Podcasts about peterson institute

In this episode, Joyce Chang, Chair of Global Research, is joined by Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics to discuss his new book, How to Win a Trade War: An Optimistic Guide to an Anxious Global Economy, and what “winning” means in a world where trade wars are increasingly becoming the default setting.   Speakers: Joyce Chang, Chair of Global Research, J.P. Morgan Chad Bown, Reginald Jones Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)   This podcast was recorded on June 9, 2026.   This communication is provided for information purposes only. Please visit www.jpmm.com/research/disclosures for important disclosures. © 2026 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved. This material or any portion hereof may not be reprinted, sold or redistributed without the written consent of J.P. Morgan. It is strictly prohibited to use or share without prior written consent from J.P. Morgan any research material received from J.P. Morgan or an authorized third-party (“J.P. Morgan Data”) in any third-party artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems or models when such J.P. Morgan Data is accessible by a third-party.  

While the best trade war strategy is to not have a trade war, this seems to no longer be an option. In their new book 'How to Win a Trade War' the goal of Soumaya Keynes and Chad Bown is to “… arm you with the knowledge to fight [because] these battles are going to last for a very long time.” Soumaya and Chad join EconoFact Chats to discuss the effects of the rise of China in the world trading system, the policy approaches taken by the United States, the European Union, and other countries, the role of multinational corporations, the intersection of trade and national security, and the efficacy of defensive policies (like limiting dependence on foreign goods) and offensive strategies (like tariffs). Soumaya Keynes is an economics columnist at the Financial Times and host of The Economics Show with Soumaya Keynes. Chad Bown is a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and served as Chief Economist at the State Department in the Biden administration.

In the United States, inflation is just as high as it is in the European Union—if not higher. Yet it seems to be hurting the American economy much less, according to a report published on Monday by the Peterson Institute for International Economics. So why are Europeans feeling the pain more intensely, and how much higher could prices still go?Production: By Europod, in co-production with the Sphera network.Follow us on:LinkedInInstagramTake your personal data back with Incogni! Use code EUROPOD at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: https://incogni.com/europod Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chad Brown, Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute, discusses his new book, "How to Win a Trade War" with Bloomberg's Tom Keene and Paul Sweeney. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this episode of the Trade Guys, Bill and Scott welcome Chad Bown (Reginald Jones Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics) and Soumaya Keynes (Economics Columnist, Financial Times) to discuss the issues raised in their new book, How to Win a Trade War.

“The rules-based system just hasn't worked. China's system is so opaque that you can't see the subsidies. And when you've got China not interested in new rules and the US not interested in a referee, you've got two of the world's biggest actors who aren't on board.” — Soumaya Keynes It would have been nice to get John Maynard Keynes on the show to get his critique of Trump's trade war. But in the long run, we're all dead — even old Maynard. So instead, we found his great-great-niece, Soumaya Keynes — Financial Times columnist and co-author of How to Win a Trade War: An Optimistic Guide to an Anxious Global Economy. Having already appeared on Jon Stewart this week, Soumaya has a bit of Keynesian star quality about her. But she's also a first-rate economist. Her thesis is that the old rules-based trading system that her great-great-uncle helped design after World War II is gone. And it ain't coming back. China's subsidies are so opaque that rules can't be written to constrain them, let alone enforced. The US is no longer willing to submit to a referee. Without the two biggest players, no rules-based system is meaningful. So — now what? Keynes says we must think like a trade warrior. Donald Trump should leverage the tools available — but use them strategically. Trump's error in his second term was not being tough on China while being too tough on everyone else, especially allies like Canada and Mexico. Soumaya Keynes' most contemporary idea might be her most Keynesian one. John Maynard Keynes proposed penalties for countries running large trade surpluses as well as those running deficits — recognising that global imbalances are a two-sided problem. That idea didn't make it into the 1944 Bretton Woods agreement. Eighty years later, in equally anxious economic times, his optimistic great-great-niece is reviving it. Five Takeaways •       Can Trade Wars Be Won? Yes, Sometimes: The conventional wisdom: no one wins a trade war. Keynes and Bown agree — in theory. In practice, countries in a weaker position cave. History has examples: France in the late nineteenth century told its trading partners they were renegotiating treaties, and the smaller partners complied. Trump's tariffs in his first term produced concessions. The problem is not that trade wars can't be won. It's that the smaller power's only defence — coordinating with other smaller powers — is extremely hard to sustain. There's always an incentive to cut a deal first. •       China Is the Doper on the Sports Field: Keynes's sharpest analogy: the global trading system is like a sports game that needs rules to ensure a level playing field. China's subsidies — cheap credit, corporate handouts, opaque support for state-linked companies — are the equivalent of performance-enhancing drugs. The problem is that unlike doping in sport, China's subsidies are invisible. You can write a rule saying China won't give these handouts. But you can't verify compliance. And without enforcement, rules are meaningless. The WTO has not solved this. Nothing has solved this. •       Trump Was Right About China, Wrong About Everything Else: Keynes is careful here. She credits Robert Lighthizer in Trump's first term with identifying China as the real problem and building a focused strategy. In the second term, Trump put tariffs on everyone simultaneously — which dissipated leverage, alienated the coalition of allies needed to pressure Beijing, and mixed up the problem of China's subsidies with grievances against Canada, Mexico, and the EU. If you were genuinely tough on China, you wouldn't have put tariffs on everyone. You would have been more targeted. •       The Rules-Based System Is Gone and Isn't Coming Back: Why can't we return to the system Keynes's great-great-uncle helped build? Two reasons. China's subsidies are too opaque to write enforceable rules against. And the US has lost confidence in any international referee — a long and complex story, but the result is that America won't submit to neutral adjudication. Without the two biggest players, no rules-based system is meaningful. Yearning for the old approach is not an option. A new strategy is needed — and that's what the book is about. •       AI and the Next Trade War: Services: AI is central to the US-China conflict already — chip restrictions, military advantage, economic supremacy. But Keynes's less-noticed observation: AI could fundamentally reshape international services trade. The UK, for example, is a massive services exporter — finance, legal, consulting, accounting. If AI eliminates demand for those services, the UK faces a new current account crisis, new trade tensions, a new wave of economic conflict. Nobody knows how this plays out. Which is why, she suggests, the tools in the book will remain relevant for longer than the current tariff cycle. About the Guests Soumaya Keynes is an economics columnist at the Financial Times and host of The Economics Show with Soumaya Keynes. Before joining the FT she spent eight years at The Economist. She co-founded the Trade Talks podcast with Chad Bown during Trump's first term. Chad P. Bown is the Reginald Jones Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and former Chief Economist at the US State Department under President Biden. Together they are the authors of How to Win a Trade War: An Optimistic Guide to an Anxious Global Economy (Simon & Schuster, May 26, 2026). References: •       How to Win a Trade War: An Optimistic Guide to an Anxious Global Economy by Soumaya Keynes and Chad P. Bown (Simon & Schuster, May 26, 2026). •       Soumaya Keynes on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, May 19, 2026 — referenced in the interview. •       Episode 2892: Jason Pack on the Iran war — the companion episode on America's strategic distractions from the China problem. About Keen On America Nobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States — hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,900 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting. WebsiteSubstackYouT...

India's growth numbers shape how we understand everything from jobs to investment to global standing. But what if those numbers don't tell the full story?  New research suggests India may have both underestimated and overestimated growth at different moments over the past two decades. That insight opens the door to a broader conversation about India's macroeconomic choices, from exchange rate policy to electricity pricing to the quiet persistence of trade barriers. To discuss these issues and many more, Abhishek Anand joins Milan on the podcast this week. Abhishek is the Founder and Managing Director of Insignia Policy Research and a Visiting Fellow at the Madras Institute of Development Studies. He's previously worked as an Economist at the World Bank and was a member of the Indian Economic Service, working in key positions throughout the Indian Ministry of Finance. Together, with Arvind Subramanian and Josh Felman, Abhishek is the author of a new working paper published by the Peterson Institute for International Economics titled “India's 20 Years of GDP Misestimation: New Evidence.”  Abhishek and Milan discuss the controversy over India's GDP estimates, important reforms within India's statistics ministry, and the debate over the Reserve Bank of India's policies to defend the rupee. Plus, the two discuss Abhishek's work on power sector reform and the embrace of non-tariff barriers that stymie the spirit of India's new bilateral trade agreements. Episode notes: Abhishek Anand, Josh Felman, and Arvind Subramanian, “India's 20 years of GDP misestimation: New evidence,” Peterson Institute of International Economics Working Paper 26-3, March 2026. Abhishek Anand, Arvind Subramanian, and Josh Felman, “How GDP data misread the economy, complicated policy,” Indian Express, March 14, 2026. Abhishek Anand and Naveen Thomas, “Free Trade on Paper, Protection in Practice: How India's Policy Interventions Hollow Out Trade Liberalisation,” O.P. Jindal Global University, January 2026. Abhishek Anand, Arvind Subramanian, and Josh Felman, “Going forward, RBI's rupee policy must not repeat errors of recent history,” Indian Express, December 29, 2025. Abhishek Anand, Praveen Ravi, Navneeraj Sharma, and Arvind Subramanian, “To help India's economy, unleash the power sector,” Indian Express, August 27, 2025.

