热情和忠诚度。Noting that work schedules like"996" have hurt people's working rights, Li Chang'an, a professor at the Academy of China Open Economy Studies at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing, said that employees find it hard to achieve a work-life balance and may have health or marriage problems because of those unreasonable schedules.北京对外经济贸易大学的国家对外开放研究院教授李长安指出，“996”这样的工作模式损害了人们的劳动权益，使得员工难以实现工作与生活的平衡，甚至可能引发健康或婚姻问题。He said that steps taken by these companies to improve their working schedules will help promote high-quality employment, with their working hours being more in line with the national regulations.他认为企业改善工作安排，使员工的工作时间更符合国家规定，将有助于促进高质量就业。"The companies themselves can also improve their attractiveness to workers, as corporate social responsibility and sound protection of workers' right to rest have become an important part of their competitiveness in the market," Li said.“这样的话，企业也可以提升对求职者的吸引力，如今，企业社会责任以及对员工休息权的保障，已成为企业市场竞争力的重要组成部分。”李长安补充道。He said he hopes that more companies can adopt a reasonable and humanistic work culture to ease the workload, which can help create harmonious working relationships, expand consumption and increase the marriage rate.他表示，希望更多企业能够采取合理、人性化的工作文化，以减轻员工的工作负担，这样不仅能营造和谐的工作关系，还能促进消费，提高结婚率。

China's economy continued to recover in the first two months this year as consumption and investment showed improvement, official data showed on Monday, making a steady start for 2025.今年前两个月，随着消费和投资状况改善，中国经济持续复苏。官方周一公布的数据显示，这一表现为2025年实现了平稳开局。 Retail sales, a key measurement of consumer spending, surged 4 percent year-on-year over the January-February period, after the 3.7 percent rise in December.衡量消费支出的关键指标——零售销售，在1月至2月期间同比增长4%，较12月的3.7%增幅有所提升。 China's value-added industrial output - a gauge of activity in the manufacturing, mining and utilities sectors - grew by 5.9 percent over the January-February period from a year earlier after a 6.2 percent rise in December, figures released by the National Bureau of Statistics NBS showed.国家统计局（NBS）数据显示，中国工业增加值（衡量制造业、矿业和公用事业部门活动的指标）在1月至2月期间同比增长5.9%，而12月的增幅为6.2%。 Fixed-asset investment - a gauge of expenditures on items including infrastructure, property, machinery and equipment - increased by 4.1 percent over the January-February period year-on-year, compared with a 3.2 percent rise for the whole year of 2024.固定资产投资（涵盖基础设施、房地产、机械设备等领域的支出指标）在1月至2月期间同比增长4.1%，相比之下，2024年全年增幅为3.2%。 The surveyed urban jobless rate came in at 5.3 percent in the first two months, up from 5.1 percent in December, according to the NBS. The figure came in at 5.4 percent in February, 0.2 percentage point higher than that in the previous month.据国家统计局数据，前两个月调查城镇失业率为5.3%，高于12月的5.1%。2月失业率为5.4%，较前月上升0.2个百分点。 The NBS said the Chinese economy maintained growth momentum in the first two months with various n.花费,使用policy measures taking effect gradually.国家统计局表示，前两个月中国经济保持增长势头，各项宏观政策逐步显效。 Meanwhile, the bureau warned of challenges from a more complicated and grimmer external environment and the lackluster domestic demand, saying some enterprises still face production and operational difficulties and the foundation for sustained recovery is not yet solid.但该局同时警告，外部环境更趋复杂严峻，国内需求不足，部分企业仍面临生产经营困难，持续复苏的基础尚不牢固。 Looking ahead, the NBS said the country should implement more proactive and effective macro policies, calling for more moves to stimulate domestic demand, further deepen reforms and opening-up as well as boost economic vitality and improve expectations.展望未来，国家统计局提出应实施更加积极有效的宏观政策，呼吁进一步刺激内需、深化改革开放、增强经济活力并改善预期。 consumptionn. 消费，消耗；消费[耗]量expendituren. 花费,使用grimadj.严酷的,无情的solidadj.固体的；实心的结实的；稳定的

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

Critics on the Left have long attacked open markets and free trade agreements for exploiting the poor and undermining labor, while those on the Right complain that they unjustly penalize workers back home. In Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital (Harvard University Press, 2019), Kimberly Clausing takes on old and new skeptics in her compelling case that open economies are actually a force for good. Turning to the data to separate substance from spin, she shows how international trade makes countries richer, raises living standards, benefits consumers, and brings nations together. At a time when borders are closing and the safety of global supply chains is being thrown into question, she outlines a clear agenda to manage globalization more effectively, presenting strategies to equip workers for a modern economy and establish a better partnership between labor and the business community. Kimberly Clausing holds the Eric M. Zolt Chair in Tax Law and Policy at the UCLA School of Law. During the first part of the Biden Administration, Clausing was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis in the US Department of the Treasury, serving as the lead economist in the Office of Tax Policy. Prior to coming to UCLA, Clausing was the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. Professor Clausing is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. She has worked on economic policy research with the International Monetary Fund, the Hamilton Project, the Brookings Institution, the Tax Policy Center, and the Center for American Progress. She has testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Committee on Finance, the Senate Committee on the Budget, and the Joint Economic Committee. Professor Clausing received her B.A. from Carleton College in 1991 and her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1996, both in economics. Other New Books Networks interviews on related themes include Yale economist Penny Goldberg, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, on The Unequal Effects of Globalization, Princeton economist Leah Boustan on how immigrants have contributed to and rapidly assimilated into US society, and University of Massachusetts economist Isabella Weber on China's process of integration into the world economy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