Beijing said on Monday that it was ready to work with the United States to expand cooperation, manage differences and inject more stability and certainty into a turbulent and changing world as it confirmed that US President Donald Trump will pay a three-day state visit to China starting from Wednesday.According to Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun, President Xi Jinping will hold in-depth exchanges with Trump on issues concerning China-US relations as well as major issues related to world peace and development.The visit will mark Trump's first trip to China during his second term in office and the first visit to China by a US president in nine years.Noting that head-of-state diplomacy has played an irreplaceable strategic guiding role in China-US relations, Guo told a regular press briefing that China is willing to work with the US in the spirit of equality, respect and mutual benefit to expand cooperation, manage differences and provide more stability and certainty for a transforming and volatile world.Since Trump secured re-election in November 2024, the two heads of state have spoken five times over the phone and held one face-to-face meeting, maintaining regular communication as Beijing and Washington seek to keep bilateral relations on a stable track.Speaking on a television program on Sunday, Trump said that he was looking forward to visiting China again and believed the upcoming trip would be "amazing", adding that his relationship with President Xi was "very good".Su Xiaohui, deputy director of the Department for American Studies at the China Institute of International Studies, said head-of-state diplomacy has consistently served as the "anchor" of China-US relations.Direct communication between the two leaders, she said, can help both sides better understand each other's intentions, avoid miscalculation, grasp the overall direction of bilateral ties and explore ways to build a relationship that is strategic, constructive and stable.Diao Daming, a professor at Renmin University of China, said that given the complexity of China-US relations, the significance of Trump's visit lies not in resolving all issues at once, but in whether the two sides can use top-level communication to address each other's concerns and send more positive signals to the world.Washington should view China objectively, develop a rational perception of China and work with Beijing in the same direction, rather than approach bilateral ties from a position of strength, he added.Diao said that both sides should expand areas of cooperation, reduce the list of problems, and ensure that economic and trade ties continue to serve as a ballast and driver of bilateral relations rather than a source of friction and conflict.Regarding the technological landscape, experts have pointed out a current "truce" that offers a window for structured dialogue.Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said during an event last week that "the technology front looks relatively calm compared to past administrations".Chorzempa suggested that high-level engagement could help cement this atmosphere, noting that many restrictive measures have been "walked back or paused" over the last year as both nations seek to avoid further escalation.Sourabh Gupta, a senior fellow at the Institute for China-America Studies, told China Daily that extending the trade and technology truces established at earlier high-level meetings remains a top priority.He suggested that setting a clear framework for conversation is vital for creating a stable environment throughout the current administrative terms. He added that artificial intelligence has emerged as a significant area where both nations recognize a mutual interest in risk management.Scott Kennedy, senior advisor and trustee chair in Chinese business and economics at the US-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said during a news briefing earlier that the current trajectory reflects a period of relative confidence. He said that as the two sides prepare for senior-level dialogues, "China has the right to be confident that they are doing very well bilaterally". He added that as long as the trajectory remains stable, the outcome favors bilateral health.While both sides are seeking to expand cooperation, managing differences and sensitive issues — particularly the Taiwan question — is also expected to be high on the agenda.During a phone conversation with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio in late April, Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the Taiwan question concerns China's core interests and remains the biggest risk in China-US relations. He urged Washington to honor its commitments, make the right choice and create new space for bilateral cooperation while making due efforts for world peace.Bonny Lin, director of the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that stability in the overall relationship is predicated on mutual understanding. Referring to official positions, Lin pointed out that fulfilling international obligations on this question is viewed as "a necessary prerequisite for the stable, sound and sustainable development of China-US relations". Experts suggest that maintaining clear communication on these foundational concerns remains essential for avoiding miscalculations.

Javier Milei is brash and audacious, and he loves Donald Trump. But in many ways Donald Trump is the one who is following Milei. Argentina has an 18 month head start on Russell Vought’s wet dream of implementing a harsh libertarian doctrine. For a while it looked like everything Milei did was succeeding. He tamed inflation, created an export surplus and got back on track with debt service. Economic shock doctrines that rely on austerity for the masses and corporate giveaways always wind up the same, however. It was only a matter of time. The wheels are coming off Milei’s project this year as inflation is back, money is tight and people are pissed. America’s canary came out of the coal mine with black lung. Resources Buenos Aires Times: Economic activity posts biggest slump since 2023 Argus Media: Argentina inflation eases to 32.6pc in March | Latest Market News Argus Media: Argentina economy has sluggish start to 2026 Peterson Institute for International Economics: Argentina’s fragile monetary framework risks renewed volatility BBVA Research: Argentina Economic Outlook. March 2026 Americas Quarterly: Argentina’s Polarization Threatens Milei’s Pro-Market Agenda Americas Quarterly: REACTION: Milei’s Decisive Midterm Election Victory Paul Krugman: Why Is Trump Bailing Out Argentina? - Paul Krugman New York Times: Milei Vowed to Fix Argentina’s Economy. Then Came a New Crisis. Newsweek: Trump’s Argentina bailout sparks fury among farmers, Republicans Al Jazeera: Argentina Senate approves contentious Milei-backed labour reforms Buenos Aires Times: Pure polarisation in Congress – Milei delivers partisan speech full of insults Buenos Aires Times: Sharp drop in Argentina’s poverty rate delivers boost for Milei LatinNews: In brief: Argentina renews China currency swap line UNFTR Resources Video: Milei Promised Miracles, Delivered Chaos—Trump Is Next Essay: Don’t Cry for me Milei, Argentina. -- If you like #UNFTR, please leave us a rating and review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify: unftr.com/rate and follow us on Facebook, Bluesky, and Instagram at @UNFTRpod. Visit us online at unftr.com. Become a member at unftr.com/memberships. Buy yourself some Unf*cking Coffee at shop.unftr.com. Visit our bookshop.org page at bookshop.org/shop/UNFTRpod to find the full UNFTR book list, and find book recommendations from our Unf*ckers at bookshop.org/lists/unf-cker-book-recommendations. Access the UNFTR Musicless feed by following the instructions at unftr.com/accessibility.Support the show: https://www.unftr.com/membershipsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Visit us at Network2020.org. It has been just over a year since President Trump's “Liberation Day” global tariff announcement. Since then, the global trade landscape has shifted as countries hedged against their traditional dependence on the U.S. market. Driven by the increasing use of trade as a political weapon and constant tariff disputes, long-time allies like Canada, the UK, and the EU are now diversifying their trade partnerships as evidenced by landmark moves like the new EU-India trade deal and recent diplomatic pivots toward China. How is the web of trade alliances being re-woven and what are the implications for Washington? How is the U.S. private sector adapting to this complex new reality? And will this move toward strategic autonomy lead to a more stable global equilibrium or simply spark more conflict between competing regional blocs?Join us for a discussion on the changing landscape of global trade, featuring Edward Alden, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Alice Slayton Clark, Senior Vice President of Trade, Investment and Digital Policy at the United States Council for International Business, and Dr. Adam Posen, President of the Peterson Institute for International EconomicsMusic by Aleksey Chistilin from Pixabay

In 2003, Premier Wen Jiabao warned that China's growth model was unbalanced between supply and demand, over-reliant on investment and exports. More than 20 years later, the imbalance is smaller — but China is vastly larger. What its economy produces and exports now moves global markets. The argument about China's external surplus is no longer just a spat between Beijing and Washington.Yiping Huang, Dean of the National School of Development at Peking University, has written a chapter in the fourth Paris Report, published jointly by CEPR and Bruegel, examining China's structural imbalances from the inside. His argument: the same policies that powered 45 years of growth also suppressed household income and consumption. Factor market distortions, especially artificially low interest rates, kept the cost of capital down and subsidised state-owned enterprises; decentralised GDP-target competition pushed local governments toward investment and industrial expansion rather than services and household support.The result was a powerful supply side with a persistently weak domestic demand side. When you produce more than you can sell at home and you are a small economy, you export the rest. When you are the world's second largest economy, the world notices. China's consumption share of GDP rose from around 50% in 2010 to 57% in 2024, still well below the mid-seventies average of comparable economies, and two fresh crises complicate the path. The property market has been contracting since mid-2021 and it is now a drag on local government finances, household wealth, and bank balance sheets. Local government subsidies have created overcapacity in new industries such as electric vehicles and batteries. Huang's conclusion is that rebalancing is necessary and achievable, but it requires the government stepping back from direct resource allocation, the private sector and market taking on larger roles in innovation, and a significant strengthening of social protection to give households both the income and the confidence to spend.The report discussed in this series of episodes:Rey, Hélène, Beatrice Weder di Mauro, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer (eds). 2026. The New Global Imbalances. Paris Report 4. CEPR Press and Bruegel. Free to download at cepr.org.The chapter discussed in this episode:Huang, Yiping. 2026. "Rebalancing of the Chinese economy: Challenges and policy options." In Rey, Weder di Mauro, and Zettelmeyer (eds), The New Global Imbalances. Paris Report 4. CEPR Press and Bruegel. To cite this episode:Phillips, Tim, and Yiping Huang. 2026. “Rebalancing the Chinese Economy”. VoxTalks Economics (podcast).Assign this as extra listening. The citation above is formatted and ready for a reading list or VLE.About Paris Report 4The fourth Paris Report, The New Global Imbalances, is a joint publication of CEPR and Bruegel. It was edited by Hélène Rey (London Business School and CEPR), Beatrice Weder di Mauro (Geneva Graduate Institute and CEPR, and President of CEPR), and Jeromin Zettelmeyer (Bruegel and CEPR). The report examines how, in a high-debt and fragmented world, excess savings, rising surpluses, and rising deficits pose a risk to stability and undermine the global trading system. It is free to download at cepr.org.About the guestYiping Huang is Dean of the National School of Development at Peking University. [verify URL before publishing] He is one of China's leading macroeconomists, with research spanning China's economic transition, financial reform, and the political economy of development. He has advised Chinese policymakers and international institutions including the IMF and the Asian Development Bank on issues of growth, financial reform, and structural change.Research cited in this episodeAsymmetric liberalization is Yiping Huang's term for the approach China took when reforming its economy from the 1980s onward. Rather than the shock therapy adopted by former Soviet economies — privatising state-owned enterprises overnight and hoping markets would fill the gap — China used a dual-track approach. It opened the economy to private firms and foreign investors while maintaining state-owned enterprises in parallel, accepting some inefficiency in exchange for stability in output, employment, and growth. To subsidise the SOEs without direct fiscal transfers, the government kept factor markets, particularly financial markets, partially distorted: deposit and lending rates were held below market-clearing levels, reducing funding costs and effectively transferring income from savers and households to producers. The result was a very strong supply side and a structurally weak domestic demand side, which Huang identifies as the root cause of China's persistent external surpluses.Involution (Chinese: 内卷, nèijuǎn) is a term in wide use in China to describe a particular form of competitive overextension: effort that intensifies without producing proportional gains in quality, efficiency, or welfare. In the economic policy context Huang uses it, involution refers to the overcapacity problem in China's newer industries, including electric vehicles, batteries, and solar panels. Local governments, motivated by GDP targets and decentralised competition, have subsidised capacity expansion in these sectors without requiring corresponding advances in technology or product quality. The result is high-volume, low-margin competition that can suppress prices globally while leaving firms unable to earn sustainable returns domestically. Huang distinguishes this from the property market crisis, which has a different structure and cause.New quality productive forces is the term used in China's 15th Five-Year Plan (2026 to 2030) to describe the supply-side transformation the government is aiming for: a shift away from labour-intensive, low-value-added manufacturing toward high-technology, innovation-driven sectors. It reflects the recognition that the industries China dominated in its first decades of reform — low-cost assembly, commodity manufacturing — are no longer competitive given rising domestic wages and costs, and that the next stage of growth has to be driven by productivity and technology rather than factor accumulation.The 15th Five-Year Plan (2026 to 2030) is China's current medium-term planning document. Huang identifies two key anchors: the development of new quality productive forces on the supply side, and a shift toward domestic demand — particularly private consumption — on the demand side. The plan signals a different role for government, more focused on providing social infrastructure, basic research, and protection for households, and less focused on direct resource allocation and industrial project selection. Huang describes the two anchors as a circuit: if supply-side innovation and demand-side consumption can be connected efficiently, the Chinese economy can sustain growth for much longer without relying on external demand.The Japan comparison is used by Huang to set expectations for China's consumption rebalancing. Japan's private consumption share of GDP was at its lowest in 1970 and did not reach the average of comparable advanced economies — around the mid-seventies — until around 2010: a process of roughly forty years. China's consumption share is currently around fifty-seven percent, still well below that average. Huang acknowledges the parallel but expresses hope that China can close the gap faster than Japan did; the point of the comparison is that raising household consumption is a structural, decades-long process, not a policy lever that can be pulled in a single plan cycle. It requires sustained growth in household income and improvement in the social safety net to reduce precautionary saving.China's current account surplus peaked at 9.8% of GDP in 2007, immediately before the global financial crisis. Huang notes that significant adjustment has already taken place: the average surplus between 2018 and the mid-2020s was below two percent of GDP, and the investment share of GDP fell from a peak of forty-seven percent in 2011 to forty-one percent in 2024. The surplus rose to 3.7% of GDP in 2024 partly as a result of weak domestic demand following the property market correction. Huang's argument is that the external imbalance and the internal consumption shortfall are the same problem viewed from different angles; fixing one requires fixing the other.More VoxTalks Economics episodesThis is the third episode in our series on Paris Report 4. In the first episode, Maurice Obstfeld of the Peterson Institute for International Economics examines the history of global imbalances and what previous episodes can teach today's policymakers. In the second episode, Gilles Moëc, Chief Economist at AXA, explains why the US government is so keen to promote stablecoins and the risks they may pose to the financial system.For an interview with two of the report's editors, Beatrice Weder di Mauro and Jeromin Zettelmeyer, on the problem of global imbalances, listen to The Sound of Economics, Bruegel's podcast. Available at bruegel.org.

Three times since the 1970s, global imbalances have grown large. In the 1980s, the US trade deficit ballooned under Volcker's tight money and Reagan's tax cuts and military spending. In the 2000s, a global savings glut and then a US housing credit boom pushed the deficit to 6% of GDP. Today, the imbalances are back. The US current account deficit stood at 3.9% of GDP in 2025. The policy medicine this time: tariffs.Maurice Obstfeld of the Peterson Institute for International Economics and CEPR has written a chapter in the fourth Paris Report, published jointly by CEPR and Bruegel, examining that history, how policymakers responded, and what it can tell us about the effectiveness of policy remedies in 2026. He tell Tim Phillips that blaming foreigners misdiagnoses the problem if the US saves too little and invests heavily. The gap has to be financed from abroad. Good policy for the new global imbalances would requires three actors to move together: fiscal consolidation in the US, stronger consumption in China, and more investment in Europe. All three would benefit, none are close to doing it. The longer the can is kicked, Obstfeld warns, the greater the risk that the resolution arrives the way it always has: not through policy, but through crisis.The report discussed in this series of episodes:Rey, Hélène, Beatrice Weder di Mauro, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer (eds). 2026. The New Global Imbalances. Paris Report 4. CEPR Press and Bruegel. Free to download at cepr.org.The chapter discussed in this episode:Obstfeld, Maurice. 2026. "Global imbalances redux." In Rey, Weder di Mauro, and Zettelmeyer (eds), The New Global Imbalances. Paris Report 4. CEPR Press and Bruegel.To cite this episode:Phillips, Tim, and Maurice Obstfeld. 2026. “Global imballances redux”, VoxTalks Economics (podcast). Assign this as extra listening. The citation above is formatted and ready for a reading list or VLE.About Paris Report 4The fourth Paris Report, The New Global Imbalances, is a joint publication of CEPR and Bruegel. It was edited by Hélène Rey (London Business School and CEPR), Beatrice Weder di Mauro (Geneva Graduate Institute and CEPR, and President of CEPR), and Jeromin Zettelmeyer (Bruegel and CEPR). The report examines how, in a high-debt and fragmented world, excess savings, rising surpluses, and rising deficits pose a risk to stability and undermine the global trading system. It is free to download at cepr.org.About the guestMaurice Obstfeld is Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and a Research Fellow of CEPR. He served as Chief Economist of the International Monetary Fund from 2015 to 2018. His research spans international finance, exchange rate economics, and macroeconomic policy. He is a former member of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Obama.Research cited in this episodeThe Plaza Accord (1985) was a joint agreement between the US, West Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and Japan to intervene in foreign exchange markets to depreciate the US dollar. It was negotiated because a surging dollar, driven by Volcker's tight monetary policy and the Reagan fiscal expansion, had pushed the US current account deficit to then-unprecedented levels and created severe competitive pressure on US manufacturing. The accord moved the dollar, but did not resolve the underlying imbalances; those were corrected by German reunification and the Japanese asset bubble, which were not planned by anyone.The Louvre Accord (1987) was a follow-up agreement among the same countries to stabilise the dollar once it had depreciated far enough. Obstfeld uses both episodes to illustrate that exchange rate agreements address the symptom, not the cause, and tend to sidestep the hard political decisions about fiscal policy.The global savings glut hypothesis, associated with Ben Bernanke, holds that rising savings outside the US in the early 2000s, particularly from Asian economies building dollar reserves after the Asian financial crisis and from oil exporters, depressed global interest rates and drove capital into US assets. Obstfeld argues that from around 2002 onward the better explanation is US demand pulling capital in: loose Fed policy, the housing boom, subprime lending, and equity extraction from rising home values all drove US spending higher, and the current account deteriorated as the dollar fell rather than rose.The One Big Beautiful Bill Act is US tax legislation that prevents the expiration of tax cuts that had been written into law, effectively delivering a tax reduction. Obstfeld points out that by lowering national saving it pushes the current account in the opposite direction to what the administration wants, partly undoing whatever modest deficit-reducing effect the tariffs might have through their revenue.The Draghi report and the Letta report are European policy documents calling for deeper integration, more investment, improved competitiveness, and a completion of the EU's capital markets and banking unions. Obstfeld cites them as pointing in the right direction for reducing Europe's current account surplus, alongside the defence spending increases that European countries are now pursuing.More VoxTalks Economics episodesThis episode is the first of two published simultaneously to mark the launch of Paris Report 4. In the second episode, Gilles Moëc, Chief Economist at AXA, explains why the US government is so keen to promote stablecoins and the risks they may pose to the financial system in the US and Europe.For an interview with two of the report's editors, Beatrice Weder di Mauro and Jeromin Zettelmeyer, on the problem of global imbalances, listen to The Sound of Economics, Bruegel's podcast. Available at bruegel.org.