The space business landscape is changing. Companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin are moving at breakneck speed toward goals Americans have dreamed of since the 1960s. At the same time, a whole host of smaller startups are arriving on the scene, ready to tackle everything from asteroid mining to next-gen satellites to improved lunar missions.Today on Faster, Please — The Podcast, I'm talking with Matt Weinzierl about what research developments and market breakthroughs are allowing these companies to thrive.Weinzierl is the senior associate dean and chair of the MBA program at Harvard Business School. He is also a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. Weinzierl is the co-author of a new book with Brendan Rosseau, Space to Grow: Unlocking the Final Economic Frontier.In This Episode* Decentralizing space (1:54)* Blue Origin vs. SpaceX (4:50)* Lowering launch costs (9:24)* Expanding space entrepreneurship (14:42)* Space sector sustainability (20:06)* The role of Artemis (22:45)* Challenges to success (25:28)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Decentralizing space (1:54). . . we had this amazing success in the '60s with the Apollo mission . . but it was obviously a very government-led, centralized program and that got us in the mode of thinking that's how you did space.You're telling a story about space transitioning from government-led to market-driven, but I wonder if you could just explain that point because it's not a story about privatization, it's a story about decentralization, correct?It really is, I think the most important thing for listeners to grab onto. In fact, I teach a course at Harvard Business School on this topic, and I've been teaching it now for a few years, and I say to my students, “What's the reason we're here? Why are we talking about space at HBS?” and it's precisely about what you just asked.So maybe the catchiest way to phrase this for folks, there was one of the early folks at SpaceX, Jim Cantrell, he was one of the earliest employees. He has this amazing quote from the early 2000s where he says, “The Great American Space Enterprise, which defeated Communism in defense of Capitalism, was and is operating on a Soviet economic model.” And he was basically speaking to the fact that we had this amazing success in the '60s with the Apollo mission and going to the moon and it truly was an amazing achievement, but it was obviously a very government-led, centralized program and that got us in the mode of thinking that's how you did space. And so for the next 50 years, basically we did space in that way run from the center, not really using market forces.What changed in various ways was that in the early 2000s we decided that model had kind of run its course and the weaknesses were too big and so it was time to bring market forces in. And that doesn't mean that we were getting rid of the government role in space. Just like you said, the government will always play a vital role in space for various reasons, national security among them, but it is decentralizing it in a way to bring the power of the market to bear.Maybe the low point — and that low point, that crisis, maybe created an opportunity — was the end of the Space Shuttle program. Was that an important inflection point?It's definitely one that I think most people in the sector look to as being . . . there's the expression “never waste a crisis,” and I think that that's essentially what happened. The Shuttle was an amazing engineering achievement, nobody really doubts that, and what NASA was trying to do with it and with their contractors was incredibly hard. So it's easy to kind of get too negative on that era, but it is also true that the Shuttle never really performed the way people hoped, it never flew as often, it was much more costly, and then in 2003 there was the second Shuttle tragedy.When that happened, I think everybody felt like, "This just isn't the future." So we need something else, and the Shuttle program was put on a cancellation path by the end of that decade. That really did force this reckoning with the fact that the American space sector, which had put men on the moon and brought them back safely in 1969, launching all sorts of dreams about space colonies and hotels, now, 40 years later, it was going to be unable to even put a person into orbit on its own rockets. We were going to be renting rockets from the Russians. That was really a moment of soul searching, I guess is one way you think about it in the sector.Blue Origin vs. SpaceX (4:50)I guess the big lesson . . . is that competition really does matter in space just like in any other business.I think naturally we would lead into talking about SpaceX, which we certainly will do, but the main competitor, Blue Origin, the Jeff Bezos company, which seems to be moving forward, but it's definitely seemed to have adopted a very different kind of strategy. It seems to me different than the SpaceX strategy, which really is kind of a “move fast, break things, build them back up and try to launch again” while Blue Origin is far more methodical. Am I right in that, is that eventually going to work?Blue Origin is a fascinating company. In fact, we actually opened the book — the book is a series, basically, of stories that we tell about companies, and people, and government programs, sprinkled in with some economics because we can't resist. We're trying to structure it for folks, but we start with the story of Blue Origin because it really is fascinating. It illustrates some really fundamental aspects of the sector these days.To your specific question, we can talk more about Blue in many of its aspects. The motto of Blue from its beginning has been this Latin phrase, gradatim ferociter or, “step-by-step, ferociously,” and Bezos in the earliest days, they even have a tortoise on their company shield, so to speak, to signal this tortoise and the hair metaphor or fable. From the earliest days the idea was, “Look, we're going to just methodically work our way up to these grand visions of building infrastructure for space,” eventually in the service of having, as they always said, millions of people living and working in space.Now there's various ways to interpret the intervening 20 years that we've had, or 25 now since they were founded. One interpretation says, well, that's a nice story, but in fact they made some decisions that caused them to move more slowly than even they would've wanted to. So they didn't continue working as closely with NASA as, say, for instance SpaceX did. They relied really almost exclusively on funding from Bezos himself issuing a lot of other contracts they could have gotten, and that sort of reduced the amount of external discipline and market competition that they were facing. And then they made some other steps along the way, and so now they're trying to reignite and move faster, and they did launch New Glenn, their orbital rocket, recently. So they're back in the game and they're coming back. That's one story.Another story is, well yes, they've made decisions that at the time didn't seem to move as fast as they wanted, but they made those decisions intentionally. This is a strategy we will see pay off pretty well in the long run. I think that the jury is very much still out, but I guess the big lesson for your listeners and for me and hopefully for others in the sector, is that competition really does matter in space just like in any other business. To the extent that Blue didn't move as fast because they didn't face as much competition, that's an interesting lesson for the private sector. And to the extent that now they're in the game nipping at the heels of SpaceX, that's good for everybody, even for SpaceX, I think, to have them in the game.Do you think they're nipping at the heels?Well, yeah, I was just thinking as I said that, that might have been a little optimistic. It really does depend how you look at it. SpaceX is remarkably dominant in the commercial space sector, there's no question there. They launch 100 times a year plus and they are . . . the latest statistic I have in 2023, they launched more than 80 percent of all the mass launched off the surface of Earth, so they run more than half the satellites that are operational in space. They are incredibly dominant such that concerns about monopoly are quite present in the sector these days. We can talk about that.I think “nipping at the heels” might be a little generous, although there are areas in which SpaceX still does have real competition. The national security launch sector, ULA (United Launch Alliance) is still the majority launcher of national security missions and Blue is looking to also get into the national security launch market. With Amazon's satellite constellation, Kuiper, starting to come into the launch cadence over the next couple of years, they will have demand for lots of launch outside of SpaceX and that will start to increase the frequency with which Blue Origin and ULA also launch. So I think there is reason to believe that people in the sector will have more options, even for the heavy-lift launch vehicles.Lowering launch costs (9:24)[SpaceX] brought the cost of getting a kilogram of mass into orbit down by 90 percent in less than, really 10 or 15 years, which had been a stagnant number for going on four or five decades.People in Silicon Valley like talking about disruption and disruptors. It's hard to think of a company that is more deserving, or A CEO more deserving than Elon Musk and SpaceX. Tell me how disruptive that company has been to how we think about space and the economic potential of space.We open our chapter in the book on SpaceX by saying we believe it'll go down as one of the most important companies in the history of humanity, and I really do believe that. I don't think you have to be a space enthusiast, necessarily, to believe it. The simplest way to summarize that is that they brought the cost of getting a kilogram of mass into orbit down by 90 percent in less than, really 10 or 15 years, which had been a stagnant number for going on four or five decades. It had hovered around — depending on the data point you look at — around $30,000 a kilogram to low earth orbit, and once SpaceX got Falcon 9 flying, it was down to $3,000. That's just an amazing reduction.What's also amazing about it is they didn't stop there. As soon as they had that, they decided that one of the ways to make the business model work was to reinvent satellite internet. So in a sector that had just over a decade ago only 1000 operational satellites up in space, now we have 10,000, 6,000 plus of which are SpaceX's Starlink, just an incredibly fast-growing transformational technology in orbit.And then they went on to disrupt their own disruption by creating a rocket called Starship, which is just absolutely massive in a way that's hard to even imagine, and that, if it fulfills the promise that I think everyone hopes it will, will bring launch costs down, if you can believe it, by another 90 percent, so a total of 99 percent down to, say, $300 a kilogram. Now you may not have to pass those cost savings on to the customers because they don't have a lot of competition, but it's just amazingWhat's possible with those launch costs in that vicinity? Sometimes, when I try to describe it, I'm like, well, imagine all your 1960s space dreams and what was the missing ingredient? The missing ingredient was the economics and those launch costs. Now plug in those launch costs and lots of crazy things that seem science-fictional may become science-factual. Maybe give me just a sense of what's possible.Well first tell me, Jim, which of the '60s space dreams are you most excited about?It's hard for me, it's like which of my seven kids do I love more? I love the idea of people living in space, of there being industry in space. I like the idea of there being space-based solar power, lunar mining, asteroid mining, the whole kit and caboodle.You've gone through the list. I think we're all excited about those things. And just in case it's not obvious to your listeners, the reason I think you asked that question is that, of course, the launch cost is the gateway to doing anything in space. That's why everyone in the industry makes such a big deal out of it. Once you have that, it seems like the possibilities for business cases really do expand.Now, of course, we have to be careful. It's easy to get overhyped. It's still very expensive to do all the things you just mentioned in space, even if you can get there cheaply. Once you put humans in the mix, humans are very hard to keep alive in space. Space is a very dangerous place for lots of reasons. Even when there aren't humans in space, operating in space, even autonomously, is obviously quite hard, whether it's asteroid mining or other things. It's not as though, all of a sudden, all of our biggest dreams are immediately going to be realized. I do think that part of what's so exciting, part of the reason we wrote the book, is that there is a new renaissance of enthusiasm of startups building a bit on the SpaceX model of having a big dream, being really cost-conscious as you build it, moving fast and experimenting and iterating, who are going after some of these dreams you mentioned..So whether it's an asteroid mining company — actually, in my course later this week, we're having Matt Gialich, who's the CEO of AstroForge, and they're trying to reboot the asteroid mining industry. He's coming in to talk to our students. Or whether it's lunar mining, we have Rob Meyerson who ran Blue Origin for more than a decade, now he's started up a company that's going to mine Helium 3 on the moon; or whether you're talking about commercial space stations, which could eventually house tourists, manufacturing, R&D, a whole new push to bring the cost savings from the launch sector into the destinations sector, which we really haven't had.We've had the International Space Station for 20 plus years, but it wasn't really designed for commercial activity from the start and costs are pretty high. So there is this amazing flowering, and we'll see. I guess I would say that, in the short run, if you're trying to build a business in space, it's still mostly about satellites. It's still mostly about data to and from space. But as we look out further, we all hope that those bigger dreams are becoming more of a reality.Expanding space entrepreneurship (14:42)The laws of supply and demand do not depend on gravity.To me, it is such an exciting story and the story of these companies, they're just great stories to me. They're still, I think, pretty unknown. SpaceX, if you read the books that have been published, very harrowing, the whole thing could have collapsed quite easily. Still today, when the media covers — I think they're finally getting better —that anytime there'd be a SpaceX rocket blow up, they're like, “Oh, that's it! Musk doesn't know what he's doing!” But actually, that's the business, is to iterate, launch again, if it blows up, figure out what went wrong, use the data, fix it, try again. It's taken a long time.To the extent people or the media think about it, maybe 90 percent of the thought is about SpaceX, a little bit about Blue Origin, but, as you mentioned, there is this, no pun intended, constellation of other companies which have grown up, which have somewhat been enabled by the launch costs. Which one? Give me one of those that you think people should know about.There's so many actually, very much to your point. We wrote the book partly to give folks inside the industry a view they might not have had, which is, I'm an economist. We thought there was room to just show people how an economist thinks through this amazing change that's happening.Economics is not earthbound! It extends above the surface of the planet!The laws of supply and demand do not depend on gravity. We've learned that. But we also wrote the book for a couple other groups of people. One, people who are kind of on the margins of space, so their business isn't necessarily involved in space, but once they know all the activity that's happening, including the companies you're hinting at there, they might think, “Wait a minute, maybe my business, or I personally, could actually use some of the new capabilities in space to drive my mission forward to have an impact through my organization or myself.” And then of course the broader population of people who are just excited and want to learn more about what's going on and read some great stories.But I'll give you two companies, maybe three because I can't help myself. One is Firefly, which just landed successfully on the moon . . . 24 hours ago maybe? What a great story. It's now the second lander that's successfully landed, this one fully successfully after Intuitive Machines was a little bit tipped over, but that's a great example of how this model that includes more of a role for the commercial sector succeeds not all the time — the first lunar lander in the program that was supporting these didn't quite succeed — but try, try again. That's the beauty of markets, they find a way often and you can't exactly predict how they're going to work out. But that was a huge success story and so I'm very excited about what that means for our activity on the moon.Another really fascinating company is called K2. A lot of your listeners who follow space will have heard of it. It's two brothers who basically realized that, with the drop in launch costs being promised by Starship, the premium on building lightweight small satellites is kind of going away. We can go back to building big satellites again and maybe we don't need to always make the sacrifices that engineers have had to make to bring the mass down. So they're building much bigger satellites and that can potentially really increase the capabilities even still at low cost. So that's really exciting.Finally, I'll just mention Varda, which is a really fun and exciting startup that is doing manufacturing in automated capsules right now of pharmaceutical ingredients. What I love about them, very much to your point about these startups that are just flowering because of lower launch costs, they're not positioning themselves really as a space company. They're positioning themselves as a manufacturing company that happens to use microgravity to do it cheaper. So you don't have to be a space enthusiast to want your supply chain to be cheaper and they're part of that.Do you feel like we have a better idea of why there should be commercial space stations, or again, is that still in the entrepreneurial process of figuring it out? Once they're up there, business cases will emerge?I was just having a conversation about that this morning, actually, with some folks in the sector because there is a wide range of views about that. It is, as you were sort of implying, a bit of a chicken-and-the-egg problem, it's hard to know until you have a space station what you might do with it, what business cases might result. On the other hand, it's hard to invest in a space station if you don't know what the business case is for doing it. So it is a bit tricky.I tend to actually be slightly on the optimistic end of the spectrum, perhaps just because, as an economist, I think you are trained to know that the market can't be predicted and that at some level that is the beauty of the market. If we drive down costs, there's a ton of smart entrepreneurs out there who I think will be looking very hard to find value that they can create for people, and I'm still optimistic we'll be surprised.If I had to make the other side of the case, I would say that we've been dreaming about using microgravity for many decades, the ISS has been trying, and there hasn't been a killer app quite found yet. So it is very true that there are reasons to be skeptical despite my optimism.Space sector sustainability (20:06)Space does face a sort of structural problem with investing. The venture capital industry is not really built for the time horizons and the level of fundamental uncertainty that we're talking about with space.It's also a sector that's gone through a lot of booms and busts. That certainly has been the case with the idea of asteroid mining among other things. What do you see as the sustainability? I sort of remember Musk talking about there was this kind of “open window to space,” and I don't know what he thought opened that window, maybe it was low interest rates? What is the sustainability of the financial case for this entire sector going forward?It is true that the low interest rate environment of the early 2020s was really supportive to space in a way that. Again, opinions vary on whether it was so hot that it ended up actually hurting the sector by creating too much hype, and then some people lost their shirts, and so there was some bad taste in the mouth there. On the other hand, it got a lot of cash to a lot of companies that are trying to make really hard things happen. Space does face a sort of structural problem with investing. The venture capital industry is not really built for the time horizons and the level of fundamental uncertainty that we're talking about with space. We don't really know what the market is yet. We don't really know how long it's going to take to develop. So that's I think why you see some of these more exotic financing models in space, whether it's the billionaires or the so-called SPAC boom of the early 2020s, which was an alternative way for some space companies to go public and raise a big pile of cash. So I think people are trying to solve for how to get over what might be an uncomfortably long time before the kind of sustainable model that you're talking about is realized.Now, skeptics will say, “Well, maybe that's just because there is no sustainable model. We're hoping and hoping, but it's going to take 500 years.” I'm a little more optimistic than that for reasons we've talked about, but I think one part we haven't really mentioned, or at least not gone into that yet, which is reassuring to investors that I talked to and increasingly maybe an important piece of the puzzle, is the demand from the public sector, which remains quite robust, especially from the national security side. A lot of startups these days, even when capital markets are a bit tighter, they can rely on some relatively stable financing from the national security side, and I think that will always be there in space. There will always be a demand for robust, innovative technologies and capabilities in space that will help sustain the sector even through tough times.The role of Artemis (22:45)Artemis is a really good example of the US space enterprise, broadly speaking, trying to find its way into this new era, given all the political and other constraints that are, of course, going to impinge on a giant government program. I can imagine a scenario where most of this book is about NASA, and Artemis, and what comes after Artemis, and you devote one chapter to the weird kind of private-sector startups, but actually it's just the opposite. The story here is about what's going on with the private sector working with NASA and Artemis seems like this weird kind of throwback to old Apollo-style way of doing things. Is Artemis an important technology for the future of space or is it really the last gasp of an old model?It's a very timely question because obviously with all the change going on in Washington and especially with Elon's role —Certainly you always hear rumors that they'll cancel it. I don't know if that's going to happen, but I certainly see speculations pop-up in the Wall Street Journal or the Financial Times from time to time.Exactly, and you probably see debates in Congress where you see some Congress-people resistant to canceling some contracts and debates about the space launch system, the SLS rocket, which I think nobody denies is sort of an older model of how we're going to get to space. On the other hand, it's an incredibly powerful rocket that can actually get us to the moon right now.There's a lot of debate going on right now. The way I think about it is that Artemis is a really good example of the US space enterprise, broadly speaking, trying to find its way into this new era, given all the political and other constraints that are, of course, going to impinge on a giant government program. It's a mix of the old and the new. It's got some pieces like SLS or Gateway, which is a sort of station orbiting the moon to provide a platform for various activities that feel very much like the model from the 1980s: Shuttle and International Space Station.Then it's got pieces that feel very much like the more modern commercial space era with the commercial lunar payload services clips contracts that we were briefly talking about before, and with some of the other pieces that are — whether it's the lander that's also using commercial contracts, whether it's those pieces that are trying to bring in the new. How will it all shake out? My guess is that we are moving, I think inexorably, towards the model that really does tap into the best of the private sector, as well as of the public, and so I think we'll move gradually towards a more commercial approach, even to achieving the sort of public goods missions on the moon — but it'll take a little bit of time because people are naturally risk averse.Challenges to success (25:28)We're going to have some setbacks, some things aren't going to go well with this new model. There's going to be, I'm sure, some calls for pulling back on the commercial side of things, and I think that would be a real lost opportunity. . .How do we not screw this up? How do we not end up undermining this momentum? If you want to tell me what we can do, that's great, but I'm also worried about us making a mistake?There are threats to our ability to do this successfully. I'll just name two which are top of mind. One is space debris. That comes up in virtually every conversation I have. Especially with the increasing number of satellites, increasing number of actors in space, you do have to worry that we might lose control of that environment. Again, I am on the relatively more optimistic end of the spectrum for reasons we explain in the book, and I think the bottom line there is: The stakes are pretty high for everybody who's operating up there to not screw that part up, so I hope we'll get past it, but some people are quite worried.The second, honestly, is national security. Space has always been a beacon, we hope, of transcending our geopolitical rivalries, not just extending them up there. We're in a difficult time, so I think there is some risk that space will not remain as peaceful as it has — and that could very much short-circuit the kind of growth that we're talking about. Sadly, that would be very ironic because the economic opportunities that we have up there to create benefit for everybody on Earth and are part of what hopefully would bring people together across borders up in space. It's one of those places where we can cooperate for the common good.How could we screw this up? I think it's not always going to be smooth sailing. We're going to have some setbacks, some things aren't going to go well with this new model. There's going to be, I'm sure, some calls for pulling back on the commercial side of things, and I think that would be a real lost opportunity. I hope that we can push our way through, even though it might be a little less clearly charted.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedMicro Reads▶ Economics* The Case Against Tariffs Is Getting Stronger - Bberg Opinion* NYC's Congestion Pricing Is Good for the US - Bberg Opinion* Musk and DOGE Are Doing It Wrong - Project Syndicate▶ Business* With GPT-4.5, OpenAI Trips Over Its Own AGI Ambitions - Wired* Google is adding more AI Overviews and a new ‘AI Mode' to Search - Verge* Home Depot Turns to AI to Answer Online Shoppers' Questions - Bberg▶ Policy/Politics* Trump Set to Meet With Technology Leaders Early Next Week - Bberg* EU Lawmakers Push Back on U.S. Criticism of Tech Antitrust Regulation - WSJ* China aims to recruit top US scientists as Trump tries to kill the CHIPS Act - Ars* Rebuilding the Transatlantic Tech Alliance: Why Innovation, Not Regulation, Should Guide the Way - AEI* A New Way of Thinking About the N.I.H. - NYT Opinion▶ AI/Digital* You knew it was coming: Google begins testing AI-only search results - Ars* Are Large Language Models Ready for Business Integration? A Study on Generative AI Adoption - Arxiv* Turing Award Goes to 2 Pioneers of Artificial Intelligence - NYT* ChatGPT for President! Presupposed content in politicians versus GPT-generated texts - Arxiv* Chat-GPT4 Does Enhance Creativity. But Human Ego Can Hamper its Potential - SSRN▶ Biotech/Health* Alzheimer's could be treated by enhancing the brain's own immune cells - NA* Will NIH Cuts Boost Public Health—or Destroy It? - Free Press▶ Up Wing/Down Wing* Many Chinese See a Cultural Revolution in America - NYT▶ Substacks/Newsletters* On the US AI Safety Institute - Hyperdimensional* What is Vibe Coding? - AI Supremacy* In defense of Gemini - Strange Loop Canon* Economic Uncertainty in the US Economy - Conversable EconomistFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