A radical macroeconomic experiment is under way at exactly the moment the US external position is showing signs of real stress.Gilles Moëc, Chief Economist at AXA, has written a chapter in the fourth Paris Report, published jointly by CEPR and Bruegel, on stablecoins: what they are, why the US government is so keen to promote them, and what risks they carry. His argument is that stablecoins are a fast-growing digital asset backed almost entirely by short-dated US government debt. When investors buy a dollar stablecoin, they are effectively buying into a US T-bill at zero interest; the platform keeps the yield. The US government likes this because it draws global savings into dollar assets at minimal cost, extending the dollar's reach and helping fund the deficit. But the regulatory framework has a three-year grace period and leaves supervision partly to the states, which compete to attract platforms. And there's the historical parallel: find out how the National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864 give us an insight into the attraction, and risks, of using stablecoins in this way.The report discussed in this series of episodes:Rey, Hélène, Beatrice Weder di Mauro, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer (eds). 2026. The New Global Imbalances. Paris Report 4. CEPR Press and Bruegel. Free to download at cepr.org.The chapter discussed in this episode:Moëc, Gilles. 2026. "Stablecoins and global imbalances: Attempting to preserve the US exorbitant privilege." In Rey, Weder di Mauro, and Zettelmeyer (eds), The New Global Imbalances. Paris Report 4. CEPR Press and Bruegel. Chapter 9, p. 210.To cite this episode:Phillips, Tim, and Gilles Moëc. 2026. "Stablecoins and Global Imbalances." VoxTalks Economics (podcast). Assign this as extra listening. The citation above is formatted and ready for a reading list or VLE.About Paris Report 4The fourth Paris Report, The New Global Imbalances, is a joint publication of CEPR and Bruegel. It was edited by Hélène Rey (London Business School and CEPR), Beatrice Weder di Mauro (Geneva Graduate Institute and CEPR, and President of CEPR), and Jeromin Zettelmeyer (Bruegel and CEPR). The report examines how, in a high-debt and fragmented world, excess savings, rising surpluses, and rising deficits pose a risk to stability and undermine the global trading system. It is free to download at cepr.org.About the guestGilles Moëc is Chief Economist at AXA and Head of AXA Research. He previously held senior roles at in the French civil service, Banque de France, and Bank of America Merrill Lynch. His research covers macroeconomics, monetary policy, and the European economy.Research cited in this episodeStablecoins are privately issued digital tokens whose value is pegged to an existing fiat currency, typically the dollar, and backed by safe and liquid assets, typically short-dated US Treasury bills. Unlike most cryptocurrencies, they are designed to maintain a stable exchange rate with the pegged currency. Platforms issue the tokens and invest the cash received in T-bills, keeping the interest for themselves; holders receive no yield. Stablecoin platforms may have absorbed roughly twenty to twenty-five percent of net US T-bill issuance.The GENIUS Act (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins) is the US federal legislation organising the stablecoin market. It requires platforms to hold back-to-back liquid assets as reserves and establishes common minimum standards across states. Regulatory competition across states means platforms can seek the most permissive jurisdiction. European regulation, MiCA, is more detailed and already in force but has not yet generated European platforms.Exorbitant privilege describes the advantage the US gains from issuing the world's dominant reserve currency. For decades, foreigners were content to hold low-yielding dollar assets while Americans invested in higher-returning foreign assets; the result was a positive US income balance despite a large trade deficit. In 2024, for the first time in modern records, the income balance turned negative: the US was paying more on its foreign liabilities than it was earning on its foreign assets. The National Banking Acts of 1863 and 1864 created a system of private national banks that issued dollar banknotes backed by US government bonds. The structure is the closest historical parallel to today's stablecoin framework: private platforms issuing dollar-denominated tokens backed by government debt. The system required over-collateralisation (one hundred and ten dollars of bonds for every one hundred dollars of notes) and included a Treasury backstop. Milton Friedman, in his Monetary History of the United States, identified the key flaw: money supply became tied to the quantity of public debt rather than the needs of the economy. The system was replaced by the Federal Reserve in 1913.De-dollarisation refers to the trend in some countries toward conducting trade and holding reserves in currencies other than the dollar. Moëc notes examples such as Iranian demands for non-dollar payments for passage through the Strait of Hormuz. Stablecoins work against this trend by making dollar access easier and cheaper for people in developing countries with weak or distrusted domestic financial systems; rather than buying dollars directly, they can buy a dollar-pegged token through a digital platform. More VoxTalks Economics episodesThis episode is the second of two published simultaneously to mark the launch of Paris Report 4. In the first episode, Maurice Obstfeld of the Peterson Institute for International Economics examines the history of global imbalances and what today's policymakers can learn from previous episodes. For an interview with two of the report's editors, Beatrice Weder di Mauro and Jeromin Zettelmeyer, on the problem of global imbalances, listen to The Sound of Economics, Bruegel's podcast. Available at bruegel.org.

Read the full transcript here. Could AI trigger an economic break as large as the Industrial Revolution, or even larger? What changes when labor stops being the main bottleneck in production? If intelligence becomes reproducible like software, what happens to the structure of an economy? How should we think about a world where capital captures what labor once did? Does faster growth necessarily mean better lives, or only more output? How should economists model an economy when software begins to substitute for minds? Are current production functions adequate for a world of autonomous systems and robotics? Why do small shifts in annual productivity matter so much once compounding takes over? How much of AI's impact depends on cognitive automation alone versus full physical automation? When does automation reduce labor demand, and when does it make human work more valuable? If AI does part of a job better, does that destroy the profession or increase demand for it? Under what conditions do humans remain complements rather than substitutes? Could an AI boom create a recession before it creates abundance? What happens to aggregate demand if white collar workers lose income before productivity gains diffuse widely? If the economy can produce more than ordinary people can afford, who is it really producing for? How quickly can consumption patterns shift in a world of extreme concentration of wealth? Anton is a Professor at the University of Virginia, Department of Economics and Darden School of Business as well as the Faculty Director of the Economics of Transformative AI (EconTAI) Initiative. He was named to the 2025 TIME100 AI list of the most influential people in artificial intelligence. He is a Nonresident Senior Fellow at Brookings and the Peterson Institute, a Research Associate at the NBER, a Research Fellow at the CEPR, and serves on Anthropic's Economic Advisory Council. His research analyzes how to prepare for a world of transformative AI systems. He investigates the implications of advanced AI for economic growth, labor markets, inequality, and the future of our society. Links: Anton's Website When Does Automating AI Research Produce Explosive Growth? Economic Growth under Transformative AI Staff Spencer Greenberg — Host + Director Ryan Kessler — Producer + Technical Lead WeAmplify — Transcriptionists Igor Scaldini — Marketing Consultant Music Broke for Free Josh Woodward Lee Rosevere Quiet Music for Tiny Robots wowamusic zapsplat.com Affiliates Clearer Thinking GuidedTrack Mind Ease Positly UpLift [Read more]

Today my guests are Arvind Subramanian and Devesh Kapur. Arvind is a Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and a former Chief Economic Advisor to the Government of India. Devesh is the Starr Foundation Professor of South Asian Studies and Director of the Asia Programs at the Johns Hopkins. They are co-authors of the recent book, A Sixth of Humanity: Independent India's Development Odyssey. We talked about India's redistributive democracy, why Indian states have taken such different development paths, India's socialism and consequent scarcity, manufacturing challenges, and much more. Recorded February 13th, 2026. Read a full transcript enhanced with helpful links. Connect with Ideas of India Follow us on X Follow Shruti on X Follow Arvind on X Click here for the latest Ideas of India episodes sent straight to your inbox. Timestamps (00:00:00) - Intro (00:01:18) - A Sixth of Humanity (00:06:51) - The Effect of Education on State Development (00:13:39) - Redistributive Democracy in India (00:21:54) - One Democracy, Multiple Outcomes at the State Level (00:36:52) - Tamil Nadu (00:38:01) - The Collapse of Punjab (00:42:12) - Shades of Socialism in India (01:08:00) - Upside-Down State (01:26:36) - Manufacturing (01:46:23) - Outro

Visit us at Network2020.org. With the 2025 National Security Strategy placing renewed emphasis on the Western Hemisphere, Washington appears poised to engage more actively in Latin America than at any time in the past three decades, prioritizing challenges such as migration, transnational crime, and growing geopolitical competition with China. At the same time, several nations, including Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Haiti, and Peru, are preparing for presidential elections in 2026, with analysts anticipating continued political polarization.What are the political and economic implications of this strategic shift for Latin American countries during a new electoral cycle? How are governments across the region responding to Washington's evolving policy approach? Could a renewed U.S. focus on the hemisphere generate new flows of investment and economic engagement? And what are the implications of Washington getting distracted by other foreign policy priorities?Join us for an insightful virtual discussion that will examine how the Trump administration may seek to reassert U.S. influence in the region, and how heightened political and economic volatility, as well as an upcoming Latin American electoral cycle may impact this strategy. This conversation features Mr. Jason Marczak, Vice President and Senior Director at the Atlantic Council's Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and Dr. Monica de Bolle, Macroeconomist and Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.Music by Aleksey Chistilin from Pixabay

As officials from China and the United States wrapped up one-and-a-half days of economic and trade talks in Paris on Monday, some US experts described the outcome as a modest but meaningful step toward greater stability in bilateral economic relations.中美双方3月16日在巴黎结束为期一天半的经贸磋商。美国专家形容此次对话成果虽小，但富有意义，是稳定双边经贸关系向前迈出的一步。According to Xinhua News Agency, the two sides addressed issues of mutual concern, including tariff arrangements, ways to promote bilateral trade and investment, and the need to preserve the existing consultation consensus. The talks took place under the guidance of the important consensus reached earlier by the two heads of state.据新华社报道，双方以中美两国元首重要共识为引领，围绕关税安排、促进双边贸易投资、维护已有磋商共识等彼此关心的经贸议题，进行了坦诚、深入、建设性的交流磋商。Leader of the Chinese delegation, Vice-Premier He Lifeng, told his US counterpart that guided by the strategic common understandings between the two leaders and building on five rounds of consultations last year, China and the US have achieved a series of outcomes in the economic and trade field. "These outcomes have injected greater certainty and stability into bilateral economic and trade relations as well as into the global economy," He said.率团参加此次对话的国务院副总理何立峰表示，在两国元首重要共识战略引领下，经过去年五轮经贸磋商，中美在经贸领域达成一系列磋商成果，为两国经贸关系和世界经济注入了更多确定性和稳定性。The vice-premier pointed out that the US Supreme Court has ruled that the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act are unlawful. However, the US imposed an additional 10 percent import surcharge on all trading partners under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and launched trade measures, including Section 301 investigations. China has consistently opposed unilateral US tariffs, He said, urging Washington to completely remove such tariffs and other restrictive measures.何立峰指出，美最高法院已裁决美依据《国际紧急经济权力法》加征的关税违法，随后美方依据《1974年贸易法》第122条对所有贸易伙伴加征10%进口附加费，还陆续出台了包括301调查在内的涉华消极举措。何立峰表示，中方反对美方加征单边关税的立场是一贯的，敦促美方彻底取消单边关税等限制措施。Vice-Minister of Commerce Li Chenggang, who is also China's international trade representative, said that China's stance on Section 301 investigations remains consistent, and it opposes such unilateral probes.中国商务部国际贸易谈判代表兼副部长李成钢表示，中方对美方单边的301调查的立场是一贯的，中方反对这种单边的调查。US experts, meanwhile, welcomed the positive tone of the Paris meeting and said that this round of talks had contributed toward stability of bilateral economic relations.与此同时，美国专家对此次巴黎对话的积极基调表示欢迎，并称本轮对话有助于稳定双边经贸关系。Sourabh Gupta, a senior fellow at the Institute for China-America Studies, a think tank based in Washington, DC, viewed the just-concluded Paris talks as a clear stabilizing step. The talks "seemed to hint for the first time that the two sides may be moving beyond their mutually assured destruction framework to framing their tech, trade and investment relationship on a more positive-minded basis" that is more "durable", he said.华盛顿智库中美研究中心的高级研究员苏拉布•古普塔认为，刚刚结束的巴黎对话是稳住阵脚的一步。他说，对话"似乎首次暗示，双方可能正在超越"相互确保摧毁"的框架，开始在更积极的基础上构建两国技术、贸易和投资关系"，这种关系将更加"持久"。Gary Hufbauer, a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a think tank based in Washington, DC, said the Supreme Court ruling has not weakened leverage. "There is not much weakening of leverage since Section 301 tariffs at arbitrary levels are around the corner," he said.华盛顿智库彼得森国际经济研究所非常驻高级研究员加里•郝夫鲍尔表示，美国联邦最高法院的裁决并没有削弱关税杠杆。他说："由于即将出台301条款下的任意关税，杠杆并没有削弱多少。"Hufbauer said he anticipated modest tariff progress if a summit between the two heads of state took place. "If and when the summit occurs, I expect mutual reduction on a few tariffs or other barriers. But nothing big," he said.郝夫鲍尔说，他预计如果两国元首举行会晤，将会取得小幅度的关税进展。"如果两国元首实现会晤，我预计双方会互相取消部分关税或其他壁垒，但可能不会有什么大动作。"The Paris talks reportedly included the topic of US farm exports to China. The US Soybean Export Council told China Daily that it is "watching for developments that come from the pending summit talks and hoping for good outcomes".据报道，巴黎对话的议题包括美国对华农产品出口。美国大豆出口协会告诉《中国日报》说，该协会"正在关注即将举行的两国元首会晤取得的进展，期待能有好结果"。bilateral economic relations /ˌbaɪˈlætərəl ˌiːkəˈnɒmɪk rɪˈleɪʃənz/双边经济关系inject /ɪnˈdʒekt/注入leverage /ˈliːvərɪdʒ/杠杆；影响力；筹码summit /ˈsʌmɪt/峰会；首脑会议pending /ˈpendɪŋ/即将发生的；待定的

Interview recorded - 19th of February, 2026On this episode of the WTFinance podcast I had the pleasure of welcoming on Barry Eichengreen. Barry is a renowned economist and Professor of Economics and Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught since 1987. He is also the author of many books, including the upcoming book “Money Beyond Borders: Global Currencies from Croesus to Crypto”During our conversation we spoke about his thoughts on the economy, the K-shaped economy, geopolitical shift, move away from the US dollar, what it means for the future and more. I hope you enjoy!0:00 - Introduction1:08 - Overview of the economy2:18 - K-shaped economy3:41 - Geopolitical shift6:13 - Europe becoming a world power?9:23 - US currency12:53 - China be trusted?14:58 - Precious metals movements17:09 - Next reserve currencies?19:58 - US Dollar devaluing21:47 - Bifurcating currency world23:56 - Influence for writing the book?25:58 - Any surprises?28:00 - One message to takeaway?Barry Eichengreen is George C. Pardee & Helen N. Pardee Chair and Distinguished Professor of Economics and Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught since 1987. He is a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research (Cambridge, Massachusetts) and Research Fellow of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (London, England). In 1997-98 he was Senior Policy Advisor at the International Monetary Fund. He is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (class of 1997). Professor Eichengreen is the convener of the Bellagio Group of academics and economic officials and chair of the Academic Advisory Committee of the Peterson Institute of International Economics. He has held Guggenheim and Fulbright Fellowships and has been a fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences (Palo Alto) and the Institute for Advanced Study (Berlin). He is a regular monthly columnist for Project Syndicate. His books include The Populist Temptation: Economic Grievance and Political Reaction in the Modern Era (2018), How Global Currencies Work: Past, Present, and Future, with Livia Chitu and Arnaud Mehl, (2017), The Korean Economy: From a Miraculous Past to a Sustainable Future (Harvard East Asian Monographs) with Wonhyuk Lim, Yung Chul Park and Dwight H. Perkins, (2015), Renminbi Internationalization: Achievements, Prospects, and Challenges, co-edited with Masahiro Kawai, (2015), Hall of Mirrors: The Great Depression, The Great Recession, and the Uses-and Misuses-of History, (2015). He was awarded the Economic History Association's Jonathan R.T. Hughes Prize for Excellence in Teaching in 2002 and the University of California at Berkeley Social Science Division's Distinguished Teaching Award in 2004. He is also the recipient of a doctor honoris causa from the American University in Paris.Barry Eichengreen - Website - https://eml.berkeley.edu/~eichengr/X - https://x.com/B_EichengreenBook - https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691280530/money-beyond-borders?_glWTFinance - Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/wtfinancee/Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/67rpmjG92PNBW0doLyPvfniTunes - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/wtfinance/id1554934665?uo=4Twitter - https://twitter.com/AnthonyFatseas

Dr. Adam Posen, President of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, discusses the global economic outlook and the US monetary policy impact after today's January CPI report. He believes that inflation that could potentially exceed 4% by 2026. Dr. Posen speaks with Bloomberg's Carol Massar and Tim Stenovec.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of WealthVest: The Weekly Bull&Bear, Drew and Tim discuss developments around Greenland, comments at Davos, gold and the recent Peterson Institute's article on inflation. WealthVest – based in Bozeman, MT– is a financial services marketing and distribution firm specializing in fixed and fixed index annuities from many high-quality insurance companies. WealthVest provides the tools, resources, practice management support, and products that financial professionals need to provide their clients a predictable retirement that has their best interest in mind.Hosts: Drew Dokken, Tim PierottiAlbum Artwork: Sam YarboroughShow Editing and Production: Tavin DavisDisclosure: The information covered and posted represents the views and opinions of the hosts and does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of WealthVest. The mere appearance of Content on the Site does not constitute an endorsement by WealthVest. The Content has been made available for informational and educational purposes only. WealthVest does not make any representation or warranties with respect to the accuracy, applicability, fitness, or completeness of the Content.WealthVest does not warrant the performance, effectiveness or applicability of any sites listed or linked to in any Content. The content is not intended to be a substitute for professional investing advice. Always seek the advice of your financial advisor or other qualified financial service provider with any questions you may have regarding your investment planning. Investment and investing involves risk, including possible loss of principal. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