This episode on the pellagra epidemic focuses on its prevalence in the U.S. in the early 20th century. Some of the scientific work done to understand it involves self-experimentation, and some of it is ethically problematic by today’s standards. Research: Akst, Daniel. “Pellagra: The Forgotten Plague.” American Heritage. December 2000. https://www.americanheritage.com/pellagra-forgotten-plague Baird Rattini, Kristin. “A Deadly Diet.” Discover. Mar2018, Vol. 39 Issue 2, p70-72. Bridges, Kenneth. “Pellagra.” Encyclopedia of Arkansas. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/pellagra-2230/ Clay, Karen et al. “The Rise and Fall of Pellagra in the American South.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 23730. 2018. http://www.nber.org/papers/w23730 Cleveland Clinic. “Pellagra.” 07/18/2022. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/23905-pellagra Crabb, Mary Katherine. “An Epidemic of Pride: Pellagra and the Culture of the American South.” Anthropologica , 1992, Vol. 34, No. 1 (1992), pp. 89-103. Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25605634 Flannery, Michael A. “’Frauds,’ ‘Filth Parties,’ ‘Yeast Fads,’ and ‘Black Boxes’: Pellagra and Southern Pride, 1906-2003.” The Southern Quarterly. Vol. 53, no.3/4 (Spring/Summer 2016). Gentilcore, David and Egidio Priani. “Pellagra and Pellagrous Insanity During the Long Nineteenth Century.” Mental Health in Historical Perspective. Palgrave Macmillan. 2023. Ginnaio, Monica. “Pellagra in Late Nineteenth Century Italy: Effects of a Deficiency Disease.” Population-E, 66 (3-4), 2011, 583-610. Hung, Putzer J. “Pellagra: A medical whodunit.” Hektoen International: A Journal of Medical Humanities. https://hekint.org/2018/09/18/pellagra-a-medical-whodunit/ Jaworek, Andrzej K. et al. “The history of pellagra.” Dermatol Rev/Przegl Dermatol 2021, 108, 554–566 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/dr.2021.114610 Kean, Sam. “Joseph Goldberger’s Filth Parties.” Science History Institute Museum and Library. https://www.sciencehistory.org/stories/magazine/joseph-goldbergers-filth-parties/ Kiple, Kenneth F. and Virginia H. “Black Tongue and Black Men: Pellagra and Slavery in the Antebellum South.” The Journal of Southern History , Aug., 1977, Vol. 43, No. 3. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2207649 Kraut, Alan. “Dr. Joseph Goldberger & the War on Pellagra.” National Institutes of Health Office of NIH History and Stetten Museum. https://history.nih.gov/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=8883184 Marks, Harry M. “Epidemiologists Explain Pellagra: Gender, Race and Political Economy in the Work of Edgar Sydenstricker.” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences , JANUARY 2003. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24623836 Morabia, Alfredo. “Joseph Goldberger’s research on the prevention of pellagra.” J R Soc Med 2008: 101: 566–568. DOI 10.1258/jrsm.2008.08k010. Park, Youngmee K. et al. “Effectiveness of Food Fortification in the United States: The Case of Pellagra.” American Journal of Public Health. May 2U(H). Vol. 90. No. 5. Peres, Tanya M. “Malnourished.” Gravy. Southern Foodways Alliance. Fall 2016. https://www.southernfoodways.org/malnourished-cultural-ignorance-paved-the-way-for-pellagra/ Pinheiro, Hugo et al. “Hidden Hunger: A Pellagra Case Report.” Cureus vol. 13,4 e14682. 25 Apr. 2021, doi:10.7759/cureus.14682 A. C. Wollenberg. “Pellagra in Italy.” Public Health Reports (1896-1970), vol. 24, no. 30, 1909, pp. 1051–54. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/4563397. Accessed 13 Feb. 2025. Rajakumar, Kumaravel. “Pellagra in the United States: A Historical Perspective.” SOUTHERN MEDICAL JOURNAL • Vol. 93, No. 3. March 2020. Savvidou, Savvoula. “Pellagra: a non-eradicated old disease.” Clinics and practice vol. 4,1 637. 28 Apr. 2014, doi:10.4081/cp.2014.637 SEARCY GH. AN EPIDEMIC OF ACUTE PELLAGRA. JAMA. 1907;XLIX(1):37–38. doi:10.1001/jama.1907.25320010037002j Skelton, John. “Poverty or Privies? The Pellagra Controversy in America.” Fairmount Folio: Journal of History. Vol. 15 (2014). https://journals.wichita.edu/index.php/ff/article/view/151 Tharian, Bindu. "Pellagra." New Georgia Encyclopedia, 20 September 2004, https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/science-medicine/pellagra/. University Libraries, University of South Carolina. “A Gospel of Health: Hilla Sheriff's Crusade Against Malnutrition in South Carolina.” https://digital.library.sc.edu/exhibits/hillasheriff/history-of-pellagra/ University of Alabama at Birmingham. “Pellagra in Alabama.” https://library.uab.edu/locations/reynolds/collections/regional-history/pellagra Wheeler, G.A. “A Note on the History of Pellagra in the United States.” Public Health Reports (1896-1970) , Sep. 18, 1931, Vol. 46, No. 38. Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4580180 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A small group of elite universities holds an outsized influence over the field of economics, shaping research, policy, and the broader economic narrative. But is that concentration of power stifling innovation and reinforcing the status quo? This week, Harvard economist David Deming joins Nick and Goldy to discuss his recent Atlantic article, in which he argues that Big Econ functions like a monopoly—limiting competition, excluding diverse perspectives, and making it harder for new ideas to take hold.  David Deming is the Isabelle and Scott Black Professor of Political Economy at the Harvard Kennedy School. Deming is also a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research and Associate Editor of the Journal of Economic Perspectives. Social Media: @ProfDavidDeming Further reading: Break Up Big Econ DOGE Is Failing on Its Own Terms David Deming's Substack Forked Lightning The Trouble With Macroeconomics Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Threads: pitchforkeconomics Bluesky: @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social Twitter: @PitchforkEcon, @NickHanauer, @civicaction YouTube: @pitchforkeconomics LinkedIn: Pitchfork Economics Substack: The Pitch