I step into the studio with one question in mind: where do all of Donald Trump's many legal battles actually stand right now, especially in the courts over the past few days?Let's start with the arena that now overshadows almost everything else: the Supreme Court. Axios reports that the justices are gearing up for a series of blockbuster Trump cases this year, and some of the key moves have landed just in recent days and weeks. According to Axios, one of the biggest is Learning Resources v. Trump, the case that will decide whether Donald Trump can use a declared national emergency to impose sweeping tariffs without Congress. A recent Supreme Court docket entry shows that an emergency application tied to this dispute has been set for full argument in January, rather than decided quietly on the shadow docket, a sign the Court knows how massive the stakes are. A ruling against Trump could force the government to refund more than 100 billion dollars in tariffs and sharply limit his ability to drive economic policy through emergency powers alone, something economists at the Peterson Institute for International Economics have been closely watching.But that tariff fight is only one front. Axios also highlights Trump v. Barbara, the case over his executive order targeting birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to undocumented immigrants. Lower courts have split and issued injunctions, and now the Supreme Court is expected to decide whether a policy Trump calls essential to immigration enforcement can override more than a century of Fourteenth Amendment precedent.On the power front, Axios notes yet another Supreme Court showdown: Trump's attempt to fire independent agency officials like Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook and Federal Trade Commission officials Rebecca Slaughter and Alvaro Bedoya. The question is whether a president can unilaterally remove these figures for policy reasons, shredding a 90‑year tradition of insulation from raw politics. If Trump prevails here, the presidency's reach over watchdogs and economic regulators could expand dramatically.Zoom out from the Supreme Court, and you see the lower courts straining under wave after wave of Trump‑era litigation. Just Security and Lawfare both maintain litigation trackers showing dozens of ongoing suits targeting Trump's executive orders on everything from conditions of imprisonment to crackdowns on law firms and civil rights groups. These trackers reveal a pattern: plaintiffs argue that Trump's actions routinely stretch or shatter constitutional limits, invoking the First Amendment, due process, equal protection, and separation of powers in case after case.Politico, looking at the criminal and enforcement landscape more broadly, describes what it calls a renaissance in the use and resistance of grand juries around Trump‑related prosecutions. Veteran prosecutors told Politico they had rarely seen grand juries push back on indictments the way some have when confronted with aggressive Trump‑aligned cases, and at least one federal judge has openly criticized what she called “apparent prosecutorial machinations” tied to these efforts. Even where Trump himself is not the defendant, his policies and his Justice Department's tactics keep popping up in the courtroom record.Taken together, the last few days have not brought a single dramatic verdict with Donald Trump at the defense table, but they have tightened the vise around his presidency's legal legacy. Supreme Court calendars, emergency applications, and fresh filings in federal courts all point to 2026 as the year when judges, not voters, will finally decide how far Trump can go on tariffs, immigration, and presidential power itself.Thank you for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more, check out QuietPlease dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

One on One Video Call W/George https://tidycal.com/georgepmonty/60-minute-meetingSupport the show:https://www.paypal.me/Truelifepodcast?locale.x=en_US

At the CEPR annual Symposium in Paris we sat down with Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a distinguished fellow of CEPR, and a global authority on geopolitics and trade to discuss the profound changes in the multilateral order in 2025, how countries will adjust to this new normal – and whether the changes we have seen will ever be unwound.

Techaktien Oracle har tabt 15 procent på en uge, og investorerne begynder at tvivle på Larry Ellisons selskab. Oracle har kastet sig ud i et hasarderet gældsfinansieret sats på at indhente konkurrenterne i kunstig intelligens-markedet, og nervøse investorer trykker på exitknappen. Hvor alvorlig er Oracles krise og ser vi en bredere krise i amerikansk tech? Vi kigger også på et helt nyt forskningspapir, der slår fast, at brexit har været en økonomisk katastrofe for Storbritannien. Resultat har været lavere vækst, færre jobs og mindre produktivitet. Til sidst diskuterer vi et glimrende interview i Børsen, hvor den amerikanske økonom Adam Posen fra tænketanken Peterson Institute siger, at den amerikanske centralbank groft undervurderer risikoen for at inflationen kommer bragende tilbage i 2026. Men frygten er en smule ubegrundet, lyder det beroligende fra Milhøj. I studiet: Magnus Barsøe og Mikael MilhøjSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today on the show, Katie Martin and Rob Armstrong talk with special guest Adam Posen about the prospects for inflation and even a financial crisis. Posen has worked for both the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Bank of England, and is the current president of the non-profit Peterson Institute for International Economics. They talk about the options facing the next Fed chair, the conditions for serious inflation, and AI's role in our economic future. Also they go short crypto and long the New England Patriots. For a free 30-day trial to the Unhedged newsletter go to: https://www.ft.com/unhedgedoffer.You can email Robert Armstrong and Katie Martin at unhedged@ft.com.Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's been over six months since the so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs -- a 10% baseline tariff on all US imports, and additional country-specific tariffs determined by their trade surplus with the US -- came into effect. The Trump administration argued these tariffs would result in a stronger economy, and a revival of American manufacturing. Have they? Chad Bown joins EconoFact Chats to discuss the rollout and consequences of the sweeping tariffs thus far, and how they compare to the tariffs enacted during the first Trump administration. Chad is the Reginald Jones Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Our speaker is Nicolas Veron who is a Senior Fellow at Bruegel in Brussels as well as at the Peterson Institute in DC. He is also the author of the book entitled Europe's Banking Union at Ten: Unfinished Yet Transformative. I want to learn from Nicolas about the resilience of the European Union and how it has been affected by the European banking crisis, Brexit, the war in Ukraine, and fears of increasing immigration. Get full access to What Happens Next in 6 Minutes with Larry Bernstein at www.whathappensnextin6minutes.com/subscribe

Max Bergmann is joined by Federico Steinberg and Nicolas Véron for a conversation about Europe's economic future. The discussion covers the Euro's evolving international role, the rise of stable coins and the digital Euro, and how Europe can chart a fiscally sustainable future.  Federico Steinberg is a visiting fellow with the CSIS Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program, Prince of Asturias distinguished visiting professor at Georgetown University, and senior analyst at the Elcano Royal Institute. Nicolas Véron is senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Learn more:  Russian Roulette | CSIS Podcasts

Dr. Adam Posen, President of the Peterson Institute for International Economics discusses the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, the economic reprecussions of the relationship, and the remarks earlier today by United States President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Posen spoke with Bloomberg's Carol Massar and Tim Stenovec.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We welcome back Arvind Subramanian, Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, to Kopi Time. We focus on some recent work by Arvind and Shoumitro Chatterjee (see article here), in which they argue that China’s continued dominance in low-skill export sectors reflects not just efficiency, but deliberate policy choices that prevent poorer countries from climbing the development ladder. We talk about their findings, nuances to the conclusions, implication for trade and exchange rate policy, geopolitical considerations, and delve into a few issues beyond the article, including China’s rapid climb up the technology value-addition ladder. We also touch in Arvind’s new book, A Sixth Of Humanity: Independent India's Development Odyssey, co-authored with Devesh Kapur.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Un an après sa réélection, Donald Trump revendique une Amérique plus forte grâce à ses taxes douanières massives. Le président promettait que la Chine, l'Europe et les autres pays « paieraient » pour redresser l'économie américaine. Mais les chiffres montrent une tout autre réalité : ce sont bien les entreprises et les consommateurs américains qui supportent la facture. Lors de sa campagne, Donald Trump assurait vouloir « faire payer la Chine, l'Europe et tous ceux qui profitent de l'Amérique ». Selon lui, ces droits de douane ne coûteraient rien aux Américains. Le principe était simple : taxer les produits importés pour protéger les entreprises nationales, réduire le déficit commercial et financer des baisses d'impôts. Mais la réalité économique, elle, s'est montrée bien différente. En pratique, les exportateurs étrangers ne paient pas ces droits de douane. Ce sont les importateurs américains – distributeurs, industriels, commerçants – qui s'en acquittent auprès du Trésor. Et quand la facture devient trop lourde, elle finit par se répercuter sur les consommateurs. À lire aussiSur la piste d'une machine à café pour comprendre les effets des taxes douanières de Trump Les entreprises américaines en première ligne Les données du Peterson Institute for International Economics sont claires : jusqu'à l'été 2025, ce sont les entreprises américaines qui ont absorbé la plus grande part du coût de ces surtaxes, notamment dans la distribution, l'automobile et l'électronique. Les recettes douanières ont, elles, explosé, avec plus de 100 milliards de dollars encaissés par le gouvernement entre janvier et juillet 2025, contre seulement 70 milliards sur toute l'année 2024. Mais cet argent vient… des entreprises américaines elles-mêmes. Des géants comme Apple ou Nike ont tenté de maintenir leurs prix de vente stables, en réduisant leurs marges. Mais cet équilibre n'a pas tenu. Les coûts additionnels ont fini par être transférés aux consommateurs. Résultat : les prix à la consommation augmentent et le pouvoir d'achat recule. À lire aussiDroits de douane: Donald Trump gagne-t-il vraiment la guerre commerciale? Un impôt déguisé pour les ménages américains Les économistes de l'université de Yale estiment que ces taxes coûtent en moyenne 3 800 dollars par an à chaque ménage américain. Autrement dit, une nouvelle forme d'impôt indirect, qui pèse d'autant plus lourd sur les foyers modestes. Et le phénomène touche bien au-delà des produits importés. De nombreux biens estampillés made in USA sont, eux aussi, concernés, car leurs composants ou leurs pièces détachées proviennent de l'étranger. Presque tout ce qui est consommé sur le territoire est donc indirectement surtaxé. Donald Trump, lui, reste triomphant. Il affirme que sa politique « rapporte des milliards à l'Amérique ». Et c'est vrai que les recettes douanières devraient dépasser 300 milliards de dollars d'ici à la fin de l'année. Mais ces milliards proviennent avant tout du portefeuille des entreprises et des ménages américains. À lire aussiDroits de douane de Trump: pourquoi il est quasi impossible de les abandonner Une Amérique qui taxe le monde… mais se taxe elle-même En définitive, les taxes de Donald Trump frappent bien les importations du monde entier, mais ce sont les Américains qui passent à la caisse. Les droits de douane gonflent les recettes fédérales, tout en alimentant l'inflation et en grignotant le pouvoir d'achat. Le paradoxe est total : le président voulait faire payer les autres, mais un an après son retour au pouvoir, c'est l'Amérique elle-même qui paie la note.