Ilya Strebulaev has devoted two decades to studying how venture capitalists approach decision-making, and the reasons behind the successes and failures of corporate innovations. He joins Google to discuss his book, “The Venture Mindset,” a playbook on how to adapt to a rapidly changing world, make smarter bets, launch new ventures, and transform traditional organizations into hubs for innovation. Ilya is an international expert in venture capital, private equity, and financing innovation. Among his many achievements, he's been a professor at Stanford University's Graduate School of Business since 2004. He is also a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research and the founder and faculty director of the Stanford GSB Venture Capital Initiative. Watch this episode at youtube.com/TalksAtGoogle.

The pellagra epidemic of the early 20th century may have been the deadliest epidemic of a specific nutrient deficiency in U.S. history. Part one covers what it is, its appearance in 19th-century Italy, and the first reports of it in the U.S. Research: Akst, Daniel. “Pellagra: The Forgotten Plague.” American Heritage. December 2000. https://www.americanheritage.com/pellagra-forgotten-plague Baird Rattini, Kristin. “A Deadly Diet.” Discover. Mar2018, Vol. 39 Issue 2, p70-72. Bridges, Kenneth. “Pellagra.” Encyclopedia of Arkansas. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/pellagra-2230/ Clay, Karen et al. “The Rise and Fall of Pellagra in the American South.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 23730. 2018. http://www.nber.org/papers/w23730 Cleveland Clinic. “Pellagra.” 07/18/2022. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/23905-pellagra Crabb, Mary Katherine. “An Epidemic of Pride: Pellagra and the Culture of the American South.” Anthropologica , 1992, Vol. 34, No. 1 (1992), pp. 89-103. Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25605634 Flannery, Michael A. “’Frauds,’ ‘Filth Parties,’ ‘Yeast Fads,’ and ‘Black Boxes’: Pellagra and Southern Pride, 1906-2003.” The Southern Quarterly. Vol. 53, no.3/4 (Spring/Summer 2016). Gentilcore, David and Egidio Priani. “Pellagra and Pellagrous Insanity During the Long Nineteenth Century.” Mental Health in Historical Perspective. Palgrave Macmillan. 2023. Ginnaio, Monica. “Pellagra in Late Nineteenth Century Italy: Effects of a Deficiency Disease.” Population-E, 66 (3-4), 2011, 583-610. Hung, Putzer J. “Pellagra: A medical whodunit.” Hektoen International: A Journal of Medical Humanities. https://hekint.org/2018/09/18/pellagra-a-medical-whodunit/ Jaworek, Andrzej K. et al. “The history of pellagra.” Dermatol Rev/Przegl Dermatol 2021, 108, 554–566 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/dr.2021.114610 Kean, Sam. “Joseph Goldberger’s Filth Parties.” Science History Institute Museum and Library. https://www.sciencehistory.org/stories/magazine/joseph-goldbergers-filth-parties/ Kiple, Kenneth F. and Virginia H. “Black Tongue and Black Men: Pellagra and Slavery in the Antebellum South.” The Journal of Southern History , Aug., 1977, Vol. 43, No. 3. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2207649 Kraut, Alan. “Dr. Joseph Goldberger & the War on Pellagra.” National Institutes of Health Office of NIH History and Stetten Museum. https://history.nih.gov/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=8883184 Marks, Harry M. “Epidemiologists Explain Pellagra: Gender, Race and Political Economy in the Work of Edgar Sydenstricker.” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences , JANUARY 2003. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24623836 Morabia, Alfredo. “Joseph Goldberger’s research on the prevention of pellagra.” J R Soc Med 2008: 101: 566–568. DOI 10.1258/jrsm.2008.08k010. Park, Youngmee K. et al. “Effectiveness of Food Fortification in the United States: The Case of Pellagra.” American Journal of Public Health. May 2U(H). Vol. 90. No. 5. Peres, Tanya M. “Malnourished.” Gravy. Southern Foodways Alliance. Fall 2016. https://www.southernfoodways.org/malnourished-cultural-ignorance-paved-the-way-for-pellagra/ Pinheiro, Hugo et al. “Hidden Hunger: A Pellagra Case Report.” Cureus vol. 13,4 e14682. 25 Apr. 2021, doi:10.7759/cureus.14682 A. C. Wollenberg. “Pellagra in Italy.” Public Health Reports (1896-1970), vol. 24, no. 30, 1909, pp. 1051–54. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/4563397. Accessed 13 Feb. 2025. Rajakumar, Kumaravel. “Pellagra in the United States: A Historical Perspective.” SOUTHERN MEDICAL JOURNAL • Vol. 93, No. 3. March 2020. Savvidou, Savvoula. “Pellagra: a non-eradicated old disease.” Clinics and practice vol. 4,1 637. 28 Apr. 2014, doi:10.4081/cp.2014.637 SEARCY GH. AN EPIDEMIC OF ACUTE PELLAGRA. JAMA. 1907;XLIX(1):37–38. doi:10.1001/jama.1907.25320010037002j Skelton, John. “Poverty or Privies? The Pellagra Controversy in America.” Fairmount Folio: Journal of History. Vol. 15 (2014). https://journals.wichita.edu/index.php/ff/article/view/151 Tharian, Bindu. "Pellagra." New Georgia Encyclopedia, 20 September 2004, https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/science-medicine/pellagra/. University Libraries, University of South Carolina. “A Gospel of Health: Hilla Sheriff's Crusade Against Malnutrition in South Carolina.” https://digital.library.sc.edu/exhibits/hillasheriff/history-of-pellagra/ University of Alabama at Birmingham. “Pellagra in Alabama.” https://library.uab.edu/locations/reynolds/collections/regional-history/pellagra Wheeler, G.A. “A Note on the History of Pellagra in the United States.” Public Health Reports (1896-1970) , Sep. 18, 1931, Vol. 46, No. 38. Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4580180 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Matthew Weinzierl and Brendan Rosseau are the authors of Space to Grow: Unlocking the Final Economic Frontier.  The new book explains the business side of space. I interview both authors.  Here's my interview with Matthew Weinzierl. Watch the Video Timeline 00:00 Intro 02:00 Low-hanging fruit 07:00 Surprises 09:30 Space is vast and crowded 11:30 Kessler Syndrome 16:30 What won't happen in space? 21:45 Moon and Mars predictions 25:21 Advice for Entrepreneurs 28:00 New news 30:00 Co-authoring advice          About Matt Weinzierl Matt Weinzierl is Senior Associate Dean and Chair of the MBA Program at Harvard Business School, where he is the Joseph and Jacqueline Elbling Professor of Business Administration in the Business, Government, and the International Economy Unit and a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. His research focuses on the optimal design of economic policy, particularly taxation, emphasizing a better understanding of the philosophical principles underlying policy choices. Recently, he has launched a set of research projects focused on commercializing the space sector and its economic implications, viewable at www.economicsofspace.com. He has served on the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Tax Expenditure Commission, the board of the National Tax Association, and on the editorial boards of Social Choice and Welfare and National Tax Journal. Before completing his PhD in economics at Harvard University in 2008, Professor Weinzierl served as the Staff Economist for Macroeconomics on the President's Council of Economic Advisers and worked in the New York office of McKinsey & Company.  My Questions In these podcasts, I ask them the following questions: 1. If you were an entrepreneur, what space-related startup idea would you pursue? 2. What are some of the most surprising findings from your research? 3. How do you envision the future of human habitation in space? 4. In what ways can space exploration contribute to solving Earth's economic challenges? 5. What ethical considerations arise from expanding economic activities into space? For example, can we colonize Mars or Europa if we find non-DNA-based bacteria there? 6. What were the challenges you faced during your research? 7. How do you foresee international relations evolving as nations compete for resources in space? 8. What are your predictions for the next decade in space exploration? 9. What are your thoughts on space tourism? 10. Who is the primary audience for this book? 11. What do you hope readers take away from "Space to Grow"? 12. What's a popular vision of space exploration that probably won't happen? 13. What narratives or myths about space need to be challenged? 14. What's the percentage chance that the Kessler Syndrome catastrophe will occur in the 2020s, 2030, and beyond? 15. How can public awareness be raised regarding the importance of investing in space? 16. What advice would you give entrepreneurs looking to enter the space industry? 17. In what ways might our values shift as we become a multi-planetary species? 18. What is a rarely discussed consequence of expanding into outer space? 19. If there was one message you want readers to remember, what would it be? 20. Do you want to clarify any misconceptions about the space economy? 21. What do you wish you had mentioned in the book? Perhaps some breaking news? 22. Lastly, how can interested individuals get involved or contribute to discussions around space economics?  23. What tips do you have for co-writing a book? 24. Did you change your mind about something during your writing process? 25. Do you have action items for the audience? More info You can post comments, ask questions, and sign up for my newsletter at http://wanderlearn.com. If you like this podcast, subscribe and share!  On social media, my username is always FTapon. Connect with me on: Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram TikTok LinkedIn Pinterest Tumblr My Patrons sponsored this show! Claim your monthly reward by becoming a patron at http://Patreon.com/FTapon Rewards start at just $2/month! Affiliate links Get 25% off when you sign up to Trusted Housesitters, a site that helps you find sitters or homes to sit in. Start your podcast with my company, Podbean, and get one month free! In the USA, I recommend trading crypto with Kraken.  Outside the USA, trade crypto with Binance and get 5% off your trading fees! For backpacking gear, buy from Gossamer Gear.

Jon Hartley and Neale Mahoney (Stanford Economics Professor) discuss Neale's career, Neale's research on consumer sentiment, junk fees, and medical debt, as well as Neale's time in the Biden Administration National Economic Council and the future of economic policy. Recorded on January 8, 2025.  ABOUT THE SPEAKERS: Neale Mahoney is the Trione Director of Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR), a Professor of Economics at Stanford University, the George P. Shultz Fellow at SIEPR, a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, and an Affiliated Professor at J-PAL. In 2022-2023, he was a Special Policy Advisor for Economic Policy in the White House National Economic Council. Mahoney is an applied micro-economist with an interest in healthcare and consumer financial markets. He is a member of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Academic Research Council. He received the ASHEcon Medal in 2021 (given to an economist age 40 or under who has made the most significant contributions to the field of health economics) and a Sloan Research Fellowship in 2016.  Before joining Stanford, Mahoney was a professor of Economics and David G. Booth Faculty Fellow at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. He was also a Robert Wood Johnson Fellow in health policy research at Harvard University and worked for the Obama Administration on healthcare reform. Mahoney received a PhD and MA in economics from Stanford University and an ScB in applied mathematics-economics from Brown University. Follow Neale Mahoney on X: @nealemahoney Jon Hartley is a policy fellow, the host of the Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century Podcast at the Hoover Institution and an economics PhD Candidate at Stanford University, where he specializes in finance, labor economics, and macroeconomics. He is also currently an Affiliated Scholar at the Mercatus Center, a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity (FREOPP), and a Senior Fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. Jon is also a member of the Canadian Group of Economists, and serves as chair of the Economic Club of Miami. Jon has previously worked at Goldman Sachs Asset Management as well as in various policy roles at the World Bank, IMF, Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, US Congress Joint Economic Committee, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and the Bank of Canada.  Jon has also been a regular economics contributor for National Review Online, Forbes, and The Huffington Post and has contributed to The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, USA Today, Globe and Mail, National Post, and Toronto Star among other outlets. Jon has also appeared on CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, Bloomberg, and NBC, and was named to the 2017 Forbes 30 Under 30 Law & Policy list, the 2017 Wharton 40 Under 40 list, and was previously a World Economic Forum Global Shaper. ABOUT THE SERIES: Each episode of Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century, a video podcast series and the official podcast of the Hoover Economic Policy Working Group, focuses on getting into the weeds of economics, finance, and public policy on important current topics through one-on-one interviews. Host Jon Hartley asks guests about their main ideas and contributions to academic research and policy. The podcast is titled after Milton Friedman‘s famous 1962 bestselling book Capitalism and Freedom, which after 60 years, remains prescient from its focus on various topics which are now at the forefront of economic debates, such as monetary policy and inflation, fiscal policy, occupational licensing, education vouchers, income share agreements, the distribution of income, and negative income taxes, among many other topics. For more information, visit: capitalismandfreedom.substack.com/

Rebecca Henderson is a professor at Harvard Business School and is 1 of only 25 professors at Harvard given the distinction of University Professor, which is the highest honor a professor can receive at Harvard. She is the author of the book Reimagining Capitalism which explores how the private sector can help build a more sustainable economy. Rebecca is also a research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a fellow of both the British Academy and of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. She also sits on the boards of several companies, including AMGEN. Rebecca earned a degree in mechanical engineering from MIT and a PhD in business economics from Harvard. In this episode we discuss the following: I love the story Rebecca shared about the book contract she had lined up. She was going to write a book about how we are prone to take on too much stuff, and then she had to cancel the contract because she had taken on too much stuff. Finding the right balance between staying focused and embracing change is a never-ending struggle. Rebecca worked with Nokia, Kodak, and Motorola. All of them were at the cutting edge of technology and poised to dominate the cell phone and camera market. But none could adapt quickly enough to the changing technology. I thought it was fascinating to hear how some firms got superior results to other firms, even though they had the same inputs. The economists hated the finding because the research showed that leadership and management practices could make such a difference. The best firms took care of their people. Here are two of Rebecca's papers: Innovation in the 21st Century: Architectural Change, Purpose, and the Challenges of Our Time Moral Firms? And here is a link to her book website for Reimagining Capitalism.  Connect on Social Media: X: https://twitter.com/nate_meikle LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/natemeikle/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nate_meikle/ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@nate.meikle