A Sixth of Humanity: Independent India's Development Odyssey is a landmark new book by the scholars Devesh Kapur and Arvind Subramanian.The book is an audacious attempt to trace how India—uniquely and daringly—attempted four concurrent transformations—building a state, creating an economy, changing society, and forging a sense of nationhood under conditions of universal suffrage.It is the joint product of one of India's most respected political scientists and one of its best known economists. The book includes insights from politics, economics, history, and literature and provides a developmental history of India that is big, bold, engaging, and utterly unique.To talk more about their book and the lessons it holds for India's next 75 years, Arvind and Devesh return to Grand Tamasha to speak with Milan.Devesh Kapur is the Starr Foundation professor of South Asia Studies at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.Arvind Subramanian is senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, in Washington, DC. He previously served as former chief economic adviser to the government of India.The trio discuss the vision for the book, India's checkered history of upholding the rule of law, and what we get wrong about India's tryst with central planning. Plus, they discuss India's stellar record as an export powerhouse, the long shadow of vested interests, the pressures on India's model of fiscal federalism, and ongoing challenges with nation-building.Watch the video version of this episode here.Episode notes:1. Arvind Subramanian, “Can India reverse its manufacturing failure?” Financial Times, November 10, 2024.2. Josh Felman and Arvind Subramanian, “Is India Really the Next China?” Foreign Policy, April 8, 2024.3. “The Future of India's Fiscal Federalism (with Arvind Subramanian),” Grand Tamasha, October 16, 2024.4. Amit Ahuja and Devesh Kapur, eds., Internal Security in India: Violence, Order, and the State (New York: Oxford University Press, 2023).5. “Opening the Black Box of India's Internal Security State (with Amit Ahuja and Devesh Kapur),” Grand Tamasha, May 10, 2023.6. Devesh Kapur, “Why Does the Indian State Both Fail and Succeed?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 34, no. 1 (Winter 2020): 31-54.7. Rohit Lamba and Arvind Subramanian, “Dynamism with Incommensurate Development: The Distinctive Indian Model,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 34, no. 1 (Winter 2020): 3-30.8. Yamini Aiyar, “New GST regime: A grand bargain reduced to imperfect compromise,” Hindustan Times, October 7, 2025.9. “A Blueprint for India's State Capacity Revolution (with Karthik Muralidharan),” Grand Tamasha, May 23, 2024.

Vil de, eller vil de ikke? Omverdenen ser bekymret på, at USA og Kina er ved at gøre klar til en ny barsk runde i de to landes handelskrig. USA vil bremse Kinas adgang til teknologi som computerchips. Kina har begrænset eksporten af sjældne jordarter, som bruges i alt fra elbiler til våben. Så ender det med strid og skyhøje toldsatser? Og hvad betyder det for parterne - og os andre. Eller er et kompromis stadig muligt? Deltagere: Philip Roin, DR's korrespondent i Kina, seniorforsker i økonomi ved Peterson Institute og Bruegel, Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, og chefstrateg hos Nykredit, Frederik Engholm. Vært: Jakob Vinde Larsen.

An issue that's been top of mind in Greece for some time now is the demographic crisis. This isn't unique to Greece, however, as it's a problem most of Europe is also looking for answers to. Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a Senior Fellow at Bruegel and a non-resident Senior Fellow with the Peterson Institute for International Economics, joins Thanos Davelis as we look at how an aging population is challenging Europe, and why migration remains an important part of the equation. You can read the articles we discuss on our podcast here:The macroeconomic impact of ageing, EU immigration policy and pension expendituresMitsotakis calls for united European defense, energy strategy at MED9 summitErdogan heads to Gulf as Turkey looks to ease energy dependence on Russia

The Trump administration authorized a $20 billion financial lifeline for Argentina as it faces an economic crisis. The deal has raised major questions and criticism about its merits. President Trump also said it’s contingent on Argentine President Milei’s party winning elections later this month. John Yang discussed more with Monica de Bolle of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

The Trump administration authorized a $20 billion financial lifeline for Argentina as it faces an economic crisis. The deal has raised major questions and criticism about its merits. President Trump also said it’s contingent on Argentine President Milei’s party winning elections later this month. John Yang discussed more with Monica de Bolle of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

The Trump administration authorized a $20 billion financial lifeline for Argentina as it faces an economic crisis. The deal has raised major questions and criticism about its merits. President Trump also said it’s contingent on Argentine President Milei’s party winning elections later this month. John Yang discussed more with Monica de Bolle of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

Maurice Obstfeld, Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics & Professor of Economics at UC Berkeley, discusses why tariffs should not be relied on as a long-term revenue tool. He speaks with hosts Tom Keene and Paul Sweeney.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In a new article in Foreign Affairs, 'The New Economic Geography: Who Profits in a Post-American World?,' Adam Posen, the President of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, argues that the policies and institutions the US has helped put in place over the past eight decades have not only bolstered its own economic fortunes, but have helped much of the world thrive. Adam joins EconoFact Chats to discuss the article, and point out how the Trump administration's pursuit of an America first policy could render the US, and much of the world, less economically stable. He also discusses who might benefit from America's retreat from global leadership.

In Episode 441 of Hidden Forces, Demetri Kofinas speaks with Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, about the profound transformations underway in the global economy driven by America's transition away from being the world's primary insurance provider for international security to its most enterprising racketeer. In a recently published Foreign Affairs essay titled “The New Economic Geography: Who Profits in a Post-American World?” Adam compares America's role in the post-World War II era to that of an insurance provider, underwriting global security by protecting international shipping lanes, providing deep and liquid capital markets, and enforcing international laws and standards that have formed the bedrock of the last 80 years of economic growth and prosperity. Kofinas and Posen spend the first hour of this episode digging into Adam's insurance framework and why he believes the United States was the largest beneficiary of the system it created. They discuss some of the recent policy changes out of Washington and why they are transforming America's sphere of influence into something that looks more like a protection racket than a market for affordable insurance. Adam Posen draws implications for the continued role of US Treasuries as a global safe asset and whether a reduction of foreign capital flows into dollars will ultimately prove stimulative for the resurrection of industrial ecosystems that the administration has identified as vital to American national security and the long-term prosperity of the United States. The two also consider the degree to which the increased premiums that Washington is now charging its allies can be justified by rising risks in the international security environment and by the unpopularity among the MAGA base for foreign U.S. involvement. The second hour of their conversation turns to questions of execution—specifically, what is required for the successful implementation of a U.S. industrial policy. This includes a discussion about apprenticeships, skilled immigration, government-supported R&D, federal funding for university science and technology programs, and more integration and collaboration with allied economies. Posen and Kofinas also discuss why the use of tariffs, subsidies, and export controls—including the CHIPS and Science Act—implemented during both Joe Biden's and Donald Trump's administrations have underdelivered. They also examine why the current administration's trade policies have been oddly more accommodative toward China than toward America's closest allies and why this will ultimately prove to be a losing strategy in the long-term. Lastly, Demetri asks Adam for his view on what the recent battles between the Fed and the White House mean for the future of Fed independence and if Washington is laying the groundwork for a long-term rise in inflation expectations as it seeks to monetize its debt and deficits through an increasingly compliant and captured central bank. Subscribe to our premium content—including our premium feed, episode transcripts, and Intelligence Reports—by visiting HiddenForces.io/subscribe. If you'd like to join the conversation and become a member of the Hidden Forces Genius community—with benefits like Q&A calls with guests, exclusive research and analysis, in-person events, and dinners—you can also sign up on our subscriber page at HiddenForces.io/subscribe. If you enjoyed today's episode of Hidden Forces, please support the show by: Subscribing on Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Spotify, Stitcher, SoundCloud, CastBox, or via our RSS Feed Writing us a review on Apple Podcasts & Spotify Joining our mailing list at https://hiddenforces.io/newsletter/ Producer & Host: Demetri Kofinas Editor & Engineer: Stylianos Nicolaou Subscribe and support the podcast at https://hiddenforces.io. Join the conversation on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter at @hiddenforcespod Follow Demetri on Twitter at @Kofinas Episode Recorded on 09/16/2025

Trump's economic policies have caused chaos globally and he's made it clear he's happy to use America's financial might against his enemies – or help his friends. But, when it comes to security, who is this actually helping?  In the latest episode of This Is Not A Drill – we ask,how do tariffs and inflation in the US impact global security? Emma Beals is joined by Adam Posen, the president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Read Adam Posen's Foreign Affairs article ‘The New Economic Geography' here. • This episode of This Is Not A Drill is supported by Incogni the service that keeps your private information safe, protects you from identity theft and keeps your data from being sold. There's a special offer for This Is Not A Drill listeners – go to https://incogni.com/notadrill  to get an exclusive 60% off your annual plan. • Support us on Patreon to keep This Is Not A Drill producing thought-provoking podcasts like this. Written and presented by Emma Beals. Produced by Robin Leeburn. Original theme music by Paul Hartnoll – https://www.orbitalofficial.com. Executive Producer Martin Bojtos. Managing Editor Jacob Jarvis. Group Editor Andrew Harrison. This Is Not A Drill is a Podmasters production. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this episode, Nathan Goodman is joined by Michael Clemens to discuss why immigration policy matters not just for migrants themselves but for broader economic growth. Drawing on his influential work, including “Economics and Emigration: Trillion-Dollar Bills on the Sidewalk?” (JEP, 2011) and “The Place Premium: Bounding the Price Equivalent of Migration Barriers” (REStat, 2019), Clemens explains how even modest liberalization of migration can create enormous gains, why exchange is positive-sum, and how complementary skills across the workforce drive production. Together they assess the claim that immigration undermines culture and institutions and revisit historical panics ranging from the Chinese Exclusion Act to the Dillingham Commission. Dr. Michael Clemens is a professor in the Department of Economics at George Mason University and a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. He helped build the research program on international migration at the Center for Global Development. Show Notes: Samuel Bazzi, et al., “The Confederate Diaspora” (NBER, 2025) Timur Kuran's book, Freedoms Delayed: Political Legacies of Islamic Law in the Middle East (Cambridge University Press, 2023) Chloe N. East, et al., “The Labor Market Effects of Immigration Enforcement” (Journal of Labor Economics, 2023)Mexican Migration projectIf you like the show, please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell others about the show! We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you get your podcasts.Virtual Sentiments, a podcast series from the Hayek Program, is streaming. Subscribe today and listen to season three, releasing now!Follow the Hayek Program on Twitter: @HayekProgramLearn more about Academic & Student ProgramsFollow the Mercatus Center on Twitter: @mercatusCC Music: Twisterium

Today, we're sharing an episode from our fellow FT podcast, Swamp Notes.The US president is angry with the chair of the Federal Reserve over interest rates. He's applying a lot of pressure on Jay Powell to lower them or leave his job. The FT's Claire Jones and Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, break down what will happen if Trump succeeds in either of those goals.This episode originally aired on July 26.Subscribe to Swamp Notes on Acast, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts.Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This weekend, we're sharing an episode from our fellow FT podcast, Swamp Notes. The US president is angry with the chair of the Federal Reserve over interest rates. He's applying a lot of pressure on Jay Powell to lower them or leave his job. The FT's Claire Jones and Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, break down what will happen if Trump succeeds in either of those goals.Subscribe to Swamp Notes on Acast, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For the next 90 days, the two countries will temporarily ease tariffs on each other's goods as trade talks continue. But what does this deal mean for the broader economy? Marketplace's Kai Ryssdal sits down with Adam Posen from the Peterson Institute for International Economics to discuss the damage that's already been done. Also on the show, how soybean farmers feel about the latest trade deal and why Chinese manufacturers are trying to reach American consumers via TikTok.

After declaring victory in yesterday's Canadian election, Prime Minister Mark Carney said the “old relationship” with the United States is over. Over the past few months, President Donald Trump's on-and-off tariffs and repeated annexation threats have caused Canadians to reconsider the United States as its leading trading partner and ally. But Patricia Goff, professor of political science at Wilfrid Laurier University, said the idea of disentangling the two economies is unrealistic. On the show today, Goff explains how Trump's tariffs and annexation threats influenced the Canadian election, how Canadian industries are navigating the trade war, and what this all could mean for the future of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.Plus, we'll hear a pitch for a new “Make Me Smart”-themed rear window sticker. And, what one psychologist got wrong about burnout. Here's everything we talked about today:"Trump knows exactly what he just triggered in Canada" from CBC News"Liberal Bruce Fanjoy topples Pierre Poilievre in Carleton" from CBC News"Canada-U.S. Relations Continue to Reach Lows Over Tariffs and Annexation Threats" from The New York Times"Mike Myers Is Ready to Defend Canada" from The New York Times"Canada says its friendship with the US is ‘over.' Now what?" From Politico "The future of the USMCA" from the Peterson Institute for International EconomicsWe want to hear your answer to the Make Me Smart question. Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

Tonight's rundown:  Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Thursday, April 10, 2025. Stand Up for Your Country.  Talking Points Memo: How the United States could hurt China and why the Chinese economy will collapse unless a deal is reached. Nicholas Lardy, Ph.D., Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, joins the No Spin News to discuss U.S.–China relations and whether Trump may have overestimated his leverage. Bill looks at the anti-Trump media's overreaction to the price of oil and eggs. Panama and the U.S. sign a new security deal for the canal.  Why did CNN hold a town hall with Bernie Sanders? This Day in History: Paul McCartney announces that he is leaving The Beatles. Final Thought: Television pundits' saying, 'by the way' and 'we'll see.' In Case You Missed It: Read Bill's latest column, Make America Scared Again. Stand out from the crowd with our Not Woke baseball cap for just $28.95! For a limited time, get Bill O'Reilly's bestselling The United States of Trump and a No Spin Mug for only $39.95. Pre-order Bill's next book in the new Confronting Series, ‘Confronting Evil' NOW! Now's the time to get a Premium or Concierge Membership to BillOReilly.com, the only place for honest news analysis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today, it's all YOU! We're diving into the mailbag to play your voicemails, read your comments, and answer your questions after a wild week of tariff insanity. We'll hear from YOU on how you've been riding the economic uncertainty. Plus, is Trump's tariff pause, really a pause? And a listener shares what it's been like teaching elementary students about tariffs. Here's everything we talked about today:“US-China Trade War Tariffs: An Up-to-Date Chart” from the Peterson Institute for International Economics“The Fiscal and Economic Effects of the Revised April 9 Tariffs” from The Budget Lab at YaleMillion Bazillion by MarketplaceJoin us tomorrow for “Economics on Tap.” The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern.

Hey Smarties! Today we’re revisiting an episode from earlier this year that might help you make sense of all the tit for tat tariff fight from the past few weeks. It unpacks some tariff history and the potential economic consequences of President Trump’s ongoing trade war. If President Donald Trump goes through with his plan to levy sweeping tariffs on foreign imports, it wouldn't be the first time the U.S. has done such a thing. Ever heard of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930? Anyone? Those tariffs are widely credited with sinking the United States deeper into the Great Depression. And although global trade looks different nowadays, they can teach us a lot about how Trump's protectionist approach to global trade could play out. On the show today, Inu Manak, a fellow for trade policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, explains how the Smoot-Hawley tariff debacle can shed light on the current moment, why the president has the power to wield tariffs in the first place, and how punishing trading partners could leave the U.S. economy at a disadvantage. Plus, what this fight has to do with the 1980s film “Ferris Bueller's Day Off” and Roomba vacuum cleaners! Later, one listener's call to visit your local butcher. And, dating coach Damona Hoffman, host of the “Dates and Mates” podcast, answers the “Make Me Smart” question just in time for Valentine's Day. Here's everything we talked about today: “Tariffs on Trading Partners: Can the President Actually Do That?” from Council on Foreign Relations “One Response to Trump's Tariffs: Trade That Excludes the U.S.” from The New York Times “The United States has been disengaging from the global economy” from the Peterson Institute for International Economics “Protectionism 100 years ago helped ignite a world war. Could it happen again?” from The Washington Post “The US is one of the least trade-oriented countries in the world – despite laying the groundwork for today's globalized system” from The Conversation Double your impact when you donate to Marketplace today, thanks to a $30,000 match from the Investors Challenge Fund: https://support.marketplace.org/smart-sn

Wall Street thought Donald Trump was bluffing about his tariff plans. The stock market rallied after his election. But the reality has started setting in. Trump is doubling down on tariffs, even as he warned Americans that the economy may experience a “period of transition,” insisting this is just short-term pain.So what exactly is Trump's theory here? And how much pain should we expect?Answering those questions requires a bit of a tariffs primer. And the economist Kimberly Clausing kindly agreed to come on the show, walk through the basics, and help me make sense of what Trump is doing here. Clausing has modeled the possible costs and consequences of the tariffs Trump has proposed, and she breaks down how much you and I might end up paying. Clausing is a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a professor at U.C.L.A. and the author of “Open: The Progressive Case for Free Trade, Immigration, and Global Capital.”This conversation contains strong language.Note: This conversation was recorded on Wednesday, March 5.Mentioned:We're taping an “Ask Me Anything” episode soon. You can email me at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com with a question. Please use the subject like “AMA.” We'll consider any questions that are shared by the end of the day on Tuesday March 18.“The Real Reason President Trump Pushes Tariffs” by Kimberly ClausingAbundance by Ezra Klein and Derek ThompsonAbundance book tourBook Recommendations:The Undoing Project by Michael LewisMountains Beyond Mountains by Tracy KidderThe Worldly Philosophers by Robert L. HeilbronerThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.This episode of “The Ezra Klein Show” was produced by Rollin Hu. Fact-checking by Michelle Harris. Mixing by Isaac Jones, with Efim Shapiro and Aman Sahota. Our supervising editor is Claire Gordon. The show's production team also includes Elias Isquith, Kristin Lin and Jack McCordick. Original music by Pat McCusker. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The executive producer of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Special thanks to Pat McCusker. Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.