The United States is an outlier in health insurance coverage. Almost all other high-income countries have near-universal coverage, while almost 10% of the non-elderly US population is uninsured. How did this come to be? And what can policymakers do to improve access to health insurance? Mark Shepard joins EconoFact Chats to discuss these questions. Mark is an associate professor at Harvard Kennedy School of Government, and a faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Join the Nudge Unit: https://maven.com/nudge-unit/course-cohort Why does a $5 Uber voucher turn angry customers into loyal fans? In this episode, Eva van den Broek and Tim den Heijer share actionable insights from their book The Housefly Effect, revealing seven marketing psychology tips you can use to grow your business.  You'll learn: How scarcity drives demand, from pineapple rentals to volume-limited products. Why a $5 apology voucher boosted Uber's revenue (feat. reciprocity principle). How Tropicana's rebrand taught marketers a costly lesson about habits. Why "95% fat-free" yoghurt sells better than "5% fat" (feat. framing effect). The clever way airlines manage flight-time expectations to keep customers happy. ---- Get the book: https://bedfordsquarepublishers.co.uk/book/the-housefly-effect Sign up to my newsletter: https://www.nudgepodcast.com/mailing-list Connect on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/phill-agnew-22213187/ Watch Nudge on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@nudgepodcast/ ---- Sources: van den Broek, E., & den Heijer, T. (2024). The Housefly Effect. Bedford Square Publishers. Bundesliga study | Brandes, L., & Franck, E. (2012). Social preferences or personal career concerns? Field evidence on positive and negative reciprocity in the workplace. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(5), 925–939 McFlurry sales boosted by 55% | Walsh, N. (2024). Tune in: How to make smarter decisions in a noisy world. Bedford Square Publishers. Uber $5 apology | Halperin, B., Ho, B., List, J. A., & Muir, I. (2019). Toward an understanding of the economics of apologies: Evidence from a large-scale natural field experiment (No. w25676). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w25676 Berger, J. (2013). Contagious: Why things catch on. Simon & Schuster. Gu, Y., Botti, S., & Faro, D. (2013). Turning the page: The impact of choice closure on satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(2), 268–283.  Martin, S. J. (2024). Influence at work: Capture attention, connect with others, convince people to act. [Paperback]. Economist Edge. Yuan, Y., Liu, T. X., Tan, C., Chen, Q., Pentland, A., & Tang, J. (2020). Gift contagion in online groups: Evidence from WeChat red packets.

Join Abhishek Nagaraj and Arindam Goswami in this episode of All Things Policy, where we discuss innovation policy, private sector R&D and AI. In today's world of techno-nationalism, where technological supremacy is considered to be an indicator of a country's prowess, and in the ever-evolving landscape of technological advancement, innovation and private sector research and development have become the backbone of economic growth. And recent developments in AI have dramatically accelerated this innovation cycle. Join us as we discuss all this and much more in this fascinating podcast episode.Abhishek Nagaraj is an Associate Professor in the Management and Organizations (MORS) and the Entrepreneurship and Innovation group at Berkeley Haas. He is also a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). His research is in the area of innovation management and entrepreneurship. His research studies the power and limits of data-driven decision-making and AI on innovation and creativity in a variety of different contexts. The PGP is a comprehensive 48-week hybrid programme tailored for those aiming to delve deep into the theoretical and practical aspects of public policy. This multidisciplinary course offers a broad and in-depth range of modules, ensuring students get a well-rounded learning experience. The curriculum is delivered online, punctuated with in-person workshops across India.⁠⁠⁠⁠https://school.takshashila.org.in/pgp⁠⁠⁠⁠All Things Policy is a daily podcast on public policy brought to you by the Takshashila Institution, Bengaluru.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Find out more on our research and other work here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://takshashila.org.in/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠...⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Check out our public policy courses here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://school.takshashila.org.in⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

China's entry into the World Trade Organization, normalizing trade relations with the PRC, was billed to the American public as a rising tide that lifts all boats. But decades later, many of the manufacturing workers who lost their jobs to cheaper Chinese goods have not recovered. And while the first “China shock” left millions of textile and low-skill manufacturing workers without a job, Chinese trade practices are now targeting sectors crucial to American prosperity and national security. How can the U.S. protect vital industries from unfair trade practices? And why is it so difficult to help those who lose their job to trade find new work? David Autor is the Daniel and Gail Rubinfeld Professor in the MIT Department of Economics and co-director of the National Bureau of Economic Research Labor Studies Program and the MIT Shaping the Future of Work Initiative. Autor is also an elected Fellow of the Econometrics Society, the Society of Labor Economists, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a Faculty Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research and the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab. In 2019, the Economist labeled Autor “The academic voice of the American worker.”Read the transcript here. Subscribe to our Substack here.

Jon Hartley and Federal Reserve Governor Adriana Kugler discuss the stance of monetary policy, the Federal Reserve balance sheet, the natural rate of interest (r-star), inflation, labor markets, productivity, entrepreneurship, the US economy, and the recent growth in Miami. Recorded on February 7, 2025. ABOUT THE SPEAKERS: Dr. Adriana D. Kugler took office as a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System on September 13, 2023, to fill an unexpired term ending January 31, 2026. Prior to her appointment on the Board, Dr. Kugler served as the U.S. Executive Director at the World Bank Group. She is on leave from Georgetown University where she is a professor of Public Policy and Economics and was vice provost for faculty. Previously, she served as chief economist at the U.S. Department of Labor from 2011 to 2013. Dr. Kugler was also a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research and of the Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality at Stanford University. Dr. Kugler's other professional appointments include being the elected chair of the Business and Economics Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association. She was also a member of the Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy of the National Academies of Sciences and served on the Technical Advisory Committee of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Dr. Kugler received a BA in economics and political science from McGill University and a PhD in economics from the University of California, Berkeley. Jon Hartley is the host of the Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century Podcast at the Hoover Institution and an economics PhD Candidate at Stanford University, where he specializes in finance, labor economics, and macroeconomics. He is also currently an Affiliated Scholar at the Mercatus Center, a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity (FREOPP), and a Senior Fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. Jon is also a member of the Canadian Group of Economists, and serves as chair of the Economic Club of Miami. Jon has previously worked at Goldman Sachs Asset Management as well as in various policy roles at the World Bank, IMF, Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, US Congress Joint Economic Committee, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and the Bank of Canada.  Jon has also been a regular economics contributor for National Review Online, Forbes, and The Huffington Post and has contributed to The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, USA Today, Globe and Mail, National Post, and Toronto Star among other outlets. Jon has also appeared on CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, Bloomberg, and NBC, and was named to the 2017 Forbes 30 Under 30 Law & Policy list, the 2017 Wharton 40 Under 40 list, and was previously a World Economic Forum Global Shaper. ABOUT THE SERIES: Each episode of Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century, a video podcast series and the official podcast of the Hoover Economic Policy Working Group, focuses on getting into the weeds of economics, finance, and public policy on important current topics through one-on-one interviews. Host Jon Hartley asks guests about their main ideas and contributions to academic research and policy. The podcast is titled after Milton Friedman‘s famous 1962 bestselling book Capitalism and Freedom, which after 60 years, remains prescient from its focus on various topics which are now at the forefront of economic debates, such as monetary policy and inflation, fiscal policy, occupational licensing, education vouchers, income share agreements, the distribution of income, and negative income taxes, among many other topics. For more information, visit: capitalismandfreedom.substack.com/

Tariffs—what are they, and why do they matter to you? In this episode, we break down the basics of tariffs, explaining why governments use them and how they impact everything from the price of everyday goods to job opportunities. If you're wondering whether certain products will get more expensive or how global trade policies affect your financial future, we've got you covered. We'll also dive into real-world examples, exploring how tariffs on industries like steel and electronics have shaped markets and consumer prices. Plus, we'll discuss what these policies mean specifically for Millennials and Gen Z, from the impact on jobs to the cost of living. If you've ever wanted to make sense of the headlines and understand how trade decisions impact your daily life, this episode is for you! Don't forget to subscribe or share this episode with a friend. Have questions, thoughts, or ideas for future episodes? We'd love to hear from you--reach out on social media or send us an email to askcreatingwealth@taberasset.com. Resources: Connect with us on LinkedIn: Bill Taber and Anastasia Taber AP: What are tariffs and how do they work? National Bureau of Economic Research paper NBC: Tariffs contribute to job losses in American manufacturing, Fed report shows Yahoo Finance: Tariffs could raise car prices quickly What is the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act?

During this episode of The Evolving Leader podcast, co-hosts Jean Gomes and Scott Allender are in conversation with Anant Nyshadham who's work includes studying the effectiveness of firms in developing countries with the intention of accelerating economic development. Anant is an associate Professor in the Business Economics and Public Policy area of the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan and a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. He is also an affiliate of BREAD, which is a nonprofit dedicated to research and scholarship in development economics. And he is a research affiliate of the IGC, a J-PAL affiliated professor and an affiliate of the Montreal Partnership for Human Resource Management. Anant is also co-founder and chief strategy officer of the Good Business Lab, a nonprofit seeking to promote investment in worker welfare as a business imperative. His work focuses on enterprise, firm and worker characteristics and decision-making like labour contracting and worker training and managerial quality and the resulting performance dynamics, particularly in developing countries.  Other reading from Jean Gomes and Scott Allender: Leading In A Non-Linear World (J Gomes, 2023) The Enneagram of Emotional Intelligence (S Allender, 2023) Social:Instagram           @evolvingleaderLinkedIn             The Evolving Leader PodcastBluesky           @evolvingleader.bsky.socialYouTube           @evolvingleaderThe Evolving Leader is researched, written and presented by Jean Gomes and Scott Allender with production by Phil Kerby. It is an Outside production.Send a message to The Evolving Leader team

The warning lights are blinking for the world's food supply. At least that's what 150 Nobel Prize and World Food Prize laureates said in a recently-published open letter calling for a “moonshot” urgency effort to start the immediate ramping up of food production to meet the global demands of 9.7 billion people by 2050. Harvard Kennedy School economist Wolfram Schlenker, the new Ray A. Goldberg Professor of the Global Food System says doing that will require urgent policy changes and, in some cases, policy reversals to meet those goals against the headwinds of climate change. Even as crop yields are under stress due to rising temperatures and extreme weather events, Schlenker says spending on research and development of new, climate-resistant crops and other food technologies has declined. Countries are also starting to put up more protectionist barriers around their domestic agricultural sectors, undermining the global free trade in staple food commodities that is essential to preventing severe agricultural shocks that can result in civil upheaval, mass migration, and global instability. Schlenker is the co-author of a groundbreaking study in 2009 which found that crop yields fall precipitously after reaching a certain heat threshold. The study's conclusions were validated just three years later when a heat wave over the U.S. corn belt saw yields drop by 25 percent. With 700 million people globally already classified as undernourished and the world having at least temporarily breached the crucial 1.5 degrees Celsius warming standard in 2024, it may be the most important problem nobody's talking about. Schlenker joins PolicyCast host Ralph Ranalli to talk about the ticking global food crisis clock and policy changes that could make a difference.Wolfram Schlenker's Policy Recommendations:Limit beggar-thy-neighbor agricultural policies where countries impose export restrictions when food prices rise. Specifically, implement the Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture passed at COP-28 by ensuring that the World Trade Organization has an enforcement mechanism that limits trade restrictions in agricultural markets following climatic events.Reverse the current decline in public R&D funding for agricultural technologies. Private companies, which currently conduct most of the R&D, do not have the correct incentives to innovate when there are positive spillovers on others.Ensure that the Social Cost of Carbon — the cost of emitting an extra ton of CO2 — reflects its impact on all countries and not just the U.S., as climate change is a global problem.Episode Notes:Wolfram Schlenker is the Ray A. Goldberg Professor of the Global Food System at Harvard Kennedy School. An economist and engineer by training, he studies the intersection of climate, agriculture, and the global economy. His research interests include:The effect of weather and climate on agricultural yields and migration,How climate trends and the U.S. biofuel mandate influences agricultural commodity pricesHow pollution impacts both agricultural yields and human morbidity. He is a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. He currently serves on the Board of Reviewing Editors at Science.Schlenker holds a PhD in agricultural and resource economics from the University of California, Berkeley, a master's in engineering and management Sciences from the University of Karlsruhe, Germany, and a master's in environmental management from Duke University (1998).Ralph Ranalli of the HKS Office of Communications and Public Affairs is the host, producer, and editor of HKS PolicyCast. A former journalist, public television producer, and entrepreneur, he holds an BA in political science from UCLA and a master's in journalism from Columbia University.Scheduling and logistical support for PolicyCast is provided by Lilian Wainaina. Design and graphics support is provided by Laura King and the OCPA Design Team. Web design and social media promotion support is provided by Catherine Santrock and Natalie Montaner of the OCPA Digital Team. Editorial support is provided by Nora Delaney and Robert O'Neill of the OCPA Editorial Team.

Jon Hartley and Douglas Irwin discuss Doug's career, the history of US trade policy, tariffs, globalization, the consumer and labor market effects of trade, the World Trade Organization, and industrial policy. Recorded on January 9, 2025. ABOUT THE SPEAKERS: Douglas Irwin is John French Professor of Economics at Dartmouth College. He is the author of Clashing over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy (University of Chicago Press, 2017), which The Economist and Foreign Affairs selected as one of their Best Books of the Year. He is president-elect of the Economic History Association (2022-23). He is the author of Free Trade Under Fire (Princeton University Press, fifth edition 2020), Trade Policy Disaster: Lessons from the 1930s (MIT Press, 2012), Peddling Protectionism: Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression (Princeton University Press, 2011), The Genesis of the GATT (Cambridge University Press, 2008, co-authored with Petros Mavroidis and Alan Sykes), Against the Tide:  An Intellectual History of Free Trade (Princeton University Press, 1996), and many articles on trade policy and economic history in books and professional journals. He is a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research and a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. He worked on trade policy issues while on the staff of President Ronald Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers and later worked in the International Finance Division at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C. Before joining Dartmouth, Irwin taught at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business. Follow Douglas Irwin on X: @D_A_Irwin Jon Hartley is the host of the Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century Podcast at the Hoover Institution and an economics PhD Candidate at Stanford University, where he specializes in finance, labor economics, and macroeconomics. He is also currently an Affiliated Scholar at the Mercatus Center, a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity (FREOPP), and a Senior Fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. Jon is also a member of the Canadian Group of Economists, and serves as chair of the Economic Club of Miami. Jon has previously worked at Goldman Sachs Asset Management as well as in various policy roles at the World Bank, IMF, Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, US Congress Joint Economic Committee, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, and the Bank of Canada.  Jon has also been a regular economics contributor for National Review Online, Forbes, and The Huffington Post and has contributed to The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, USA Today, Globe and Mail, National Post, and Toronto Star among other outlets. Jon has also appeared on CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, Bloomberg, and NBC, and was named to the 2017 Forbes 30 Under 30 Law & Policy list, the 2017 Wharton 40 Under 40 list, and was previously a World Economic Forum Global Shaper. ABOUT THE SERIES: Each episode of Capitalism and Freedom in the 21st Century, a video podcast series and the official podcast of the Hoover Economic Policy Working Group, focuses on getting into the weeds of economics, finance, and public policy on important current topics through one-on-one interviews. Host Jon Hartley asks guests about their main ideas and contributions to academic research and policy. The podcast is titled after Milton Friedman‘s famous 1962 bestselling book Capitalism and Freedom, which after 60 years, remains prescient from its focus on various topics which are now at the forefront of economic debates, such as monetary policy and inflation, fiscal policy, occupational licensing, education vouchers, income share agreements, the distribution of income, and negative income taxes, among many other topics. For more information, visit: capitalismandfreedom.substack.com/

My guest on Episode 78 is Carola Binder, an associate professor of economics at the University of Texas at Austin and a fellow at the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy. She is also a research associate of the National Bureau of Economics Research in the Monetary Economics group. Carola holds a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley.    Carola's work focuses on inflation, inflation expectations, monetary policy, and economic history. She is the author of Shock Values: Prices and Inflation in American Democracy, a book on the history of inflation and price stabilization in the United States. She has also published research in several economic journals and is an associate editor for the Review of Economics and Statistics and the Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking.    The Bogleheads on Investing podcast is hosted by Rick Ferri, CFA, a long-time Boglehead and investment adviser. The Bogleheads are a group of like-minded individual investors who follow the general investment and business beliefs of John C. Bogle, founder and former CEO of the Vanguard Group. It is a conflict-free community where individual investors reach out and provide education, assistance, and relevant information to other investors of all experience levels at no cost. The organization supports a free forum at Bogleheads.org, and the wiki site is Bogleheads® wiki.    Since 2000, the Bogleheads' have held national conferences in major cities nationwide. There are also many Local Chapters in the US and even a few Foreign Chapters that meet regularly. New Chapters are being added regularly. All Bogleheads activities are coordinated by volunteers who contribute their time and talent.     This podcast is supported by the John C. Bogle Center for Financial Literacy, a non-profit organization approved by the IRS as a 501(c)(3) public charity on February 6, 2012. Your tax-deductible donation to the Bogle Center is appreciated.  

Edward Alden, senior fellow at CFR and co-author of When the World Closed Its Doors: The Covid-19 Tragedy and the Future of Borders, sits down with James M. Lindsay to discuss Trump's proposed immigration policies and their likely effects on the economy. This episode is the ninth and final episode in a special TPI series on the U.S. 2025 presidential transition and is supported by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.   Enter the CFR book giveaway by January 28, 2025, for the chance to win one of ten free copies of When the World Closed Its Doors by Edward Alden and Laurie Trautman. You can read the terms and conditions of the offer here.   Mentioned on the Episode   Edward Alden, The Closing of the American Border: Terrorism, Immigration, and Security Since 9/11   Edward Alden and Laurie Trautman, When the World Closed Its Doors: The COVID-19 Tragedy and the Future of Borders   Alessandro Caiumi and Giovanni Peri, "Immigration's Effect on US Wages and Employment Redux," National Bureau of Economic Research   Council on Foreign Relations, The Work Ahead: Machines, Skills, and U.S. Leadership in the Twenty-First Century   Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition   Anna Maria Mayda, Francesc Ortega, Giovanni Peri, Kevin Shih and Chad Sparber, "The Effect of the H-1B Quota on Employment and Selection of Foreign-Born Labor," National Bureau of Economic Research   For an episode transcript and show notes, visit The President's Inbox at: https://www.cfr.org/podcasts/tpi/trumps-immigration-policy-edward-alden-transition-2025-episode-9

There is a natural desire on the part of governments to ensure that their future citizens -- i.e. their nation's children -- are happy, healthy and productive, and that therefore governments have policies that work to achieve that. But good intentions never guarantee good policies. Here's where economist Janet Currie steps in. Currie is the Henry Putnam Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at Princeton University, where she co-directs, with Kate Ho, the Center for Health and Wellbeing. In this Social Science Bites podcast, the pioneer in assessing the nexus of policy and parenting explains to interviewer David Edmonds how programs like Head Start in the United States and Sure Start in the United Kingdom provide real benefits over time to both their young clients as youths and later on in life. After looking at a variety of programs and interventions, she details that "the general conclusion [is] that the programs that were spending more money directly on the children tended to have better outcomes." Her findings suggest this holds true even when similar approaches don't have the same effect on adults. "[I]n the United States," she says, "if you give health insurance to adults who didn't have health insurance, they use more services, and they are happier about that, that they get to use services. But it doesn't actually seem to save very much money. On the other hand, when you cover children from a young age, that is cost effective, that does save money, and in fact, the costs of the program probably pay for themselves in terms of the reduction in illness and disability going forward." In addition to her work at Princeton, Currie is also co-director of the National Bureau of Economic Research's Program on Families and Children. She has been president of the American Economic Association for 2024 and has also served as president of the American Society of Health Economics, the Society of Labor Economics, the Eastern Economic Association, and the Western Economic Association. Two years ago, she received the Klaus J. Jacobs Research Prize "for her foundational work on the influence of context such as policy decisions, environment, or health systems on child development."

First - Andrew Walworth and Carl Cannon interview political scientist Lara Brown on Biden's legacy. Then, Andrew talks to Jay Bhatacharia who is a Professor of Medicine at Stanford University and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economics Research. They have a discussion about free speech. Next, Tom Bevan chats with author and political scientist Charles Lipson on big winners and losers of the past year. And finally, Carl speaks with Columnist Miranda Devine on winning the Samizdat award.

This week, Nick and Goldy discuss the future of AI and its potential impact on labor markets and society with MIT professor and economist David Autor. While many pundits predict that AI will bring economic misery to working Americans, Autor optimistically argues that AI could empower the middle class by augmenting human expertise, unlocking new solutions to complex problems, and enabling individuals with fewer formal skills to excel in areas requiring advanced knowledge. Professor Autor also underscores the need for targeted investments, labor market supports, and thoughtful regulations to ensure the benefits of AI are widely and equitably distributed rather than concentrated among a privileged few. It's a fascinating discussion about the future of AI that tackles the pressing questions about its ethical deployment, the risks of monopolization, and the societal shifts required to harness it for the greater good. David Autor is a labor economist and professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies how technological change and globalization affect workers. He is also co-director of the MIT Shaping the Future of Work Initiative and the National Bureau of Economic Research Labor Studies Program. Social Media Twitter: @davidautor Further reading:  NOEMA - AI Could Actually Help Rebuild The Middle Class New York Times - How One Tech Skeptic Decided A.I. Might Benefit the Middle Class Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Threads: pitchforkeconomics Bluesky: @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social Twitter: @PitchforkEcon, @NickHanauer, @civicaction YouTube: @pitchforkeconomics LinkedIn: Pitchfork Economics Substack: The Pitch

Make 2025 your year! Free 2-part Workshop to build 3 new habits January 3 and 10th  – 12 Noon Eastern – 1 hour via Zoom Sign Up here _________________________ While we focus on the non-financial aspects of retirement here, your money clearly matters. With a new year around the corner we check back in with economist Larry Kotlikoff, author of Money Magic: An Economist's Secrets to More Money,Less Risk and a Better Life, for his views on what may lie ahead, common mistakes to avoid with Social Security, how you can Maximize (Your) Social Security, why Roth IRA conversions make sense for many people and his retirement planning software MaxiFi. Larry Kotlikoff joins us from Rhode Island. _________________________ Bio Laurence J. Kotlikoff is a William Fairfield Warren Professor at Boston University, a Professor of Economics at Boston University, a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, a Fellow of the Econometric Society, a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, President of Economic Security Planning, Inc., a company specializing in financial planning software, a Research Associate of the Gaidar Institute, and a Research Fellow of the Goodman Institute. Kotlikoff is also a New York Times Best Selling author. The Economist Magazine ranked Kotlikoff one of the world's 25 most influential economists. Professor Kotlikoff received his B.A. in Economics from the University of Pennsylvania in 1973 and his Ph.D. in Economics from Harvard University in 1977. From 1977 through 1983, Kotlikoff served on the faculties of economics of the University of California, Los Angeles and Yale University. In 1981-82 Professor Kotlikoff was a Senior Economist with the President's Council of Economic Advisers. Professor Kotlikoff's writings and research address personal finance, inequality, taxation, Social Security, climate change, investing, healthcare, deficits, and insurance. Professor Kotlikoff is author or co-author of 20 books, hundreds of professional journal articles, and a multitude of op eds and blogs. His most recent books are Money Magic: An Economist's Secrets to More Money,Less Risk and a Better Life, You're Hired, Get What's Yours – the Revised Secrets to Maxing Out Your Social Security (a NY Times Best Seller co-authored with Philip Moeller and Paul Solman), The Clash of Generations (co-authored with Scott Burns), The Economic Consequences of the Vickers Commission, Jimmy Stewart Is Dead, Spend ‘Til the End, (co-authored with Scott Burns), Generational Policy (MIT Press), The Healthcare Fix, and The Coming Generational Storm (co-authored with Scott Burns). Kotlikoff's columns have appeared in The NY Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Hill, The Financial Times, The Times of London, Forbes, CBNC, Bloomberg, PBS NewsHour, The Dallas News, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, the Seattle Times, Vox, Fortune, Seeking Alpha, Yahoo.com, VoxEU, Huffington Post, and other leading media. Kotlikoff has served as a consultant to the Federal Reserve, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Harvard Institute for International Development, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Swedish Ministry of Finance, the Norwegian Ministry of Finance, the Bank of Italy, the Bank of Japan, the Bank of England, the Government of Russia, the Government of Ukraine, the Government of Bolivia, the Government of Bulgaria, the Treasury of New Zealand, the Office of Management and Budget, the U.S. Department of Education, the U.S. Department of Labor, the Joint Committee on Taxation, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, The American Council of Life Insurance, Merrill Lynch, Fidelity Investments, AT&T, AON Corp., and other major U.S. corporations. Kotlikoff has provided expert testimony on numerous occasions to committees of Congress including the Senate Finance Committee, the Senate Budget Committee, the House Ways and Means Committee,

Urban upzonings have been rare across the world, and many of the most significant occurred only in the past 5–10 years or less. One exception is the canton of Zurich, Switzerland, where cities and towns have been relaxing land use restrictions for over 25 years. Simon Büchler and Elena Lutz share their research on the long-term effects of these reforms on housing supply and rents, and the kinds of zoning changes that produce real-world results.Show notes:Büchler, S., & Lutz, E. (2024). Making housing affordable? The local effects of relaxing land-use regulation. Journal of Urban Economics, 143, 103689.Anagol, S., Ferreira, F. V., & Rexer, J. M. (2021). Estimating the economic value of zoning reform (No. w29440). National Bureau of Economic Research.Greenaway-McGrevy, R. (2023). Can zoning reform reduce housing costs? Evidence from rents in Auckland. Economic Policy Centre. Asquith, B. J., Mast, E., & Reed, D. (2023). Local effects of large new apartment buildings in low-income areas. Review of Economics and Statistics, 105(2), 359-375.Gyourko, J., Mayer, C., & Sinai, T. (2013). Superstar Cities. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5(4), 167-199.Mast, E. (2024). Warding off development: Local control, housing supply, and nimbys. Review of Economics and Statistics, 106(3), 671-680.Mast, E. (2023). JUE Insight: The effect of new market-rate housing construction on the low-income housing market. Journal of Urban Economics, 133, 103383.Bratu, C., Harjunen, O., & Saarimaa, T. (2023). JUE Insight: City-wide effects of new housing supply: Evidence from moving chains. Journal of Urban Economics, 133, 103528.

Cesarean sections to deliver babies are among the most common surgical procedures in U.S. hospitals. A new study from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that Black women are almost 25 percent more likely than white women to have unnecessary C-sections, putting them at risk of surgical complications. John Yang speaks with New York Times investigative reporter Sarah Kliff to learn more. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

For the first time since the Black Death in the 1300s, the world is heading towards an era of depopulation. And for the first time in human history, this era of depopulation will be by choice. All over the world, women are choosing to have fewer and fewer children even as medical advances continue to prolong life. The result will be that people born today will live in graying societies in which the elderly and retired vastly outnumber the young and employed who are critical in supporting older generations. Why are people around the world choosing to have fewer children? And what do graying societies mean for the global economy? Nicholas Eberstadt is the Henry Wendt Chair in Political Economy at the American Enterprise Institute where he researched demographics, economic development, and international security in the Korean peninsula and Asia. He is also a senior advisor to the National Bureau of Asian Research, a founding board member of the US Committee on Human Rights in North Korea, and has served as a consultant or adviser to the US Government and international organizations. His most recent book is the Post-Pandemic Edition of Men Without Work (Templeton, 2022).Read the transcript here. Read Eberstadt's Foreign Affairs article here. Subscribe to our substack here.